The state’s conference committee, a bipartisan group of lawmakers, is scheduled to meet next week to begin hammering out differences in the two Houses’ plans to deal with the state’s $1.1 billion deficit.
Lawmakers said the plans, passed by Assembly Republicans and Senate Democrats, are reflective of the differences in party ideology.
The Senate’s plan, passed April 5, would reduce the state’s budget deficit without drastic cuts to the UW System or the elimination of shared revenue. Both were included in the Assembly’s version of the budget bill.
Some Assembly members have lauded the plan for reducing the budget deficit without cuts to UW, but others said the Senate’s plan is a quick fix that will leave the state with a deficit in the next fiscal year.
The Senate Democrats’ plan also includes early retirement for state officials as a way to save $60 million in the next two years. The plan would coax veterans into early retirement, thereby reducing the state’s work force and cutting payroll spending.
According to the Legislative Fiscal Bureau, about 17,000 state workers would be eligible to retire, but only 6,000 are expected to do so.
Some Republican lawmakers say the plan will actually cost the state more money because there is no way of knowing how many people will retire and how many will be replaced.
Under the plan’s 10-year payback period, taxpayers are expected to pay approximately $421 million.
Rep. Bonnie Ladwig, R-Town of Mt. Pleasant, said the Senate’s plan is “credit card spending.”
“I am very concerned about the plan,” she said. “And very, very concerned about the early retirement.”
The projected $60 million in savings, Ladwig said, are a best-case scenario and not actual figures.
“They did a lot of quick fixes,” Ladwig said. “The Democrats’ plan itself is bad.”
Rep. Steve Kestell, R-Town of Herman, said he is disappointed to see the Senate is spending more money than it proposes to cut.
“Essentially, there is no attempt to address long term problems, like state spending,” Kestell said. “It is setting itself up for greater budget problems.”
He said it is going to be challenging for the committee to create a compromise that both Houses will accept.
“When you look at it, it is hard to imagine how we’ll come to a conclusion,” he said.
But not all Assembly members are critical of the Senate’s plan. Rep. Spencer Black, D-Madison, said the Senate bill is a “vast improvement over the bill passed by the Assembly.”
Black, who will serve on the conference committee, said that the Senate’s bill makes important changes.
“It funds the University of Wisconsin, which is important to the future of the state,” Black said. “The Assembly’s cuts were vindictive and short-sighted.”
Under the Senate’s version, environmental programs like anti-water pollution efforts will be preserved, Black said. Comprehensive campaign finance reform will also be included.
Black said creating a compromise bill is going to be difficult and challenging, but said he hopes strong public support will help the Senate’s bill prevail.
