As a state, Wisconsin has plenty of room for improvement in order to better help citizens’ livelihoods. There is a dire need for job creation, and the economy can always use improvement. If you look at the plans for job creation by Gov. Scott Walker and Democratic challenger Mary Burke, both present some very favorable points in their overarching vision for Wisconsin.
The commonalities between the two candidates’ agendas are a focus on education, aid to the private sector and a desire to continue and expand job growth. One major contrast between the two is that Burke seems to provide only a basic economic explanation for how to grow the economy, whereas Walker gives both an economic explanation and specifics on what policies he will institute in order to create change.
Burke discusses how investment is a quintessential factor in creating jobs in the state. True. Reading an economic textbook would tell you the same thing. Investment allows companies to expand production which creates a labor demand. But, how is that investment actually going to take place? Where is it going? Burke is fast to criticize Walker, but she really has not introduced any plans regarding how she will create change.
Burke has also harshly criticized the school voucher system and the elimination of collective bargaining for public employees. Candidates will always criticize other candidates, but typically they will also create a plan that has specific actions for the voters to consider. Burke’s plan is full of words like “strengthen,” “invest,” “boost” and “stop.” These words produce a nice facade of an individual who is aware of a problem and wants to implement some sort of solution. But, what is the solution? What exactly is she going to do to provide support to the middle class? The ambiguity in Burke’s plan would give her the ability to do something entirely different if she is elected into office. That means that the people could not hold her accountable for not executing specific plans which they voted on.
There are actually a few specific components to Burke’s plan, one of which is to raise the minimum wage. That sounds great to individuals, like students, who often make the standard $7.25. However, raising the minimum wage is a temporary solution to a much larger and complex problem. This initial raise will cause prices to go up on products, meaning that this raise is essentially insignificant.
Alternatively, Walker’s plan is different. Primarily, he is much more specific on most of his issues. This could be the consequence of being the incumbent, but either way it does not excuse Burke from presenting her economic plan during the election. This is especially significant considering many individuals base their vote off candidates’ economic plans. Specifics are important, especially when dealing with the economy. Everyone wants to fix it, but there is always a debate as to how. (Remember the government shut-down?) Walker actually tells you what he wants to do and how he plans to do it.
Walker’s plan has a very specific Wisconsin-centered focus. His proposals for education are all about Wisconsin; taxes will be reduced (property, income tax and taxes in manufacturing and agriculture); and to promote private sector growth and thus further job creation, he plans to reduce barriers to entry into the market for new companies and small businesses. Other changes which, if instituted, would have an economic impact include refusal to institute Obamacare (the Affordable Care Act) and instituting a regulatory drug test for those seeking unemployment benefits or food stamps.
Education is something Walker is planning to focus on in order to create job growth. He plans to implement state educational standards, meaning students from Wisconsin will remain competitive when compared to students from other states. Another major consequence of this is that educational standards are created in Wisconsin for Wisconsin, not Common Core which are educational standards created in Washington as a universal plan for all students.
In addition, Walker plans to continue the tuition freeze on the University of Wisconsin System for two more years. This is done so that college is not a pipedream for individuals not yet enrolled and for current students, in order to continue their education without being at the mercy of yet another tuition hike (at least for the next two years).
Promotion of education and enhancing skills will make individuals more desirable candidates for jobs, and individuals can then receive higher pay based on their skillset. This does not mean that higher pay will cause prices of goods and services to go up universally, like raising the minimum wage would.
The reduction in taxes and barriers for new companies will promote business growth and entrepreneurship because the money reserved for taxes is freed and instead used to seek innovation and new hires. The private sector, in this scenario, is given the tools to expand if these plans are executed properly with individuals taking advantage of the opportunities.
These are all specific plans to address specific Wisconsin problems. We need explicit solutions, not just general outlines to respond to problems that have a huge impact on Wisconsin. Burke needs to present specifics for her economic policy. Until she does so, a vote for Burke is not a vote for change.
Amy Hasenberg ([email protected]) is a senior majoring in political science with a certificate in African Studies.
