Greenfield To Look At Ordinance to Block Sick Day Mandate  |   Home  |   Fifteen Unfortunate Crookcuts

Wisconsin Senate Dems Introduce Three Craptacular Bills

The Wisconsin Senate Democrats have decided to come screaming out of the gate with proposals to further harm the business climate in Wisconsin. 

The first three bills of the new session have been introduced in the State Senate and will be a priority Majority Leader Russ Decker (D-Weston) announced today. The bills target important issues for working families in Wisconsin.

Senate bill 1 will raise the minimum wage and is authored by Decker. The bill would increase the minimum wage from $6.50 to $7.60 and then index it for inflation.

Once again, the economy is on the bubble and the Dems want to make it more difficult for businesses to hire unskilled labor.  Then again, perhaps this is a back door proposal to encourage the manufacturing sector to create machines to do these jobs. 

Senate bill 2 is the Employee Wage Protection Act, authored by Senator John Lehman (D-Racine). The bill makes payment of unpaid wages a priority when a company goes out of business. It also closes a loophole created by a 7th Circuit Court of Appeals decision that held Wisconsin wage lien laws would not apply in bankruptcy cases.

The real effect of this will be to kill businesses faster.  If you are a business that is struggling, what do you do?  You borrow money to either invest in something to spur the company or even just to pay the bills until things turn around.  Who is going to loan money to a company on the verge of bankruptcy when they know that they will be last in line if that company goes bankrupt?  Only fools.  What vendor is going to do business with the company for anything but cash?  Dumb ones.  This bill takes away that last lifeline that companies use to stay afloat. 

Senate Bill 3 will require insurance companies to cover treatment for children with autism and is authored by Senator Judy Robson (D-Beloit). The bill would require every individual and group health insurance policy and plan, including defined network plans and cooperative sickness care plans, to cover the cost of treatment for insured persons with autism, Asperger’s syndrome or other pervasive developmental disorders.

Should insurance cover autism?  Perhaps.  But by forcing every insurance company to carry coverage, it further drives up the cost of health insurance.  Many companies in these past years have been dropping insurance or moving more of the cost to the employee.  This will help continue that trend.

You think Wisconsin’s business climate is hostile now?  Just wait until after this next session.  You ain’t seen nothing yet.

Posted by Owen at 1947 hrs
Politics + Politics - Wisconsin

1. Owen, banks make bets all the time (until about 90 days ago.)

   The banks will survive.  Wage-earners—maybe not.

   Posted by dad29 on January 08, 2009 at 2105 hrs
   
   
   

2. in spite of all this Forbes Magazine ranked Madison #1 and Milwaukee #5 on their list of top 10 cities for job growth in 2009.  i don’t feel nearly as dom and gloom as you do.

   Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on January 08, 2009 at 2125 hrs
   
   
   

3. dom and gloom as you do.
   
   Sorry, that should be doom and gloom.  Though you probably knew that.

   Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on January 08, 2009 at 2126 hrs
   
   
   

4. 1)The minimum wage is going up federally.  This will keep the pace. 

   2)This insures workers rights, instead of letting scoundrels and bad business people take off with the money they earned.  I guess that AFP crap was just that - crap.

   3)You would rather see parents go broke trying to pay for these services or would you rather your taxes go up when the autistic kids grow up and can’t do anything independently.  Again, where’s the AFP crap? 

   Or is it only for certain Americans?

   Posted by capper on January 08, 2009 at 2202 hrs
   
   
   

5. That autism bill is a steaming pile and WILL NOT do what its proponents think, or worse, promise, it will do.

   Screw the cost - I’m willing to cede the point that the cost is negligible for the sake of argument.  But the larger issue is that it will only apply to about 30 percent of employees in Wisconsin.

   If you work for Harley-Davison, Miller Brewing, General Electric, or any other large employer, this bill would not provide insurance coverage for your autistic child’s treatment.

   That’s because those firms self-insure and are regulated by federal ERISA regulations, not state insurance regulations.

   If that bill becomes law, there will be hell to pay for those legislators that made these promises - knowing full well that this bill CANNOT live up to those promises.

   Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on January 08, 2009 at 2238 hrs
   
   
   

6. “If that bill becomes law, there will be hell to pay for those legislators that made these promises - knowing full well that this bill CANNOT live up to those promises.”

   Maybe so, but it’s a start. Better than doing nothing. And by offering it to some, the others may follow along.

   What’s with this country? Why is it that people have to struggle with both medical and financial problems. That’s damn cruel…and stupid.

   As for the rest, if businesses keep wriggling out of those bills we pass new ones.

   Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on January 08, 2009 at 2353 hrs
   
   
   

7. When did we start to worry about government of the business climate, by the business climate and for the effin’ business climate?

   Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on January 09, 2009 at 0541 hrs
   
   
   

8. It isn’t just parents who are currently bearing the costs of autism treatment. Many public schools are on the hook because the treatment is considered special education (an underfunded federal mandate) rather than medical treatment. So it’s currently going on your property taxes rather than your insurance rates. Do you prefer the status quo?

   And I’m curous whether you are against any pro-worker legislation, or just those that have a potentially large price tag. If you had been a newspaper editor in the early 20th century, would you have railed against the legislation creating Workers Compensation? Do you wax nostalgic when you read Upton Sinclair’s “The Jungle”?

   Posted by Ordinary Jill on January 09, 2009 at 0734 hrs
   
   
   

9. Schmitz, you clearly don’t get it.  I mean, really don’t get it.

   “Maybe so, but it’s a start. Better than doing nothing. And by offering it to some, the others may follow along.”

   How about we just fund the state program that actually pays for the treatment?  That’s what Assembly Republicans tried to do last session, but Democrats didn’t want to go along.  Russ Decker didn’t want to go along.

   If government doesn’t exist to help the least fortunate and the most struggling in society, what does it exist for?  You see, your knee-jerk reaction is to put this onerous new burden on the private sector, whereas the thoughtful person realizes that autism treatment is what government can and should do - because of the general rarity of autism.

   For someone who has repeatedly declared that capitalism has failed, you sure do put a lot of faith in it.  I, on the other hand, recognize that in the context of government mandates, capitalism won’t respond and adjust well to mandating insurance coverage for such a small segment of society.

   Moreover, as noted earlier, this mandate only applied to 30 percent of employees in the state.  By fully funding the government program charged with providing the treatment, then we can get all 100 percent of children covered.

   And see, Jill?  A little thought and you’d quickly realize that it isn’t an either or northing proposition.  Opposing the legislation does not mean supporting the status quo, it means that, unlike Senate Dems, some people aren’t doing this a sop to special interests and using it as a game to box in their political rivals.

   Decker, Robson, et al, know exactly that the autism bill doesn’t solve a problem, yet they remain opposed to a real solution.  They are disgusting people that would rather bat around autistic children and their families to score political points.

   And be sure to call the Governor’s office and ask him why he defunded the program that provides treatment for autistic children.

   Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on January 09, 2009 at 0811 hrs
   
   
   

10. Decker, Robson, et al, know exactly that the autism bill doesn’t solve a problem, yet they remain opposed to a real solution.  They are disgusting people that would rather bat around autistic children and their families to score political points

    Precisely.  The failure of their program will engender a backlash which will enable them to come up with another program.

    And child abuse is supposed to be illegal!

    Posted by dad29 on January 09, 2009 at 0910 hrs
    
    
    

11. Funny
    i Remember the entire Assembly chamber packed With Autistic Parents and Supporters wanting this Autism Bill Passed.

    Naturally the Gop waited til they left in the early AM to use their bait and switch plan to not even vote on this autism bill!

    At least the DEMS WILL ALLOW A VOTE!

    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on January 09, 2009 at 0918 hrs
    
    
    

12. “i Remember the entire Assembly chamber packed With Autistic Parents and Supporters wanting this Autism Bill Passed.”

    If autistic parents are leading productive lives and procreating, surely they don’t need intensive therapy, then.

    However, I know what you meant and the point doesn’t change.

    Vote on it, don’t vote on it.  It doesn’t matter; the result will be the same - THE LEGISLATION DOESN’T DO WHAT THE POLITICIANS HAVE PROMISED IT WILL DO.

    But the parents and families of autistic children have been sold a bill of goods.  This bill is about $$$$.  For school districts, for therapists, for clinics…  Insurance pays higher rates of reimbursement than does the government.  THAT is why politicians and therapists and schools didn’t (and won’t) want an alternative bill passed.

    Where’s Jack Lohman on this???

    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on January 09, 2009 at 0953 hrs
    
    
    

13. While the Titanic is sinking, the Senate Democrats want to give the band a raise and make sure they get paid first.

    Whatever.

    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on January 09, 2009 at 1109 hrs
    
    
    

14. I’m with Owen on the minimum wage, but I like the Employee Wage Protection Act provided it only covers wages.  If you work for a nearly bankrupt company your risk is that you might lose your job, but you shouldn’t have to worry about doing two weeks worth of work and then not getting a paycheck.  However, when it comes to retiree healthcare, pension fund payments, accrued vacation, etc, the bondholders should get priority in a bankruptcy.

    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on January 10, 2009 at 1218 hrs
    
    
    

Commenting is not available in this channel entry.