Tag Archives: Jesse Kremer

Kremer: Thoughts on the GOP: Why Have WI Conservatives Become Afraid of Their Own Shadows?

From the email…

Although the foundation of my own campaign was “Bold Ideas, Conservative Values” not “Republican Ideas,” as a new legislator who came into office post-Act 10, I was excited and proud that the Republican party in Wisconsin woke up, finally began to tell their story, and took on the opposition – with real common sense solutions.  But where has this new brand of conservative, Wisconsin GOP gone over the past few years?  I get it, it’s an election year, but last year wasn’t.  Why have we given up on our base, do we really expect that they’ll just show up?  One would think that the GOP would learn from history and realize that the bold ideas and common sense stories must continue to be pushed if they expect to remain at the helm.   Actions speak louder than words.

While we do have some outstanding accomplishments over the past few years, Wisconsin Republicans, who typically had the backs of those who have no voice, have failed aborted children for two sessions and continue to allow the trafficking of their body parts.  Wisconsin Republicans have had zero appetite to protect our young school girls from changing in shower rooms and locker rooms with other students who have male body parts.  While the GOP Assembly passed the toughest protections for 1st amendment freedom of expression on our taxpayer funded universities, the GOP Senate flatly rejected to protect college student’s constitutional rights.  The Assembly dropped the ball on Federalism and have little to no desire to push, or even ask, the EPA for permission to remove outdated, unscientific Clinton, Bush and Obama era air initiatives; even with a Republican administration in Washington ready to drain the swamp.

And finally, there is the issue of school safety.  While the voters, and my constituents “get it,” the mainstream party and leadership in Madison doesn’t have the appetite to do everything that they possibly can to prevent terrorism in our schools.  While a few of Governor Walker’s school security bills will be useful and effective, we are not doing everything that we possibly can to effectively protect our students – especially those in parochial and small rural public schools.  Why can’t the GOP allow local control regarding school security?  Let parents and school boards decide how best to protect their own kids – not big brother Madison; especially private and parochial schools that are on PRIVATE property.   Allow parents and school boards to decide if an armed guard, beefed up doors, or even armed, trained, volunteer personnel are the answer.  While we should continue to address mental health, we are letting our guard down on another reality of life – that small Christian and Jewish schools are real-life terrorist targets.  Yes, we secured airliners after 9/11, but how?  We now have armed security on some aircraft and a volunteer, well-trained, armed pilot corps.  The $100 million funding bill will run out in the very near future and set up public school districts for tax increases or small private schools for massive tuition increases if they choose to retain hired security personnel.

It is time for Wisconsin Republicans to wake up and realize that we need to continue telling our stories and discussing real common sense fixes.

 

Respectfully,

Rep. Jesse Kremer

Wisconsin State Assembly District 59

Kremer Introduces Private School Carry Act

This has almost no chance of passing this year since the legislative session is pretty much over, but I support this bill.

In response to the Feb. 14 shooting in Parkland, Florida, State Rep. Jesse Kremer, R-Kewaskum, has introduced a bill that would allow licensed concealed carry holders to bring weapons into private schools, if the school enacts a policy allowing it.

The deadline to co-sponsor the Private School Carry Act was noon Friday.

In a co-sponsorship memo, Kremer said, “We hope this program will gain popularity for expansion into all public schools statewide.”

The thinking behind the bill is that a shooter who is aware of a school with armed people in it will bypass it for another school.

One of the candidates running to replace Kremer also supports it:

Stockbridge – Former Campaign Manager and Legislative Intern for Rep. Kremer, Ty Bodden, comes out in support of Kremer’s Private School Carry Act. This bill gives private schools the option to arm their teachers with guns to protect their students. The bill is meant to be a pilot program, starting in private schools and could eventually lead to being enacted in our public schools as well. “This bill and any future bill gives power to the schools and the school boards. They know what is best for their students and can decide what is best for their classroom safety. If schools do not want their teachers having guns, they do not have to have them, but it at least gives them the option,” states Bodden. The idea of arming teacher is not a new concept. In Ohio, decisions about whether to allow guns in schools are up to school boards in the more than 600 districts across the state. Many districts voluntarily acknowledge the presence of guns on campus, but only the staff knows who has access to them. Other districts have not said anything at all about their policies. The decision is up to each individual school. Attorney General, Brad Schimel, has also come out in support of legislation like this.

Bodden also supports the recently passed Assembly Bill that creates a grant program to help schools pay for armed guards. “These are the pieces of legislation that can lead to real safety change when it comes to protecting our students and schools,” Bodden said. The bill also makes purchasing a gun for someone prohibited from possessing one a felony punishable by up to 10 years in prison instead of the four years the state has now. “More of a discussion needs to be had in regards to protecting Wisconsin students and I look forward to having those discussions.”

Rep. Kremer Heads Home

It is wonderful to see good people take a few years out of their lives to serve their community in the legislature and then return to the private sector. Congratulations to Rep. Kremer on his retirement from public office and may he enjoy the remainder of his career.

Jesse Kremer’s time as the state representative for the 59th state assembly district will come to an end after four years in the role.

In 2014, Kremer ran against three other Republicans and was unopposed in the general election. In 2016, the conservative ran unopposed without facing other Republicans in a primary.

A statement from Kremer’s office in Madison said, “Rep. Kremer will be returning to the private sector to continue his primary career path as a pilot for a growing and well respected Wisconsin family supporting job creator.”

The representative is an army veteran who served a tour in Iraq during the 2003 invasion of the country. His career, however, has been spent as a pilot, something he plans to return to.

During his speech announcing his decision, he stated he would soon be traveling to Dallas for three weeks of training to pilot a Gulfstream IV aircraft.

“I never looked at this as a career,” Kremer said. He later explained that those in politics should term limit themselves and that each person takes a different amount of time to accomplish their goals.

Protect free speech on campus

My column for the West Bend Daily News is online. Here you go:

There has been a virulent strain of anti-free speech fascism developing on our college campuses, and on too many campuses, this fascism has been nurtured and encouraged by the very faculty and staff that are charged with expanding minds.

The most recent high-profile example of this trend happened at the University of California, Berkley, over the past few weeks. A group of fascists rioted in order to prevent conservative firebrand Ann Coulter from giving a speech on campus. Under the threat of violence and Berkley officials’ unwillingness to control the rioters, Coulter cancelled her speech.

This has been happening to invited speakers who do not espouse leftist political beliefs at campuses all over the nation. In March, students at Middlebury College in Vermont shouted down American Enterprise Institute political scientist Charles Murry, pulled the fire alarm, banged on the walls, and assaulted a female professor. Berkley was the scene of more riots back in February when pro-free speech (not conservative) provocateur Milo Yiannopoulos was scheduled to speak. The fascists set fire to trees, attacked bystanders, and forced the speech to be cancelled.

Lest you think that such behavior is confined to the coasts, Madison and Milwaukee was the scene of similar actions when conservative public speaker Ben Shapiro came to Wisconsin last year. When Shapiro spoke at the University of Wisconsin, Madison, students organized to shout Shapiro down and prevent him from speaking. Over at Marquette University earlier this year, Marquette’s faculty was caught trying to sabotage the event by reserving seats for the speech as fake students in order to prevent actual students from attending. Such lying is apparently condoned by Marquette’s staff.

Protests on college campuses are nothing new. In the classical liberal tradition, college is a place for students to have their minds stretched, their beliefs questioned, and their prejudices challenged. Protesting for and against various causes and pushing against authority is part of the American college tradition. But what is going on now on college campuses is something different and vile.

Instead of merely protesting or offering a different viewpoint, liberal fascists on campus are acting -often

violently – to repress the speech of people with whom they disagree. That is not expression. That is oppression.

In years past, college administrators and faculty were often the most ardent defenders of free speech and would take necessary actions to defend and protect others’ right to free expression. Unfortunately, for too many colleges, those days have ended. Too often, we see college administrators and faculty either refusing to defend anyone except fellow leftists and, as in the case at Marquette, actively work to suppress anyone who would challenge leftist orthodoxy.

State Representative Jesse Kremer (R-Kewaskum) has introduced a bill titled the “Campus Free Speech Act” to attempt to force public college administrators to do what they should have been doing all along – defend free speech on their campuses. The bill would require the University of Wisconsin Board of Regents to develop and implement a system wide policy to defend the free expression of ideas. The policy must continue to allow protests, but would punish students who repeatedly attempt to quash the free speech of others.

In a perfect world, the legislature would not need to step in and require the Board of Regents to take action to defend free speech. In a perfect world, UW officials at all levels would so honor and cherish the right to free speech that they would marshal every weapon at their disposal to protect and defend people who are speaking their minds – however contrary to their own beliefs. But as we all know, the world is not perfect, and we must continue to push back the forces of oppression and fascism. Kremer’s bill is a necessary step to protect free speech for everyone precisely in the place where diverse viewpoints should be celebrated.

It’s Time for School Carry

My column for the West Bend Daily News is online. Here you go:

“An active response by potential victims affects the outcome.”

That is one conclusions in an extensive article for Concealed Carry Magazine by Michael Martin after he studied school shootings in the United States. It seems like an obvious conclusion, but it is one that is ignored in our schools.

An active response to an active shooter in a school may include running away, throwing things at the shooter, or barricading a door. One thing that it cannot include in most schools under current law is shooting back. That is one of the issues that folks discussed at a recent forum sponsored by the USCCA at Kettle Moraine Lutheran High School.

Rep. Jesse Kremer (R-Kewaskum) plans to reintroduce a bill in the next legislative session that would allow private schools to decide for themselves whether or not to allow firearms on school grounds. Kremer expects a sister bill to be introduced to allow the same thing for public schools, but his bill would only deal with private schools. A panel of eight members from law enforcement and education answered questions from the audience for two hours regarding the prospect of allowing firearms into schools and school safety in general.

One issue that Kremer’s bill would address would be to allow teachers and school staff to be armed in school. It would be left up to the school to determine the parameters, training requirements, etc. and to integrate an armed response into their overall school safety protocols.

Michael Mass, a teacher on the panel who is a licensed concealed carry permit holder and has completed some tactical training, shared that he takes his responsibility to care for the safety and wellbeing of the children in his charge very seriously. He said the baseball bat he armed himself during a lock down drill was insufficient if there was an actual active shooter.

Washington County Sheriff Dale Schmidt, who was on the panel, admitted that even if the police can respond quickly, they are faced with an unknown threat in a large building with several entrances. He said that the reality is that the most effective protection must come from inside the school.

It is clear that there is an evolving consensus regarding the most effective way to respond to an active shooter in a school. The old “lock down” drill is no longer considered adequate in most situations. For several of the most horrific school shootings in our history, all a lock down did was to congregate a lot of defenseless kids into one location for the killer to find. Instead of just a lock down, many modern school responses include fleeing the school, barricading, shouting, throwing, and, in some cases, an armed response. Anything that disrupts the fantasy playing out in a killer’s head is more effective than just crouching and waiting. The most effective response is going to vary by the physical layout of the school and other factors.

A second issue that Kremer’s bill seeks to address is the parents and other school visitors who are licensed to carry a concealed weapon in Wisconsin. Federal law does not outright prohibit firearms on school grounds, but state law does. Kremer’s bill would allow private schools to decide if they would allow people who are licensed to carry a concealed weapon to carry that weapon on school grounds.

There is no rational justification for continuing banning guns on school grounds. More than 300,000 Wisconsinites are licensed to carry a concealed weapon. Tens of thousands carry a weapon every day. Despite the dire warnings of opponents of the Second Amendment, Wisconsin has not turned into the Wild West and neither has any other state that permits concealed carry. In fact, many states saw a decrease in crime after concealed carry went into effect. The arguments are old and the evidence is overwhelming on the side of proponents of concealed carry that good Americans carrying firearms are a net benefit to society as a whole.

Banning the same people who safely carry a concealed weapon into grocery stores, banks, restaurants, parks and many other places from carrying that same weapon into a school is nonsensical. The ban is based on an irrational fear of guns that has been debunked everywhere else in society. And for many CCW parents, like me, it is ludicrous to disarm parents precisely at the time when they are with the people they most want to defend — their children.

Furthermore, as several people at the forum highlighted, it is actually less safe to require a person to unholster their weapon and store it before going to a school than it is for that same person to just carry it. Most firearm accidents occur during administrative handling of the weapon — not during the carrying or active use of it.

A child has not died in a fire at school in more than 50 years, yet we still do regular fire drills and evolve our responses to ensure that a child never does again die in a fire. We need to see the same vigilance and common sense responses to the threat of an active shooter in a school. Passing Kremer’s bill is a step in the right direction.

School Carry Forum

Yesterday the USCCA hosted a forum at Kettle Moraine Lutheran High School regarding the prospect of allowing people to carry firearms in private schools. It was an exceedingly interesting discussion that covered a lot of angles.

The impetus for the forum is that Representative Jesse Kremer (R-Kewaskum) will be reintroducing a bill next session to allow private schools to permit firearms in their schools. The panel was moderated by Katrina Cravy, former TV reporter. On the panel were KML Superintendent David Bartelt, teacher Michael Maas, Grafton Police Sargent Sean Fuerstenberg, Washington County Sheriff Dale Schmidt, USCCA firearms trainer Kevin Michalowski, Delta Defense Director of Marketing Matt Fehlhaber, parent Laura Ganshow, and parent Scott Scriver.

20161112_112635

The subject of the forum was specific to allowing firearms into private schools, but the subject of public schools was also addressed. According to Kremer, a companion bill for public schools will likely be offered at the same time as the one for private schools. The reason for separating them is primarily political. There is fairly broad support for allowing private schools to do this, but the public schools have a well-funded and organized opposition in the form of the unions that will oppose Republican bills just because they are written by Republicans. The Republicans in the legislature want to make progress on this issue. Hopefully they will be able to pass both bills, but even if they only pass the one for private schools, it is progress. The issues facing private and public schools are largely the same, however, so the discussion was apropos to both.

The forum was mostly driven by audience questions with people coming up to the microphones to make statements and ask questions. The discussion can be broken down into three major sections. Bear in mind that any of these issues would only be applicable if an individual school decides to permit firearms on campus.

First, there is the issue of allowing CCW on campuses. Federal law does not prohibit this, but state law does. As the law is now, a licensed concealed carry holder commits a crime to even carry their weapon in their cars onto campus – much less into the buildings. Interestingly, this subject area was probably discussed the least. There was broad agreement that the law needs to be corrected to allow licensed CCW parents to carry on campuses. One former and one current police officer even commented that is is more dangerous to have people unholster their weapons to store them rather than just letting them carry as usual. Most accidental discharges happen during the administrative handling of a weapon – not when holstered or in active use. Also discussed was the fact that several other states already allow schools to decide whether or not to allow firearms on campus and those states haven’t had any negative consequences.

The second section was a lively discussion around allowing trained teachers and staff members to be armed. Michael Maas, one of the teachers on the panel, said that when they do a lock down drill, he arms himself with a baseball bat because that is all he is allowed to do. He lamented the fact that he is charged with protecting his students as if they were his own kids and he did not think he could adequately do that with a bat.

The discussion ranged from what kind of training could and would be given to teachers who chose to arm themselves and what the mechanics of an armed classroom would look like. For example, there are very good biometric gun safes that could be bolted into a desk drawer so that a teacher would not have to wear a firearm the entire time. One parent stood up and said that he hated the fact that his kids were not as safe as they could be because Wisconsin mandates that schools remain soft targets. Someone mentioned that police response was great, but never good enough. The statistics of school shooting show that most of the killings happened within the first 10 minutes. Sheriff Schmidt shared that even when the police can be on site within a few minutes, they still have a large building with multiple entrances, hundreds of people, and an unknown threat to contend with. He said that the reality is that the most effective protection must come from within the school.

The third main topic discussion revolved around how schools respond to threats in general and how that response has, and should, evolve. Right now, the prevailing threat response is the lock down. Everything is locked and kids are instructed to stay still and hide. A few schools are starting to use a technique that instructs kids to scatter and run from the school. The good part of that is that it disperses the target opportunities for the killer, but the bad part is that it is difficult to manage everyone and ensure they are safe.

Some people advocated using the Department of Homeland Security’s “Run, Hide, Fight” protocol in schools. Instead of just hiding, staff and kids would be taught to still hunker down in their rooms, but to spread out and arm themselves with whatever is available like books, chairs, whatever, to throw at the killer if they enter the room. Also discussed was ALICE, another active shooter response methodology. There was broad agreement that the simple lock down was not sufficient. Some folks cited the fact that in some cases, all the lock down did was provide a convenient place for the killer to find a lot of people to kill at once.

Also interesting was how school responses have changed over the years and some of the challenges that schools face. For example, in the past, the students and staff were instructed on where to go in an active shooter event just like a fire drill and were issued cryptic, coded messages over the P.A. to tell them what to do. This makes sense if the killer is from outside of the school, but no sense at all if the killer is one of the students who would know the response. That methodology serves to tell student killer exactly where to go find everyone in one place after the attack starts and the killer knows the “code” used over the P.A. The updated methodology is to instruct staff on what to do, but not tell students unless it happens. Also, instructions on the P.A. are to be clear and precise like, “the shooter is in the cafeteria.”

They also discussed how the physical layout of a school greatly impacts the effectiveness of a response. For example, one audience member said that his kids used to go to an open concept school that did not have doors. He told his kids to leave the building and run into the nearby woods if something happened. A teacher said that his school had solid doors and had installed special locks that that shove a steel bar into the floor and can only be unlocked from the outside with a special tool. In some schools, the only way for people to leave the building would be to go through the halls, which might be a bad idea with an active shooter. Some schools have gates than can be easily deployed to block off entire hallways. Essentially, the consensus was that a school’s specific response should be tailored to the specific school, but that a more active response than a simple lock down was required. As one person said, a kids hasn’t died in a school fire in 50 years, but we still have monthly fire drills and teach stop, drop, and roll. We should spend at least as much time and effort teaching kids how to respond to an active shooter threat.

Overall, it was a very good forum that provided a ton of information. I look forward to more sensible laws regarding firearms in schools.

School Carry to Be Discussed

With a stronger GOP majority in the state legislature, this is an initiative that should get done.

14991952_1202135143207473_3766396457625282959_n

Forum About Concealed Carry in Schools

This ought to be informative and entertaining.

14715688_1295435417173780_3041225971999844519_o

Wisconsin Republicans Propose Loosening Gun Laws

Yes, and yes.

Meanwhile, two of the Assembly’s most conservative Republicans told the AP that they think Wisconsin gun laws should be loosened.

Rep. Bob Gannon, of Slinger, said there’s no way to totally protect people in a free and open society. He said the state should reduce the number of gun-free zones, allow school personnel to carry a concealed weapon on school grounds and allow people to transport weapons in their car while on school grounds, all of which would make it easier for law-abiding citizens to protect their families and themselves.

Rep. Jesse Kremer of Kewaskum said Wisconsin gun laws shouldn’t be changed except to allow people to carry weapons on college campuses in the state. Kremer introduced a bill this past session that would have allowed concealed weapons in college buildings. He introduced the measure after a gunman killed nine people at a community college in Oregon. The bill failed.

A bill about carrying a gun in a car while on school grounds needs to be done just to clean up the law. It is a grey area of the law right now. The rest of it would be a positive change.

Rep. Kremer Pushing Conservative Agenda in Legislature

It’s nice to see a local guy on the forefront of pushing conservatism in the legislature. It’s also nice to see him doing so with or without the leadership’s support.

Longtime lobbyist and Republican strategist Brandon Scholz, who works for The Capitol Group, said Kremer represents a state Legislature that is trending younger in recent years and leadership’s relatively new approach of allowing freshmen lawmakers a more prominent role.

“It is a much younger and less institutional Legislature than it has been,” said Scholz. “I also think it is reflective of an attitude — not held by everybody — but certainly held by some of those like Jesse Kremer, who don’t care if they buck the system and don’t care if they get re-elected because they are there on principle.”

Since taking office, Kremer has authored legislation that banned abortion after 20 weeks of pregnancy, would place gender restrictions on school bathrooms and locker rooms, allow concealed carry permit-holders to carry weapons on public school grounds and college campuses, put photo IDs on food stamp recipients’ debit cards and prohibit city officials from blocking police officers from asking people about their immigration status.

Bill to Allow Schools More Control of Guns on Campus

Excellent. Let’s hope they can get this passed.

Madison, WI A bill circulated today by State Senator Mary Lazich (R-New Berlin), Representative Rob Brooks (R-Saukville) and Representative Jesse Kremer (R-Kewaskum) would give public and private K-12 schools the ability to allow or ban concealed carry holders from carrying concealed weapons on school property. In response, Rep. Jesse Kremer issued the following statements:

[…]

“My goal with this bill is to give our schools the tools to protect our kids and those who have watch over them. I urge my colleagues to support this important measure.”

 

Kremer to propose equal treatment for all transgendered schoolchildren

My column for the West Bend Daily News is online. Here it is:

What do you do if you are a transgender kid in Wisconsin attending a public school and you need to use the restroom or change in a locker room? In the world of binary bathrooms — male or female — which one do you go into?

State Rep. Jesse Kremer, R-Kewaskum, will begin circulating a bill in the next few weeks to try to answer these questions for Wisconsin’s public schools. It’s prompted by the different approaches that some school districts are taking with policies regarding transgendered people now.

Whenever looking at an issue like this, it is worth trying to assess the scope of the problem. According to the Social Security Administration, 135,367 people have changed their name to that of another gender wince it was formed in 1936. Of those, 30,006 have medically changed their sex accordingly. In another view, according to the 2010 census, 89,667 people currently living in America changed their names to another gender and 21,833 people medically changed their sex to match. Given the population of the United States, the transgendered population is something like 0.03 percent of our community. There are more people with albinism in America than there are transgendered people. Needless to say, transgendered people are exceedingly rare.

Still, part of the rule of law is that we protect individual liberties irrespective of whether a person is a member of a majority or minority. In this case, however, there are not any individual liberties being threatened. But there are some individual and social sensibilities to consider.

Not to be too graphic, but the reason that we segregate bathrooms and locker rooms by gender is that most people are uncomfortable exposing their genitals or engaging in routine bodily functions in front of members of another gender. In fact, most kids are equally uncomfortable with exposing themselves in front of members of their own gender. But there is not a right to be comfortable at all times.

In the case of a transgendered person, a boy who identifies as a girl might feel more comfortable in the girls’ locker room. At the same time, the other girls in that locker room who also identify as girls may feel uncomfortable with someone who is anatomically indistinguishable from a boy sharing the locker room. Why is the transgender kid’s comfort more important than those around him (or her, if you prefer)?

All of this puts school districts into a quandary. They are tasked with creating and maintaining an environment where kids feel safe to learn. Short of individual unisex bathrooms and locker rooms, how should a school district respond to transgender kids who adamantly oppose sharing a bathroom or locker room with a member of their biological gender? And in our litigious culture, is there any decision that a school district can make that will ward off an expensive lawsuit? Probably not.

That is exactly the problem Kremer wants to eliminate. By passing uniform state standards on the treatment of transgender kids, it takes the onus off of local school districts to create their own standards and moves it to the state where the Department of Justice would be tasked with the duty expense of defending the standards from lawsuits.

Kremer’s bill is quite simple. It says that a school must provide reasonable accommodation for kids who identify as something other than their biological gender. By doing so, it prohibits school districts from forcing transgender kids into an uncomfortable environment, but also does not force a school district to permit a boy who identifies as a girl to congregate in the girls’ locker room. Kremer’s bill is a good middle ground that meets the needs of accommodating a transgender kid while still protecting the sensibilities of non-transgender (gender?) kids.

It is a virtual certainty that the transgendered community is going to pursue any perceived transgressions of their sensibilities through the court system. Kremer’s bill would help save the taxpayers from having to litigate that battle in every district and, instead, allow the issue to be settled in a statewide venue.

Rep. Kremer: Repeal of Prevailing Wage is Real Money Savings

Over the past few weeks I have been cautiously optimistic, working diligently behind the scenes regarding transportation funding and prevailing wage reform. A few weeks ago, I submitted a budget motion suggesting that the DOT go back to the days of maintaining our roads instead of adding frills to projects such as extra beautification measures, closed circuit cameras, overhead message boards and highway on-ramp gates. Unfortunately, this motion was rejected. I have also been a strong supporter of the Governor’s budgetary removal of the “complete streets” mandate, requiring a one-size-fits-all approach to highway projects. This requirement would have forced the villages of St. Cloud and Campbellsport to install bicycle lanes through town, eliminating half of the available parking during road improvements.

These issues aside, prevailing wage reform provides a real solution to a real funding problem. The state has kicked the can on transportation funding for over a decade and yet, we continue to borrow and spend. Responsible citizens must live within their means. As a legislator, I demand that we budget within our means as a state. At times, this may require bold reforms. Some legislators have requested increases in revenue sources to fix the problem, including gas tax increases and higher registration fees. These revenue “uppers” are not in my playbook – at least not when we have before us a real solution with real savings. The elimination of the state’s prevailing wage law would remove artificial state intervention on public works projects, allowing smaller contractors to bid on projects, give schools with building referendums (such as Campbellsport) real savings and provide our counties and municipalities with long-overdue relief on local road projects.

These savings are real and will positively impact our state. I pray that we see these savings implemented through the state budget this week.

Respectfully Submitted,

Rep. Jesse Kremer