03/21/10
By Lee Bergquist In an election where the economy looms as the biggest issue, the candidates for governor are touting what they’ve done to help create jobs. But their claims are often challenged by opponents, inevitably launching the campaigns into a frantic exchange of finger-pointing about who is doing the most to help business. In recent weeks, the candidates have sparred over job-creation promises and blockbuster economic development deals. The jabs involving Republican Milwaukee County Executive Scott Walker and Democratic Milwaukee Mayor Tom Barrett have been especially pointed, in part, because they are both in a position to take credit for the same deals. On the stump, Walker and Mark Neumann, a Nashotah home builder and former congressman, have emphasized smaller government and lower taxes as the best ways to turn the economy around. Barrett agrees the answer to Milwaukee’s and Wisconsin’s job losses lies primarily in the private sector. But he also has said he would cut ineffective state programs and tie tax cuts to job creation that would add 180,000 jobs over three years. After decades of acrimony between Milwaukee and the suburbs, Barrett says that he’s helped spearhead cooperation by helping start M7, the regional economic development initiative. He gets a laugh from audiences when he tells them that he deserves credit for formally recognizing Waukesha County’s right to exist. Still, when it comes down to what each candidate has done, there is often little agreement. One recent dust-up involves Walker’s talk of his help in landing GE Healthcare’s $85 million headquarters in the Milwaukee County Research Park in Wauwatosa in 2004. But the former mayor of Wauwatosa said Walker’s part in the project is overblown. “That’s a good piece of revisionist history,” said Theresa M. Estness, who was mayor of Wauwatosa from 2000 to 2008. The pitch to GE included more than $30 million in public funds, with nearly $28 million coming from Wauwatosa in the form of a grant and a low-interest loan to the developer to help woo GE and its 2,000 employees. “The county executive was never at the table negotiating this,” she said, adding “there was never anyone from the county involved when we were negotiating with GE.” Estness described herself as a political independent and not involved in the governor’s race. Campaign statements since 2004 show that she hasn’t made contributions to Barrett. Walker and his campaign organization were quick to release a flurry of documents and newspaper stories to the Journal Sentinel last week showing that Walker and the county were important players. Walker emphasized that when he’s on the stump, he has shared the credit with Wauwatosa and the state, which provided all of the public financing for the project. He noted that the county guaranteed $24 million in revenue bonds issued by Wauwatosa. “GE wanted the benefit of a larger entity guaranteeing the bonds,” Walker said. “I would contend that Milwaukee County had a lot more to do with GE than the mayor and the city had to do with Republic Airways.” He was referring to Barrett, who has told audiences about Milwaukee’s role last year in persuading Republic Airways to decide to consolidate maintenance and call center operations in metro Milwaukee after buying Midwest Airlines. The move could add as many as 800 jobs here. With Republic, Walker says the airline is using hangar space of Midwest Airlines for which the county provided an $8 million guarantee if Midwest ever defaulted. The county’s investment in Mitchell International Airport enables Mitchell to charge a lower price to airlines for each passenger than the Milwaukee’s rivals for the jobs — Denver and Indianapolis. Walker characterized the Republic deal as a victory for the region. He and many others were involved, especially the state, which is providing up to $27 million in tax credits through 2021. But the Barrett camp says the hangar was originally financed with the city’s bonding authority. Much of the work involved M7, and Barrett noted that the mayor met with Republic CEO Bryan Bedford and others on June 23 to make a pitch, said Barrett spokesman Phil Walzak. “Between these two candidates, Tom is the person who has showed the real leadership and the real effort,” Walzak said. Neumann said that GE and Republic were successes, but that Barrett and Walker needed to do more to create jobs, given the losses over the past year. As governor, he says he would create economic development plans similar to the way he’s run his home-building businesses. “I would not be doing the politics of it,” he said. “I’d be laying out a business plan.” Patrick Marley of the Journal Sentinel contributed to this story. The Packers' Chris Jacke beat the 49ers with a 53-yard field goal in overtime in 1996. Milwaukee Journal Sentinel file photo. By Tom Silverstein If the National Football League needed a test case for proving why it might be worth changing the current sudden death format, it could pick the Green Bay Packers’ overtime history. Since sudden death was introduced in 1974, the Packers have played 32 overtime games, and the results line up neatly with the argument that will be presented by the NFL’s competition committee at the annual owners meetings this week in Orlando, Fla. According to Atlanta Falcons President Rich McKay, who is co-chair of the competition committee, there has been a significant increase in the percentage of times the winner of the overtime coin flip wins the game and the number of times the game ends with just one team getting the ball on offense. The shift can be traced to a rule change in 1994 that moved the kickoff from the 40-yard line to the 35, an attempt to reduce touchbacks that were occurring because of rapidly improving kicking games. Whereas getting beyond the 20-yard line used to be the goal of most kickoff return units, now the standard is getting beyond the 30. From 1973 to 1993, the team that won the coin toss won the same percentage of games (46.8) as the team that lost the toss. But with the kickoff moved back and field-goal accuracy reaching unparalleled heights, the numbers have shifted. “Changes occurred over time,” McKay said. “Now the numbers have changed pretty dramatically. The team that wins the toss wins 59.8 percent and the team that loses the toss wins 38.5 percent. The pros of the switch is it tries to rebalance the advantage that’s been gained.” The competition committee will present a change that will require that the coin toss loser get the ball if the coin toss winner manages only a field goal on its first possession. If the coin toss winner scores a touchdown, the game is over. Once the coin toss loser gets the ball, it’s back to sudden death. The rule would only apply to postseason games. Owners and general managers have been reluctant to change the format before, but with the statistical evidence so strong, and the NFC Championship Game last season being decided on a field goal in overtime (depriving the league of a Brett Favre Super Bowl), there may be enough momentum to pass the proposal. “It will be interesting to see when we get to that discussion,” McKay said. In the era before the kickoff change, the Packers were 12–5 in overtime coin flips. Their record in those games, however, did not reflect their coin-flip success. They were just 8–9 in those games. In seven of those 17 games, the two sides combined for four or more possessions in overtime. The best example (or maybe the worst) was a 17–17 tie the Packers played against Denver at County Stadium in 1987 in which both teams had three possessions. Kickers Al Del Greco and Rich Karlis missed game-winning attempts of 47 and 40 yards, respectively. Clearly, field goal kicking has been a factor. In those 17 overtime games the Packers played, field goal kickers made just 9 of 18 attempts (50 percent) during the overtime period. As a result, only four games were decided on the first possession, two of them on touchdowns. Fast forward to 1994 through the present and there is a huge swing in how the games are decided. The Packers are 7–8 in overtime coin flips since 1994 and their record in those games? It’s 7–8. Of those 15 games, eight have been won on the first possession (53.3 percent), not including the Arizona wild-card playoff game this year in which the Cardinals won on a defensive touchdown on the Packers’ first possession. To hammer in McKay’s point about field goal accuracy, kickers have made 10 of 11 field goal attempts (90.9 percent) in those 15 overtime games the Packers have played since 1994. The Packers have won four on the first possession and lost four without ever getting the ball. McKay said moving the kickoff back to the 40 has been proposed before, but has been rejected because it doesn’t address the increase in field-goal accuracy. For the current proposal to pass, 24 of the 32 teams will have to vote in favor of it. The overtime rule probably will be the most hotly debated rule change at the owners meetings, but not necessarily the most important topic. This gathering will allow the owners a forum to discuss the labor situation and the prospects of a lockout in 2011. There won’t be any agreement with the players union, but the owners will be updated on the state of negotiations. Some other issues that will be discussed:
Four cubs nuzzle close to a sow black bear in the Marathon County Forest. The state’s bear population has nearly tripled since 1985. Story and photos by Paul A. Smith The popple stand in this section of the Marathon County Forest near Wausau seems pretty typical — just 7 years old, it’s a vertical, gray maze of trunks. Some are just 6 feet tall and thick as a broomstick. Others tower overhead and are more like baseball bats. The trees are spaced tightly enough to require a human visitor to side-slip between trunks every few feet. Every so often, too, the ground is mounded with an old stump or a pile of slash from the previous timber harvest. An average stand of regrowth in north central Wisconsin? Yes, except for one large difference: the dark, cooing mass ahead. “She’s got four cubs,” says Karl Malcomb, a University of Wisconsin researcher, nodding at a circular clearing in the aspen. There, sprawled on its side, is a sow black bear with four suckling cubs. The cubs emit soft squeals and purrs as they jostle for position and take nourishment in the cold, winter air. Malcomb and a team of researchers, including Karl Martin and Dave MacFarland of the Department of Natural Resources, have visited the sow to evaluate its health and reproductive success and to change its radio collar. They inject a tranquilizer with a long jab stick; 10 minutes later the sow is immobilized and ready for handling. The cubs are plucked off the sow and held by assistants like squirmy toddlers. At about 8 weeks old, they are perfect little bears, with full, black coats, strong forearms and tiny claws. The mom isn’t too bad, either. At about 275 pounds, the sow is large and healthy looking, even after a winter in which it has given birth and provided milk to the newborns. The sow has a track record of success, too. “When I first saw her two years ago, she had four cubs, too,” says Terry Lane of Mosinee, one of the other guests on the den visit. “She seems to be a pretty good mom.” Lane was rabbit hunting this section of public land two years ago when he heard a squealing noise in an adjacent thicket. He crept closer, thinking perhaps it was a raccoon. What he found was something else entirely. Like this year, the sow had denned on top of the ground. The four cubs were happily nursing. The bears are part of a growing population of the large omnivores at the edge of Wisconsin’s forest and farming landscape. The Wisconsin population of bears is estimated at between 26,000 and 40,000. Though the population is considered healthy and expanding, it was not always the case. Before 1985, unlimited and increasing harvests caused the bear population to decline; the bear hunting season was closed in 1985. With the cooperation of major hunting organizations and new legislation, a new system of bear hunting and harvest control began in 1986. Since then, the bear population in Wisconsin has nearly tripled, according to DNR estimates. Most bears are found in the northern third of the state, but bears are being sited more frequently in counties farther south and southwest. Bears, probably dispersing young adults, have even been sighted in suburban Milwaukee in recent years. This area west of Wausau is a mixture of hardwoods, aspen and pines surrounded by agricultural land. Malcomb, working in collaboration with the DNR, is trying to learn how bears move through fragmented forest habitat and where they are likely to set up breeding populations. The work is funded by a grant from the U.S. Department of Agriculture and logistical support from the Wisconsin Bear Hunters Association. The radio collars allow researchers to closely follow the movements of the bears. Dispersers are important from an ecological and management perspective because their behavior and survival determines how a population expands into unoccupied territory, according to a research paper on the project. Some data indicate agricultural areas south of traditional bear habitat will sustain populations of bears, perhaps because of changing farming practices or farms being converted into recreational land and managed for wildlife. It’s also possible that, due to abundant food resources in the agricultural areas, sows will have larger litters. Studies on Wisconsin bears have shown average litter sizes from 2.5 to 4 cubs. “If this one is any indication, these bears around here will definitely have more,” says Lane, looking down at the sow he found two years ago. Lane and his fellow members of the Mosinee Sportsman’s Alliance have become more than observers. They have donated thousands of dollars to the project to pay for drugs and other supplies. The club keeps the den location a secret to help protect the sow and cubs. It is, however, within 50 yards of a public trail and 500 yards of a subdivision. Another aspect of the research is to see how well bears and people coexist in areas like this near Wausau. Yet another is to evaluate the degree of crop damage caused by bears in these areas. Malcomb and the other researchers take measurements of the sow’s temperature, respiration and evaluate tooth wear. A new radio collar is also attached. The cubs are weighed and quickly evaluated. Once the work is done, the cubs are placed back on the sow. Within seconds, they work into position and begin suckling. In the coming weeks the sow will arise from its slumber and lead its four new charges into the Wisconsin spring. For now, though, it’s time to rest. The group of researchers and assistants picks up its clipboards and tools and walks out through the popples. From 25 yards away, the den is obscured by the fence-like aspen, its presence betrayed only by a sweet, soft yelping. By Thomas Content New financing mechanisms for renewable energy and energy conservation are building across the state, as cities and utilities encourage homeowners to make their houses more efficient. In Milwaukee, a new solar loan program adopted by the Common Council will set up revolving loans that homeowners can repay on their property tax. Milwaukee will allocate $135,000 for the initial loans from a We Energies grant to the city’s solar initiative, Milwaukee Shines. “We’re pleased, particularly with the credit markets as tight as they are, to be in a position here we can put that money out to help families make their homes more energy efficient through the use of solar and, hopefully, create some jobs at the same time,” Mayor Tom Barrett said. The initiative will offer loans of $5,000 to $20,000 for qualified homeowners, said Andrea Luecke, project manager with Milwaukee Shines. The loans will carry an interest rate of 2 percentage points above the prime rate, which is now 3.25 percent. Ald. Tony Zielinski said he already has heard from interested constituents in his Bay View district. “The big barrier to entry for people has been the significant upfront cost, and that’s the strongest part of this package,” he said. “For as little as $300, they can have a solar system installed on their homes and they have 15 years to pay back the city. The money they save on reduced costs for energy, those dollars can be used to pay back the city.” Other initiatives are being launched, as well: • River Falls Municipal Utilities allows residents of the Pierce County community of 14,352 to spread out payments for renewable energy additions — from wind turbines to geothermal systems to solar electric or hot water systems — through charges on their property tax bill. “The idea behind the Save Some Green program is that residents would see a decrease in their electric bill roughly equivalent to the loan payments,” Mike Noreen said of the city-owned utility. River Falls is a member of WPPI Energy, a public-power utility in Sun Prairie. WPPI is exploring the creation of a companywide initiative that offers similar initiatives across the state, spokeswoman Anne Rodriguez said. • Racine will let residents finance energy-efficient retrofits in the Retrofit Racine program, launched with the help of the Center on Wisconsin Strategy, based at the University of Wisconsin–Madison, and the Delta Institute, a Chicago nonprofit that creates, funds and implements programs that promote the environment. The Racine program will use stimulus dollars and private funds to help retrofit homes that are old and inefficient. It’s limited to homes built between 1946 and 1975. The program can save customers up to 40 percent on their energy bills. As with Milwaukee’s program, if a homeowner moves while payments are still due, the new owner will be asked to take over the obligation. “This program has the potential to really help Racine homeowners in this tough economy,” said Brian O’Connell, the city’s development director. “The initial cost of retrofits is one of the main reasons people don’t do them, even though they may make a lot of sense financially.” The idea behind the Milwaukee and Racine initiatives is the work of the Center on Wisconsin Strategy founder Joel Rogers, a MacArthur Fellow who’s also a leader of Emerald Cities Collaborative, a national initiative. The concept: Shore up older buildings that are so inefficient that residents pay too much in utility bills. “With energy efficiency, it’s an obvious market imperfection,” Rogers said. “It’s the $20 bill lying on the sidewalk. Only the economist wouldn’t pick it up because he doesn’t believe it could be there.” The state program and the national initiative want to expand the use of pay-as-you-go financing mechanisms to help raise the energy efficiency of homes as a way to lower utility costs, reduce carbon emissions and create jobs insulating homes or installing solar panels. Milwaukee’s program is a trial run for a broader initiative known as Milwaukee Energy Efficiency, or ME2, said Erick Shambarger, the city’s acting director of sustainability. That initiative could get a big boost if Milwaukee, Racine and Madison win a joint U.S. Department of Energy grant to expand the loan programs. Together, the three cities, the state Focus on Energy program and Johnson Controls Inc. are seeking $65 million. The grants will be awarded in coming weeks, said DOE spokeswoman Jen Stutsman. Congress allocated $454 million in the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act for efforts to get Americans to retrofit their homes to make them more energy efficient. Studies in Wisconsin and elsewhere have found that energy efficiency is the least expensive way to reduce emissions of carbon dioxide. It’s much cheaper to retrofit homes than to build new power plants. A study last year by the utility- and foundation-funded Energy Center of Wisconsin found that, if the state tripled its investment in energy efficiency, it could reap $900 million in savings and create 7,000 to 9,000 jobs by 2012. The Clean Energy Jobs Act proposed by the Doyle administration would expand funding for energy efficiency. However, it is uncertain whether those funds will be included in a scaled-back version of the bill being drafted by lawmakers in Madison. The bill is being revised in response to objections from business groups that it would drive up energy prices and make the state’s job climate less competitive. One utility that supports a bigger investment in energy efficiency than the rest of the state is Wisconsin Public Service Corp. of Green Bay. WPS is conducting an energy-efficiency experiment with Focus on Energy and the ratepayer group Citizens’ Utility Board. Under that program, utility customers pay more on their monthly energy bills toward Focus. In return, they get bigger incentives to curtail energy waste. Focus on Energy began an initiative last week that doubles the incentives it typically offers for energy-saving home upgrades such as whole-house air sealing. The program also offers low-interest financing, now at 3.5 percent, to help bring down the initial cost of the projects. Upfront costs and competing priorities for residential customers are barriers the Energy Center found in its research, said Marge Anderson, the center’s associate director. Another big hurdle, not addressed by the financing programs, is the “hassle factor” associated with getting bids, hiring contractors and managing disruption for major home-improvement work, she said. “Financing options for homeowners are a positive development, but at the same time we don’t want to be unrealistic about how much they will accomplish on their own,” Anderson said. For Rogers, seeing these programs get off the ground has required patience, but he’s optimistic given the federal push through the stimulus package. “I’m upbeat about the whole thing,” he said. “It’s moving in the right direction.” By Larry Sandler Forget what you learned in civics class. Here’s how a major bill really becomes a law in Wisconsin: After a bill is introduced, a committee calls a public hearing on as little as 24 hours’ notice. Interested citizens must scramble to figure out what’s in the bill, take time off from work and drive to Madison, only to wait for hours as special-interest groups’ representatives speak first. Depending on what backroom deals lawmakers have cut, the bill may be sent to the floor, passed the next day, then sent to the other house and finally the governor. If it looks as though that route won’t work, the measure’s supporters might ask the governor to include it in his biennial budget. Then the Legislature’s Joint Finance Committee holds hearings, but testimony on that provision risks being lost in a crowd speaking on taxes, spending and dozens of other issues. While crafting its version of the budget, the finance panel repeatedly postpones meetings as members negotiate in private. The committee sends the budget to the Assembly and Senate, where the majority party huddles in closed-door caucuses, tweaking policy provisions and inserting new items with little to no public input, before ramming the plan through on the floor. If the two houses disagree, a conference committee comes up with a compromise, but only after still more secret deal-making. Either way, the public doesn’t get a full picture in time to influence lawmakers, a key goal of open-government laws highlighted during Sunshine Week, a national effort by the American Society of Newspaper Editors and others promoting the public’s right to know. Jay Heck, executive director of Common Cause in Wisconsin, noted that legislators required local governments to follow the open meetings law, adding, “There’s such hypocrisy that they passed the law and exempted themselves” for caucuses. Former Democratic lawmaker Mordecai Lee argues that secrecy is needed to forge compromises. “A lot of legislators don’t feel they can speak openly of compromise, because they would lose face with some special-interest group,” said Lee, a professor of governmental affairs at the University of Wisconsin–Milwaukee. That’s the problem, says Mike McCabe, executive director of the Wisconsin Democracy Campaign. As campaigns grow more costly, lawmakers depend more on special-interest groups to fund their campaigns and feel more pressure to stick publicly with those groups’ positions, he said. Heck and McCabe want taxpayers to fund campaigns, curtailing special interests’ influence. Those interests keep lobbying after public hearings end, as lawmakers secretly reshape bills. “Public hearings are really more for show now,” McCabe said. “It used to be that public hearings really mattered.” For example, an October hearing on regulating payday lenders exposed rifts among Democrats. They emerged with a compromise bill in February, a little more than a week after Assembly Speaker Mike Sheridan (D–Janesville) acknowledged he had dated a payday loan lobbyist. Republicans accused Democrats of rolling out the new bill to cover for Sheridan, but Democrats insisted a small group had been working on the issue for months behind closed doors. The bill was endorsed by a committee a day after it was unveiled and passed by the full Assembly less than a week later. It is now before the Senate. Similarly, Rep. Phil Montgomery (R–Ashwaubenon) said Democrats are now changing a global warming bill behind closed doors after public hearings and public disagreements. “What have they done but taken it underground again?” Montgomery said. “What will come out of this process … will have nothing to do with the public hearings. They did not listen at the public hearings. The people they did not want to hear from were left until 5:30 or 6 o’clock in the evening to hear their testimony.” When Republicans ran the Legislature, they also made major decisions out of public view and called hearings with little notice. Both parties enact many major laws as budget provisions, rather than separate bills. The 2009–11 budget created new laws on everything from auto and health insurance to teacher pay and domestic partner registries. But majority Democrats crafted much of that budget behind closed doors, a bipartisan tradition. The finance panel often delayed meetings — once as much as 12 hours — while lawmakers worked out deals in their offices. Rep. Mark Pocan (D–Madison), the panel’s co-chairman, said late-night sessions come after public testimony ends and the committee wrestles with complex issues. He also said that sometimes when Republicans claimed Democrats were cutting a backroom deal, they actually were waiting for nonpartisan legislative staff to draft a motion or amendment. Weeks later, after the committee finished its work on the budget, Democrats retooled the spending plan in closed caucuses. Rep. Cory Mason (D–Racine) has introduced a bill to open caucuses to the public. He did not respond to repeated requests for comment. Mason’s bill has been buried in committee for a year. It could die there if not acted upon before the regular legislative session ends next month. On the Web: To read more about Sunshine Week, go to www.sunshineweek.org. Jason Stein of the Journal Sentinel contributed to this report. 03/20/10
By Diana Marrero and Annysa Johnson A dispute over the way abortion coverage is treated under health care legislation moving through Congress remains a sticking point for House members as Democrats push for a final vote Sunday. With passage of health care reform on the line, President Barack Obama and congressional leaders are courting a small group of anti-abortion Democrats who supported the House bill but express concerns that the final legislative package could allow federal funds to be used to provide abortion coverage. The abortion question has also given rise to a public clash between the influential U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops and some Catholic organizations over how to interpret the Senate language on abortion. How anti-abortion House members end up interpreting that language has the potential to make or break historic health care reform efforts. Members of the Catholic Church are playing a major role in framing the issue, but Evangelical Christians and other religious groups are also weighing in. Milwaukee Archbishop Jerome Listecki said the bishops’ position is clear: The bill “does not give protections to human life that have to be present.” But the Catholic Health Association and a group of nuns across the country say the legislation does, in fact, keep federal dollars from being used for elective abortions. “This is the real pro-life stance, and we as Catholics are all for it,” said a letter signed by the heads of 55 religious orders and groups, including the Leadership Conference of Women Religious, which represents 90 percent of American nuns. Leaders of at least eight Wisconsin orders signed on to the letter, including Milwaukee’s School Sisters of Notre Dame and School Sisters of St. Francis. At issue is the difference in the legislative language used in the House and Senate bills. Under the House version, women buying insurance under a proposed exchange would have to buy a separate premium using their own money if they want abortion coverage. In the Senate version, women wishing to have abortion coverage would send a separate check for the portion that covers abortions. Under both bills, however, many women would have to pay for abortions out of pocket because of a complex set of restrictions on insurers and buyers that could limit the development of insurance plans that offer abortion coverage, according to a report by the Kaiser Family Foundation. Congressional leaders are asking House members to vote for the Senate bill, along with a package of tweaks, in order to get around a Republican filibuster in the upper chamber. Because of parliamentary rules, the legislative tweaks can include only provisions that have a financial impact on the federal government. Changes to the abortion language would not qualify under those rules. Leading the charge against the Senate language in the House is Michigan Democrat Bart Stupak, a Catholic who has threatened to derail the final legislation if his concerns are not addressed. He has said that he and about a dozen anti-abortion Democrats will vote against the bill unless they can reach a deal with congressional leaders. At the same time, a number of anti-abortion Democrats who voted for Stupak’s abortion amendment in the House have announced in recent days that they are now prepared to endorse the Senate language. Rep. Dale Kildee, a Michigan Democrat who spent six years in Catholic seminary, said the Senate language conforms to his stringent anti-abortion views. “I’m a pro-life member of Congress both for the born and the unborn,” he said. “This bill is important for both.” Rep. Paul Ryan, a Janesville Republican who is also Catholic, said he was surprised by Kildee’s announcement this week but thinks the bishops have a stronger understanding of the legislation’s impact on abortion funding. He called the break between the Catholic Health Association and the bishops “an argument between hospital administrators and the keepers of doctrinal discipline.” But Father Thomas Reese, a senior fellow at the Woodstock Theological Center at Georgetown University, said the fissure amounts to a “disagreement over the meaning of legislative language.” “It’s not a theological or doctrinal issue. It’s not a moral issue. It’s legislative language, and bishops have no special expertise on this,” Reese said. “This is a matter on which Catholics can disagree.” The abortion language in the House and Senate versions also has managed to rankle abortion rights supporters, who say either bill would make it so onerous to obtain abortion coverage that few women will choose to do so. “It sets up so many ridiculous arbitrary barriers that we feel it’s the same as saying they can’t buy coverage with their own money,” said Judy Waxman of the National Women’s Law Center. Even so, many abortion rights supporters say they still back the bill and that they believe it retains the status quo when it comes to banning federal funding for abortions. “This is a health bill, not a bill addressing abortion as an issue,” said Rep. Tammy Baldwin (D–Madison). In the final days before a House vote, Catholic groups on both sides of the debate have launched a series of ads aimed at swaying wavering lawmakers. Catholics United, which supports the bill, is running television ads in eight congressional districts urging members to vote for the bill. A newspaper campaign by the Catholic bishops asks members to oppose the bill. In Wisconsin, the 10-county Archdiocese of Milwaukee posted statements by the U.S. bishops opposing the legislation on its Web site and urged members to voice their opposition to Wisconsin’s representatives in Congress. Listecki said in a meeting with the Journal Sentinel Thursday that he stands with the conference and its president, Cardinal Francis George of Chicago. He said he has not lobbied Congress, as George has done, saying he believes Wisconsin’s delegation has made up its mind. Although Rep. Dave Obey, a Wausau Democrat, voted for the Stupak amendment in the House, he has been vocal in his support for health care reform. Obey, a Catholic who has long expressed anti-abortion views, has not formally announced whether he will vote for the Senate bill. Catholic supporters of the legislation stressed they were not breaking with the bishops on either abortion or Catholic social teaching, and that their differences stem from their interpretations of the legislative language. “We don’t support abortions. We don’t perform them. We subscribe to all the elements of Catholic social teaching ... that promote the common good and respect for human dignity,” said Terri Rocole, senior vice president of mission services for Wheaton Franciscan Healthcare in Milwaukee. Sister Theresa Sandok, president of the Servants of Mary in Ladysmith, called health care reform a “social justice issue.” “In this regard there is no disagreement between the sisters and the bishops,” said Sandok, one of the few signers of the letter in support of the Senate health care bill to speak openly of her support. Health care experts and supporters of reform say expanding health care coverage is likely to reduce, not increase, abortions in the country. Massachusetts, which enacted what amounts to universal health care in 2006, saw a 1.5 percent drop in its abortion rate in the first two years of the new law, according to a study in the New England Journal of Medicine. And according to the United Nations, industrialized countries that have universal health care, including Canada and Britain, have lower abortion rates than the U.S.
 By Paul A. Smith The Natural Resources Board approved increases in overwinter population goals for deer in 43 management units in Wisconsin. Meeting Tuesday in Madison, the board’s action would result in a statewide target of 794,172 deer; the current statewide goal is 734,938 deer. According to an estimate released last week, the Department of Natural Resources estimates there were 990,000 deer after the 2009 hunting seasons. The board approved the amended rule 4–2. Board chairman Jonathan Ela and members Preston Cole, Christine Thomas and Jane Wiley voted in favor; members Dave Clausen and John Welter were opposed. Board member Gary Rohde was absent. The increases in the modified rule would be in Deer Management Units 2, 3, 6, 12, 13, 14, 15, 17, 18, 19, 20, 22, 22A, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 29B, 30, 33, 34, 43, 57, 57A, 59A, 59B, 59D, 59M, 60A, 60B, 60M, 61, 62A, 62B, 63A, 64, 64M, 66, 68B, 74A, 77C, 77M and 80B. The new goals were developed at the request of the Assembly Fish and Wildlife Committee. A joint legislative committee hearing in December heard many reports of hunter dissatisfaction over the number of deer seen and harvested in the 2009 gun deer season. The modified rule will now be returned to the Legislature for review by committees in the Senate and Assembly. 03/19/10
By Sharif Durhams The University of Wisconsin System announced six finalists for the chancellor post at UW–Stevens Point: UW System President Kevin Reilly will recommend a successor to the Board of Regents for approval. The person selected will succeed Chancellor Linda Hunt Bunnell, who stepped down in May. By Sharif Durhams Keeping score of President Barack Obama’s attempt to capture votes needed to secure passage of his health care proposal this weekend? Well, The Washington Post is doing the same. The paper’s Web site has a chart of all 435 members of Congress, their leaning on the current package and how they voted when the House passed a different health care overhaul bill in November. The chart also includes a listing of how much money those representatives have received from health care industry lobbyists and the percentage of people in each of their districts who do not have health insurance. Here is the information on the Wisconsin delegation: Here’s the Post’s list of all of the other representatives. West Business Services announced today that it will expand its national business to business sales center in Appleton to meet the increased demands of its clients, which include consumer packaged goods, healthcare, wireless and financial services companies. West is hiring for more than 140 new professional sales positions in the Fox Cities, Wausau and Middleton. To support local hiring efforts, the company plans to hire immediately for more than 40 new full-time sales positions in the Appleton area and will host an onsite job fair at its office at 100 W. College Ave. in Appleton Wednesday, March 24 from 10 a.m. to 6 p.m. English/French and English/Spanish bilingual opportunities are also available. “It’s great to be hiring for such well-respected clients,” said Kathy Van Zeeland, divisional director, employment. “West Business Services provides some exciting opportunities to work with well-respected leaders in the healthcare industry and in some cases with major Fortune 500 companies — an impressive offering for a market of Appleton’s size.” Applications for any available West Business Services position can be submitted through www.westbusinessservices.jobs or by calling (920) 997-6927. |
ADVERTISEMENT
MARKETPLACE MAGAZINE  ADVERTISEMENT
|
08:30:00 am, by Steve Prestegard 
XML Feeds