Tuesday, March 14, 2006
Unessential workers, paid by taxpayers, and focused on re-election.

Bruce Murphy points out in Milwaukee Magazine column that the caucuses cost taxpayers millions of dollars over the years. http://www.milwaukeemagazine.com/murphyslaw/ He is absolutely right about that, but he's missing an important part of the picture. Personal staff numbers have exploded over the last 10-20 years, and the job of the typical staffer is to get his or her boss re-elected. Unessential workers, paid by taxpayers, and focused on re-election.
They create campaign literature that masquerades as an official "report from Madison" newsletter. They answer constituent mail so that their bosses look responsive. They help constituents with their government complaints because it creates friends and voters for their boss. They write press releases to get their bosses noticed and make them appear worthy of re-election. And they work with lobbyists so that their boss can raise money from the special interests come election time.
Everything these less-than-crucial state employees do is funded by the taxpayers, and designed to assure their boss's re-election. Why are intelligent observers like Murphy so unaware of this reality? Maybe it just doesn't fit with the evil-caucuses story line to have a more complete understanding of how the Wisconsin state capitol works. And might we perhaps have overlooked some of the most subtle tricks of the Wisconsin incumbent protection system? Most observers also seem to have forgotten that Wisconsin legislators used to be able to do all of their own work.
Virtually everything done by a Wisconsin state legislative office is meant to increase electoral support for their legislator. The trick has been in convincing the media and the public that the increase in staff has been all about improving service to constituents. That has to be legitimate, right? All legislative bodies, state and national, create a support structure advantageous to those in power. Not so hard to understand how the slippery slope could have resulted in a specialized caucus staff to supplement this conglomeration of tools for incumbent protection.
And, yes, I've been and aspired to be a capitol staffer. That's why I understand how the system works. It is, after all, a pretty cushy, well-paid position. And the nature of the capitol staff job is not the fault of the person doing the job, so don't get all defensive on me, people. They're just doing what their job requires them to do -- getting their bosses re-elected. Just like Rusty Feingold's press secretary. And... just like those evil and now departed partisan caucuses.
Comments:
<< Home
Ragnar,
Your friend, John Gard, has done more to bloat capitol staff in recent years than anyone else. In 03-05 he created the largest number of committees ever. Then, in 05-07 he one-upped himself and created even more! With every committee comes extra staff. Not only that, committees get extra money for photo-copies and an even greater cost: letterhead and envelope printing budgets on top of their office budget.
Why do we need an Assembly Transportation Committee, Southeast Wisconsin Freeways Committee, and Highway Safety Committee? Three transportation-related committees? Sounds to me like Gard is just trying to hand out extra staff to some buddies. There are countless committees that have met less than 5 times and heard less than 5 bills.
Southeast Wisconsin Freeways has heard zero bills and their last committee "hearing" was reportedly to take a tour of Miller Brewing.
Your conclusion is absolutely right, it "is not the fault of the person doing the job." Instead, it is the fault of the body's leadership because they set the rules in regard to staffing levels and actually have the power to do something about it.
Post a Comment
Your friend, John Gard, has done more to bloat capitol staff in recent years than anyone else. In 03-05 he created the largest number of committees ever. Then, in 05-07 he one-upped himself and created even more! With every committee comes extra staff. Not only that, committees get extra money for photo-copies and an even greater cost: letterhead and envelope printing budgets on top of their office budget.
Why do we need an Assembly Transportation Committee, Southeast Wisconsin Freeways Committee, and Highway Safety Committee? Three transportation-related committees? Sounds to me like Gard is just trying to hand out extra staff to some buddies. There are countless committees that have met less than 5 times and heard less than 5 bills.
Southeast Wisconsin Freeways has heard zero bills and their last committee "hearing" was reportedly to take a tour of Miller Brewing.
Your conclusion is absolutely right, it "is not the fault of the person doing the job." Instead, it is the fault of the body's leadership because they set the rules in regard to staffing levels and actually have the power to do something about it.
<< Home