Memo from Dem Sen. Gary George
October 30, 2001

Dear Senate Democratic Colleague,


Recent developments have focused attention on the need to again address the issue of reform in the State Senate. The Senate has grown increasingly reluctant, over the last two majority leaders, to maintain the long-standing tradition of a shared power concept for the organization of the Senate.

I write today to ask you to again consider a return to those traditions which guided Senators of both parties for many years and which led to a reputation of the Wisconsin State Senate as a body to be respected, especially compared to the Assembly, which has a traditionally unified power structure.

As I stated on the Senate floor, the number one reform we ought to pursue is a modification of the Senate Rules to allow for an independently elected Joint Finance Committee Chair. Budgetary matters are so important that to allow those matters to be dictated by a majority leader that controls all other policy and political matters for the majority party is a mistake.

There are many examples in Senate history of independent actions by the finance chairs. It is clear that the last two budgets have been mismanaged and national financial organizations have said that Wisconsin has just about the worst finances in the country. These examples dictate that we have to take some firm action to get a stable handle on our finances and to free the budget debate to a greater degree from the political influence that is a natural part of the majority leader's position.

The inability under the current system for the current Finance Chairmen to develop a workable relationship is in part the result of the fact that neither chair has an independent political base in the caucus and they both work for someone else, in that they serve at the pleasure of their appointing authority, the Majority Leader in the Senate and the Speaker in the Assembly. The recent use of the "Senate" Finance Committee will only make matters worse.

A return to that system would give more independence to the position of Finance Committee Co-Chair and allow for more diligent management of our state's finances and help restore public confidence in the State Senate. In addition, the rules should reflect that the finance chair will serve as the chair of any conference committee on our state budget.

Second, I think we return to a position where the presiding officer the president appoints conference committees. Again this provides for some insulation from concentrating so much power in the hands of one individual, the majority leader.

Third, I think we should return to the practice of having the campaign committee chair be appointed by the majority leader but be a person other than the majority leader. Again, to concentrate so much power in the hands of one person not only means that there could be possible conflicts that can't be resolved between what is in the best interests of the majority leader or the full caucus. It also prevents the campaign effort from receiving the full attention of the chair when you have a majority leader who has so many other responsibilities, including running the Senate, playing such a major role in budget issues, being concerned about their own political future as well as being concerned about the future of the caucus in general.

Over the long term this will develop membership skills in members that are now stifled under the control of one person. Certainly the model that's followed in the United States Congress where both the Senate and House campaign committees have chairs that are not the leaders is proof of the wisdom of this move.

Fourth, the Senate should reestablish the Committee on Committees to make recommendations to the Majority Leader for committee assignments in the Senate. The Committee should be made up of the three senior members of the Democratic caucus and would be able to provide much-needed advice and insight to the majority leader.

Finally, the operation of the State Senate Democratic Caucus office should be under the direction of the Campaign Committee Chair. The facilities of the SSDC should be made available to each member with clearly stated rules, so that when political work needs to be done it can be done at the SSDC office. Again, this is similar to what's done in Washington D. C. by both parties.

Unfortunately, Senator Chvala has taken a step in what he apparently feels is the best interest of the caucus to try to frustrate the ambitions of members of the Senate who wish to seek higher office. His direction to those who might support either Senator Shibilski or myself might not be in the best interests of the Senate Democratic Caucus is one example. Another was his opposition to the appointment of Senator Adelman to the federal bench. Each members' value to the current caucus should not be undermined because of future plans.

None of these proposals is an attempt to undercut any majority leader, including this one. Majority leaders need to be supported as they exercise good judgment. However, the Wisconsin State Senate has many able and skilled members who could prove much more valuable in managing the complexities of government if they are given an opportunity to hold leadership positions. These reforms will make the majority leader more effective and the Senate more effective.

It is critically important that we use this opportunity now to discuss what reforms might make not only Senator Chvala stronger, but make the whole caucus stronger. Again, those reforms include independent caucus election of the chair of the finance committee, a return to the conference committee appointment authority of the Senate President, the reestablishment of the Committee on Committees and effective and open access to the political skills of the SSDC.

I am available to discuss these reform suggestions at your convenience.

Sincerely,

Senator Gary R. George
GRG