Wisconsin: Vote "NO" on the "Wisconsin Transportation Fund Amendment, Question 1"

[Scuba]

http://ballotpedia.org/Wisconsin_Transportation_Fund_Amendment,_Question_1_(2014)

The Wisconsin Transportation Fund Amendment, Question 1 is on the November 4, 2014 ballot in Wisconsin as a legislatively-referred constitutional amendment. The measure would, upon voter approval, require that revenue generated by transportation fees and taxes be deposited into the state's transportation fund. None of the revenue collected from transportation-related levies could be appropriated to any program that is not directly administered by the Wisconsin Department of Transportation.[1] Therefore, the amendment would guarantee that revenue from transportation-related levies, such as the gas tax and vehicle registration fee, would be allocated to transportation-related projects.[2]
Text of the measure

Ballot title
The official ballot text reads as follows:[1]

“Question 1: "Creation of a Transportation Fund. Shall section 9 (2) of article IV and section 11 of article VIII of the constitution be created to require that revenues generated by use of the state transportation system be deposited into a transportation fund administered by a department of transportation for the exclusive purpose of funding Wisconsin's transportation systems and to prohibit any transfers or lapses from this fund?"[3]

...

Rep. Gary Hebl (D-46) disagreed with putting constitutional protections on one segregated fund, but not the other segregated funds. He viewed this as prioritizing transportation over other important budget issues, such as education and health care, since the transportation fund could not be raided, but the other funds could still be raided. Rep. Chris Kapenga (R-99), the only Republican to vote against the amendment, issued a similar statement, saying all segregated state funds should be protected, not just the transportation fund.[11]

Republicans are all for it, Democrats against.

[Pharaoh]

1. Why do we have referendoms like this

and not ones for high speed rail, taking the medicare money, citizens united etc ? Because they don't serve the people. With the internet we now have the ability to vote on important controversial matters. That would go along way to fix our so called Democracy!

[dragonlady]

7. Milwaukee County is having referendums like that this year

Our Milwaukee County Board members, the ones that Scott Walker and Chris Abele think should be beaten into submission, put these on the ballot for November. They are all nonbinding, but I for one would like to at least express my opinion (yes, yes, yes, probably yes).

Milwaukee County Referendum - Question 1 (Campaign Finance)
“Shall the United States Constitution be amended to establish the following: 1. Only human beings, not corporations, are entitled to Constitutional rights, and 2. Money is not speech, and therefore, regulating political contributions and spending is not equivalent to limiting political speech.” Yes / No

Milwaukee County Referendum - Question 2 (Badgercare)
“Shall the next state legislature accept all available federal funds for Badgercare to ensure that thousands of Wisconsin citizens have access to affordable health coverage?” Yes / No

Milwaukee County Referendum - Question 3 (Minimum Wage)
“Should the State of Wisconsin increase the minimum wage to $10.10 an hour?” Yes / No

Milwaukee County Referendum - Question 4 (County Executive / Administrator)
“Should Wisconsin Statutes be amended to allow Milwaukee County to transition its management and administrative functions from an elected county executive to a professional county administrator?” Yes / No

[Elmer S. E. Dump]

8. Cuz we aint no republican'ts

[riversedge]

9. Some counties have referendums to Expand Badgercare....

chippewa cty has included it also.


There is hope that these referendums will help get out the vote for Dems.

And older article here:

http://www.stevenspointjournal.com/story/news/local/2014/07/05/counties-push-back-walkers-badgercare-decision/12195959/


Counties push back against Walker's BadgerCare decision
Sari Lesk, Stevens Point Journal Media 10:24 a.m. CDT July 6, 2014



STEVENS POINT – Portage County might join several other Wisconsin counties demanding that Gov. Scott Walker's administration accept federal money to expand BadgerCare .

.........Portage County is among at least 11 Wisconsin counties that have pursued BadgerCare referendums in one form or another.

Although the referendum question is advisory and wouldn't require any action following the vote, Suomi said she thinks it is important for people to share their opinions with state leadership.

"It gives the opportunity to have a voice in what the state is doing at the state level," Suomi said.

Walker was among about 25 governors who declined federal funding to expand Medicaid in their states. Under the Affordable Care Act, states were allowed to expand their Medicaid programs to cover people earning up to 138 percent of the poverty level. Walker chose to expand the program only for those earning 100 percent of the poverty level and said his approach would keep everyone living below the poverty line covered.

So far, Eau Claire, Dunn and Milwaukee counties have voted to include BadgerCare questions on November ballots. County committees in Outagamie, Dane, Washburn and Bayfield counties have recommended similar moves and all await county board action.......

[Pharaoh]

2. PS

If this money is earmarked for transportation, does it not go there now? This thing is really kind of confusing.

[sybylla]

5. The issue isn't protecting this segregated fund.

It's protecting this segregated fund constitutionally but none of the other segregated funds.

Secondly, while it seems simple, and while if may be worthy to protect segregated funds, passing this constitutional amendment means that even in uncertain times or unusual circumstances there is zero budgetary flexibility. Essentially it ties hands.

Plus, on its face, it appears to protect segregated funds in a foolproof way. The only problem is that tgey are making better fool every day.

[LoveIsNow]

3. Why are Democrats against this?

It seems relatively uncontroversial that revenue earmarked transportation should go for transportation.

[customerserviceguy]

6. It's a matter of how people view taxes

Drivers view fuel taxes and vehicle registration charges as user fees, while non-drivers like to think of them as penalty fines, and seek to undo the 'karma' of the drivers by funding their pet projects.

[ewagner]

4. Being a County elected official....

I hear this continuing rant from Town Board Chairs/Members on the County Board floor constantly.

Understand the context....in Town Government, IT'S ALL ABOUT ROADS.... there is not much else they have to govern or have control over...because of the generally rural nature of Townships, there is little tax base with which to fund road improvements so their funds to do road improvements come from the County and the State.

Counties through the Wisconsin Counties Association and Towns through the Wisconsin Towns Association put a lot of effort into lobbying the state legislature for more or a larger share of the State's transportation fund. The perception is that every dollar that is diverted to another issue (e.g. Education) is a dollar DIRECTLY out of their pockets.

You will see lobbying support of this referendum item from the above organizations, individual LTE support in local papers from Town/County officials and probably from the Wisconsin Highway Superintendent's Association (yes, they are organized too...as well as County Clerks Association, County Registers of Deed Association, DAs and on and on and on).

Personally, I don't like segregating state funds in this manner. Needs and priorities of the State change from budget to budget and the Governor and Legislature need the flexibility to fund the priorities as they see fit.

[cassg]

10. We had to fight for "Transit is transportation"

A couple of years ago, there was a move by the Republicans to move transit out of the transportation fund and into the social services budget. We had to fight an uncertain battle to keep transit in the books as transportation. If they succeed in creating a "transportation lock-box", their next move might well be to kick transit out of "transportation" so that the whole transportation budget will go to highway-building.

[dragonlady]

11. Thank you for this information

And welcome to DU!

[Scuba]

12. Welcome to DU!

[midnight]

14. Very interesting…..

http://jakehasablog.blogspot.com/2014/10/transportation-fund-looking-up-for-now.html

[yourout]

13. I voted NO. As a small business owner I can unequivocally say.....flexibility is everything.