When Will They Fix Foster Care?

by capper

The Bureau of Milwaukee Child Welfare, the privatized foster care system overseen by the State, has been in the news a lot lately, and not for good things. Now in today's JSOnline is this story:

UPDATE: Infant death possible homicide

The death of a 5-month-old boy, who was left unsupervised with his mentally ill mother by a visitation worker employed by the state-run Bureau of Milwaukee Child Welfare, is being investigated as a homicide, police said today.

The child died about half an hour after the visitation worker left the infant without supervision, police said. An autopsy was being performed Saturday to determine the cause of death.

The death is the latest in a series involving child welfare workers and comes on the heels of a state report released last month that accompanied a plan to beef up programs to keep children at risk of abuse or neglect safe, after a review of more than 600 active Milwaukee child welfare cases.

The review was ordered in May after the Journal Sentinel reported the suffocation death of a toddler, Alicia Burgess, who was left in her home by child welfare workers despite warnings by two doctors that the child and her brother were in danger. Raul Arteaga, 34, the boyfriend of Alicia's mother, is charged with first-degree reckless homicide.

In February the Journal Sentinel reported that a 7-month-old baby starved to death as child welfare workers regularly stopped by her Milwaukee home to check on an older child who had been abused. The bureau had been warned of concerns about the baby's health, but caseworkers reported that the parents refused to let them check on her conditions.

In the latest case, police said the 29-year-old mother lost custody of the infant in July because her mental illness interfered with her ability to care for the child. The baby was then placed in foster care. On October 19th, a niece of the woman was granted custody of the infant by Milwaukee County Children's court and the mother was granted visitation rights, police said. They said they did not know if the visits were supposed to be supervised or unsupervised.

Police gave this account of the events leading up to the baby's death:

The 24-year-old visitation worker picked the infant up from the niece's house at
9:45 a.m. Friday for a visit at the mother's apartment in the 2500 block of W. Wells St. that was to last from 10 a.m. to 2 p.m. She told police that she was only supposed to supervise the mother's visit with the infant for the first half hour and the last half hour of the visit and left at 10:30 a.m.

At 10:45 a.m. a mental health social worker who knew the mother was having a visit with the child called to make sure it was going well and was told by the mother that everything was fine. That worker told police that she could hear the baby "cooing" in the background and that the mother was coherent.

At 11:10 a.m. the mother called the mental health worker back and said something
was wrong with the baby and the worker called 911.

Police said they did not know where the baby was when the fire department rescue
squad arrived, but that there was some water in the bathtub.

The mother told police that she overdosed on medications, passed out and indicated that she had left the baby in the bathtub.The mother, who police said suffers from an undisclosed mental illness, was being held at the Milwaukee Mental Health complex.

I understand, even though I disagree with, the right's desire to privatize anything and everything. The thought is that it would save money, although I have not seen any credible proof of this.

But even if this argument, some things should not be done with the bottom line being the driving concern. Some things, like taking care of our children. There is no way this child should have been left alone with this mother without knowing whether she was stable enough to care for the child. Apparently they knew she wasn't, or they would have someone staying for parts of the visits, or checking up on her.

UPDATE: In an update story, MSJ is reporting that the court ordered unsupervised visits. The still does not absolve the Bureau, as that the article also states that the workers never spoke with neighbors, who were aware of the situation. If they had done so, they would have been able to suspend visits and take the issue back to court.

At least there are some reason to hope. When I see stories like this one, I know not all is lost, and that some people still get it.

Alberta Darling: Even I Don't Like The Job I've Done

by capper


As I had noted previously, in 1996, Alberta Darling, along with her fellow Republicans, at the marching orders of then-Governor Tommy Thompson added a clause to the budget bill, taking over the child welfare system in Milwaukee County. Their rationale was that, even though independent audits had shown the foster care system to be grossly underfunded, that they could do a better job at running the system than Milwaukee County had.

In 1998, the state took over, creating the Bureau of Milwaukee Child Welfare (BMCW) and began to privatize the system. By the end of 2001, they had it all but completely privatized, with contracts to no less than five different agencies. They also increased the budget for Milwaukee County's child welfare system by some $35 million. At that time, the standard payment to a foster parent of a child less than three years old was $292 per month.

In this morning's Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, there is an article that reports the payment to foster parents has skyrocketed up to $317 per month. That is $25 per month, or a .o9% increase, in six years. Not exactly a great big lot of help.

Now, I will admit that I don't have children myself, but I did work in the child welfare system. I know that the cost to raise a child is pretty high. It becomes higher when the child has been abused and neglected, as that child will have some serious emotional and sometimes physical issues that need to be contended with. There is the need for special medical equipment, extra time is needed for meetings with social workers, attorneys, advocates, doctors and other professionals that would not be in the life of a healthy child, and there is the damage that can occur when an emotionally scarred child acts out.

And, based on conversations that I have had with people that are still working in the system, foster parents are not getting a lot of support from BMCW. Their requests for extra services are ignored, their complaints fall on deaf ears, and they are often left with an inexperienced worker, or no worker at all.

Foster parents do one of the hardest jobs in the world. They take in someone else's child that has been neglected, physically abused, and/or sexually abused, and they give it a loving home, nurturing and an affection that is totally alien to what they have had previously experienced. They don't do it for accolades, or money, or any reason other than they love children.

So, where is all that extra money going? Well, there is the administration of all these different agencies, and their own spending issues, including $9,000 for a conference table. There is also a faulty computer system, the lawsuits, and the ongoing internal audits done by the state to tell itself there are no problems, even though everyone else can see them. Oh, and there is the inefficiencies of the private agencies.

The article goes on to report that State Senator Alberta Darling, the same person who helped give birth to this monster, and is on the advisory board, which is supposed to be overseeing BMCW, due to all of its problems, takes this position:

Sen. Alberta Darling (R-River Hills) says she supports that increase - and more in the future. "We are really significantly behind," she said. "We are spending millions and millions of dollars on foster care, and some of that needs to be directed toward foster parent reimbursement."

Darling, who is a member of the advisory group to the state-run Bureau of Milwaukee Child Welfare, added that the state needs to come up with a 10-year plan to "redirect some of the money going to the bureaucracy into direct service on the line to foster parents and kinship parents."

She admits that there are serious flaws that are ongoing in BMCW, which she helped to create, and is supposed to be overseeing. In other words, she admits that even she doesn't like the job she has been doing. It should only be a matter of time before she is wearing a "Sheldon Wasserman for State Senate" button.

BMCW Enables Sex Offenders

by capper

I've already spoken about how the Bureau of Milwaukee Child Welfare has let down the children of Milwaukee County, and that I put the blame with the fact that it is privatized. I still stand by the position that by privatizing the foster care system, it has increased the cost to taxpayers, decreased services to the children and their families, and have made the situation worse.

In an article in the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel this past Saturday, we find that the Bureau is now allowing sexual predators to continue preying on children. They are doing this by not doing their job:

In November, the girl said she was tired of the abuse and reported it again, to someone who is not identified in records. This time it was reported to police, who reported it to the Bureau of Milwaukee Child Welfare. The criminal complaint alleges Lee-Kendrick had sexually abused two of the girls for years. The third said she was sexually assaulted when she was at a sleepover at one of the other teens' homes in January.

The social worker in the April case told authorities that a supervisor directed her to close the investigation several months before the recent charges without contacting police.

She said the supervisor told her that the closure was "in accordance with the administrative decision to close this case, as well as numerous other cases, during a time when (child welfare) investigations of referrals were purged due to overload," according to records filed in Milwaukee County Children's Court.

Closing the case without completing the investigation and by willfully failing to contact the police is in direct violation of BMCW policy and the law. Not only should have the worker contacted police, the child should have been interviewed by a trained professional (the Bureau had a contract with Children's Hospital to do these, and they were very good), but the worker should have made the effort to contact the alleged perpetrator, not just wait for him to call him or her. Even if he refused to speak with the worker, the other two things should have been done, at a minimum.

When I worked for Milwaukee County in the foster care system, and their was a large influx of referrals regarding the possible neglect or abuse of children, we were not allowed to close cases or screen them out. All workers would be assigned to do the investigations, not just the intake workers, regardless of their job classification.

When the State took over and privatized the system, this option of bringing in extra workers to help with the overflow of referrals was also removed. Now, only state workers can handle the investigations, and if there are too many referrals, as we can see from the article, they just close them.

Who knows how many children are being left in neglectful and/or abusive situations? We do know that there has been a massive audit of these cases, but now we must wonder if we can even trust the results of the audit.

I still encourage people to contact their State Senator and State Representative and encourage them to either deprivatize child welfare in the county, or better yet, just give it back to Milwaukee County, with sufficient funding this time, so that we can take care of our own children.

Abusing The Abused

by capper

In the early 1990's, a group of child rights advocates groups filed a federal law suit against Milwaukee County and the State of Wisconsin, stating that the rights of children in foster care in Milwaukee were being violated. The state tried to get out of the lawsuit, but wasn't allowed to. Then the county, the state and the advocacy groups agreed to have a private audit done of the child welfare system. The audit showed that Milwaukee County was not being fully funded in the state.

The state denied this finding and stated that Milwaukee was getting enough money, but that it was being mismanaged. In 1996, Tommy Thompson and some of his puppets (including Margaret Farrow and Alberta Darling) in the state legislature added an earmark to the state budget. This earmark stated that, effective January 1, 1998, the state would take over the child welfare system in any county with a population of more that 500,000. There was only one county that fit into that parameter-Milwaukee. Thus, the Bureau of Milwaukee Child Welfare was formed. It had a starting budget that was more than $30 million dollars than what they allotted Milwaukee County when it ran the system.

The Bureau took over and immediately divided the county into five sections, and put up each section for bidding, as well as the adoptions and foster home licensing sections of the system. The county was able to win contracts for adoptions, licensing and two of the five sites. The other three sites went to three private agencies.

Over the course of the next three and a half years, Milwaukee County was slowly, but surely, forced out of the system, and it was entirely privatized. This is in despite of an audit that showed that the county was able to provide better care more efficiently and for less money. Many of the private agencies folded and/or merged with others to create new agencies.

Ever since the state took over, the same problems continue, and new ones have arisen. The only positive is that children are being adopted at a faster pace, but that is mostly due to compliance with a federal mandate passed by the Clinton administration. Otherwise, the children who have been abused and/or neglected continue to be bounced from home to home, abused in the foster homes they are placed in, don't receive needed services, and having their lives put on hold due to high staff turnover rates.

Now, in today's paper, there is a story of this continuing. The most alarming part of the article is that the number of foster homes available to these children have dropped by 78%. The article fails to mention why the drop in available homes, but common complaints from the past include the extremely low rate of reimbursement (just over $300 per month to feed, clothe and provide all other necessities) and the fact that the Bureau is not receptive or supportive when they are trying to deal with these troubled children. The lack of homes results in children being placed in unsafe homes, or in being bounced from home to home. These results only further traumatize the child, making him or her more difficult to care for.

These poor showings, without any real or substantive shows of improvement, continue year after year. Every year, after every more report, the state says that it is unacceptable and is going to change, but never does. It is time that we demand that the state either put forth a more serious effort to help our children who have already been failed by their own parents, or better yet, get out of the system and give it back to Milwaukee County, and let us take care of our own.


This demand should be bipartisan. Not only will it provide better protection for our children, it would put control back on a local level, and make more efficient use of our tax dollars.

Milwaukee Children Are Still Not Being Protected

by capper

Ironically, at the end of Child Abuse Prevention Month, the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel reported today that the Bureau of Milwaukee Child Welfare still isn't doing its job. Today's article focused on the Bureau's inability to provide services to families in which one or both of the parents have mental health issues. This is not surprising, as that the Bureau has a long history of not providing services to families, which needs to be done for the children to be reunited with their families, or to find a permanent alternative home. These services are required by state and federal laws, to protect everyone's rights.

The Bureau has historically done such a poor job of protecting our children, and an even worse record of responding to these problems, that three years ago they created the Office of the Milwaukee Ombudsman for Child Welfare, which was to oversee their performance. But they aren't even doing their job, and shuffle the majority of the cases that they're supposed to review back to the Bureau.

The sad part is that the system is so fouled up that I don't know if there is an easy fix anymore. I used to advocate that the system should be returned to Milwaukee County, which, while not perfect, did a much better job than what's been happening the last ten years. Unfortunately, I can no longer advocate for such an action, and still remain ethical. Given how badly Walker has destroyed the transit system, the parks, mental health services, corrections and the courts, I would be even more afraid for the children's well being if Walker would have control of the system. And I would be remiss if I did not point out that Walker was part of the legislature when this fiasco was slipped into the 1996-7 state budget.

The only realistic solution to start solving things would be to finally fire Denise Revels Robinson. She came to Wisconsin, after ruining Minnesota's child welfare system, and has been in charge for the entire ten years of the Bureau's existence. And despite repeated reports of failures to protect her wards, and just running a totally ineffective system, she issues a statement that she is aware of the problems, but feels that the Bureau has improved and continues to work to improve. But it never does.

It should also be noted that another person who has had her finger in the mix, from introducing the whole ill-planned fiasco to the budget, to being on the "advisory panel" that is supposed to be monitoring things, is Senator Alberta Darling. But she has already admitted that she has done a lousy job of things. She should be sent packing as well.

Who's Watching The Watchers

by capper

What's it going to take before people start worrying about the abused and neglected children in Milwaukee County?

I have pointed out before that the Bureau of Milwaukee Child Welfare isn't doing their job in protecting these kids that have already been maltreated.

Now we see that the Milwaukee Child Welfare Partnership Council, which was formed to oversee the BMCW, can't even oversee themselves.

I can't imagine why a County Board Supervisor, or a private citizen couldn't make any of the meetings, but even if they had a valid reason, then they should resign and let someone who gives a darn take their place. Without oversight, the BMCW will continue to try to get away with murder, sometimes literally.

And for the conservatives that might be worried that the gubmint is only trying to take away their God-given rights to abuse children, let me point out that this Council is part of an agreement to settle a huge class action suit, and failure to follow through could end up costing the taxpayers millions of dollars, like Sheriff Valvoline Clarke is costing us with his failure to live up to his end of the bargain, regarding the overcrowding at the Milwaukee County Jail.

But it should be enough just to want to keep kids from further abuses.

George Bush Hates Taxpayers, Loves Deadbeats

by capper

Not only has George W. Bush proven himself to be absolutely incompetent at running a war, running a country, foreign policy and speaking English, he has added another nail to the coffin of the fallacy that he can do anything right fiscally or socially.

Bush slashed funds to child support enforcement in his Deficit Reduction Act of 2005. These cuts went into effect on October 1, 2007. There currently is a bill in the U.S. Senate, the Child Support Protection Act of 2007, which would, if passed, restore these funds.

What would it mean if the funding is not restored? According to the National Women's Law Center, in 2006, the child support program collected $24 billion for 17 million children-a fourth of the nation's children. For every 74 cents the federal government spent on the program, it collected $4.58 in private child support dollars. This is money that single parents, usually mothers, can use to provide for their children and raise their families out of poverty. It is also money that doesn't need to be spent in entitlement programs, such as welfare, Medicaid and food stamps.

Not only does this program collect child support from deadbeat parents, it helps impoverished and/or unskilled parents gain the skills necessary to attain and maintain viable employment so that they can help support their children.

So, if you would like Congress to exhibit uncommon common fiscal sensibility, contact your U.S. Senator and U.S. Congressman, and encourage them to pass the Child Support Protection Act. If you do, you'll have already done more than George Bush to make this country a better place.

Bravo Channel

By Keith Schmitz

Local labor activist Ellen Bravo popped up in the New York Times letters column yesterday.

Alas, “welfare as we know it” was ended by those who’d never known welfare or poverty.

For low-wage workers ineligible for unemployment insurance, welfare was how you made do when you got laid off or fired, including for being pregnant. It often supplemented inadequate wages.

For many, it gave a path out of violence. It represented a way to care for a newborn or a dying parent, get health insurance or avoid having to leave young children home alone.

Welfare recipients would tell you in a heartbeat that the system needed reform. But their wish list grew out of one goal: getting out of poverty. That was never the purpose of the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act, and it certainly wasn’t the result.

We’ll resolve the problem only if we name it correctly: the need to reform work and value caregiving.

This is a nice lead in to the perfect cynicism of Congressman Mark Green. Since I heard it in front of a group of businesspeople, I imagine he has picked up the theme of how our state programs has led to some of the worst poverty in the nation within the city of Milwaukee.

The problem is this is like an arsonist describing why your house is on fire.

Programs passed by the GOP have led to manifold problems for Wisconsin's poor, but in the world of these hammerheads all the world consists of nails and of course the remedy is...hold your breath...TAX CUTS!

Ellen Bravo of course describes one problem, which is the so-called "welfare reform" program. It is jay dropping burt last Friday Wall Street Journal editor Steve More equated this brain-child with the great Badger ideas of workmens' compensation and social security.

To end "dat welfare" was of course the cherished dream of barflies everywhere, brought to life by the lord of the barflies, Tommy Thompson. The trouble is this poorly thought through solution has thrust thousands of families deeper into poverty as Ellen describes. What's more this program gives scant chance for these mothers to work their way out of the pit.

On the male side we have the explosion of incarcerations, which never looks good on anyone's resume. Building prisons we didn't need was the one and only idea of Scott Walker that propelled this beautiful mind back to the legislature, thanks to his grateful constituency.

Of course we have the constant drumbeat every night on our local news of the string of homicides that take place in Milwaukee, far from the cul de sacs of New Berlin but yet it makes the easily afraid in these and other distant suburbs to send off crime fighters like Walker to Madison.

The only problem is it costs us -- and the convicts of course -- royally. Our cost of incarceration far exceeds that of our neighbors, but there is one thing our two GOP AG candidates will never tell you. Our violent crime rate is the fourth or fifth lowest in the nation.

On top of that we have businesses locating their jobs far beyond the Milwaukee bus lines.

The way we treat our poor and minorities is a shame in light of our PROGRESSIVE tradition, putting us right down there with the redneck realms in the South. There is no way we are going to hack our way out of this forest with tax cuts.

Lessons in Hypocrisy from Charlie Sykes

by bert

WTMJ talker Charlie Sykes once “wrote” a “book” about lessons not taught in school. Since the tragedy at the O’Donnell Park ramp last week, I can only surmise from listening at times to Charlie that there are a few other, I guess, lessons that must seem obvious to him, but, to be honest, had not really made sense to the rest of us up to now.

#1: Charlie can talk a lot about the parking lot tragedy and the issue of who is not to blame. However, it is insensitive and “despicable” that others have talked about the parking lot tragedy and who is to blame.

#2: We should not try to find the cause for falling cement in a county parking garage, at least not for a long time. However, a rapid response was called for when Charlie and fellow WTMJ talker Jeff Wagner were on the air blaming the governor and Milwaukee mayor within the hour in May when it was announced we needed to close the Zoo Interchange bridges for repairs.
UPDATE: Playground Politics also picked up on this inconsistency.

#3: Because the death of a 15-year-old resulted from the parking lot tragedy, it is reprehensible to suggest blame rests with a government entity. That’s playing politics with a tragedy. On the other hand, Charlie was a righteous avenger letting loose with both compassionate barrels when he railed ad nauseum against the state-run child welfare agency and Gov. Jim Doyle for their obvious role in the death of the 13-month-old foster child Christopher Thomas in Milwaukee last November. That’s because Charlie cares about kids.

If there are no further questions, class is dismissed.

Why Aren't We Doing This?

by capper

In an article in yesterday's paper, there is a report about a study comparing the differences between foster care systems in the Midwest. Specifically about kids aging out of the system.

In most states, including Wisconsin, kids that are in foster care are cut loose on their 18th birthday. If they haven't graduated from high school by then, the foster care order can be extended for up to a year or until they graduate, whichever comes first.

Illinois takes a different approach. They provide support for their foster kids until the age of 21 years, which is closer to the norm of a child that was raised in their natural parents' home. The study found this:

According to the report, youths who remain in state care until age 21 are 3 1/2 times more likely to attend college and more than twice as likely to complete at least one year of college than those who leave care at 18.

Each additional year in state care is associated with increased earnings of about 17%, the study says, and remaining in state care until age 21 is associated with a 38% reduction in the risk of becoming pregnant during late adolescence.

In other words, for spending a little money now, taxpayers can save a lot of money later on not having to pay for incarcerations, additional insurance for the kids of foster kids, and other associated costs to society. It also helps these foster kids have a better chance of succeeding and becoming more productive members of society, not to mention that it keeps from totally abandoning kids that have already been abandoned, emotionally, if not physically, by their natural parents.

And for the conservative readers, yes, this type of support can be and is offered by private agencies. Off the top of my head, I can think of Pathfinders and Walker's Point Youth & Family Center, which already offer similar programs, with wonderful success rates.

Yet besides what would seem like a no-brainer for politicians from either party, nothing is being done about this. It helps children who have already been abused and/or neglected, it saves money for the taxpayers, and it makes the community a better place. The only reason I can think of for our leaders' failure to act is two-fold. One, social services are rarely popular among the conservatives, no matter how much they may actually save. Second, foster kids usually don't have enough money to be politically influential.

So, why isn't the state-operated Bureau of Milwaukee Child Welfare providing these services? And if Governor Jim Doyle and his state agency can't see past their noses and campaign coffers, why isn't Scott Walker taking action on this? After all, it would benefit Milwaukee County citizens and taxpayers as well.

Wigderson sets up straw curd man, eats it

by folkbum

James Wigderson's latest "special guest perspective" at the MacGruber World Institute for Advancing Agendas in Spite of Facts touches on a subject near and dear to me (my emphasis):

The increase in the child tax credit is due to expire in 2011 along with the rest of the Bush tax cuts. If the Democrats in Congress and the Obama Administration follow through on their threat to let the Bush tax cuts expire, middle-class taxpayers in Wisconsin and elsewhere could receive a huge tax jolt. [. . .]

Wisconsinites benefit from this tax cut more than residents in other states. Of the tax filers claiming the credit, Wisconsin filers ranked eighth in benefiting from the credit. Wisconsin filers’ average credit ranked fourteenth of all filers. Of the Wisconsinites claiming the credit, the average tax benefit was $1,335 off what they owed.

That’s a lot of cheese curds.

When you invoke the mighty curd, you had better be right in your facts, as I can hear curdspolitation six counties away and doubtless will descend upon those who befoul the curd with a righteous fury.

In Wigderson's case here, the cheese stands alone. At least, the cheese stands outside the realm of reality.

Let's start with the opening presumption. "Democrats in Congress," the son of Wigder writes, "and the Obama administration" have apparently made "threats to let the Bush tax cuts expire," and if that happens, "middle-class taxpayers" would lose their curds. But here's where Wiggy starts to fall off the cheese wheel.

The simple fact is that while "Democrats in Congress and the Obama administration" have indeed stated their intent to let some of the Bush Tax cuts sunset as originally intended (note that he doesn't direct any curdignation at the Republicans who originally scheduled that sunset!), no leading Democrat and no one in the Obama administration has suggested letting the child tax credit expire.

If you don't believe me, just google it. (I assume Wigderson opted not to run a four-second google search because it would have totally ruined his argument, scuttled his column, and cost him that sweet wingnut welfare payday.) You'll see that not only has Obama promised to extend that credit beyond 2011 (with Congress expecting to make it permanent later this summer), he has proposed doubling the credit*. The truth here is precisely the opposite of what Wigderson claims.

This is worth repeating: Wigderson's entire column, from start to finish, top to bottom, is predicated entirely on a complete disconnect from reality.

There are other little bits of disconnection from reality along the way, of course (why stop at just the thesis of your argument when you can muck up even the details?). As an example, there's this: "Democrats unhappy with the Bush tax cuts neglect to mention that only 25% of the benefits went to those making $250,000 per year or more."

Democrats "neglect to mention" this statistic because, you know, it is a stupid and misleading one. Let's assume it's true--that "only" a quarter of all the benefit of the cuts accrues to those making $250,000 or more. It would be good to know how many such filers there are. And in fact, those earning $250,000 or more account for "only" the top 10% of earners in the country. This means that they are receiving a disproportionate share of the benefit of the cuts. Other people note the disparity more clearly:

In 2006, the bottom fifth of income earners got an average tax cut of $20, or 0.3 percent of their income. In 2006, the top fifth of income earners got an average tax cut of $5,800, or 4.1 percent of income. At the very top, the average tax cut was more than 6 percent of income.

[T]he top 0.6 percent of tax filers, those with more than $500,000 in income, received nearly three-quarters of the benefits of the capital gains and dividend tax cuts in 2005.

And indeed, Widgerson's statistic is not true. According to a 2008 report of the Joint Economic Committee, "In 2007, one third of the total benefits of the tax [Bush] cuts went to the top one percent of households." (And the top 1% is those earning $350,000 and up.) Since 2007, the middle-class tax cuts have been constant while breaks on capital gains and estate taxes have continued to grow, pushing the disparity even higher. This year, with the complete absence of any kind of estate tax at all, the skew will be at its peak.

It is always, by definition, easier to argue against a straw man: State something you know is not true (Democrats are going to let the child tax credit expire!) and then amass your evidence and have at it. And here Wigderson does indeed to a nice job of explaining why Obama and the Democrats are smart to not only extend but perhaps increase the child tax credit. But a straw man is a lazy writer's strategy, and one that subjects you to ridicule and derision for not having a basic grasp on the truth. Here Wigderson has gone all-in on an argument full of rotten cheese.

*Corrected. Also, see this report on the benefit of the Bush tax cuts to the wealthiest earners.

Walker On Privatization

by capper

After writing my previous post about the privatization of the Milwaukee County child welfare system and what a disaster it turned out to be, I wondered what County Executive Scott Walker's position on privatization was (as if I didn't already know).

Well, the answer is: It depends on when you ask him. In 2002, when he was first elected to his current position, Walker had this to say:

Meanwhile, he has repeatedly said he will not look to turning large chunks of county government over to the private sector. Nevertheless, he can expect battles from the county's labor unions, most of which backed his opponents - first Milwaukee Ald. Tom Nardelli, then Ryan.

But just like with his promise not to run for re-election, Walker is singing a different tune these days. From the MSJ article covering his decision to run again:

We've got to get even more aggressive at being innovative," he said. He wants more consideration of privatization or contracting with other governmental units to provide services more efficiently, Walker said.

Maybe if he kept his word once in a while, and would display some leadership instead of pandering to his base, he wouldn't need to worry so much about poll numbers. But then again, his poor leadership is what is making Senator Lena Taylor look even better for Milwaukee County.

Alberta Darling: My Staff Will Not Be Outworked

by capper

Last week, the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel ran a story about the political races that are forming up for this fall's elections.

Without a doubt, one of the biggest races on the local scene is the match up between state Senator Alberta Darling and state Representative Sheldon Wasserman. This is what Greg J. Borowski wrote about the race (emphasis mine):

In the Milwaukee area, the marquee battle pits Sen. Alberta Darling (R-River Hills) against Rep. Sheldon Wasserman (D-Milwaukee). In what could become an expensive battle, Democrats hope a win will add to their edge in the Senate.

“There is a huge mood in this country for change,” said Wasserman, who added, “This race will not be bought. It will be earned by someone knocking on doors.”

Wasserman said he has knocked on more than 17,000 doors (17,274 to be exact). Darling said she and her staff have visited 25,000 homes, including 10,000 since spring.

“I will not be outworked,” Darling said, adding: “People are looking for somebody who listens to them, hears them and works for them.”

It would be interesting to know just how many of those 25,000 homes Darling did herself, and if she spent any time with the people that live in those homes. It is also rather tacky to take credit for the work of others, even if they're volunteers for her campaign.

My personal impressions of Darling are not favorable, and she has spoken out of both sides of her mouth on more than one occasion. I remember that in the mid 1990's, she, along with Mia Farrow and a few other Republican Senators, spearheaded getting Milwaukee County's child welfare system privatized. On the morning that she came to speak to the county workers, in which she was going to thank and praise us for our years of devotion, the MSJ ran an article in which she completely smeared the workers, and not the fact that three different auditors found that the state had been shorting the system for years. Since then, the privatization efforts have only made things worse.

Now, more than ten years later, she even admits that she did a lousy job of it.

Cross posted at Cognitive Dissidence.

The Morgan Stanley Starbucks Verizon Wireless Miller General Billy Mitchell International Airport

by capper

Scott Walker must be looking for more publicity in the face of the upcoming election.

Today's MSJ has a story about how Walker, County Board Supervisor Paul Cesarz, and County Board Patricia Jursik met with with representatives from Morgan Stanley, who were pitching the idea of privatizing the airport. If you remember, Walker did tried to do a back door deal to do this a ways back, and it blew up in his face.

The story makes the proposition look rosy, saying that the county could see anywhere from $500 million to $1 billion dollars. That is a very tempting offer to a county that has been strapped for cash since the pension scandal, the second pension scandal, and Walker's repeated ham-handed attempts at creating a budget, which inevitably blows up.

But there are many unanswered questions in this story. For example, how long would the lease be for? If it is only a year, even I would urge Walker to take it. If it over 99 years, well then it's not such a great deal after all.

And what are the chances of it even happening? The article reports that Chicago has already put in a bid, and the feds are saying only one midsize to large airport could be privatized at this time.
Not only that, but come April, there might be a whole new slate of faces running the county government, besides Lena Taylor being the new County Executive. Even Walker himself said that nothing would be done on this until after the elections.

And the same questions arise, that were brought up from the last time Walker tried to privatize the airport. There are no answers yet about how it may affect airport operations, how it may affect people living in close vicinity to the airport, and what would happen if the private agency would fail.

I'll spare you the rehashing of the local endeavors of privatization of public entities that have flopped. Things like the Bureau of Milwaukee Child Welfare, the Public Museum and MMSD. And I won't go into a big, long spiel about how many time Walker has lied to the people of Milwaukee County about these wonderful things he does.

All I will say is: It may or may not be a good idea, and it might or might not happen, but why is this being reported without these answers, unless it is just Walker trying to get some attention. So much for the liberal media.

UPDATE: Even Ed Garvey and Owen Robinson agree with me. Will wonders never cease?

Bryan Kennedy's Progressive Religious Values

Update by folkbum: MU Warrior and Boots and Sabers readers are encouraged to read the entire essay below, as McAdams and Owen both completely misrepresent what Professor Kennedy actually says. Bryan responds here, and my personal rejoinders are here and here.

How is it that conservative religious zealots have seized my Savior and determined His values? Why do they try to tell me how to live my life and how to follow Him? How did they come to the conclusion that Christ was pro-war, pro-business, and that He spouted hatred for people who were not like Him? These questions have puzzled me for quite some time. I was raised to believe that Christ was the peacemaker, he cast the money changers out of the temple, and he taught us to turn the other cheek.

I was raised Catholic, but as a teenager my family and I converted to the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints (Mormons/Latter-Day Saints). This was not an easy transition. We were nominally Catholic, so the move to a Church that requires so much of its followers was a big step. Mormons are among the most personally conservative of all Christians. We are strongly pro-family, don't drink, don't smoke, believe in chastity before marriage and fidelity once married, and we tithe 1/10th of our household income to the Church. To become a Latter-Day Saint is to make a major lifestyle change for most people. (It certainly was for us!!)

Despite conservative personal behaviors, Latter-Day Saints are also very progressive collectively. The Church has its own welfare system and we take care of people during hard times. The LDS Church has a worldwide charitable arm that functions in areas of natural disaster, famine or war to feed the hungry and clothe the naked. Our women's auxiliary regularly provides meals and assistance to families when a new child is born, a parent is sick or there is a death in the family. We take seriously the passage from the Book of Mormon, "When ye are in the service of your fellow being, ye are only in the service of your God." (Mosiah 2:17) Our Sunday School classes and weekly worship services regularly teach of: faith, hope and charity; brotherly kindness; and lifting up the sick, the afflicted, the elderly, the fatherless, the widows, and the downtrodden.

We also hold as one of the most important tenets of our faith God's gift of agency. We believe that we are saved by grace after all that we can do for ourselves. Being a follower of Christ requires us to give all of our heart, might, mind and strength to keeping His commandments and to emulating His example. In the end, we are human and will fall short. Thus, Christ's grace saves us after all that we attempt to do for ourselves. Our agency is our God-given right to make our own decisions and to chart our own paths in life. God forces no one to follow His Son; we must decide for ourselves to pursue His Gospel in word and deed. Agency allows us the freedom to choose for ourselves in all things. To Latter-Day Saints there is NOTHING as important as agency.

Latter-Day Saints so strongly supported agency and religious freedom that they were driven by mobs of religiously intolerant Christians from Illinois and Missouri in the 1840's to leave the United States and go to the Rocky Mountains. (Utah was part of Mexico when Mormons fled there 160 years ago.)

In the past couple of decades, LDS people have compromised their belief in religious tolerance and have "gotten into bed" politically with conservative religious ideologues, most of whom hate Mormons. (This animosity is because we believe that we have a living prophet, who talks with God and provides revelation for us today.) Despite this hatred by many conservative Christian churches, LDS people have voted lock-step with them on issues of abortion, lotteries/gambling, and "moral values." Utah, which is over 70% Mormon has not voted Democratic for President since 1964. While Mormons espouse conservative, moral, personal behavior, we still believe that each person has their agency to choose for themselves. This conservative political realignment of the LDS Church appears to be overshadowing the best characterisitics of our religious actions--the progressive social values that fuel our church welfare, fellowship, and charitable programs.

Having now given a primer on what Latter-Day Saints believe, let me explain why I diverge from my religious community on political issues. It comes down to two things--my upbringing in an immigrant, pro-labor family, and my STRONG belief in agency as my primary religious value.

While I live by the conservative code of conduct of the Church, I recognize that it is a personal choice. I choose to live this way and I feel spiritually stronger by having bedrock principles that guide my actions. There is nothing so important to me as my freedom to make these decisions for myself. I resent people telling me how to live my life and criticizing me for not drinking and for not "sowing my wild oats" before getting married. There were many in my extended family who chastised us for abandoning our cultural religion in search of greater spiritual satisfaction. Within a few years, however, they saw a dramatic change in our family, our relationships improved, and my overwhelmingly Catholic family respects my parents, my brothers and me for our dedication to following Christ's example.

Our representative democracy promotes religious freedom and tolerance and allows for people to make their own decisions about what to believe and what religious organizations to join. We also allow the freedom to not worship at all, if an individual so chooses. Essentially the "agency" that is so central to Mormon doctrine is written into the guaranteed freedoms of the United States Constitution.

The official policies of the Church are actually more moderate than many other conservative Christian religious groups. The LDS Church does not excommunicate a woman who has an abortion, although they do excommunicate persons who commit murder or assault. The Church's policy on abortion is "Abortion is a most serious matter and should be considered only after the persons responsible have consulted with their bishops and received divine confirmation through prayer. The Church has not favored or opposed legislative proposals or public demonstrations concerning abortion" (Church Policies Handbook, p. 157). The LDS Church does not oppose birth control. Once again, the Church Policies Handbook: " The decision as to how many children to have and when to have them is extremely intimate and private and should be left between the couple and the Lord. Church members should not judge one another in this matter. Married couples also should understand that sexual relations within marriage are divinely approved not only for the purpose of procreation, but also as a means of expressing love and strengthening emotional and spiritual bonds between husband and wife" (p. 158). On prolonging life, such as the Terry Schiavo case, the Church has said: "When severe illness strikes, members should exercise faith in the Lord and seek competent medical assistance. However, when dying becomes inevitable, it should be seen as a blessing and a purposeful part of eternal existence. Members should not feel obligated to extend mortal life by means that are unreasonable. These judgments are best made by family members after receiving wise and competent medical advice and seeking diving guidance through fasting and prayer" (Church Policies Handbook, p. 156). We are a more moderate people that current political behaviors would lead one to believe. Each of these "moral values" issues mentioned above has agency and personal choice as its foundation.

As you can see, my personal political views appear to be in-line with the policies and teachings of my church. I choose to use my agency to follow Christ's example. I respectfully allow others the right to use their God-given agency however they may. A respected conservative, Voltaire, is purported to have said: "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." That is my personal feeling about civil liberties and religious freedom--agency and personal choice.

I am the grandchild of Italian immigrants. My grandfather, as a teenager, fled Mussolini and ended up in central Pennsylvania working in a coal mine, later a steel mill, and finally in a Mack Truck plant in Hagerstown, Maryland. My grandfather was one of the original signatories on UAW Local 171 union charter at Mack. While my grandfather was a religious conservative, he was a strong supporter of workers' rights and liveable wage. He taught me that management can do good things, but they won't generally do it without some prodding. He always believed in working together and in fostering good relationships with management. His philosophy was: "Sometimes they give; sometimes we do." Outside of the union hall, he was a charitable and giving person. He once said to my 9th grade social studies class: "I have worked hard and been poor. I cannot judge someone else because I do not know what setback they have suffered. I give and don't ask questions." That is my example of progressive religious values.

My progressive religious upbringing does provide a foundation for my political beliefs. My recipe for successfully navigating the political world and getting things done in Washington: Take a healthy dose of personal choice and individual freedom and add equal parts of moderation in all things, building consensus, and working together.

This post should probably invite a lot of commentary. I look forward to reading your feedback and comments. Thanks, God bless, and Happy New Year.

Bryan Kennedy
www.bk2006.org

Initial reactions to MPS budget audit, takeover talks

by folkbum

As my post below implies, I am aware of the state/city audit of the Milwaukee Public Schools. But because the report was released at 9AM today, and I have been, you know, working, I have not read all 100 pages (.pdf) or so. However, I have some initial reactions based on the news stories and the press releases that followed.

It sounds to me like the report recommends a bunch of nibbles and one big bite to save the district something like 8% of its budget. No doubt 8%--about $103 million--is a significant chunk of change, especially when you think about compounding it for years hence. On the other hand, the audit isn't suggesting any kind of grand silver silver bullet that will resolve the intractable issue of MPS's long-term fiscal health. Taking the MPS budget from $1.2 billion to $1.1 billion is not any kind of miracle; and given that some of the initial discussion is about redirecting those dollars to other places ($103 million buys something like a million fancy pencil sharpeners, apparently), there will continue to be the same budget pressures as always.

And a lot of the nibbles are actually projects underway at MPS. The district has a dozen or so properties up for sale and they're also slashing busing options for students--much to the chagrin of parents, by the way. Another recommendation seems to be re-centralizing purchasing, which was de-centralized a decade ago on the theory that schools would spend less if they were responsible for finding their own vendors and so forth. Instead, the district lost the economies of scale it used to achieve.

Yet another nibble is to change all schools over to pre-packaged school lunches. This is one of those things where clearly people are prioritizing budget over the best interests of the kids. Local, freshly prepared food is exponentially better for kids than frozen and reheated instameals, if more expensive. And other districts trying this exact solution are finding resistance from parents.

The big bite, of course, is the sacred cow/ favorite target of employee benefits. The report seems to estimate about $45 million in savings by eliminating family-supporting jobs, cutting employee hours to start walmarting (i.e., forcing our employees onto the public dole), and making MPS teachers' insurance option the least appealing in the metro area.

Essentially, any cost-saving measures have to be weighed against what they might do to the welfare of the kids. This is especially true of anything like a state or city takeover. The governor and the mayor insist that's not on the horizon (.pdf) (it's not a "takeover in disguise" (.pdf)), but Bob Donovan didn't wait until the mimeo sheets were even dry before blasting out a press release (.pdf) insisting on a city takeover. (Donovan didn't even wait to go through his office to do it; a quick once-over by the staff might have kept the insults to a minimum.)

But a study (.pdf) out yesterday from EPIC, the Education and the Public Interest Center, suggests that takeovers, like all the other possible "restructuring" efforts required under No Child Left Behind, has no effect on achievement. Here's a bit from the press release that sums it up:

The brief reviews the existing body of research on each of the five sanction options and finds that "there is little or no evidence to suggest that any of these options delivers the promised improvements in academic achievement."

In particular, Mathis finds:

• Both state takeovers and private management of schools by companies known as Education Management Organizations are rare, although both have been the subject of intense media publicity when they do occur. There exists no reliable evidence that either approach has improved achievement as measured by standardized test scores. [. . .]

Mathis concludes: "Given that these approaches are being proposed for the nation's most troubled schools, the solutions [currently set forth by NCLB] are likely to be woefully inadequate." Furthermore, states and districts alike simply lack the necessary capacity to comprehensively implement such sweeping remedies as contemplated by the NCLB sanction provisions.

In light of such findings, Mathis recommends against relying on restructuring sanctions to promote school improvement. He also recommends more rigorous and detailed research into certain reform measures assumed to be "best practices," but that have not been adequately studied; that policymakers provide states with adequate technical assistance to implement, support, and sustain school improvements; and that policymakers support a range of measures that have been demonstrated to lift achievement, including early education, longer school years and days, smaller school communities, and others.

The study walks through each of the prescribed punitive restructuring methods and finds that each is lacking, and some incredibly disruptive at the transition--often depressing scores even further.

This is on top of the recent report (.pdf) from the Public Policy Forum that also said that municipal takeovers are also at best a mixed bag. Donovan and others like him eager to wrest control of the district from the voters should think twice about what effects that would really have.

Additional info at BloggingMPS.