The Wisconsin Taxpayer

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Load more

A SERVICE OF THE WISCONSIN TAXPAYERS ALLIANCE TheThe WWisconsinisconsin TTaaxxppaayyerer List of 2011 A monthly review of Wisconsin government, taxes, and public finance legislators and contact information inside New Legislature . New Direction? For the second consecutive legislative session, one party will be in charge of state government. This time, it is the Republicans’ turn to manage both legis- lative houses and the governor’s office. Although January will welcome a new party into power, the state’s fiscal outlook remains bleak. Two years ago, Democrats started work on a new state budget with an $800 million structural “deficit.” Now, Republicans face an imbalance of at least $1.2 billion in 2011-12. 2010 ELECTIONS After losing seats in both 2006 and 2008, Republicans picked up four senate and 14 assembly seats in 2010. Can- didates running unopposed or without major-party opposi- tion in November’s election included two Republican senators, and 23 assembly candidates—15 Republicans and eight Democrats. Senate IN BRIEF Republicans now have a 19-14 seat advantage in the A new legislature takes office in January 2011 and im- senate, defeating four incumbent Democrats—three of mediately faces a fiscal crisis. Republicans deprived Demo- whom were in their first term. The senate will have eight crats of their majorities in both houses of the state legislature new members when the 2011 session begins, six Republi- while also winning the governor’s race. This is the first cans and two Democrats. Seventeen of 33 state senators time in over five decades that one party controls the legis- were up for reelection in 2010, with terms of the remain- lature and governorship immediately following a census ing 16 ending in 2012. year. Assembly n Republicans now hold a 19-14 senate advantage. Republicans will hold a 60-38 majority in the assem- n The state assembly has 60 Republicans, 38 Democrats, bly, with one independent. There will be 30 newly elected and one independent. representatives who did not serve in the 2009 session. Five n Twenty-five senate and assembly candidates faced no of them are Democrats, while 25 are Republicans. major-party opposition in the 2010 general election. Ten incumbent Democrats lost reelection in 2010, in- cluding the speaker of the assembly and other members of Also in this issue: the Democratic leadership. Republicans gained four seats Taxpayer Index • Redrawing State and Congressional previously held by Democrats, and picked up an indepen- Legislative Boundaries • Legislative Directory dent seat. Democrats won in the 80th assembly district, a seat formerly occupied by a Republican. wis tax 79 Years of Research December 2010 Vol. 78 No. 12 & Citizen Education Gender Composition Table 1: Two new women were elected to the senate and six to Female Representation in Wis. Legislature Number of Female Legislators by Session, 1989-2011 the assembly. After accounting for retirements, however, the legislature will have a net increase of just two females. 37 36 35 35 Women will hold 31 (23.5%) of the 132 legislative seats 34 (see Table 1), a proportion slightly above the national av- 34 33 erage (23.4%) but below neighbors Minnesota (31.3%) 32 31 31 31 30 and Illinois (28.2%), according to the National Confer- 31 30 ence of State Legislatures. Female representation is high- 29 est in Colorado, where nearly four in 10 (39.0%) state 28 legislators is female, and in Vermont (37.8%). Legislative Leadership 25 With Republican majorities in both houses, leadership 89 93 97 01 05 09 and committee-chair positions change. In the senate, Michael Ellis (Neenah) is president, while Scott Fitzgerald Job Creation. With a goal of creating 250,000 jobs by (Juneau) is majority leader. Senate Democrats elected Mark 2015, the incoming governor says he plans to consider Miller (Monona) minority leader. targeted tax relief for small businesses, a state tax break In the assembly, former minority leader Jeff Fitzgerald for health savings accounts, and reversing individual in- (Horicon) is the new speaker, while Abbotsford’s Scott come tax increases included in the 2009-11 state budget. Suder becomes majority leader. Assembly Democrats are He and other Republicans have said they also want to reas- led by minority leader Peter Barca (Kenosha). sess aspects of Wisconsin’s new combined reporting law, LEGISLATIVE BUSINESS which requires multistate corporations operating here to State Finances. With a new state budget to be un- combine income from all subsidiaries and apportion a part veiled in February, much of the legislature’s early attention of it to Wisconsin. Opponents of the law argue it drives will be on state finances. New estimates from state bud- businesses to leave the state. get officials suggest that, without corrective action, the Other Items. The legislature may also pursue voter- mid-2013 general fund deficit will likely top $2 billion and identification and concealed-carry legislation. Both mea- could exceed $3 billion. sures received Republican support in past legislative ses- Recent legislatures and governors—of both parties— sions but failed to become law. o have repeatedly addressed state financial problems with temporary budget solutions. Some of the tactics included accounting maneuvers, use of one-time money, segregated The Wisconsin Taxpayer fund raids, and sale of tobacco bonds. December 2010 Vol. 78 No. 12 Publication Number USPS 688-800 2010 Wisconsin Taxpayer Index (Vol. 78) Periodical postage paid at Madison, Wisconsin Month Title Subscription Price: One Year, $17.97; Three Years, $36.97 January Municipal Fees and Charges Published each month, except July, by the Wisconsin Taxpayers Alliance, 401 North Lawn Avenue, Madison, Wisconsin 53704-5033 February Wisconsin’s Public Workforce Postmaster: March The Unemployment Reserve Fund Send address changes to The Wisconsin Taxpayer, 401 North Lawn Avenue, Madison, Wisconsin 53704-5033 April The Cost of Corrections: Wisconsin & Minnesota phone: 608.241.9789 fax: 608.241.5807 e-mail: [email protected] Web site: www.wistax.org May Wisconsin’s Rising Public Sector Debt Officers and Board of Directors: Carol Ward Knox, Chair, Jefferson; J.R. Riordan, Vice-Chair, Madison; June/July Challenges Facing State Voters in 2010 Jere D. McGaffey, Secretary-Treasurer, Milwaukee August How County Admin. and Finances Stack Up J.L. Adams, Beloit; M.D. Bugher, Madison; C.D. Fortner, Milwaukee; S.D. Loehr, La Crosse; J.D. Quick, Manitowoc; D.R. Schuh, Stevens Point; September Wisconsin Jobs and Wages: A Wake-Up Call? T.L. Spero, Milwaukee; J.B. Williams, Milwaukee October Electricity: Competitive Advantage Eroding? Staff: Todd A. Berry, President; Kyle Christianson, Research Analyst; Dale J. November Wisconsin’s Total Taxes: 2010 Knapp, Research Director; Sandra Mumm, Business Manager; Kelly Pfeifer; Susan Ryan; Sharon Schmeling December New Legislature . New Direction? Page 2 The Wisconsin Taxpayer Redrawing State and Congressional Legislative Boundaries As required by the U.S. Constitution, cen- lines. In January, the number of congressional sus counts are completed once every 10 years. seats due Wisconsin (currently eight) will be de- Used to distribute federal funds for education, termined, as seats in the 435-member U.S. transportation, infrastructure, and other pro- House of Representatives are apportioned using The Wisconsin grams, the census also impacts political repre- new Census figures. Each state receives at least legislature is sentation at all levels. One of the most important one representative. charged with tasks awaiting the 2011 legislature is the redraw- With new population counts available, the redrawing ing of congressional and state legislative bound- legislature will begin redrawing both state and congressional aries. congressional districts. If history is predictive, and legislative the debate will largely focus on state legislative districts. PROCESS districts. Members of Congress have histori- In Wisconsin—like most states—this task cally drawn their own lines, which were then is left to legislators. Because the job can be approved by the legislature. driven by self-interest and partisanship, federal and state statutes require districts to be drawn New district maps need to be approved by in specific ways. However, observers of the the legislature and the governor by the spring of process often question the extent to which the 2012, if candidates are to circulate nomination rules are followed. papers in their new districts. Requirements HISTORY The Wisconsin Constitution limits the num- Because sitting state legislators are charged ber of assembly districts to no fewer than 54, with redistricting, the political parties often dis- and no more than 100. Since 1973, the assem- agree over what is, and is not, fair. These dis- bly has had 99 districts. The state senate is agreements have led to costly court battles. divided into 33 districts, each comprising three Reportedly, the state spent over $1 million in assembly seats. attorney fees during the 2000-02 redistricting New legislative cycle. These single-member districts are required districts need to to be as equal in population as possible—what Past Cycles be approved by political scientists refer to as “one person-one 1960s. Redistricting is particularly difficult the legislature vote.” Because each senate district is composed when control of state government is split be- and governor. of three assembly districts, state senators have tween the two major parties. This was the case about three times as
Recommended publications
  • The Effects of Bicameralism on U.S. Appropriations Policies

    The Effects of Bicameralism on U.S. Appropriations Policies

    THE EFFECTS OF BICAMERALISM ON U.S. APPROPRIATIONS POLICIES by MARK EDWARD OWENS (Under the Direction of Jamie L. Carson) ABSTRACT This dissertation examines how supermajority rules interact with other institutional constraints. I study appropriations policies to better understand how the content of legislation develops in response to bicameral differences over a one-hundred and four year period. As each chamber has developed independently of one another, the institutional differences that have emerged have had a dynamic impact on the lawmaking process. The time frame of the study, 1880 to 1984, is particularly important because it captures the years when the Senate grew to play a more active role in the legislative process and a number of key budgetary reforms. To study this phenomenon empirically, I measure how regular appropriations bills were packaged differently by the House and Senate from 1880 to 1984 and compare the final enactment to the difference in chamber proposals to determine the magnitude of a chamber’s leverage on enacted policy changes. By treating the Senate’s choice to amend the House version as a selection effect, we can examine the effect bicameralism has on policy outcomes. Specifically, I analyze a ratio that represents how close the final bill is to the Senate version, given the size of the bicameral distance. Finally, I complete the study by examining how the president influences bicameral negotiations and how bicameralism complicates our theories of intra-branch relations. INDEX WORDS: Appropriations, Bicameralism, Budgeting, Polarization, Senate THE EFFECTS OF BICAMERALISM ON U.S. APPROPRIATIONS POLICIES by MARK EDWARD OWENS B.A., University of Florida, 2006 M.A., Johns Hopkins University, 2008 A Dissertation Submitted to the Graduate Faculty of The University of Georgia in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY ATHENS, GEORGIA 2014 © 2014 Mark Edward Owens All Rights Reserved THE EFFECTS OF BICAMERALISM ON U.S.
  • State of Oklahoma

    State of Oklahoma

    STATE OF OKLAHOMA 2nd Session of the 49th Legislature (2004) COMMITTEE SUBSTITUTE FOR HOUSE BILL NO. 2567 By: Greenwood COMMITTEE SUBSTITUTE An Act relating to schools; creating the Middle School Mathematics Task Force; stating purpose of the Task Force; establishing membership; establishing duties; providing for appointments and appointment of cochairs; providing for meetings and staffing; providing for travel reimbursement; requiring a report; providing for noncodification; and declaring an emergency. BE IT ENACTED BY THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF OKLAHOMA: SECTION 1. NEW LAW A new section of law not to be codified in the Oklahoma Statutes reads as follows: A. There is hereby created, to continue until July 1, 2005, the Middle School Mathematics Task Force. The Task Force shall study and prepare recommendations concerning mathematics education at the middle grade levels in public schools in the state. B. The Task Force shall be composed of the following members: 1. The State Superintendent of Public Instruction, or a designee; 2. The Executive Director of the Oklahoma Commission for Teacher Preparation, or a designee; 3. The Chancellor of The Oklahoma State System of Higher Education, or a designee; 4. Two members of the House of Representatives, one to be appointed by the Speaker of the House of Representatives and one to be appointed by the Minority Floor Leader of the House of Representatives; 5. Two members of the State Senate, one to be appointed by the President Pro Tempore of the Senate and one to be appointed by the Minority Leader of the State Senate; 6. One member who is a middle school level mathematics teacher appointed by the Speaker of the House of Representatives; 7.
  • Background of Pennsylvania Government

    Background of Pennsylvania Government

    Background of Pennsylvania Government The Pennsylvania General Assembly In 1776, the Pennsylvania Legislature was established as a lawmaking body by the first state constitution. Originally unicameral, the General Assembly became bicameral under the second constitution of 1790 and since that time has been comprised of a House of Representatives and a Senate. The General Assembly meets in two-year sessions. House and Senate legislative districts are reapportioned every 10 years after the federal census is taken. Reapportionment following the 2000 census created state House districts of approximately 59,000 people and Senate districts of about 240,000 people. There are 203 members in the House of Representatives; a number established when the state's constitution was revised in 1967. A representative must be at least 21 years of age, a resident of the commonwealth for four years and a resident of the district for at least one year. The term of office for a member of the House is two years, with all seats up for re-election at the same time. When the Senate was first established in 1790, there were only 18 senators. Following the 1874 Constitutional Convention, that number was increased to 50, where it remains today. A senator must be at least 25 years of age with the same residency requirements as members of the House. Senate terms are four years, with odd- and even-numbered district seats contested on a rotating basis. Chamber and caucus leadership The principal officers of the state Senate are the president pro tempore, the secretary and the chief clerk, all of whom are elected by the Senate.
  • New Member Pictorial Directory

    New Member Pictorial Directory

    NEW MEMBER PICTORIAL DIRECTORY PREPARED BY THE COMMITTEE ON HOUSE ADMINISTRATION Candice S. Miller, Chairman | Robert A. Brady, Ranking Minority Member NEW MEMBER PICTORIAL DIRECTORY As of November 7, 2014, the Clerk of the House had not received certificates of election for any of the individuals listed in this directory. At the time this publication was sent to press, the following races had not been finally determined: Arizona 2nd California 7th California 9th California 16th California 17th California 26th California 52nd Louisiana 5th Louisiana 6th New York 25th Washington 4th Profiles of candidates from these districts begin on page 33. PREpaRED BY THE COMMITTEE ON HOUSE ADMINISTRATION Candice S. Miller, Chairman | Robert A. Brady, Ranking Minority Member TABLE OF CONTENTS Adams, Alma .........................23 Katko, John...........................21 Abraham, Ralph .......................36 Khanna, Ro...........................35 Aguilar, Pete ...........................4 Knight, Steve ..........................4 Allen, Rick ............................9 Lawrence, Brenda......................15 Amador, Tony.........................34 Lieu, Ted..............................5 Ashford, Brad .........................17 Loudermilk, Barry ......................9 Assini, Mark ..........................38 Love, Mia ............................26 Babin, Brian ..........................26 MacArthur, Tom.......................19 Beyer, Don ........................... 27 Mayo, Jamie ..........................37 Bishop, Mike .........................14
  • How a Bill Becomes 4

    How a Bill Becomes 4

    WELCOME TO THE WISCONSIN STATE ASSEMBLY ince becoming a state in 1848, Wisconsin has continued to demonstrate strong leadership and democracy. Because TABLE OF CONTENTS S 2 ...... Introduction of this proud history, our state has been looked to repeatedly as a national leader in government 4 ...... “The Law Needs to Change” innovation and reform. “How A Bill Becomes 4 ...... WisconsinEye Provides View of the Legislature Law” was created to help visitors understand 5 ...... Deliberation and Examination Wisconsin’s legislative process and provide 5 ...... Making a Good Idea Better suggestions on how citizens can participate in 6 ...... The Importance of Caucuses that process. This booklet explains how one idea 7 ...... First & Second Reading or inspiration becomes a bill and moves through 7 ...... Third Reading and Passage the legislative process and into the law books. 7 ...... On to the Senate It is a long road from initial development of an 8 ...... Assembly Bill 27 idea to the emergence of a new law. During 9 ...... Approval of the Governor and Into the Law Books consideration, the bill will be scrutinized and 9 ...... Conclusion examined, criticized and praised. It will be 10 .... Staying in Touch–How to Contact changed, improved, strengthened, and even Your State Representative weakened. If passed, it will undergo the ultimate 11 .... Find Information Online test of merit—time. 12 .... “How a Bill Becomes Law” Cartoon 13 .... “How a Bill Becomes Law” Flow Chart *Words in bold print are defined in the Glossary at the back of the booklet. 14 .... Glossary In this booklet, the bill used as an example of “How a Bill Becomes Law” is 2015 Assembly Bill 27.
  • Feature Article

    Feature Article

    3 ABOUT WISCONSIN 282 | Wisconsin Blue Book 2019–2020 Menomonie residents celebrated local members of the Wisconsin National Guard who served during the Great War. As Wisconsin soldiers demobilized, policymakers reevaluated the meaning of wartime service—and fiercely debated how the state should recognize veterans’ sacrifices. WHS IMAGE ID 103418 A Hero’s Welcome How the 1919 Wisconsin Legislature overcame divisions to enact innovative veterans legislation following World War I. BY JILLIAN SLAIGHT he Great War seemed strangely distant to Ira Lee Peterson, even as his unit camped mere miles from the front lines in France. Between drills and marches, the twenty-two-year-old Wisconsinite swam in streams, wrote letters home, and slept underneath the stars in apple orchards. TEven in the trenches, the morning of Sunday, June 16, 1918, was “so quiet . that all one could hear was the rats running around bumping into cans and wire.” Peterson sat reading a book until a “whizzing sound” cut through the silence, announcing a bombardment that sent him and his comrades scurrying “quick as gophers” into their dugout.1 After this “baptism with shell fire,” Peterson suffered a succession of horrors: mustard gas inhalation, shrapnel wounds, and a German 283 | Wisconsin Blue Book 2019–2020 COURTESY LINDA PALMER PALMER LINDA COURTESY WILLIAM WESSA, LANGLADE COUNTY HISTORICAL SOCIETY HISTORICAL COUNTY LANGLADE WESSA, WILLIAM Before 1914, faith in scientific progress led people to believe that twentieth-century war would be less brutal. In reality, new technologies resulted in unprecedented death and disability. (left) American soldiers suffered the effects of chemical warfare despite training in the use of gas masks.
  • S/L Sign on Letter Re: Rescue Plan State/Local

    S/L Sign on Letter Re: Rescue Plan State/Local

    February 17, 2021 U.S. House of Representatives Washington, D.C. 20515 U.S. Senate Washington, D.C. 20510 Dear Members of Congress: As elected leaders representing communities across our nation, we are writing to urge you to take immediate action on comprehensive coronavirus relief legislation, including desperately needed funding for states, counties, cities, and schools, and an increase in states’ federal medical assistance percentage (FMAP). President Biden’s ambitious $1.9 trillion American Rescue Plan will go a long way towards alleviating the significant financial strain COVID-19 has placed on our states, counties, cities, and schools, and the pocketbooks of working families. Working people have been on the frontlines of this pandemic for nearly a year and have continued to do their jobs during this difficult time. Dedicated public servants are still leaving their homes to ensure Americans continue to receive the essential services they rely upon: teachers and education workers are doing their best to provide quality education and keep their students safe, janitors are still keeping parks and public buildings clean, while healthcare providers are continuing to care for the sick. Meanwhile, it has been ten months since Congress passed the CARES Act Coronavirus Relief Fund to support these frontline workers and the essential services they provide. Without significant economic assistance from the federal government, many of these currently-middle class working families are at risk of falling into poverty through no fault of their own. It is a painful irony that while many have rightly called these essential workers heroes, our country has failed to truly respect them with a promise to protect them and pay them throughout the crisis.
  • Direct Primary Care State Approaches to Regulating Subscription-Based Medicine

    Direct Primary Care State Approaches to Regulating Subscription-Based Medicine

    LEGISLATIVE REFERENCE BUREAU Direct Primary Care State Approaches to Regulating Subscription-Based Medicine Jessie Gibbons legislative analyst WISCONSIN POLICY PROJECT • January 2020, Volume 3, Number 2 © 2020 Wisconsin Legislative Reference Bureau One East Main Street, Suite 200, Madison, Wisconsin 53703 http://legis.wisconsin.gov/lrb • 608-504-5801 This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ or send a letter to Creative Commons, PO Box 1866, Mountain View, CA 94042, USA. Overview Direct Primary Care (DPC) is a health care payment model in which physicians contract directly with patients to provide care outside the traditional insurance-based system. In- stead of billing health insurers, DPC providers charge their subscribers a monthly fee per individual, ranging from approximately $25 to $125 per person. In exchange, subscrib- ers receive unlimited primary care services—including physical exams, management of chronic diseases, and diagnoses of acute illness—usually at no additional cost. Dozens of DPC providers are currently practicing in Wisconsin, and many physi- cians and patients who are using the model are satisfied with it. Patients appreciate that they can spend more time with their physicians and have more immediate access to care, while physicians like that the model allows them to streamline their practices and reduce the administrative burden of billing health insurers. However, many stakeholders in the health care industry have expressed concerns about the DPC model being a duplicative and unregulated form of health insurance. In Wisconsin, medical practices currently using the DPC payment model are oper- ating legally, and the agreements between patients and providers vary from practice to practice.
  • Statutory Duties of Legislative Leaders: Updated

    Statutory Duties of Legislative Leaders: Updated

    LEGISLATIVE REFERENCE BUREAU Statutory Duties of Legislative Leaders: Updated Richard A. Champagne chief Jillian Slaight, PHD legislative analyst LRB REPORTS • January 2019, Volume 3, Number 2 © 2019 Wisconsin Legislative Reference Bureau One East Main Street, Suite 200, Madison, Wisconsin 53703 http://legis.wisconsin.gov/lrb • 608-504-5801 This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ or send a letter to Creative Commons, PO Box 1866, Mountain View, CA 94042, USA. Introduction This report summarizes the statutes that specifically refer to legislative leaders and the Joint Committee on Legislative Organization. These statutes cover such topics as ap- pointments by legislative leaders, reports made to legislative leaders, and certain duties imposed upon legislative leaders. The report does not cover the duties imposed upon legislative leaders under the rules of the assembly and the senate and the joint rules. The report is organized into the following topics: • Operation of the legislative branch. • Service on or appointments to nonlegislative boards. • Agency rule making and procedure. • Receipt of reports or other information. • Miscellaneous duties and responsibilities. Where appropriate, the report further organizes the topics into subtopics. The digital version of the report is searchable using terms such as “Speaker,” “president,” “presiding,” “majority,” “minority,” or “Joint Committee on Legislative Organization,” and, for certain requirements relating to appointments, using the term “standing committee.” It is im- portant to note that article IV, section 8, of the Wisconsin Constitution grants each house of the legislature the power to “determine the rules of its own proceedings.” Thus, to the extent that a statute attempts to govern the proceedings of the legislature, the courts are unlikely to enforce the statute.
  • Oklahoma State House of Representatives

    Oklahoma State House of Representatives

    Oklahoma State House of Representatives District 1 State Representative: Johnny Tadlock Current term ends: 1/8/2018 Address: 2300 N Lincoln Blvd, Room 539B, OklAhomA City, OklAhomA 73105 Main phone: (405)-557-7363 E-mail: [email protected] Counties represented: Le Flore, McCurtain (2) Zip codes represented: 74549, 74571, 74577, 74722, 74724, 74728, 74734, 74736, 74740, 74745, 74750, 74754, 74755, 74764, 74766, 74937, 74939, 74949, 74957, 74963, 74966 (21) PoliticAl AffiliAtion: DemocrAt Committees: Agriculture and Rural Development; County and Municipal Government; General Government Oversight and Accountability; Judiciary – Criminal Justice and Corrections MeAsures Authored in 2017: HB1367, HB1368, HB1369, HB1370, HB1371, HB1372 Tribal Jurisdictions: Choctaw AssistAnt: Leslie Smith-HaddAd District 2 State Representative: John Bennett Current term ends: 1/8/2018 Address: 2300 N Lincoln Blvd, Room 301A, OklAhomA City, OklAhomA 73105 Main phone: (405)-557-7315 E-mail: [email protected] Counties represented: Sequoyah (1) Zip codes represented: 74931, 74936, 74945, 74946, 74948, 74954, 74955, 74962 (8) PoliticAl Affiliation: Republican Committees: A&B Public Safety (Chair); Appropriations and Budget; Joint Committee on Appropriations and Budget; Veterans and Military Affairs; Wildlife MeAsures Authored in 2017: HB1933, HB1934, HB1935, HB1936, HB1937, HB1938, HB2177, HCR1021 Tribal Jurisdictions: Cherokee, United Keetoowah Band of Cherokees AssistAnt: MArthA Perry District 3 State Representative: Rick West Current term ends:
  • Women in the Wisconsin Legislature— a Summary and Historical List

    Women in the Wisconsin Legislature— a Summary and Historical List

    LEGISLATIVE REFERENCE BUREAU Women in the Wisconsin Legislature— A Summary and Historical List Lauren Jackson senior legislative analyst LRB REPORTS • December 2018, Volume 2, Number 10 © 2018 Wisconsin Legislative Reference Bureau One East Main Street, Suite 200, Madison, Wisconsin 53703 http://legis.wisconsin.gov/lrb • 608-504-5801 This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ or send a letter to Creative Commons, PO Box 1866, Mountain View, CA 94042, USA. hen the new legislative session begins in January 2019, a total of 142 wom- en will have held seats in the Wisconsin Legislature. It is estimated that more than 5,500 people have served in the state legislature since 1848.1 WThis means that more than 97 percent of those people have been men. The U.S. Census Bureau currently estimates that just over 50 percent of the population in Wisconsin is female.2 This report summarizes the service and achievements of Wisconsin women legislators. When Mildred Barber, Hellen Brooks, and Helen Thompson took office in January 1925 as “assemblymen,” they became the first women to serve in the Wisconsin Legisla- ture. Until the 1970s, no more than three women at a time served in the Assembly, with some sessions reverting back to no women’s representation at all.3 Since the 1970s, wom- en have gained roles in both the Assembly and the Senate, within legislative leadership, and on powerful committees. A total of 36 women will serve in the 2019 biennium.
  • Table 3.6 SENATE LEADERSHIP POSITIONS

    Table 3.6 SENATE LEADERSHIP POSITIONS

    STATE LEGISLATURES Table 3.6 SENATE LEADERSHIP POSITIONS: METHODS OF SELECTION State or other majority leader floor Majority whip Majority chair caucus Minority leader Assistant minority leader Minority leader floor Assistant minority leader floor Minority whip Minority chair caucus jurisdiction President President pro tem Majority leader Assistant majority leader Majority leader floor Assistant Alabama (b) ....................... (a) ES (b) . (b) . Alaska ................................. ES . EC . EC EC EC . EC EC Arizona ............................... ES AP EC . EC . EC EC . EC . Arkansas ............................. (a) ES EC . EC . EC . EC . California ........................... (a) ES EC . EC EC EC . EC EC Colorado ............................. ES ES EC EC . EC EC EC EC . EC EC Connecticut (c) .................. (a) ES AP AP AP AP AP AP EC AL AL AL AL AL Delaware ............................ (a) ES EC . EC . EC . EC EC Florida (mm) ...................... EC/ES ES AP AL . EC EC . AL AL Georgia ............................... (a) ES EC . EC EC EC . EC EC Hawaii................................. ES ES (e) EC . EC . EC EC (f) EC . EC . Idaho ................................... (a) ES EC EC . EC EC EC . EC Illinois ................................. ES AP AP AP . AP AP EC AL . AL AL Indiana ................................ (a) ES . AT AT AT EC EC . EC (h) (h) EC Iowa .................................... ES ES EC EC . EC . EC EC . EC . Kansas ................................ ES ES (e) EC EC . EC EC EC EC . EC EC Kentucky (i) ....................... ES ES . EC . EC EC . EC . EC . Louisiana ............................ ES ES . Maine (ll)............................ ES ES EC EC (j) (j) (k) . EC EC (l) (l) (m) . Maryland ............................ ES ES AP (n) AP (n) (n) (n) AP . EC (o) . (o) . EC . Massachusetts .................... EC . AP AP . (p) EC . (p) Michigan (q) ....................... (a) ES EC EC EC EC EC EC EC EC EC EC EC EC Minnesota ..........................