Most northeastern Wisconsin lawmakers on May 13 voted for a failed tax and education bill negotiated between Democratic Gov. Tony Evers and Republican legislative leaders.
Two days prior to voting, Evers announced the measure, which would have used a projected $2.5 billion state surplus toward tax rebates, ending taxes on tips and overtime, and funding education. The nonpartisan Legislative Fiscal Bureau estimated that public schools in the Green Bay metro area would have gotten over $14 million in special education reimbursements and $16 million in general aid through the 2026-27 school year.
All the region’s Republican lawmakers voted for the bill.
The area’s Democratic legislators were fractured. Voting in favor were Reps. Lori Palmeri, D-Oshkosh, and Ryan Spaude, D-Ashwaubenon. Three cast votes in opposition: state Sens. Kristin Dassler-Alfheim, D-Appleton, and Jamie Wall, D-Green Bay, and Rep. Amaad Rivera-Wagner, D-Green Bay.
Rep. Lee Snodgrass, D-Appleton, was marked as not voting.
Here’s how the area’s state senators voted:
Here’s how the region’s state representatives voted:
Yes:
No: Amaad Rivera-Wagner, D-Green Bay
Not voting: Lee Snodgrass, D-Appleton
A mashup that defied party-line voting
The votes reflected a larger mashup in the state Legislature and wider campaign around the bill that defied party-line voting.
Republican gubernatorial-hopeful Tom Tiffany and most Democratic candidates for governor agreed in opposing the bill, with several Democrats criticizing Evers leading up to the vote.
In the state Senate, three Republican senators joined their Democratic colleagues in opposition despite several amendments introduced by GOP leaders to try and change their minds. The state Senate voted 18-15 against the bill. In the Assembly, the pattern of defections was reversed, with 10 Democrats joining Republicans to pass the bill in a 61-32 vote.
Criticism of politicking abounded all around in the vote’s aftermath.
Evers issued a statement: “So many Wisconsinites feel left behind, frustrated, and disillusioned by politics these days because they think a lot of politicians in the Capitol are only here to serve themselves. And, today, they’re right.”
He said U.S. Rep. Tiffany and some Republican and Democratic lawmakers decided to blow up the measure “because they’d rather do what’s best for the next election than what’s right for the people of our state.”
Goeben, R-Hobart, said in a statement that she was “distressed to see legislators from both sides of the aisle let perfect be the enemy of good.” She called the proposal “a true compromise” and put the failure to pass the legislation on “selfish politicians who won’t have to face the voters [siding] with Democrats.”
Spaude, in a statement, voted for the bill “to invest in our public schools, return the surplus, and provide relief to hardworking taxpayers.” He added, “Despite controlling both chambers of the legislature, Republicans couldn’t get the bill over the finish line.”
State Rep. Nate Gustafson, R-Omro, in a statement cast the outcome as a “show of complete insanity” that he attributed to Senate Democrats who “refused to work with legislative Republicans and their own Democratic governor to return this surplus to hard-working taxpayers.”
Wall criticized the proposal as “reckless” in a statement. He said the bill would have added a future hole in the budget that could raise taxes.
“We shouldn’t spend money that we don’t have,” Wall said. “No business would handle its finances this way, and neither should the state.”
Rivera-Wagner said his vote against the proposal came down to his belief that it would not have provided the economic relief that had been touted. He said in a statement that the bill “failed to address the real drivers of rising costs” and criticized the short time that lawmakers had to consider the bill.
Public schools in greater Green Bay would have gotten millions of dollars
In a statement to the Green Bay Press-Gazette prior to the vote, Green Bay School District Superintendent Vicki Bayer said she was pleased to learn about the proposal, but more was to be done.
“School districts across Wisconsin, including Green Bay, have been raising alarms about the significant challenges of balancing next year’s budget,” Bayer said before the Legislature voted, adding that the state still needed “to address the broken public school funding system. As a state, we must continue working toward a sustainable, long-term solution..”
Following the vote, the Wisconsin Association of School Boards released a statement that “expresses deep disappointment” at the bill’s failure.
“This bill was not a cure-all,” the statement read, saying it would not have addressed structural funding challenges long faced by school districts. “But it would have been a productive first step toward continuing conversations on both sides of the aisle for the betterment of students and taxpayers.”
The association asked the governor and Legislature “to return to the table, set aside political gamesmanship and find a path forward for Wisconsin’s students and the communities that support them.”
The failed bipartisan legislative deal would have brought millions in special education funding and tax relief to the Green Bay area.
Any new aid to schools would have been divided into two portions: special education aid and general school aid.
School districts are partially reimbursed for the cost of meeting students’ special education needs, but the total often requires them to pull from their general budgets. In last year’s state budget, legislators said the reimbursement rate would be raised from about 30% to an estimated 42%.
Schools actually received about 35%, the Wisconsin Department of Instruction announced in September. Under the proposed agreement, districts would have been reimbursed 42.7% of their incurred costs.
The Legislature did not increase school general aid in last year’s state budget, which school districts have said was unprecedented. Without increased general aid, school districts had to raise taxes to bring in the same amount of money.
The new agreement would have grown general aid by $302.5 million for the 2026-27 fiscal year, according to documents from the Legislative Fiscal Bureau, allocated based on school districts’ average enrollment.
It’s important to note that the general aid wouldn’t have increased the amount of resources available to school districts, because districts are capped by revenue limits. The general aid portion would have essentially acted as a form of property tax relief.
Here’s what Green Bay area schools would have gotten in special education reimbursement funds under the deal:
Here’s what a projection based on this year’s enrollment shows each school district would have gotten in general aid. This money would have helped to lower property taxes, but wouldn’t have increased a school district’s resources.
Jesse Lin is a reporter covering the community of Green Bay and its surroundings, as well as politics in northeastern Wisconsin. He also writes a weekly column answering reader questions about Green Bay. Contact and send him questions at 920-834-4250 or jlin@usatodayco.com.
Contact Green Bay education reporter Nadia Scharf atnscharf@usatodayco.com or on X at @nadiaascharf.
This article originally appeared on Green Bay Press-Gazette: How did Green Bay-area lawmakers vote on deal to spend budget surplus?
Reporting by Jesse Lin and Nadia Scharf, Green Bay Press-Gazette / Green Bay Press-Gazette
USA TODAY Network via Reuters Connect
