Wisconsin Legislature: 2023-08-04 Assembly Journal

'Reforms' to change or restrict economic assistance programs that are definitionally designed to support individuals and families experiencing economic hardship are not a silver-bullet solution to our state's workforce challenges. Indeed, if they were, then presumably the broad, sweeping changes passed by Republicans in this Legislature – many of whom are still serving – and enacted under my predecessor years ago now would have yielded substantial or material workforce benefits. And yet, our state's workforce challenges persist.

I continue to be perplexed by the Legislature's misplaced emphasis on changing and restricting economic assistance programs while offering no other comprehensive solutions or plans to meaningfully address our state's workforce challenges. Especially concerning is that, rather than supporting and passing the solutions and plans I have offered to comprehensively address our state's workforce challenges even in the absence of any plans of their own, the Legislature's apparent focus remains re-passing bills I have previously vetoed.

The people of Wisconsin expect their legislators to prioritize pressing issues facing our state and to work together to find real, impactful solutions to address those issues. The workforce challenges that have long plagued our state – challenges I believe will be imminently exacerbated by the looming fiscal cliff facing our state's child care industry – deserve the Legislature's immediate attention and urgent effort. The continued failure to address these challenges head-on will be catastrophic for our state's workforce, our communities, and our economy.

My commitment to the people of Wisconsin remains – I will always try to do the right thing, and I am committed to working with any legislator on either side of the aisle who shares my concerns and is ready to work together on substantive legislation to comprehensively address our state's workforce challenges.

Therefore, I am vetoing this bill in its entirety because I object to creating additional barriers for individuals applying for and receiving unemployment insurance benefits, which is designed to provide critical support during times of economic hardship. The department currently engages in robust fraud prevention and detection efforts (including identity proofing), and codifying identity proofing measures for unemployment insurance is both restrictive and redundant to the agency and burdensome on claimants. In addition, the department already provides training and information not only for employers, but individuals seeking assistance claiming unemployment benefits, making the training and informational material sections of the bill duplicative as well. Further, the provisions under the bill would create additional workload for the department, and the legislation does not provide any additional resources associated with these additional responsibilities.

Moreover, the department is currently building a modernized unemployment insurance system, which includes a modern web-based call delivery system that allows agents increased flexibility in answering calls.

Finally, modifications proposed to the state's unemployment insurance law should be considered as part of the long-established process of review and recommendation by the Unemployment Insurance Advisory Council, or in consultation with the council and the department. The process is intended to ensure that proposed modifications reflect the expertise and agreement of employers, workers and the department.

hist171140I am vetoing Assembly Bill 200 in its entirety.

This bill would require the Department of Safety and Professional Services to report on various statistics related to the issuance of occupational credentials in its biennial report to the Legislature. Statistics included in the biennial report under the bill would include: (a) the number of applications the department or any credentialing board receives for initial, renewal, and reciprocal credentials, and the total number of those issued; (b) the lowest, highest, and median number of days from the date a credential application is initiated to the date a determination is made; (c) the median number of contacts made to and received from an applicant for an initial, renewal, or reciprocal credential before a final determination is issued; (d) the number of applications for initial, renewal, and reciprocal credentials for which the department or a credentialing board requested more information; and (e) the number of applications for initial, renewal, and reciprocal credentials that required the department or a credentialing board to review an arrest, conviction, or other offense record. The bill requires the department to report this information in total and separately for each profession.

I am vetoing this bill in its entirety for several reasons. I object to the Legislature requiring the department to provide arbitrary metrics that not only would not offer meaningful information to applicants but would divert critical resources away from the department's critical goal of processing applications efficiently and effectively. More specifically, I object to the Legislature mandating additional reporting requirements without providing the necessary resources for implementation, most especially given that the Legislature is acutely aware of urgent resource needs at the department but nevertheless refused to fulfill my request for additional staffing and resources to meet the department's current workload. The failure to do so has once again ensured that existing, pressing needs at the department will go unmet. The preparation and continual updating of the metrics on the department's website would divert valuable staff time away from the actual evaluation and processing of applications. The bill would not only not speed up the licensure process but would actually cause processing delays by placing unnecessary burdens on the department. Without providing the necessary, additional resources to implement the requirements of the bill, I cannot support it.

hist171141I am vetoing Assembly Bill 201 in its entirety.

This bill would require the Department of Safety and Professional Services to post and update specific information on its website for each license, permit, or certificate that it issues every month. The department would have to post and update the following credential metrics, for each credential and collectively: (a) the median number of days from the day that all required application fees for an initial, renewal, or reciprocal credential application are submitted to the date a final determination is made; (b) the number of initial, renewal, or reciprocal credential applications submitted over the prior month; (c) the number of final determinations made on initial, renewal, and reciprocal credential applications over the prior month; and (d) the number of initial, renewal, and credential applications for which more than 45 days have passed since the applicant submitted all required fees or, if a fee is waived, since the application was submitted. In addition, the department would be required to report the number of applications undergoing legal review and where necessary information to complete the review from the applicant or a third party is pending.

I am vetoing this bill in its entirety for several reasons. I object to the Legislature requiring the department to provide arbitrary metrics that not only would not offer meaningful information to applicants but would divert critical resources away from the department's critical goal of processing applications efficiently and effectively. More specifically, I object to the Legislature mandating additional reporting requirements without providing the necessary resources for implementation, most especially given that the Legislature is acutely aware of urgent resource needs at the department but nevertheless refused to fulfill my request for additional staffing and resources to meet the department's current workload. The failure to do so has once again ensured that existing, pressing needs at the department will go unmet. The preparation and continual updating of the metrics on the department's website would divert valuable staff time away from the actual evaluation and processing of applications. The bill would not only not speed up the licensure process but would actually cause processing delays by placing unnecessary burdens on the department. Without providing the necessary, additional resources to implement the requirements of the bill, I cannot support it.