The Politics of Mismanagement

When you are county executive of the largest county in the state and dreaming of running for governor, it can be a bit of a problem when the state declares you incompetent at running government programs in your own county.

That was the spot Milwaukee County Executive Scott Walker found himself in last week. After months of warnings, the state Department of Health Services announced it was taking over management of Milwaukee County’s public assistance programs because of the county’s “sustained inability to successfully provide services” to poor and working families.

The bureaucratic incompetence wasn’t news to anyone in Milwaukee County who was poor. For years, the county’s poor people have known that applying for food stamps, child care, medical programs and other public assistance meant running a gauntlet of humiliation and degrading treatment.

Single mothers, often with several children in tow, show up every day at the Coggs Center at 12th and Vliet to get in line before the building opens. Once inside, they can wait all day without ever seeing a caseworker and have to come back the next day to begin the same process all over again.

A call center to direct people in need to county programs receives hundreds of thousands of calls every month. Fewer than 5% of those calls get through—the rest receive a busy signal.

Even many of those who manage to apply for services are unfairly denied benefits. Of particular concern to the federal government is an error rate of nearly 20% of applicants who were denied food stamps they were entitled to receive.

Error rates that exceed federal and state standards are at the heart of a class-action lawsuit against the state and county governments over denial of benefits to people who qualify for government assistance. That lawsuit also provided an enormous incentive for state government to try to improve services to the poor in Milwaukee County.

Dancing Around

Walker had to do some fast dancing when word came down that the state was finally going to make good on its repeated threats to take over administration of the county’s mismanaged programs.

The day before the takeover was to be announced, Walker released a letter to Karen Timberlake, secretary of the state Department of Health Services, blaming cuts in state funding for the mismanagement and urging the state to take total control of the programs.

In other words, you can’t fire me: I quit. Then, the day after the state takeover, Walker denounced it, using an entirely different argument. It was politics, he said, suggesting it was related to his reported interest in running for governor.

Gov. Jim Doyle was “trying to create an issue and deflect blame for the problems the state has had.”

What Walker really wanted was for the state to run all public assistance programs with state employees. Since he has been county executive, Walker has proposed systematically dismantling all of county government. Walker has proposed turning over the parks and transit system to regional authorities while privatizing the airport and just about everything else in sight.

When Milwaukee County doesn’t have to do anything anymore, taxes will really be low. Timberlake crossed up Walker by announcing that she intended to hire new managers to run the county programs, but would continue to use county workers. The state also intends to fill many of the budgeted county positions Walker has left unfilled, leading to enormous caseloads for county workers and the woefully understaffed call center.

Despite Walker’s complaints about the level of state funding, the state pays more per capita for the administration of public assistance in Milwaukee County than it does in any other county in the state.

The $55 million budget for income support programs in Milwaukee County includes only about $3 million in county funds, with the rest coming from the state and federal governments. Timberlake said it was reasonable for the county to take some financial responsibility for its own citizens in need.

It was the second time in recent weeks Walker found himself out of step with other levels of government in meeting the needs of the growing number of county residents facing financial hardship as a result of the current economic crisis.

Other state and local politicians were dumbfounded when Walker announced he didn’t intend to apply for federal economic stimulus funds for Milwaukee County, which has one of the highest unemployment rates in the nation.

Now the state says Walker has failed to provide public assistance to families in need as many citizens face the worst economic crisis of their lifetimes.

Then again, maybe there’s a method to Walker’s missteps. Republicans who oppose a federal economic stimulus to avert another Great Depression may well embrace a Republican candidate for governor who has made it hard for poor people to receive government benefits.

What’s your take?

Write: editor@shepex.com or comment on this story online at www.expressmilwaukee.com.

REPLY TO THIS COMMENT

anonymous

Joel you're right: what we need to do is raise our property taxes to hire more country employees to help more poor people claim their "right" to our money. Next on the agenda: turn lead into gold and change our textbooks to reflect the fact that 2 2=5 in the United Socialist States of America.

skeletor, I think your missing the point. Scott can't manage the county, how can he manage the state? Will he freeze the budget and bankrupt state programs, and let mass transit, parks, and leave needed positions empty to save money? Social programs have alot of grey area. Do all desire it, hard question. I think we need work incentives tied to any money handed out. I have used things like unemployment, and I'm glad the program is there when I need it. Social programs are for the poor or unworthy, until the day you need it.

to the comment below: I agree we need a work incentive, it's called a paycheck. While I don't call for the broad elimination of all social programs (because there will always be a slim percentage of the population who truly needs, but certainly does not intrisically deserve, such services)I applaud Walker for taking a philosophical/ideological stance against the stimulus money. Although I admit he earns "political capital" with this move, he is like the only kid on the bus who refuses to eat from the bag of candy his friend stole from the store. Instead of "investing" in social programs, governments at all levels need to reduce the size of programs, reduce spending, and reduce the tax burden. Government can only consume resources, it can not create resources. While I truly feel for those in need (especially in these times), we need to think about the long-term and create an environment where actual jobs (not Obama-style make-work jobs) will be created and will then allow people to take care of themselves. In the meanwhile, I know you are just as concernced for the welfare of others as I am, so donate to foodbanks, start a business and hire someone, and pick up the trash in the park yourself.

to the comment below... I agree with most of your points on social programs. On how do reduce spending I do not. The US spends more in Military spending than the rest of the WORLD combined!!! We send billions a year to Iraq. But when we want to spend domestically some claim wasteful spending. We spend 20-30% a year on Military spending. Bush also created the Dept. of Homeland Security. While we need this spending, how long can we spend this much on our Military? Should we spend more than the rest of the world in Military spending? This a worthy debate and maybe spending can be reduced in Military and social programs?

I am disgusted by Walker for taking a philosophical/ideological stance against the stimulus money. I say he looses "political capital" with this move. By not taking money for transet and other projects instead of a 20% bill we get 100% of the bill. In-action is not action. I Walker was running the county smothly while keeping taxes low I say good job, but clearly he is letting everything slide to make a polical point. We need to think years down the road, not just how do we make it through this year. Shame on Walker!!! Government can consume resources, but it can create resources. Think public schools, public libraries, the great works project, and WWII. By spending here in the US and not Iraq we are thinking about the long-term and creating an environment where actual jobs will be created. Green energy jobs, supporting teachers and health care professionals. I call those jobs! We should then allow people to take care of themselves. But when they get laid off or loose their job we should catch them until they get on thier feet again. I can talk about breaking the cycle of dependancy in socal programs, I think Tommy Thomson had some neat ideas here with W2 to work type programs.

I'll say it again: government can only consume resources, it can not create resources. Perhaps you have not heard of a little school district called MPS and the press it has received over the past couple of decades? To summarize, it consumes more resources and produces lesser results than other public school districts nationally and private/parochial schools locally. Government (especially with this so called "stimulus" bill) skims resources from the productive sector of society and redistributes these resources to the least productive members of our society. The message is clear: in the United Socialist States of America we reward failure and punish success. I'll see you all at the local work camp, I'll be one of the remaining few with fire in my eyes.

Government can create resources! If you don't call an educated child a resource with unlimited potential I am not sure what you call a resource. I have heard of MPS in fact. My wife taught in MPS. MPS gets a lot of bad press and a bad rap. Some very deserved criticism to be sure. What you don't hear is about how some school in MPS outperform suburb schools. Look at Rufus King, Milwaukee School of the Arts. Rufus king:King offers a strong college-preparatory program including accelerated courses in all subject areas and many co-curricular activities. In 2003 and 2005, Newsweek magazine ranked Rufus King as the top high school in Wisconsin, based on a ratio of of IB or AP examinations taking to the number in the graduating class. Does MPS have problems, yes. But tell me again how the best high school in the state happens to be a MPS school is not a resource. An example of lifting kids out of poverty and giving them a chance to become a productive member of our socialist society. Let's reward success and give everyone a chance to succeed. Tell me what makes us socialist: Public schools, libraries, Medicare, Medicaid, social security or a stimulus bill?

Public transit, public roads, power plants, power lines, bridges, FDA, EPA, FBI, Homeland Security, Military, public parks, firemen, police, jails, teachers..the list goes on... I guess these are not resources either? The question not weather government can create resources, which it DOES!!! It's are we getting value or a return on our investment(taxes)?

Tell me how a stimulus bill that includes tax cuts for middle class families is punishing the success? Are we rewarding failure by investing in schools, green energy,transit,health care, infrastructure and roads? Creating resources that will be used and ready us for the future and create green jobs that unless the sun stops shinning and the wind stops blowing, we never get sick and kids stop needing education will never go away? Where is the part that takes from the most productive and gives to the least? Where is the part that rewards failure and punishes success?

"Stimulus Bill" and "Tax Cuts" are an oxymoron when used simultaneously and have no business being in the same sentence. It's like a credit card company issuing a cash advance to pay down a current credit card debt. A "stimulus" is a promise of tax hikes to come, for spending on programs that will do nothing to address the root of the economic problem. What it does do is signal to every greedy investment banker and irresponsible homebuyer who purchased more house than they could afford, that they will not be held accountable or responsible for their personal actions because Barry Soetoro's got their back. That is the single most dangerous lesson we are teaching children today. The best thing the government can do is lower taxes, reduce spending, and let us decide how to spend our own money. I am not categorically opposed to many of these local services (fire, police, MPS, etc.), but it is shameful how every pet project is clamoring for more money at a time when every other sector must be fiscally conservative. And agencies like the FDA, EPA, Homeland Security are the most inefficient in that they simultaneously make generating real wealth more difficult through regulation AND consume real resources. And sorry, but I missed my first communion in the Church of Environmentalism, and have no faith in the Green Jobs Fairy and his son on earth, Al Gore. Looks like you'll have to send me to the re-education [FEMA]camp after all.

More proof that you stimulants are drinking too much koolaid and living somewhere over the rainbow: "Creating resources that will be used and ready us for the future and create green jobs that unless the sun stops shinning and the wind stops blowing, we never get sick and kids stop needing education will never go away?" Sounds like paradise, I now can see why so many of you have traded common sense for this lie.

How many of you pro-government shills are employed by government and receive a paycheck paid for by taxpayers? That's what I thought, and I understand why you're all drooling over this money.

Starting a war, running it poorly and explosion of spending under president Bush, while cutting taxes is part of the actions that got us here in the first place. Are you holding Bush accountable for the trillions were are spending in Iraq? I agree that spending has to be controlled and watched. Government agencies need to be held accountable and find ways to work better. The EPA and FDA and others have serious problems. I won't argue that. Greedy bankers and those that lent above what they could afford also need to be held accountable. I won't argue that either. So we know the problems, let's get some transparency and hold government accountable for every dime it spends. This includes the military and homeland security. So lets look at all spending. Guess what? Beside social security and medicare where do we spend the most? Military... Let's reduce spending here too! It needs to be done carefully, but military spending is growing and growing. Spending a few billion in stimulus won't be what breaks us. Spending trillions on military spending will! If you don't believe in the green jobs fairy, maybe you believe in the oil fairy. Oil, natural gas, coal are all running out, when that happens what do you want to do? When the price of gas skyrockets what then? Tell me what is the energy of your future? Hint: It's not going to be oil...

It amazes me how any call for reduced spending is quickly met with "b,b,b,but what about spending on the war?" Yes, that too is uneccesary spending and should not occur. Again, and for the final time, government can not create resources. Whether spending money on a tank, a teacher's union, or the truffles on the menu at Obama's inaugural balls, government can only CONSUME money extorted from private individuals and corporations which have created real wealth. We need to cut the beast off, regardless if the presiding monkey-puppet happens to be disguised as a donkey or an elephant. What makes our current monkey-puppet so dangerous is the fact that most Americans have been so well conditioned and programmed that even a whisper of the words "change" and "hope" make us disregard the fact that Obama, just like Bush II, Clinton, Bush I, etc., is controlled by a class of international bankers who continue to use the Fed and the Treasury as their personal piggy-bank and the American people as their happy slaves.

Yes spending need to controlled. I won't argue that. But unless you don't use roads, use electricity, have running water, educated in a public school you have used a resource our government created for you. So maybe you live in a cave and were home schooled by candle light because government creates resources! We have to make sure it creates efficient, useful resources, but it creates resources. But I guess businesses that generate the real wealth don't use roads, electricity, or water either.

The US military is credited with creation and development of the internet and GPS. Those are just a few but the list is endless. How many US military developments end up the private sector? But it's business that creates the real wealth, not exploiting the developments of our own military...

I'm all for cutting spending. But we need more than that. What's the plan for the future? We know we can't live on oil, coal, natural gas forever. So what's your plan? Cutting taxes won't fix these problems. The longer we wait to invest in our own country the harder it will be to face the challenges that lay ahead! So what's your plan?

My plan? Our economy needs to move in the direction of a "profit model" rather than a "bureaucractic model." We need to ensure that property rights are a guarantee, promote the rule of law, and hold our government accountable to the U.S. Constitution. Only then, in an absence of expensive interference from extraneous market forces, will the economy be productive again. In the "State of the State" Doyle blasted Big Oil and Big Tobacco, but never blasted Big Government. He said that we need to eliminate uneccessary spending without raising the question of how we arrived at the point where we are squandering taxpayers money on unecessary projects. We can no longer allow the pragmatic mantra of "let's do what works" beat out ideology. Free markets are the most efficient economic system and have the potential to raise all boats. The problem is, we live in a mixed economy marked by excessive government intervention into all aspects of our society. We can not say with any certainty that free markets don't work, because they have never been attempted in our contemporary world.

We tried the profit model with wall street. The same expensive interference comes from corporate America as well. Skyrocketing lobbing, Enron's, creative accounting, corruption, waste, greed these exist not only in government, but in business as well. By reducing the oversight of banks we allowed them to give loans to those who could not afford them. They used risky interest loaded loans to drive profits, not because they care about the customer. We need oversight of any business, just as we do our government. Now auto makers, banks are asking for government money. The might get it because of the incredible lobbing power they have. I believe in free markets, I believe in small government. Who is bringing us smaller government? No one! I guess the company you own or work for does not employ anyone that went to a public school, college. They must also provide their own roads to employees. Run their own power plant, water plant, and sewage plant. So I guess just as a business can create a resource so can a government. A business can consume and make waste as well. See wall street, car makers. Business in unable to self govern because of human nature. It's not a question of free markets working, but how do you control the human factor. Lying, cheating, steeling, greed exist in government and business.

Will your profit model solve global climate change? Will it solve our dependency on oil, coal, and natural gas? How will your profit model account for greed and accountability? When faced with a choice of profit over social responsibility what choice will be made? When I sell you peanut butter, or drugs that make you sick who will I answer too? No system is perfect, be it a profit model or a bureaucratic model!

Well, I can't respond to everything you wrote (both because there is too much to discuss in your posts and because I won't claim to have all the answers). I do acknowledge that waste and greed occur in the private sector, but the market has tools built-in to correct these errors: go out of business or pay fines. I'm not *entirely* opposed to regulation and fraud should be punished. Having said that, the current banker bailout goes against all economic laws by rewarding companies who have not performed well. We should leave them alone to fend for themselves. The economy also has a tool built-in to correct much of what we are seeing right now: it's called a recession. Rather than interfere, we need to let market forces correct the mistakes that have been made. I disagree with you on your assessment of the housing market however. Most people were able to buy homes due to an expansion of the money supply. We need to abolish the Fed so that this funny money is no longer able to distort the market. And Republicans actually wanted MORE regulation of the mortgage industry, but thanks to Bill Clinton reviving the CRA and due to Barney Frank's bitching, banks were FORCED to loan to high credit risks or face discrimination in lending suits. This is what Obama means by "economic justice." According to him, the Civil Rights movement is not only about securing the right to sit at the lunch counter, it is about securing the "economic right" to have somebody else pick up the tab. As far as the environment is concerned, at some point energy efficieny and even alternative energy become economically desirable and profitable. In most cases it's not right now.

The Politics of Mismanagement

Related content

Also in Taking Liberties:

Also from Joel McNally: