 |
 |
 |
||
 |
|
|
||
|
||||
 |
|||||
|
1/2/2006 The Race for Governor: Similarities Between 1986 and 2006 By Joe Murray In 1986, first-term Democratic Governor Tony Earl faced a tough reelection campaign after a rough and tumble four years in the governor's office. Twenty years later, first-term Democratic Governor Jim Doyle faces a tough reelection campaign of his own after a difficult and contentious four years on the job. While there are significant differences in personal style between Governors Doyle and Earl, it's interesting to note some of the striking similarities in the Wisconsin political landscape of 1986 and 2006. Both Doyle and Earl came into the governor's office facing huge state budget deficits left over from the previous Republican administration; both governors worked to change Wisconsin's reputation as a difficult place to do business; and both governors found themselves at odds with the progressive wing of the Democratic party. Similarities By 1986 the Wisconsin economy was in good shape. The deep recession of 1982 was over and the economy was generating new jobs and revenue for the state. Given Earl's sizable tax increases in 1983, the deficit should have been eliminated. But Earl and the Democratically-controlled Legislature decided to dramatically increase state spending on K-12 education in the 1985 state budget and, just as he prepared to kick-off his campaign for reelection, the budget was back in the red. From a political standpoint the timing couldn't have been worse for Governor Earl. His tax increases were not popular with voters, and with the budget bleeding red, he wasn't in a position to take credit for eliminating the deficit. Instead of using the additional revenues from the new taxes to eliminate the deficit, the governor chose to spend it on schools. Today, Governor Doyle enjoys the benefits of a strong Wisconsin economy that is generating more manufacturing jobs than any state in the upper Midwest, and a steady stream of revenue to pay for state government services. The strong economy, along with deep spending cuts in Doyle's first state budget, should have come close to eliminating most of the state budget deficit he inherited. But the governor has made a policy decision similar to Tony Earl 20 years ago by proposing to dramatically increase state spending on K-12 education and trying to provide local property tax relief for homeowners. Moreover, because Doyle, unlike Earl, had to deal with a Legislature controlled by Republicans, Governor Doyle had to extensively, and creatively, use his veto pen to get there. As Governor Doyle gears up for a difficult reelection campaign he will find himself explaining why he hasn't eliminated the budget deficit in spite of his highly touted fiscal prudence. To his credit, the governor didn't raise general tax rates. He simply shifted funds from other segregated accounts to fund his additional spending. From a budgetary standpoint, one conclusion is clear: Without spending discipline, a budget deficit will not disappear despite additional revenues from a good economy or tax increases. The other significant similarity between Tony Earl then and Governor Doyle today is discontent from the progressive wing of the Democratic Party. Former Governor Earl was elected during the deep recession of 1982 and signed into law several bills to stimulate the Wisconsin economy that didn't sit well with the left (utility holding companies and one-stop permitting were two of those bills). To his credit Earl understood the necessity of addressing Wisconsin's well-deserved reputation for being anti-business. The manufacturing base had really taken a turn for the worse during the early 1980s, and Earl supported legislation that he felt would help the state shed its reputation as a difficult place to do business. But Earl's support for this legislation hurt his standing with progressives, and in return, they never fully committed themselves to his reelection in 1986. Earl lost that November to Republican challenger Tommy Thompson. Today, Governor Doyle faces similar, if not more deep-seated anger from progressives. His support for the "Job Creation Act" (a bill streamlining the permitting process), the two-year property tax "freeze" (which he initially opposed), and his campaign pledge to eliminate 10,000 state government positions has left him with a politically vulnerable left flank. Environmentalists and state employees, two pillars of the Democratic base, are not happy with the governor. As he enters the final year of his first term and gears up for a very competitive election, Governor Doyle finds himself in the same position as Tony Earl in 1986. He will have unwavering support from the teachers union (WEAC), but large segments of his base may very well approach this election with the same lack of enthusiasm they did for Tony Earl. In a politically competitive state like Wisconsin, this is dangerous. Will the similarities between 1986 and 2006 mean Governor Doyle will meet the same electoral fate as Governor Earl? It's impossible to know but it's worth noting that there are striking dissimilarities between the two governors as well. Doyle has a more aggressive and dedicated team of campaign professionals who know how to campaign effectively. Moreover, they know how to raise money and have already set fundraising records. The governor will bring a hefty campaign war chest into his reelection battle that former Governor Earl would never have dreamed of. In a close race this could put Doyle in the drivers seat. And today, unlike 20 years ago, the rise of independent spending by third parties could very well work to the advantage of the Doyle reelection effort. As the incumbent, Governor Doyle will likely have powerful and well-funded allies spending on his behalf. Earl ran for reelection in 1986 without this kind of formidable campaign assistance. Again, in a close contest this could provide an edge. As we enter the New Year and the elections of 2006, you can bet electoral history is on the minds of Governor Doyle and his GOP opponents this holiday season. --Murray is a longtime member of the Wisconsin REALTORS Association government relations team. |
|