Singing a September School-Start Song

Thursday will be the first day of the new school year for the vast majority of public school students in Wisconsin. Why? Because that’s the law. No, not that school start on a Thursday, but that it not start earlier than September 1. And why is that? Because tourism industry leaders lobbied so hard for it.

In fact, when the law went through the legislature in the late 1990s, it was handled in the tourism committees of the Assembly and Senate, and not in the education committees, even though the subject was school calendars. I’ve always thought that said something about priorities in Wisconsin.

School opening dates in many districts had moved up over the years into late August. This was a problem, in the eyes of those in the tourism business. They said they wanted kids and parents to have the maximum opportunity to take vacations that build healthy family bonds and life-long memories. (As the song from Man of La Mancha put it, I’m only thinking of him.)  Let’s assume they also wanted to maximize their summer season and hold on to their high school student employees longer.

So, since 2000, state law 118.045 has specified “no public school may commence the school term until September 1.”   Athletic contests are exempted, as are in-service days for staff (which is why most teachers went back to work Tuesday or so).  Schools on so-called year-round calendars (which mean they take  shorter summer breaks but have the same total of school days) are exempt. And other schools that convince the state Department of Public Instruction there are “extraordinary reasons” may be granted exceptions. In Milwaukee, that includes several schools that have International Baccalaureate programs that call for starting in August. Private schools and higher-education institutions are not included in the law.

Continue ReadingSinging a September School-Start Song

The Constitutional Right of Recall

The largest newspaper in Wisconsin, the Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel, continues to take the editorial position that the public’s right to recall elected officials should only be exercised in cases of misfeasance in office or of criminal conduct.  The editorial page actively disparages the use of the recall process in cases where voters simply disagree with the policy choices of their elected representatives.  Recent examples of this editorial position can be seen here, and in the decision to excerpt a similar editorial published by the newspaper USA Today here.  On this past Sunday, Steven Walters commented in the Journal-Sentinel on possible amendments to the Wisconsin Constitution intended to modify the existing recall provisions and to bring them into line with the more limited scope advocated by these editorials.

I have commented on this issue before.   The editorial position of the Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel is misguided.  In particular, in editorializing against the exercise of the recall power, the Journal-Sentinel fails to account for both the specific text of the Wisconsin Constitution and the understanding of the recall power among the founding generation of our country.  The key to understanding the proper scope of the recall power is the basic conception of “the sovereignty of the people.”

Continue ReadingThe Constitutional Right of Recall

Separation of Powers and the Wisconsin Supreme Court

Yesterday, I participated in a panel discussion hosted by the Madison Chapter of the Federalist Society, entitled “Separation of Powers: Wisconsin Supreme Court’s Decision Upholding the Collective Bargaining Law.”  The discussion was moderated by Justice Jon Wilcox of the Wisconsin Supreme Court (Retired) and along with myself the panel included Deputy Attorney General Kevin St. John, who argued the Ozanne v. Fitzgerald case on behalf of the State of Wisconsin.  The entire discussion was recorded by Wisconsin Eye and can be viewed at this link.

What follows are my prepared remarks.  However, I encourage interested readers to follow the above link in order to hear both Attorney St. John’s able defense of the Ozanne decision on separation of powers grounds, and also the questions and answers following our presentations.  I want to thank Andrew Cook and the Federalist Society for the opportunity to present my views.

Continue ReadingSeparation of Powers and the Wisconsin Supreme Court