Paris Procopis:It seems like the most popular word of the month is ‘Vetting’. Yes, it is indeed important to vet ALL candidates for governor and ask them all tough questions. After all it’s important to see how they respond and to make sure they are really up to the task of standing up to the certain onslaught the Democrats will unleash against the primary winner, and it will be unrelenting.

Unfortunately, one candidate and seems to feel they are above being vetted and asked tough questions. Well, feeling entitled, does not mean you get your way. Since Rebecca Kleefisch feels that she wants to run on the Walker record, then she must own it, ALL OF IT. I think it is time to do some ‘vetting’ and talk about some harsh truths regarding the Walker/Kleefisch record on education.

Education has increasingly become one of the top hot button issues across the country. Wisconsin is no different. Especially over the course of the past year or two, we have seen example after example of ordinary parents on the front lines fighting for their children. Their chief opponent? Left-wing indoctrination programs like Critical Race Theory (CRT) that have all but taken over our public-school systems.

How did this happen? How did CRT so easily gain such an intractable foothold in our public schools in Wisconsin? To show how we got to this place, a close examination of Act 10 might just shed some light.

Act 10 was the crown jewel of the Walker/Kleefisch administration. Act 10 sparked a national debate. Footage of waves of Madison protesters were beamed night after night across TV screens throughout the country. Act 10 spawned a massive and costly statewide 2012 recall which served only to further propel Governor Scott Walker onto the national stage. Fast forward to 2022… now, with Walker’s unfettered and unflailing endorsement, Rebecca Kleefisch hopes to ride those coattails right into the governor’s mansion.

So, what was the primary goal of Act 10 anyway?

We were told the objective was to save taxpayers money. Assurances were made. Collective bargaining would be limited. Teachers would be required to pay a small and reasonable portion of their healthcare and retirement cost just like most other employees in the private sector. The trade-off? Walker/Kleefisch would be able to significantly cut K-12 education spending in their first budget to help offset and overcome a $3.2 billion dollar deficit left behind by the Doyle administration. No other significant educational reforms were included in Act 10.

Kleefisch and Walker stood firm on Act 10. For their perseverance, credit is surely due. Who can forget the Act 10 battle of 2011-2012? Who can forget what the Teachers Union put the state through during their epic “temper tantrum”, dare I say, “insurrection”?

Over the years, Act 10 did exactly what it was designed to do. It limited the teacher union stranglehold on schools and was able to save taxpayers billions of dollars.

Let’s take a closer look at the record.

The conservative education spending cuts of 2011 actually gave way to continuous increases in public school spending. Might seem strange, but Republican majorities ruled both houses in the state legislature. Actually, the Walker/Kleefisch administration, in step with Assembly Speaker Robin Vos, substantially increased school spending in EVERY budget year that followed. By 2016, education spending was significantly higher than before the Walker/Kleefisch administration took office, and those numbers just continued to rise. This is not hyperbole. Look at the DPI numbers and Walker Budget Numbers on school spending.

2011$6,234,200,300.00 (Walker inherited this)
2012$5,802,070,600.00
2013$5,873,000,600.00
2014$5,947,372,600.00
2015$6,086,875,000.00
2016$6,258,778,300.00
2017$6,458,849,200.00
2018$6,731,701,400.00
With the extra half billion dollars in spending by 2018, what did taxpayers receive in return? Higher student performance? No. Universal school choice for more parents to choose the best school for their kids? No. Closing the achievement gap for minority students? No. Funding equity for charter and choice students? No.

Then, what was the trade-off for all of the extra spending on education in Wisconsin? It appears that the major result was that taxpayers simply spent more on public schools under Walker/Kleefisch with no strings attached.