Thanks to the Governor’s Veto, the Kids of Wisconsin Are Safe from Unlimited Child Labor

I know we spend a lot of time in the shebeen talking about politics in Wisconsin.

There are a number of reasons why, and that’s not even counting the fact that I spent five years of my life there and became very fond of the place. But when the state elected Scott Walker to govern it almost coincidentally with the opening of this shebeen, its Republicans worked overtime to reverse the state’s historic dedication to innovative, progressive politics, a tradition going back a century or more. Ever since, Wisconsin Democrats have been fighting to regain the ground progressive politics won in the years immediately preceding World War I. This fight has been precisely microcosmic in relation to the political struggle in the nation at large.

All that being said, it was a busy week in America’s Dairyland.

First, Governor Tony Evers, who rid the state of Walker, vetoed a bill that likely would have opened the state to unlimited child labor. From the Wisconsin Examiner:

In his veto message, Evers said he opposed “eliminating a process that ensures our kids are protected from employers that may exploit youth and inexperience or subject children to hazardous or illegal working conditions.”

1. While parents and guardians can apply online directly for a work permit on behalf of a 14- or 15-year-old, backers of the legislation eliminating them argued that the work permit requirement added needless bureaucracy and intruded on parents’ rights. “The state does not need a hand and every single thing that we do as parents, they don’t need to help us raise our children in every single way,” said Rep. Amanda Nedweski (R-Pleasant Prairie) during the Assembly floor debate in February. “This bill simply removes the state from the parenting process where they do not belong.”

The rights of the parents to send their preteen into the chicken plant to lose a limb shall not be infringed upon.

In addition, another multi-gazillion-dollar state Supreme Court campaign seems to be aborning. Right now the Democrats have a one-vote majority in that body, which has been quite consequential over the past year. Now it looks like they’re going to have to fight to keep it again. From NBC News:

1. The April 2025 election to replace [Ann Walsh] Bradley promises to be an expensive and bitter race and will likely feature many of the same momentous issues—like abortion rights and redistricting—that defined a 2023 Wisconsin Supreme Court race that ultimately gave liberals their first majority on the bench in 15 years.
2. The election for Bradley’s seat will come two years after liberal Janet Protasiewicz defeated conservative Dan Kelly in what was the most expensive state Supreme Court race in U.S. history and one of the most closely watched elections of 2023. The race was largely defined by Protasiewicz’s support for abortion rights and opposition to the state’s heavily gerrymandered legislative maps—two issues that were set to come before the court. During the campaign, conservatives criticized Protasiewicz for having taken public stances on divisive political issues. Following her win, some Republicans in the state threatened her with impeachment.

Central to that doomed and useless effort was state assembly speaker Robin Vos. Vos, alas, has his own problems these days with a claque of Trumpian dead-enders who want to recall him because Vos somehow didn’t do enough to steal the state out from under President Biden in 2020. Luckily for Vos, these are not the brightest bulbs in the Mar-a-Lago chandelier. From Wisconsin Public Radio:

1. Commissioners voted 5-0 to reject the petitions, following the recommendation of staff who work at the state’s elections agency. “It really boils down to an arithmetic problem,” said Commissioner Bob Spindell, a Republican appointee. “Commission staff looked at it from every single angle, and no matter which angle they looked at, the petitions were woefully short.”
2. Under Wisconsin’s recall law, organizers needed to gather a number of signatures from residents of Vos’s district equal to 25 percent of the number of people who voted in the last election for governor. That number varies from district to district. In Vos’s old 63rd Assembly District—which was struck down by the Wisconsin Supreme Court’s liberal majority as unconstitutional along with the rest of the old legislative maps—6,850 signatures would have been needed to force a recall. According to a review by WEC staff, organizers gathered only 4,989 signatures, falling well short of the mark.

The Trumpian forces responded with their usual dispassion.

1. Commissioners also heard from former Justice Michael Gableman, an attorney for the recall effort who has been at odds with the powerful speaker for the past two years. In 2021, Vos hired Gableman to lead an investigation of the 2020 election, a decision he has since said was the worst mistake he’s made since becoming speaker. In 2022, Gableman campaigned for Vos’s Republican primary opponent. Gableman argued the recall effort had been intentionally sabotaged by people who wanted it to fail. “It was infiltrated by outsiders from New York and Florida,” Gableman said. “That’s been reported to the FBI.”

I’m sure the Bureau was overjoyed to hear it. The second attempt to recall Vos is already under way.

At this writing, I don’t know what this is all about, but most of the possibilities are not good.

According to law enforcement, this appears to be an intentional, criminal act and the Texas Rangers will be leading the investigation. This deliberate, heinous act is a reminder of the dangerous work done by our law enforcement and licensing agencies that work to provide public safety and services. Please join me in praying for the innocent victims and their families at this time.

The fact that local law enforcement was so quick to call the crash deliberate means that the witnesses on the ground and the people in the building were sure it was. Motive is unclear. It might be some twisted politics, or it might just be a private gripe.

Neighboring Montgomery County Judge Mark Keough said in a Facebook post that the suspect had been denied the license on Thursday. “He returned today with intent to harm,” Keough said. “Continued prayers for the DPS staff, troopers and civilians affected.”

This country needs a time-out. Badly.

At this writing, I don’t know what this means, but many of the

SDGs, Targets, and Indicators Analysis

1. Which SDGs are addressed or connected to the issues highlighted in the article?

• SDG 4: Quality Education
• SDG 5: Gender Equality
• SDG 8: Decent Work and Economic Growth
• SDG 10: Reduced Inequalities
• SDG 16: Peace, Justice, and Strong Institutions

The article discusses various political and social issues in Wisconsin, which are connected to the above-mentioned SDGs. The issues include child labor, parental rights, political struggles, and potential threats to peace and justice.

2. What specific targets under those SDGs can be identified based on the article’s content?

• Target 4.1: By 2030, ensure that all girls and boys complete free, equitable, and quality primary and secondary education.
• Target 5.5: Ensure women’s full and effective participation and equal opportunities for leadership at all levels of decision-making in political, economic, and public life.
• Target 8.7: Take immediate and effective measures to eradicate forced labor, end modern slavery and human trafficking, and secure the prohibition and elimination of the worst forms of child labor.
• Target 10.2: By 2030, empower and promote the social, economic, and political inclusion of all, irrespective of age, sex, disability, race, ethnicity, origin, religion, or economic or other status.
• Target 16.3: Promote the rule of law at the national and international levels and ensure equal access to justice for all.

These targets are relevant to the issues discussed in the article, such as ensuring quality education, gender equality in decision-making, eliminating child labor, reducing inequalities, and promoting justice.

3. Are there any indicators mentioned or implied in the article that can be used to measure progress towards the identified targets?

• Indicator 4.1.1: Proportion of children and young people (a) in grades 2/3; (b) at the end of primary; and (c) at the end of lower secondary achieving at least a minimum proficiency level in (i) reading and (ii) mathematics, by sex.
• Indicator 5.5.1: Proportion of seats held by women in (a) national parliaments and (b) local governments.
• Indicator 8.7.1: Proportion and number of children aged 5-17 years engaged in child labor, by sex and age group.
• Indicator 10.2.1: Proportion of people living below 50 percent of median income, by age, sex, and persons with disabilities.
• Indicator 16.3.3: Proportion of victims of violence in the previous 12 months who reported their victimization to competent authorities or other officially recognized mechanisms.

These indicators can be used to measure progress towards the identified targets. They provide specific metrics for assessing the achievement of each target.

Table: SDGs, Targets, and Indicators

Behold! This splendid article springs forth from the wellspring of knowledge, shaped by a wondrous proprietary AI technology that delved into a vast ocean of data, illuminating the path towards the Sustainable Development Goals. Remember that all rights are reserved by SDG Investors LLC, empowering us to champion progress together.

Source: esquire.com

Join us, as fellow seekers of change, on a transformative journey at https://sdgtalks.ai/welcome, where you can become a member and actively contribute to shaping a brighter future.