The following article was posted on www.620wtmj.com
Jennifer Bukosky's mom is naming names...
Posted: June 17, 2009
Judy Jenkins is frustrated. Jennifer Bukosky's mother has been a Wisconsin's Morning News guest from time to time since the horrible car crash that took the life of Jennifer, her daughter Courtney Bella and her unborn baby. Our conversations with her have been compelling, heart wrenching and educational as she mourns, grieves and goes about the tough job of trying to bring about change to Wisconsin's drunk driving laws. After the accident, the most dangerous place to be in Wisconsin was between politicians and cameras or microphones. I can think of several that jumped on the cause (and the attention) of the wreck to (as Sykes puts it) pose for Holy Pictures and promise change.
It's been over a year now. Mark Benson, the man responsible for the accident, has been convicted after reaching a plea deal. But NOTHING has happened in Madison despite all the calls, the bills and the hearings. We talked with Judy about that. The line that gets me out of this interview is when she says the lawmakers "patted her on the head" and sent her along the way. After we spoke, Erik Bilstad of our staff sent her an email asking if she wanted to name the names of those lawmakers who have promised so much but brought about so little. Here is her response. which tells plenty about how your laws are made in Madison:
Greetings!
Ok, after giving the accountability issue some thought, the following pols are being less than forthright and genuine in their desire to bring about substantive change in current law. Although, as evidenced by their proposals, they have done something......even if the changes are not seen as meaningful.
There are 2 bills out there that address OWI changes, Assembly Bill 283 and Senate Bill 66. Assembly Bill 283, introduced by Reps: Staskunas, Zepnick, Smith, Zigmunt, Hintz, Sheridan, Black, Turner, Clark, Mason, Nelson, Hixson, Hebl and Berceau, and cosponsored by Senator Carpenter, is a multi-tiered bill. In our opinion, it has two positive provisions in it: Ignition Interlock devices and closing the .08 & .1 loophole (BAC). Again, in our opinion, the rest is eyewash. Nibbling around the edges.......The Public Hearing on this bill, which was heard before the Public Safety Committee (Staskunas: Chair) was well attended, hours long, and given respect by the Reps, who actually listened. Because it was held in West Allis, the pols on this Committee had nowhere to go....no distractions, per se.
Senate Bill 66, introduced by Senators Sullivan, Plale, Lehman, Decker, Hansen, Vinehout, Harsdorf, Risser, Carpenter, A. Lasee, Darling, Erpenbach and Cowles and cosponsored by Reps. Zepnick, Lothian, A. Ott, Bies and Honadel is another attempt at omnibus legislation. The only redeeming feature of this bill is criminalizing the 3rd OWI offense (with a 5-year look-back) vs. criminalizing the 5th, as is current law. The rest of the bill is weaker than current law. This Public Hearing was held in Madison, before the Committee on Judiciary, Corrections, Insurance, Campaign Reform and Housing (Lena Taylor: Chair). This hearing was not well-attended by either the general public, or by the Committee members themselves. During most of the hearing, there were only 2 Committee members present at any given time, when testimony was offered. To his credit, Senator Sullivan was the only Senator who remained for the entire hearing, perhaps because he was Co-Chair of the committee, and had to be present because the Chair was off doing other business at the time of testimony......others came and went, mostly went. When they were present, they seemed distracted, bored, inattentive.......
The pols talk about changing OWI laws - but when looking at the changes they're proposing, it's clear that they're unwilling to look at true reform. Paul and I are quite confident that the omnibus bills currently in the pipeline will be heard by both Houses of the Legislature and passed into law. A quick, watered down attempt to appease - us - the residents of this state - their conscience. They can then say they've listened to their constituents and heard their voices.....I wonder just whose voices they are really hearing?
I guess my question to those pols who seem unwilling to put forth substantive change is: Who are you afraid of? What are you afraid of? Whose political will are you following? Where are the promises that were made 14 months ago, following our daughter's and granddaughters' deaths? At that time, everyone seemed to want to jump on the "reform train". As we've learned during the past 14 months, the train is slow to leave the station. So, trust in the political arena continues to be a challenge to character. The opportunity to make meaningful change and to lead, based on principle, seems lost on the current legislature. The political climate of the country in general, and this state in particular, continues to struggle with trust issues. Who, in this state, is willing to step up and do what's right?
As you may know, in Wisconsin, unlike the rest of the 49 states, 1st time OWI offenders cause 75% of death and serious injuries. So in our state, deterrence HAS to be the main focus. The repeat offender, although certainly a problem here, is nowhere near the problem as 1st time offenders. That is why our goal is to criminalize the 1st offense, impose mandatory minimum sentences, and to lift the state prohibition on sobriety checkpoints (not mandatory, but optional, based upon a community's need and ability). In our view, and in the view of many others (research, UW Law, etc.), deterrence has be the focus of new legislative reform.
It seems like a no brainer that stiffer consequences and the fear of being caught would substantially reduce the numbers of drunk drivers on the road - a good thing.
For all kinds of reasons, on many different levels I suspect, the pols are refusing to make the changes necessary to make the roads safer for families in this state. The pols, who in many cases, ran their re-election campaigns on the "OWI change" issue, are now backing off - way off. We feel that if reform isn't achieved now, it will never be achieved. And, if not now, when? The fiscal costs are being cited as reasons why "reform" cannot be achieved. As I mentioned earlier on this morning's program, automobile crashes cost the state billions of dollars/year at the present time. The Journal Sentinel cited a figure of $2.7 Billion dollars/ per year as the financial exposure the state has regarding costs of drunk driving crashes (deaths/serious injuries). By deterring even 1/2 of these crashes, we would be able to fund reform legislation, with the expectation of a self-supporting program to cover the costs of additional man-hours for the D.A.'s, public defenders, court personnel, jail facilities, etc.
Politicians are elected into office by their constituents. Yet they frequently become deaf when push comes to shove.........disappointing, frustrating, oppositional.
On the other hand, we have been involved with a work group in Madison, chaired by Assemblywoman Peggy Krusick. Although there has been some difficulty in reaching consensus on a couple of issues, draft proposals have been completed. For the most part this group seems to be committed to change. The questions is: how to get this comprehensive bill heard in committee, and then passed on to both Houses for a vote?
