UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN-MADISON ARCHIVES
ORAL HISTORY PROJECT

Interview #328
EARL, ANTHONY S.

EARL, Anthony S. (1936- )   
State Assemblyman; Governor

Interviewed: 1987		
Series: Merger
Interviewer: Laura Smail
Length: 4 hours
Transcript: 76 pages

Background; Reasons for coming to Wisconsin; Election to Legislature; Merger bill; UW's failure to mount opposition to it; Reasons it passed; Changes in Legislature; System's approach to lobbying; Aborted plans for 1987-89 biennial budget; Current prospects for UW; Considerations in preparation of first biennial budget; Star fund; Faculty reactions to salary freeze; Faculty Compensation Review Committee; Two differentials it proposed; Catch-up dispute and its consequences; Academic staff issue; TA collective bargaining bill; His contacts on Madison campus; His regent appointments.

First Interview Session (January 28, 1987): Digital File (tapes 1-2)
Time		Keywords

00:00:00	Start of Interview/Interviewer’s Introduction [begin Tape 1/Side 1]

00:00:21	Background, education at University of Chicago, and early memories of interest in politics.

00:04:09	Reasons for taking job as assistant district attorney and city attorney in Wausau WI, wanting to move back to the Upper Midwest.

00:06:13	Involvement with Marathon County Democratic Party. David Obey. Melvin Laird. Election to assembly in special election of 1969.

00:07:56	Fractious time with Father Groppi’s movement, infighting within Republican Party. Becomes majority leader in 1970.  Keppler, Hollander, Knowles, Johnson in senate.

00:10:54	The UW 2-year campus in Wausau.  Dealings with UW System, CCHE, HEAB.  Dreyfus a neighbor.

00:13:13	The competition between WSU and UW.

00:15:48	On Joint Finance Committee.  Joint Finance Committee's power at that time. Education Committee weak.

00:18:14	Merger as fiscal matter.

00:19:05	UW people didn't take merger seriously, but WSU advocated for it. Dreyfus anecdote on how competition was going on.  Every legislator wanted to bring in a campus.

00:21:37	Why WSU supported merger—prestige, higher pay, resources for campuses

00:22:37	UW only came out when went to senate.  Lucey's performance.  Importance of Ray Johnson's support.

00:25:38	Molinaro's role in Joint Finance Committee.  Co-chair with Hollander/Huber as Speaker.  Named young turks Dennis Conta and AE to Joint Finance Committee.

00:29:38	[end side 1; begin Side 2] The story on Cirilli.  Budget tie up.  The conference committee with Molinaro, Anderson, AE, Walter Hollander, Swan, Cirilli.

00:33:01	Three big points in merger: UW didn't take seriously which allowed it to become partisan rather than policy issue. (2) Lucey's performance in Senate. (3) Johnson's support.

00:33:50	Question about tax distribution as reason for merger. Wasn’t a distraction; Lucey really wanted it and it was a big test for him.

00:35:35	Q. re legitimacy of appointment of Weaver.  Lucey had his heels dug in about UW.  Very serious.

00:37:27	AE's views on merger.  Harmfulness of competition. His irritation at the denigration of state schools. Story about Madison lobbying, which seemed like elitism.

00:42:59	Question about expectations of equal salaries.  Need for differential not faced.  AE's reaction as governor to the "Don't cram 10% down our throats."

00:44:23	Concern in 1970 that reaction against spending on higher education would set in during 1970s.  Something in that.  Lucey-Weaver opposition a factor.  With more money going to VTAE.

00:47:56	Why didn't faculty speak minds. Ray Bowen was direct. Cronon, Finman. Midge Miller a principal opponent, organized faculty people. Particularly angry at Norm Anderson.

00:50:35	UW's staunchest champion was DeBardeleben, who was wild about merger.  Anec- dote about Gaylord Nelson's appointment of him. Contrast to Dreyfus. Haas supported merger.

00:55:37	Madison administrators not as visible as regents. AE recalls debating bill.  People--Breuscher, Lemon, Percy--were supplying information to Midge Miller.

01:00:01	[end tape 1; begin Tape 2] No one in legislature supported UW effectively.  Lack of cordiality between Weaver and Lucey.  Lucey going after excesses, smarting from opposition he'd gotten from UW and board.  Mary Lou Munts began to build up a base of support.

01:03:50	In 1974 Lucey wanted more emphasis on mission statements, on stopping excesses.  As secretary of DOA, AE studied closings.  Less than 500 students formula.  Richland Center, Medford, Baraboo, and Baron County the targets.  Consternation.  In end legislature given only right to close campuses.  AE thinks some will disappear in future.

01:07:46	Legislators operate on a one for all, all for one basis. Don't take my center, I won't take yours.

01:08:57	Talked with System about closings.  Center System campuses concern at being satellites of WSUs.  Resolved when Center System established as a unit.

01:11:31	Percy highly regarded by legislators.  Weaver not effective.  Partisan allies of UW in minority.  UW stuck to Molinaro and Hollander who no longer had power.  Conta was Joint Finance Committee head.  Percy an exception.

01:14:10	Tony Curreri story.  Molinaro sanctimonious about lobbyists.  Lemon and Breuscher seldom down except for crises.

01:16:14	The indirect contacts UW kept.  Jim Wimmer dinner party.  Harrington, Conta.  AE met Shain.  But all indirect.  No systematic way of making wishes known to legislature.  AE thinks UW must compete.  Grover, the school board, voc tech people do.  Regents showed they knew this when they appointed Shaw.

01:22:44	On Molinaro and Parkside campus.

01:25:32	Molinaro and Hollander not effective by 1970s.  Lucey's budgets were decided by Joint Finance Committee, which in the beginning was Molinaro and Hollander.  No wonder UW thinks no need for extensive lobbying.

01:27:55	Ron Bornstein and David Martin not highly visible.  AE saw O'Neil, Shaw.  Few legislators know either one.  Most legislators would say Lemon and Breuscher represent UW.  Harry Peterson more visible than all put together.

01:30:51	[end side 1; begin side 2] Other interviews from the same time period.

01:31:35	Chancellors, if they speak for the System, can tear everything apart.  On catch-up were lobbying for 15% for everyone.  George Field's phone call to AE.  O'Neil thought he could persuade people.  Regents began pulling back.

01:38:15	Donald Smith, gray eminence.  Lucey trusted him.  Didn't go in for rhetoric.  Shain did in farewell address.  Fells on deaf ears.  Leaves bad taste.

01:38:15	Issue of senior bottleneck discarded in favor of catch-up.  As if didn't care about systemic problem.  Could have argued for it.

01:42:38	Differential a major refinement of merger. Rhetoric and hyperbole very bad.

01:44:50	AE thought with Shaw and catch-up the worse problems were solved.  Better relations possible.  Story about proposed 1987-89 budget.  Cullen, Loftus, Lawton, Shaw, AE to meet day after election.  Now regents and System have put in an $88 million budget, and Thompson has said he will cut it 5%.  Both pipe dreams.  AE talked to Weinstein after Lawton became ill.  Weinstein feisty.  But regents have no votes and saber rattling not useful.

01:49:49	New view of UW in state.  Seen as service rather than enrichment of life.  People going to school for better jobs, should pay fees to cover cost.

01:55:01	End of First Interview Session

Second Interview Session (February 27, 1987): Digital File (tapes 3-4)
Time	Keywords

00:00:00	Start of Interview/Interviewer’s Introduction [begin tape 3/Side 1]

00:00:17	Contacts with Madison.  People who were supportive during campaign.  Hart, Lardy, Miller, Andreano, Shannon, Dresang.  Formally keeping in touch with Harry Peterson, O'Neil. Strong support for campaign from University community.  After election, level of contact picked up.  Meeting with O'Neil, Knowles, Lawton about budget; later with Shain, O'Neil and Lawton about budget.  Got advice.

00:02:58	Difficult time economically.  Getting worse into January. Trough of recession.  Concern that budget wouldn't endanger UW.  In close touch with Lawton throughout.  Beckwith president.

00:04:54	Conversations with budget focused on making up for across-the-board cuts under Dreyfus.  Damaged UW.  O'Neil and Shain felt library situation serious.  Also instructional support.  Break away from funding formula that related so closely to body count. Use some other measurement.  Led to competition to for bodies.

00:06:48	AE pointed out wouldn't leave much for salaries. In Nov ’82 to Jan ’83 it was agreed there couldn't be salary increase. To offer something said would pick up contribution to state employees’ retirement fund.  Didn't bother people at that time.  Widely understood.  Unemployment rate 13%.  Only when started to come out of recession in May, June 1983 that furor over freeze began.  When that got started it really snowballed.  Very unpopular thing, and it was my most difficult time with the UW community, more difficult than fight over catch-up.  Good many didn't understand origin of freeze during recession.  AE appeared before variety of faculty assemblages--senate in Madison, Whitewater, Stout, Stevens Point explaining what situation was.  Was respectfully received, but you can't miss fire that was in eyes of a lot of people there.  Perceived by some not as manifestation of difficult economic times but as willful judgment to squeeze down UW.  Had difficulty explaining that wasn't the case.  Example at Whitewater.  AE pointed out people unemployed.  Water off a duck's back, didn't translate to a lot of people.  Difficult time in University relations.  Most of the regents and most of central administration understood what situation was.  11th hour effort by O'Neil to get some kind of faculty salary raise in budget.  Put AE in embarrassing spot because would have been just a bump for faculty and not for rest of state employees.  No way could have done that.  Lowest ebb of relationship with UW.

00:12:30	Had pushed through substantial change in unemployment compensation law.  State borrowing $1,000,000 a day every day.  Cut benefits, increased taxes.  By time left office, debt paid off and living on own money, and everyone congratulating themselves.  But people don't remember in 1983 the wrenching business of changing.  Similarly with freeze, people don't remember the situation at the time.  Nonetheless the freeze and consequent unhappiness did not seriously affect the relations between AE, O'Neil and regents.  Remained good.  When the second budget ran around, were able to rectify, to more than rectify, some of the problems that remained from the freeze.  After the budget was done, AE appointed a committee.

00:14:48	Star fund came up very early in conversations with Shain and O'Neil.  Ought to have something available to hold on to star faculty in case somebody tries to grab them off.  Somehow manifest our appreciation for their worth to us.  Who actually articulated it AE can't recall.  Product of informal discussions. Misbegotten idea.  Was never explained to people in a very satisfactory way.  The campuses outside Madison thought it was going to be for Madison; Madison thought it a pittance, an insult.  Wouldn't begin to take care of top faculty.

00:16:53	AE understood salary situation bad but state finances were in desperate shape.  Slipping deeply into deficit.  We don't know how large the deficit would have been.  When AE took office he called a special session and established measures to take care of it.  That had begun to have a positive effect by the time the budget was making its way through in May and June.  I certainly understood tough spot faculty salaries were in.  But not a result just of the freeze.  Ten, twelve year deterioration.  Freeze exacerbated it, but didn't cause desperate faculty compensation problems.

00:19:07	Question about letters.  Stevens Point had organized letter writing campaign.  Most from Madison.  Anxiety about losing faculty ran the deepest here.

00:20:47	Q. re the Joint Finance Committee meeting in late spring.  AE saw it as 11th hour effort to get more money to star fund.  Feingold introducing the $2.5 million addition.  AE saw it as bonus; O'Neil as addition to base.  AE sees it as honest misunderstanding.  O'Neil a gentleman about it.  Never engaged in purple rhetoric, doomsday rhetoric, unlike Shain.  Can't always cry wolf.  O'Neil didn't use that tactic.  O'Neil and AE talked about scope of problem. Ought to be addressed comprehensively, for whole UW System, under forum not under constraints that Joint Finance Committee is.  Not in context of budget.  Faculty Compensation Review Committee was result.  Put top notch people on.  No preconceived notion about result.  They worked hard.  Came up with unanimous vote, which some of them subsequently forgot.

00:26:07	Question about appointments to Task Force.  Munts co-chair joint finance.  Dick Coy from Eau Claire, TAUWF member.  Had a labor background.  Man from southeast Wisconsin, labor man, Kenny Germanson, with Allied Industrial Workers.  Ted Kinneman from Janesville as representative of 2-year campuses.  They needed to be competitive with high-school teachers.

00:29:29	[end side 1; begin Side 2] AE thought differential was important.  First differential: first time judgment made that UW faculty ought to be treated differently from all other state employees.  Very important.  Had always been same percentage across board.  Recognition that faculty competing in different market.  AE's view on differential.  Couldn't do it if other state employees were not to be getting a fairly decent raise.  State was in process of bargaining salaries.  AE had money in budget to give up to 6%.  Got a lot of grief on it, ultimately.  Legislature threatened not to ratify.  Too much.  Thompson said going to break the state.  AE thinks no way could have gotten acceptance of explicit differential, if giving UW up to 15%, and the others 2%.  Would have been very difficult.  AE thinks frankly would have been unfair.  Others would say he was trying to buy them off.  But that differential crucial.  Will be important in next few budgets to keep that differential.  Not to let them push for catch-up.

00:33:49	Second differential: within the System.  Madison and Milwaukee faculties remarkably restrained during that debate.  Oshkosh, Stevens Point, Eau Claire, were not.  Strong difference O'Neil and AE had was that AE thought O'Neil should have called chancellors in and knocked heads.  They were risking whole catch-up.  Was infectious.  Gives the George Field story.  AE met with O'Neil.  Said, he had to call these folks together.  He believed in sweet reasons.  Got them down on Halloween to reason with them.  Didn't do a damn bit of good.  Whole thing almost became unraveled.  Muzik's statement, "Don't cram it down our throats."  They got after Ben Lawton.  He was in AE's office, getting in touch with legislators, trying to get it passed.  Up and down.  Travis, Schneider, Loftus, all suggesting alternatives.  In end, sweetened it a bit but essentially was what committee had recommended.

00:38:29	Terrible scrap, corrosive within legislature. Heightened possibility of legislature making decisions about University. Will begin saying what courses you ought to offer. Loftus most articulate about this--did fine job on reflecting what this it meant for future government-UW relations.  Worst would be that legislature drawn into the decision making process and would not easily be removed from it.  UW-Milwaukee School of Urban Journalism evidence of what was starting to happen.

00:40:56	AE thinks that considering the atmosphere of commission what was being developed seemed reasonable.  Then when people, e.g., Dick from Eau Claire, got back to their own campuses and talked to TAUWF people, looked different.  They wanted equal pay with Madison.  The rhetoric of crumbs.

00:44:00	AE says he used to make case for Madison in talking to outstate campuses, but then they'd say, you're one of these people who think Madison is superior.  And he'd say, no not better, just different.  He used comparison of research and freshman courses in communication skills.  A faux pas.  But on most campuses a substantial number of faculty understood the distinction.

00:45:27	AE thinks should have made more of fact that it wasn't to be a cross-the-board 15%, that only the top people would get it.  Didn't do a good job of pointing out that raise would depend on work you were doing, and competitive environment in which you operated.  AE was anxious to leave fair amount of flexibility. Realized difficult decisions to make, but only way.  Competition is on person-to-person basis.  New president has opportunity to smooth over rifts, and to enhance the differentials, make them more explicit, make clear not just a one-time palliative.

00:48:33	Stevens Point one of first to throw caution to the winds, say to hell with you.  Ran ad in Wall Street Journal, made lots of racket.  Made things uncomfortable for local legislators.  Then other campuses saw what was going on, so they began squeezing their legislators.  Inappropriate for those chancellors.  If faculty wanted to do it, but chancellors' loyalty lies with System, they are part of management, not part of faculty.  O'Neil should have made that point more forcefully.  When AE met Shaw for first time, Shaw said, Governor I want you to know that if I get this job, I am the boss and these other chancellors will be answerable to me.  Regents must have said this is a bone in Tony Earl's throat.  He's been good on that so far.  Has made it clear that he speaks for the University, and is not just one of several.

00:51:24	His chore will be made easier by the fact that Chancellor Shain has gone.  Paranoia in other campuses is that Shain really ran the show here and whoever was head of System was a paper tiger.  Now they won't have that myth to live with.  Next chancellor will be seen as one of them.  The ultimate expression of this is the bills to move Central Administration out of Madison.  But it's not the proximity, it's the fact that Madison is different from other campuses and is clearly going to be more a focus of president's attention than 2-year campus at Barron.

00:53:18	Question about O'Neil's bringing outstate campuses up to 9%.  Gave it away.  As a matter of political reality they weren't going to get that little.  Task force was most interested in taking care of Madison situation but knew had to address rest of System.  Difficult to chose right peer group for other campuses.  They must have known that big gap would be politically unpalatable and they'd have to bump that up a bit.  The mistake the regents and president made was to say right off, we're going to bump that up.  Should have seemed to be thoughtful.  Having given it away, and started high, had to get something more.  Didn't handle it very artfully.

00:56:51	[end tape 3; begin Tape 4] Academic staff issue came up very late in the game.  AE thought it something to do separately but the pressure got very heavy to at least begin to address it in the faculty catch-up.  In the end, it was a mistake because AE didn't have very good data.  Within the System there's no consistency from campus to campus as to what is academic staff.  AE thinks employees whose functions are related to academic pursuit ought to be made part of faculty catch-up.  The others ought to be treated like classified personnel.  University doesn't like that at all.  AE thinks what's led to the abuse of academic staff is that you don't have to go through all the tough processes to hire and promote and fire.  Ought to be a rigorous review of everyone called academic staff and sort them out.  AE doesn't think a special problem in Madison really.  Doesn't think loan counsellors should be called academic staff.  Thinks it's going to continue to trouble people, like with the very quick legislative committee support for allowing academic staff to organize and bargain collectively.  Each of the committees boomed that through, even though governor indicated he wasn't friendly toward it.  That's because of the discontent.  Some academic staff compare to peers in classified; others say doing same thing as faculty so ought to be getting same.  Will just be the beginning of the fermentation if they're allowed to organize.  If it is, there will be a real fare-thee-well between Wisconsin Federation of Teachers and the WEA.

01:02:49	AE on his belief that everyone should be able to organize and bargain if they want to.

01:04:43	Q. re collective bargaining for TA.  AE thinks they brought it on themselves by the way they treated the TAs.  Was working to bargain, had been a nuisance.  Foolish thing to stop it.  Now they can bargain on a far wider range of things.  Very poor judgment on the chancellor's part.  AE never talked to Shain about it, did to Peterson.  AE doesn't think it will be the end of the world.  Comes from insensitive treatment of the people involved.  Has led to academic staff thing too.

01:06:30	Examples of notorious use of academic staff aren't necessarily here.  The Oshkosh case.

01:07:55	Question about his ongoing contacts with Madison.  AE would initiate contacts with Harry Peterson more than Harry would with him.  Story about AE's involvement in Elroy Hirsch matter.  AE getting calls.  Hirsch only has year to go.  Called Peterson, asked him to have Shain call him.  When he did, urged him not to, untold grief for minor matter.  Said blame should be shared.  Let them have raffle.  Shain didn't like AE's involvement.  Quite brusque.  AE said if you proceed to go ahead, I will publicly disagree with you.  Said it would be a terrible mistake.  Shain said, what if Hirsch won't retire after one year?  AE agreed to make some inquiries, called two people.  Both said Hirsch would definitely leave in a year.  Got back to Shain.

01:11:45	So communication most often initiated by AE to Peterson, when Shain did something AE thought could cause some consternation.  Not that they didn't get along, they did.  Shain a rather crusty person, but they got along.  Peterson would arrange for them to have lunch now and then.  Shain didn't like comparable worth.  Never bad blood between them.

01:12:51	Question: Did friendship with O'Neils color his attitude?  AE: it did.

01:13:43	AE saw Howard Temin on a couple of occasions.  He was very anxious in a very graphic way to show AE how his teaching responsibilities differed from those of an average person.  Tried to make a couple of other visits to other schools on this campus.  People here would know he'd been to Stout or Parkside or La Crosse and would say, gee you ought to come and see us.  But a large community and hard to get to see everybody.

01:15:10	Sheila Earl tried hard not to be a conduit.  Didn't want to be seen as an extension of AE, or be a lobbyist, nor an apologist.  She felt if she was ever seen in that light, would have had no peace.  Her own legitimacy would have been questioned.

01:16:16	Don Nichols and AE would talk about campus matters some.  Dennis Dresang, Ed Schtenn, Hank Lardy, Ted Shannon--people he would see in political or personal context.

01:16:59	Should there be a formal structure?  Yes.  Question of time.  AE would try to get together with faculty.  Had a dinner party for people in biochemistry once, met with younger people.  Felt badly he didn't see more of people here on campus, but time is a governor's most precious asset and there's never enough of it to go around.

01:18:12	Would be a good idea if there were someone to meet with the governor once a week.  25% of money spent for state operations, half of that for University of Wisconsin.  But doesn't get much more time than DNR, Department of Ag, Department of Justice, etc.  Just in terms of dollar impact and impact on state economy UW should get more attention but didn't.  Example.  AE always intended to get to know Katharine Lyall then would forget about it.  A mistake that he didn't do more of that.

01:19:55	Story about taking out Henry Maier's phone on governor's desk.

01:21:24	Ultimately, if University going to have good working relationship with governor and with key legislators, impetus will have to come from University, because everyone is vying for time.  And governor's horizons much broader, so University has to present its own case and be more aggressive in pushing its agenda.  Could be true of Madison as well as System--especially with Madison.  Because of the proximity here people take for granted is better communication, and then of course there isn't.

01:22:46	Question about regent appointments.  No formula.  Wanted people who cared deeply about University.  Reappointed Ben Lawton.  Wanted geographical diversity, diversity in background, without picking people who would have a campus.  So picked Nikolay, Camilla Hanson.  Outstate perspective but not affiliated with a campus. That's worked.  They both represent that kind of point of view. Appointed Warren Knowles out of deep respect for Bob Knowles.  Appointed Nes Flores as perfect example of what relatively low cost education can do to benefit society.  Migrant worker's son. First elected Hispanic judge; first Hispanic to serve on Public Service Commission.  Is evidence that minority programs ought to be given a fair shake.  And favored low tuition.  So motivations differed from case to case.  Lawrence Weinstein may turn out to be controversial because he is so strong willed, but his concern and affection for the UW is unquestioned.

01:26:44	End of Second Interview Session
End of Oral History #328