AB 69 Commentary

AB 69 could have moved to the Senate on November 6, but it didn’t because it failed to gain a two-thirds majority vote to suspend the rules to have the third reading.

I was able to watch the floor debate on AB 69 on November 6.

The debate tried to compare the value and capabilities of persons with an engineering degree compared to persons with a technical school degree. This despite the fact that ASCE has endorsed a more rigorous and longer academic preparation than the current 4-year degree which will contain far more training than the 2-year technical school degree.

This debate is not about the rhetoric I heard on the floor about the value of one education system or another—far from it. It is about who is in responsible charge of projects that affect everyone’s life—like bridges, water systems, highways, etc. It is not about who can “do engineering work.” There are highly skilled technicians in private companies as well as public agencies who fill a vital role in the development of projects. You DO NOT need an engineering license to work at an engineering firm or government agency. You DO need an engineering license to be in responsible charge.

There are people who are abusing the broad criteria Wisconsin has for licensure—people in Wisconsin, other states, and even other countries.

The current industry (ASCE and others) have actually approved a higher number of credits than a BS degree for professional practice. This will eventually be adopted by the states.

This is not about boxing out careers and protecting a profession—it is about assuring the citizens of Wisconsin; that they have the best protection reasonably assured.

It is also about showing young people the path to careers so they can make appropriate educational choices. This bill does not preclude anyone from becoming a licensed engineer. It makes the path to licensure the same for all to assure a common standard of proficiency.

This bill also creates a common standard so that Wisconsin engineers can have opportunities in other states.

One of those offering the Amendment said something to the affect of needing to keep the profession open to keep the economy going and increase the number of engineers. True, but not by diluting the standards and putting the public in potential risk. Why should we change standards to meet a demand or create an economic opportunity where public health safety and welfare are at stake? Tragic incidents, such as the Hyatt collapse and the IH 35W collapse tell us we need the MOST qualified persons in charge of projects supported by a very large number of highly skilled engineers, scientists, and technicians.

AB 69 Passes Second Reading.

AB 69, related to requirements for engineer licensure was before the full Assembly on Tuesday, November 6, 2007. An amendment that was offered was rejected. It is expected that the bill will be up for a vote before the Assembly on December 11th, 2007

Here is a link to the bill and bill history:

http://www.legis.state.wi.us/2007/data/AB69hst.html

AB 69 Scheduled for Assembly Vote November 6

AB 69, relating to professional engineer licensure, has been scheduled for a vote in the Assembly on November 6.

Please contact your legislative representatives and ask them to support the bill.