Boots & Sabers

The blogging will continue until morale improves...

M
Category: Politics – Wisconsin

The Education Reformation sweeps America

by | 0800, 4 Feb 23 | , | 21 Comments

Here is my full column that ran in the Washington County Daily News earlier this week.

Frustrated by chronically poorly performing government schools and a well-heeled government education aristocracy that has an agenda far removed from the priorities of parents, education advocates have ignited an education reformation that is sweeping across America. Once a pioneer in education, Wisconsin looks like it will be watching from the sidelines due to unrequited loyalty to a failing bureaucracy.

 

The education reformation is manifesting in several forms that are being lumped into the moniker of “universal school choice.” While the mechanisms differ, the concept is the same. Reformers are decoupling education funding from the government education industrial complex and crafting programs that fund education for children irrespective of their race, creed, religion, socioeconomic background, or school of choice. They are programs that fund students and not systems.

 

Last year, Arizona became the first state to pass universal school choice. West Virginia got close, passing a broad plan that provides educational choice to about 93% of their children. Already this year, Iowa has passed universal school choice. The states of Florida, Texas, Utah, Oklahoma, Arkansas, and Indiana are all advancing universal school choice and likely to pass some form by the end of 2023. Several other states are in earlier stages of considering universal school choice. It is conceivable that half of the United States will have universal school choice by 2025. Disastrously for Wisconsin’s children, our state is unlikely to be one of them. Gov. Tony Evers is a lifelong creature of the government education establishment and is vehemently loyal to defending the bureaucracy irrespective of its performance. He has demonstrated his willingness to veto any educational reform that threatens the entrenched power structure and is unlikely to shift his loyalty to children any time soon.

 

While the Republican majorities in the Legislature are strong, they lack the votes to overcome Evers’ vetoes without some legislative Democrats shifting their support to children. When Governor Tommy Thompson pioneered the original school choice program in Wisconsin, there was bipartisan support, and bipartisan opposition, for it. In today’s political landscape, it is unlikely that enough Democrats are willing to cross the yawning political divide to support kids.

 

The benefits of school choice have never been clearer. Dr. Will Flanders from the Wisconsin Institute for Law and Liberty has released his fifth annual “Apples to Apples” research study which evaluates student outcomes across government, charter, and choice schools while controlling for student demographics. This statistical methodology controls for the fact that government, charter, and choice schools have dissimilar student demographics to provide a clear comparison of performance. Notably, this year’s study uses public data from the 2021-2022 school year report cards from the Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction and is the first post-pandemic look at school performance.

 

The results are clear. According to the study, students in the Milwaukee Choice program are significantly more proficient in English Language Arts and math than their peers in government schools. Students in Milwaukee charter schools (still government schools that have been somewhat liberated from the crushing educational bureaucracy) also perform better than their government school peers, but only about half as much as their peers in choice schools.

 

In the statewide choice program, students in choice school also have better outcomes, but the benefit is not quite as pronounced as it is for kids in Milwaukee.

 

Tellingly, the data also bears out the well-known, if patently ignored, fact that spending has very little to do with performance in government or choice schools. This tells us two things. First, it tells us that once spending has reached a level that provides an adequate level of support for good teachers and a safe physical space, all of the additional spending is just waste. Wisconsin already funds education at a level where each additional dollar spent does not have any positive impact on student outcomes. That being the case, policymakers must ask themselves why they would force taxpayers to pay more when there is no measurable benefit to kids.

 

The second thing this data tells us is that it is the government school system that is retarding student performance. Choice schools operate with less money and produce better outcomes even after accounting for demographic differences in the student body. If the system is the problem, then why should taxpayers and parents be forced to continue to lavishly fund a failed system when demonstrably better systems exist?

 

I am well aware that such arguments rooted in data and genuine passion for educating children do not hold sway in the intellectually sclerotic mind of Governor Evers, but his term will eventually end and we cannot afford to lose another generation of kids to a failed government system.

Dem Leaders Plan Spending Spree

by | 2124, 1 Feb 23 | | 0 Comments

This is precisely why you never want to leave a pot of money near a politician. People who want to be good stewards of the people’s money would ALWAYS be choosy.

 

 

 

“I do think that there is room for bipartisan agreement in getting that robust surplus back into the hands of our communities,” the Madison Dem said. “And we don’t need to be choosy; $7 billion is a lot of money.”

The Education Reformation sweeps America

by | 1743, 31 Jan 23 | , | 3 Comments

My column for Washington County Daily News is online and in print. Here’s a part:

 

While the Republican majorities in the Legislature are strong, they lack the votes to overcome Evers’ vetoes without some legislative Democrats shifting their support to children. When Governor Tommy Thompson pioneered the original school choice program in Wisconsin, there was bipartisan support, and bipartisan opposition, for it. In today’s political landscape, it is unlikely that enough Democrats are willing to cross the yawning political divide to support kids.

 

The benefits of school choice have never been clearer. Dr. Will Flanders from the Wisconsin Institute for Law and Liberty has released his fifth annual “Apples to Apples” research study which evaluates student outcomes across government, charter, and choice schools while controlling for student demographics. This statistical methodology controls for the fact that government, charter, and choice schools have dissimilar student demographics to provide a clear comparison of performance. Notably, this year’s study uses public data from the 2021-2022 school year report cards from the Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction and is the first post-pandemic look at school performance.

 

The results are clear. According to the study, students in the Milwaukee Choice program are significantly more proficient in English Language Arts and math than their peers in government schools. Students in Milwaukee charter schools (still government schools that have been somewhat liberated from the crushing educational bureaucracy) also perform better than their government school peers, but only about half as much as their peers in choice schools.

 

In the statewide choice program, students in choice school also have better outcomes, but the benefit is not quite as pronounced as it is for kids in Milwaukee.

 

Tellingly, the data also bears out the well-known, if patently ignored, fact that spending has very little to do with performance in government or choice schools. This tells us two things. First, it tells us that once spending has reached a level that provides an adequate level of support for good teachers and a safe physical space, all of the additional spending is just waste. Wisconsin already funds education at a level where each additional dollar spent does not have any positive impact on student outcomes. That being the case, policymakers must ask themselves why they would force taxpayers to pay more when there is no measurable benefit to kids.

 

The second thing this data tells us is that it is the government school system that is retarding student performance. Choice schools operate with less money and produce better outcomes even after accounting for demographic differences in the student body. If the system is the problem, then why should taxpayers and parents be forced to continue to lavishly fund a failed system when demonstrably better systems exist?

 

I am well aware that such arguments rooted in data and genuine passion for educating children do not hold sway in the intellectually sclerotic mind of Governor Evers, but his term will eventually end and we cannot afford to lose another generation of kids to a failed government system.

 

 

 

 

 

April ballot gets even more important

by | 0803, 27 Jan 23 | , | 0 Comments

Here is my full column that ran in the Washington County Daily News last week:

Wisconsin’s April election is shaping up to be one of the most important spring elections in decades. Not only is there an election for the state Supreme Court that will decide whether the court retains its majority of constitutional conservatives or flip to an activist tool of leftists ideologues, but the Legislature has placed two important referendums on the ballot for the voters’ consideration.

 

The first referendum is an advisory referendum regarding work requirements for welfare recipients.

 

The question put to voters is simply, “Shall able-bodied, childless adults be required to look for work in order to receive taxpayer-funded welfare benefits?”

 

The referendum is only advisory, so it is more akin to a broad opinion poll of Wisconsin’s voters. The impetus for the referendum is to bolster support for planned Republican efforts to enforce welfare work requirements. Since Gov. Tommy Thompson implemented Wisconsin Works in 1996 which required welfare recipients to work or seek work and broke the cycle of dependency for thousands of Wisconsinites, the enforcement of the work requirement has eroded.

 

Gov. Tony Evers has used the pandemic to waive work requirements for some welfare programs despite continued low unemployment and Wisconsin businesses being unable to fill open jobs. There are ample opportunities to work for those who are willing, but Evers is using the pandemic as an excuse to stop enforcing a law that he opposes. As Republicans prepare legislation to reinstate work requirements for welfare recipients, they are hoping, probably in vain, that a strong show of public support will encourage Evers to agree.

 

The second statewide referendum on the April ballot is far more important. Article 1, Section 8(2) of Wisconsin’s Constitution currently prohibits judges from considering anything other than what it will take to ensure that a defendant will appear in court when setting a bail amount. The result of this prohibition has been that judges are hamstrung into granting low bail to defendants even when there is a glaring risk that the defendant will commit more carnage before their court date.

 

Way too many Wisconsinites have been victimized by criminals who were out of jail because of grossly low bail.

 

The referendum on the ballot asks the voters to amend the Constitution to allow judges to consider, “the totality of the circumstances, including the accused’s previous convictions for a violent crime, the probability that the accused will fail to appear, the need to protect the community from serious harm and prevent witness intimidation, and potential affirmative defenses” when setting bail for someone accused of a violent crime.

 

This is the final step in the process to amend the state Constitution. The identical question has been passed by two successive sessions of the Legislature and now the question goes to the voters for final approval. The governor does not have any role in the constitutional amendment process. Noteworthy is the fact that the question passed with bipartisan support in both houses of the Legislature in both legislative sessions.

 

If the amendment passes, it does not mean that Wisconsin judges will use their newly granted latitude to impose appropriately high bail for defendants who have a history of habitual thuggery. There are far too many leftist judges on the bench who will continue to coddle crooks with low bail. If Wisconsinites want to keep more violent offenders off the streets for longer, they will have to get to the polls and elect better judges. But the good judges will use their new power to protect Wisconsinites with higher bail for violent criminals and Wisconsin will be better for their diligence.

 

Wisconsinites who want a safer Wisconsin that takes crime seriously should vote “yes” to amend the state Constitution. Then they should vote for the conservative Supreme Court candidate to affirm their anticrime convictions.

Dorows Eye Gun Range

by | 1938, 26 Jan 23 | , , | 2 Comments

This makes me like her more. Entreprenurial and firmly rooted in our American rights and heritage.

According to local news reports, Waukesha County Judge Jennifer Dorow, a conservative candidate, and her husband Brian, are developing an indoor gun range that would not only host weddings and other events, but would also serve alcohol. The couple requested a Class B liquor license to sell beer and wine to members and guests in the “clubhouse.” The range would also sell firearms and accessories on-site. The Dorows said in city documents that they devised an “alcohol safety policy” consisting of hand stamps to prevent members from entering the shooting range after drinking and a breathalyzer to be used on “suspicious individuals.”

April ballot gets even more important

by | 0756, 24 Jan 23 | , | 0 Comments

My column for the Washington County Daily News is online and in print. Here’s a part:

Wisconsin’s April election is shaping up to be one of the most important spring elections in decades. Not only is there an election for the state Supreme Court that will decide whether the court retains its majority of constitutional conservatives or flip to an activist tool of leftists ideologues, but the Legislature has placed two important referendums on the ballot for the voters’ consideration.

 

[…]

 

The second statewide referendum on the April ballot is far more important. Article 1, Section 8(2) of Wisconsin’s Constitution currently prohibits judges from considering anything other than what it will take to ensure that a defendant will appear in court when setting a bail amount. The result of this prohibition has been that judges are hamstrung into granting low bail to defendants even when there is a glaring risk that the defendant will commit more carnage before their court date.

 

Way too many Wisconsinites have been victimized by criminals who were out of jail because of grossly low bail.

 

The referendum on the ballot asks the voters to amend the Constitution to allow judges to consider, “the totality of the circumstances, including the accused’s previous convictions for a violent crime, the probability that the accused will fail to appear, the need to protect the community from serious harm and prevent witness intimidation, and potential affirmative defenses” when setting bail for someone accused of a violent crime.

 

If the amendment passes, it does not mean that Wisconsin judges will use their newly granted latitude to impose appropriately high bail for defendants who have a history of habitual thuggery. There are far too many leftist judges on the bench who will continue to coddle crooks with low bail. If Wisconsinites want to keep more violent offenders off the streets for longer, they will have to get to the polls and elect better judges. But the good judges will use their new power to protect Wisconsinites with higher bail for violent criminals and Wisconsin will be better for their diligence.

What to do with Samaritan

by | 0902, 21 Jan 23 | | 2 Comments

Here is my column that ran in the Washington County Daily News last week.

Washington County’s Samaritan campus is at a crossroads. The time for tough decisions is upon us.

 

What should county taxpayers do for the people currently housed in the crumbling edifice of neglected obligations?

 

The Samaritan Campus is a senior care facility owned and operated by Washington County that provides skilled nursing, assisted living, and a residential care apartment complex for elderly citizens who cannot afford private care. It is funded through Medicare and Medicaid with shortfalls being covered by county taxpayers.

 

The problem the county is facing is severe, but not unique. The cost of operating Samaritan is far exceeding the funding provided by federal programs. Further, the facility needs a major renovation or rebuilding that will cost tens of millions of dollars.

 

Last year, Washington County taxpayers were paying nearly $50,000 per resident (about $2 million) to cover expenses and that is without the expense of a new or renovated facility. The ongoing expense for county taxpayers is projected to continue to increase exponentially.

 

Some have floated the notion that the county could use available money from one-time funds like federal COVID relief funds or opioid settlement funds to rehabilitate or reconstruct the facility. This may be feasible in the short term, but it does not fix the long-term funding problem. Using one-time funds to patch a systemic problem simply obligates future lawmakers to fix something because current lawmakers lack the courage to act.

 

What is to be done?

 

First, we must ask ourselves some hard questions. Should county taxpayers provide elder care to citizens who cannot afford it? There is no constitutional prohibition or mandate for county government to provide such a service. If the citizens of Washington County want to subsidize care for seniors, it is a policy decision. To date, county citizens have provided this service, so there is an absolute obligation to the seniors currently being cared for at Samaritan. Whether or not the citizens should carry this obligation moving forward is a separate question.

 

The second question to ask ourselves is, assuming county taxpayers are committed to providing for the county’s impoverished seniors, should the county own and operate the facility to do so? Experience should guide our answer to this question. Our collective experience is that, with exceedingly rare exception, government is terrible at running things. Government is a convenient, often abused, mechanism for the forced pooling of resources to expend on collective needs, but is pervasively inefficient, ineffective, and unresponsive when in charge of operations. We can see this in action at Samaritan itself, where decades of poor management and neglect have forced the county to this crisis point.

 

In Wisconsin, only 36 Wisconsin counties currently operate senior care facilities according to the Department of Health Services. The other counties either partner with private facilities to subsidize senior care where needed or forgo the financial obligation altogether. Washington County should transition the current residents to private facilities and support that transition with adequate funding. Using the COVID relief or opioid settlement monies to fund this transition might be necessary.

 

Whether or not county taxpayers should, or can, subsidize senior care moving forward will take some further thought. In the current arrangement, the taxpayer obligation to seniors is capped by the number of available beds at Samaritan. It is a physical cap. If the taxpayers subsidize senior care in private facilities with flexible capacity, would such a program attract seniors from outside of Washington County and become an unsustainable drain on taxpayer resources? Such potential unintended consequences will need to be mitigated should the county decide to subsidize senior care indefinitely.

 

One thing is certain. The situation at Samaritan has become intolerable and inexcusable. The caregivers are doing tremendous work but they are understaffed and under-resourced. Washington County is falling short of providing the dignity of care promised to Samaritan’s residents. This year must be a year of decisions and action — not another year of kicking the can down the road.

What to do with Samaritan

by | 0858, 17 Jan 23 | | 0 Comments

My column for the Washington County Daily News is online and in print. Here’s a part:

Washington County’s Samaritan campus is at a crossroads. The time for tough decisions is upon us.

What should county taxpayers do for the people currently housed in the crumbling edifice of neglected obligations?

[…]

The second question to ask ourselves is, assuming county taxpayers are committed to providing for the county’s impoverished seniors, should the county own and operate the facility to do so? Experience should guide our answer to this question. Our collective experience is that, with exceedingly rare exception, government is terrible at running things. Government is a convenient, often abused, mechanism for the forced pooling of resources to expend on collective needs, but is pervasively inefficient, ineffective, and unresponsive when in charge of operations. We can see this in action at Samaritan itself, where decades of poor management and neglect have forced the county to this crisis point.

In Wisconsin, only 36 Wisconsin counties currently operate senior care facilities according to the Department of Health Services. The other counties either partner with private facilities to subsidize senior care where needed or forgo the financial obligation altogether. Washington County should transition the current residents to private facilities and support that transition with adequate funding. Using the COVID relief or opioid settlement monies to fund this transition might be necessary.

Whether or not county taxpayers should, or can, subsidize senior care moving forward will take some further thought. In the current arrangement, the taxpayer obligation to seniors is capped by the number of available beds at Samaritan. It is a physical cap. If the taxpayers subsidize senior care in private facilities with flexible capacity, would such a program attract seniors from outside of Washington County and become an unsustainable drain on taxpayer resources? Such potential unintended consequences will need to be mitigated should the county decide to subsidize senior care indefinitely.

One thing is certain. The situation at Samaritan has become intolerable and inexcusable.

Wisconsin’s shifting tax burden

by | 0647, 10 Jan 23 | | 1 Comment

My column for the Washington County Daily News is online and in print. Here’s a part:

The state of Wisconsin and local governments extracted the most taxes ever from Wisconsinites in fiscal year 2022. Wisconsinites had the lowest combined state and local tax burden in at least fifty years in fiscal year 2022 (FY22). Both of those statements are true according to a report from the Wisconsin Policy Forum. What does this mean for the upcoming budget debate?

 

[…]

 

That is the data. What does it tell us? First, it tells us that the state and local government coffers are brimming with cash right now. Ignore the pleas of poverty from your favorite government entity. Many units of government have surpluses and will be using that as an excuse to increase spending in their next budgets. In state government, not even the Republican-led Legislature is talking about returning all surpluses to taxpayers.

 

Instead, they are talking about modest tax reductions combined with more spending.

 

Second, while tax burden as a percentage of personal income is decreasing slightly, personal income is still not keeping up with inflation. According to the U.S. Congress Joint Economic Committee, as of November of 2022, the annual cost of inflation for the average Wisconsin household since January of 2021, the last month we had a normal inflation rate, is $8,299. That is an 14.1% in household costs in less than two years. While personal incomes are increasing, the cruel cost of inflation is leaving Wisconsinites with less actual buying power every month.

 

Third, it could have been worse. The reason that state and local tax collections only rose 4.1% in FY22 is thanks to over a decade of relatively consistent tax policy discipline by the Republicans. Think back to the successive state budgets by the Republicans in the Governor Walker era and even in the previous budget when they kept the caps in local property tax increases, cut income tax rates, eliminated the state property tax, and dozens of other choices. These choices have resulted in slowing the rise of tax collections.

 

Thanks to Republican policies, state individual income taxes actually decreased by 0.7% in FY22 and net property taxes only grew by 0.8%. The aggregate tax collection increases were almost completely driven by an increase of 9.5% in state sales tax collections as a result of inflationary consumer prices. Corporate income tax collections were up a stunning 15.6%. Corporate income tax collections are thrice as much as they were in 2018. Interestingly, this increase is mostly due to more robust auditing of out-of-state businesses that was launched in the 2015-2017 state budget by, you guessed it, legislative Republicans and Governor Scott Walker. Corporate tax rates are not increasing, but the state is better at collecting what corporations are obligated to pay.

 

The decade-long effort by Republicans has resulted in a systemic shift of the tax burden from individual income and property taxes to consumption and corporate taxes. This has also resulted in record tax collections and annual state budget surpluses. Those surpluses are not the dividends of spending discipline, but of intelligent tax policies.

 

As state lawmakers consider the next budget, they should not take too much of the fact that the tax burden as a percentage of personal incomes is at a historic low. That metric must be understood in the context of the inflationary pressures on Wisconsin’s taxpayers from all angles and the overall cost of living in the state. Flush state coffers should be viewed as an opportunity to put more money back into the pockets of Wisconsin’s taxpayers to help them contend with the rising cost of living.

Washington County Grappling with Samaritan Campus

by | 2004, 7 Jan 23 | | 6 Comments

The question of what to do with Samaritan has been bubbling for years. Samaritan is the senior living facility run by Washington County mainly for seniors who need advanced care and can’t afford other facilities. The building is falling apart and the facility is an increasingly expensive burden for county taxpayers. Former Washington County Chairman Don Kriefall has some thoughts.

We have a responsibility to protect our seniors. As County Board chair, I advocated to find a way to continue to fund Samaritan. But common sense must rule in this matter. COVID-19 has inalterably changed the health care induDonstry. We cannot find enough qualified individuals to properly staff the facility. This is not just a Samaritan issue; there is a nationwide shortage of health care workers. Up to $15 million in upgrades are needed just to make the 54-year-old facility functional. That likely would only prolong the facility’s useful life by no more than ten years, after which, the county would be faced with the same dilemma, with a much higher price tag. Constructing a new facility is estimated to cost $35-50 million, or roughly $1 million per resident, requiring the county to accrue debt, with taxpayers footing the bill for the interest payments. Neither option is fiscally responsible.

 

 

When we started this process in late 2020, our consultant WIPFLI told us that if Samaritan were to close, private nonprofit skilled nursing facilities would have the capacity to accept our residents. Families would still be able to visit their loved ones regularly without undue hardship. The private sector can capably handle this responsibility to our seniors. Once all residents are resituated, there will still be a cost for the demolition of the aging Samaritan facility, but the ongoing financial obligation to the taxpayers will end.

 

Closing Samaritan is not pulling the rug out from our seniors or ending our obligation to provide for those in need. Our responsibility to respect and protect our seniors does not end with the closure of an aging, dilapidated building. Placing each resident in a safe and secure facility is the objective, no matter who is providing the services. Maintaining our own skilled nursing facility would be nice, but it would not be judicious or practical to spend millions of taxpayer dollars to do so for less than 50 people. Government is not tasked to provide services that the private nonprofit sector could. It should provide necessary services only.

 

Taxpayers cannot be continually asked to make financial sacrifices. Taxpayers should not be required to support a continually burgeoning government. This is the state and federal governments’ making. Taxpayers have the right to demand that government spend their money wisely, and are not taxed twice for the same service. The time has come for cooler heads to prevail and to finally allow the private sector to oversee our aging senior population, as most Wisconsin counties have done. This way, the needs of the few will be fulfilled without overburdening the many. This is the most responsible and sensible solution for the future of Samaritan.

When faced with a range of bad options, sometimes you can only choose the least bad option. In this case, I think we can all agree that we need to find a way for these seniors to get the care they need. While I do not think that this is a core function of government, the fact that the county has been caring for these seniors to date imparts some responsibility on the county. I tend to agree with Kriefall on the necessary outcome, but I’d support a transition plan where the county taxpayers help transition the residents to new facilities both logistically and financially.

Wisconsin’s Republicans should advance bold budget

by | 2014, 6 Jan 23 | | 1 Comment

Here is my full column that ran in the Washington County Daily News earlier this week.

With the new year comes the beginning of Wisconsin’s biennial budget season. By far, the budget is the most important thing that the Legislature does. This budget is the third that will be negotiated between a Republican-led Legislature and Democrat Governor Tony Evers. The public positioning has already begun.

 

After the election in which the voters decided to continue with divided government by strengthening Republican legislative majorities and reelecting Governor Evers, the Republican legislative leaders floated a few ideas for compromise on education, taxes, and abortion policy. Governor Evers promptly rejected every idea.

 

As Evers begins his second term as governor, we have learned a few things about his character that should inform the budget process. First, Evers is a leftist ideologue. His worldview does not allow for compromise as evidenced by his immediate rejection of any olive branches. Second, he is untrustworthy. Remember that this is the same bloke who secretly recorded conversations with Republicans and released the recordings to the media for political gain. Third, Evers is not above taking credit for the work of others when it gives him political advantage. Evers ran on the fact that he signed a tax cut even though he opposed it every step of the way. Knowing Evers’ character and style of governing, legislative Republicans should take a bold, positive approach that seizes the initiative. Republicans must begin by forcing meaningful accountability for education.

 

As previously documented in in this column, the performance of the state’s government schools is abysmal and getting worse. Parents know it. Kids know it. Teachers know it. Evers’ unwavering support for a system that is systemically racist and broken is a travesty. Republicans must shift the discussion from funding (schools are already overfunded) to accountability. Wisconsinites have a strong tradition of investing in education and our schools should be held accountable to deliver a quality education for kids with that investment. Many of them do not. Accountability is sorely lacking in our government schools. The Legislature should use their power of the purse to force it.

 

It is clear from the election that Wisconsin’s abortion law is out of sync with the majority of the electorate. On principle, I cannot support any effort to soften a good law that protects babies. If Republicans were to pass a compromise bill that allows abortions up to 15 weeks, for example, it would be more in line with the Wisconsin electorate. Evers has promised to veto any such compromise because Evers is a passionate supporter of unrestricted abortion up to the point of birth. Republicans would do well to point out just how radically abhorrent Evers’ position on abortion is — especially in context of the important election for the Wisconsin Supreme Court that will be taking place at the same time as the budget debate.

 

Assembly Speaker Robin Vos has suggested that Wisconsin pass a fair flat income tax to replace its discriminatory progressive income tax. Evers rejected the idea out of hand in support of making the income tax even more discriminatory with a tax cut targeted at a subset of taxpayers. Republicans should go one step further and eliminate the state income tax completely using the project surplus combined with a minimal increase in the sales tax to rebalance the budget.

 

Eliminating the income tax would reshape the debate and force Evers to defend why Wisconsin should continue to tax retirees, small-business owners, remote employees who can work from anywhere, and everyone else while seven other states manage to operate their state governments without a state income tax. When Republicans are offering every Wisconsin taxpayer a substantial tax cut, Evers will be in a position of defending the status quo. Who knows? Maybe Evers will see the light and become the governor who eliminated the state income tax. One can hope.

 

One of the reasons that there was a Republican power outage in the November election is that Republicans in many states (Florida and Texas excluded) did not give their supporters a meaningful policy agenda about which to get excited. Wisconsin’s Republicans should use their legislative majorities to reframe the debate and lead from the front.

Wisconsinites Have Lowest Tax Burden in State History

by | 1954, 5 Jan 23 | | 5 Comments

A dozen years of conservative fiscal policy has led to the lowest tax burden and the highest tax collections on record.

The Wisconsin Policy Forum released a new study on Thursday that says the state’s tax burden is at its lowest level ever.

 

“With a historic state income tax cut now in effect, the combined state and local taxes paid by Wisconsin residents and businesses in 2022 fell as a share of income in the state to the lowest level on record,” the report states. “In fiscal year 2022 (the 12 months ended on June 30), state and local tax revenues fell as a share of personal income in the state to just under 10.1%, down from 10.3% in 2021.”

 

[…]

 

“One major cause of the drop in 2022 – though far from the only one – is the $1 billion a year cut in state income taxes approved as part of the 2021-23 budget,” the report added. “Another is the state’s policy of limiting most property tax increases by local governments in the state – from towns and cities to school districts.”

 

Policy forum researchers say it is also key that Wisconsin taxpayers saw a 6.7% growth in their personal income in 2021, that’s the most recent year with available data.

Wisconsin’s Republicans should advance bold budget

by | 0807, 3 Jan 23 | | 0 Comments

My column for the Washington County Daily News is online and in print. Here’s a part:

As Evers begins his second term as governor, we have learned a few things about his character that should inform the budget process. First, Evers is a leftist ideologue. His worldview does not allow for compromise as evidenced by his immediate rejection of any olive branches. Second, he is untrustworthy. Remember that this is the same bloke who secretly recorded conversations with Republicans and released the recordings to the media for political gain. Third, Evers is not above taking credit for the work of others when it gives him political advantage. Evers ran on the fact that he signed a tax cut even though he opposed it every step of the way. Knowing Evers’ character and style of governing, legislative Republicans should take a bold, positive approach that seizes the initiative.

 

Republicans must begin by forcing meaningful accountability for education. As previously documented in in this column, the performance of the state’s government schools is abysmal and getting worse. Parents know it. Kids know it. Teachers know it. Evers’ unwavering support for a system that is systemically racist and broken is a travesty. Republicans must shift the discussion from funding (schools are already overfunded) to accountability. Wisconsinites have a strong tradition of investing in education and our schools should be held accountable to deliver a quality education for kids with that investment. Many of them do not. Accountability is sorely lacking in our government schools. The Legislature should use their power of the purse to force it.

Joel Ongert Runs for West Bend Mayor

by | 0803, 3 Jan 23 | | 0 Comments

Hoo boy.

WEST BEND — Joel Ongert officially announced on Monday his candidacy for mayor of West Bend in the April 4 general election.

 

“I will bring a high level of professionalism to the mayor’s office. Equipped with a business degree from Bradley University and 19 years of experience working at Caterpillar Inc., I am prepared to build upon the city’s strategic plan by prioritizing our hard-earned tax dollars on the most important aspects of our local government: public safety, city infrastructure, economic development and quality of life,” said Ongert in the release.

 

Previously, Ongert had unofficially announced he was running for mayor in a post on April 26, 2022 on his mayoral campaign Facebook page.

 

According to the release, Ongert said his desire to run for mayor is a result of his involvement in the West Bend community.

Ongert is probably the early favorite. He will be well-funded, well-organized, and the Left side of West Bend will rally behind him. He’s one of the guys who ran for School Board with this same kind of conservative rhetoric and then governed like a hardened Leftist. He is also just a terrible person who treats constituents who aren’t fawning acolytes like garbage. West Bend has been shifting Left and Ongert’s election would be another step in that direction.

Senator Backbencher

by | 1924, 15 Dec 22 | | 0 Comments

Here is my full column that ran in the Washington County Daily News this week:

Wisconsin has a long, annoying history of electing and re-electing relatively benign, but equally useless Democrat politicians. Herb Kohl, Russ Feingold, Tony Evers, virtually every mayor of Milwaukee in the modern era, and so many more were quite happy to keep their heads down, eschew controversial issues, and enjoy a light schedule. Perhaps this has never been as true as it is with Wisconsin’s current junior United States Senator, Tammy Baldwin.

 

After spending eight years in the Wisconsin Assembly without an accomplishment to her name, Democrat voters sent her to the U.S. House of Representatives where she spent fourteen years doing just as little. In 2012, Wisconsin’s voters sent her to the U.S. Senate. After six years without any accomplishments, the voters reelected her in 2018 to serve a second term. Rarely has someone risen so high having accomplished so little.

 

The last two weeks have been a good example of Baldwin’s style. She championed the so-called Defense of Marriage Act in the Senate in the lame duck session. It is a useless feel-good law since the Supreme Court has already required states to recognize same-sex marriages.

 

Fresh off that emotional high, Baldwin has authored a bill that would use taxpayer dollars to fund a $350 million annual grant program to pay for travel expenses for women who have to travel to get an abortion. It is a bill that is as offensive as it is unserious.

 

The bill comes in the wake of the landmark Supreme Court case that consigned the regulation of abortion to the states. Baldwin wants federal taxpayers to pay for travel costs for women who live in states that have chosen strict restrictions on killing babies to travel to states that are more willing to kill babies. Let us take the bill at face value.

 

First, consider how morally offensive it is to force taxpayers who oppose abortion to pay for women to travel to get one. For many of us, abortion is the act of killing a child. It is an atrocity. Baldwin’s bill would force a substantial plurality, if not a majority, of taxpayers to pay for something that fundamentally violates their conscience. It is one thing to allow something that others find morally abhorrent. It is quite another to make them pay for it.

 

Second, liberals like Baldwin have long asserted that on the issue of abortion, they want the government to not be involved. Yet Baldwin would have abortionists and abortion facilitators apply to the federal government to pay for expenses. Surely, if there is to be any serious attempt to prevent fraud, the women traveling to get an abortion would have to be identified and verified before federal funds are distributed, right? Does Baldwin consider it good public policy for the federal government to collect the names of women getting abortions? Would not the IRS need to know that they received material income so that it could be appropriately taxed?

 

Third, Baldwin completely ignores the rights of state voters to regulate abortion as they see fit. While Baldwin may disagree with how some states restrict abortion, it is not the role of the federal government or taxpayers to pay people to travel to states where the laws are to her personal liking. By that same logic, there should be a federal program to bus people to the marijuana dispensaries of Michigan or the heroin dens of California.

 

Finally, consider how unserious this bill is in the face of all of the problems currently facing our nation. Wisconsinites are suffering under the weight of inflation. Heating bills are way up as the winter is just getting started. Housing, food, clothing, fuel, medical care, and almost everything else that people need are far more expensive than they were even a year ago as their paychecks are not keeping up.

 

The southern border is awash with a soft invasion of people from all over the world. China is choking supply chains. Russia is rattling their nuclear saber. There is a rabid assault on free speech by government and business elites. Economic inequity continues to surge as billionaires consolidate wealth. Left unchecked, the national debt will destabilize our nation and the entitlements upon which many Americans rely are on the brink of insolvency.

 

With all of that going on, Baldwin is spending her time trying to get taxpayers to pay the travel expenses of women to get abortions. Wisconsin deserves better.

Senator Backbencher

by | 0738, 13 Dec 22 | | 8 Comments

My column for the Washinton County Daily News is online and in print. Here’s a part:

Wisconsin has a long, annoying history of electing and re-electing relatively benign, but equally useless Democrat politicians. Herb Kohl, Russ Feingold, Tony Evers, virtually every mayor of Milwaukee in the modern era, and so many more were quite happy to keep their heads down, eschew controversial issues, and enjoy a light schedule. Perhaps this has never been as true as it is with Wisconsin’s current junior United States Senator, Tammy Baldwin.

 

After spending eight years in the Wisconsin Assembly without an accomplishment to her name, Democrat voters sent her to the U.S. House of Representatives where she spent fourteen years doing just as little. In 2012, Wisconsin’s voters sent her to the U.S. Senate. After six years without any accomplishments, the voters reelected her in 2018 to serve a second term. Rarely has someone risen so high having accomplished so little.

 

[…]

 

Fresh off that emotional high, Baldwin has authored a bill that would use taxpayer dollars to fund a $350 million annual grant program to pay for travel expenses for women who have to travel to get an abortion. It is a bill that is as offensive as it is unserious.

 

The bill comes in the wake of the landmark Supreme Court case that consigned the regulation of abortion to the states. Baldwin wants federal taxpayers to pay for travel costs for women who live in states that have chosen strict restrictions on killing babies to travel to states that are more willing to kill babies. Let us take the bill at face value.

Senator Baldwin Proposes Travel Fund for Aborters

by | 2027, 9 Dec 22 | | 10 Comments

This is where Baldwin’s priorities lie – making taxpayers pay travel expenses for people to get abortions. Where is she on the raging inflation, weakening global status, open border, or any other of the issues that actually impact Wisconsinites? Nowhere…

A bill introduced Thursday by Wisconsin U.S. Sen. Tammy Baldwin seeks to establish a four-year, $350 million annual government grant program that would help support women in Wisconsin and across the country who have to travel long distances to get an abortion.

 

The bill would allow non-profit and community-based organizations to apply for federal funding that can go toward the cost of travel, lodging, child care, translation services, meals and other logistical support associated with obtaining abortion services.

Mequon-Thiensville School District Continues to Violate Open Records Law

by | 2016, 8 Dec 22 | , | 1 Comment

If they can’t be transparent about it, then it’s not something you want them to be doing.

The Wisconsin Court of Appeals on Wednesday said the school district cannot withhold its alumni, recreation department, and Momentum newsletter recipients email lists from parents who want to offer an alternative to the district’s support of “The Talk: A Necessary Conversation on Privilege and Race with Our Children.”

 

The three judge panel slapped down Mequon-Thiensville’s argument that sharing the lists would hurt its ability to communicate with parents, or would be too much work to share.

 

“In short, the District wants to be able to use government resources to collect and utilize these email addresses to promote and advance the particular ‘community outreach’ issues and positions of District (government) leaders while denying others in the community the opportunity to utilize the e-mail addresses to share differing viewpoints,” the judges wrote. “[Wisconsin’s Open Records law] does not tolerate utilizing taxpayer resources for an ideological or political monopoly.”

 

Tom Kamenick, President and Founder of the Wisconsin Transparency Project which was a part of the legal case against Mequon-Thiensville Schools, said Wisconsin’s Open Records laws are very clear.

 

“The attorney general has released consistent guidance for decades that government distribution lists – whether emails, phone numbers, or mailing addresses – must be released to record requesters,” Kamenick said. “It’s good to now have a published decision binding on courts and record custodians around the state.”

 

 

Texas Bans TikTok from State Devices

by | 2006, 7 Dec 22 | , | 2 Comments

Is Wisconsin going to protect state systems from Chinese hackers?

Texas Gov. Greg Abbott directed state agencies on Wednesday to ban the use of social media platform TikTok on government-issued devices over concerns about how the China-owned app handles data on American infrastructure and other sensitive information.

 

“TikTok harvests vast amounts of data from its users’ devices — including when, where and how they conduct internet activity — and offers this trove of potentially sensitive information to the Chinese government,” Abbott said in a letter to state officials on Wednesday.

 

TikTok has faced growing scrutiny from state and federal officials over fears that American data could fall into the possession of the Chinese government.

Mea Culpa

by | 0942, 6 Dec 22 | | 0 Comments

Well, after almost 20 years of writing a weekly column, it was bound to happen. I made a fatal factual error.

In my column for the Washington County Daily News this week, the main thrust is that there are two conservative candidates for the Wisconsin Supreme Court and that conservatives should refrain from attacking either candidate. The election is very important and I’m worried about a repeat of the governor’s race where the conservatives tear each other apart while the liberals slide into the general election unscathed. That point remains valid.

Unfortunately, I misread how the nonpartisan primary process works. I stated that voters will be able to choose the top two candidates to proceed to the general election. I thought this was the case from memory and when I was writing the piece, I referred back to some primary results and saw nonpartisan results where voters chose the top two candidates. However, voters only choose the top two candidates when there are two open seats available like for city council or school board. Voters get as many votes as there are offices to be elected. In the case of the Supreme Court race, there is only one office, so voters will have to select only one candidate. I’ve notified my editor of my error and expect a correction soon.

I apologize for my error and for any confusion it may cause. My main point and concern remains. Conservatives must not fall into the trap of destroying our own candidates while the liberals laugh. Conservatives will have to choose between Dorow and Kelly in February, but let’s keep it above the belt.

Login | Register

Archives

Categories

Pin It on Pinterest