Christian Schneider

Author, Columnist

Month: January 2008 (page 1 of 3)

Breske Tells Big Government to “Butt Out”

January 31, 2008 / / 4 Comments

In order to run a house of the state legislature, party discipline is a must. Certain members of your caucus aren’t going to agree with leadership on everything, but a lot of them will go along for the ride to achieve a greater goal.

In the Wisconsin State Senate, Democratic leadership is pushing for a smoking ban in virtually every business in the state. They cite the ban as a health issue, and have the backing of groups like Smoke Free Wisconsin and the American Cancer Society.

Until this point, Democratic Senator Roger Breske has been playing good soldier and working on a compromise bill for his caucus. Breske represents a district full of local taverns that just want government to leave them alone and make their own choices about what’s best for their businesses. As a result, Senator Breske is skeptical of the long arm of government reaching up into the north woods to micromanage the property rights of his constituents.

This week, Senate Democrats held a press conference to announce their economic “stimulus” package. During the question and answer period, Breske was asked about the smoking ban. He stammered a little, describing the process up to this point, and the fact that no agreement had been reached. Senate Majority Decker stepped in immediately to reiterate the caucus position that a smoking ban is needed.

Breske was then asked a follow-up question, at which point he dropped the “consensus builder” charade and told it like it is. He pointed out the fact that these taverns are often all the owners have in terms of investments, and a smoking ban could shut them down (a point Decker conceded in his comments.) He then bemoaned government “sticking its nose” in everyone’s business, saying, “why does the government have to tell everyone what to do all the time?”

At this point, the Senate Democrats behind him begin shifting nervously, their eyes darting around the room. Senator John Lehman cracked a smile.

Breske went on: “I just can’t believe this is what we’re here for. We should be doing something decent… instead of trying to put people out of business. I know that they say this is the greatest thing in the world, that it’s going to solve all the health problems in the country, but that’s hogwash. I was born and raised in a barn since I was that high, and I was tending bar since I was that high (holding hand four feet above the ground.) And there was only one light bulb in the bar. There was no fans, and everyone smoked. It was blue in there. Come on, I’m still alive, and I’m 69 years old. It’s sickening.”

(If you’re keeping score that would be Breske 1, science 0.)

Needless to say, Breske’s remarks are likely not going to make their way into the Democrats’ talking points when they eventually pass a smoking ban. While the media love nothing more than covering Republicans that criticize other Republicans, here’s an independent Democrat who deserves credit for exposing the wrongheadedness of a statewide smoking ban. Kudos to him.

Video of the press conference can be seen at the WisconsinEye website here. Breske begins at the 17:30 mark, but begins his breathtaking tirade at 20:00.

Cutting Down Religion

January 30, 2008 / / 0 Comments

It appears the Catholic Archdiocese of Milwaukee is a little strapped for cash these days, so they have to cut $3 million from their budget.

I have to say, this is a little spiritually unsettling. You don’t normally think of religions as having to deal with the normal constraints of modern day life – after all, God created the world – you’d think the bank might cut him a little slack. (Or God could try the old \”mail the phone bill to the gas company and vice versa\” trick that worked so well in college.) So it\’s hard to think of something so sacred and powerful having to deal with real people problems. It\’s like recognizing that Natalie Portman occasionally has to poop. Anyway.

Seeing as how the Church is in charge of my post-life accommodations, I thought I\’d pitch in and offer a few cost-saving techniques to help them out:

1. Eternal salvation now accompanied by $20 processing fee;

2. Number of times you’re allowed to take the Lord’s name in vain capped to rate of inflation;

3. Partial insertion no longer a mortal sin;

4. Confession now accompanied by two-drink minimum requirement;

5. Smaller rosaries, quicker penance;

6. Archbishop hat size reduced by 30%;

7. Fire in; brimstone out;

8. Guilt-free Thursdays;

9. Members of the same sex can marry, as long as they’re not gay;

10. Communion now features Thunderbird fortified wine;

11. Baptize three kids at once, get the fourth free;

12. God orders sub-prime mortgage loan on the Vatican forgiven;

13. 15% tax on bad comedian jokes about growing up in Catholic household;

14. Catholic schoolgirl uniform must be returned by strippers after third use;

15. Basilica renamed the \”Hooters\’ Christ Hut;\”

16. Details of Vatican scheme to control the world\’s money supply sold to the Weekly World News for $100;

17. Coveting neighbor\’s wife legal with the purchase of any two Pope Benedict pilates videos.

That\’s it. That\’s the list.

As a \”thank you,\” the Church may now begin paying me my long-overdue Altar Boy pension. I spent years ringing those damn bells, it\’s payback time.

UPDATE: As it turns out, this post belongs in the \”Bad Timing Hall of Fame,\” given today\’s revelations about past priest behavior in Milwaukee. Nothing funny about any of the documents released.

Is Medicare Harming Seniors?

January 30, 2008 / / 0 Comments

Interesting article this week in The Economist, where they point out that increased Medicare funding, in the form of President Bush\’s Medicare Part D program, might actually be harming seniors in the program.

While they concede that the program has been able to get seniors lower costs on prescription drugs, it has also faced damaging cost overruns that threaten to cut into other areas of Medicare spending.  Specifically, if the prescription drug plan continues to grow, reimbursement to doctors for treating elderly Medicare recipients may be cut.  As a result, many doctors would simply refuse to treat Medicare patients.  Others would treat them, but pass the costs on to non-Medicare patients to make up for the reduced payments.

The article concludes:

Doctors and hospitals already had a disincentive to take on Medicare patients, as cost-cutting laws enacted by Congress years ago were anyway hurting their margins. But in late December, Congress went further, and very nearly enacted a mandatory 10% cut in doctors\’ reimbursements for Medicare patients. In the end, doctors got a six-month reprieve; efforts are now under way in the Senate to extend that reprieve for a further two years. If such cuts go through, most doctors will think again about treating Medicare patients.

Mr Bush\’s Medicare reforms are popular today, but a backlash may be coming. Some private firms have been caught manipulating the elderly into signing up for inappropriate plans. Questions are being asked about why the public is subsidising the marketing expenses of pharmaceutical companies\’ expenses that the public sector does not incur. Those doubts will turn into howls if Part D puts the rest of Medicare under the scalpel.

Adrien Brody is Causing the Recession

January 30, 2008 / / 0 Comments
I know, I know – we\’re not in a recession yet. But I have pinpointed the reason why the economy might be slowing down. I lay the blame squarely on the shoulders of actor Adrien Brody.

\"\"You may have seen Brody in his various movies, including his Oscar winning role in \”The Pianist.\” He can most recently be seen in the snoozefest \”The Darjeeling Limited.\” (Random fact: Brody is 13 days older than I am.)

There\’s no easy way to put this, so I\’ll be direct. Adrien Brody doesn\’t have what you would consider \”typical\” leading man looks. In fact, it was a mistake casting him in \”King Kong,\” since his nose made the monkey look small by comparison. He\’s gaunt and greasy, yet for some reason women find him alluring. (Apparently, he was #21 on VH1\’s \”100 Hottest Hotties.\”)

For ugly white guys, Brody\’s presence in movies is a breakthrough. He\’s like the Jackie Robinson of the ugly. If they ever made a live action film about Heckyll and Jeckyll, he wouldn\’t need any makeup. But the guy triggers more ovulation cycles than Clomid.

But this has the chance to cause all kinds of problems with the economy. Suppose us ugly guys get all cocky about Brody\’s success. Suddenly, we all think we have movie star looks – fat guys, bald guys, short guys. All of a sudden we\’ll lose all motivation to do the things that we do to overcompensate for those shortcomings. We\’ll stop buying expensive cars to distract women from our baldness. We won\’t work as hard to accumulate wealth in order to coerce the ladies into thinking we\’re worthwhile. The price of beard hair coloring dye will reach $100 a barrel, causing a national crisis in ugliness. We won\’t start new businesses and hire more guys with excessive nose hair looking to make money. The ugly market will implode.

In order to stop this madness, Congress needs to take action immediately and sequester Adrien Brody. Stick him in the undisclosed bunker with Dick Cheney. Furthermore, we need to elect Mitt Romney president, in order to restore the proper level of handsomeness to the White House.

Wisconsin\’s Ready for Its Close-Up

January 30, 2008 / / 0 Comments

Last weekend, I ventured out to see the outstanding \”There Will Be Blood\” at the local moving picture house. The movie depicts the travails of ruthless oil baron Daniel Plainview around the turn of the century. Interestingly, the theater broke out in guffaws when it was revealed that Plainview\’s character hailed from Fond du Lac, Wisconsin. As everyone knows, Fondy has a strong reputation as a breeding ground for homicidal oil barons.

It was just a few weeks before, in the movie \”Juno,\” that I heard a song by Kimya Dawson (\”Tire Swing\”) that mentioned Madison. Again, muffled chuckles within the theater.

These two movies, of course, have both been nominated for Best Picture Oscars this year. And both, apparently, have some sort of spiritual connection to Wisconsin.

Of course, it could just entirely be coincidence. But it does seem that over the years, Wisconsin has gotten some pretty notable shout-outs in big movies. This includes the highest-grossing movie of all time, \”Titanic,\” where Leo DiCaprio\’s character claims to hail from Chippewa Falls.

It\’s apparent that there\’s something about Wisconsin that appeals to screenwriters. It almost seems that Wisconsin represents \”the place people are supposed to be from that represents their simple upbringing.\” Being from Wisconsin is supposed to tell us something about a character without the screenwriter having to go into detail about the person\’s past.

Okay, so I\’ll just go off the top of my head here – a character in the British movie \”Love Actually\” takes a random flight to Milwaukee to score chicks. In \”Reservoir Dogs,\” one of the back stories involves a guy who\’s a big Milwaukee Brewers fan, so the characters deduce he\’s from Wisconsin. The movie \”A Simple Plan\” was filmed in Ashland, but I can\’t recall if the movie is actually set there.

Before I blow a brain vessel, it looks like OnMilwaukee.com noticed the same thing a couple years back. Here\’s a more complete list of Wisconsin on the silver screen.

Crazy Constituent A-Go-Go

January 30, 2008 / / 0 Comments

Seeing as how this blog is now the repository (or suppository, depending on how you view it) of all the Legislature\’s crazy constituent letters, let\’s keep the mojo going. From January 23rd of this year:

Dear Wisconsin Legislators:

Wisconsin is the home of the greatest consumer fraud in the history of American marketing. The Wisconsin governors and legislators were partners in this horrible crime. Over a trillion dollars has been stolen from the American motoring public. False advertising and misrepresentation was the successful factor.

The chemical responsible, dicoco dimethyl ammonium chloride, was developed and manufactured in Janesville, Wisconsin. No chemical company was able to duplicate it. Our company worked with the chemists who invented it at Varney Chemical Company in the early 1960’s. Now owned by Degussa Chemical and very recently sold to Econik Company. Our company is very familiar with the history as we were directly involved.

The product is a drying agent that causes beading with kerosene. Butyl cellosolve, a deadly chemical is added for blending. One of many deadly chemicals sprayed on the public in car washes.

Our company refused to sell it as a wax although it became popular through a Wisconsin chemical company who called it spray wax. It sold for 50 cents and a wash sold for only 69 cents. It stormed the national industry without any warnings.

We entered the market with our Carnauba Wax called HOT WAX™. Shortly after we captured the market, Turtle Wax entered with a brush wax charging the public 4 times our product with their kerosene product. The brush failed to work so Turtle Wax continued its high price kerosene calling it polish wax.

The public bought it in large numbers through false advertising because of the Turtle Wax name. They dominated the paste wax market for many years. The key ingredient in the paste wax was Carnauba Wax.

Carnauba Wax is dielectric, which means it prevents rusting. Today Turtle Wax makes the most money selling kerosene. A judge ruled they must add, “does not contain Carnauba Wax” to their advertisings.

A federal judge, in our company’s case, against Turtle Wax embarrassed our company’s lawyers by screaming that they threw spaghetti on his wall. Because of this remark no lawyer would take any of our cases against car wash criminals. The judge put us out of business.

Criminals had no fear of cheating the public. They have gone wild stealing over a trillion dollars from the public in car washes. Many businesses are now using the car wash as promotion for a large number of consumer frauds. Huge companies and large marketers have entered the market.

If we had an honest government this would not have happened. Please challenge any of my statements. Wisconsin Administrators and Legislators owe the American people the trillions of dollars stolen from them because they supported and promoted this huge crime.

There are volumes of data available for your review to substantiate our statements
Crime always continues when governments profit. If you do not act now – this crime will never stop. You owe it to the children and families who are sprayed with these deadly chemicals.

As a citizen of Wisconsin we herby demand that you immediately act to protect the public and stop acting in favor of the criminals.

Truly yours,

Name Withheld

Boiled Frog and Taxes

January 29, 2008 / / 0 Comments

Certainly, you have heard the parable about the boiled frog. The story alleges that a frog can be boiled alive if the water is heated slowly enough. It is said that if a frog is placed in boiling water, it will jump out, but if it is placed in cold water that is slowly heated, it will never jump out.

I\’m not sure if this is true, but then again I\’ve never been able to test it. My second-grade teacher made it very clear to me that I shouldn\’t conduct any more animal experiments after I tested my ill-fated \”Can the class hamster survive on a week-long diet of Skittles and Mr. Pibb?\” hypothesis.

Anyway, the point of the boiling frog parable is that radical change scares people and doesn\’t work. Turn up the heat on them slowly and they\’ll never notice.

Government understands this. Income tax and Social Security taxes are withheld from your paycheck. You never even had your money in your hand so you never miss it.

And when the government wants to spend more of your money on something, it\’s always presented as, \”for just nickels a day, we can have an awesome light rail system everyone will, like, totally use.\”

Furthermore, we get all giggly when government sends us our refund checks in spring, even though that is just the government equivalent of getting your change back from the clerk after buying a stick of beef jerky with a five dollar bill.

So why are our pots starting to bubble? It\’s because a whole heckuva lot of people out there think the government should be doing everything for everyone.

Here\’s an example: school breakfasts. 50 years ago, it would have been unthinkable that the school would be feeding kids their morning meal. Today, we\’re crowing because we just handed out 4 million more free school breakfasts this year than we did last year. Since it\’s the school\’s responsibility to make sure some kids eat breakfast and lunch, can dinner be far behind? The logical extension of this nanny-statism ends with the lunchlady knocking at my grandkid\’s door with a pudding cup for his midnight snack. Yeah, yeah, nobody wants kids to go hungry, but is it really so outrageous to suggest that parents be responsibly for feeding their own kids?

So we have a situation where government is doing for people what people should be doing for themselves and the taxpayers footing the bill are barely noticing. We\’re inching toward full-fledged socialism without even realizing it.

There is only one solution to reverse the trend – we need to change the law to make it so we have to pay all of our taxes at once. And when I say \”all taxes\” I mean all taxes. Federal. State. Local. Income. Sales. Property. Alcohol. Smokes. No withholding. All at once.

You made $40,000 this year? You owe $15,000 in one shot. Pay up. Your family income is $100,000? Your check for $38,000 is due right now. You\’re a pack-a-day smoker too? Better tack on another $650.

Your giant tax bill is due one week before the general election.

Imagine if that is how we did it. Heads would explode. The beauty of having to pay taxes this way is that it would sure get the conversation started about how much is enough when it comes to government spending.

Maybe it IS worth millions each year for state government to consistently overpay for a ton of land to keep it out of the hands of private owners. Maybe it IS worth county government to have union employees who primarily cut grass to be on the payroll in February. Maybe the $16 billion we pay NASA to keep an eye Uranus for us is worth it. But maybe it ain\’t. I\’m even willing to have the debate on stuff I think we should spend a ton of money on, like national defense.

If this pay-it-all-at-once plan doesn\’t get us to jump out of pots, nothing will.

The Real Obama Girl

January 28, 2008 / / 0 Comments

My wife has devised a scheme to get me to watch the kids more often – apparently, the more she watches them, the more likely this is to happen:

That\’s right – after his big win in South Carolina this weekend, it appears that my children are swept up in Obama Mania. Probably not the \”youth vote\” that he\’s counting on. But this tactic just might be enough for me to offer to watch them more often – to set them straight.

On the other hand, if Obama can get them to eat their macaroni and cheese, he might just get my vote.

Endorsing Nonsense

January 28, 2008 / / 4 Comments

The second biggest story of this weekend (behind Barack Obama beating Hillary Clinton in the South Carolina, which yielded an almost Saddam Hussein-style landslide) seemed to be the flurry of endorsements granted in the last couple of days.  Desperate for anything newsworthy, national news outlets stopped just short of cutting into \”To Catch a Predator\” to announce news that (gasp!) Dick Cheney\’s daughter had endorsed Mitt Romney.

I\’m not a big believer that endorsements mean anything.  I mean, who really cares if Caroline Kennedy is voting for Barack Obama?  Who says to themself, \”well, someone who shares Dick Cheney\’s genetic material likes Romney, that should pretty much counteract the fact that he\’s switched his position on every issue that means anything to me.\”  And what\’s the deal with presidential daughters that makes them qualified to tell me who to vote for?  Should we get Jenna Bush on record?  (Breaking news: Jenna Bush endorses Beefeater gin to get your buzz on!)

They keep telling me what a big deal it is that Florida Governor Charlie Crist endorsed John McCain (Crist had previously endorsed spray-on tanning bronzer.)  All that really tells me is that McCain sent enough Facebook messages to Crist begging for his endorsement.  (Charlie Crist – You\’ve been SuperPoked!)  Honestly, who knows what kinds of deals are swung behind the scenes to garner endorsements – rarely do they have anything to do with philosophy or ideology. Let\’s just say if elected President, McCain probably won\’t have to wait long for a call from Crist asking if there might be any cabinet appointments available.

The biggest endorsement of all came when Senator Ted Kennedy endorsed Obama.  Kennedy might actually be a big enough name to move some votes in Massachusetts – but I pity anyone who decides their vote based on the recommendation of anyone else, even if they are a Kennedy.  Also, imagine the conceit involved in offering up an endorsement – thinking that somehow you have the expertise and moral authority to tell other people how to vote.  I value the opinion of the guy who makes my sandwiches at Quizno\’s more than I do any elected official. 

——————————————————————–

This election cycle is bizarre in that campaign \”strategy\” seems to be deciding who will be the nominees.  One thing I don\’t understand is how voters tend to make up their minds on who to support based on a candidate\’s physical proximity to where they live.

Take, for example, Rudy Giuliani, whose strategy has been to focus mainly on Florida, while campaigning lightly in New Hampshire, Michigan, Iowa, and South Carolina.  Who are these voters that say, \”Boy, I really like Rudy\’s leadership and conservative economic values, but I just wish he had spent a little more time near my house?\”  What does where a candidate campaigns have to do with what kind of president he (or she) will be?  In the internet age, you can get as much or as little information about candidates as you want.  It\’s not like people in South Carolina had never heard of Giuliani because he didn\’t show up there very often.  People weren\’t saying \”who is this bald man from the north coming to offer us prosperity?\”  They rejected him because he committed the sin of not kissing their behinds for a week straight.

I\’m wondering how the \”presidential proximity principle\” will be applied in the future.  For instance, Mitt Romney spent a ridiculous amount of time campaigning in Iowa.  And Iowa is only a couple hours away from where I live in Madison.  All that separates Iowa from Wisconsin is an imaginary line that makes some of us \”Iowans\” and some of us \”Wisconsinites.\”  By that standard, should I vote for Romney because he spent more time closest to where I live?  Or do I have to wait for the week of the Wisconsin primary to see who spends the most time in Wisconsin?  Is John McCain\’s stance on campaign finance reform suddenly going to become more palatable to me when he\’s waving at me driving down West Washington Avenue?

It does appear that the GOP race is narrowing to a two-man race: McCain versus Romney.  Naturally, both have significant downsides with traditional conservatives.  McCain has taken unspeakably bad positions on important issues, but he\’s most right on the issue that matters the most: the war in Iraq.  Romney has flip flopped on so many issues, it\’s hard to believe he\’s the same person that held office in Massachusetts.

The bottom line with Romney is that it\’s clear he had to take some of the liberal positions he held in order to be elected governor in a blue state.  In the end, was Massachusetts better off with Romney as governor?  Probably.  He could have remained ideologically pure, but it would have cost him his election.  For instance, I believe Romney has always been pro-life.  But he had to support abortion rights to get elected, where he could then have the power to shape policy.

Yet some of these flip-flops look terrible during the current campaign, and they could cost Romney dearly in a general election.  For conservative voters in the late-primary states, voting for Romney is like crawling back to an old girlfriend who cheated on you.  But your pathetic life has become defined by Playstation, pizza boxes, and Victoria\’s secret catalogues.  So you cross your fingers, make the call, and hope she doesn\’t do it again.

——————————————————————–

On the Democratic side, all sides involved want to make the race about things that matter the least – race and gender.  Obama loyalists are decrying the Clintons\’ use of \”racial code words\” to denigrate their candidate.

Personally, I think all the charges of racial manipulation by Team Clinton are overblown. Basically, the media had the script to this campaign written well before it even started.  It was RACE VERSUS SEX!  And now that Bill Clinton has opened up his assault on Obama, it has to be about RACE!  Somehow, Clinton calling Obama\’s position on the war a \”fairy tale\” is a RACIAL CODEWORD!  (If you don\’t find anything racially insensitive about Hillary Clinton giving LBJ credit for his work on the Civil Rights Act, then you haven\’t been properly trained in the fine art of perpetual grievance.)

Granted, Bill Clinton made the point that \”Jesse Jackson won South Carolina\” in an attempt to downplay the primary\’s significance.  But comparing Obama to Jesse Jackson isn\’t an insult because Jesse Jackson is black – it\’s an insult because Jesse Jackson is a clown.

——————————————————————–

Barack Obama\’s speech after his victory Saturday night gave me chills. He doesn\’t say anything philosphically that hasn\’t already been said, but he is a rhetorical mastermind. He uses wonderful examples, and his cadence and command of his audience are stunning.

How ironic is it that Hillary Clinton is now the victim of the same traits that her husband used to vault himself into the presidency? Obama\’s charm, good looks, and forceful speaking are the very tools Bill Clinton used to separate himself from more practical candidates like Paul Tsongas. Effectively, Obama has turned the script around on the Clintons – ironic, since nobody actually believes Hillary would be in this position without that very strategy in the first place.

One of the ironies on Obama\’s side is how he has to go out of his way to proclaim his love of Christianity and of Jesus Christ. These moments in debates seem to get lost, but they are fascinating. Obviously, the rumors of Obama\’s religious leanings are out there, so he has to make a point of giving some love to \”JC\” when he speaks. And it seems completely out of place. It\’s as if he took some time in the middle of a debate to discuss his love of peanut butter and jelly sandwiches. On the other hand, when Republican candidates express their love of Jesus during debates, they are roundly mocked.

As a final word, anyone who utters the term \”Barack Hussein Obama\” is an idiot. There are no exceptions to this rule. You all know why.

(That being said, after the events of 9/11, I would have put $1,000 on the fact that someone named \”Murderer Pedophile Terrorist\” woud be elected president before someone named \”Barack Hussein Obama.\”)

Is the Zenn a Good Idea?

January 25, 2008 / / 1 Comment

Milwaukee recently decided to further its quest in becoming yet another municipality to allow electric cars on streets with speed limits at 35 mph or less. The first such vehicle that seems to be a candidate is the Canadian manufactured Zenn. This car is a very good idea. It will be able to travel up to 35 miles on a full charge, which takes about 8 hours to complete or just 4 hours to get a nearly full charge. According to the manufacturer, it costs only 1 or 2 cents per mile to operate whereas a conventional car costs 8 to 12 cents per mile. It maintains a car frame with all of the convenient features of a car such as air conditioning and power windows. The Zenn is great for the environment giving off no harmful emissions at the automobile level.

But there is one problem I can foresee. The Zenn cannot travel faster than 25 miles per hour. Since it is allowed on streets with speed limits up to 35 miles per hour, I do not personally look forward to getting stuck behind a Zenn while driving on busy streets in Milwaukee. While it is true that disobeying the speed limit causes many accidents, it is also likely that driving too slow causes accidents as well, especially on hectic streets in Milwaukee.

It is my humble opinion that 25 mph is too slow of a regulated speed for the Zenn and should not be allowed on city streets with stated speed limits of 35 mph. For some people, driving in Milwaukee is stressful enough. Looking out for unreasonably slow cars is one more headache I would like to avoid.

Hooray for Deficits!

January 24, 2008 / / 6 Comments

Lately, we\’ve been talking a lot about the possibility of recession and what that could mean for the state\’s finances.  An economic slowdown would harm Wisconsin far more than it would other states, since our state doesn\’t have any kind of meaningful budget reserve on which to draw.  And if you don\’t believe me, I have 18 pages to prove it.

Naturally, it\’s going to be hard to set money aside when the state is trying to plug the shortfall that is almost certain to come.  As the old saying goes, \”you don\’t fix your roof when it\’s raining.\”  It would be much easier to set money aside during the good times – but since the state has never really recovered from the deficits caused by the 2001 recession, there really haven\’t been any \”good times\” recently.

As it turns out, the Legislature has recently contemplated the need to set money aside.  State Representative Eugene Hahn, who has announced he\’s not running for another term, has introduced Assembly Bill 329, which would dedicate one percent of state expenditures to a budget stabilization fund.  Apparently, responsible budgeting is reserved for people who don\’t have to worry about running again – which may be a decent argument for term limits.

In the grand scheme of things, Hahn\’s bill is fairly modest.  As the WPRI report points out, nationwide rainy day funds had reached $62.1 billion, or 10.9% of expenditures, by 2006.  Hahn\’s bill merely appropriated 1% of expenditures to assist in future budget crises.  Given, Hahn\’s bill has no chance of being signed into law as separate legislation – any money set aside would almost have to be done as a larger budget package.  But it is instructive to smoke out members of the Legislature who refuse to think ahead and save money for future downturns.

In May of 2007, the Assembly Committee on Ways and Means held a hearing on Hahn\’s rainy day fund bill.  Naturally, Hahn showed up to testify in favor of the bill.  Curiously, the \”nonpartisan\” League of Women Voters showed up to oppose the bill.  In their testimony, they compare the bill to the now-defunct Taxpayer Bill of Rights (TABOR) and say they \”oppose it as the antithesis of the real need of the State to increase its revenues.\”  They said that the bill \”contrasts with purpose of the \’rainy day fund\’ which is to ensure revenues are available despite shortfalls in tax and other revenue collection which are due to swings in the economy.\”

(To see an actual copy of the League of Women Voters\’ testimony, click here.)

Trying to parse such incoherence is impossible.  Basically, they\’re saying that the state\’s biggest problem is that they don\’t collect enough in taxes.  Yet even if they achieved their \”high tax utopia,\” (we\’re already there, incidentally) there would still be substantial deficits in times of declining revenues.  In fact, the more the state relies on taxes, the bigger the crash will be when a recession hits.  It appears that rather than using money saved up, they would much rather increase taxes during an economic downturn, which would further punish people who are out of work or making less in salary.

(By the way, ladies,  aren\’t you glad the League of Women Voters speaks for you? Apparently, a requirement of being a \”woman\” in Wisconsin is to push for more income and more spending.  Something Wisconsin husbands figured out years ago.  Am I right guys?  Hello?  Is this thing on?) 

Despite the fact that their position will likely send the state careening into economic discord, it appears they were convincing to a number of members of the committee.  When the committee voted on the bill in July,  it passed by an 8-to-5 margin:  Republicans Kerman, Lothian, Hahn, Jeskewitz, Wood, Pridemore and Strachota were joined by Democrat Bob Ziegelbauer in favor.  Democrats Steinbrink, Fields, Hebl, Toles and Kessler all voted to protect Wisconsin\’s standing as the worst-budgeting state in the nation.

———–

In other news, the Legislative Fiscal Bureau today estimated a $300 to $400 million shortfall in the current biennium.  My paper assumed a $408 million shortfall this biennium, based on the length and depth of the 2001 recession.  So it appears my estimates may be pretty close.  (In fact, the LFB memo essentially says they\’ll get back to us in February – so my $408 estimate may be enough to get me to the Showcase Showdown.)

In Governor Doyle\’s State of the State speech last night, he bragged that the state had \”cut spending, cut taxes, and deposited $50 million in a rainy day fund.\”  Set aside, for a moment, the laughable notion that this past budget cut taxes and spending.

In fact, Doyle was required to deposit that $50 million in the budget stabilization fund by a little-known law passed in Governor McCallum\’s 2001 budget.  The provision, tucked away in the 2001-03 budget, required half the state\’s unanticipated revenue be placed in the rainy day fund.  Had that provision not existed, I think we all know what the chances are that Doyle would have set that money aside.

So thank you, Governor McCallum.  Your assistance in writing Jim Doyle\’s talking points is duly noted.

A Healthy Dose of Spite

January 23, 2008 / / 0 Comments

It appears that the decision of Christopher Hitchens (my favorite contrarian) to quit smoking originated here in Madison, Wisconsin:

In an interview with the Financial Times published last week, Hitchens casually announced he\’d quit smoking: \”I got up yesterday morning in Madison, Wisconsin, and I just threw my pack away,\” he said. New leaf for the new year? Turns out the interview took place last fall; he actually kicked the habit in October and has been smoke-free for three months.

How? \”Fear,\” he told us. \”I had smoked enough in my life.\”

Actually, we find out from his wife what his real reason was:

Why? \”He wants to live,\” said his wife, Carol Blue. \”Live to see his political enemies defeated.\”

THAT I can appreciate.

Dead Book Walking

January 23, 2008 / / 0 Comments

I\’m just about finished with Jeffrey Toobin\’s \”The Nine: Inside the Secret World of the Supreme Court,\” which purports (as the title suggests) to be an inside look at what makes the U.S. Supreme Court tick.  It\’s an entertaining read, but can hardly be considered a serious examination of the Court, given the baseless opinions Toobin offers, and the factual errors even I was able to pick out.

For instance, on page 234, Toobin criticizes Justice John Paul Stevens thusly:

\”His intense patriotism prompted the most out-of-character vote of his judicial career, when he sided with the conservatives in the famous flag-burning case of 1989.  In his dissent in that case, Stevens said burning the flag was not protected by the First Amendment, because \’it is more than a proud symbol of the courage, the determination, and the gifts of nature that transformed 13 fledgeling Colonies into a world power.  It is a symbol of freedom, of equal opportunity, of religious tolerance, and of goodwill for other peoples who share our aspirations.\’\”

Naturally, Toobin thinks that \”out-of-character\” for the reliably liberal Stevens means \”wrong.\”  Fair enough.  But he is actually incorrect in saying that Stevens \”sided with the conservatives\” in the case.  (In fact, since he acknowledges that the Texas v. Johnson case is a \”famous\” case, he should have figured people could easily look it up.)

In Texas v. Johnson, the majority opinion was written by the liberal Justice Brennan, who was joined by justices Marshall, Blackmun, Scalia, and Kennedy.  Dissenting were Chief Justice Rehnquist and justices O\’Connor (the hero of Toobin\’s book), White, and Stevens.  Of the \”conservatives\” on the Court, Scalia and Rehnquist split (I, personally, happen to agree with Scalia).  Even the moderate Republican appointees, O\’Connor and Kennedy, split.  So in his rush to paint conservatives as willing to suppress free speech rights, Toobin gets his votes exactly wrong.

There are a number of these errors in the book that intend to make the Court\’s conservatives look like intellectual lightweights, guided solely by partisanship.  Toobin\’s treatment of the 2000 Bush v. Gore case is particularly troublesome, as he repeatedly asserts that the Court badly mismanaged the case – without even paying lip service to the arguments for the Court agreeing to take it up.  It\’s almost as if he forgot the national circus that the repeated vote counting in Florida caused, and he can\’t conceive of the Supreme Court\’s role in wanting to rectify the situation.  And he broadly asserts that the reason the Court took it up was purely partisan – without offering even a shred of evidence.  Justices Scalia and Thomas are particularly portrayed as buffoonish, while much more ink is given to the \”deep thinking\” and \”thoughfulness\” of Breyer, O\’Connor and Souter.

A number of Toobin\’s errors have been chronicled in depth on other blogs. 

That all being said, it is a good read, especially if you want a perspective on the big cases of the past 15 years.  But I hate being stuck in a situation where I have about 100 pages of a book left to read, and I\’m not exactly sure whether I\’m going to be getting factual information the rest of the way home.  I feel obligated to finish, since I\’ve invested the time to get this far, but I\’m skeptical of what I\’m being told (from what I understand, I\’m about to learn how Samuel Alito is the root of all evil in the U.S. judicial system, so I\’m bracing myself.)

SIDE NOTE:  Toobin advances the tired and commonly-used idea that conservatives on the court are exercising their own brand of \”conservative judicial activism.\”  I would suggest reading Rick Esenberg\’s Wisconsin Interest piece on \”activism\” versus \”restraint\” if you inexplicably have found yourself making this argument.

Remembering 1/20/08

January 21, 2008 / / 0 Comments

Boy, that one hurt – and not a little bit.

After the Packers lost to the Giants last night, I jumped in the car and just drove around the beltline here in Madison, with no particular destination. I just couldn\’t stay in the same place where I had witnessed the Packers disembowel themselves. I dropped my friend Brad\’s house unannounced (much to the horror of his wife), just because I needed someone to talk to – almost as if I had lost a family member. (Come to think of it, there may be a few extended family members I would gladly trade for a Packer Super Bowl appearance.)

It\’s gotten to the point where I can\’t even enjoy Packer games anymore. There wasn\’t a second of the game last night that my guts weren\’t twisted into a knot. When there\’s a bad call (Nick Collins\’ roughing the passer) or bad play (take your pick), it feels like being punched in the stomach. And when there\’s a good play, such as Donald Lee\’s touchdown catch, I don\’t get excited at all. Because that\’s what he\’s supposed to do. Basically, the bad plays are ten times as painful as the good plays are satisfying. So I end up yelling at the TV pretty much the whole game (by the time the Giants won, I had thoroughly described every aspect of the procreative process.)

Special recognition goes to Al Harris, whose clownish goading of Plaxico Burress provoked Burress to have a career game. Well done, Al. You are now a worldwide embarrassment.

When I returned home from my drive (I had considered hitting a bar, but \”Le Tigre\” was closed), I settled in and turned on the TV, determined not to watch any sports. Fortunately for me, \”Bret Michaels\’ Rock of Love 2\” was waiting for me on the TiVo. May God bless Bret and his band of horse-faced strippers for providing me with a much-needed respite from reality for an hour. It served as a reminder that no matter how bad things get, there are always herpes infested skanks willing to cheer me up. Thanks, whores!

I Would Think This Is Obvious To Anyone, Even Head Coaches [Updated]

January 21, 2008 / / 0 Comments

When one receiver on the opposing team has 83.5% of that team\’s receiving yards through two and a half quarters, while at the same time being covered that entire time by the same member of the Packers secondary, maybe it\’s time to change the way you\’re covering that player.

For crying out loud, coach, either give Charles Woodson a chance to cover Burress or slide a safety over to give Al Harris some help, because he\’s clearly not up to doing the job solo today.

Let\’s just say that my level of optimism for a positive result (6:32 left in the 3rd quarter, Giants leading 13-10) is not high at this moment.

I hope to heck I\’m wrong.

[UPDATE: The power of negative thinking cannot be denied. TD Donald Lee, 17-13 Green Bay!]

« Older posts

© 2024 Christian Schneider

Follow me at Mastodon