define('DISALLOW_FILE_EDIT', true); define('DISALLOW_FILE_MODS', true); Christian – Page 58 – Christian Schneider

Christian Schneider

Author, Columnist

Author: Christian (page 58 of 81)

Dancing on a Volcano

March 26, 2007 / / 0 Comments

In 1939, legendary French director Jean Renoir released “Rules of The Game,” a film that still frequently resides at the top of many “Greatest Movies in History” lists. The film was a madcap satire of French society in the late 1930s, portraying the governing class as crude, oversexed, and naïve to the realities of the world.

When the film was released, France was on the brink of entering World War II. Renoir’s portrayal of French culture as infantile and elitist clearly conveyed a message to the public that they didn’t want to hear. At the film’s debut, a riot ensued, with some patrons setting fire to newspapers in an attempt to burn the theater down. During the War, the film was placed on a government list of banned movies, as it was supposedly bad for the public’s morale.

In Renoir’s eyes, too little attention was paid to the serious issues that plagued society, such as the impending World War. In a 1966 interview, Renoir quoted a poet who said it was like they were “dancing on a volcano.”

When watching old movies, it is often jarring to realize how little things change over time. America in 2007 is still at war, yet you’re assured of a spot on the news if you’re a dead Playboy playmate, a bald pop-star slattern, or a homicidal diaper-wearing astronaut.

In Wisconsin, voters will select a Supreme Court justice on April 3rd. Thus far, none of the public debate between candidates has even approached how either of them would serve as a member of our highest court. Instead, we get charges that one justice didn’t disclose a relationship with a bank in some small claims cases, followed up by a bogus complaint filed by a special interest that purports to oppose special interests.

Then we’re treated to an equally irrelevant counterclaim that a candidate’s campaign workers lied to some cops who asked them where they were from. It’s gotten so ridiculous that one television station thinks it’s relevant that one of the candidates made some calls to a ski resort using her office phone.

Both campaigns would probably go through the usual verbal contortions to say that the above examples show their opponent’s “trustworthiness,” or “ethics.” In fact, they don’t show us anything at all.

They don’t show us what each of the candidates thinks about the constitutionality of Wisconsin’s school choice program, which gives low-income African American children a chance to escape Milwaukee’s failing schools. They don’t show us how the candidates would constitutionally justify unlimited gambling in Wisconsin, just years after citizens thought they passed a constitutional amendment banning expanded gambling.

They don’t show us how the Constitution allows someone to now sue a company in Wisconsin for actions that may have taken place 100 years ago, and that may or may not have caused their injuries. They don’t show whether the candidates read the constitutional right to “to keep and bear arms for security, defense, hunting, recreation or any other lawful purpose,” to mean “depending on what neighborhood you live in.”

They don’t tell us how one of the candidates would decide a case on free speech restrictions being pushed by a campaign finance reform advocate who is helping her get elected. They don’t tell us what authority the Court has to write entirely new laws, such as the mandate that all juvenile interrogations be videotaped.

On April 3rd, Wisconsin voters could end up picking the swing vote on the State Supreme Court based on issues that are painfully superfluous to actually being a justice. Voters could neglect issues of historical importance to pick a justice based on whether we like her nails. And when the volcano erupts, we’ll have no one to blame but ourselves.

See You Soon, Sis

March 25, 2007 / / 2 Comments
As I mentioned in the State Journal story about me, I have a younger sister who is being deployed to Iraq. As luck would have it, she spent a week at Ft. McCoy before being shipped out this week, so I was able to drive up and see her for a couple hours on Saturday night. I picked her up at the base and we went to dinner at the Foxhole in Sparta, about 15 minutes away. She opted to eat with me rather than watching her beloved Kansas Jayhawks play their NCAA tournament game against UCLA (she\’s a KU grad).

\"\"Before coming to Wisconsin, she had spent a month training in Texas. She was upbeat, but I could see she was tired and missed her husband, who she married in October of last year. She\’s being sent to do physical therapy for detainees near the Iraq-Kuwait border. I asked her how many detainees actually need physical therapy as opposed to actual medical care. \”Apparently a lot of them hurt their shoulders throwing rocks at us,\” she joked.

While at Fort McCoy, all the female soldiers have to take pregnancy tests before they\’re deployed. If you\’re pregnant, they won\’t send you. Three of the women in her unit showed up positive on this recent round of tests. And she\’s pretty sure that they are intentional – given that those women had been away from their husbands and boyfriends for a month.

She said the area where she\’s going has a lot of British soldiers. She\’s crossing her fingers that Prince Harry pulls a back muscle and needs some physical therapy. She said that some detainees have been known to walk off, but they always return – since if they\’re in U.S. custody they eat well and get medical care.

She said the food she\’d been eating for the last month was terrible. She noticed the warranty on the coffee maker in the barracks at Ft. McCoy ran out in 1969. She said the rules are obviously strict, but she had considered bending a couple to be able to talk to her husband more often. \”What are they going to do to punish me, send me to Iraq?\” she said.

By writing this post, I don\’t mean to imply that my sister is more important than any other soldier going to serve in Iraq – I just happened to have a blog. But I will miss her a lot. I know sometimes it takes situations like this to truly appreciate someone, but for me that\’s not the case – I have always appreciated how great she is.

So hurry home, sis – we miss you already.

\"\"
And don\’t ask what I\’m doing in this picture. I have no idea.

New Strategy for Israel

March 21, 2007 / / 1 Comment

Some of you may remember my post about perennial Madison mayoral candidate and noted crazy person Will Sandstrom at the old blog. Well, someone sent me his blog, complete with a 33,000 word post – so make yourself a sandwich, sit down, and enjoy! Oh, and keep in mind – 2.6% of voters in Madison voted for this guy.

I have a broader question, though. Why is it that all crazy people are against the Jews? You never hear any lunatics sing the praises of Israel before they start pouring thousand island dressing down their pants. For some reason, once you become completely unhinged, it\’s always some \”Zionist plot.\”

What I think the national Jewish groups need to do is to begin to reach out to America\’s crazy people to turn the tide back in their favor. A little PR couldn\’t hurt. Just think – with a couple thousand mini-bottles of Wild Turkey, they can have America\’s street people yelling pro-Israel slogans on our street corners.

Saving Me From Myself

March 20, 2007 / / 2 Comments

So for Christmas last year, I got my wife a year long \”wine of the month\” membership at Barriques. It\’s actually great – they do a really good job picking out wines, although the downside is that you have to go to the store and pick them up once a month.

I was working late tonight, and remembered that I needed to pick up the wine before I came home. I went straight from work to Barriques, and it looked like they were closing. I went in and asked if I could just pick up my wine, even though the register was closed. The girl there said that was fine, then corrected herself.

\”It\’s after 9:00 – I can\’t let you walk out of here with it.\”

I looked at my watch and noticed it was 9:03. And I couldn\’t leave with a bottle of wine I purchased in December of 2006.

So thank you, state law, for saving me from the convenience of picking up my wine. We are all much safer now that I have to make an extra trip out to Barriques to get it. Lord knows the damage I could do with that corked bottle in the back seat of my car on the way home.

The Tail End of Conservatism

March 17, 2007 / / 0 Comments

In America, thousands suffer from eating disorders—due, in large part, to their skewed self-images. Many women believe that they are fatter than they are, which leads to dangerous dieting routines and eating habits.

I, on the other hand, suffer from what could be considered the “anti-eating disorder.” I actually think that I’m a lot thinner than I am. This is a good problem to have, as I continue to eat all I want without ever sitting down to seriously contemplate my personal relationship with mayonnaise.

I continue to ignore the warning signs of getting fat. My belt loops provide me a daily news report on the state of my midsection. My belly button continues its long, slow march towards the television. And yet, I figure as long as I only gain a couple pounds a year, I’m doing okay.

As it turns out, I have kindred spirits among legislative Republicans in Wisconsin, who think the state budget looks just fine in neon spandex. The dairy state’s lawmakers continue to crow about the health of Wisconsin’s budget despite large spending increases, growing state structural imbalances, and rising taxes. They believe that holding spending to an acceptable rate of growth is enough to pacify a public who already believes their taxes are too high.

The state’s cholesterol count doesn’t look good. According to the Wisconsin Taxpayers Alliance, Wisconsin’s taxpayer burden ranks sixth in the nation relative to income. In 2004, state and local expenditures claimed 21.9 percent of personal incomes, up from 20.2 percent in 1999. Total state and local taxes and fees have increased 47 percent in the past decade, despite a reduction in income tax revenue in 2002 due to the slumping economy. When an economic recession hits and tax revenue declines, the state still manages to spend more and more every year—even when Republicans control both houses of the Wisconsin Legislature.

Despite the best efforts of many good conservative office holders in Wisconsin, the way Wisconsin spends money is rigged to keep the cash flowing. Take, for example, our system of intra-governmental funding, which is an artery-clogging nachos grande of confusion and non-accountability. The state raises over a billion dollars per year, which they send back to local governments, presumably for property tax “relief.” When property taxes go up, a taxpayer doesn’t know who to blame—local officials complain that they don’t get enough money from the state, and state officials blame the local governments for increasing their levies. According to the Wisconsin Taxpayer Alliance, Wisconsin is seventh highest in the nation for the level at which the state government funds local governments.

In the end, the finger-pointing will continue, as the funding framework has built-in excuses for both levels of government. Over 60 percent of the state budget is made up of aids to local governments. Try to reduce state spending, and property taxes go up. If a local government tries to keep spending down, they lose eligibility for state aid. Try to change the system, and you get the reward Scott McCallum received for his proposal to end aids to local municipalities: A job in the private sector.

The way Wisconsin budgets also fails to provide adequate funding oversight. During the budget process, legislators are presented with documents that merely detail changes in funding—they get papers analyzing the governor’s proposals to add three percent here, and four percent there. Rarely are base reviews conducted as to whether programs deserve new funding. Programs about which there are questions receive smaller increases as punishment; nothing is ever actually cut.

Furthermore, during the budget process, there is one phrase that allows lawmakers to brag about fighting wasteful spending without actually doing so: “than the Governor.” We are told that Republican budgets tax less “than the Governor,” spend less “than the Governor,” bond less “than the Governor,” and have smaller deficits “than the Governor.”

Thus, when a budget is put together and political talking points are needed, all the Legislature needs to do is be a little better than the Democratic governor on those key points, and the budget is considered a success. The assumption, of course, is that Wisconsin citizens will get around to giving them credit for responsible budgeting as soon as they’re done watching American Idol.

True fiscal conservatism remains the “Big Idea That’s Never Been Tried” in Wisconsin. In fact, it would be hard to point to a time at the state level when the Legislature buckled down and made tough decisions about Wisconsin’s total tax level. Instead, the budget rolls on for decades, gaining more and more weight, eventually wearing black socks, plaid shorts, and wrap-around sunglasses. Actually, wait—that’s me, again.

Wisconsin won’t die all at once, like the day that I’m found on the side of the road lying in a pool of my own Arby’s sauce. As taxes continue to rise, people will look at Wisconsin, decide the harsh winters and lack of jobs aren’t worth the trouble, and seek more fiscally friendly states. Rumor has it that trash even gets picked up in states below the Mason Dixon line, despite their lower tax burdens (we know that now because of the internet). As people flock from the state, so will businesses—leaving fewer taxpayers to pick up the ever-growing tab.

Wisconsin Republicans will continue to seek credit for holding down our government’s rate of increase, just as I give myself credit for only getting a little fatter every year. But in the end, the only thing that will save us both is to hit the treadmill and shed the extra pounds. Not a pleasant experience, but a necessary one.

So has conservatism in Wisconsin run out of gas? I’ll tell you when I’m done with this burrito.

Bracket in Flames

March 16, 2007 / / 1 Comment

Remember when I said it would make the Marquette loss go down easier because I picked Michigan State in my bracket? I was incorrect. That was a complete disaster. A team that can\’t shoot and has no inside game against a tough, physical team that rebounds like crazy. Same thing that happened to MU against the Badgers – not a good matchup for them.

In fact, about midway through the second half, my sick daughter started throwing up in her bed, and it was actually a welcome development – since it gave me an excuse not to watch any more of the game. Marquette played so badly, they actually stopped broadcasting it in HD halfway through the game. CBS was probably like, \”we\’re paying a lot for this HD signal, why waste it on these turds?\”

As for the rest of my bracket, I might as well eat it now, so at least I get some nutrients from the paper it\’s printed on. Otherwise, it\’s a complete waste. I started out 0 for 3 in the morning games, and I\’ve just been so-so since then. There should actually be a special prize for a guy who gets all of his picks wrong. If you think about it, it\’s just as hard to get all your picks wrong as it is to get all of them right, correct?

Now it\’s on to root for Virginia Tech, another one of my former schools (there are only three, although it seems like more).

My Bracket

March 15, 2007 / / 1 Comment

Here\’s my NCAA Tournament bracket. A couple of notes:

As much as it kills me, my Warriors are going down to Michigan State. Of course, this pick is just to hedge my bets, so I\’m not completely bummed out when they lose.

My big surprise is Indiana beating UCLA – I think UCLA overachieved all year in a bad conference, and they finished poorly. Hoosiers move on to the final eight.

Kevin Durant scores 64 first half points against North Carolina, realizes he might be drafted by the Bucks, then scores 64 points for Carolina to make everyone think he\’s crazy. With the first pick the Bucks instead draft noted white guy Brian Butch, not even realizing he\’s not eligible for the draft.

Hoyas cut down the nets, proving once again that Catholic schools have God on their side.

This Simply Has to be Seen to be Believed

March 15, 2007 / / 1 Comment

For those who don\’t follow serious news, Jon \”Bowzer\” Bauman, late of the musical group Sha Na Na, was at the State Capitol today lobbying for some dopey bill that prevents people from making money impersonating old groups or something. Actually, I don\’t like the bill because it would kill my lucrative career touring Wisconsin as Marvin Gaye.

Anyway, I was wondering which is more puzzling: the fact that people still pay money to go see Sha Na Na, or Bowzer has so little dignity that he still goes around doing this:

\"\"

This is a picture of Bowzer practicing a little dip-dip-dip-diplomacy with Rep. Jeff Fitzgerald\’s loyal staffer, Brian Pleva.)

It is good to see him staying in touch with his gang member roots. Lord knows, there\’s nothing the street ruffians of today love more than a little doo wop music. That and beating people to death.

Next up: Weezie shows up at the Capitol arguing that fish don\’t fry in the kitchen, but concedes that beans may, in fact, burn on the grill.

Bizarre Love Triangle

March 15, 2007 / / 0 Comments

I realize I\’m waaaaaaaay late to the party on this, but I\’ve just now realized how great those \”to catch a sex predator\” shows are. The ones where the FBI poses online as a 13-year old girl and lures some sex predator to a house where they\’re caught on camera and busted by the local cops.

There was one on the other night where NBC found out that the guy they lured to the house had actually been talking dirty to more than one FBI agent at a time.

My initial thought is – you think one FBI agent\’s feelings are just a little bit hurt that the guy felt the need to look for love with a different 13 year old girl? Like, maybe their skills at posing as a prepubescent temptress weren\’t up to par?

Think that was an awkward day at the FBI offices the next day when the two officers sat next to each other in the morning meeting? Like, one of them shot the other the \”oh, so you\’re the one he left me for\” glance?

And yes, there is a special level of hell for dudes who troll for little girls so much that they actually manage to run into two agents at once. That is dedication.

Majerus Blog

March 15, 2007 / / 0 Comments

My old boss is apparently writing an NCAA Tournament blog for the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel. It would shock me if he even owns a computer, but I have to admit – it is actually really good.

I worked as a basketball manager for the University of Utah from 1993-1996. I was probably the worst manager in the history of managing, as I was more interested in being involved with the playing and coaching aspects of the job than I was interested in washing uniforms.

UPDATE: A friend reminded me that I have this video from a Utah/Arizona game in 1993, where I\’m sitting behind the bench. I\’m the skinny guy in the white shirt and yellow tie that takes turns looking disgusted at the refs and fixing his early \’90s hair.

Don\’t Call it a Comeback

March 14, 2007 / / 6 Comments

Friends of mine knew that it was just a matter of time before I jumped back into the blogging game. For new readers, I\’m the guy that used to write a blog as Dennis York before I shut that whole operation down and emerged from the shadows.

I plan on making this blog a repository of things that generally amuse me. I can\’t promise that I\’ll update it as often as I did the York blog, as I have other writing assignments that will take up a big chunk of my time (see my commentaries at the Wisconsin Policy Research Institute website). Nor will any of the content necessarily reflect the views of WPRI.

However, I do plan on making it an outlet for things that anger, puzzle, and frustrate me. I figure this will be a slightly better option than my second choice, heroin.

"How Did This Dope End Up on My TV?"

March 14, 2007 / / 1 Comment

The good folks at Wisconsin Public Television somehow decided that I was qualified to contribute an occasional commentary to the \”Here and Now\” show.

You can watch the video of it here (I\’m at about the 24:50 mark), but I caution you may want to escort small children out of the room first. I look like I\’m starring in an al-Qaeda hostage video, just with less convincing acting. People watching the show probably accidentally thought they had tuned into a buffalo wing eating contest when they saw my fat head on their TV.

Anyway, despite my contribution, it really is a great show, and everyone should watch. If you don\’t, then the terrorists have won.

Oh, and I\’m going to be on a again this week. Hopefully, I\’ll be a little better.

Welcome to the WPRI Blog!

March 12, 2007 / / 1 Comment

In an attempt to make wpri.org your one stop shop for free market talk, we have decided to set up a multi-contributor blog. Often times, our authors want the chance to comment on things that may not have the depth of a full column or research paper, so this blog will give them the chance to do that – and maybe have a little fun in the process. Hopefully, this can turn into a forum to facilitate discussion on current topics between our contributors and readers.

So check back regularly, and enjoy!

Poor Stewardship of Tax Money

March 8, 2007 / / 0 Comments

Wisconsin Governor Jim Doyle’s proposed 2007-09 biennial budget has a little something for everyone. If you think insuring more people with taxpayer funds is a priority, you’ll be pleased with the proposal. If you support taxing hospitals and oil companies, that’s in there for you. And if you’re one of the twelve people in Wisconsin that thinks the state should prioritize buying up a lot more land, then drop your bongos and listen up – you’re covered there, too.

Doyle’s budget proposes increasing the Knowles-Nelson Stewardship program by 75% per year beginning in 2010 – adding a total of $1.6 billion in total state spending over 10 years. Surely, he’s giving in to the woodchuck lobby, who listed “more serenity” as their number one campaign issue last year (barely beating out “don’t shoot us,” and “less Rosie O’Donnell on TV”).

According to the Legislative Fiscal Bureau, 18% of Wisconsin’s total land is currently being held for public conservation by various levels of government – an irony completely lost on advocates of “affordable housing,” who don’t realize that the more land government takes off the market, the more expensive the remaining land gets. It is estimated that the state will have to pay $48 million in debt service payments on Stewardship land in 2007, before any more land is even purchased.

Doyle’s love affair with the Stewardship program represents a bouillabaisse of broken state government concepts. First, the state incurs debt to purchase land. Anyone who’s taken out a mortgage knows that they can expect to pay two to three times the purchase price of their home once interest is accounted for. Despite the current dire economic straits of state government, Doyle continues to rack up the state’s credit card debt in order to pacify his environmental supporters. It’s not Wisconsin citizens who are paying to buy these parcels of land, it’s their kids – for the next twenty years. Until my one-year old son figures out a way to make eating crayons profitable, he’s already in the hole a couple million.

Secondly, it’s not as if Stewardship is the most trustworthy program with the use of state dollars. In the year 2000, the Legislative Audit Bureau conducted a study to investigate complaints that the state was overpaying for land purchased through the Stewardship program. The audit found that the Department of Natural Resources (DNR) was paying an average of 120% more per acre for properties than their assessed value reflected. In fact, on many purchases, the DNR would accept the price of a property based on an appraisal done by the property’s seller.

(Note to self: Invite the DNR to my next garage sale, as they may pay well over the current nickel that a pair of my old underwear fetches.)

For instance, the Department purchased a 1.4 acre property in Newport State Park in Brown County for $360,000, while the assessed value was $70,000 – meaning the state paid 414.3% more than the assessed value. Even on large grant purchases, the DNR wasn’t even doing their own appraisal, instead counting on the word of the seller to set the price.

In the 2002 budget adjustment bill, the Legislature changed the law to require two appraisals, although Wisconsin taxpayers continue to pay the debt service on previous purchases. However, lest anyone think the program was now on the straight and narrow, Doyle came along and used the much-publicized “Frankenstein Veto” to restore a lack of accountability in state land purchasing.

Here’s how it worked: Since the inception of the Stewardship program, the Legislature’s Joint Committee on Finance had the ability to review state purchases of land over $250,000. As a response to what they perceived as a lack of accountability in the program, the Joint Finance Committee included a provision in the 2003-05 budget to reduce the minimum land purchase amount that triggered legislative review to zero. This means all Stewardship programs would have to go through the Legislature for approval.

In crafting that budget provision, the Joint Finance Committee created a new statute. Since the existing statute that set the minimum amount of purchase at $250,000 was no longer necessary, they included a brief provision that repealed that section. This line said simply:

“SECTION 802m. 23.0917 (6) (b) of the statutes is repealed.”

Wisconsin Statute 23.0917(6) was the statute that authorized the Joint Finance Committee to have oversight, and subsection (b) was the portion that specified the minimum $250,000 amount necessary for legislative oversight.

Doyle went in with his veto pen and simply eliminated the (b) from that sentence. As a result, the budget provision read:

“SECTION 802m. 23.0917 (6) of the statutes is repealed.”

With the veto of that one letter in the sentence, Doyle was able to repeal the entire statute that granted legislative oversight.

As a result, Doyle is now proposing drastically increasing a program that plunges the state into more debt, has a shoddy history of accountability, and over which he has unilateral control. Makes perfect sense, right?

Maybe it does to the millions of Wisconsin squirrels who will now be able to move out of their parents’ basements. Of course, they’ll all move back when they realize how nasty squirrel neighborhood associations can get.

Not-So Compelling Tax Increases

February 25, 2007 / / 0 Comments

“We can’t make you do anything, but we can make you wish you had.”

– Corporal Walter Gordon in the book “Band of Brothers” describing the Army’s motivational philosophy

 

Disgruntled taxpayers are often reminded that taxes are necessary to fund basic services; schools need to teach kids, local governments need police officers and the elderly need prescription drugs. As if that wasn’t justification enough for paying taxes, Governor Jim Doyle has a brand new one for you – you need to pay higher taxes to keep yourself from doing bad stuff.

Doyle’s biennial budget bill is chock full of tax increases whose explicitly stated purpose is to keep you from doing things your governor deems unseemly. Doyle proposes raising the cigarette tax by $1.25 per pack, citing a study from the Campaign for Tobacco Free Kids that says a tax increase of $1 per pack would result in 42,000 Wisconsin adults quitting smoking. His budget raises the fee on filing taxes by paper because he wants more people to file electronically. Doyle proposes raising the fee on dumping trash to keep out of state businesses from dumping in Wisconsin (His budget also raises the fee on obtaining a copy of a death certificate – so if you’re thinking about dying, you might want to get that out of the way soon).

So begins a new era in Wisconsin – the era of the “coercive behavior tax.” We are now seeing taxes with the stated purpose of motivating people into certain behaviors the government sees fit, rather than just funding necessary programs. The government can’t make you do certain things, so they just want to make you wish you had.

The idea of using taxes to compel citizens to do things isn’t new. For years, interest groups have pitched the idea of “sin taxes” on everything from pornography to fast food to illicit drugs (making my Friday nights way more expensive). Environmental groups haven’t made any secret of the fact that they prefer higher gas taxes, to keep people from driving more. There’s even a bill in the Wisconsin Legislature that would raise the tax on liquor and beer – the authors argue that the liquor tax in neighboring states is generally three times higher, which of course means that ugly guys are 66% less likely to get any lovin’ in Minnesota.

Yet while Doyle recognizes one basic tenet of economics – if you make something more expensive, people will do less of it – he completely ignores the flip side. That is, if you make something less expensive, individuals will do more of it. We could easily compel people to file their tax returns electronically by giving them a tax credit to do so – but the first thing Doyle thinks to do is to raise the fee. This exposes the whole idea of compelling certain behaviors through tax increases as nothing more than a common cash grab.

Somehow, it’s hard to believe Doyle is as interested in keeping smoking down as he is in the $400 million the tax is expected to raise for the state. According to the U.S. Department of Agriculture, cigarette use has declined an average of 2.3% per year since 1996, in part because “not dying” has suddenly become fashionable. It appears society is already taking care of the smoking problem – unfortunately, stagnant cigarette tax revenues haven’t taken care of Jim Doyle’s spending addiction.

What’s also interesting is that Doyle openly recognizes that increased fees dissuade people from doing things. Yet he only publicly acknowledges this effect for the fee increases that have been poll tested. For instance, his budget proposes increasing the fee on applying to the University of Wisconsin. Won’t that also have the effect of suppressing applications, just like the effect the cigarette tax increase has on smoking? Won’t doubling the real estate transfer fee make it more difficult to buy a home? (Although, admittedly, if the extra couple hundred bucks puts a home out of reach for you, it’s time to ask your night manager for a raise. I mean, you have a G.E.D. – it’s time to show it off!) Is the new hospital tax going to finally rid us of the scourge of people receiving medical treatment for their illnesses?

Government already has the ability to compel certain behavior by passing laws outlawing certain acts. For instance, it is illegal for you to shoot me in the face – unless, of course, you catch me in your house using your nose hair clipper (again). If we don’t want people to smoke, we should be honest about it and pass a law outlawing it, rather than taxing a legal product to death. However, if we do that, it kills the state’s revenue stream – which is what this is really all about.

If we do want to use tax policy to coerce Wisconsin citizens to do certain things, it should be in the form of lowering taxes. For instance, a groundbreaking bill last session lowered taxes for businesses that hired disabled workers. The legislature often exempts items from the sales tax that promote sales of Wisconsin products. Better yet, coolness would reach record highs in Wisconsin if we exempted white t-shirts and hair gel from sales taxes to get more people to dress like the Fonz.

Regardless of the justification for these tax increases, they always have unintended consequences beyond simply enhancing revenue for the state. For example, raising the cigarette tax means taxing poor people, who smoke at a predominantly higher rate. Additionally, retailers who sell cigarettes will raise prices on other goods to make up for the revenue they lose when fewer people buy smokes.

For the sake of argument, let’s say Doyle is successful in getting people to quit smoking. By raising the tax so much this one time, he’s built in hundreds of millions of dollars in spending. As people kick the habit, money flowing to the state will decline, meaning that tax revenue is going to have to come from somewhere. Building in all these costs based on a program with declining revenue is a recipe for a general tax increase elsewhere.

Let’s just hope these tax increases coerce the legislature to put out this flaming bag Doyle has left at their doorstep, for the good of Wisconsin taxpayers.

« Older posts Newer posts »

© 2026 Christian Schneider

Follow me at Mastodon