Conservatively Speaking

If you like your peace and quiet during dinner time and want to prevent annoying interruptions from telemarketers, it is time to sign up again on Wisconsin’s No Call List.

If you are already on the list, you need to re-register by September 1, 2007. You can also register if you have never done so by filling out this registration form. This is the easiest and fastest way to register to ensure you are on the No Call List by October 1, 2007.

You can fill out the on-line registration form I have linked for you, or call 1-866-9NO-CALL (1-866-966-2255) toll-free in Wisconsin. Consumers can sign up 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, 365 days a year.

The no-call system, which went into effect Jan. 1, 2003, requires people to renew every two years. If you sign up after September 1, 2007 but before December 1, 2007, you won't be put on the no-call list until Jan. 1, 2008.

The updated No Call List is given to registered telemarketers quarterly, so it may take 30 to 120 days for your number to get to telemarketers.

The Wisconsin No Call List is a list of residential telephone numbers of Wisconsin residents who do not want to be called by telemarketers in their homes. The Wisconsin law prohibits telemarketers from calling households that have been added to the No Call List. You can register all your home phone numbers. The law also prohibits businesses from intentionally blocking the Caller ID feature on your telephone.

Only one adult in your household needs to register. Be sure to register any additional phone numbers at the same residence. Registering is free.

The Wisconsin Department of Agriculture, Trade and Consumer Protection says the No Call List should stop most telemarketing calls but there are exceptions:

1. Calls made to an existing customer - for example, calls from: the bank you have a checking account with, your phone company or your credit card company.

2. Calls made in response to your written or verbal request or permission.

3. Calls encouraging you to make a donation of property, goods or services to a "nonprofit organization."

4. Calls encouraging you to purchase property, goods or services from a "nonprofit organization" unless sale proceeds are subject to Wisconsin sales tax or federal income tax.

5. Calls made for noncommercial purposes such as polls, surveys and political purposes.

6. Calls made to a business telephone number.

7. A call made by an individual acting on his or her own behalf, and not as an employee or agent of any other person.

Even if a call is exempt from this law, you can still stop many of these calls just by telling them not to call you again. Federal law requires each and every business to place your name on their "no call" list, if you request it.

The law excludes businesses and business telephone numbers. Any phone that is a business phone is not eligible to be on the Wisconsin No Call List. If your home office phone is your residential line, then it is eligible to be included on the List.

Telemarketers who call someone on the No Call List can be subject to a $100 fine per call.

If you get a telemarketing call after you have registered to be on the No Call List:

1. If you have Caller ID, write down the phone number from which they are calling. It is illegal for a telemarketer to block Caller ID.

2. Get the name of the company for which the telemarketer works. Often companies will contract with telemarketing companies to market their services for them. Make sure you get the name of the telemarketing company as well as the company for which they are selling. All telemarketers are required to state their name and their company's name at the beginning of the call. If you didn't hear it, ask them to repeat it.

3. Ask the telemarketer for their Wisconsin telemarketing license number.

Try to get their manager's phone number and an address for the telemarketing firm. Make sure you note the date and time the call was made. Then fill out a No Call Complaint questionnaire.

Remember you aren't automatically added to the List the day you sign up. Telemarketers are only required to update the List once a quarter. It may take between 30 to 120 days for your number to be added to all the telemarketers' lists.

Back to school means back to school expenses.

The National Retail Federation (NRF) reports students and families will spend $47.3 billion preparing for college. Students and their parents will spend a combined average of $956.93 on back-to-college merchandise, up from last year’s $880.52.

There is the obligatory spending on clothing and accessories. Adding to the final bill will be purchases of laptops, digital cameras, iPhones, other cell phones, shoes, notebooks, folders and pencils.

And we cannot forget textbooks. The NRF says, “Over $15 billion will be spent on textbooks, which are perhaps the only real necessity for college students.”

College textbooks are not cheap. Stateline.org says at the University of Wisconsin, a used copy of Chemistry and Chemical Reactivity goes for $109.90.

In July, the University of Wisconsin Board of Regents ordered its universities to prepare and submit plans by December on how they will lower textbook prices. The move came after a study by the University of Wisconsin’s Office of Operations Review and Audit found that students pay about $300 for books at some state schools but about $950 at others. The audit shows that students at the UW-Milwaukee and UW-Madison campuses can pay more than twice as much for their books as their counterparts at schools such as UW-La Crosse or UW-River Falls.

Why the discrepancy in textbook prices? One reason for the varying prices is textbook rental programs that allow students to be charged a flat fee to the university to rent books each semester. The fee is much cheaper than buying books at the retail price. The cheaper prices at La Crosse and River Falls can be attributed to book rental programs on those campuses.

There are some drawbacks to book rental programs. UW officials say they are expensive to start, and professors feel their textbook choices aren’t as great. A suggestion has been made by Julie Gordon, director of UW’s Office of Operations Review and Audit that if new schools started using the rental programs, they should initially cover introductory-level classes.

Expensive college textbooks are a nationwide dilemma that Congress even saw fit to investigate. The Associated Press writes, “A report by the Government Accountability Office two years ago found that prices had risen at more than twice the rate of inflation over the previous two decades. The national average ranges from $644 to as much as $900 a year for books.”

Stateline.org reports there is a nationwide effort is underway on college campuses to lower the cost of textbooks. You can read the entire Stateline.org article here.

The appetite to tax is insatiable for some politicians. Less and less people are smoking, yet politicians keep creating taxes that will be unsustainable by the smoking population. The cigarette taxes that are being imposed on the supposedly bad guy smokers will be paid by the nonsmokers.

Governor Doyle’s plans for the state cigarette tax are well documented. The Governor in his state budget proposes increasing Wisconsin’s cigarette tax of $o.77 per pack by $1.25. If approved, the new cigarette tax of $2.02 would be one of the highest in the nation.

To add insult to injury, Congress is considering increasing the federal tax on cigarettes to fund an expansion of children’s health care coverage.

Supporters are using a dual-based rationale to argue their case: 1) It is for a good cause and 2) Yes, it is a tax increase, but it is a sin tax, a tax on harmful cigarettes.

A group of conservative U.S.Senate Republicans is pledging to fight the increase for the right reasons.

“I’m not in favor of raising taxes, period,” Senator Saxby Chambliss (R-Georgia) told The Hill, a publication that covers Capitol Hill in Washington.

Senate Minority Whip Trent Lott (R-Mississippi) said it best when he stated, “A tax is a tax is a tax. We don’t need more taxes.”

Smokers have become easy prey for tax increasers, but as one Senator emphasized, sooner or later, the instant target of smokers will not be paying for every government program.

Debate on the cigarette tax increase in Washington is expected to last through the summer. In order to get more favorable votes, there could be a compromise to have the revenue pay for insurance coverage just for children and not parents to keep the cost down.

The potential looms for an incredible tax increase on cigarettes in Wisconsin. There is a sizeable portion of the public that does not smoke, and supposedly, would not pay the higher tax. That should not justify a tax increase. The fact that it is a tax on cigarettes that could be palatable, even popular with the general public misses the point. We must get rid of the prevailing attitude in this state that it is simple to raise taxes. Such a mindset only makes it that much easier to increase other taxes, plunging us deeper and deeper into our tax hell.

Last weekend, I wrote about the dangers associated with purchasing prescription drugs from Canada and countries outside the U.S.

You also need to be very concerned and cautious about purchasing drugs online.

A new report by the Associated Press (AP) says, “With the help of unscrupulous doctors and pharmacists, hundreds of Web sites dispense prescription narcotics to customers in exchange for nothing more than a credit card number.”

Internet access has resulted in a reduction of people searching for doctors and the growth of rogue pharmacies online. The prescriptions they offer and fill are highly risky.

According to the AP, “the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) says about 95 percent of products sold by online pharmacies are controlled substances. By comparison, controlled substances amount to roughly 11 percent of the dosages dispensed by legitimate pharmacies.”

The AP reports a DEA official testified before Congress in May, specifically outlining how illegal online pharmacies operate. The DEA’s Joseph Rannazzisi told a Congressional committee that the online sites contact doctors, usually ones that are in debt, retired, or who are after additional income. These doctors look over questionnaires filled out online by customers, then write out the prescriptions. The doctors are paid between $10 and $25 for each prescription they write. Pharmacies struggling economically are convinced by the web sites to fill out the prescriptions and ship to customers.

The illegal online pharmacies ignore the requirement of a doctor-patient relationship and certification from state boards. The AP reports the National Center on Addiction and Substance Abuse identified 581 Web sites that offer controlled prescription drugs, compared with 492 in 2004.

Illegal online pharmacies help perpetuate addictions. Customers get confused, unaware of what they are receiving.

Here is the entire AP article.

Sara Zeman of the Social Security Administration authored a piece entitled, “Regulation of Online Pharmacies: a Case for Cooperative Federalism.” Zeman wrote about the risks of online pharmacies:

”Patients who obtain their prescriptions through online pharmacies place themselves at risk of drug-related injury. While injuries can arise regardless of whether a patient obtains drugs through the Internet or through in-person visits to a local clinic and pharmacy, the risks can be amplified when prescription drug use is arranged exclusively through online pharmacies. Patients may suffer physical injury or harm as a result of taking improperly prepared drugs or drugs that are not appropriate for their conditions. They may also suffer harm from receiving poor quality medical or pharmaceutical advice, not learning of alternative therapies, or not receiving physical examinations or follow-up care. The fault for these injuries lies with various parties: Patients may misrepresent their medical histories, physicians may not deliver bona fide medical consultations, or pharmacists may not require valid prescriptions.”

As I have stated before, buyer beware.

This may be hard to believe, but here is a tax that might have slipped past the radar screens of Wisconsin officials who love to tax and spend: the fat tax.

A recent New England Journal of Medicine study received a great deal of media attention when it asserted that obesity can be caused by hanging around with other obese people. Another study, this one by Johns Hopkins University predicts 75 percent of adults in the United States will be obese or overweight by 2015.

Viewed as a serious health crisis, what is the liberal answer to obesity and most societal problems? Raise taxes.

Yale University professor Kelly Brownell first offered the idea of a fat tax in 1994 suggesting a tax in the range of seven to 10 percent on certain unhealthy items like soft drinks or fatty foods to discourage people from eating poorly. Brownell also proposed going the opposite direction, with lower taxes on fatty foods. Brownell theorized that more money would be brought in that could be used for public health nutrition programs.

The nanny state spread as Brownell’s philosophy caught on with states such as Arkansas, Tennessee, Virginia and Washington creating fat taxes on soft drinks sold within their borders.

Other states such as California, Maine and Maryland have also experimented with hefty fat-tax legislation.

One big problem is that money collected through fat taxes has typically not been earmarked for obesity-prevention programs or healthy food subsidies; instead they were often used to cover budget deficits.

Australian economist Adam Creighton is a summer Research Fellow at the National Tax Foundation. Creighton states the obvious that “government should leave people alone to decide their own size.”

Creighton wrote in a column for the National Tax Foundation and for The American, “Perhaps fat-taxers, who apparently don't want to pay for the foolish choices of others, should instead agitate for dismantling the public health system, much of which exists to alleviate health problems resulting from poor decisions. A handyman lifts packages incorrectly and injures his back; the sexually promiscuous contract STDs; a narcissist stares into the mirror all day and needs psychiatric care; and so on. Many people's behavior saps the public largesse for their recuperation; yet no one is lobbying to tax heavy parcels, nightclubs or mirrors.”

The fat tax fails in a number of areas:

Fairness: Thin people enjoy fatty foods. Where is the justice in making them pay higher taxes?

Simplicity: Under the fat tax concept, every food item would be designated a specific tax rate. What would the rate be for ice cream, cinnamon rolls, potato chips, green beans, asparagus, etc.? Who would determine those rates and how?

Transparency: There will always be confusion about who buys what food. Determining who bears the burden of a fat tax will be difficult, if not impossible.

You can read Creighton’s entire column here.

Finally, let’s return to the father of the fat tax, Kelly Brownell. What ever happened in those states that embraced Brownell’s fat tax? In states that implemented the fat tax, all the levies were repealed. Not surprisingly, revenue that was targeted for nutrition and obesity-prevention programs was, instead, used to address budget deficits.

USA TODAY is reporting thousands of older Americans are heading to nursing home and assisted living facilities in Mexico. One of them, Jean Douglas moved from Bandon, Oregon to what she calls, “paradise.”

She now has a studio apartment, gets three meals a day, laundry and cleaning services, and round-the-clock care from staff speaking English, for $1,300 a month, far less than what it would cost back home in Oregon. Plus, she’s surrounded by mountains, a lake, and year-round temperatures around 80 degrees.

Providing health care for the elderly is a new industry in Mexico, so the quality of care is sketchy. In some instances, it’s horrible.

Government regulation is scarce. Mexican officials inspect nursing homes that are operating out of private homes only once a year, unlike U.S. inspectors, visiting a home several times a year. Some facilities have gone bankrupt, sending displaced American retirees to look elsewhere to live. Conditions can be filthy, Mexican food is a challenge for the elderly, and there is the language barrier to contend with. Medicare, Medicaid, the Department of Veterans Affairs and most U.S. insurance companies do not cover care or medicine for patients outside America, so Mexican managers insist on ability to pay.

Larry Minnix, president of the American Association of Homes and Services for the Aging, cautions that the lack of government oversight can place elderly patients in jeopardy. "It's the same danger you have of going across the border looking for cheap medications," Minnix said. "If you don't know what you're getting, and you're not getting it from people you trust, then you've got an accident waiting to happen."

Many Americans, including Wisconsinites, have looked to Canada in search of cheaper prescription drugs. This year, Congress failed to pass legislation to legalize the import of drugs from abroad, but another attempt is forthcoming from Senator David Vitter, R-La. Senator Vitter wants to prohibit Customs agents from seizing U.S. residents prescription drugs brought across the border from Canada.

Joel White, a visiting senior fellow at the Galen Institute, a nonprofit tax and health policy research group in Alexandria, Va., and a former staff director of the House Ways and Means Health Subcommittee claims Senator Vitter’s legislation “would actually expose Americans to grave health risks.”

White points out the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has consistently declared that it cannot guarantee the safety of drugs brought in from other countries, and the FDA cannot keep up with inspections. White says, “On a typical day at the John F. Kennedy International Airport Mail Facility, 500 to 700 of the roughly 40,000 packages suspected of containing drugs are inspected. And according to a 2004 study, many of the packages that are inspected contain drugs that violate the FDA's safety standards. This includes expired medicines, counterfeit drugs and insecure packaging.”

If Congress legalizes drug importation, White says more unsafe drugs will pour into the United States. The sheer number of imported drugs has tripled over the past few years according to a Congress Daily study, but the number of inspectors has only increased by 10 percent.

Supporters of drug importation claim only drugs from safe countries could be purchased. Remember, it is impossible for the FDA to inspect every drug that enters the country. On-line pharmacies can easily lie about their location and the drugs they are selling. The World Health Organization estimates that 50 percent of medicines sold through rogue Web sites are fake. Counterfeit medicines that do not have active ingredients or those that have highly toxic substances can harm patients by failing to treat serious conditions. In some cases, the counterfeit drugs can be fatal.

William K. Hubbard of the FDA testified before Congress in June 2003 that the quality of drugs made in the U.S. is very high, but the same cannot be said for foreign drugs.

“Many drugs obtained from foreign sources that either purport to be or appear to be the same as U.S.-approved prescription drugs are, in fact, of unknown quality. FDA cannot assure the American public that drugs imported from foreign countries (like Canada) are the same as products approved by FDA.

These outlets may dispense expired, subpotent, contaminated or counterfeit product, the wrong or a contraindicated product, an incorrect dose, or medication unaccompanied by adequate directions for use. The labeling of the drug may not be in English and therefore important information regarding dosage and side effects may not be available to the consumer. The drugs may not have been packaged and stored under appropriate conditions to avoid degradation. When consumers take such unsafe or inappropriate medications, they face risks of dangerous drug interactions and other serious health consequences,” said Hubbard.

How risky are drugs purchased from other countries li

This is very scary.

The Senate Democrats’ government health care plan, Healthy Wisconsin, includes sweeping new taxing authority. The plan calls for the creation of a 16-member board.

Dale Knapp, an analyst with the non-partisan Wisconsin Taxpayers Alliance has been examining the Senate Democrats’ proposal. Knapp told the Wisconsin Radio Network:

"The Healthy Wisconsin Board will be unelected, and would have a taxing authority that will be over $15 billion a year, in the first year, which is actually more than the Legislature levies in taxes in an entire year.”

Knapp has the same concerns I have about un-elected boards having vast authority to levy taxes.

"Where does the taxpayer turn? How is there any accountability? I think that's the big problem here. What is it going to mean for health care costs? What is it going to mean for taxes? Those are big issues,” Knapp told the Wisconsin Radio Network.

The inclusion by Senate Democrats of an un-elected 16-member board with sweeping taxing power and absent accountability appears to have been lost in the debate over this government health care plan. I do not support this costly boondoggle, especially with Madison-appointed bureaucrats having unchecked taxing authority and deciding who gets care, what kind of care, and at what cost.

My former legislative aide, Christian Schneider has compiled a dictionary of liberal Wisconsin terms in a column for the Wisconsin Policy Research Institute entitled, “You, Too, Can Be a Wisconsin Liberal.”

You can read Chris Schneider’s article here.

Americans for Prosperity has a new report that says Wisconsin’s economy remains stagnant, while at the same time government continues to grow and Democrats are proposing the largest tax increase in state history to pay for government health care.

The Wisconsin Prosperity Report analyzed data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics from June 2006 to June 2007. Here are some of the key findings:

· Wisconsin had an anemic 0.28 percent job growth.

· 58 percent of jobs created were government jobs.

· Government payrolls are growing more than eight times faster than private-sector payrolls.

· Wisconsin lags behind the region and national average in Gross Domestic Product (GDP), a measure of everything produced in the state.

· Wisconsin’s real inflation-adjusted economic growth from 2004 to 2006 was just 2.2 percent, while the national economy expanded 5.9 percent. All of Wisconsin’s neighbors, with the exception of recession-plagued Michigan, grew far more rapidly: Minnesota at 2.9 percent, Illinois at 3.4 percent, Iowa at 4.1 percent, and South and North Dakota at 6.8 and 8.8 percent respectively.

· As of 2006, Wisconsin has fallen to 25th in per-capita GDP and can no longer be considered a rich state, but simply middle-of-the-pack, and falling. Source: U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis

You can read all the details here.

The report is clear. Wisconsin’s economy is in trouble. Raising taxes by the record-setting numbers the Governor and legislative Democrats are proposing is not the answer to our economic woes.

The state budget negotiations remain at a standstill. On the conference committee table:

· The Senate Democrats’ $15.2 billion tax increase in the form of a government health care plan.

· The myriad of tax and fee increases proposed by Governor Doyle, totaling $1.75 billion.

Wisconsin could never afford such tax increases, especially now.

The Milwaukee Journal/Sentinel reports foreclosures in Wisconsin got worse last month.

“Creditors brought 1,662 new court actions against defaulting homeowners last month - 38% more than a year earlier, ForeclosuresWI.com reported. That brings this year's toll of families facing loss of their homes to 10,891 - 25% more than the first seven months of last year, according to the Milwaukee-based data tracker.”

Making matters tough for homeowners are hikes in adjustable rate mortgages, stricter standards in the mortgage business, and a scarcity of home buyers.

Experts predict the dismal trend will continue for at least a year, possibly 18 months.

You can read the entire Journal/Sentinel article here, a story that the Governor and Senate Democrats obviously missed.

So many Wisconsinites are calling a free round-the-clock consumer help line at (888) 995-4673 that Wisconsin ranks 20th among the states in calls seeking assistance.

Residents are losing their homes at a time the Governor and Senate Democrats want to enact the largest tax increases Wisconsin has ever seen, increases that would literally force more and more people out of their homes. Wisconsin can least afford the massive tax increases being proposed by Democrats. The current state budget process must produce a biennial budget that returns Wisconsin to clear, sound fiscal responsibility.

The Janesville Gazette has written an editorial in support of my proposed legislation to require that boards with taxing authority be elected bodies.

From the Janesville Gazette:


Tech schools need change in oversight

A quick refresher on history: Before the United States was formed, the original 13 colonies balked when England's Parliament imposed taxes. The colonies argued they shouldn't be taxed without a representative in Parliament.

The Revolutionary War ensued.

Unfortunately, taxation without representation persists in corners of our country. Wisconsin's technical college system is one such case.

That would change under legislation that state Senate Republicans plan to reintroduce this month. History shows valid reasons to support it.

Sen. Mary Lazich, R-New Berlin, points to a 2003 Wisconsin Taxpayers Alliance study that showed technical college tax levies rose almost 150 percent in the previous decade. That compares to a 75 percent increase in overall levies. The alliance also found that tech school levies rose 7.4 percent annually from 1998-99 to 2003-04, compared to the 4.2 percent average increase for public schools.

This March brought a Legislative Audit Bureau report that showed full-time technical college instructors were among the nation's best paid. Their average earnings were about $22,000 more than faculty in the UW System's two-year campuses and often more than those at the UW's four-year schools.

Locally, Blackhawk Technical College's board approved a tax levy increase of 7 percent in April.

Did the boss boost your pay 7 percent this year? We didn't think so.

Technical colleges will argue that state law sensibly requires their boards to be balanced by geography, profession, background, gender and race, and that appointees typically work full time and might be reluctant or have little time to campaign for those seats. The colleges suggest that elections might bring board members who don't possess the qualities of appointees.

The colleges also argue that they must pay competitive wages to ensure qualified instructors, and that the nurses, accountants and other professionals who teach their classes could demand more pay in the private sector.

We understand that by providing people the skills needed in business, technical colleges are a vital economic engine. And that wages must be competitive to lure and keep good instructors. But why should Wisconsin's tech system pay more than every state except California and Michigan?

It goes back to our initial point: Only elected officials should have the power to levy taxes. Many appointed boards do good work. But if elections work for city councils, school boards and county boards, they should work for technical colleges.

Unfortunately, a similar bill in the last legislative session wasn't a priority for lawmakers. If this legislation again fails to get traction, lawmakers should consider another alternative: Place the tech system under the umbrella of the UW Board of Regents.

After all, tech schools are trying to become more like community colleges, and tech schools such as Madison's serve as huge feeders for their UW System counterparts. The regents could offer reasonable management and oversight and coordinate all post-high school education. This move would eliminate service duplications and competition between the two educational systems.

It's another idea worth serious consideration.

I am one of 49 lawmakers that have signed on to a letter asking Governor Doyle “to play a helpful role by publicly agreeing to enact the state budget” without using the Frankenstein veto.

We are asking Governor Doyle to follow the parameters set forth in Assembly Joint Resolution 1(AJR 1) that has bipartisan support. The resolution would prohibit any Governor, regardless of party affiliation, of using partial veto authority to create new sentences by combining parts of two or more sentences.

The Governor used this practice, the Frankenstein veto, in the 2005-07 budget process to increase state spending that had not been authorized by the Legislature.

AJR 1 is awaiting state Senate action and approval from voters in a statewide referendum.

Our letter tells the Governor that a public statement on his part to refrain from using the Frankenstein veto would respect both legislative and public sentiment.

You can see the letter to the Governor here.

Want a classic example of how government over-regulates?

A former legislative staffer from my office, Christian Schneider conveys the horror story of the bureaucratic nightmare he experienced upon trying to hire a babysitter to work 10 hours a week. Schneider writes about the fiasco in a column for the Wisconsin Policy Research Institute.

It all started when he wanted to hire a UW-student as a babysitter for his children so his wife could return to work. Here is Schneider’s trip through babysitting bureaucracy hell:

1) He and his wife had to register and get both state and federal business identification numbers. As Schneider puts it, “we essentially had to become a corporation,” just to hire a babysitter.

2) They had to pay income taxes.

3) They paid Social Security taxes.

4) They paid unemployment taxes on their babysitter.

5) They paid back taxes, because Schneider admits it took some time to figure out the entire tedious process.

6) They had to register with the Wisconsin Department of Workforce Development. Why? They set up quarterly unemployment insurance payments, even though if the babysitter left the job, she still would not collect unemployment compensation.

7) They had to file W-2 and W-3 forms with federal and state governments in order to report the babysitter’s income.

8) Schneider and his wife hired a professional tax preparer to figure everything out.

This bureaucratic mess, in addition to being cumbersome and unnecessary, serves to benefit only the government. The Schneider’s and their babysitter certainly failed to gain from this endeavor.

Government programs act as barriers to success and upward mobility. As Schneider points out in his piece, government needs to get out of the way of those who seek personal achievement.

You can read Schneider’s entire column here.

Live within your means.

That’s what Americans want the federal government to do. A new MSN-Zogby poll shows and incredible 94 percent of those surveyed want the Presidential candidates to explain how they would make the government operate with more fiscal responsibility.

When it comes to balancing the federal budget, 50 percent said they refuse to vote for a Presidential candidate who would raise taxes. Only 35 percent are willing to pay higher taxes for a balanced budget.

Budget Office Director Peter Orszag told the U.S. Senate it has choices: increase revenues (raise taxes), cut spending, or both. The MSN-Zogby poll indicates cutting spending is the more favorable option with taxpaying-Americans.

If only more people in Wisconsin state government would listen to the survey, and to the respondents of a similar poll done by MSN-Zogby in March. According to that poll, those earning an annual income between $75,000 and $100,000 were most likely (45 percent) to say they pay too much in taxes, followed by those making more than $100,000 (43 percent).

Those earning less than $35,000, the poorest Americans, were the most likely group to say they’re paying their fair share (62 percent) and least likely to say they’re paying too much (30 percent).

Here is a real shocker. Only three percent of Americans feel they pay too little in taxes.

The conclusions are clear: Americans feel they are paying their share in taxes, they do not support increased taxes to balance budgets, and they consider our current tax system to be too expensive.

According to the state Department of Transportation, the number of fatal motorcycle accidents in Wisconsin continues to increase.

The deaths of 68 motorcycle drivers and one passenger were reported in 2007 as of Monday. That compares to 57 drivers and eight passengers in 2006.

I blogged about this serious situation on our roads in late July. We have a lot of warm, motorcycle-riding weather left so please use caution while driving motorcycles, and the same holds true for motorists in other vehicles around motorcycles.

The New York Times is lamenting the fact that three states, including Wisconsin, have entered the second month of the fiscal year without one. The other two states are Illinois and California.

The New York Times writes:

“In Wisconsin, a stalemate has dragged on for weeks, as a Senate led by Democrats and a General Assembly led by Republicans passed budgets with a $10 billion gap between them. On Wednesday, a conference committee approved more than 500 budget items, The Associated Press reported, but hundreds of more controversial items are unresolved.”

The press will probably start writing more articles in the near future about the failure to pass a budget on time and the potential negative consequences this could have for Wisconsin.

Keep in mind the state is not like the federal government that shuts down if it doesn’t have a budget. In Wisconsin, the state merely continues to operate under the previously approved budget.

I have said that the budget process may drag out until November. While some editorial writers and special interest groups may protest, I say the delay isn’t necessarily a crisis.

For every day the state operates under the old budget, that is another day without:

• The Senate Democrats’ $15.2 billion socialistic government health care plan.

• A government health care plan that would be the largest tax increase in the history of the United States.

• Governor Doyle’s proposed $1.75 billion in tax and fee increases.

• Higher property taxes resulting from Governor Doyle lifting the caps on local spending

• A cigarette tax increase

• A tax on hospitals

• A tax on oil companies

• A tax on nursing home beds

• An increase in vehicle registration fees

• An increase in driver’s license fees

• A raid of the Patient’s Compensation Fund

If those are my options, I will take a tardy budget.

The needs of the Wisconsin system of bridges far exceed the funding levels available. One of the key factors responsible for this situation is the transfer of funds from the state’s transportation budget in the past two biennial budget cycles.

That is one of the major findings of the 2007 Report Card on Wisconsin’s Infrastructure prepared by the Wisconsin section of the American Society of Civil Engineers.

Governor Doyle’s raids of the Transportation Fund have been substantial. During Wisconsin's past two budget cycles, the state budget transferred $1.1 billion from Wisconsin's transportation fund to cover spending in other programs. The state borrowed money to replace much of the transferred funds that totaled $675 million in 2003-05 and $427 million in 2005-07 to give to schools despite being presented with a budget by Republicans that contained the single greatest increase in public education funding in Wisconsin history.

If the Governor continues this trend, motorists could be put in danger.

"If it would continue, it would have a negative impact," said Craig Thompson, executive director of the Transportation Development Association of Wisconsin. Quoted in the Appleton Post-Crescent, Thompson worries that the interest payments on the money borrowed to replace the transferred funds will reduce what the state can do about its roads.

The 2007 Report Card on Wisconsin’s Infrastructure reports, “The Wisconsin State Highway Plan 2020 estimated bridge needs (excluding Southeast freeways) from 2000-2020 to be $1.0 billion. In Southeast Wisconsin, freeway needs for this same time period for bridges, roadways, and safety are estimated at $2.8 billion.

The number of deficient local bridges in the past 25 years has declined from 62% to 18%, a number below the current national average of 27.1%. Estimated funding needs for these bridges from 2005-2020 are $750 million. Although the bridges in Wisconsin have improved significantly over the past 25 years, funding the ongoing program will be the major concern for the future.”

There is some good news, according to the Infrastructure Report Card. “In Wisconsin, 16.0% of the bridges are currently deficient (safe to carry traffic but approaching replacement or rehabilitation), down 4% from three years ago. This represents a significant improvement over the last 25 years, where the percent of deficient bridges in Wisconsin was 57%.”

Despite the good news, the Report Card gives Wisconsin bridges a grade of C. The report gave Wisconsin a grade of B on the current status of the system of bridges, but also gave a grade of D on the funding levels available to address the system needs. Factor the two grades together and Wisconsin bridges merit a C. You can see the entire report card here.

Ironically, Governor Doyle is now calling for increasing funding to the state’s Transportation Fund, a fund he raided twice in previous budgets, and is threatening to do so again in the 2007-09 state budget.

The tragic bridge collapse in Minnesota should serve as a wake-up call. Money pumped into the state’s Transportation Fund is to be used for roads, highways, and bridges, not the Governor’s special interests. It is time for Governor Doyle to stop playing games with the state budget and stop raiding the state’s Transportation Fund to prevent putting our motorists at high risk.

You have heard of Tax Freedom Day.

Now there is Cost of Government Day.

Cost of Government Day is the date of the calendar year on which the average American worker has earned enough gross income to pay off his or her share of spending and regulatory burdens imposed by all levels of government, federal, state and local.

According to the Americans for Tax Reform, Cost of Government Day is far worse than Tax Freedom Day. Cost of Government Day for 2007 was July 11th, two days later than last year’s revised date of July 9th. In Wisconsin, Cost of Government Day came on July 13, two days later than the national average.

Gloomy fails to even come close to describing how dismal this prospect is for American taxpayers. The nation’s average worker must labor on average 192 days, over half the year, in order to meet all tax obligations. Bloated, super-sized government takes away 52.6 percent of national income.

You can read more about the Cost of Government and Cost of Government Day here.

I have signed a pledge issued by Americans for Tax Reform that I oppose tax increases.

Taxes are just too high at every level.

Before America was born, the people of the original thirteen colonies went into an uproar that Parliament imposed taxes without the approval of colonists. Having no representative in Parliament, the colonists rebelled against taxing decisions made in London without their consent. The colonists wouldn’t stand for taxation without representation, and soon the greatest country in the world was founded.

More than 200 years after the American Revolution, taxation without representation continues to pervade Wisconsin’s political environment. All around Wisconsin, appointed boards have authority to tax residents. Taxpayers are seeing their taxes raised by people they never selected or voted for. Right now, those taxpayers do not have recourse. That is fundamentally unfair, a violation of one of the basic concepts of good, open, clean government, that if you are going to raise taxes, you should have to stand up and defend the increase and then take a vote on it.

It appears from all the data, the increases being hoisted upon taxpayers are substantial. Consider the total tax levies for the state's 16 technical colleges. According to he non-partisan Wisconsin Taxpayers Alliance, the technical college tax levies have increased from $251 million in 1992-'93 to $622 million in 2005-'06. That’s an increase of almost 150 percent compared to a 75 percent increase in overall levies during the same time period. Governor Doyle exempted technical colleges from levy limits in the 2005-07 state budget. Technical college boards were free to raise tax levies, and taxpayers were powerless.

This practice needs to end. I am introducing legislation to require appointed boards in Wisconsin that have taxing authority be elected bodies. The legislation includes the technical college boards and boards like the Metropolitan Milwaukee Sewerage District and the Wisconsin Center District Board. If these boards are going to raise taxes, they must be accountable to the people paying those taxes.

My proposal is not an indictment of all appointed boards. Many do a very good job. But others are placing an unfair burden on Wisconsin taxpayers, already some of the highest-taxed citizens in the country, by just about any study you want to examine.

This legislation should have bipartisan support. Taxation with representation should be a laudable, transparent, universal goal in a state with a long, proud history of honest government.

As a New Berlin Lioness, I am proud to volunteer every year at the popular New Berlin Lions Club Corn Roast Stand at the Wisconsin State Fair.

Located at the corner of Central Avenue and Second Street, the New Berlin Lions Club Corn Roast Stand sells well over 100-thousand ears of corn each year, and goes through a ton of butter and over 25 pounds of salt.

Money raised from the sales of corn goes to dozens of charities.

Here is a pictorial history of our stand.

Please visit the stand, buy an ear of corn, and say hello!