The State of Wisconsin and Milwaukee County have been dueling over programs to aid the poor.  This involves the county call center over which the County Board and the County Exec have fought for some time, and it involves the awarding of a $2.4 million job training grant.

The players are Lee Holloway, County Board Chairman, and Michael Morgan, a top aide to Governor Doyle, and Karen Timberlake, head of the Department of Health and Human Services.  Morgan and Timberlake are appointees of Governor Doyle.

Another player is, obviously, County Exec Scott Walker, who has run against Governor Doyle before and seems poised to do so again.

Swirling through the mist is the effort to privatize the call center handling inquiries from people in the county who need assistance in one form or another.  Walker has pushed that at least twice and has been rebuffed by the board in both instances.  The state is threatening to penalize the county for transgressions, imagined or real, and it appears this will happen as it now stands.

The question that comes to mind is this:

Is this really about the people of Milwaukee County or is it about Doyle trying to set the stage to show people just how bad it would be if they voted to elect Walker as the next governor?

I suspect that it is the latter, and that, if the case, simply proves out the old saw that politics is always hardball.  I'm reminded of the title to the Clinton-era book called "Blood Sport".

Frankly, this brouhaha isn't just confined to state-level politics.  It can be found in varying degrees where ever elections are held to pick people for offices.  Too many of our elected officials view themselves as the 'anointed' and come to believe that any tactic is permissible so long as it isn't illegal (and some don't stop for that little inconvenience, either).

Those who suffer in all this back and forth are the people whose welfare was to be paramount.  Elected officials, and their appointees, too often are consumed with re-election.  They seem to believe that it is so important that they stay in office that doing whatever that requires is 'job number one'; people be damned if that becomes necessary.  Once on that slippery slope, the next such decision becomes easier and each subsequent such decision is more easily taken yet.

None of us can sell his or her soul just once.  Once sold, it becomes a commodity with which to barter for more power, more prestige and more money.  Our recent economic tumble can be viewed through this prism, as well.  How many of the 535 elected to go to Washington, D.C. have not yet been infected by this siren's song?  Simple answer:  Not enough!

Those who do not succumb to this 'disease' can be seen along the way; they too often represent the 'road kill' of politics.

Maybe this speaks to term limits.  Maybe this speaks to more aggressive prosecution.  Maybe this speaks to laws that are far more clearly laid out so as to eliminate the decision-making process for the honest.  Maybe we actually vote in our own image; but, I hope that we're simply more uninformed, and maybe overly trusting than we are corrupt when we cast ballots for some of our politicians.

Caring state or hardball politics?

Politicians, of every stripe, tend to make lots of promises in order to get our votes.  Once they are in office, or even as they prepare to assume the office, we begin to see and hear the back-tracking.  That has gotten into full swing already on the national level and is beginning on the state level.

We are being reminded now that the economic downturn may not end in the next year even though we may've been led to believe that while viewing campaign commercials and listening to speeches.  I recall hearing that this could very well be changing by June, 2009, for example.

Rep. Dave Obey (D-WI), who is among the most powerful members of the House of Representatives since he heads the House Appropriations Committee, is now advising us that "the downward momentum appears too strong to end the recession anytime soon."  I don't mean to pick on Mr. Obey but this is a classic example of the back-tracking he and others are now engaged in to protect the image of the Democrats.

While we elect presidents every four years and senators every six years, we elect members of congress every two years.  That means that we have a two-year election cycle, and explains why we seem to have perpetual campaigning going on and why it costs so much to run for an office.  We see a somewhat similar situation in Wisconsin since our members of the Assembly stand for election every two years.

Candidates are probably reminding themselves that they need be careful for what they wish, since there comes the time when pipers must be paid.

The mood of the people can change several times between now and the next national election in just under two years, but the politicians who find themselves in control cannot forget that they need to tamp down the expectations they raised during the campaign season.

This time it is the Democrats who are experiencing this, and that is true on both the state and national levels.  The Republicans have something behind which they can hide during this cycle; they have no control.  They lost control because the mood of the voters had changed markedly...and it will again.

I do not intend to take any sides in this piece, but to simply state the facts as I see them.  If you feel that I stray, please express your thoughts in a comment.

~~~~~~~~~~

We are about to inaugurate the 44th President of the United States.  He, in this case, has much on his platter and has already taken quite a few steps in a relatively short period of time.  All this would indicate that his will be a well-organized administration and that things we see transmitted by picks, statements, leaks and so on are things of which we should take note.  I doubt that there will be a lot of 'wasted motion' from the Obama administration.  That does not appear to be President-Elect Obama's style nor does it appear to be the style of Rahm Emanuel who will be the back-seat driver, and the outspoken commenter when occasions require.

Among his early challenges is that of our economy.  I am reminded daily of just how intertwined our economy is with that of the world at large.  I am reminded daily that there is no such thing as an invincible company or institution.  The most revered names of my time, such as GM and GE and FedEx and Ford are being pummeled in the marketplace.  For example, $1,000 invested in GM at the end of 2007 is now worth $184 according to the Wall Street Journal this morning.  Similarly, $1,000 put into 3M is now worth $690.  That same $1,000 put into GE is worth $460 today.  A similar investment in Alcoa is now worth $273.  All these are the big industrial entities with which I grew up. 

There have been some indications that the Obama administration may well take the view that more government control is the desirable course at this point in our country's existence.  That suggests that our industrial model may see more governmental control over the products that are manufactured, the services that are offered, and the relationships of one with the other.  The buzz word has been "socialism".  That may well be too strong a term, and it was obviously designed to give people pause for thought when introduced by those on the right side of the aisle.

It is valid, I think, that we recognize there will be winners and losers as the new administration assumes its position and begins to guide the country.  There have essentially been two classes of appointees announced so far.  There have been the more conservative announcements such as that concerning defense, and there have been some liberal announcements such as that concerning the EPA.  This suggests that we'll likely be on a dual track from January 20th forward, at least for the foreseeable future.

If I knew who/what would be winners, I'd try to align myself as much as possible; similarly, if I knew the losers, I'd try to take the proper defensive measures.  But, I know neither with certainty.  I can only speculate.  And my speculations lead me to expect some of the following:

• Health care will not be as severely remade as had earlier been indicated since there are many impediments to wholesale change, with the economy and the country's finances being the chief reasons I see.  We just don't have the money to do wholesale change.
• Organized labor will be a beneficiary given the solid support received from those quarters by the incoming administration.  The labor department pick appears as though it could've been hand-selected by labor, for example.
• Our country will be driven to be 'greener' whether or not that is indicated by thoughtful consideration.  The Browner selection virtually assures this direction.
• Education will continue to be driven from the top down rather than from the bottom up.  Choice and charter will not be in much favor so far as I can determine.
• Stimulus packages will be aimed at infrastructure projects thus being of significant benefit to the trades and unions, and with much longer payback periods for the rest of us.  Those projects will be as 'green' as possible given the Browner appointment.
• Foreign policy will be a bit softer around the edges than during the past eight years, I suspect.  We'll be more concerned with what others think of us and that will drive changes.

We're in for an interesting ride into the future, and there will be some new winners and some new losers.

Above all this, my one hope is that you and me will be winners as the citizens of this 'changed' America, and not just those who wield the power.

Time will tell.

The global warming 'debate' seems to be rather slanted judging from reports in the mainstream media.  We seldom hear from those who question the premise, and those few references tend, from my perspective, to be used in an effort to 'debunk' the debunkers.  (The references to UN IPCC that follow, by the way, are for the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.)

The full report of the U.S. Senate Minority includes the dissent of more than 650 scientists, some of whom are former supporters of the premise, as contrasted with the 52 scientists who wrote the Majority report.  Snippets from the Minority report as shown on that website include:

• "I am a skeptic...Global warming has become a new religion." - Nobel Prize Winner for Physics, Ivar Giaever.
• "Since I am no longer affiliated with any organization nor receiving any funding, I can speak quite frankly...As a scientist I remain skeptical." - Atmospheric Scientist Dr. Joanne Simpson, the first woman in the world to receive a PhD in meteorology and formerly of NASA who has authored more than 190 studies and has been called "among the most preeminent scientists of the last 100 years."
• "Warming fears are the 'worst scientific scandal in the history'...When people come to know what the truth is, they will feel deceived by science and scientists." - UN IPCC Japanese Scientist Dr. Kiminori Itoh, an award-winning PhD environmental physical chemist.
• "The IPCC has actually become a closed circuit; it doesn't listen to others.  It doesn't have open minds...I am really amazed that the Nobel Peace Prize has been given on scientifically incorrect conclusions by people who are not geologists." - Indian geologist Dr. Arun D. Ahluwalia at Punjab University and a board member of if UN-supported International Year of the Planet.
• "The models and forecasts of the UN IPCC 'are incorrect because they are only based on mathematical models and presented results at scenarios that do not include, for example, solar activity." - Victor Manuel Velasco Herrera, a researcher at the Institute of Geophysics of the National Autonomous University of Mexico.
• "It is a blatant lie put forth in the media that makes it seem there is only a fringe of scientists who don't buy into anthropogenic global warming." - U.S. Government Atmospheric Scientist Stanley B. Goldenberg of the Hurricane Research Division of NOAA.
• "Even doubling or tripling the amount of carbon dioxide will virtually have little impact, as water vapour and water condensed on particles as clouds dominate the worldwide scene and always will." - Geoffrey G. Duffy, a professor in the Department of Chemical and Materials Engineering of the University of Auckland, NZ.
• "After reading [UN IPCC chairman] Pachauri's asinine comment [comparing skeptics to] Flat Earthers, it's hard to remain quiet." - Climate statistician Dr. William M. Briggs, who specializes in the statistics of forecast evaluation, serves on the American Meteorological Society's Probability and Statistics Committee and as an Associate Editor of Monthly Weather Review.
• "For how many years must the planet cool before we begin to understand that the planet is not warming?  For how many years must cooling go on?" Geologist Dr. David Gee the chairman of the science committee of the 2008 International Geological Congress who has authored 130 plus peer reviewed papers, and is currently at Uppsala University in Sweden.
• "Gore prompted me to start delving into the science again and I quickly found myself solidly in the skeptic camp...Climate models can at best be useful for explaining climate changes after the fact." - Meteorologist Hajo Smit of Holland, who reversed his belief in man-made warming to become a skeptic, is a former member of the Dutch UN IPCC committee.
• "Many [scientists] are now searching for a way to back out quietly (from promoting warming fears), without having their professional careers ruined." - Atmospheric physicist James A. Peden, formerly of the Space Research and Coordination Center in Pittsburgh.
• "Creating an ideology pegged to carbon dioxide is a dangerous nonsense...The present alarm on climate change is an instrument of social control, a pretext for major business and political battle.  It became an ideology, which is concerning." - Environmental Scientist Professor Delagado Domingos of Portugal, the founder of the Numerical Weather Forecast group, has more than 150 published articles.
• "CO2 emissions make absolutely no difference one way or another...Every scientist knows this, but it doesn't pay to say so...Global warming, as a political vehicle, keeps Europeans in the driver's seat and developing nations walking barefoot." - Dr. Takeda Kunihiko, vice-chancellor of the Institute of Science and Technology Research at Chubu University in Japan.
• "The [global warming] scaremongering has its justification in the fact that it is something that generates funds." - Award-winning Paleontologist Dr. Eduardo Tonni, of the Committee for Scientific Research in Buenos Aires and head of the Paleontology Department at the University of La Plata.

These are not crackpots; these are well-educated, thinking people who are calling out their peers.  These are people who are very concerned with what the Global Warming movement may succeed in causing to be wrought on the planet.

Could it really hurt to slow this rush to judgment even though Al Gore is fully invested, both psychically and financially, in the 'movement'?

How is it that a world that takes centuries to embrace religions has adopted this "religion" in a decade or less?

And, we're going to get 'change' if the Democrats have their way...and that seems likely.

Saxby Chambliss (R-GA) retained his seat in the senate yesterday so the Democrats will not have the magic number necessary to absolutely control the senate.  The outcome in Minnesota is still somewhat in question, but, at the rate that new votes for the Democrat candidate are being 'found', I suspect that he'll prevail.

The problem with Republicans in the senate has always been the number who have worked hard to earn the right to be called by that ugly name, "RINO"; "Republicans In Name Only".  Those people are still there and they are still beyond the ability of the Republican leadership to 'control'.  Even though the Democrats will technically be unable to override filibuster attempts, the RINOs will often tip the scales by bolting from the 'party line'.  Those three or four people tend to be more liberal in their thinking than conservative.

So, we are going to see the 'change' we voted for in November.  The only questions remaining, in my mind, are just what that 'change' will be, how quickly it will occur, and how much it will cost.

The magic "first 100 days" comes into play so far as answering the question of how quickly change will occur.

The Democrat leaders are busy shaping what they'll propose, developing the time lines for each, and determining whether or not they'll go for a few all-encompassing bills or take smaller bills up, pass those and bask in the victories during the course of those first 100 days.

The likely items include the vaunted "economic stimulus plan", a bill requiring electric utilities to be using renewable sources for at least 15% of their power by 2020, a big push on funding and hurdle-clearing for embryonic stem cell programs and increases in the funding and reach of the State Children's Health Insurance Program (SCHIP).

After the meeting between governors and the president-elect yesterday, I presume we'll also see some kind of state-directed stimulus programs proposed, possibly as part of the overall stimulus package.

Change is around the corner.  The Democrats understand that they will be gaged by what they accomplish in the coming two-year period, so far as the elections that hit two years down the road for the entire house of representatives and for one-third of the senate seats in Congress.

As always, these are interesting times in which we live.

Our political system creates winners and it creates losers.  It has done that since there was a political system.  It does that no matter the party in power.  We are watching the reshuffling of the seats of power in Washington now, and that is a great thing to watch since it did not involve a military coup or the forceful overthrow of one regime in favor of another.

The winners and losers are being resorted as the result of the most recent election.  It is interesting to me that I see many of the same faces that I recall seeing over the course of time.  They seem to ebb and flow almost like the tides.  They may be "out of favor" for awhile and then they're back "in favor".  In their cases, there is relatively little difference between the two except that there may be more prestige when they're "in favor".  Money always seems to flow in their direction although it can be diminished when they are "in favor" if that means they hold an office in the government of our country.

We shouldn't anguish over their plight for too long since they seem to make up for any financial duress suffered when they 'retire' from the government position.

Government employees are adept at remaining winners.  Some in Milwaukee County walk away with a million dollars in their pocket at retirement.  Few are ever laid off even though that threat hovers every once in awhile.  All have solid benefit programs.  Few seem to be overworked.  It seems almost impossible to "privatize" any of these positions as we see from the trials and tribulations of Scott Walker as Milwaukee County Executive

Some winners seem adept at remaining winners almost without regard to the party in control.

Some losers seem adept at remaining losers, too.

The perennial losers of whom I am thinking are us...the taxpayers.  It seems we are always coming out on the 'short end of the stick', doesn't it?

Just over the course of three days in November, we learned why we are in the column called "losers".

MATC was given the seemingly perpetual right to tax us to the tune of at least $5.7 million every year since we are blessed to be part of that taxing district.  Us taxpayers took another one in the shorts!

Governor Doyle was quoted as saying "the pain must be shared" in speaking of the current $5.4 billion expected shortfall in the next biennial budget.  We know to whom he was speaking...us taxpayers!

Then to add insult to injury, three gentlemen wrote an article called "How to raise money for our state" that was published on JSOline on November 22nd.  I tote up the great ideas they espoused:

• the Doyle proposal to increase taxes on oil companies and hospitals to the tune of hundreds of millions of dollars
• a sales tax increase of 1% that would raise something on the order of $800 million per year
• the extension of the sales tax to non-medical professional services like tax preparation and accounting services that would raise some $300 million per year
• the extension of the sales tax to business services that would raise $230 million
• closing business tax "loopholes" for companies doing business in and out of Wisconsin (so-called "combined reporting") that would generate an estimated "several hundred" million dollars a year.
• elimination of something that is called the "domestic production deduction" that would 'only' impact companies with over $100 million in assets and that would yield "at least $40 million"
• changing the taxing of businesses from that of taxing profits to a system where business receipts would be taxed instead (so that a business not making a profit would still pay taxes) which would generate some $400 million
• increasing the top rate on personal income tax from 6.75% to 7.75% ( a nearly 15% increase) which would raise another $180 million
• taxing all capital gains thus adding some $280 million to the treasury
• restoring the tax on the first 50% of social security earnings to get another $100 million
• elimination of a thing called the "itemized deduction credit" that would 'only' hit people earning more than $100,000 per year thus generating $320 million
• bringing back the tax on inheritances that would generate another $95 million
• and, last but certainly not least, restoring the annual inflation indexing of our already highest in the nation tax on gasoline that would bring in another $32 million for every penny of gas tax (that would mean something in the range $1 billion annually if the gas tax is now $0.30 per gallon)

I certainly appreciate their attempt to be helpful but I doubt that our governor and the senate and the assembly majorities need any help to raise taxes.

What is forgotten, ALWAYS, is that it is us losers...us taxpayers...who pay every penny of every tax levied in the state in one form or another.

Taxes always find their way to the lowest rung on the economic ladder, and that is us, the consumer and the taxpayer.

There certainly are winners and losers.  Wouldn't it be wonderful if we could experience being a winner once in awhile?

And...isn't it amazing that we never learn how much could be saved if some of the jobs would be eliminated, and if some of the benefits would be reduced, and if some of the massive 'give-away' programs were curtailed?

Yup.  I'm hallucinating, all right!

There is more and more speculation as to the potential that we'll see a 'clean sweep' by Democratic candidates on Tuesday, November 4th at both the state and federal levels.  I hope that isn't the way it turns out, but I'm tiring of being beaten about the head and shoulders every time I read a newspaper article or watch the bulk of the television news items.  Maybe that is the intent.  If us conservatives can be sufficiently demoralized, maybe we'll just stay home.  Not this conservative!

What do I mean by 'clean sweep'?  I refer to the potential that both the Assembly and the Senate in Wisconsin will see a sufficient Democratic majority that will be able to pass anything they wish in spite of the number of Republican votes that could be massed, with assurances on most such items that those will be signed into law by the Democratic Governor Doyle.

Similarly, I refer to Democratic victories in both the U.S. House and Senate that will be Republican-proof and that will likely find favor with a Democratic President Obama.

Jay Weber has done a good job on setting forth 23 items that could be part of the triumvirate of Sen. Harry Reid (D), Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D) and a President Obama and you can find those by clicking here.  Things included on Jay's list include renegotiating NAFTA, ending secret ballots in union organizing, government-run healthcare encroachments, reintroduction of the 'Fairness Doctrine' to control conservative access to the airways, and so on.

At the state level, we could easily see state-run health care, the increase in costs of education, ever larger portions of our income going to state and local taxes,  more and more loss of personal freedoms and so.

There has been, in most of our history, a certain "check and balance" relationship in most of our governments so that not everything that was proposed was ever likely to be passed.  That 'protection' could disappear for years if we see the 'clean sweep' at the state or federal levels, or both, as the result of our national election on November 4th.  Our country tends not to flourish well under such governments regardless of party in power.

Vote your conscience next Tuesday!

I had intended to scan a copy of the sample ballot for Germantown however that wasn't sufficiently legible.  So, we'll list the offices for which there are candidate selections to be made by all of us who are registered to vote in the village.

You may elect to vote a straight ticket including, in the order found on the ballot:

• Democratic
• Republican
• Wisconsin Green
• Libertarian

The race for President and Vice President, in the order found on the ballot:

• Barack Obama/Joe Biden (Democratic)
• John McCain/Sarah Palin (Republican)
• Cynthia McKinney/Rosa Clemente (Wisconsin Green)
• Bob Barr/Wayne A. Root (Libertarian)
• Brian Moore/Stewart A. Alexander (Socialist Party USA)
• Gloria LaRiva/Robert Moses (Party for Socialism, & Liberation)
• Ralph Nader/Matt Gonzalez (Independent)
• Chuck Baldwin/Darrell L. Castle (Constitution Party)
• Jeffrey J. Wamboldt/David J. Klimisch (We, the People)
• Write-in________________

Representative in Congress District 5, in the order found on the ballot:

• F. James Sensenbrenner, Jr. (Republican)
• Robert R. Raymond (Independent)
• Write-in________________

State Senator District 8, in the order found on the ballot:

• Sheldon A. Wasserman (Democratic)
• Alberta Darling (Republican)
• Write-in________________

Representative to the Assembly District 24, in the order found on the ballot:

• Charlene S. Brady (Democratic)
• Dan Knodl (Republican)
• Write-in________________

District Attorney:

• Todd K. Martens (Republican)
• Write-in________________

County Clerk:

• Brenda J. Jaszewski (Republican)
• Write-in_________________

Treasurer:

• Janice Gettelman (Republican)
• Write-in_________________

Register of Deeds:

• Sharon Martin (Republican)
• Write-in_________________

Referendum - Germantown School District

Question #1:

Shall the following Initial Resolution be approved?

INITIAL RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $22,500,000

BE IT RESOLVED by the School Board of the Germantown School District, Washington County, Wisconsin that there shall be issued pursuant to Chapter 67 of the Wisconsin Statutes, general obligation bonds in an amount not to exceed $22,500,000 for the public purpose of paying the cost of constructing a new elementary school on school district property next to Kinderberg Park; technology, safety and security initiatives District wide; and acquiring furnishings, fixtures and equipment.

Yes ____

No   ____

Question #2

Shall the following Resolution be approved?

RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE SCHOOL DISTRICT BUDGET TO EXCEED REVENUE LIMIT BY $500,000

FOR RECURRING PURPOSES

BE IT RESOLVED by the School Board of the Germantown School District, Washington County, Wisconsin that the revenues included in the School District budget for the 2010-2011 school year and thereafter be authorized to exceed the revenue limit specified in Section 121.91, Wisconsin Statutes, by $500,000 a year, for recurring purposes consisting of costs associated with the new elementary school.

Yes ____

No   ____

~~~~~~~~~~

The ballot is two-sided as you would expect from the many questions.

ACORN, the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now, has been in the news for several of the past election cycles and finds itself there again.  Is this simply a politically-driven campaign or does ACORN merit this attention?  How does ACORN influence elections, if it does?

The Journal Sentinel editorialized yesterday on this subject, and essentially took the position that this is much ado over nothing.  The editorial staff cites the recent revelation that ACORN hired seven felons to serve as 'deputy registrars' and justifies this with its further discussion about how the registration cards are subjected to review before being handed over to the election officials, etc.

That seems to miss the fact that 49 'deputy registrars' in Milwaukee were referred to the authorities for possible voter registration irregularities discovered by the Election Commission.

It is interesting to me that ACORN has no political agenda but seems to somehow find itself registering Democrat-leaning voters in over 95% of the cases.  It specifically targets parts of the communities in which it works that typically vote heavily for Democrats.  Barack Obama's campaign actually donated some $832,000 to an ACORN affiliate to 'get out the vote'.  It originally tried to obfuscate the reason for the payment but finally admitted that it was to be used to 'get out the vote'.  We can surmise which voters that money will be used to identify and push to the polls.

Why did the first 'solution' offered to end the economic crisis in our economy include an automatic funding mechanism to get more and more money to ACORN?  Do you think there might be a political agenda at work here?  That was removed as the result of the initial failure of that 'solution' to get sufficient votes.  That speaks well for Jim Sensenbrenner voting no.  Yes, I know that the Democrat in Appleton voted no, as well, but he was given permission to do that only because he is in a tough race for re-election at the end of his first two years in the House of Representatives and Ms. Pelosi needs to be able to count on his re-election.

Finally, there are legal actions being taken against ACORN in other parts of the country over the issues that have dogged this organization for years.  Why were only the 'deputy registrars' referred for legal scrutiny while the organization proper again was given a pass in our state?

Why has the state Government Accountability Board not required voter registration lists be checked for irregularities since early-August of this year?  Why have voter registration officers across the state been told to not cross-reference with the motor vehicle department database?  There was time for that yet it didn't happen...it isn't being permitted even where community officials have asked to be able to do the verification.

The action brought, finally, by the Attorney General has been 'slow-walked' through the system so as to assure there'll be nothing to interfere with the 'system' until at least after the race for President is decided. 

Beyond all this lies a simple solution, so far blocked by the party in power in Wisconsin (Democrat if you've any question).

What is that simple solution?  It is voter photo identification.  It also could be a dose of 'no same day registration' that would give our officials the opportunity to verify the information provided by those who register at the pools the same day as they vote.

Last, but possibly most important is this:  Wisconsin voters are so evenly divided as to make any illegally-cast votes significantly more important to the outcome.  If we again have a difference of a few thousand voters deciding the outcome, a few thousand illegally-registering and voting people could easily change the outcome thus impacting every honest vote in the state.  And, there can be no credible argument that illegal votes do not occur.  We all know better...or should!

Much is being written and discussed during this Presidential election period about health care reform.  Barack Obama prefers a government-run version of reform.  John McCain prefers a private market reform that would use tax law changes to accomplish nearly-universal coverage...the stated goal of both approaches.

I saw a news report this morning that serves as a great reminder of one of the things we need to be mindful of if we are going to move to government-run health care.  Here is that article:

Medco CEO argues for federally mandated end of life care protocols for Medicare patients.

CQ (9/17, Weyl) reports that in a recent speech at the National Press Club, chairman and CEO of Medco Health Inc., David B. Snow Jr., said that "the federal government should set protocols based on medical science to guide Medicare treatment for patients at the end of their lives." Snow elaborated that "30 percent of Medicare spending -- about $130 billion per year -- is spent on patients in the last year of their lives, often when recovery is no longer possible." But, nearly all of that money could be saved by establishing guidelines "of when to forgo further treatment." Snow also proposed "increasing electronic medical coordination, passing tort reform, promoting healthy lifestyles, and encouraging compliance among patients," which would save an estimated "$1 trillion per year, or half of current healthcare spending."

I have written of the "R" word before.  Rationing is a very common practice where tax dollars are used to fund health care.  I recall the situation recently reported from Oregon where a patient with cancer was not accorded medicines that likely would prolong life, but would be accorded coverage for 'assisted suicide' since that is legal in Oregon.

This isn't intended as a debate on the efficacy of withholding treatment that would extend life.  It is intended to provoke some thought about the need for such decisions if we go down the government-run health care road.  There will never be enough tax money available.  We see that in the debate over a new school building, and in road repair discussions and so on.

When there is not enough money in a government-run health plan, the patient will pay the price.  The organizational structure won't be pared down and taxes won't be increased because it is politically unpalatable.  The weakest link in this chain is the patient who has no way to fight the decision.  A "dispassionate" board who have never met the patient will make "an informed" decision and move on to the next agenda item.

Medicare is government-run healthcare.  Medicaid is government-run health care.  Between the two programs, more than 50% of the people in the United States already have health care coverage provided by the government. 

So, we debate the question all the while that government-run health care grows essentially unchecked.  The next step in Wisconsin, by the way, after BadgerCare Plus is to be BadgerCare Connect...if the politicians on the Democrat side of the aisle in Madison have their way.

Incrementalism is alive and well in Wisconsin.  It reminds me of the old saw that asks how one eats an elephant?  The answer, of course is: one bite at a time.

Labor Day has arrived and signals the 'end of summer' as nights get chillier and children and grandchildren go back to their respective schools.  Ideally, we will enjoy a luxurious fall season with leaves ablaze and many beautiful days before snowflakes once again arrive.

Labor Day was formally decreed across the United States in 1894 by then President Grover Cleveland.  The new federal holiday was swiftly approved by Congress and has been with us since.

Labor Day has, like so many special holidays, lost a lot of its meaning for many people.  For some, it is simply another three-day week-end.  For others, it is the time when the Muscular Dystrophy fund drive is hosted by Jerry Lewis, and so on. 

I have never been a member of organized labor, unless by accident during my six-week 'career' at the Estwing hammer plant in Rockford, IL in the early 1960s.  I have friends who were and still are members of unions.  I have many acquaintances who were and/or are members of unions.  My feelings about the labor movement tend toward the position that they were very important during the later years of the Industrial Revolution and during the early third of the 20th century.  Since that time, I am convinced that unions, in general, have lost the essence of what made them so dominant during those times.  Child labor laws have curtailed that practice.  Employers have come out of the dark ages in most cases and recognize they must treat their employees as humans who are part of the reason for the success or failure of their business.

Among the strongest unions today is the SEIU (Service Employees International Union) run by Mr. Andy Stern.  He has proved to be a consummate organizer and is one of the brightest people in organized labor today of which I'm aware.  I see entities such as 9 to 5 with the soon to be held referendum that would bind employers in Milwaukee to offering sick leave for all employees.  These organizations tend to signal the changes that have been occurring in our country.  The strongest union is one that organized workers in the 'service' sector.  The old United Auto Workers (UAW) struggles with the malaise felt throughout that industry.  Coal miners no longer have the clout that once was theirs.

I see the Democrats in Congress still carrying the water for labor with such things as the open vote effort that would certainly favor organizers and quiet the opposition.  Political power changes hands periodically and that has a great deal to do with the ebb and flow of organized labor.  Labor organizations still have the ability to mobilize tens of thousands of 'volunteers' to get out the vote.  Republicans can only stand in the shadows and lament that they do not have similar clout.

I wonder where organized labor will be in a decade or two or three.  I don't know but I do recognize that change will continue at the same or a faster pace.  Will organized labor find ways to make inroads in India or China?  Will those governments permit such organizing?  If the government of China permits organizing, I wonder at what cost to the workers?  Will unions in the U.S. come together to maintain a level of strength that many have already lost individually?  If so, where will the new leaders come from?  I doubt that heavy industry will be the source of leadership; it more likely comes from the service sector of our economy given the massive shifts in employment in our country.

At any rate, I trust you will have or have had a very pleasant Labor Day 2008.

You and me are really great people.  Why is that?  Well, we seem to help bail out just about everything that bangs on Washington's door.

A short time ago, the sub-prime mortgage companies received their bail out; likely the first of their bail outs since Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac are still in the throes of that mess.

Now the automobile industry is in the queue for what yesterday was about $25 billion and today has already climbed to $40 billion according to the press.

Is this a proper use for the tax dollars that are extracted from each of us?  Should we be funding these bail outs for industries that essentially have gone bad because of their own doing?  If you or me were responsible for these 'disasters', we'd probably step up to the plate and take what was coming to us.  But we didn't force people to be too gullible and let people sell them homes they couldn't afford.  We didn't cause the oil price jump because we didn't approve new refineries for thirty years or drill for new fields of oil?

If any of us should be paying 'the price', it seems that the finger of blame needs to be pointed at Washington and the people we send there to represent us.  That group has caused these issues to surface through favors to those putting money into their campaign accounts.  That group has caved in to the environmental groups that are fanatical to the extreme in their pursuit of the ultimate goal they espouse.

Oh, that's right.  We are to blame because we continue to return the same people to Washington in spite of what they do and don't do.  We don't require any 'reparations' for their actions.

Maybe we all need to get a little more involved and a little more vocal starting with our upcoming local elections.  Too may of us simply shake our heads and fume; we really need to be more active in our precincts and districts and villages or cities, and in our counties and states.

I saw a quote in the past few days that went along these lines:  "Too many people have died for our freedoms for us to not vote."

Cigarette Taxes...

The state raised cigarette taxes to $1.77 per pack and promptly budgeted/spent all the new money that would bring in.  The only problem is that this 230% increase in the tax rate only generated a 48% increase in the tax money received!  Now, we're stuck with a lot of people circumventing the tax entirely by buying cigarettes out-of-state or over the Internet.  And, we have added to an already staggering budget shortfall.

Makes a lot sense, huh?

~~~~~

Clean Air Act Gone Wild...

One of my favorite agencies, the EPA, has decided that it now has free rein over so-called greenhouse gases.  This came to pass as the result of a 'namby-pamby' U.S. Supreme Court decision last year that didn't go quite far enough to ward off this rampant agency.  EPA has now released its Advanced Notice of Proposed Rule-making, an ANPR in the jargon, and this is astonishing.  EPA would regulate airplanes, trains, ships, boats, tractors, farm and mining equipment, lawn mowers, garden equipment, portable power generators, fork lift trucks, construction equipment and logging equipment.

EPA estimates that more than 500,000 new permits will be required.  Among the supposed new requirements are these:

• Lawn mower standards:  "...each application could require a different unit of measure tied to the machine's mission or output-such as grams per kilogram of cuttings from a 'standard' lawn for lawn mowers."
• Truck speed standards:  "Speed limiters are generally available on new trucks or as a low cost retro-fit..."
• Single family homes become polluters:  "...we believe that small commercial establishments...and indeed, a large single-family residence could exceed this [CO2 pollution] threshold."

All of this means that our taxes go up exponentially since the EPA will be forced to grow staff and facilities to handle this new found mission.  And, it means that we'll all pay more for products and services.

And, none of this was ever the intent of Congress nor has it had the opportunity to inject itself to this point.

~~~~~

Compact Fluorescent Bulbs...

Regular, nice old incandescent light bulbs (starting with 100 watt bulbs) become illegal to manufacture in 2012.  The National Center for Policy Analysis (NCPA) points out that this means we can forget about spending 20 cents or so for the old bulb while buying the new CFLs for something on the order of $3.00+ (remember that these are usually subsidized today).

While CFLs save energy, they have costs associated with them that make all this really questionable:

• The average lifetime is not 10,000 hours, but "up to 10,000 hours"
• The energy savings and lifetime of CFLs has been exaggerated in some applications
• The CFL only achieves the claimed efficiency if burned continuously for long periods
• If left on for only 5 minute periods, the CFL will burn out just as fast as an incandescent bulb
• CFLs dim over their lifetime and do not deliver what is promised

And, we're adding mercury to the environment which supposedly will be handled by proper disposal.  Yeah, sure!  How many of us has disposed of a burned out CFL improperly already?  How is that ever going to be policed?

~~~~~

Clean Water Restoration Act...

The EPA is back again.  The original Clean Water Act of 1972 had gotten to be very broadly interpreted under various EPA rulings.  "Navigable waters" had morphed into isolated wetlands, dry lake beds and drainage ditches, for example.  Now, two Democrat members of Congress have introduced the bill named in the title.  It would replace the phrase "navigable waters" with the phrase "waters of the United States"  This means "all waters subject to ebb and flow of the tide, the territorial seas, and all interstate and intrastate waters and their tributaries, including lakes, rivers, streams (including intermittent streams), mudflats, sloughs, prairie potholes, wet meadows, playa lakes, natural ponds and all impoundments of the foregoing".  Reason magazine, August/September 2008

If this bill were to pass in its current state, it would very likely result in massive new regulations for boaters, fishermen, hunters, and even conservationists.  This act would leave it to the courts to decide what constitutes "waters of the United States".

Thanks to Ronald Bailey for writing the article "Feds in a Fishbowl" in Reason.

~~~~~

Anti-Meat Campaign...

Finally, from the Heartland Institute, this on global warming activists' latest efforts.  They are launching new efforts to restrict meat production and consumption, building on prior efforts to restrict various agriculture activities that supposedly would reduce 'greenhouse gases'.

More on this can be found on the worldchanging.org website.

If we continue to have a ban on drilling more oil, we won't be able to buy meat anyway, so maybe this isn't as bad as I first thought.

Maybe we really do have too many crackpots in Congress...or too many people are being paid through campaign contributions and don't have the commonsense necessary to sort out the good from the crazy.

Oregon has had government involved in health care for quite a few years.  The state electorate also approved the concept of state sanctioned suicide several years ago.

Recently, the board that reviews the medications that are approved for state residents made a determination that was controversial...in my mind if no where else.  The board, in essence, said that, given the cost of a certain medication, it would approve suicide for this patient but would not approve use of the medicine given its relative newness and the lack of convincing data as to the outcome.  It had essentially set a price on the human life involved.

Today I read the story concerning Denver Children's Hospital and heart transplants in infants that use the heart from another infant that died a 'cardiac-related death'.  This differs from a heart harvested from a brain-dead infant in which that heart is beating until removed from the donor body.  A decision has been made that the donor that has been pronounced dead and has been in that state for only 75 seconds, is a valid heart donor for purposes of this new program.  The earlier line that had existed required death be determined only after some five minutes during which time the heart did not re-start itself.  In this instance, the length of time a person had been deemed 'dead' had been reduced to assure that the harvested heart had a decent chance of functioning in the new body.  The three cases in which this approach has been employed resulted in three infants alive today.  The decisions to withdraw life support were made by the parents in all three instances.

We know so much more today than we did a decade ago.  We can do things from a medical perspective that were impossible then, and these procedures have become commonplace now.  We are, in this area, pushing the envelope as it has never before been pushed.

I know there are at least two sides to these issues.  I have good friends whose daughter lives today because of transplanted organs that were available on a timely basis.  I can't even begin to comprehend being placed in the middle of such decisions, and I earnestly hope that never befalls me.

And this leads to my general question:  Is there a line we dare not cross?  If so, where is or was that line?  Am I comfortable with an appointed board making life and death decisions about me?  Who among us can claim the right to make such a decision?  How do medical ethicists deal with these kinds of issues?

I don't profess to have the answers to these questions.  If you do, and you're willing to share, I'd appreciate your comments.

Is 'perversion' too strong a term?  I don't think so.

The EPA has turned down attempts by the State of Wisconsin to relax the ill-conceived S.E. Wisconsin requirement for 'reformulated' gasoline even as we are virtually in full attainment.  That was probably dwarfed by comparison to the decision it announced that it was denying the State of Texas' request for a cutback on the amount of ethanol required to be blended with gasoline.

There is a radio commercial playing in our market that is sponsored by the ethanol lobby that makes the case, in essence, that we, who question the use of corn to make ethanol, are over-reacting and need to check our facts.  I am angered every time I hear that commercial, including this morning as it played while I was shaving...with a blade.  That could've hurt!

The simple facts are being ignored by the EPA, Congress and the President.  And, these aren't stupid people.  This is intentional ignorance.  Our food prices are going up, and it is caused in part by the insistence that ethanol be blended with gasoline even as us taxpayers pay the price for the ethanol support being paid on every gallon.  The other part of the increase is obviously that caused by the fact that Democrats have so far refused to relax their stance against oil drilling here and now.

Back to ethanol.  It is causing many cattle ranchers to reduce their herd size because they can't afford the feed to grow them for market.  The prices for chicken and beef are rising at a rapid pace.  I looked at flank steak a few days ago since it always used to be a relatively lower priced cut of meat.  That is a thing of the past.  I bought chicken breasts a few days ago and was astounded at the prices I saw on the packages.

I know that my mileage with reformulated gas is less than it was before that edict; about 10% worse.  I know that ethanol is much less efficient in terms of the energy it generates than is gasoline.  So, I am burning more and getting less.  A double-whammy in our part of Wisconsin.

The EPA stated that there was "no compelling evidence" that the mandate for ethanol is causing "severe economic harm".  That had to have been spoken by a federal employee who is reimbursed for his or her mileage...from our tax dollars  These people simply have no contact with reality, or manage to suppress the lessons they really learn in order to be a "dutiful servant of the people".

As if all this isn't enough to put me into a deep funk, I am confronted with the idiocy that is called political campaigning where people talk about wind power, sun power, and bio-fuels while not mentioning oil or coal or nuclear power.  How in the world are we supposed to leap forward a decade or more when technology is not yet even available to soften our landing?

We are in real danger of becoming a third world nation if the current policies are not changed and changed quickly!  Our economy simply cannot withstand the political assault it is under.  And this is not a political assault from another country...it comes from within.

So, I don't think calling the EPA the Environmental Perversion Agency is much of a reach. 

And I, for one, am very, very tired of the elected people we all put into office forgetting who it is they represent, and what it is we want.

Have I lost my mind?  I hope not.

My concern is this:  With gas prices dropping and now at the mid $3.80s per gallon, will we lose our impetus to keep the pressure on our elected officials to get more drilling going and to relax the myriad rules on new refineries?

We are a strange group, we humans.  We got used to paying $4.20 per gallon for regular for a week or two and now we're "saving" nearly $.40 a gallon.  We forget very quickly that only a year or so ago we were paying a dollar or more less for our gas.

We seem to forget that we were upset over ethanol and its impact on our mileage and on our food prices.

We seem to forget that reformulated gas is costing us more and causing lower miles per gallon.

Are we going to meekly go about our daily business now until prices go back up?  Are we going to give our politicians a 'free pass'? 

Are we going to let the presidential candidates avoid dealing with this issue...even though they'll make promises that'll probably be forgotten in a week or two?

Are we going to demand that our state representatives push hard to get the ethanol lobby off our backs?

The people have spoken; loudly and clearly.  There is now a roughly two-thirds majority across all political lines that want oil drilling and refining capacity increases to commence immediately.  That two-thirds majority has had enough of the 'fluff' that passes for 'bipartisanship' in politics today.  That two-thirds majority fills its tanks every week and is very cognizant of the sacrifices it has been forced to make while its elected representatives in Congress dither.

Demagoguery has run rampant...even more so than has come to be the usual level of demagoguery in Washington, D.C.  We witness the daily back and forth of polite name-calling that passes for bipartisanship.  I have yet to be able to understand why it is that conservatives almost always end up on the wrong end of the 'bipartisanship stick'.  Why is it that a conservative-driven effort is demagogued by the liberals but a liberal-driven effort is almost always labeled a 'bipartisanship' effort?

Now we see an almost amazing display of partisan chutzpah with Nancy Pelosi's pronouncement yesterday that the Republican efforts to increase drilling are "a hoax" designed to take the peoples' minds off other Republican problems.  Even the poorly-equipped Senate Majority Leader, Harry Reid, has softened his rhetoric in the face of public sentiment.  But not the erstwhile Nancy Pelosi who is re-elected by her ultra-liberal San Francisco district by super majorities in the 70%+ range.

Nancy Pelosi will continue to be a member of Congress for so long as she wishes, and needn't give a whit about the will of the people...other than for the ultra-liberals in her home district.  How are these 'reigns of terror' to be dealt with under our constitution?  By the sacking of Nancy Pelosi as the Speaker of the House by the Democrats who elected her to that position.  Even Steny Hoyer would seem good by comparison!

The House Dems are frightened to death by the power of Nancy Pelosi.  So much so, in fact, that they willfully ignore their own constituents who are part of that two-thirds majority.  Unless and until the other Democrat members of the House of Representatives feel the real passion of their constituents on the subject of oil drilling and refining capacity, nothing will happen to improve prices at the pump on a long-term basis.  We have five of those people in Wisconsin.  We also have two Democrat Senators who might just seek a meeting with Nancy Pelosi to express their concern...if they have any real concern about what you and I pay for our gasoline.

The all too short and simple explanation is this:  they don't care about you and me except when we cast our votes.  And, they have come to understand that they'd have to commit some horrific act in order to be defeated after serving two terms in office.  They couldn't care less about you and me because they are beholden to Nancy Pelosi for their committee appointments and they know that she can influence their campaign funding situation come election time.

That is another thing that is problematic.  Our Members of the House of Representatives are in constant campaign mode.  They are campaigning for re-election even before being sworn in for the next term to which they've just been elected or re-elected.  The reverse problem exists with our Senators; they know that we have short memories so they can easily vote against our will for four years and then 'straighten up and fly right' for two years to get re-elected.  It has happened so regularly that we could nearly do away with re-election and simply wait for retirement to open a seat.

Now, we are looking at the very real possibility that the President and both houses of Congress will be under Democrat control.  We are looking at the very real possibility that both houses of Congress will also be 'veto proof' if the Democrats sweep as they suspect they will.

This seems to me to be too great a price to pay for the reminder that we shouldn't ever be so silly as to permit this to occur.  But...it seems we never learn.  It seems we love to be taught the same lesson over and over again.  It must be akin to our need to push on a sore spot or bite down on the tooth that aches.

We are, by all signs, involved in an oil cost run-up driven by demand being greater than supply.  It is exacerbated for us Americans because our monetary policy has seen an intentional softening of the dollar (our money is worth less than other peoples' money, so it takes more of it to buy a barrel of crude oil).  I paid $4.20 per gallon yesterday with the price of crude oil standing at about $130 +/- per barrel.  Predictions of crude oil prices of $150 per barrel or more are seen or heard regularly now.  And, the cost of oil could well be higher than that by year-end.

How did we get to this point?  We got there by congressional law making, by presidents rolling over and signing those bills, and by our country's increasing needs/demand for gasoline and diesel fuel.  Why would we permit ourselves to become part of such a quagmire?

Politics!  Politics played by those on both sides of the aisle.  Conservatives seem to have lost their voices.  Liberals never seem to lose their voices.

Laws were re-written more than thirty years ago to make it nearly impossible for a new refinery to be built.  Those were the result of congress being rolled by the environmentalists and presidents either believing the rhetoric of the day or fearing the backlash should they stand up to the rhetoric.  This has continued to this very day.  We are forbidden from drilling within 200 miles of the California and Florida coastlines but the Chinese are already doing so as we sit on our thumbs.  We are unable to pursue the shale oil deposits that span our northern plains and southwestern states.  We have ample untapped resources that are readily available but our laws don't permit us to make use of those resources.

We see the 'global warming' group and the 'environmentalist group' driving our economy into the ground...and we have not found the moral outrage/courage to stand up to them and say "no more"!  We could easily build new refineries in any number of locations around our country but we're not permitted to do so.  We know how to drill and refine today without ruining our world.  It takes from 6 to 10 years to bring a new refinery on-line so the time to have declared a moratorium on the rules that made it impossible to build new refining capacity has come and gone.  But, the typical congressional response of "that will take ten years" should remind us that if we don't roll back those silly laws today, it'll take ten years from whenever we do roll back those silly laws.  The time to begin is now, not next week or next month.

We witnessed the ridiculous 'hearings' held by congress in the past few weeks.  We watched as Sen. Herb Kohl embarrassed himself by chiding the 'big bad oil companies' for making a profit.  He is a former businessman who certainly understands that profit must be derived in order for businesses to exist and grow.  He knew how that worked when he ran Kohl's Food Stores.  He certainly must have some comprehension as the owner of the Milwaukee Bucks.  His statement to the oil company executives that their profits didn't seem fair gives one a lot of insight.  He knows better but he will play/pander to the crowd he favors.  He 'feels' as do most liberals.  He doesn't necessarily reason.  He has his millions, so he can set out to control everyone else who aspires to similar success.

Sen. Kohl is but one of the 535 members of congress.  Too many of those men and women are too intent on keeping their offices to actually vote the way they probably know they should.  You have probably heard the old phrase that states you must "go along to get along".  That should be inscribed over the doorways leading to the House and the Senate chambers since it is the rule that is followed by the vast majority of people who walk through those portals.  That is true on the national stage, the state stage and the local stage.

The people who go to Washington and who do not give in and play by the Washingtonian rules are few and very far between.

Whose fault is this dilemma in the final analysis?  Yours and mine. 

We're the men and women who have permitted this to happen.  We don't vote in the House or the Senate, but we do elect those who do...and we do not seem to unelect people very often once they've gotten into office.  Rep. Steve Kagen (D) from the Appleton area stands for re-election this November.  He is at his most defeatable point historically.  If he survives the first re-election campaign and keeps his seat, he is likely to be in that seat for so long as he desires without regard to how he votes or doesn't vote.

We're so unconcerned about our vote, it seems, that we don't even think voting is sacrosanct enough to require valid photo identification before we're permitted to cast a ballot. 

So, all this angst has been brought to us by us.  Remember that the next time you buy gasoline or diesel fuel.  Remember that the next time you go to the grocery store and try to make your food budget stretch.  Remember that when you ponder whether or not you'll be able to take a vacation this year, or buy new school clothing for your children, or go out for a fish fry.  Remember that when you try to stretch your retirement income to cover your basic needs.

And, when you've gotten yourself all 'cranked up', if that happens, make a resolution to get involved and stay involved and to talk with your elected representatives at every level of government and let them know what you think and what you want them to do on your behalf.  And, if they fail you, fire them with your vote at the polling place.

Had you and I done that two decades ago instead of simply going with the flow, maybe we'd not be in the situation we find ourselves in today.