I don't know if the MATC has a public relations agency under contract but, if it does, they deserve a raise..more than the president of MATC deserves the one he just received!  It is impossible for any PR firm to cover the smell of this institution.

That's right.  The president of MATC, Darnell Cole, just received a pay increase of 5.2%.  This is the same Darnell Cole that was trying to get out of MATC by applying for a position with Lansing Community College in Michigan.  This is the same Darnell Cole that thumbs his nose at the constituency and gets higher and higher budgets passed that take more and more of our money in property taxes.

This almost seems like the college basketball coaches and football coaches who apply for other jobs simply to 'justify' increased compensation when they change their minds and stay in their already over-paid positions.  Maybe this is the way of the world of academia.  Maybe I simply am so out of touch that I can't comprehend that fact.

Cole now receives, effective today, $223,675 in base salary.  That's not all, of course.  He gets a total of $259,131 which includes retirement plan contributions and travel allowance.  The base pay increase was 3.25%.  The retirement supplement increase was 6.7%, and the travel allowance increase was some 44%.  His travel allowance doesn't cover the trips he takes by plane, etc.; it covers the cost of him driving around the MATC world in his automobile.  The retirement supplement is in addition to his already very attractive retirement under the Wisconsin Retirement System.  A little gravy for the gravy, as it were.

Even worse, if that is possible, is the fact that three of the nine members of the MATC Board didn't think it worth their while to be in attendance at the meeting where this was approved.  The remaining six voted, 5-1, in favor.  The sole dissenting vote was from Rep. Pedro Colon (D-Milwaukee) who felt Cole's long-term commitment to MATC was called into question by the recent attempt to leave the college for a better-paying job. 

Kudos to Rep. Colon!  Was his decision prompted by the fact that he must face the electorate?  Obviously, if the full MATC board were comprised of people who were forced to face the electorate, we would very likely see a much different MATC. 

There is but one conclusion.  MATC simply rubs our noses in it every chance it gets.  MATC is impervious to our scolding.  It never has to face the music.  It simply goes on its merry way increasing programs whether or not there is a return on that investment.  It simply goes on providing largess for its own.

This is an example of why the overall tax increase caused by the recently approved MATC budget was 4.9%.  Of course, we weren't told, before the budget was cast in stone, that Darnell Cole had yet to get his.  That might have been too obvious...even for we members of the great unwashed who only pay the toll on this road to nowhere!

Where does the secession petition stand?  Will it be filed on time?  Will the school board and the village board see eye-to-eye on the desired district?  Will our elected officials, both local, county and state, get behind this is a vocal and meaningful way? 

The latest count on the race to replace Sue Jeskewitz is now standing at five.  Randy Melchert (R) and Jason LaSage (R) have been involved in our Assembly "Debate" series as you know.

The additional filed candidates are:

Ms. Charlene Brady (D), a Germantown resident who is currently serving on the Washington County Board of Supervisors

Mr. Torrey Lauer (D), a Germantown resident

Mr. Dan Knodl (R),  Germantown resident who is currently serving on the Washington County Board of Supervisors

We hope to obtain the agreement of the three additional candidates to participate in the Assembly "Debate" Blog series that has begun.  If one or more decide to do so, we'll ask them the same questions already published and print a 'catch-up' Blog to get all five on the same topics from that point forward.

There is still time for another candidate or two if I remember correctly.  I believe that July 8th is the final date for the Declaration of Candidacy filing.

We should have a spirited discussion as we move toward the primary election in early-September.

This marks the first of a new class of Blogs that will be labeled 'Village Buzz'.  We'll discuss things that are gathered from what I consider to be reliable sources.  I'll sometimes share the source' names and other times will avoid doing so for obvious reasons.

Barley Pop Update...

I am hearing that the Barley Pop Pub will be able to handle its tax obligation and continue to maintain its liquor license.  Employees have apparently been told that mortgage refinancing or something along those lines will make this possible and they are very upbeat about their futures as employees.

We'll see if this was a reliable barometer.

Mequon Road Trees Cut...

I watched as the new Sendik's Village Center signage was being put into place and thought about the change that seemed to have taken place when the new replaced the old.  It finally dawned on me that this new sign was quite a bit taller than the old and that had caused visibility to be hampered because of trees that had been planted as part of the Village Street Tree program of some years ago.

Now I see that three trees have been removed and the former spots are landscaped over probably indicating that nothing will be there to replace those removed.  I don't know when that happened but it must've been within the past two or three days.

And then, I noted that ten trees had been cut down in the Pick 'n Save area although those stumps are still there.

What is going on?  Does the new sign exceed the height limits that the village has in place?  Why were those beautiful trees removed?  Who made this decision?  Did this go through an appropriate committee?  Is there a public record to be seen?

Why did ten trees need to be cut down a bit further west on Mequon Road?  Were those interfering with sight lines or was there some other reason?

I guess I need to visit with village officials to determine why this all was necessary, unless some of the readers already know the answers.

MATC has now ended the suspense.  Whew!  It has officially increased its tax take by the 4.9% that it miraculously managed to get down to from the original 'straw man' of 6.4%.  This codifies the fact that MATC's appetite for tax dollars has risen by some 30% over the past five years.  MATC's leadership, if it can be called that without demeaning the word, just can't seem to understand that, while it is impervious to the wants and needs of the citizenry it serves, it really has permitted its reach to exceed our grasp.

MATC strikes me as an iceberg looking for a ship to sink.  It is floating along with the tip showing while the bulk of the 'bloat' lies just under the waterline, out of sight and, too often, out of mind.  Until it hits the ship of taxpayers yet again.  The taxpayers on this 'ship of fools' have finally come to understand, at least in Germantown, that they would be better-served if they were permitted to disembark from the current ship that continues to be victimized by the MATC iceberg...year after year after year after year!

That disembarkation is, however, contingent on so many disparate factors as to seem nearly unachievable.  First and foremost is that failure to make the petition to the state technical college board seeking a move from MATC to another contiguous tech college district renders all the other points moot.  If that is filed, then we wait and see what the august state tech college board members decide is to be our fate.  The last such application was made in 2004 and was denied.  That doesn't necessarily mean that this petition would suffer the same fate...but it is probably a decent precursor.  The only other successful action of this nature involved Germantown's petition to be moved into the MATC district back in the early 1970s.  (Ironic, isn't it?)

Back to the basics, however.  This rate of increase could've been far better controlled if the governing board for MATC were subject to re-election.  It isn't.  It is subject only to the parochial appointment desires of MATC.  Talk about a great deal, huh?  If I'm going to be governed by someone, I'd love the opportunity to pick the person without any outside interference over things such as how effective they'd be in administering their responsibilities.  If I 'accidentally' picked someone that was in lock-step with my positions and goals, could I possibly be faulted?  Sure, but it would be meaningless because no one could do anything about it except maybe move away to escape.

Maybe more to the point, I could've used the euphemism of a polar ice mass, a glacier, grinding everything in its path into submission.  Pretty soon there'll be nothing left here to tax.  It'll have been destroyed by the taxes rendered.

I guess the good news is that you can't tax the same dollar for more than 100 cents, so there is some ultimate end point.  Yet, there are so many taxes being levied against each of our dollars that we get less and less while everything costs us more and more.

Maybe, IF we pursue the change in tech college districts, and IF the state tech college board approves, we can rid ourselves of MATC President Cole, his board and his kingdom of fire-breathing dragons that burn everything of value they can identify in their domain.

I believe a full scale audit of that institution is called for and I believe one or more of our elected officials at the state level needs to pick up that banner and carry it high for all to see.  This is way past the point of being mere Blog fodder, although it sure has been good for that!

There are apparently some rules regarding the conduct of exit interviews when an employee (or volunteer in the case of firefighters/EMTs) leaves the position.  Those don't always occur and, in some cases, could become an adversarial encounter depending upon circumstances involved.

Trustee Jim Langer has, I think, an excellent idea and that is requiring exit interviews and requiring that those be done by the human resource director.

I'd hope for there to be some caveats included:

The exit interview would be recorded (audio at least) from start to finish and the tapes would become public records.  The interviews would follow an agreed upon routine with all interview guidelines and questions published as part of the village policy statement concerning employment or volunteer positions such as those in the fire department.  The person being interviewed would have the right to be represented by counsel by providing notice prior to the hearing to that effect.  These new policies and procedures would supersede any and all existing policies and procedures.

All people who leave an organization leave for at least one reason and often more than one reason.  Those retiring may elect to retire early for some reason.  Those being terminated should have the opportunity to state their opinions and vent their grievances.  Those who have found a better job may be able to offer ideas or thoughts that will be helpful to the village in the future.

Exit interviews can be rewarding to both parties, one party or neither party.  That is simply the way it is.  But, there is a certain check and balance process that is triggered through exit interviews.  If, for example, one department loses three people in short order and if each has similar complaints that they claim led to their decision to leave, some initial conclusions might be drawn.  Leaders might conclude that there is a need to counsel the department head or to review compensation tables or any of a number of other things.

Exit interviews should be done by a person as disinterested as possible since the immediate superior may be the reason for the departure.  The recordings will, ideally, establish the full story of the departing person.  That story may be simple 'sour grapes', or it may point to very real issues needing resolution.  The weight of multiple departures with the same 'sour grapes' reason(s) claimed as part of the cause should serve to point to a possible problem even though it sounds like 'sour grapes'. 

Our village relies on relatively few people to make it work.  The loss of a key person can be problematic.  The loss of several people at the lower rungs can be problematic.  The loss of volunteers can be problematic.  The loss of anyone should give leadership the reason to pause and reflect.  Was there some underlying issue that could've caused the loss to be avoided?  If pay scales are the issue, then there may be a need to review that structure if we expect to be able to continue to attract solid performers.  If management styles are the issue, then village leaders need to reflect on those and make adjustments to avoid that becoming a continuing issue.  Managers can be 'in the dark' about their personal management styles, and exit interviews can help focus their own attention on personal shortcomings.

There is, inherently, relatively lower turn-over in villages and cities than in the private sector workplace.  Once one is employed by the Village of Germantown, for example, there is a clear set of expectations, there is a decent income, there are good benefit programs, there is stability of employment, and there is a decent working environment.  Turn-over rates of 15% to 20% are not at all unusual in the private sector, and yet those rates are unheard of in the public sector where 5% to 7% or even less might be closer to the norm.

We all want Germantown to be a good place in which to live and work, and we cannot reach and maintain that 'nirvana' unless those who help keep everything working as we expect also see Germantown as being a good place to live and work.

Exit interviews such as described above will certainly help us get to and stay at that point.

The morning Journal Sentinel talks about a petition being presented to the Milwaukee Common Council today that would require all Milwaukee private employers to provide paid sick days.  Employers with ten or fewer employees would be required to provide 1 hour for every 30 hours worked to a maximum of 40 hours of paid sick time per year.  Employers with more than ten employees would be required to provide 1 hour for every 30 hours worked up to a maximum of 72 hours per year.  Unused sick days would roll over from year to year.

This petition has been pushed by "labor, educational and community organizations" according to the article with the lead organization being 9 to 5, the National Association of Working Women.  It uses a state statute that provides for what is known as 'direct legislation', and requires the petitioner to present petitions signed by 15% of the total residents of the city or village involved that voted for governor in the most recent election.

Presuming all is in order with the petitions and signatures, the city council or village board would then be required to pass it or to put it on the ballot in the next election for a binding decision by the electorate.

I do not believe that a mandated employer sick pay law is appropriate anywhere, and am not suggesting that it ought be tried in Germantown.  The article cites the food service industry, for example; can you imagine how that would affect that industry?  Can you imagine how the costs would escalate if this were to occur?  Can you think of a more 'anti-business' proposition?

* * * * * * * * * *

It is interesting, however, that such direct action is available to citizens in cities and villages in Wisconsin.  Someone at sometime thought this was a good approach, and it found its way into law.  It obviously has a double edge to it.  It could be employed for good things or not so good things.  What it does do, however, is place the ultimate decision in the hands of the electorate if the city or village officials chose to ignore the petitioners' demands.

Is this a necessary 'check and balance' functionality or is it simply a tool that can be misused by the few taking advantage of emotional responses from the many?  Do we destroy the concept of representative government?  Do we permit populism to run rampant?

In keeping with the protocol we have established, we'll lead with the response of Senator Darling to each question in this chapter.

 * * * * * * * * * *

What is your position on Ethanol mandates in Wisconsin?

Darling:  I oppose ethanol mandates!  I have asked our federal lawmakers to repeal the federal renewable fuel mandate and eliminate tax credits for ethanol production.  I have also asked the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to lift the reformulated gas (RFG) blend mandate.

Wasserman:  I am against Ethanol mandates.

* * * * * * * * * *

Wisconsin is now listed as only the 11th highest taxed state in the union.  Is this appropriate given the services we receive?  Are there ways that taxes can be reduced further and, if so, where do you think that can be accomplished?

Darling:  For way too long, Wisconsin was among the top ten of most highly-taxed states.  Wisconsin is now out of the top ten because legislative Republicans have successfully defeated billions in Democrat-backed tax hikes over the years.  While I am pleased that our tax rank is dropping, the state must start to spend less too.

Wasserman:  Based on the services we receive, I think we could be more in the middle of the pack.  We can do that by restructuring government and eliminating unnecessary layers of bureaucracy.  We also need to stop giving tax breaks to every individual who comes to Madison with a paid lobbyist.  Instead of increasing the complexity of our tax code and favoring the few instead of helping the many, taxes should be cut across the board.  We can all share in tax breaks.

* * * * * * * * * *

Is the UW system working as it should or are there problems that need resolution?  If problems, what do you see those as being?

Darling:  As a proud alumna of UW-Madison, I think it is important that our UW-System remain a top notch higher educational system that is a major driver of our state's economy.  That said, there have been far too many examples where the UW-System has wasted taxpayer dollars.  Everyone remembers examples like the $26 million spent on a new computer payroll system that didn't work and the $700 per month automobile allowances for chancellors.  While the UW-System is very important to our state, it needs to eliminate wasteful spending.

Wasserman:  The overall UW system is the third largest in the country, and I'm proud of it.  I graduated from the University of Wisconsin Milwaukee, and I'm very proud of my education and what it's done for me.  One area of concern is the administrative system for the UW itself, which needs to be cut.

* * * * * * * * * *

As always, our thanks go to both contributors for taking the time to respond to our questions.  And, we again encourage readers to pose their questions for future chapters in this 'debate'.

The question for today in our 'debate' between candidates LaSage and Melchert is this:

What specific existing state programs can be cut to stop the ongoing issues of budget shortfalls?

LaSage:  The reason that I am running for State Assembly is to return the Republican Party back to being the party that stands for smaller government.  My philosophy of good government is one in which bureaucracy is reduced and local control is increased, which leads not only to a need for less tax revenue, but it returns control and ownership back to the local level, where the people that have first-hand experience with local needs reside.  So while I understand that this office carries a great deal of responsibility, it is not power that I seek, but rather empowerment for our citizenry.

Further, my core belief is that budgetary shortfalls occur because the state fails to operate like a business.  When examining a budget, a business looks at all programs that yield little value.  For example, ethanol has been proven to be an ineffective product and thus state subsidies to encourage its production should be abolished.  Gas blended with ethanol causes even more financial pain at the pump and reduces fuel economy.  Furthermore, taxpayer funded incentives to produce ethanol leads to a government sponsored heightened demand for corn, which in turn contributes to higher prices at the grocery store.  All of this for dubious positive environmental impact, as ethanol needs to be transported on trucks, which of course use gas.

Another item that needs to be addressed is wasteful pet pork project spending.  One example of such spending in the state budget would be $250,000 for a Hmong cultural center in La Crosse.  While I fully support and have worked for preserving cultural heritage in our community, this is simply absurd.  With the state's budget over 1600 pages long, examples such as these abound.

If a deficit still exists after such review, a business would also tell each of its departments to put together proposals that cut spending across-the-board.  Upon making this directive, bureaucratic administrators will say that taxpayers' most valued programs will need to be cut.  When this demagoguery occurs, your assemblyman should call them out on it, telling them to go back to the drawing board and work harder.

In the midst of cash flow problems, a business would also look at the revenue side of the equation.  Presidents ranging from Democrat John F. Kennedy to Republican Ronald Reagan understood that tax cuts for individuals and businesses spurs growth, creating jobs that in turn yield more tax revenue.  What has worked at the federal level (when employed) should be implemented in Wisconsin.  Thus, I support a lower gas tax, as well as individual and corporate income tax rate reductions.

Finally, rather than monolithically telling citizens every program I feel should be cut, I look forward to engaging in an ongoing dialogue with district residents who can share their experiences and frustrations with state government bureaucracy and excess spending.  You can reach me on either my cell phone: (262) 573-6360, or via emailing jason.lasage@gmail.com .  By working together to put Wisconsin on the right track, our collective 24th district voice will be heard.

* * * * * * * * * *

Melchert:  We need to seriously consider a spending freeze for the next biennium.  A spending freeze would keep existing government offices and services in place, but would prohibit new spending.  Rep. Pridemore states that "This budget could almost be balanced with an across the board spending freeze that would allow the level of expected revenue to catch up with spending without any of the tax increases that democrats are proposing."  (http://donpridemore.com/BudgetTaxes/IsNoBudgettheBestBudget/tabid/70/Default.aspx)  A spending freeze may be unpopular, but a $2.3 billion deficit is immoral.

In addition, the budget has grown so much that we need to re-examine every dollar of government spending.  While Wisconsin is already under a form of "base budget review reporting", we need to introduce a more aggressive culture of spending restraint.  Instead of simply justifying expenses, let's require agencies to rank their spending priorities.  What expenses would each department cut if they only had 90% of their existing budget?  Would we lose essential services or would the reduction even be noticed?  Let's have a televised hearing on Wisconsin Eye as we justify to the state why we are going to spend each dollar of the $20 billion of your money.  While Jack Welch was criticized for his cost-cutting, he took GE from a $14 billion market value in 1980 to $410 billion in 2004.

By re-evaluating every dollar of government spending and implementing a spending freeze, we can restore fiscal accountability.

The mainstream media has taken up the fight now that Hillary and Barack have gotten their 'thing' settled; at least until the gathering in Denver. 

The learned political scientists on our college campuses have nearly unanimously opined that Obama is incapable of being defeated.  They have preordained that this election will be among the most lopsided victories for the left that we have witnessed in the entire history of our country.  Polls show Obama up by double digits over McCain.  It is all over but for the voting.

The election of Barack Obama as our next president is, apparently, inevitable.

So...there you go.  We conservatives can simply suck it up, pack it in, and decide how we're going to survive the coming four or eight years.  It is divined: Barack Obama is the next President of the United States...and will create a veto-proof majority for Democrats in both houses of our congress.

But wait.  Is it really inevitable?  Is the smugness of the left such that it will determine the course of history?  Is it really time for undefined change simply for the sake of change?  Are we in such dire straits that we will anoint Obama without so much as a discussion about that inevitable future?  Will the influx of young voters automatically accrue to the benefit of Obama?  Have the liberal professors that dominate our college campuses (98% + and counting) so indoctrinated the student body that inevitability is the only outcome imaginable?

Are 'we the people' so enamored of this man of change as to be taken with his oratorical skills in spite of the lack of depth of our knowledge of the details?  It is commonly discussed in political circles that the 'devil is in the detail', and yet, so far, there is very little flesh to be found on the skeleton of change. 

Will it remain the rule that any question of Obama's positions is akin to unfairly characterizing the man?  We smear him when we reflect upon the pastor that he followed willingly for twenty years.  We smear him when we talk about his very limited experience in politics, let alone on the national scene.  We smear him when we criticize his broadly-brushed position papers.  We smear him when he is forced to restate previous statements, sometimes more than once, to 'clarify' what he originally meant to say.

Obama has created a bubble that seems to surround him.  It is a protective bubble that keeps the hounds at bay.  One is to accept his speeches at face value.  One must not question the lack of substance.  One must not ask from where the money will come (although we know if we but listen to the tax increase rhetoric).  One must not ask which of the ladies in waiting the public would prefer in the White House.

Obama has created a protective bubble with the willing assistance of the liberal media.  Will that media be silent as well when we wake up to the second term of Jimmy Carter?  Will that media be silent when we throw away victory in the war on terror so that foreign governments will profess to like us better?  Will that media be silent when terrorists again begin to strike us in our homeland? 

Is it really Obama the Inevitable?  Or was the only inevitable thing about all this that the liberal media would fall into lockstep?

Our country was founded with three equal branches of government: the judicial branch, the legislative branch and the executive branch.  The Constitution granted certain privileges to each branch and was careful to separate those duties as the country's founders saw fit.

That effort by our country's founders was overthrown yesterday when the Supreme Court usurped the powers of both the legislative and the executive branches.  The swing vote, as has become the norm in this court's decisions, was Justice Anthony Kennedy.

Justice Kennedy's vote means that non-citizens captured in the war on terror are to be granted the rights of habeas corpus heretofore granted solely to U.S. citizens.  Habeas corpus is the right of American citizens to challenge detention by the government.  This case involved a captured Algerian native who has been in Guantanamo Bay for several years.  He has never contested the finding of the military tribunal that he is an enemy combatant.  His attorney, to the contrary, has only asserted his supposed right to have a habeas corpus hearing in a federal court.

There are likely attorneys queued up this morning filing motions that can lead to the release of these enemy combatants based on the court's decision.  There can be questions posed that the government will feel cannot be answered on the grounds that the answers would give away intelligence sources or techniques.  If the questions are not answered, then the enemy combatant can be released.

Article I, Section 9 of the Constitution, as pointed out in the Wall Street Journal's editorial this morning, contains the clause that says: "The privilege of the Writ of Habeas Corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in Cases of Rebellion or Invasion the Public Safety may require it."

So, we see the liberal members of the supreme court aligned on the issue.  They see the Constitution as something to be twisted to meet their world view at the time.  The Constitution does not impact non-citizens.  It does permit habeas corpus to be suspended in the case of 'invasion'. 

The man in question is not a U.S. citizen.  The country was 'invaded' when the terrorists attacked the trade towers and killed 3,000 people on a single morning in September.  That was but one instance of attacks that had gone on for some time.

We are not involved in legal semantics; we are involved in the fight for our continued freedoms.  And now, it appears the terrorists have opened a new front in the fight located in Washington, D.C. with its allies in the U.S. Supreme Court.

The left is hung up on what it claims is the "Bush War"; this is an American War and it has dire implications if we should lose the war.  We have been safe in America since 9/11 for a reason; that reason is that we are taking the fight to the terrorists and not sitting on our haunches waiting for their next attack as had been happening through-out the 1990s and into the early 2000s.

Congress must step up to the plate, pass new legislation and take any semblance of ambivalence out of the language.  There must be three equal branches.  We simply cannot permit one branch being more equal than the others...no matter which 'side' has the voting advantage.  Politics has to stop when the welfare of our country is at stake...and it is at stake!

We are all too aware of the 'fabled' 9th U.S. Court of Appeals found in San Francisco.  This is the single most liberal-leaning court in the federal system and can be counted on for ground-breaking decisions that often run counter to the mainstream.

Now, we're being given the opportunity to make our own judgments about the chief judge of that court, a gentleman by the name of Alex Kozinski.  By all accounts, the judge has had a storied career.  He was appointed to the 9th Circuit by President Ronald Reagan and was considered as a possible Supreme Court nominee by then President George H.W. Bush in 1990 and 1991 according to an Associated Press story that ran in the morning Journal Sentinel.

How is it that we are now able to make personal judgments about the chief judge?  Well, he was forced to suspend an obscenity trial that he was presiding over when sexually explicit material was discovered posted to his family's web site.

Certainly anything can happen on the Internet; things can be made to seem something that they are not.  Slack needs to be cut for anyone in this respect.  But, when they open their mouths to defend themselves, they may tend to open the flood gates.

Judge Kozinski said he didn't believe any of the images were obscene. (They were, by the way, reported to have been scenes of a man cavorting with a sexually aroused farm animal as reported in the article.  A female painted as a cow was seen nude on all fours in another image according to the press.)  That seems to be along the lines of what I think of as bestiality and pornography.  He is quoted as saying, in response to the question of whether or not this was prurient, "Is it prurient?  I don't know what to tell you.  I think its odd and interesting.  It's part of life."

The judge is computer savvy.  He apparently builds his own computers, and has battled federal court administrators over Web filters they installed to block porn from government computers.  He seems to know his way around a computer and the Internet.

He said he must have accidentally uploaded the images to his server while trying to upload something else.

He is, or was, presiding over a trial for a man accused of obscenity for selling movies depicting bestiality.

Several thoughts come to mind:

This court is notorious for its liberal bent, and this seems to bear out the sense that many of us have about that court.  I view this court as an embarrassment but I understand that the ACLU would have a different take.

The press has written the story so as to tell us everything good about this judge while sort of lamenting that something like this could beset such a learned jurist.  I submit that had this been a conservative justice, we would see the equivalent of the smear that we witnessed during the hearings to confirm Justice Clarence Thomas.  This story would not have been buried in the innards of the morning paper; it would have, instead, been on the front pages in every newspaper and appear as the lead article on every newscast in the country for a week.

Will there be an investigation in this matter such as was conducted by the Cedarburg School Board?  There ought to be at least that level of scrutiny brought in this instance.

Will people finally admit that the 9th Circuit is an embarrassment?  A few of us will do so, but the majority just don't seem to see things the right way.

Are we being a bit presumptuous by having a Wisconsin global warming task force?  There is no solid scientific evidence of anything other than what our earth has always gone through.  Our emotions are being played "like a fiddle" with pictures of polar bears drowning when, in fact, the pictures were of nothing of the sort, and the fact that there are twice the number of polar bears today as were on this earth 40 years ago.  The Great Lakes were drying up at an alarming rate and today we don't know what to do with all the water that fell on us.

We are reduced to blaming both hot weather and cold weather on global warming.  We are reduced to blaming both drought and flooding on global warming.  We either have more hurricanes or fewer hurricanes, but both those phenomenons are caused by global warming.  We just had one of the greatest snow falls in any winter on record, but it is caused by global warming.

It seems as though the powers that be have succumbed to this burst of 'junk science' that we've been treated to in the past handful of years since Al Gore adopted global warming as his latest crusade.  His Power Point slide show has spawned a great deal for him...at our collective expense.  We can't drill for oil, we can't build power plants using nuclear technology, and we are burning our food as fuel while people starve around the world.  Every one of those decisions was based on politics, not on reason and certainly not on any rational approach to the issues confronting us today.  This whole movement is destroying our economy and we seem blind to that reality.

The reality is that none of us knows anything for certain.  We don't have a clue as to whether we are in a true global warming crisis or not.  It is not sound science to assume that we are in crisis because we cannot prove otherwise.  Where is the rationality to that?  Yet, that is precisely what is happening today.  We could as easily be creating a new problem where none exists today by following the "siren's song" of global warming.

This task force convenes and decides what you and I need to be doing, but it is doing so without any basis in fact.

Why is it that this task force thinks that wind turbine energy must produce 25% of our electricity before they, the task force members, will even think of permitting us to build another atomic power plant?  Have they, the task force members, stopped to consider how many wind turbines at what cost planted where will be required to produce 25% of the electricity we consume today let alone will consume in a quarter-century?  Have they performed a cost benefit analysis for nuclear versus wind-powered electricity generation?  Of course not, since that would destroy any credibility they claim to have.

How gracious of this task force to at least say they will think of atomic power before the Yucca Mountain storage facility has been placed into use provided, of course, that we build the wind turbine farms across our landscape.  I wonder what ever happened to the fears of birds flying into these huge blades?  Is concern for wildlife now being replaced on the left by the overriding concern about global warming even though it is unproved?

The task force leaders say that their intent is to compromise.  If I had the position of manufacturing something from nothing, I, too, would believe in compromise.  The other side would have to give up 50% of its position and, in return, I'd get 50% further toward my goal of this fantastic future-land where everything is balanced, where none of us uses any more than any of the rest of us on the globe...where we are in the same desperate condition as everyone else on the face of the earth.  That makes a lot of sense to me.

Why do we insist on doing these things to ourselves?

Two candidates have declared, so far, for the Assembly 24th district seat being vacated by Sue Jeskewitz.  They are Republicans Randy Melchert and Jason LaSage.  I continue to hear that there will be other candidates declaring between now and the deadline on July 8th, however we want to begin the Assembly 'Debate' so as to help voters learn as much as possible about the candidates.  I have posed much the same questions to both candidates as were discussed in the Senate "Debate' series.

The initial question was this:  If you were to introduce yourself to a roomful of voters, what would you tell them of yourself?

Melchert:  I am Randy Melchert, and I am a 5th generation Menomonee Falls resident.  My great grandmother ran a small café near the corner of Main Street and Appleton Avenue.  My grandfather started his law practice near that same corner as well.  My mother practiced law there as well.  I have lived my entire life in this community and I enjoy it.  Except for one thing.

Taxes.  While we have "The Best Care in the Air" nearby, the Packers up the road, and a beautiful wonderland every winter, the tax situation in this state is hurting the families of the state.  The average Menomonee Falls family over the next ten years will send around $77,000 to Madison in state income and sales taxes.  In Germantown a little less, in Richfield a lot more.  We have the 7th highest state and local tax burden, the 8th highest gas tax, and the 11th worst business tax climate.  Unfortunately the tax bill may rise.  On top of our already large spending habit, we could have a $2.3 billion deficit.  That's $1,655 of debt for every family of four in the state.  We need change now.  We need legislators who are responsible, dependable, and accountable.

* * * * * * * * * *

LaSage:  I am a life-long resident, taxpayer and worker in the 24th district, truly grateful for the support I have received from this community throughout my entire life.  When I was a 5th grader at County Line School, residents, led by my Cub Scout Leader, Jim McNally, generously donated money to provide me with a scooter so that I would have a way to keep up with my friends.  At Kennedy Middle School, one of the many special teachers in my life, now principal, Steve Bold helped spark my interest in social studies by demonstrating how serving others is a rewarding enterprise.  While I was a high school student, area parents came to my aid, as I helped lead the way with a group of friends to promote drug and alcohol-free activities in the community through initiating Youth Future's 1st annual lock-in for middle school students-an event that recently celebrated its 14th year.

In 1998, residents embraced my eagerness for public service, by electing me to the Germantown School Board-an office I was re-elected to.  That same year, current outgoing state Representative Sue Jeskewitz was kind enough to take me to Madison for a day to see first-hand how state government works.  As a board member, the MacArthur Elementary School community welcomed me, as I tutored youngsters and volunteered at MacFest events.  I also worked with Keith Musolff's gifted and talented middle school students for two years.  Additionally, as I was focusing on my bachelor's degree in communication and political science from UW-Milwaukee, state Senator Alberta Darling gave me the opportunity to intern for her.

Menomonee Falls also accommodated me for four years at Guaranty Bank and six years at Strong Investments.  I have kept involved with area youth for the past six years (and counting) by part-time substitute teaching in the Menomonee Falls School District.  I am also thankful to have had the ability to learn even more about the area and enhance my leadership skills through participation in Leadership Germantown this past year.

Now, as a 24th district taxpayer and homeowner, I want to be your representative in the state Assembly, taking my rich experience from the area and championing our shared values-creating jobs through lower taxes, spending and regulation; working to achieve more local control of education and municipal government; addressing healthcare with free market, consumer solutions; protecting individual liberties-while being accessible and willing to listen to all constituents.  I realize that some politicians have the tendency to disappoint, letting the lure of outside money get in the way of doing the people's work.  Though, if given the opportunity to serve as your representative in Madison, I assure you that my values and character, my ties to the community, and my aspiration to deliver sound, conservative leadership are not for sale.

* * * * * * * * * *

As always, we thank both gentlemen for taking time to participate in this 'Debate' and welcome readers' questions for future 'Debates'.  Either email those or frame them as comments to this blog.

The move toward filing the documents necessary to seek secession from the Milwaukee Area Technical College tax district has begun to draw some debate amongst the politicos in Germantown.

Village President Kempinski has been quoted as being concerned with the seemingly slow movement in this process, and School Board President Erdmann says that we shouldn't worry because it is being taken up in July for ultimate filing in August.

Some have pointed to the earlier appointment of Superintendent Victor Rossetti as the death blow to any secession movement since Germantown is now directly represented on the MATC Board.

Mr. Rossetti will serve his last day as superintendent on June 30th.  What happens then?  Does he have to step down or is he permitted to serve out his term since he is then a 'former' superintendent.  What happens if he moves from the MATC district?  Is he immediately susceptible to removal if he doesn't resign?

Interesting questions all.  I have written earlier of some concern since the MATC discussion had been quiet for a seemingly long period of time.  Then we were advised that we shouldn't worry since the school board would resume its discussion in July. 

We are still a long way from the actual filing of documents and then we must await the decision of the state technical college board that is due within ninety days of the filing.  Then, even if we were to be successful...and that is far from a certainty...the actual secession wouldn't occur until the start of a new fiscal period for technical colleges.

And, of course, while this all plays out, we are being over-taxed and under-served by the money-eating monster that we know as MATC.

What we don't need are any artificial obstacles cropping up along the pathway to change.

We have, it appears, survived the presidential primary campaign season. 

During this season just passed, we witnessed the significant defeat of the Clintons.  Yes, of both Clintons, not just Hillary.  There is no 'just Hillary'.  With her comes the other, Bill.  With her comes the remembrances of all that was the Clintonian presidency; the innuendo, the smears, the lost billing records, the huge trading gains, the eleventh-hour pardons and on and on and on.  It wasn't a significant defeat in terms of numbers of votes, but it was significant in terms of the name and the legacy.

During this season just passed, we saw the emergence of a first-term senator from Illinois who is now the Democrat candidate for President of the United States of America.  He is biracial, and that means that a historic 'barrier' appears to have been overcome.  He is inexperienced as compared to the typical candidate for our highest elected position, but he has an eloquence about him that seems to enthrall those to whom he speaks.  He is Barack Obama.  Of that we can be sure.  But, beyond that we are unsure.  There is much about him and his beliefs that needs to be fleshed out between now and November

During this season just passed, we saw the Republicans settle on an elder member of the senate who will be nearly 72 if and when he takes office.  The word 'settle' was chosen intentionally.  The conservative members of the Republican party were forced to 'settle' for John McCain.  They may take up the banner and charge ahead, or they may hold back, contribute little and vote begrudgingly.  We know that he has been bloodied in battle, and that is reality and not simply an expression.  We know the mettle of the man.

So, Hillary is expected to finally make her amends to Barack Obama today by suspending her campaign.  That means that she is still trying to finagle something more for herself.  It might be that promise of a nomination to become a member of the Supreme Court, or it might be the payment of her $20 million campaign shortfall that came from the Clintons' pocket, or it might be the selection as the vice presidential candidate.  We don't know, and we may not come to know anytime soon; but we do know the Clintons and we do know that there will be some price extracted by them.  That is the way it is with them.

And the rest of us are left to make a monumentally important decision as to whom we desire as our next titular head.  I use the word 'titular' intentionally, as well.  The President of the United States influences but seldom decides policy.  The President lives in a world of 'checks and balances' that sometimes seems to be unchecked and imbalanced.  Congress will be very important as it always is.  That is frightening when one steps back and observes the ofttimes childish machinations that come from this body.

As it stands today, we would choose between an elder about whom we know a good deal and a junior about whom we know virtually nothing.  I am reminded of the phrase that refers to the 'devil we know versus the devil we don't know'.  I don't use that phrase in a derogatory manner.  This election is, to my thinking, a classic 'lesser of evils' election.  The campaign will be waged between one who is so far only a passable speaker but whom we know, and between the other who is as eloquent a speaker as any politician in my lifetime but about whom we know next to nothing.

And I confess to great concern since us voters tend to be swayed by eloquence more than substance far too often...and we often pay a dear price as the result.

Wisconsin's gross domestic product (GDP) increased by about 1% in 2007, half the rate of growth of the nation as a whole.  But one sector continues its dominant position as the leading growth segment in our state: government seems to be our biggest growth segment.

State government and related institutions continue to grow at significantly greater rates than the GDP.  Might our GDP have risen more than 1% if the state's business climate were better than it is?  I believe the answer to that rhetorical question is a resounding YES!

Seriously, there needs to be some level of sanity restored to our state government and to those institutions funded with tax money and other fees.  This simply is an unsustainable situation and that seems to have, as yet, escaped too many of our elected officials.  We cannot continue to increase the tax and fee loads at greater rates than the economy can sustain.  We cannot continue to extract more and more money from our citizenry even as they all pay far more for energy and foodstuff and virtually everything else that is consumed.

Our state educational institutions' budgets grow at rates of several times the rate of growth of our GDP.  Our government continues to give money away to the 'favored few' in the forms of ethanol subsidies, and 'ear marks' that send dollars here and there again to the 'favored few'.  Social engineering continues to be practiced as an 'art form' at the state level.

Seemingly every time we open our eyes, we're looking at someone's proposal for spending more money.  Or, we're looking at someone's proposal to curtail this or that segment of our economy.  Or, we're confronted with the latest effort to protect us from ourselves.  Or, we see the latest state labor settlement that raises the compensation of this group or that group.

The U.S. average for all states was GDP growth of 2.0%, so we came in on the bottom side of that mark.  In fact, we ranked 39th of the 50 states in terms of our GDP growth.  Coincidentally, that is also our ranking in terms of tax collections.  Do you suppose there might be a tie-in there if we probed a bit?

There is a point beyond which our GDP growth will simply become a negative number; a point at which the economic engine will simply not sustain the government demands placed upon it.  Michigan had a GDP growth rate of -1.2% in 2007.  There is a reason for that.  The reason for Michigan's problem is the auto industry decline and the rate of spending by the state government.  Wisconsin faces its own declining industry base and it certainly is spending too much.  What does that suggest?

We lose two people for every one person that moves into the state.  We watch as more and more businesses either leave the state entirely or relocate their headquarters or become acquired by an out-of-state entity.  We become defensive about negative news rather than stepping up to the proverbial plate with aggressive alternative approaches to solve our declining growth.

We do not seem to understand that states cannot use tax increases to get out of these situations.  States that use tax decreases find their economies booming in contrast to those states that use the reverse approach.

The old bromide, "will the last one out, turn out the lights?", has been employed regularly with regard to Michigan.  When will we begin to hear it used in conjunction with our own state?  What must we do to get the attention of our leaders?

Maybe the answer is: we have to fire them to get their attention...and the attention of those who follow that group!

MATC students along with all technical college and two-year college students in Wisconsin have a more difficult time gaining their education as the result of lenders leaving this marketplace.

MATC has nearly 5,300 students now at risk due to the fact that several lenders have decided to pull out of this market stating that it is unprofitable.  That supposedly is caused by too little money being borrowed for too short a time.

The total of loans that are affected by these pull-outs is more than $18 million, and involves five lenders for MATC students.

Several thoughts occur:

What other programs are available to these 5,300 students?  Supposedly there are from six to twenty other lenders available to the students if we are to believe the technical college system president, Daniel Clancy.  If that is the case, why would some big names pull out?  Those names included Chase, Citibank and TCF.  If there is money to be made, wouldn't they still want some of it?  Or is this indicative of some other more pervasive problem?

Will they qualify for replacement loans or is that really part of the problem that causes the lenders to want out?  Many of the students relying on these loans are low income people as you would presume could be the case.  It may not be possible for them to apply to other lenders and expect to be granted access to credit.  The federal government passed the College Cost Reduction and Access Act of 2007 and, contrary to what the name might suggest, this limited federal subsidies to those who lend money to students, and more than fifty such lenders left the market.  This suggests that we're talking about marginally-viable loans and that, without government guarantees, there will be fewer dollars available and those will go to better credit risks.

If there is a loss of significant numbers of MATC students, will MATC face up to the need to reduce budget?  There are nearly 5,300 students affected by this situation.  If half of those are unable to obtain different loans, there will likely be a similar number dropping out of MATC.  I don't know what the 'full time equivalent' student number is, but let's assume that these students are half-time.  So we would have a loss of half of the 5,300, or 2,650 and those would equate to 1,325 full time equivalent students.  That is about ten percent of the current total FTE students now attending MATC.  Will we see a ten percent reduction in the MATC budget?

Or, will MATC see this as forcing it to actually increase its tax take in order to offset the loss of student tuition?  Your guess is as good as mine, but I'll be amazed if we see a budget reduction as the result of this situation.  One cannot simply reduce staff because the student load has dropped, can one?  How does one manage to down-size when there are so many fixed costs, so many people relying on MATC for their livelihoods, so much left to do in the building of the empire?

What seems more likely is that this will be dragged out as alternatives are sought, and it will be talked about for awhile until we lose track of the issue.  Maybe state legislators will step up up and recommend new state guarantees.  After all, military veterans are given 100% tuition credits so it is only fair to begin providing everyone with 100% tuition to attend MATC.  It is only fair that MATC have this kind of support since the Milwaukee Public Schools are generating so few qualified graduates any longer.

The last paragraph was intended as 'tongue in cheek' in nature but I fear that it might be closer to reality than not. 

The president of the MATC teachers union, Michael Rosen, says he'll be in contact with Representative Gwen Moore (D-Milwaukee) to seek her help in assuring that students still have access to federal loans.  The dominoes have begun to fall and they threaten to crush us taxpayers yet again.  Why do they never topple in the other direction?

The UW Board of Regents decided that tuition had to go up 5.5% for students at the four-year universities.  They laid the blame in large part (3% of the 5.5%) at the feet of the legislature that mandated free tuition for veterans.  There are some 3,200 veterans now registered as students under this program; the program was originally intended to pay 50% of the tuition and that was raised to 100% last fall.

The UW and the legislature have been at odds for a long time.  This is likely just the next salvo to be fired in this long battle.

The Regents recently made their selection for the new head of the UW system and she will get a boost in what seems an already hefty salary.  That may be offset in small part by contributions from the UW Foundation as has been the past habit since the legislature has attempted to rein in the spending at UW.  She was reported to have stated her desire to see salaries increased soon to bring the UW system up to the standards of the large universities across America.  She also wants to see 'domestic partners' covered by the benefit programs made available to system employees.  Sounds as though this is going to be a costly hiring decision.

There is concern on the part of some students and the administration over the cost of the veteran's program being shouldered by the students.  Maybe that wouldn't have had to be the case had the Regents learned better how to live within their means. 

There was little hue and cry from the student body when the UW-La Crosse tuition was increased by some $1,300 per year with those funds to be used to support the tuition of more disadvantaged students attending that institution to better reflect the needs of that community.

The military has never been a 'favorite' of the UW system, so I guess we should expect that kind of differentiation.  The students' attitudes tend to reflect that of the institution in which they are immersed. 

There is a very real problem with the UW system.  We see out-of-state students being rewarded with reduced tuition rates at the expense of Wisconsin students.  We see the administration expense running at very high rates with no checks and balances apparent.  We see ever-increasing pay ranges for staff, and yet we understand there are many hangers-on that are not earning their keep.  Have costs ever been reduced in the UW system?  Are shrinking programs ever eliminated?  Are these concepts foreign to the Regents?

The system seems to have its own political beliefs and those do not fit in an institution of higher learning.  Schools should be apolitical, but that seems to have been forgotten completely over the past four decades.

The UW system begs for a thorough house-cleaning and some solid oversight with enforcement teeth.  It has become a significant part of the education industry in our country.

Communities are fragile.  They are interdependent on so many disparate pieces as to be capable of being degraded quickly.  Maybe we can learn something from this morning's General Motors announcement concerning Janesville.

General Motors is closing the Janesville GM plant and that will put something in the range of 2,600 to 2,800 employees out of work.  This could happen as late as 2010 or as soon as next week, dependent only upon the marketplace.  There have already been over 2,000 jobs lost simply as the result of GM's slowdown in production.  This announcement will, unfortunately, cause many, many more announcements over the next months.

The economy of South Central Wisconsin is at risk.  Chrysler operates a similar facility in Belvidere, IL and many Wisconsinites work at that facility, too.

Communities either have or do not have spirit and vitality about them.  Those that do not seem to fit into one or the other categories are simply in transit from one to the other.  There can be no indefinite in-between in the life of communities.

Communities can move all too quickly from vitality to despair.  The trip back to vitality from despair takes much longer...often several decades if that quickly.

Germantown is not immune.  No matter that it was determined one of the thirty best places to live.  That distinction is solely in the eye of the beholder.  If the spirit of a community is broken, you can see that by simply driving through.  And, driving through is what prospective new inhabitants and prospective new employers do in communities without vitality.

I had the opportunity to drive into Beloit several weeks ago.  It had been years since I drove into Beloit; it was always easier and, frankly, more pleasant to drive around Beloit.  But this time, I had to go to the heart of the community...and I was amazed at what I saw and what I felt.  Beloit had re-captured the spirit that had eluded it most of my adult lifetime, and it was palpable.  It was present where ever I looked.  It was present in the lively steps of its citizens.  It was present in the well-kept boulevards, and in the pride taken by its residents in their homes.

If you can imagine a brightly colored balloon that is full of air, and then picture that same balloon as it has lost some of its air pressure, that might be the exercise we need to take daily as we think about our own community.  Those full, bright balloons exude their own sense of well-being.  And the half-full balloons send out their message, as well.

I hope that Germantown hasn't started losing air.  If I missed it and the air is already beginning to leave our balloon, then I hope we'll realize that something needs to change so that we can restore our fullness and brightness before we've lost too much air pressure. 

It is not possible to touch politics, but it is possible to sense ebbs and flows caused by changing political scenes.  It is the addition or subtraction of spirit.  It is the spirit of the community that determines its future.  Communities with spirit just seem to overcome the obstacles put in their way, while those that lose their spirit go into nearly perpetual decline.

I hope that our spirit isn't being eroded with the political in-fighting that seems to be flourishing today.

A brief article appeared in the Journal Sentinel this morning discussing the money received by the Miller Park stadium district from its share of the five-county sales tax collections.  We've always heard about that expressed as 1/10th of 1%, and that makes the tax seem smaller, at least to me as I briefly process the sentence that I read.

After all, that is only a penny for every $10 spent in the five county area set aside to pay for Miller Park.  I was, by the way, not opposed to that cost sharing just to set the record straight.

The month of March generated a $2,197,487 payment to the stadium district based on that penny per ten dollar sharing level.  That is a lot of money sucked out of the economy especially when we are in the midst of the cost increases we're seeing for most everything due to the price of fuel that ripples through almost every segment of our economy in the form of increased prices.

This really hit home when I recalled that there has been talk about extending the stadium tax beyond the 'sunset' date in 2014.  Then I learned that the 2014 date was never formally established as the final year in which we would all pay toward the costs of Miller Park through our general sales tax contributions.

There is way too much truth involved in the saying that when a tax is established, it never goes away.  We recently saw Mayor Barrett seeking to continue and even increase the cell telephone tax paying for development of cell 911 coverage.  He wants to use that for something else totally unrelated to cell phones. 

Now financial consultants to the stadium district say that the tax may need to be continued beyond 2014.  Does this ever end?  Not unless we demand that it end.  And, we can apparently only be heard through our use of the vote.  Yet another reason to protect the sanctity of our votes through the implementation of voter photo ID.

And, yet another reason to end the creation of taxing districts that are run by boards appointed and not elected.  The stadium district board is comprised, as I recall, of elected representatives so the voter ultimately can have some influence, but too many taxing districts are impervious to the desires of the voters (such as MATC).