Let's see how they do with their newfound control.

The state has a record deficit totaling some $2.5 billion using GAAP (generally accepted accounting principles) as those of us in the real world must.

The lust to use the power vested in any political party is very strong; it is, in fact, often irresistible to the detriment of both that particular party and the citizens of the state.

Governor Doyle has proved to be a master at maneuvering through the political maze.  He has yet to admit that he'll again be a candidate for the office of Governor but that is a foregone conclusion.  Unless he is tapped for a Washington job or there is some 'pay for play' scandal yet to unfold in our state, he is a shoe-in to run for another term.

The Republicans will be challenged as the 'loyal opposition' to have any discernible impact on the important items even though both houses' leaders claim they'll run their domains on an 'inclusive' basis (don't waste a lot of money betting on that).

Those of us who follow the 'ins' and the 'outs' will have much to occupy our time.  Those of us who don't follow the machinations of our state government will likely come to wish they had paid closer attention.  There are new taxes to be levied.  There are existing taxes to be increased.  There are any number of old fees to be increased; and, there are a number of new fees to be created.

The idea of balancing our state's budget through reductions in expenditures and through elimination of programs and through improvements in efficiency simply is a none starter in Wisconsin.  The only thing we seem to know is creating new programs that require even more funding.

You and me are the only people who can change that...and we only get that opportunity when we walk into the voting booth.  In the meantime, we can do our best to hold feet to fires.

Obama Smoking 'Issue'...

I continue to see little references to the fact that President-Elect Barack Obama has the occasional cigarette, and musings about whether or not he will or even should quit that nasty habit.  (I can say that because I did smoke cigarettes... a lot...and quit many years ago.)

I am amused that these musings probably come from people who were and are adamantly opposed to smoking but who are now being 'forced' to make excuses for the person they favored in the recent election.  Some of the musings have been nothing short of farcical including the comments that he might well make better decisions if he can smoke a cigarette while pondering the weighty issues of the office he occupies come January 20th.

Will this slow the inexorable tide to rid our nation of any and all cigarettes and all other tobacco products, to close any business that has the audacity to think it is a private entity entitled to make decisions as to the customers it will serve, to outlaw all public use of a lawful agricultural product?  I suspect not.

Does anyone detect any hypocrisy?  Does it matter to anyone?  Is this the sound of one hand clapping? 

~~~

More Scientists Join Global Warming Dissenters...

Dr. Will Happer, award winning Princeton University Physicist says, "I am convinced that the current alarm over carbon dioxide is mistaken."  Happer, who was fired by former Vice President Al Gore in 1993, said of that incident, "I was told that science was not going to intrude on policy."

Additional dissenting scientists include:

• Dr. W.M. Schaffer, Ph.D. who is Professor of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology at the University of Arizona - Tucson.
• CNN Meteorologist Chad Meyers, a meteorologist for 22 years and certified by the American Meteorological Society.
• Engineer and Physicist J.K. "Jim" August, formerly of the U.S.Navy nuclear power program and former chair of professional standard committees in both the American Nuclear Society and the American Society of Mechanical Engineering.
• Biologist and Neuropharmacologist Dr. Doug Pettibone who has authored 120 scientific publications and holds ten patents and is a past member of the American Association for the Advancement of Science.
• Meteorologist Tom Wysmuller, former weather forecaster at Amsterdam's Royal Dutch Weather Bureau.
• MIT Scientist Dr. Robert Rose, a professor of Materials Science and Engineering at MIT with approximately fifty years of teaching experience.
• Climate researcher Dr. Craig Loehle with the National Council for Air and Stream Improvements and who has published more than 100 peer-reviewed scientific papers.
• German Meteorologist Dr. Gerd-Rainer Weber, a Consulting Meteorologist.
• Atmospheric Scientist Robert L. Scotto, who has more than 30 years air quality consulting experience and a past member of the American Meteorological Society.
• Atmospheric Scientist Timothy R. Minnich who has more than thirty years experience in the design and management of a wide range of air quality investigations for industry and government.

The story line of a "consensus agreement" is simply not true as we have come to understand with the more than 650 dissenters who have now made themselves and their views known.  Those who are pushing for rapid adoption of the so-called "consensus" are doing so for fear they are being disproved more with every passing day.  They cannot afford to answer the criticisms since they're hypothesis is riddled with error.

Is there any real need to rush to judgment?  Or is this more a contrived need with those pushing the global warming issue recognizing that once unleashed, the movement will go on and on and on regardless of the validity of the movement.  These things take on a life of their own as we have seen in any number of previous government-backed programs, without regard for facts.

This debate is far too important and far too costly for us to make an incorrect judgment.  We will literally ruin the economy of the United States if this is permitted to take root, and we're already sliding down a very slippery slope created by other government meddling where well enough should've been left to be.

The use of the term "debate" is really a reach since there has been only a one-sided diatribe to date; there has been no true debate. 

I read an article over the time off following Christmas that puzzled me...not that many don't have that same effect...but this one said that we, Germantown, "thirst for comprehensive water plan".

As I went a bit further, I noted that the vaunted Southeastern Wisconsin Regional Planning Commission was behind this 'movement' that would result in at least $352 million in construction expense and 53 miles of new water pipe.

Germantown, and other communities would be forced to shut down their water facilities and would buy the Lake Michigan water from the Milwaukee Water Works.  The costs are estimated to be as much as $8.5 million per year...BUT, we'd no longer need water softeners  and the attendant salt and we'd all SAVE at least $8.7 million.

Several things come to mind...

...will our water facilities be purchased from us or will we simply close the doors and the wells and the pumps and the towers and continue to eat those costs until everything is paid off?

...will this result in a fiasco on the order of the Metropolitan Milwaukee Sewerage District with the high prices over which no elected board has control?

...why should we do this?  Are we starved for water?  Do we have radium issues that are not resolvable?

...would we be included simply to provide additional funding?

...who says we "thirst for comprehensive water plan"?

...what will happen when, twenty years from now, our former water facilities will be beyond re-use, and we have a Great Lakes problem that threatens to shut down the Milwaukee Water Works?  We'll obviously have no practical alternative at that point, and will be more victimized than I suspect we'll have been for the first twenty years.

How many of our trustees have been briefed on this and who are they and where do they stand on this issue? 

The only thing I've heard anything about are Menomonee Falls with its recent deal done, New Berlin with the radium issues and Waukesha with its radium issues.  Were we involved in these discussions?  Or are we simply being lumped in because, like the MATC, the Southeastern Wisconsin Regional Planning Commission (SEWRPC) needed more money to even begin to make this boondoggle appear to be affordable?

I am growing very weary of being the flea on the tip of the tail of the doggy.  It is plain that we'll be unable to 'wag the dog' because we've no leverage; to my knowledge, we're not even represented on this Commission...but I guess that's okay since it works well for the technical college system.

Every time that tax eating dog wags its tail, we get whipsawed...if we don't end up being tossed to the ground and run over.

This report is found on the SEWRPC website by clicking here. 

The Journal Sentinel has been going through the throes faced by virtually all in the print media.  Layoffs have been encountered several times, newspaper size has diminished and now the daily news stand prices have been increased with the daily editions going from $.50 to $.75 and the Sunday edition going from $1.75 to $2.00.

I noted a week or so ago an announcement of the hiring of a senior executive and paid relatively little attention to that item.

As I saw the note about price increases, I was reminded about that earlier announcement and recalled that the new hire was given what is commonly called a "Change of Control" agreement.  These agreements typically offer protection of one kind or another to the person hired in the event of a 'change of control', or, in other words, in the event that the company were to change hands.  My recollection was that this agreement carried a term of two years from his date of hire.

I had a personal experience that saw me receiving a similar agreement and that was prompted by inquiries from potential suitors about the availability of the company by which I was then employed.

With this line of thought going, I recalled that there was a recent infusion of cash by an investor who thus increased his stake in the company.

Beyond this, the prices were raised on those things that could bring a more or less immediate increase in income that could cause the 'books' to look better than might've otherwise been the case on top of the decrease in people costs.

As I began to put all these pieces together, I found my self wondering if we're watching the sale of the Journal Sentinel being discussed, or if a suitor or two has or have made themselves known to senior management.

The pattern looks familiar.

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?

I was struck as I read the morning Wall Street Journal with two items appearing on page A2:

California adopted the nation's toughest, most far-reaching greenhouse gas emissions policy yesterday.  It likely will further exacerbate the economic plight in that state by placing new burdens costing untold dollars on the state's businesses while also creating the vaunted cap-and-trade program that is to become effective by 2012.  That will create the market for businesses to sell their capacities for creation of greenhouse gases to others who need more capacity to do the same.  Greenhouse gases are thought to trap heat rising up from the earth, thus adding to the "global warming" that is so far an unproved theory.

At the same time, Louisiana saw an 8" snowfall in Amite and had an inch of snow on the ground in New Orleans, adding to the apparent invalidity of the movement.

All this became even more frightening to me as I noted that Carol Browner has been designated to be the new "energy czar" for President-Elect Obama's cabinet.  She established herself as head of the EPA in President Clinton's cabinet and left havoc in her wake.

We are in for a real thrilling ride of environmentalism over the next four or eight years.  The excesses will be mind boggling.

I don't think I'm going to like the idea of a "czar" running a range of agencies that she believes have enough legal standing already to be able to mandate anything she decides ought be implemented.  The "change" could be devastating to an already frail economy.

There is debate over whether or not the "trickle-down" theory of economics functions as advertised.  I have a friend whom we'll refer to as John Jones for the purposes of this Blog since he prefers to remain anonymous.  He feels that he can attest to the fact that "trickle-down" is alive and well.

John Jones is a small business owner.  He is a professional and sells his services to clients.  That process often finds him traveling and sometimes traveling for several weeks at a time.  This creates, as you can imagine, some pretty hefty travel bills by the time flights, hotels and meals are all totaled up.

John has been a user of his American Express card in good standing for many years, and has had no need for a second card.  The typical AMEX card, as you may know, is not really a credit card in that it requires full payment by the due date that shows on each and every billing statement.  American Express is known to not be very understanding when one misses that due date, so John Jones has been quite meticulous about being sure his payment has been made on a timely basis.  John's card was set at a maximum amount of $10,000 and that had worked well for John over the many years he has been using it.

John tried to use his AMEX card a few weeks ago and was shocked to learn that his card was declined.  Fortunately, this usage occurred at a gas station and he had sufficient cash to pay for the gasoline.  When he called the American Express customer service group, he indicated that his card was well within the limits set by AMEX and that he was within the time period (set by them) for his payment to have been made.

He was even more shocked to learn that his $10,000 card limit had been arbitrarily lowered to $2,000.  He hadn't been notified of this and told them so.  They said that their company policy recently (apparently for about a year) has been to review all accounts and to re-establish credit limits based on the analysis of patterns of use.  Since his card had typically not been at the amount he was carrying at the time, they had decided he didn't need the $10,000 limit, so they thought they'd lower it.  In effect, AMEX was trying to protect itself since it's customers have been getting slower at paying as the economy sours, and AMEX was simply cutting future losses by limiting card exposure one customer at a time.

As stated earlier, John Jones is a small business person and isn't made of money.  He is accustomed to paying his bills and most of his clients are accustomed to paying their bills.  But, they take the full 30 days and sometimes a little more.  As the economy tightens, they are likely to take 45 days or maybe even 60 days.  Some may falter and have to go through the process of bankruptcy.

So, John is now faced with having to make some decisions.  He may need more capital put into his company.  He may need to tighten his credit terms.  He may need to insist on prepayment of some engagements if those are going to be extensive and sure to cost much more than the $2,000 limit, etc. 

John's clients may tell him that they'll find another professional with similar credentials to handle their business.  They may simply use his services much less than today.  This is representative of the "trickle-down" theory of economics, and it really has an impact on each of us whether or not we recognize that. 

We're not crying huge tears for John.  He's a big boy and he knows how the world works.  But, I thought it very interesting to hypothesize about what I would've felt in a similar situation.  What would happen if you or I were traveling on an extended trip only to learn that we can't get a hotel room in New York or Los Angeles or where ever?  Remember that hotels reserve a portion of your credit line for the costs they expect you might run up when you check in or even when you make your reservation, if in the near-term.  What would have happened if a large meal for several members of the client firm had been consumed and then you learned you couldn't cover the cost?  How embarrassing!  And, would that client have remained a client?

I'll be sure to review my credit limit on each monthly AMEX bill since I'm also a user.  I'll try to be sure I have some other alternative 'plastic' just in case.  And I'll continue to try to pay my bills on a timely basis even as the economy softens.

And, I'll continue to be a firm believer in "trickle-down" economics...at least on the ill effects of "trickle-down" economics.

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!

I wrote about 'slippery slopes' back on October 15th.  It seems that things have gotten progressively worse since then.  We are, if we permit it, deluged with bad news.  That can take a real toll on us if we permit.

I know it isn't happening this often, but seemingly I read about another 'intervention' on a daily basis.  This morning I learned that you and me have bailed out Citibank with $20 billion of our dollars and more to follow that in the form of protecting that company against some $300 billion of bad investments.

We have been pummeled over the subject of the 'big three' automobile companies and what it is we need to do for them and their employees.  This one particularly hits home since we have relatives who could be adversely affected depending upon what is or isn't done.

We know people who have had significant losses in the stock market over the past several months.  Obviously the word 'significant' has a different meaning to each of us.  If we had a million dollars and lost half, that would be 'significant'.  If we had five hundred dollars and lost half of that, that would be just as significant if not more so, as I suspect you'd agree.

I read about our president-elect and a new multi-hundred billion dollar 'bail out' program that he wants ready for his signature by the time he is sworn in as our next president.  I read about the price of turkeys being higher this year. Thanksgiving Day is upon us and I imagine that many are questioning what it is they have for which to be thankful.  Even though we live in the greatest time in history and in 'the land of plenty', we sometimes seem to have problems finding things for which to be thankful.

It really seems that we have to search for our daily dose of "feel good".  Yes; I do believe that we need some "feel good" daily or we risk becoming deadened to the things about us that are good.  Some of us find that dose of "feel good" in the scriptures; some of us find it in the beauty of nature; some of us find it in the kind words of a friend; some of us find it in the giggles of a youngster; some of us find it in books or art or music; some of us find it in the warmth of the touch of a loved one; some of us find it having done a good deed for another.

Some of us, on the other hand, feel good only if we're able to buy things, or if we can dine at the best restaurants, or if we can sip an expensive wine each day, or if we can feel superior to a neighbor because our house is bigger, or our automobile is larger and more expensive.

In our present economic situation, it will be much easier to find our daily "feel good" if we can do that in a non-economic sense.  It isn't always easy to make that transition; I know that from having been on both sides of this equation.  But, it is well worth the effort that is required.  Some of us will find ourselves learning or re-learning how it is to live on less; some of us have already begun that learning process.  Very few of us will be able to avoid some level of 'less' during this period in our nation's history.

But, we don't have to go without that daily dose of "feel good".   

Okay, I lied just to get you to look; because, not many people read when I write on this topic...even though it is critically important! 

This is really about Wisconsin and its plan to require all small businesses (50 or fewer employees) to have health insurance.

I am a small business person and I do provide health insurance.  I don't want to be forced to do that, since I might be unable to stay in business someday if that were to be a requirement.

It is bad enough that Wisconsin would tell me I have to do this, but it is also going to ultimately tell me what plan I have to subscribe to in order to provide the required coverage.  I will be forced to buy my health insurance through something called BadgerChoice and a new concept called a 'connector'.  Massachusetts has been using a 'connector' for a couple of years; that plan has exacerbated the shortage of primary care doctors, has driven many insurance brokers out of business and has been short of money since its inception (this leads to rationing of care, by the way).

As I drive through Germantown, I see a bunch of what are called 'small businesses'.  I recognize that there are more employees employed by small businesses in Wisconsin than are employed by big business.  I am among the roughly 50% of small businesses that are able to provide health insurance and I do that because it is good for my business and for my employees...and therefore for my customers.

There have been rumors circulating about a new small business health plan that was being touted in very quiet sessions using a power point show that had been designed by the Wisconsin Department of Health Services that is now run by Ms. Karen Timberlake who obviously gets her marching orders from Governor Jim Doyle.  The Business Journal published an article today that discusses this program.  I know enough people in the benefits industry to have heard about this several months ago, and dreaded the day that it gained enough steam to break out into the light of day...at least partially...since there are a lot of things that we're not yet being told.

By the way, Ms. Timberlake is quoted in this article as saying, "I would like to avoid having small businesses opt out if they already have a good deal.  Otherwise, the program will only have high-risk participants and insurance will still be unaffordable."  That is why I said that we'll be forced to join this plan.

This is one of the 'great benefits' of the new Democrat-controlled state government.  They can make this happen without regard for whether or not it is a good thing.  They have wanted this for a long time, and by golly, they're going to have it now that they are in absolute power.  They need some "Pass Go & Collect $200" cards from the Feds and that will happen, if not already in place, because the Dems control that level of government, as well.  We voted for change, and we're gonna' get it whether we like it or not.

What is worse is that this is being cobbled together in the new state budget so that it will not be a stand-alone bill that can be debated in public.  This is the same state budget that now has to find ways to handle a $5.4 billion funding shortfall.  Tell me what comes to mind when you see this great new program being foisted on the small businesses in Wisconsin at the same time we have a huge hole needing to be filled?

TAX INCREASES!

On top of tax increases, there will be more and more vacant store fronts and more and more people unemployed; and it will be able to be traced directly to this garbage.

How appropriate that this would surface just as we prepare to "stuff" our turkeys.  Those aren't the only things being "stuffed".

Hedged promises...

Promises are made in every election campaign, and especially in presidential election campaigns.  We're told that one candidate will do this for us and the other will do that for us.  We are made promise after promise, almost on the order of a 'can you top this' game.

Today, as the president-elect makes his preparations for the assumption of office, there is a decided 'tamping down' of his promises.  Those promises are said to have totaled some $135 billion per year.  Those are the promises that can be specifically identified.  There are another 'passel of promises' that we'll never be able to price because they were implied to special interest groups and/or made in somewhat more private settings as deals were cut.

Already, we see and hear that some are "shocked" that their pet things are being relegated to the back of the line so far as promises to be kept.  There is a very simple thing that all should remember, and that is this:  If you vote for a person on the basis of promises made that will favor you or your special interest group, you need to step back and reassess just how you'll make voting decisions in the future.  After the campaigning is done and reality begins to reestablish itself, we realize that not every promise will be kept, that some will but they won't resemble what you expected and that some will result in nothing like what you expected they would.

Today, there simply isn't $135 billion available for the grandiose promises made on the trail to the White House.  And, even the money that may be available will be allocated according to lobbying and the back-room deals in Congress.  Your needs and my needs be damned; there are more important things that have to be accomplished...such as the payoffs to those who got the next president to this point.  And that is the case no matter which ticket won the popular vote.

Character would be a much better barometer with which to gage decisions than promises which were probably only intended to gather a few more votes.  I hope all of us voted on that basis...but I am skeptical.

Bail-out expectations...

It is amazing to me, although it shouldn't be at my age, to see the length of the lines of those special interests seeking a government bail-out.  The Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae sub-prime mortgage debacle (Barney Frank, Christopher Dodd, and Charles Schumer continue to try to hide from their special culpability in all this) pointed out just how shaky the economy was.  That proved to be more than the economy could swallow without massive corrections.

And, it showed the truly global nature of the economy...every country was in a very tenuous position economically and all are now in the tank...except maybe for China and maybe for India.  Even the oil sheiks are pinching pennies or whatever it is they pinch.

Enter stage-left...

The likely actors were lined up before we knew the magnitude of the debacle to come.  The investment banks, the insurance companies, the commercial banking industry, the Wall Street stock barons, the hedge fund managers; all were waiting for their piece of the bail-out.  So some $700 billion was thrown into a thing called TARP and the Treasury Secretary, Paulson, was given the go ahead to steer us through.  Of course, Congress began almost immediately to try to seize the tiller and steer where it thought it could garner the greatest political gains.

Detroit has been in shambles, and that happened long before the most recent economic decline; and that is in no small part courtesy of both federal and state politics and excessive payroll costs, both labor and executive.  The auto makers were 'given' $25 billion for "green" manufacturing change-overs.  That money has yet to be dispensed, by the way, as is so often the case when Congress does something like this.

The Democrats are now working their behinds off to force the Bush administration to move ahead on the next major phase of the 'bail-out' by trying to get a new hand-out through in the coming "lame duck" session starting tomorrow.  The obvious reason behind this is simple, they can then point to one more "failure" on the part of 'Bush 43' when this all goes down the toilet...which is most likely where it'll go.

The Republicans, of course, are trying to sit this one out by saying that the $25 billion of "green" money ought be the bridge that Detroit is seeking, to force the Democrats to finally have to show some political courage of their own come January 20th.  It would make the Republicans happier if they were able to paint the Dems with the brush that had been reserved for President Bush and the Republicans.

Underlying all this action on the 'stage', to which I referred earlier, is the problem you and me are facing as members of the audience for this multiple act thriller/dark comedy.  Yet again, we see that politics trumps everything in Washington, D.C. 

Our representative democracy is the greatest form of government ever seen on this earth, but it sure has its seamy and vulgar sides...and we seem to be witnessing most of it today.

And you and me are the only people who can make that less a problem as we cast our future votes.  We must demand better...and we must punish those who disobey our demands by sending them home!

A few short weeks ago, our governor mentioned that we would be contending with as much as a $3 billion budget shortfall in the next biennium.

A few days ago, that number was escalated to as much as $4 billion.  At that time, the governor was quoted as saying that he would do everything possible to avoid having to increase taxes.

Today, we appear to be staring a $5 billion budget shortfall in the eye, and, while he says he will do everything possible to avoid tax increases, there is some mention of income tax and sales tax.

I am reminded of that age old 'frog in the water' story.  We're the frog and the State of Wisconsin is the water and the elected masses will prove to be the hand that turns the heat up so that we boil under the strain of tax increases.

In the intervening few weeks, there has been no talk about how the budget can be cut to accomplish the magic 'balancing' act.  The state budget has been rigged for this failure for awhile.  Handy dandy accounting games have been used to continually push a significant shortfall into the next biennium in order to help "balance" the current biennium. 

That and the use of funds 'stolen' from every little rainy day money pot the governor could find have, to mix metaphors, kept the wolf from the door; but the 'big, bad wolf' has just huffed and puffed and the door is about to cave in on top of us taxpayers.

There is no other money available.  There are only budgetary cuts or tax and fee increases.  Guess which will be used to get the majority of the shortfall covered.  Oh, there will be some marginal cuts for our consumption but nothing even approaching what is required.

What will they cut?  Education?  Are you joking?  The new health care program they're trying to foist on us?  Are you joking?

I'm sorry to tell you that I think we all better buckle our chinstraps; we've a rough ride ahead and the Democrats are in control.  They haven't been too anxious to reduce spending as I recall.

Maybe I'll be surprised; I certainly hope so.  I'd love to take a bite of that crow!

I find myself in a contemplative mood following the election last Tuesday.  I was not a Barack Obama fan but he is our president-elect and will guide us, in conjunction with the Congress, over at least the next four years.  He is my president-elect and, as he said during his press conference yesterday, "We have only one president at a time."  I really want him to be successful!

There were three articles on the Opinion pages of the week-end Wall Street Journal this morning that I found particularly appropriate in these days of transition.  Maybe you'll find them such as well.

The first, was Jim Towey's piece titled Why I'll Miss President Bush.

The second was Jason Riley's The Weekend Interview with Rahm Emanuel, the newly selected Chief of Staff for President-Elect Barack Obama.

And, finally, an editorial concerning my favorite rising star, Rep. Paul Ryan.

I hope you enjoy these items.

The voters in Wisconsin have decided that the Democrats are going to run the state for at least two years.  They control state government and can, if they choose, push their way past any Republican opposition.  That remains to be seen, however I suspect the power vested in the Democrats will be too much for them to resist.  Just as there is a 'pent-up demand' in the Democrat majority in Washington, there is also that same force at work in Madison.

Some of the things I expect we'll see include (in spite of my protestations):

• Smoking Bans that apply to all public buildings, and some outdoor public spaces across the state...
• These bans will follow the patterns set by some municipalities and counties that have taken action already.  The ban will probably include taverns and gaming establishments.  The ban will not attempt to outlaw tobacco products but could also include additional taxation above and beyond that we've seen in the recent past.
• These bans will, unfortunately, trample on the property rights of business owners.  Tavern owners should be given the right to determine if they will appeal to non-smokers or to smokers.  Cigar bars and retail smoking parlors should be permitted to continue to exist.  Second-hand smoke and its dangers to employees will be the mantra and "property rights be damned" will be the battle cry.
• Expansion of state-funded health care plans...
• There will be little or no opportunity for a rational discussion of those already existing programs where lessons could be learned because the controlling party members want no such 'light of day' to shine on their ideas.  That proved too damaging in the past, and they have the raw power to ram this through.
• We risk moving too far down this slippery slope so as to inhibit a return in the future as this behemoth proves to have been the wrong decision.  These incursions in the 'free marketplace' will carry a dastardly price tag.
• There will likely be more 'mandated benefits' than in the past in spite of the fact that a significant part of our cost issues can be laid at the feet of existing over-zealousness on this front.
• Education Economics...
• I am convinced that the QEO (qualifying economic offer) provisions in place now will be eliminated or significantly altered and that this will lead to higher taxes within a year.
• I expect that there will be a significant change in the manner in which education is funded and there is a present danger that, without adequate debate, those results will be skewed toward the establishment and not the students and taxpayers.
• I expect to see limitations on alternative forms of education such as home schooling, Internet Schools, school choice and on and on.  WEAC owns the Democrats and it will demand its payback.
• Increased Taxes...
• At the very time when our state should be cutting expense to reduce the tax burden, it will add expense.  The state budget is already some $3 to $4 billion underfunded.
• Mandated programs implemented at the state level are unlikely to be adequately funded, so localities will be forced to increase their taxes to comply.
• Caps on local tax increase rates will be lifted or significantly modified so that property taxes can and will increase more often and at higher amounts.  There is never 'enough' money and there are always 'good programs' that really need to be enacted.

My concern is that the controlling party will be unable to keep itself from making too many things on its 'wish list' reality, and we will all suffer as the result.

I really hope that I am wrong

Now that the dust of the election returns has begun to settle, the talk of the governance approach of our new president has taken flight.  I have read several pieces that discuss this subject and heard several discussions on the same subject.  The Wall Street Journal had an excellent editorial today titled Obama's Real Opposition.

The subject of that piece was the old line liberals who will be pushing and pulling President Obama as they wish, to make him decide as they wish him to decide.

There are many who believe that President Obama will actually move to the center left as he takes office and begins to face the daily decisions required of him.  There are also many who remind us of his very liberal voting record and suggest, therefore, that he'll govern from the left or far left.

We are reminded of those with whom President Obama will interact:

• David Obey from our own state who wants to slash the defense budget to get money for his social entitlements.
• Barney Frank who recently said that he thought defense could be reduced by 25%.
• Chuck Schumer who continues to push banks to lend more money even after being heavily involved in causing the Freddie Mac/Fannie Mae problems due to similar tactics.
• George Miller who heads the House Education and Labor Committee who is talking about 'nationalizing' 401K and other private pension plans to free up all that money for other purposes.
• Jim McDermott who chairs the House Ways and Means Committee and who seems to like Mr. Miller's ideas.
• John Conyers who loves the idea of the Europeans indicting President Bush and Bush officials for 'war crimes'.
• Henry Waxman who wants to grab the Chairmanship of the House Energy and Commerce Committee from Rep. John Dingell so that he can really push the global warming agenda.
• Pete Stark who believes that a Canadian-style single payer health care system is exactly right for us.
• Rep. Pelosi whom we presume will retain her leadership post will continue down the very liberal path she has trod to now.
• Sen. Reid whom we presume will continue in his leadership role, although he could find that a difficult task given his miscues so far.

These men are well-seasoned congressional combat veterans who know the inner workings much better than does the new President Obama.  They will stop short of nothing to take advantage of what they see as a 'significant mandate' from the United States electorate.  They are running short of time in which to make the country over into the image they believe is best for us all; they will not be anxious to slow their pace simply because a new president wants that to happen.

President-Elect Obama has seemed to recognize this in his appointment of Rep. Rahm Emanuel (D from Chicago) as his new Chief of Staff.  This is the single most powerful position in any White House.  The person in this role manages the President; he determines who the President will see and what he will hear; he selects those on the staff who will be granted limited access to the President; he will play a very large part in determining the programs the new president will pursue and the order in which various initiatives will occur.  Everything goes through the Chief of Staff.  Everything.

Emanuel is a rough and tumble Chicago-style politician.  He is liberal.  He is going to be a tough Chief of Staff.  The battles between him and those in Congress who believe they deserve the President's ear will be legend before this tour of duty is finished.

I suspect that our new president will be pushed to the left of center very quickly whether or not he wishes to be in that position.  The question in my mind is just how far left of center he'll end up after the first hundred days that seem to be so magical.

He will have inherited a terrible economy and a country with so much debt that it will be able to do only limited things in the way of new programs.  Against that backdrop stand the legions such as described above who simply don't care about this, that or the other.  They are intent on getting their way, on making their imprint seen.

This Congress has it within its power to limit this new president to a single term, as was the case with President Carter, if it forces the new president too far to the left and pushes too hard for what it thinks is now being demanded by a country they believe to be left-leaning like themselves.

First, thank goodness that the elections are essentially over this morning.  This seemed a particularly grueling election season although I don't quite understand why.

From a personal perspective, I won some and lost some; probably like many of you.  Now, I'm trying to determine what I think will be happening as the result of the votes made yesterday and earlier by absentee ballot.  I haven't even thought about the national implications, but have some ideas about our state and local implications.

The Democrats achieved the 'trifecta' they have desired by taking control of the Assembly, and keeping control of the Senate and statehouse.

Some of the results that I foresee are these...

• The state budget is in a three to four billion dollar shortfall situation,  I think we'll see an increase in the sales tax statewide, and that we could see an increase in our income taxes, as well.
• The municipalities have long complained about the limitations they face on local property tax increases.  I think those limits will either be removed or significantly increased so that we will almost certainly see property tax increases at our village level.
• The state teachers' union, WEAC, has long advocated the removal of the QEO (qualified economic offer) rules in Wisconsin.  I think we'll see QEOs gone and that will result in some very large increases in teacher compensation and benefits thus increasing our local property taxes on that score, as well.

Among the other hot button issues will be the discussions concerning a state run health care plan for virtually all citizens.  This has been happening incrementally in the various BadgerCare plans, but I expect to see a real push in the coming year.

Given the budget shortfall and the pain that will cause, I suspect that other programs will have to be put on the 'back burner'.

Other things, such as the ban smoking movement will be much more visible.

Some have wondered if our current governor might be selected to become part of President Obama's leadership team.  Governor Doyle is actually less liberal than is the lieutenant governor, Barbara Lawton.  I won't be surprised if Governor Doyle is tapped for a role in Washington, but I'll grit my teeth at the thought of a "Governor Lawton".

I am overloaded with politics!  This election for president has been going on seemingly forever.  Obviously, it has been going on for nearly two full years.  The two final candidates have spent nearly $1 billion between the two of them.  They have filled the airwaves with television and radio advertisements and they have filled the newspapers and mailboxes with written advertisements.

In addition to the presidential campaigns, we have been inundated with congressional campaigning and local senate and assembly campaigning.  Telephones have been ringing with 'get out the vote' campaigns and with 'robo calls'.  Lawn signs have seemed to grow for the past three or four months.  Early voting has been going on for a month or better.

I have watched the 'talking heads' tell me what I should be thinking until I want to throw something through my television screen.  I have seen the Saturday Night Live videos over and over again.  I have seen the late night show clips over and over again.

I have listened to the 'pollsters' explain this and that trying to convince us as to their method's accuracy.  The plethora of polls has produced varying numbers for months on end.  If there are six polls released in a day, there six different sets of numbers.  Exit polls were even wrong last time around.  Why should I put money on pre-election polls?

The candidates seem unable to even agree with themselves.  One tax plan has three or four different versions in as many weeks.  Amazingly, each political party is to blame for everything bad that has happened according to the other party.  Washington insiders dress up to appear on the Sunday morning talk shows and spew the day's 'talking points' as if they are gospel.

We are given the treatment befitting idiots by both parties.  If we are so dumb as to fall for their lines, why in the world are we given a vote?  We would obviously not even be able to find a polling place if we were susceptible to their diatribes.

Political activist organizations are falling all over themselves to sign up new voters.  Mickey Mouse and Donald Duck get registered and we are to feel assured that every vote cast is a legitimate vote from a legitimate voter.

Senators running for re-election are convicted of accepting bribes.  Congressmen who took money from Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac like it was going out of style are now sitting in Washington meeting rooms with the look of the pious telling us why it was someone else's fault that our economy took a nose dive.

Re-election to office is so nearly automatic that we citizens ought to be examined carefully to assure full mental faculties before we permitted to get close to a ballot box.

I am tired and it isn't even election day yet.  I am disgusted with what we have permitted to happen in our country.  I am disgusted that so many of my fellow citizens seem to fall for the largest promise of good things if we'll simply elect the right people from the right party.  Elect me and I'll give you this; no, elect me and I'll give even more than he will!

Have we lost our senses completely?  Do we really think that government creates anything?  Is it possible that we can all get a tax cut, especially when tax reductions from one administration will be ended?  Is it really possible for 95% of Americans to receive a tax cut?  How is it that we can reduce taxes when we have the national debt that we have?  How is it that we permit ourselves to be hoodwinked on a regular two year and four year cycle?  Should we really end our foreign trade deals?  Will we be able to have what we want when others don't get what they want?  How will we keep our economy moving when we refuse to recognize that we can't possible get to the level of greenhouse gas emissions the various players are telling us they'll get us to in the time span allotted by their plans?  Where do we think the money for such programs is coming from?

Are we nuts?

I have political overload, and I fear it isn't going to end on the evening of November 4th