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!

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".

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!

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

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".

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

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

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

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

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

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

Vote your conscience next Tuesday!

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Have I lost my mind?  I hope not.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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.

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.

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!

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).

If we could look into the future and learn the outcome of our decisions before we implemented those decisions, would we do so?  If we did see the outcome, would we persist even if the outcome was not desirable?

We have just that opportunity, as a state, before us today.  We can see the outcome of following the path we've been following and we can see it in time to avert the same consequences...if we are willing to do so.  The Wall Street Journal offered us the opportunity this morning.

Michigan is the example.  Tax increases are the path that was followed.  Dire consequences are the result.

Governor Granholm, a second-term Democrat, shut her state down last year until she got her wish of increased taxes.  Her tax increases were supposed to raise another $1.3 Billion in new revenue that Michigan could 'invest' in social programs, and to lure new businesses to the state.

The outcome isn't what she envisioned.  Michigan's revenue is down by one-third from what had been expected.  Tax collections are falling further and further behind as people lose jobs and as property values fall.  Michigan is actually in a recession unlike what the mainstream media would have you believe about the country as a whole.  Of course, Michigan's Governor blames everything but her tax hikes for this dilemma.

Michigan's unemployment rate is now at 6.9% far ahead of the country and its neighboring states.  Michigan ranks 4th in the country in terms of declining property values for homes.  Two families leave the state for every one family that moves in (which is virtually what is now happening in Wisconsin).

The only thing enjoying growth in Michigan today is government according to the WSJ editorial.

If even more convincing is necessary, just take a look at Texas.  Texas has been following the opposite course and has arguably the most vibrant economy in our country today.  New businesses are streaming into Texas and unemployment rates are less than 4%.  Tax rates have been reduced and good things follow.

So, we do have the opportunity to look into the future and see the outcome for Wisconsin...if we're willing to do so and if we're smart enough to believe what we see.

Our state's elected officials need to pay attention, and they need to pay attention from this day forward if we are to avoid the same future.  We must cut spending.  We cannot mortgage our future by borrowing money like there's no tomorrow...if that continues, there may not be a tomorrow, at least not a fiscally-sound and affordable tomorrow. 

Wisconsin is in the midst of its own budget woes; we watched the 'special session' that was called to deal with those issues.  There was actually nothing 'special' about those sessions.  When Governor Doyle seems a better tax cutter than the Republicans, then there was nothing 'special' about the session.

This started with the headline, "If We Could Look Into The Future, Would We?"  I fear that the answer is no, unless us citizens begin to demand different outcomes.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Randall Melchert has announced that he is seeking election to the Assembly seat (24th District) being vacated by Sue Jeskewitz at the end of her current term.

He is the son of a prominent Menomonee Falls couple and the family has deep roots in the Falls.  Randy, as he calls himself, declares himself to be conservative and his stated positions suggest that he may be quite conservative.  His campaign site (www.randymelchert.com) contains position statements on a variety of subjects.  He is a member of the Waukesha Republican Party.

Among his areas of expertise is apparently that of debate skills.  That should serve him well in both his campaign and in the Assembly if he is victorious.

I have extended an invitation to him to engage readers by responding to questions that will be published on Curmudgeon's Corner much as we've begun doing in the Senate race.  I hope he will accept that invitation.

There is, so far, no indication of any opponents but that may develop over the coming weeks.

The next two questions in our 'debate' are posed below.  We'll reverse the order and feature Sen. Darling's responses to each question followed by Rep. Wasserman's responses.

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

Darling: 

During the 2003-05 budget process, I was the Senate Chair of the budget-writing Joint Committee on Finance.  In that budget, we cut spending on state government operations by 27.5%, without cutting core services such as programs upon which low-income citizens rely.

In addition to the types of spending cuts such as those made in that budget, it's worth discussing programs that were created or expanded in the state budget passed last fall.  In that budget, which I voted against, the Governor proposed increased spending of nearly $100 million of "general fund" revenue just for new or expanded programs.  Certainly each of those programs will will have supporters and the merit of this spending can be debated, but there ought to at least be a discussion on whether these spending increases can be set aside or delayed until we resolve the state's fiscal problems.

Earlier this May, the  Milwaukee Journal Sentinel ran an article about how some prison guards appear to be abusing the sick leave and overtime rules to inflate their salaries into the six figures.  Tightening up the sick leave and overtime policy at the Department of Corrections is just one specific example of where the state can still provide necessary services but at a lower cost to taxpayers.

Wasserman:

Instead of program closures we should have county closures.  There's no reason for Wisconsin to have 72 counties.  Counties are often just an extension of state government, and one of the primary reasons why taxes are so high in Wisconsin is because we have the third highest amount of government per capita in the nation.  For example, Appleton is in three counties; Wisconsin Dells is in four.  Bayside, in my district, is in two counties.  That means keeping multiple sets of tax records and voting lists and keeping track of different court systems, highway departments, sheriff's and veterans' offices.  I proposed legislation to downsize and streamline government by reducing the number of counties to 18 or less, a 75% reduction that would save taxpayers tens of millions of dollars.  Creating new county lines that do not divide communities artificially will consolidate services by ensuring that only one county serves each city, village or town.  It's time we changed our government structure from an 1848 model to one that meets the needs of the 21st century.

* * * * * * * * * * *

Do you support the repeal of state minimum mark-up laws?  If so, why and if not, why not?

Darling:

Yes.  The mandatory minimum markup on gasoline was enacted in Wisconsin in the 1930s to prevent large conglomerates from entering the gasoline market and driving "ma and pa shops" out of business.  The minimum markup law requires gas retailers to mark up the price of gas by 9.18%.  The Federal Trade Commission and economists have suggested the law restricts competition, hurts consumers and drives up the cost of gas.  This antiquated law makes it illegal for Wisconsin gas retailers to offer discounts on gasoline.

U.S. Magistrate Judge William Callahan ruled in October 2007 that Wisconsin's minimum markup law violates federal anti-trust laws.  However, he did not issue an injunction against the state's law, so the law is still in place until the Legislature acts to repeal it.  I am coauthor of a bill that would repeal the minimum markup law, but the session ended in March without a vote on the bill.

Wasserman:

I have voted for every single repeal of the minimum mark-up law since I've been in the legislature.  I have been very frustrated by legislators in both the Republican and Democratic party who would rather talk about the free market than support it and have refused to take up this issue.

In addition to supporting a full repeal, I introduced legislation that would repeal the minimum mark-up on prescription drugs.  Recently Wal-Mart and Target expanded their $4 a month discount drug programs, but the minimum mark-up law prevents such programs from taking full effect in Wisconsin.  You might think we'd have to go to Canada to buy cheap drugs but no, all we have to do is go to Illinois, where blood pressure medication that costs $28 here sells for $4 there.  It's bad enough that we're paying more for gas because of the minimum mark-up law, but paying more for medication becomes a life and death issue when people are facing such tough times with their budgets.  The minimum mark-up law in all forms has to go, but let's begin with my proposal, which will drastically reduce the cost of healthcare in Wisconsin.

* * * * * * * * * *

My thanks to both Sen. Darling and Rep. Wasserman for making this forum possible.  We have more questions already answered and will produce another of these 'debates' in the next week or so.

In the meantime, please help us by sending you questions or subjects you'd like to see addressed, and I'll gather the information from both the incumbent and the challenger so that all can share in the answers.  You can do so in the form of comments tied to this Blog or simply by clicking the email link at the top of this Blog to reach me that way.

It appears that the Assembly and Senate have reached sufficient agreement to bring a budget repair bill to a vote later this week.

Word available indicates that there may have been a few actual budget reductions while the bulk of the heavy lifting is being done on the back of money being pulled from the transportation fund and money being pulled from the 'rainy day' fund.

Additional tactics reportedly include pushing some school funding into the next budget period and adding some additional taxes that were overlooked before this.

The long and short is that we'll be borrowing more money to replace the tax collection shortfall that will be used for transportation expenses.  Some cookies have been included that don't seem to have anything to do with the budget dilemma so those must've been payment for votes promised by some of the politicians.

We will be looking at the same set of issues next budget at this rate since we're not fixing the problems by reducing expenditures.  Except those issues will very likely have bigger teeth.  Our elected officials are being asked to vote in favor of a deal that pins its hopes on an improved economy by the next time the 'problem' pops up on radar screens.

What will it take to get actual budget reductions approved?  Apparently more people in office with the fortitude to stand up against the tax and spend crowd that sits in far too many chairs today.