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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

The additional filed candidates are:

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

Mr. Torrey Lauer (D), a Germantown resident

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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'.

Barley Pop Pub closing?  Say it ain't so! 

I had the opportunity to get clarification on the story below from the Village Clerk several hours after posting the blog below.  She advised that the license for the Barley Pop Pub had been renewed earlier this month along with all the other establishments' licenses.  The issue concerning taxes owed must be resolved by the owners not later than June 30th according to Village Ordinance to prevent the loss of the current license.  Any establishment that has a liquor license must remain in good standing so far as building codes, taxes and fees and so on in order to avoid the suspension or loss of the license.  Village officials are powerless to make any concessions since the ordinance governs the situation.  Discussion did occur on the subject of amending the ordinance, however that did not result in any action being taken. 

My thanks to the Village Clerk for her clarification.

* * * * * * * * * * 

The liquor license of the Barley Pop is being threatened with non-renewal by the village unless back property taxes are paid by the end of June, and the owners say the Barley Pop may close if that happens.

The Barley Pop has been a fixture for nearly as long as I can remember.  I wonder how many of G'town's citizens have been in the Barley Pop at one time or another?  Probably a significant percentage and probably more than just once in awhile.

I don't recall hearing or reading of the occasional bar fight that I see reported every so often for other G'town establishments.  My food has always tasted fine; the portions are good; it isn't a gourmet stop, but it is a really good pub.  The non-smoking accommodations certainly point the way for an alternative to banning all smoking and the owners did that because they knew it would cater to most all the public.  I've always thought of the Barley Pop as being a well run business.

This business has been around for more than two decades.  I've not heard of this type of situation (unpaid taxes) regarding this business before.  I wonder just what the problem could be?  Could it be that the rising cost of food has slowed the business?  Could the cost of gasoline have depressed the business?  Every time I go into a grocery store, I'm reminded that food costs are rising regularly, and I know this has hit restaurants, as well.  It is not at all unusual to sit down and to be handed a freshly printed menu...with new higher prices.

We don't eat out as often as we did because the costs are going up and our budget is squeezed by other needs.  Maybe that has been the primary cause, or a major part of the problem, at least.

I hope that the owners and the village trustees can resolve this issue before we lose the Barley Pop.  It has become one of the icons of Germantown.  Our 'downtown' area doesn't need more empty store fronts.  Blight tends to lead to more blight and that isn't the mark of one of the thirty best places to live.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

* * * * * * * * * *

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

* * * * * * * * * *

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

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

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

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

* * * * * * * * * *

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Several thoughts occur:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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).

A name familiar to many Germantown people will become even more familiar.  Jason LeSage, a two-term Germantown school board member has filed as a Republican in the race for the 24th Assembly district seat.

In reading his press release, it appears we may have a choice between two conservative thinkers.  LeSage indicates that he favors lower taxes, fewer regulations and reduced government spending.

He also has agreed to participate in our 'debate' with Randy Melchert; as a matter of fact, he offered to participate since he claims to be a reader.  That may be the only soft spot we'll find in him :-)

He was an intern in Senator Alberta Darling's office, and holds a bachelor's degree in communications and political science from UW-Milwaukee.

We welcome Jason to the race and look forward to getting to know him and Randy Melchert better over the next few weeks and months.  I had actually wondered 'out loud' about Jason LeSage as a possible candidate over a cup of coffee with a friend the other day.

Will we find a Democrat candidate before this is all over?

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.

There seems a very real sense in our community that bodes ill if the school board decides to pursue a re-vote on the same bonding issue from the spring election this fall.

Judging from the discussion that has ensued since that news was made public, whether or not formalized by the board at the time of its disclosure, the residents of the school district appear to feel very much opposed to the idea that a re-vote would follow so closely on the heels of the recent defeat.  And, they seem to be especially opposed to a re-vote on the identical bonding questions.

We are able to observe the 'test tube' that is called Hartford and what we see in that situation could easily be what we'll see in Germantown unless the school board steps to the plate with a different approach.  Even though the board used the services of a communications consultant, the communication seemed to be unidirectional.  The district voters' response was this: "you talk to us but you don't seem to listen to us".  That may be an over-simplification, but that is the essence of the problem today.  In Hartford, now, when the real damage is done, the board seems to have realized that it might need to reach out and learn why.  That may well be 'too little, too late' and that will be a shame because there are undoubtedly needs.

If the voters are 'given another opportunity' in the same form and in such a quick fashion, they may very well take that as an insult and seize that opportunity to really show their dissatisfaction. That will succeed in nothing more than polluting the well for a good long time to come.

There seems more a problem with feeling that the board has ignored the voters' feelings as expressed in the initial outcome, than outright opposition to anything the district wants to do.  Although, the district is getting very close to the edge of that chasm, in my opinion, and really needs to step back, reassess and reformulate its approach.  The outright distrust factor is growing and will only be overcome with earnest effort.  It will not be overcome with 'in your face' tactics...and that is what seems to be happening today. 

It seems from my vantage point that communication has been lacking.  I know that the school board hasn't taken that approach intentionally; at least I hope that has not been the case. Communication involves give and take.  It involves outreach in a form that seems more earnest than purely intended to show voters why the district is correct.  The district may well be correct, but the voters need to come to understand that.

Just as all students don't learn in the same way, all voters don't learn in the same way.  Maybe we need to slow the process a bit, engage the citizenry in other ways and have some earnest back and forth conversations.

My opinion is that a mistake was made when taxpayer money was spent on the Baird effort; it wasn't a lot of money, but it didn't sit well in the community.  I think that simply having had board members out in the community would've been better providing they were each on the same page.

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 MATC has developed yet another draft budget after the first such exercise produced the need for a 6.4% property tax increase (see Blog of April 23rd).  At the time of that budget draft, the governor apparently said he would not countenance such an increase.  MATC announced then that it would go back to the old drawing board and see what could be done to get down into the range of 'as little' as a 5.0% to 5.5% property tax increase.

Guess what?  They can now apparently declare victory in this onerous task since the finance committee is only proposing a revised draft budget that would consume another 4.9% increase in property taxes.  The proposed draft will come to a vote by the full board on May 27th.

MATC has developed budgets since 2004 that will have caused property tax increases of more than 30% if this draft is ultimately approved.

Has your personal income increased by 30% in the past four years?  Has your savings account grown by 30% in the past four years?  Has yours become a single income family instead of a dual income family in the past four years?  I doubt it.  But, if so, congratulations!  Even with such an increase, if that has happened for you, I'll wager that you have better places to put your hard-earned money.

The MATC finance committee says it has cut all it could cut from the budget.  Jeannette Bell, committee member and former West Allis mayor, was in favor of not only this 4.9% property tax increase, but also favors reducing the reserve account held by MATC which has been done as part of this draft. 

People costs are budgeted to increase significantly.  Wages and salaries will go up about $1.5 million.  Health care costs will rise by some $2 million.  Other 'fringe' benefits will add another $4.5 million, including  $2 million required to bring the recognition of accrued benefits onto the MATC books like any other 'business' must do today.  That is $2 million of 'funny money'; where else would we find accounting tricks employed if we were to subject this institution to the standards maintained by businesses?

I cannot accept the statement that MATC has cut 'everything possible' and still needs this kind of increase budget over budget.  The paragraph above suggests to me that people costs are way too high, and a very quick way to achieve reductions there is to have fewer people.  Maybe MATC should think about outsourcing certain functions.  Maybe they should think about 'tough love' negotiations with union representatives.  There are or ought to be limits even for tax-funded entities.

Maybe MATC needs to review its class demand and determine the bottom third by attendance and end those classes.  If there is insufficient demand, there is apparently not an identifiable 'significant' need.  MATC cannot be providing services to a market that doesn't exist in sufficient numbers to show demand.  That would free up space for other uses, and it would, or should, enable staff cuts that will reduce costs.

It is impossible to forget, in this debate over MATC, that there is a very real problem with the Milwaukee schools system and we must recognize that some of MATC's costs should rightfully be paid for by the Milwaukee school system since MATC is mopping up after that dismal performance.  Adult high school education classes and GED classes are an example of how the public education structure in Milwaukee fails its students and the residents of the community.  Interestingly enough, this may well be an intended consequence rather than an unintended consequence.  It gets non-Milwaukee taxpayers to pay more of the Milwaukee education costs than is already done through state tax distribution formula.

Finally, I suggest once again that MATC needs to clean up its many acts.  It needs to get out of the failed business incubator function.  It needs to quit building physical monuments to itself and its leaders.  It needs to look at sale and lease-back arrangements.  It needs to reduce staff. 

Frankly, it is becoming more and more apparent that significant leadership changes may be required, as well.  MATC leadership seems to be ignorant of the public's needs.  This is an institution answerable to no one other than the governor through his ability to appoint members to the state technical college board.  The state legislature and the governor must act to bring this renegade system under absolute control.  There must be a change in the manner in which the state board and the district boards are created; voters need to determine who sits on those boards.  The current incestuous approach simply doesn't work...for anyone other than the leaders and those who sit on the rubber stamp boards.

All this brings me to the next obvious question:  Where do we stand in the quest for permission to move to another technical college district?  There seems to have been a long delay in the process; maybe it is justified.  I hope it doesn't mean that the movement has been quietly put to sleep.