I want to shift the focus now to the Wisconsin Education Association Council, or WEAC as it is commonly known.  Following this, we'll look at the WEAC affiliate that delivers health and other insurance coverages.

WEAC is among the state's 800 lb. gorillas so far as labor organizations are concerned.  It touts having some 98,000 members.  Its history shows a start in 1853, some 8 years after Wisconsin became a state.  It became known as WEAC in 1972 following adoption of collective bargaining laws for public employees in Wisconsin.

WEAC represents the following segments of education today: teachers, education support professionals, custodians, university students, state education employees, paraprofessionals, retired education support professionals, retired educators, library media specialists (one of whom, Mary Bell, is the current WEAC President), nutrition employees, school safety personnel, Wisconsin Technical College faculty and support staff, clerical staff, counselors, secretaries, teacher aides, bus drivers, cooks and state-employed education and information professionals.

WEAC's structure begins at the local level with the local unions such as the Germantown Education Association (GEA).

The local unions are members of a unified services unit, or UniServe unit, in their local area.  That unit includes the professionals required to support the locals, and is typically limited to some 1,200 to 1,500 individual union members.  Five of the largest school districts have their own UniServ units (Milwaukee, Madison, Racine, Kenosha and Green Bay).  The staffs of each UniServ provide locals with collective bargaining, member rights, public relations, professional development, and political action assistance.

The UniServ entities are tied to WEAC in Madison and WEAC is a member of the National Education Association, or NEA located in Washington, D.C.

It is easy to see that this organization is very well developed for the functions it has carved out for itself.  That is among the reasons that education is such an effective political force.  I have made earlier references to the fact that WEAC has spent millions of dollars to assure an attentive audience in the halls of Wisconsin government and in the Governor's mansion.

WEAC has identified its major initiatives for the period 2008-2010 and those are:

School Funding  They state: "It is evident that school funding is broken.  It is at the center of discussion from local to local.  The WEAC Board of Directors has identified measures of success for school funding reform, and they are offering a comprehensive education to kids and fair compensation for members."

Health Care  They state:  "We know that under the Qualified Economic Offer we've been sacrificing salary increases for health insurance.  But WEAC's commitment to health care reform is much bigger.  We care deeply for kids and their families because we all know that health care is also a learning issue."

Professional Development & Licensure  They state:  "Educators are required to focus more attention than ever on licensing and professional development, and WEAC is stepping up to provide quality support and services.  You are the best person to manage your professional development, with support from your union and financing from your district."

Achievement Gaps  They state:  "This issue is very close to the hearts of WEAC members.  The frustration of not being able to meet the needs of all our students drives us to do more - demanding needed resources and bringing the issue forward into a public conversation.  We will continue our work to involve communities, corporations and government in closing the achievement gap."

Membership  They state:  "We are listening to what you need and value, and connecting your union to your daily work.  We are focusing on groups who are already organized - and those who are not yet - in order to fulfill the promise of public education for future generations."

I'll close this piece with the 2009-2010 WEAC legislative agenda.  Their printed material says:

"WEAC Supports Legislation To:

• Repeal the Qualified Economic Offer law.
• Repeal revenue caps.
• Make preparation time for educators a mandatory subject of collective bargaining.
• Increase funding for SAGE to provide $2,500 per low income pupil beginning in the 2009-2010 fiscal year.
• Implement voucher accountability.
• Make attendance of 5-year-old kindergarten mandatory and a prerequisite to admission to first grade.
• Treat education support professionals the same as teachers under the Wisconsin Retirement System in terms of qualifying for coverage and for early retirement calculations.
• Establish WTCS pay equity by requiring that the salary and fringe benefits of part-time technical college instructors be prorated based on the salary and fringe benefits of full-time staff.
• Create a loan forgiveness program for teaching math, science, special education and ELL in high-poverty districts.
• Repeal residency requirements.
• Provide a tax deduction for non-reimbursed classroom purchases.
• Adopt the 'Wisconsin Indoor Environmental Quality in Schools Act' for public school buildings.
• Require school boards to adopt anti-bullying policies.
• Allow parents to take leave time from work to attend school conferences and activities."

~~~~~~~~~~

Several things jump out at me as I write this but I'll use another piece to explore those.  The one major thing that occurs is that virtually everything about WEAC means higher costs of education which translates into restructuring school financing laws and that will ultimately translate into more tax dollars.

The angst that followed the election concerning the defeat of the referenda items has subsided a bit.  I want to explore the whole subject of education in our community and state, and have been discussing many issues with those involved including school board members from communities in Wisconsin, educators and taxpayers.  I have no idea how long this series will run, but the input of the citizenry is important and I hope this might provoke some additional rational discussion.

~~~~~~~~~~

I was off the mark on the qualified economic offer (QEO) when I referred to it as the maximum amount that could be provided to teachers in the combination of salary and benefits.  The QEO was instituted in 1993 and replaced the then mediation and arbitration system,  It provided that school boards providing at least 3.8% increases of salary and benefits combined would be protected from binding arbitration which had been problematic for school districts up to that time.  In this sense, the QEO is the minimum and usually the maximum.

There are teachers/former teachers who would admit that the QEO has served to protect the jobs of teachers that might otherwise have been cut in the old binding arbitration days since the arbitrators could assess whatever they felt was appropriate in terms of combined increases without regard to the district's ability to pay the added load.

Similarly, those people would also indicate that rescission of the current QEO rules and their replacement with mediation/arbitration, as the governor has tried to gain over the past several budgets, would probably cause teacher terminations since the proposed mediation/arbitration language has been moot on the subject of districts' ability to pay.  That leads, I suspect, to some of the 'scare' tactics citizens face whenever teachers' compensation is debated.  We almost always hear of the 'programs that will have to be ended if...' there were to be limits to increases proposed.  Those debates seldom, if ever, are concerned with actual reductions, but almost always with limits to the amounts of increases.

The cost of healthcare has played a significant part in the rising cost of education.  The 3.8% increase has to cover the cost of benefits and compensation.  If the health premium increases in double-digits annually, that translates into relatively little remaining for salary increases.  In the unregulated world that most of us occupy, the employer makes the decisions and enforces those decisions.  That world does not exist in education.

So, it is possible to extrapolate that the removal of QEO and its replacement with mediation/arbitration, without consideration for a district's ability to pay, could result in teacher losses, increased class sizes and some issues surrounding the nebulous issue of 'quality of education'.  That issue is nebulous in that it is poorly defined on a consistent basis.  It seems that whenever we get into those discussions, the achievement side becomes dynamic so that it is never quite possible to gather information permitting solid decision-making to occur.  Cause and effect are difficult to equate in those discussions.  That coupled with the emotional response that comes very quickly from one or both sides fairly well suggests that we'll not get to a good, solid, well-informed decision.

Under our current rules, after the 3.8% has been granted by the district, and that is not acceptable to the teachers, a mediator is brought in to attempt to help the sides find common ground.  If neither side is willing to give ground, the mediator can declare an impasse and the 3.8% offer is put into place with no further negotiation.  This has tilted the equation to the district's side and it has been that way since QEO was created.  It is understandable that teachers would find this 'unfair' even though you and me might think 3.8% was a pretty fair increase...especially if we've not received an increase for awhile...or if we've lost our job due to cutbacks.

Next time, we'll look at some hypotheticals that put some numbers in place.

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!

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".

Wow, voting day is finally here and my telephone will quit ringing so much, my mailbox will be less cluttered and I can either celebrate or cry in my proverbial beer.  This election 'season' has seemed to go on forever.  Several things are at top of mind this morning...

Milwaukee Police Unit Disbanded...

The special investigative unit of the Milwaukee Police Department that generated the 67 page election fraud report has apparently been disbanded some five days prior to today's election.  The detective who led that operation has, according to the Wall Street Journal, been relegated to the sidelines today.  John Fund of the Wall Street Journal reported this morning that Detective Michael Sandvick had predicted that Wisconsin could see as many as 55,000 illegal votes cast.  He cited the cross-border flow from Minnesota and Illinois since Wisconsin is one of only eight states that have 'same day' registration coupled with the weak verification of eligibility.  His estimate was that as many as 30,000 votes could be cast today in that manner. 

There are only two people of whom I'm aware who could've caused this 'stand down' and those are Milwaukee Mayor Tom Barrett and/or Police Chief Flynn.  Neither has been available for interviews today to my knowledge.

~~~~~~~~~~

My Voting Site...

I drove past the site where I vote at about 7:20AM today and was astounded at the number of vehicles parked and at the length of the line of people waiting to move into the building to vote.  I plan to vote in the 9:00AM range and we'll see if this surge was simply caused by people on their way to work as I suspect.

At any rate, it certainly seems that our voter turn-out will be in the range predicted by the Village Clerk's staff which I recall was in the 73 percent range.

On top of this was an inordinately high number of absentee ballots being cast based on my casual observations of parking lot loads during the preceding couple of weeks and of anecdotal comments from people working in village hall.

UPDATE:  I voted at about 9:20AM and was number 580.  The people were still streaming in and there was about a ten minute wait at that time.

~~~~~~~~~~

Media Hype...

I am angered with what now seems to pass for the mainstream media so far as their seeming promotion of Obama's 'inevitable' victory.

We have been fed the 'facts' for many days that there is no way for McCain to win.  There are, unfortunately, too many voters who are swayed by this 'stuff' and who don't think for themselves.  If just 1% of potential voters were dissuaded from 'wasting' their time voting, the swing could become a 'self-fulfilling' prophecy.

~~~~~~~~~~

Direct Legislation...

Finally, we are witnessing direct legislation in Milwaukee concerning mandatory sick days from employers.  This would create a burden for many businesses that would force them to close or move thus negatively impacting the residents.  But, there are too many who can't or won't think these issues through and simply vote because they like the idea that they can have sick days. 

We are witnessing some 25 to 30 communities across the state that have ballot questions concerning 'mandatory health care plans similar to those afforded state employees'.  These types of issues are done at the state level but grass roots groups have begun to work at the local levels to bring some pressure to bear on state legislators.  The simple fact is that there isn't enough money in the state to provide that level of health care coverage for all the residents.  We would bankrupt ourselves.

Having family members in Colorado, I am reminded of the folly that those voters are subjected to in the form of ballot initiatives.  There are something on the order of fifty individual questions on ballots in Colorado today that require some real effort to understand.  The majority of voters do not take the time to do their own research and, instead, follow the direction of their associations or unions or professional affiliations.

This is a very dangerous thing, in my opinion, that lends some credence to the old saw about us voters getting the government we deserve.

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.

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.

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.

I was very surprised to learn that Rep. Sue Jeskewitz had announced that she would not be a candidate for the 24th District seat in the Assembly this fall.  She will have served for 12 years, is 66 (although she doesn't look more than 55) and apparently has just decided it is time to stay home.  She is part of a 'political' family, so I know this decision could not have been taken lightly.

Some of her positions caused me angst as readers know.  I have heard others refer to her as a RINO (Republican In Name Only) and there have been those times when I felt that way as various issues came up and decisions were made.  I am obviously more conservative than she has been.  I understood that and still made visits to her offices in Madison whenever I was part of a lobbying group.  She and her staff were always very considerate although it is difficult to tell what the true position of virtually any politician is by simply visiting their office and chatting on talking points for 5 to 10 minutes.

There are probably several people out today with nomination papers seeking signatures that will enable them to run.  There may be some behind the scenes activity that has already led to a 'chosen one' on the Republican side.  I am not privy to any of that information.  There are certainly those in the Democrat party that are working feverishly to secure the best possible candidate since this seat had been quite safe for Rep. Jeskewitz.

I do hope that we will be given a candidate for whom we can vote that is decidedly conservative.  The Assembly must stay Republican if we conservatives are to have any hope of keeping the state on something even remotely resembling the straight and narrow we would prefer.  Can you imagine the damage that would've been done in the past couple of sessions if both the Senate and the Assembly had been under Democrat control with Governor "taxalot" in office?

I received a telephone call from Katie Prown late Friday afternoon.  I know...I had no idea who she was either.  But, she advised me that she was calling on behalf of Rep. Wasserman and virtually pleaded for me to permit him to participate in the 'debate' with Sen. Darling.  She apologized for him, said he had been so busy knocking on doors (up to something like 12,905 now), had received such great acceptance....blah, blah blah.  He was obviously too busy to call me himself...or too embarrassed if that is possible for a politician.

She indicated that she is his newly hired campaign manager.  Her email said, "I can assure you that you will receive prompt and timely responses in the future" and I wondered how she could assure me that he would change since she had just assumed her role, but that is for another day.  I told her that I was very disappointed in his performance to this point and that, if I relented, this would be the absolute last time there would be any slack cut for Rep. Wasserman.

She did precede the call with her email to which was attached the responses that I've sought for the past months.  I have her email address and her telephone numbers.  So, we're going to try this one more time.  The series will kick off early this coming week and I hope it will prove informative.

I decided to 'give the guy a break' since a one-person 'debate' isn't terribly stimulating for readers.

I received several emails that provided some additional information and thoughts on the subject of the intersection at Mequon and Wausaukee Roads at the very east edge of the village.

Trustee Wolter was kind enough to send an email covering a meeting held at the Germantown Library on Thursday afternoon, April 24th.  The City of Mequon and Village of Germantown were represented, Senator Darling and Representatives Ott and Jeskewitz attended and several Department of Transportation representatives were present.

The topic was the intersection in question and DOT was seeking a 'compromise' for the signalization of the intersection.  The plan that was in process of implementation at that time was for two straight through lanes, dedicated left turn lanes with islands, and dedicated right turn lanes on Mequon with a single straight through lane traveling north and south on Wausaukee Road.

City of Mequon officials thought this was 'overkill' since they consider the area to be rural, and their planning supports that it will remain rural in their eyes.  They preferred the roundabout solution and were pushing for that as the outcome of this meeting.  Germantown officials wanted the intersection to stay as the DOT had designed and based this on the increased traffic due to Waste Management trucks and the increase in auto traffic east and west during weekday commute periods.  They also foresaw an increase in traffic as building in TIF 4 increased.  The DOT was looking out 20 years so far as design and capacity.

The 'compromise' that came from this meeting was this: a single straight through lane east and west on Mequon along with dedicated left hand and right hand turn lanes while Wausaukee stayed as designed with a single lane in both directions.  The provision was that something might need to be rebuilt if traffic projections were to be reached in the next ten years.

Conversations I have had indicate that some are concerned about the village being required to pick up the future cost while the DOT is now paying 100% of the costs for the construction.  Others have voiced the opinion that a roundabout was their preference, as well, and cited the thought that we may have been able to forego all construction if enforcement were to be stepped up in that area.  Still others questioned the need for any change suggesting that there were single digit accidents per year from their observations.

So, there is apparently a compromise in place. Maybe this will stay in place since all the 'official' parties were at this table.  As is customary, some of the 'unofficial' parties will continue to disagree.  That is among the reasons we hold elections every few years.

The intersection of Wausaukee and Mequon Roads has been accident prone for some time with the increased traffic loads that have developed.  The state Department of Transportation had originally indicated that it intended to place a 'round-about' at this intersection to slow traffic and control the flow through the intersection.  Seemingly the fact that this involved a state highway with relatively high speeds hadn't crossed the state's institutional mind.  Long story short, a couple of Germantown people who are no longer in office worked diligently to get this intended action changed and succeeded.

The state recently announced that a traffic light intersection would be created at that location and that the state would fully fund the work with the proviso that Germantown maintain the intersection.  Part of this intersection is in Ozaukee County and Mequon.

It seems that Mequon has made a 'stink' with very little in the way of rational reason, and this has apparently caused the state to threaten to renege on its written intention earlier provided to Germantown.  This situation has degenerated to the point where the 'round-about' solution was back on the table, and the ultimate outcome is very much in doubt.  In the meantime, accidents continue to occur and will continue to occur until something is done to eliminate the danger.

If you have strong feelings about this, it is the time to voice those to your elected representatives who serve in Madison.   When the state makes a decision and then rescinds that decision, someone somewhere must've done some tail-twisting.  You might also want to let your Trustees and Village President know just how strongly you feel about this so they can add the weight of your comments to their own.  The appropriate addresses are to found on the Village website link that is located at the very bottom of the GermantownNOW site you're on now.

Our politicians are dancing along merrily plotting to see just how they can use your money and mine to reward less-than-desirable behavior.  They have forgotten, if ever they knew, that when we reward bad behavior, we get more bad behavior.  On the other hand, if we permit some kind of 'pain' to follow poor decisions, we tend to see modified behavior.

What has this to do with the sub-prime mortgage debacle?  Plenty!

First, our government swooped in to help save the mortgage bankers that had encouraged this irrational activity given the lax oversight of federal agencies.  And, it continues down that same path.  What lesson will be learned from this?  Simple: we can continue to do stupid things with money because the government will bail us out just like always.

Second, the politicians fell all over themselves to earn 'points' (also known as votes) from the people who had over-extended and gotten themselves into this mess voluntarily.

What will be learned when a couple earning less than necessary to support the payments, is 'given' a mortgage loan using the adjustable rate feature in spite of credit scoring?  And who, when the rates went up, were given a 'pass' on the deal?  The lesson being taken away when there is no 'pain' associated with the decision is this:  it's okay to do things like this because the government won't let us hurt ourselves!

The answer is that each of us has to pay the price for our decisions.  If we are not forced to pay a price, we will repeat the same behavior or worse.  We can all remember that 'little urchin' in the neighborhood who could do no wrong in the eyes of his or her parents.  They were the worst little kids in the neighborhood.  We can probably each remember how we 'got away' with something, and we can likely remember just how that experience tempted us to continue doing whatever it was that we had 'gotten away with'.

Why is it that politicians think the way too many of them do in these situations?  Because, if they can succeed in getting the majority to think like this, they will have achieved their goal.  What is that goal?  The goal is to get the majority to believe that without big government involved in every decision we take in our daily lives, even if we hurt ourselves, it doesn't matter; it doesn't matter because big government is there looking out for our best interests. 

This is a decidedly liberal point of view.  We don't often hear conservatives espousing this kind of action.  The solution to this 'slippery slope' mentality seems obvious to me: elect conservatives and re-elect other conservatives if the first group loses sight of reality from having been in office in Germantown, West Bend, Madison or Washington for too many terms.  This is how we influence the direction of our community, our county. our state and our country in a representative form of government!

Our ignoring such problems is how the politicians who want the 'nanny' state to evolve past the tipping point get that to happen.  And it will happen at the rate our country is moving down that pathway.  Once it happens, there will be no turning back.

Am I the only person who is exasperated with our state and national political/tax scene?  I doubt that very much. 

As I watch the 'Amazing Obama' versus 'Deserving Hillary' race unfold, I see a real race as to which can promise greater tax increases/profit confiscation to the tune of TRILLIONS of dollars.  What is even more amazing to me is the blatant approach both are taking...coupled with the seeming lack of perception their two groups of supporters have of what they're getting into.  These two people are socialist/populists so far as I can see.  There is the inevitable class warfare coupled with promises that neither will ever be able to keep...thank goodness!  And, it seems, with every passing day, that Barack Obama will wrest this nomination away from Hillary Clinton unless the Clinton 'machine' is able to do him in...and that cannot be discounted.

Then, I read of our state's revenue collection shortfalls totaling something in the range of $650 Million by the middle of next year.  And, I hear the 'solutions' offered by Governor Doyle and by the Republicans.

On the one hand, we are collecting $650 Million less than projected due to an economic downturn.  That economic downturn is, in large part, caused by heavy taxation in our state.  We have all learned, if we'll admit it to ourselves, that lower tax rates increase revenue collections since they stimulate the economy.  Let us keep more of what we earn, and we'll find ways to earn even more than we were before, and tax collections increase.

Governor Doyle would combine his already once-defeated tax on hospitals (which will exacerbate the health care cost crisis), and delay some of the tax decreases that were part of the so-called 'bipartisan' budget passed just a few short months ago.  In essence, his solution is to raise taxes to get us out of our economic slump.

Fortunately, the Republicans are, so far at least, saying there can be no new taxes and there must be spending reductions instead.  Sen. Alberta Darling is releasing today her "Stay In Wisconsin" program.  That program represents her agenda aimed at keeping seniors, students and working families in Wisconsin.  We talked just days ago about Wisconsin's outflow of population.  Her package of proposals would eliminate the Estate Tax, increase the Property Tax Credit for seniors, eliminate tax on Social Security income, increase Tax Exemption limits, make Student Loan interest fully deductible, along with a few other things including evidenced-based health care reform. 

Probably the biggest boost would come from what Sen. Darling calls 'Invest Wisconsin 2.0'.  That includes the following:

• a 1% across the board income tax cut for all Wisconsin taxpayers
• Capital Gains reinvestment
• Angel Investment tax credit
• Education tax credit
• Green Data Center tax credit
• NanoSTEM research initiative
• Nanotechnology tax credit
• Product liability reform
• Expert Witness reform
• Jobs Preservation

The Governor seems intent on raising taxes to increase revenue while many Republicans are pointing in the direction of economic stimulation as the solution. 

I don't know about you, but I am just about at my tax paying limit.  I'd much rather help pay for a new elementary school in Germantown than add more money to the state's tax collection coffers.  The return on investment seems much better if we invest locally while our state stimulates the economy instead of increase taxes.

By the way, the idea of reducing expenditures when income lags is something that just about everyone of us has had to to do at one time or another.  Isn't it the state's turn to practice that simple budget technique for awhile?