Each December, the staff at Radio Free W.O.W. selects the biggest Political Winners and Losers of the past year. 2017 has been an incredibly busy year in the political arena. We had little difficulty in identifying Losers in this Walker/Ryan/Trump era. Winners were a little harder to come by. Here are our nominees:
Losers- The 8,900,000 American children who count on the Children's Health Program (CHIP) to access medical care and the 700,000 Dreamers who face deportation to countries they don't know. All are still waiting on Congress to do something about their situation.
Winners-The children of Wisconsin after Tony Evers won the State Superintendent race with 70% of the vote. The only areas carried by his wack-a-doo opponent, Lowell Holtz, were (sadly) my own Washington County and adjacent Waukesha County.
Loser- Former Milwaukee County Sheriff David Clarke. Clarke was a regular fixture at far-right events. Known for a chest full of cereal-box medals, cowboy hat, and deaths at his jail. Clarke gave definition to the term "snowflake" when he had his deputies detain a man who looked at him meanly.
Winners- Lovers of the English language. 2017 politics popularized a number of formerly obscure and interesting terms like emoluments, dotard, collusion, narcissist, the Dunning-Kruger effect, and cofeffe.
Losers-The 58 people killed in October's Las Vegas shooting. The 26 people killed at a church in rural Texas in November. The other 14,683 Americans killed by gun violence in 2017. The 29,893 Americans injured in 2017 by gun violence. Still, Congress only offers thoughts and prayers instead of real solutions.
Winners- Foxconn executives for getting an unsophisticated rube of a governor to give them a cool $3 billion to locate a plant in southeast Wisconsin. This is the largest public subsidy to a foreign company in US history.
Loser- American leadership in world. We alienated our closest allies (Canada, Mexico, UK, France, Germany, Australia) while sucking-up to dictators (Russia, China, Turkey, Philippines). We ceded moral leadership by dropping-out of the Paris Accord. We alienated Arab friends with the move of our embassy to Jerusalem.
Winners- All of the comedians who have given us a bit of comic relief in these trying political times. Special kudos to Stephen Colbert, Jimmy Kimmel, Samantha Bee, Alec Baldwin, Anthony "the Mooch" Scaramucci, Melissa McCarthy, Omorosa Manigault, and Randy Rainbow.
Losers- The tiki-torch-carrying, polo-shirt-wearing Nazi wannabes who marched in Virginia in August. Of course, Trump thinks that some of them are good people.
Winners- Billionaires. The ultra-rich usually win, but their wholesale purchase of Congress is paying-off big-time. They are getting a huge tax break, despite what it will do to the middle class and to the national debt.
Losers- All of the politicians who betrayed the public trust by acting in sexually inappropriate ways. US Senator Al Franken, Senate candidate Roy Moore, Rep. John Conyers, Rep. Blake Farenthold, Rep. Trent Franks, and Rep. Joe Barton are the latest examples to come to light. One of the worst violators still occupies the Oval Office.
Winner-Robert Mueller, for assembling a top-notch team of investigators. They are carrying-out a thorough and impeccably honest investigation of interference in US elections by a hostile foreign government. Four solid indictments down and many more to follow.
Losers-The hardworking taxpayers of Wisconsin who were forced to pay $245 million for school vouchers and another $12 million for tuition tax credits to send other people's children to private, mostly religious, schools.
Winners- Democrats in deep red regions. Whether in W.O.W. counties, Indiana, or Texas, dedicated Democrats everywhere are making a difference. We always have an impact on purple-state statewide races. Sometimes, we can even pull-off an upset, as in the Virginia and Oklahoma legislature elections or the Alabama US Senate race!
Loser- Donald Trump, who showed that he has very weak political influence. His heavily-endorsed gubernatorial candidate in Virginia lost. His heavily-endorsed primary candidate for Alabama Senate lost. His heavily-endorsed general election candidate for Alabama Senate lost. Is there a pattern here?
Winners- The Washington Post, The New York Times, Politico, and the few other media outlets that still conduct investigative reporting. You are needed now, more than ever.
Losers- The 3.5 million people of Puerto Rico and the US Virgin Islands who suffered from September's Hurricane Maria. FEMA's weak response was a national disgrace. The islands did, however, get badly needed paper towels. We also were amazed to discover that they are islands in the middle of the ocean.
Winners- People of the resistance. Millions of American patriots who were awakened by the most granny-starving, hate-filled, rights-restricting agenda the country has ever seen. They raised their voices through the Woman's March, the March for Science, airport rallies, taking a knee during the National Anthem, calling Congressional offices, knocking doors for candidates, and participating in town halls. America is now woke.
The GOP scheme to give giant tax cuts to billionaires and corporations is well on its way to becoming law. The plan will blow an unprecedented $1.4 trillion hole in the National Debt. In order to make-up for the Republican largess to their rich donors, huge automatic cuts in spending will likely kick-in. An estimated $25 billion per year will be taken from Medicare alone.
But that is not enough punishment for those retired or near retirement. After finishing their job of enacting the largest ever transfer of wealth from the middle class to the rich, Republicans will just be hitting their stride. Next on their agenda? A total and complete gutting of both Social Security and Medicare.
Much buzz has been made over Paul Ryan's interview yesterday on Denver right-wing radio. Most of the conversation centered on Ryan's next plans for his GOP majority. Ryan boasted, “We're going to have to get back next year at entitlement reform, which is how you tackle the debt and the deficit. ... Frankly, it's the health care entitlements that are the big drivers of our debt, so we spend more time on the healthcare entitlements — because that's really where the problem lies, fiscally speaking.”
The interviewer asked if Ryan was making an impact on Trump when talking to him about the importance of Medicare "reform". Ryan responded, "This is my big thing for many, many years. I think its the biggest "entitlement" that's got to have reform."
It is no big surprise that, with Republicans now in power, Ryan plans to gut the Social Security and Medicare benefits you have earned. After all, this has been a central feature of Ryan's "Path to Prosperity" manifestos for years. In these documents, Ryan has advocated the privatization of Social Security and replacing Medicare with discount coupons for private insurance.
Ryan claims that even as a college student, he was dreaming about gutting the safety net. While everyone around him was thinking about dating and classes and parties, young Paul was pondering the block-granting of Medicaid. He was wondering how he could deny healthcare to millions of Americans.
But Ryan cannot destroy Social Security and Medicare all by himself. He needs the complicity of the entire Republican Party. How does the rest of the Wisconsin Congressional delegation feel about taking a wrecking-ball to your retirement security? Do they share in Ryan's youthful fantasy?
Certainly, Jim Sensenbrenner is on-board. In a 2016 statement, he said, "Every day that goes by, the situation grows worse and will require more drastic changes to the Social Security and Medicare programs. The time to act is now. The health and security of all Americans depend on it.”
Sensenbrenner's record on the two crucial programs for retirees leaves something to be desired. He has earned an abysmal 5% Lifetime Rating from the Alliance for Retired Americans (AFRA). Jim got a "thumbs down" rating on 10 of 11 key Medicare votes, as reported by MedicareVotes.org. He is certainly not an advocate for his district's older constituents.
Glenn Grothman is no better on strengthening these programs for retired Americans. He has a 0% lifetime rating from the AFRA and "thumbs down" on all three of his three key Medicare votes.
Senator Ron Johnson just admitted that he is OK with adding 2 to 3 trillion dollars to the National Debt to fund GOP tax cuts for the wealthy. Yet, he claims that we cannot afford the programs that keep so many of our elderly out of poverty. He famously compared Social Security to a giant Ponzi scheme. He voted for Paul Ryan's plot to turn Medicare into a discount coupon plan. Johnson has certainly earned his failing 2% lifetime rating from the AFRA.
In stark contrast, Senator Tammy Baldwin and Representatives Gwen Moore, Mark Pocan, and Ron Kind have earned 100%, 100%, 100%, and 89% Lifetime ratings, respectively from the AFRA. The four Democrats in Wisconsin's Congressional delegation are 7/7, 9/10, 4/5, and 10/11 for "thumbs up" on key Medicare votes since 2003. Wisconsin Democrats stand with our state's seniors.
There is no more clear cut difference between the two major parties than on Social Security and Medicare policy. Wisconsin Congressional Democrats consistently vote to preserve the programs, while state Republicans vote to demolish them. We know which party is looking-out for the interests of retired Wisconsinites and those who plan to retire someday. We know which party's candidates deserve to be sent to Washington in 2018.
Wisconsin politicians continue their crusade to endanger your family's health and safety. In October, we reported on the GOP legislators' push to slash training and educational requirements for state-issued professional licenses. In August, Walker signed the so-called REINS Act into law, which allows corrupt politicians to kill critically-needed environmental, safety, and health regulations.
Now, in their latest attempt to make you sicker, Republican legislators are taking a meat cleaver to state air pollution rules. Assembly Bill 587 will repeal any state air pollution standards that go beyond Federal EPA rules.
The Federal standards cover 188 pollutants. That sounds like a lot, but it is only a small fraction of the tens of thousands of hazardous chemicals used or produced in America every day. According to a 2004 Legislative Audit Report, the Wisconsin DNR monitors an additional 293 hazardous air pollutants. If all enforcement of state standards ends, this will constitute a 61% reduction in the number of toxic pollutants monitored in the air you breathe.
The noxious bill has widespread support among the GOP majority. Thirteen Republican Representatives and four State Senators are listed as sponsors. A brief hearing by the Assembly Committee on Federalism and Interstate Relations was held on the bill on November 21. The hearing lasted about an hour and forty-five minutes, with a handful of people testifying. The entire proceedings can be seen on WisconsinEye.
During the hearing, the bill's primary authors, Duey Stroebel (R-Wheezetown) and Jesse Kremer (R-Gasp City), kept repeating that if regulation of a hazardous air pollutant is deemed necessary by DNR scientists, then they could conduct the studies to re-regulate that pollutant. There are three problems with this idea.
First of all, the bill would instantly end state regulation of many state-monitored air pollutants. In order to reinstate a toxic compound on their list, the DNR staff would need to conduct an entirely new set of studies and hearings. This would take a great deal of time, possibly years. During this lengthy process, there would be no monitoring of that air toxin. In the meantime, you might just have to live with the emissions of o-chlorotoluene, dioxins, or hydrogen cyanide in your town.
Secondly, recent budget maneuvering by Walker has led to a much smaller DNR. Department scientists have been especially hard-hit by the staff reductions. A decreased scientific staff will lead to unacceptably long wait periods for reinstatement of noxious compounds on the monitoring list.
Finally, it may simply be politically impossible to reinstate a bad-actor compound on the monitoring list. With the Wisconsin REINS Act now in place, any regulation deemed to cost businesses at least ten million dollars over the entire state must pass through the legislature. If legislative leaders or committee chairs refuse to bring up the regulation for a vote, it will die. Big industry polluters need only "convince" one leadership politician of the righteousness of their cause to kill the DNR monitoring of a hazardous compound.
Wisconsin has long been on the forefront of environmental protection policy. It is sad that our state legislators now want to roll back state rules to the much weaker Federal ones. At the same time, the US EPA is being destroyed from within. The current EPA Administrator, Scott Pruitt, is a man on a mission to weaken the organization. For example, while Oklahoma Attorney General, Pruitt sued the EPA fourteen times.
The organizations that have come-out against AB587 include environmental groups like the Sierra Club, Clean Wisconsin, Inc, and the Wisconsin League of Conservation Voters. As a defender of public health, the American Lung Association is also against the bill.
Who is for the bill? A pack of polluters and polluting-industry advocates, such as the American Petroleum Institute, Wisconsin Energy Group, Inc., Wisconsin Paper Council, and Wisconsin Manufacturers and Commerce (WMC). WMC is certainly getting their money's worth with this legislation. On their website, the business lobbying group states as one of their goals -"...conforming Wisconsin regulations to those of corresponding federal laws like the Clean Air Act and Clean Water Act. "
AB 587 is a brazen GOP attempt to roll-back the quality of Wisconsin's air. Anyone who lives, works, or breathes in our state should be angry about this bill. If we permit it to become law, AB587 will allow more air pollution, thereby endangering our health, and lowering our quality of life.
In 2011, GOP politicians took over both Wisconsin and Ohio as part of a national wave election. The Republican governors and legislatures soon let their newly-gained power go to their heads. Both states quickly enacted laws to destroy the right of public employees to bargain. Both states saw huge public anger at this gross abuse of power. Hundreds of thousands of outraged citizens descended on Madison and Columbus for weeks of protest.
But the way that the people were able to deal with the crisis was very different between Wisconsin and Ohio. In Wisconsin, nine State Senators faced recall elections in 2011. Scott Walker, along with four more State Senators faced recall in 2012. After all of the dust settled, three Republican State Senators had been replaced by Democratic challengers.
The actions taken in Wisconsin required a great deal of activity by people in the state. Signatures were collected and verified. Candidates were recruited. Expensive primary and general elections were conducted.
The political climate in the state was poisoned during this time, and has never fully recovered. Neighbor turned on neighbor. Friend turned on friend. Kin turned on kin. Political witch-hunts took place in which judges, reporters, office holders, and candidates who signed recall petitions were called-out for public shaming. "Wisconsin Nice" died a tragic death.
But after all of that effort and energy, we are still stuck with the unpopular Act 10. Even today, we are burdened with the poorer schools, lower wages, and residual employee resentment that the Republican law forced on us.
By contrast, Ohio was able to handle the same union-destroying power-grab quite differently. Unlike Wisconsinites, Ohio citizens are able to call a referendum on laws that don't reflect the will of the people. Citizens actually have veto power over unpopular legislation.
Ohio's anti-worker bill, SB 5, was signed into law by John Kasich on March 31, 2011. Ohio citizens have 90 days after a law is signed to submit petition signatures to force a veto referendum onto the ballot. Valid signatures totaling 6% of the vote in the state's prior gubernatorial election are required (amounting to 231,149 names in 2011). At the end of June, over five and a half times that many signatures were proudly submitted to the Ohio Secretary of State.
The referendum was placed on the ballot in November. The good guys won. The anti-worker law was defeated by an overwhelming 62-38% vote. The law was "recalled". It was vetoed by the people. But no politicians lost their jobs. This was a much less divisive, and much more effective, way of overturning the GOP's unpopular scheme.
Wisconsin does have referendums, but they are of very weak types. The people approve any changes to the state Constitution through referendums. We can have an advisory referendum on an issue if the state legislature requests one. We are also allowed to initiate non-binding advisory referendums to voice public opinion on an issue (such as all of the recent local referendums on overturning Citizens United).
Twenty three states have the sort of strong veto referendums used so effectively in Ohio in 2011. People in these states can overturn bad laws and counteract partisan power-grabs. They have much more of a voice in the way they are governed than we do.
Twenty four states have a process by which the people can circumvent a do-nothing legislature or obstinate Governor to enact a new law or constitutional amendment. This sort of referendum was successful in Maine just last week , when voters overruled the five vetoes of Medicaid expansion by crazy Governor Paul LePage. Seventy thousand additional Maine residents will now have access to Medicaid coverage.
The people of Wisconsin need to have a more active and democratic participation in our state government. We should have the chance to over-rule bad laws from our gerrymandered legislature. We should have the opportunity to initiate new laws through binding citizen referendums. We should join with half of the states in the country. We should have meaningful referendum provisions in our state Constitution.
I never thought that I would say this, but thank you, Mr. Trump ! Because of your recent actions to sabotage the Affordable Care Act, I will get my health insurance for free in 2018.
My wife and I can be considered an Obamacare success story. We are both retired, but not quite old enough for Medicare. For the last four years, we have purchased insurance through the Federal ACA Exchange. Each year, our retirement income was too high for cost-sharing subsidies, but we kept our IRA income low enough (<4 times the poverty rate) to qualify for tax credits at the end of the year .
Thanks to the ACA, our insurance costs have stayed comparatively low. The available tax credits are based on the Second Lowest Cost Silver Plan (SLCSP) for each county's exchange. In the interest of saving money, we have always bought one of the less-expensive, higher deductible Bronze Plans.
After tax credits, our monthly out-of-pocket costs for insurance for 2014-17 has averaged $400/month. That is substantially less than we paid for similar insurance before implementation of the exchanges. Thank you, President Obama!
Of course, we signed-up again for 2018 coverage. It was fast and easy to re-enroll online at https://www.healthcare.gov/. We did not need help, but telephone operators are available for those who do. But if you also plan to get your 2018 insurance through the Exchanges, please hurry ! Open enrollment ends on December 15 this year.
Several companies, including the carrier we used from 2014 through 2017, dropped out of our exchange for 2018. In Washington County, we went from a choice of 41 plans in 2017 to just 20 plans (offered by three companies) for next year. Both Anthem and Molina cited the "uncertainties" in Washington as their reason for exiting the Exchange. This was a polite way of saying that Trump and his HHS Secretary have been purposely sabotaging the law.
There are certainly fewer choices this year than in the past. Still, the Marketplace is thriving, despite the moronic "Obamacare is dead!" bleating from the Saboteur-in-Chief.
Trump has done everything he can to kill Obamacare. He refused to allow the Government to spend funds allotted for publicizing the Exchanges. He has cut the enrollment window in half. He has berated Obamacare at every opportunity, often confusing many into believing that the program no longer exists. Worst of all, he has played politics with the lives of Americans by reneging on the law's Cost Sharing subsidies (CSR) provision.
CSR helped especially poor people afford insurance. It remitted money directly to the insurance companies in exchange for lower rates on Silver plans they bought on the Exchanges. After Trump welched on the government's payments, the insurance companies were still legally required to provide the lower rates to poorer people. In order to stay out of a Trump-induced bankruptcy, most of the remaining exchange insurance providers drastically raised the prices of their Silver plans.
The huge Trump-caused price increases only affected Silver plans. For examples, the Bronze plan that we selected for 2018 is only 16% more than the similar Bronze plan that we had in 2017. In contrast, the Second Lowest Cost Silver Plan (SLCSP) for 2018 is a whopping 67% higher than the SLCSP for 2017.
With our Bronze plan increasing by just 16%, and the SLCSP, upon which federal tax credits are based, increasing by 67%, we will end-up paying zero dollars for our Bronze plan. That is correct. We will get free health insurance in 2018. Through his ham-handed efforts to kill the Affordable Care Act, Trump has inadvertently made insurance much cheaper, or even free for many of us. Thank you, Mr. Trump !
IQ45 has become increasingly deranged as the FBI investigation of his collusion with Russia closes in. In a desperate attempt at distraction, he resurrected a discredited conspiracy theory accusing Hillary Clinton of handing-over US uranium to the Russians.
On Sunday, he tweeted:
It is unclear who Trump is desperately begging to "DO SOMETHING !" It is equally unclear what he expects them to do. However, I have a suggestion for somebody in Washington who really should do something.
Congress has much that they should deal with before the end of the year. They must do something to allow the Dreamers to remain in America, after Trump ended DACA. They must do something to authorize payment of Affordable Care Act cost-sharing subsidies, after Trump ended those payments. They must do something to reauthorize the expired Children's Health Insurance Program (CHIP). They must do something to increase the debt limit in December, so that the Government can actually stay open.
But instead of doing something on these four critical tasks, what has the House of Representatives done since the first of October? They voted to criminalize abortion after twenty weeks (Sensenbrenner, Grothman voted for). They named three Post Offices. They jammed through a sham budget in a procedural scheme targeting huge tax cuts for corporations and the wealthy. They passed a bill allowing clear cutting of National Forests with no environmental review or public comment (Grothman for, Sensenbrenner against).
Most importantly, the House passed the South Carolina Peanut Parity Act of 2017. This all-important bill will allow South Carolina to appoint members to the Peanut Standards Board.
With only twelve in-session days remaining in November and nine in December, we should worry about the ability of the House to act on the critical matters waiting for them. However, all we seem to hear from House leaders is the importance of gigantic tax cuts.
The American people are not clamoring for tax cuts. We have been here before. We realize that the unwise move will balloon the deficit in order to give huge tax breaks to profitable corporations and the ultra-rich. These cuts, that Republican politicians are hell-bent on jamming-through by the end of the year, are a callous pay-off to wealthy political contributors.
Failure of Congress to implement a new Dream Act will affect over 700,000 young people. Since Trump killed the DACA program two months ago, the lives of these kids have been a Kafkaesque nightmare. Paul Ryan has not promised any plan of action on the issue.
It has been 33 days since Congress allowed the Children's Health Insurance Plan to expire. The program provides healthcare to 8.9 million children through state-run Medicare and CHIP plans. The House GOP is attempting to attach poison pills to this must-pass bill. States are scraping to keep their programs going, but can't continue emergency funding efforts forever.
It has been 21 days since Trump announced that he was ending cost-sharing subsidies, a provision of the Affordable Care Act. This cost-sharing program helped low-income families afford health insurance. Last year, nearly six million people received assistance. Trump timed his announcement for maximal disruption of the insurance markets. His decision means that millions will be unable to afford insurance, the government will pay billions more, and fewer insurance companies will participate in the exchanges. Neither Paul Ryan nor Mitch McConnell appear to be interested in a bipartisan solution negotiated in the Senate.
The 700,000 Dreamers, and the 6,000,000 poor getting cost-sharing insurance subsidies, and the 8,900,000 children on CHIP do not seem to be a priority with this Congress. Their piece-of-mind does not concern Paul Ryan or Mitch McConnell or Donald Trump. Calls for Congress to "Do Something!" on these issues fall on deaf ears. The problems of millions of Americans will be addressed, maybe sometime, at a future date, in the not-too-distant future.
No, the number one priority of the Republican Congress is tax cuts for the wealthy and big corporations. Everybody else will just have to wait their turn. After all, there are only twenty-one Congressional work days left in 2017.
I have to confess. I am a fiscal conservative. Other than during a deep recession or national emergency, I believe that the Federal Government should not spend more money than it takes in.
Senator Ron Johnson has long claimed to be a fiscal conservative, too. However, Johnson has totally reversed himself by supporting current GOP efforts to slash federal taxes on corporations and the ultra-rich.
While we are running deficits, we have absolutely no business in drastically increasing defense spending. We should not take-on purposeless multi-billion dollar projects like the DOTUS's Great Wall. We cannot afford to waste tens of billions on political stunts like IQ45's ending of supplemental ACA payments. We cannot justify huge pay-outs to the profitable pharmaceutical and fossil-fuel industries. And most of all, we should not reduce the amount of money coming-in by enacting humongous tax cuts.
Although I reject Sen. Ron Johnson's Tea Party approach on almost every issue, I have agreed with him on one thing. I saw Johnson's budget Power Point presentation several years ago during a West Bend town hall. He made the point that the growing Federal debt is a big problem. I totally agree. I appreciate the fact that he has brought attention to this problem. However, I do not agree with his placing the blame on Social Security and Medicare. We should not gut these programs that we have paid-into in our entire working lives.
But Johnson can no longer claim to be a fiscal conservative. He is currently a big proponent of so-called tax reform. There are two things he, and all Republicans, co-mix in that term. There is tax simplification, in which many of the byzantine rules of the current tax code would be revised to make filing taxes simpler. It is hard to argue against this. Who doesn't like the idea of a tax-return the size of a postcard?
However, the GOP's main drive for "tax reform" is not simplification. That is merely a diversion. The real motivation is to cut taxes for the wealthy and corporations. This fiscally destructive move is being insisted on by major Republican donors. Depending on the final details, the GOP bill will add between $1.5 and $2.2 TRILLION dollars to the national debt over the next ten years.
Anyone who is concerned about deficits should be terrified of the Republican tax plan. This isn't rocket science. If you bring-in less money than you spend, then you run deficits. If you enact policies that drastically axe the amount of money coming-in, you make those deficits even larger.
However, many of the Republican politicians touting tax reform want us to believe that multi-trillion-dollar tax cuts will fund themselves. They are feeding us the lie that we will miraculously see such incredible economic growth that the government will actually see higher revenue. Variously called trickle-down economics, or voodoo economics, or bullshit, this has been shown time after time to simply not work. It didn't work in the '80's under Reagan. It didn't work in the 00's under Bush. It isn't working at the state level in the basket-case of Kansas.
Congressional Republicans put so much faith in the myth of self-funding tax cuts that they are calling on the CBO to score their tax-giveaway using fantasy numbers. They do not want the CBO to use realistic projected economic growth numbers to determine how badly the federal debt will balloon (so-called static scoring). They want the CBO to assume much higher growth rates, so that the resultant debt will not appear so cataclysmic (so-called dynamic scoring).
Like most Republicans, Ron Johnson has totally reversed his Obama-Era position that the deficit is important. He wants to run the US into ruinous debt by giving huge tax breaks to the already wealthy and to corporations enjoying record profits. During a September interview with the Koch-funded Americans for Prosperity, Johnson said that the tax reform he supports will lead to "a somewhat lowering of rates. From my standpoint, not even close to enough, but it's better than nothing."
Earlier this month, Johnson confessed that he was fine with being responsible for adding trillions to America's debt, "Just agree we’re going to lose money on a static scoring basis. I’m happy to live with a $2-3 trillion static loss."
So Ron Johnson is supporting what will be the largest corporate tax give-away ever. He is supporting a Republican effort to run America into a ditch of financial ruin. He is supporting policies that mortgage our children's future to give tax breaks to the one percent. He would be happy to add $3 trillion to the national debt. Fiscal conservative, my eye !
Republicans have been steadfast in pushing a handful of important agenda items. They want to take healthcare away from Americans. They want to give huge tax breaks to the ultra-rich. They want to lower the income of working-class Americans. They want to slash the environmental and workplace regulations that keep us healthier and safer.
Wisconsin Republicans have been especially effective in achieving the latter two goals. When it comes to slashing people's wages, they succeeded in spades. Act 10, Right-to-Freeload, the end of prevailing wage, and a refusal to increase the minimum wage combined to drastically lower the salaries of Wisconsinites.
State Republicans have also been adept at slashing important regulations that make us safer. They gutted the DNR and killed crucial environmental protections. They made the workplace more dangerous. They axed consumer protections.
A bill relating to the licensing of professional workers is currently being jammed through our state legislature. In a remarkable two-fer, this bill will slash workplace safety protections at the same time that it drives down wages. It's no wonder that GOP politicians are all-in on this dream opportunity.
Senate Bill 288-Assembly Bill 369 authorizes a new, partisan Licensing Review Board charged with examining current requirements for all of the 166 professions that require a license to practice in Wisconsin. The Board will report back to the legislature on which professions they feel a license should no longer be required, and on which ones the requirements should be relaxed.
The professions affected run a broad gamut. Skilled tradesmen such as plumbers, electricians, and elevator inspectors are covered. Health professional such as nurses, radiological technicians, and doctors are covered. Business professional such as architects, accountants, and funeral directors are covered. The complete list can be found on the WI Department of Safety and Professional Services website.
Licensing requirements give us some assurance that people we hire are competent. They let us know that professionals have been trained. They let us know that workers are aware of job-related safety standards. Obtaining a license requires some basic coursework. Maintaining a license requires continuing education and on-the-job experience. Cutting or eliminating license requirements will result in increased danger to workers and consumers.
Cutting or eliminating license requirements will also lower the entry barriers to those fields. Any quack who can afford a website could claim to be an elevator inspector, an acupuncturist, or a dietician. This will both depress the quality of services that we purchase and drop the salaries of people in the affected fields.
Far-right Wisconsin politicians have jumped on the national bandwagon for lower professional licensing standards. Our legislature's bill is almost a word-for-word copy of a model bill from the right-wing ALEC organization.
The list of supporters at an August hearing on the bill reads like a Who's Who of extreme right policy groups. Testifying in support of the bill were two Bradley Foundation-funded organizations, the Wisconsin Institute for Liberty and Law, and the Wisconsin Policy Research Institute. The Koch-funded groups Mercatus Center, the Institute for Justice, and Americans for Prosperity all came-out in support of the bill.
There is absolutely no Democratic support on these radical bills to weaken professional licensing. The Senate bill (SB288) is sponsored by Republican Senators Kapenga, Darling, Tiffany, Nass, Stroebel, and Wanggaard. The Assembly bill (AB369) is sponsored by a cast of 21 Republicans.
A national initiative is underway to slash the licensing requirements for a broad range of professions. The far-right policy groups behind this effort are driven by a blind worship of decreased regulation and lower wages for American workers. The Wisconsin GOP has jumped on the bandwagon and has introduced SB288/AB369 to bring about this radical change in Wisconsin.
If this bill becomes law, Wisconsin residents will see poorer professional workmanship, weakened consumer and worker safety, and lower wages. For the good of the state, we cannot allow that to happen.
Righties are often inconsistent in their opinions. The latest manifestation of that inconsistency is the MAGAtts' insistence that no gun control steps could possibly be effective in slowing the epidemic of gun violence. They tell us that there is nothing that we can do to lessen the odds that innocent men, women, and children will be gunned-down in our streets.
At the same time, many of these same folks insist that Trump's wall will be extraordinarily effective in stopping determined economic refugees from entering our country. They believe that once the dotard's Great Wall is erected, we will finally be safe from those darn illegals, their drugs, and their violence.
In just about any discussion with pro-death gun nuts, we are informed that there is nothing that will end the nearly daily American mass murders. They believe that there is no reason to ban weapon enhancements such as silencers, bump stocks, micro-penis compensators, high capacity clips, gat cranks, flash suppressors, etc. After all, once these devices are made illegal, psycho killers could still easily obtain them (assuming that they have access to a metal machine shop, an industrial-grade 3-D printer, or an outlaw arms merchant).
We are weary of hearing how inventive, resourceful, or handy crazy mass-murderers are. In reality, most of these sickos have neither the patience or engineering ability to boost the lethality of their guns on their own. Experts agree that making it illegal to produce, sell, or own lethality-enhancement devices such as these will go a long way toward cutting America's death count.
We are nauseated by the pro-death crowd telling us that we shouldn't have universal background checks. That there is no reason to ban gun sales to watch-list terrorists, the mentally ill, the senile, or domestic abusers. After all, these people will find someone who will sell them a murder weapon, no questions asked. Pro-deathers believe that nobody will ever report sketchy purchasers to the authorities. They think that no responsible citizens will gladly speak-up to head-off the next Sandy Hook massacre.
We are fed-up with pro-deathers who get into a semantics morass when the topic of banning semi-automatics and assault rifles comes up. (What do you mean by an assault rifle? What really is a semi-automatic?) They get into the circular argument that we shouldn't ban the carrying of weapons of war at the local mall. After all, there are already so many of these human-killing machines on our streets that it won't do any good to outlaw their carry, manufacture, or sale. They really believe that a halt to making new rapid-fire guns and aggressive buy-back programs will do nothing to lessen the chance that one will be discharged in your direction.
Despite all of the contrary evidence from other industrial democracies, pro-deathers keep telling us that common sense weapons laws will do nothing to stop the endless violence in American schools, nightclubs, concerts, and theaters. We are told that we must simply live (or die) with the consequences of America's all-guns, all-the-time, everywhere culture.
At the same time that the MAGAtts are claiming that common sense gun control would not be effective, they are touting Trump's wall as being the solution to all of America's problems. It will end the illegal drug problem. It will stop people from entering the country illegally. It will end thousands of terrorists from swarming our streets. They think that the Wall will be extraordinarily effective.
But Trump's folly, a wall that will cost taxpayers tens of billions of dollars, will simply not keep people out. Smart people determined to enter the US will easily find ways to fly over the wall, tunnel under it, go around it, or burrow through it. According to the Government's specs, a successful design should resist attempts to bore through for just thirty minutes. Last Wednesday, our own Jim Sensenbrenner stated that "...the Border Patrol says that the wall will slow-down people who are attempting to enter our country illegally by anywhere from 20 to 30 minutes...". So, our mighty Wall will be able to be breached in as little as twenty minutes. After that, people could stream through the created gap.
Many MAGAtts believe that common sense gun regulations-of the kind that have been effective in other industrial democracies-will simply have no effect in curbing gun violence in America. They believe that we should do absolutely nothing to protect our children and families from being gunned-down by madmen. Many of these same people have convinced themselves that a Great Wall, costing tens of billions of dollars, will keep people from entering the United States in search of economic opportunity.
Many on the right believe that insane potential murderers could easily find ways around strong gun laws, but sane and determined migrants will not find ways through a stationary wall. They are convinced that gun laws are totally ineffective, but Trump's Wall will be extraordinarily effective. They are wrong on both counts.
The destruction of labor unions has long been a goal of the extreme right. In almost every GOP-controlled state, legislation has been passed that weaken unions through Right-to-Freeload (RTF) rules.
While no employee can be forced to join a union in any state, unions must represent all workers in a unit. RTF laws allow some to refuse to pay for that representation. It allows some to freeload on the backs of their co-workers who diligently pay their dues.
RTF laws certainly weaken unions. The unionization rates in RTF states average only 8.1%, compared to 15.3% in states where workers pay the cost of their representation. Without strong unions, all workers in RTF states suffer, not just the unionized ones. Wages are lower, poverty is higher, and worker safety is poorer. For obvious reasons, these laws are often called "Right-to-Work-For-Less".
Workers in states that have not imposed RTF average 19% higher income than those in RTF states. Of the ten highest income states, not a single one has an RTF law on the books. Of the 12 states with the lowest average pay, 10 are RTF states.
But, it's not just pay. The weaker unions in RTF states cannot push as strongly for workplace safety. RTF states have a horrendous 50% higher rate of workplace-related deaths.
There are currently 28 states with RTF laws. The most recent states to impose these laws are Wisconsin (2015), West Virginia (2016), Kentucky (2017), and Missouri (2017, delayed for referendum). However, not content to bring economic ruin to just the red states, the extreme right is trying to cripple unions nationwide through the court system.
On Thursday, the US Supreme Court* agreed to hear a case brought by Mark Janus, an AFSCME-represented public employee in Illinois. Janus evidently feels put upon by the union and thinks that he is entitled to union protections without paying for them. The case is being bankrolled by the National Right-to-Work Foundation, as well as Liberty Justice Center, part of the Koch network.
The case will be heard early next year. A decision will be handed-down in late Spring or early Summer. If the case is decided broadly in Janus' favor, it will impose Right-to-Freeload on public-sector employees across the country. Such a decision will greatly weaken the labor movement and workers' rights in America.
The Court* is closely divided along ideological lines on the issue. A similar case was argued in early 2016, involving an employee and the California Teacher's Association. After the death of conservative demigod Anton Scalia, the Court* split 4-4 on the case. The death of Scalia, who would likely have decided against the union, brought a temporary break in the effort to implement RTF through the courts.
All last year, President Obama was denied his Constitutional right to name Scalia's replacement. In one of the most heinous and blatant power grabs in US history, the Republican Senate refused to even consider the President's moderate replacement nominee, Merrick Garland. This outright GOP theft of a Supreme Court seat leaves the legitimacy of the Court* in question for years.
However, Senate Republicans such as Mich McConnell and Ron Johnson wasted little time in breaking previous Senate rules to allow the new Republican president to confirm a nominee with only 51 votes. Getting his marching orders from the Federalist Society, Trump nominated a far-right ideologue, Neil Gorsuch for the post.
Based on his past record, there is little doubt that Gorsuch will join with the far-right majority to cast his stolen vote against worker's rights. There is no doubt that he will side with his corporate masters to weaken unions. There is no doubt that he will legislate a nation-wide RTF law from the bench.
One of my Facebook friends is an Illinois public sector worker. She has the conflicted position of being strongly pro-union, but voted for Trump. She is very worried about the pending case and how a negative decision will affect her future job security.
It never crossed her mind (or crossed the minds of the 37% of other union members who voted for Trump) that her candidate would act to weaken her voice in the workplace. It never occurred to her that her President would install the deciding Court* vote to kill her union.
Here we go again. Just when we thought that our healthcare system was safe and ready for improvement, Zombie-Trumpcare re-emerged from the crypt. The latest version of the Republican effort to demolish our healthcare system is the Graham-Cassidy-(Heller-Johnson) bill.
Graham-Cassidy will take insurance away from an estimated 32 million Americans. Every major physician and hospital group is against this travesty. Every major organization dedicated to the health of a particular body part or aimed at fighting a specific disease is against it. Retiree organizations, reproductive rights groups, and consumer associations are all against it.
Who is for it? Most Republican politicians are reflexively for killing Obamacare because... Obama! Trump, who is desperate to sign anything that he can declare a "win", is for it. Billionaire GOP donors are for it, in order to free-up money for their promised tax-breaks. But right at the forefront of this drive to demolish our healthcare system is Wisconsin's worst political hack- Gov. Scott Walker.
The Graham-Cassidy provision that has Walker licking his chops sends huge federal sums to the states as block grants. Governors like Walker could spend these billions any way they want, with little control. Somehow, having 50 different insurance systems is supposed to be better than having uniform healthcare standards and laws across the country.
Walker has been involved in this most recent attack on the ACA from the beginning. Rather than working to help the people of Wisconsin, he has spent much of his time trying to take away our healthcare. He traveled to the White House several times since January to lobby against the Affordable Care Act.
Walker attended an emergency White House meeting in July after a previous repeal bill had failed in the Senate. Among the attendees were HHS Secretary Tom Price, Sen. Cassidy, former Sen. Rick Santorum, and the governors of Mississippi, Arizona, and Arkansas. The far-right group soon congealed around the block-grant concept.
In a Breitbart interview (don't worry, I disinfected my keyboard), Walker spoke about the White House meeting and the repeal efforts that became Graham-Cassidy, "I think it's awesome....What a perfect way to kick start a true repeal and replace of Obamacare by sending it back to the states where we’re definitely more effective, more efficient, and more accountable to the people."
In the same interview, Walker said that Graham-Cassidy is a way to head-off a Medicare-for-All system,"...my fear is at some point in the future there will be a decisive push to go the opposite direction and instead of repealing they will push for a government-run single-payer system which would be horrible for people. That is something we have to prevent from happening and I think this gives us our last best effort to do that.” It appears that Scottie's fear is my hope.
Walker is doing everything that he can to take away your healthcare through the atrocious Graham-Cassidy bill. For example, earlier this month, he published an opinion piece, "States Can Fix Obamacare's Mess". The article strongly pushes the right-wing panacea of block grants to the states.
A bipartisan group of governors wrote to Mitch McConnell, asking him to refrain from bringing Graham-Cassidy to the Senate floor. But Walker was having none of that. He sent his own letter, signed by a strictly partisan group of GOP governors, asking for a floor vote on the bill to kill healthcare.
So Walker, who is responsible for the WEDC boondoggle of lost and untracked millions of dollars is asking for control of billions in federal block grants. Walker, who cost hardworking taxpayers hundreds of millions of dollars by turning-down Medicaid expansion, wants to have complete control over our state healthcare system. Walker, who negotiated the failed Foxconn fiasco, wants us to trust him with our lives.
Walker wants us to believe that a state government, run by kleptocrats like him, Robin Vos, and Scott Fitzgerald will be "more effective, more efficient, and more accountable to the people".
Under Walker, Wisconsin has become a pay-for-play carnival. Organizations seeking favorable treatment by the state inevitably donate to GOP candidates. With Walker's control of billions more in block-grant money, our state will turn into a special-interest feeding frenzy. It's no wonder that the Governor is pushing this block-grant idea so hard.
Jim Sensenbrenner represents the most heavily Republican region of Wisconsin. His 5th Congressional District is redder than Mark Pocan's Madison-based district is blue. Jim won his last three elections by an average of thirty-eight points. In even the most epic blue election tidal wave imaginable, we have little hope of electing a Democrat in the 5th.
Our twenty-term Congressman has been in office since 1979.The year that our Congressman took his current job, the USSR invaded Afghanistan. Jimmy Carter was President. Kramer vs. Kramer was a box office hit. Magic Johnson met Larry Bird in the NCAA basketball finals. One of the top albums was Saturday Night Fever. Our world and country have drastically changed in all that time, but Jim Sensenbrenner still occupies our Congressional seat. And according to the Journal-Sentinel, he plans to be on the ballot yet again in 2018.
Still, Sensenbrenner was forced to face a Democratic challenger in every election since 2008. For the last four elections, we have had a progressive hero step forward to give voters some semblance of an electoral choice. And the 2018 election will be no different. With 424 days until the November 2018 election, we have not just one, but three Democrats who are announced candidates for the race.
In the order of their announcement, the three candidates are Shawn Rundblade, Ramon Hyron Garcia, and Thomas Palzewicz. If all three remain in the race, they will meet next year in the August 14 Democratic primary.
Shawn Rundblade announced his run last December. According to his website, Shawn has been a bagger at a grocery store, a pharmacy technician, a camera store manager, a warehouse worker, a home appliance delivery driver, and now he helps coordinate appliance deliveries. He also served as a volunteer fire fighter for seventeen years. Shawn does not have a college degree.
The 38 year old Waukesha resident calls himself a Berniecrat. His issues include single payer healthcare, getting money out of politics, education reform, and social equality. Shawn has pledged to accept no contributions from fossil fuel companies, but I can't image that he has had to return any yet. Shawn's campaign website can be found here, his LinkedIn page here, his Twitter page here, and his Facebook page here.
Ramon Hyron Garcia announced in May. According to his website, Ramon has worked as a hardware store manager, a foreman, and a hospital telemetry tech. He attended La Cordon Bleu in Chicago and does not have a college degree. Ramon has MS and is on SS Disability. He has written a book about living with MS, No More Depression. He is also a life coach.
The 40 year-old Ramon is also inspired by Bernie Sanders. Some of his major issues are a $15/hour minimum wage, universal healthcare, and an end to Citizens United. Ramon has several interesting in-car You-Tube videos, including this one that explains his candidacy. On his website, Ramon states that he did not vote in the last Presidential election. Ramon's campaign website is here, his Face Book page here, and his Twitter page here.
Yesterday, Tom Palzewicz announced his own candidacy for the 5th Congressional seat. Since 2005, Tom has been a co-owner of a business-consultancy franchise. In the past, he was a treasurer at a mortgage company and is a six-year Navy veteran, serving as an electrician aboard a submarine. Tom has a business degree (BBA) from UW-Milwaukee.
The 54 year-old Palzewicz lives in Brookfield. Among his major issues are affordable healthcare for all Americans, fighting climate change, and education. Tom has published a book, Consistent Cash Flow. I understand it is quite the page turner. Tom's campaign website is here, his Face Book page here, his Twitter page here, and his LinkedIn page here.
We are blessed to have three 2018 candidates who are running as Democrats against Jim Sensenbrenner. None of these men are professional politicians. Each comes to the race with interesting and real-world experiences. Any one of them would be a better Congressman than our current occupant. Any one of them would do a superior job at listening to the concerns of their constituents.
This blog does not endorse primary candidates. Make-up your own mind which one of these fine candidates to select in August. We encourage you to explore the campaign sites linked above, compare issue statements, and to go see the candidates in-person as the primary race heats-up.
The November 2018 elections will be the first major referendum on the failed Trump presidency. Every one of the 435 US House seats, and 33 of the 100 Senate seats, are up for grabs. Thirty-six governor offices are at stake. In Wisconsin, our gubernatorial and US Senate races will top the ballot.
Running for reelection in a state that narrowly tilted to Trump in 2016, Tammy Baldwin will be one of the prime targets for right-wing groups that want to retain control of the US Senate. However, considering the traditionally poor showing of the President's party in mid-term elections, the early poll numbers, and the poor quality of announced GOP candidates, you have to like Tammy's chances.
Several early GOP favorites for the Wisconsin Senate race have already dropped out of consideration. In February, "Struggling" Sean Duffy declared that "this is not the right time". The Congressman from up north may have been influenced by an early poll that had him 13 points behind Baldwin. He also may have realized that the public is not ready to elect another low-intelligence reality-TV star to high office.
Fake-Democrat Sheriff David Clarke also dropped out of contention. Milwaukee County's medal-covered snowflake cowboy must have realized that the race would focus attention on the four negligent deaths at his jail. Clarke recently became a national laughing-stock when he publicly announced that he would take a Trump Administration job that was never actually offered to him. (update-Clarke resigned today! Yea !)
With these two Republican heavy hitters out of the picture, legions of other GOPers have flirted with running. Lt. Gov. Rebecca Kleefisch has been suggested as a candidate, but she ruled that out in June. Multi-millionaire Nicole Schneider of the Schneider trucking fortune discussed running, but then thought better of it.
As late as March, State Senate Majority Leader Scott Fitzgerald toyed with running. However, he hasn't made any public moves since. Scott would likely have as much success as brother Jeff did in his own failed 2012 Senate run. State Rep. Dale Kooyenga, (R-Brookfield) had been one of the likeliest of the second-tier candidates to run. However, he announced yesterday that he was not yet ready. I guess that he is too busy with his bizarre quest to change the US Constitution.
A few others have been mentioned as possible GOP candidates. Mike Gallager, the one-term Congressman from WI-8, and Glen Grothman, the two-term Congressman from WI-6 are among the most prominent. State Senator Duey Strobel is listed as a possible candidate in Wikipedia (and I trust Wikipedia implicitly).
However, the three GOP candidates mentioned by most people are investor Eric Hovde, State Senator Leah Vukmir, and the only officially-announced candidate, Kevin Nicholson.
Hovde was a Washington DC hedge-fund banker and real estate developer who came-in second to Tommy Thompson in the 2012 GOP primary. During that race, he expressed his disdain for the poor, saying that he was sick of the "sob stories" of people suffering during the recession. He famously called Tammy Baldwin a commie, saying, "Her philosophy has its roots in Marxism, communism, socialism, extreme liberalism ..."
Leah Vukmir is a 59 year-old Wisconsin State Senator from Tosa. The extreme Vukmir is being bankrolled by anti-worker billionaire, Diane Hendricks, who is acting as her finance co-chair. Vukmir is not only a proud member of the infamous ALEC, but is on their Board of Directors. Among her legislative "accomplishments" is dismantling Wisconsin's non-partisan Government Accountability Board. Most recently, she has advocated for the disastrous Foxconn give-away.
Kevin Nicholson, unlike Leah Vukmir, has no legislative experience. The 39 year-old business consultant has a background that has many righties concerned. He was President of the College Democrats of America and spoke at the 2000 Democratic National Convention (horror of horrors !). There are rumors that he voted in a Democratic Presidential primary as recently as 2008. Nicholson claims to have seen the light and is now a conservative, professing to be pro-life, pro-gun, and pro-voucher. He is being bankrolled in his quest for glory by out-of-state billionaire Richard Uihlein.
Either of the two most likely Republican Senate candidates should be highly vulnerable. Vukmir's 14 year career has included many extreme and unpopular positions. Her deep involvement in the notorious ALEC organization will certainly be part of any campaign discussion. Nicholson's vigorous flip-flopping leads one to believe that he would say anything to be elected.
With the low popularity of Congressional Republicans, as well as the poor quality of probable GOP Senate candidates, Tammy Baldwin has an excellent chance of retaining her Seat. With luck and some hard work by motivated Wisconsin progressives, we will return Tammy to Washington in 2018.
While on vacation in Washington, DC last week, we toured the US Capitol building. We found ourselves right at the epicenter of the heated controversy over Confederate monuments.
Each state chooses two people to be honored with a statue in the Capitol's Statuary Hall. The Hall was established by an 1864 law that instructs "the States to provide and furnish statues, ...not exceeding two in number for each State, of deceased persons who have been citizens thereof, and illustrious for their historic renown or for distinguished civic or military services..."
The big controversy is that many of the former Confederate states chose to honor Civil War Generals or politicians. They chose men who committed treason against the government in whose Capitol they are commemorated. In doing so, the states celebrate the abhorrent practice of human slavery. This is a big poke in the eyes of all loyal Americans and a big slap to the faces of black citizens.
Of the 100 people honored in our Capitol, eight were political or military leaders who played major roles in the fight against the United States. President Jefferson Davis (MS) and VP Alexander Stephens (GA) are there. Rebel officers Robert E. Lee (VA), James George (MS), Wade Hampton (SC), Edmond Smith (FL), Joseph Wheeler (AL), and Zebulon Vance (NC) are honored.
Commemorating these men who fought against the United States in our Capitol building is equivalent to honoring others who fought against America. Why not a statue of Admiral Yamamoto or Field Marshal Rommel in the rotunda? Why not a bust of Vietnamese General Giap in the Visitor's Center? Why not statues of British Revolutionary War Generals Howe or Burgoyne in Statuary Hall? (Actually, a painting of Burgoyne is in the Rotunda, but he is surrendering to Americans).
But these foreign military leaders who fought the US have far more honor than the rebel leaders from the Civil War. After all, they were patriots in their own countries. In contrast, the Confederate leaders turned their backs on the United States. They should no more be allowed a place of honor in our Capitol than other notorious traitors like Benedict Arnold, KGB mole Aldrich Ames, or atomic spy Julius Rosenburg.
Republicans have come to the defense of honoring traitors and defenders of slavery in our Capitol. House Speaker Paul Ryan meekly said, "These are decisions for those states to make." VP Pence said (of course) on Fox News," [whether to remove monuments] should always be a local decision. And with regard to the U.S. Capitol, should be state decisions." And it has been made perfectly clear how the quickly-failing President Trump feels about keeping the monuments to racism and bigotry.
In sharp contrast, Democrats are on the right side of history. Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi stated, "The Confederate statues in the halls of Congress have always been reprehensible. If Republicans are serious about rejecting white supremacy, I call upon Speaker Ryan to join Democrats to remove the Confederate statues from the Capitol immediately." I agree with Nancy. Statues of Confederate leaders should come down now ! Turn them into something more useful, like nails or gravel !
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On the lighter side, there is a silly article in White Right Wisconsin suggesting that the statue of Bob La Follette should be removed from the US Capitol and replaced with someone deemed more suitably conservative, such as Supreme Court Justice Rehnquist. I guess that reforms championed by Fightin' Bob, such as women's suffrage, worker's rights, consumer protections, child labor laws, and the direct election of US Senators are just too far left for the goofy author of the article.
If we are going to replace one of the two Wisconsin commemorative statues, let's not remove the one of La Follette. Let's not take down the statue of a man who was voted by historians as the greatest Senator in American history, based on accomplishments in office and long term impact.
If we must remove a statue, let's take down the one of Jacques Marquette. He merely passed through Wisconsin on his travels around the Upper Midwest. He had as much, or more impact on Michigan and Illinois as on our own state. Aren't there Wisconsinites who have given more to our state and country than an ancient French explorer from the 1600's ?
Who should we honor instead of Marquette? Let's not venerate yet another politician. Since the state honoree decisions are made by politicians, this self-important group is naturally way over-represented in Statuary Hall.
How about an aeronaut or astronaut? Wisconsin can claim Billy Michell (father of the Air Force), Deke Slayton, and Jim Lovell. Or an entertainer? Houdini is ours, as are rocker Steve Miller and Orson Welles. Or an important environmentalist such as John Muir, Aldo Leopold, or Gaylord Nelson?
Wisconsin has claims on many creative types worthy of statuary honor. Frank Lloyd Wright was from here. Several important inventors have Wisconsin ties, including Les Paul, King Gillette (safety razor), Seymour Cray (supercomputer), and John Bardeen (twice a Physics Nobel laureate, invented the transistor).
Let's leave Bob La Follette in his place of honor in both the US and state Capitols. He has earned it. If we must switch-out a statue, let's remove Jacques Marquette and replace him with someone more worthy of acclaim.
I am old enough to remember when the Republican party was a group of adults with rational, albeit misguided, policy objectives. That party is long gone. The new GOP has become a party of third graders with a juvenile fixation on urination. Republicans want to test your urine, tell you where to urinate, and talk about urination in public rallies. The party of Goldwater has become the party of golden water. The GOP has become the GOPee.
For example, GOP legislators across America have introduced bills to force transgender people to use the bathrooms corresponding to their birth gender. North Carolina went farther than any other state in telling people where to pee, but somewhat backed-off after facing strong economic pressure. Even Wisconsin has its own supporters of this regressive idea. Representative Jesse Kremer (R-Neolithic) has been a primary proponent of bathroom gender-verification police.
The Obama Administration put some order on this chaos. In 2016, the Department of Education issued a directive protecting the rights of transgender students, including allowing them to use a restroom in alignment with their gender identity. However, like in so many areas, the Trump administration scrapped the rational Obama policy. We have returned to the previous "where can I pee?" pandemonium.
Another case of the Republican urine fixation is their push to collect and analyze the pee of poor people. Drug testing the urine of those on public assistance is one of the few bedrock principles of the modern GOP. They've gotta punish those "undeserving poor" ! Mean-spirited Republican states, including Florida, Utah, Missouri, Michigan, North Carolina, and Tennessee have wasted taxpayer money on testing unemployment insurance applicants.
Each trial of the Republicans' vast drug testing experiment failed to reveal hordes of drug-crazed welfare recipients. Tennessee screened 39,000 applicants and turned-up 69 positives. Utah screened 9,500 applicants and turned-up 29 positives. Arizona screened 87,000 applicants and found one positive. The percentage of drug users among those on unemployment is consistently much lower than among the employed.
Despite all of the failed programs in other states, our own Scott Walker still is obsessed with collecting and testing the urine of the poor. He has long wanted to pee-test those on food stamps, but was denied by the Obama Administration. He spent state funds on a lawsuit against the Federal government to try to be allowed to do that testing. He has applied to the Trump Administration for permission to urine-test those on Badger Care. There seems to be no limit to the amount of your tax dollars Walker is willing to spend on his strange little urine fetish.
The intellectual leader of the national Republican party has a thing about urine, too. During a campaign rally, Donald Trump babbled on and on about the fact that Hillary goes to the bathroom. She had been a little delayed coming back from a short break during one of the Democratic debates.
This was unfathomable to Trump. To his crowd of mouth-breathing supporters, Trump rambled, “I thought she quit. I thought she gave up. Where did she go ? Where did Hillary go? They had to start the debate without her! Phase two. I know where she went. It’s disgusting. I don’t want to talk about it. It’s disgusting. Don't say it! It's too disgusting! Let's not talk about it!” National politics have degenerated to the point that a presidential candidate delves into his opponent's toilet trip. Sad.
And who can forget the infamous pee-pee tape ? An intelligence dossier on Trump's Russian connections implied that the Russians have a compromising video of Trump in a Moscow hotel. Our President allegedly paid two hookers to urinate on a bed in the Presidential Suite at the Ritz-Carlton. Of course, the White House denied the story.
Out of respect to the office of President, I would normally accept a White House denial of such a wild tale. But Trump is not a normal President. His bizarre obsequence to the Russians, combined with the fact that he constantly lies about all matters big and small, lead one to believe the pee-pee tape story is entirely plausible.
Today's GOP is fixated on your precious bodily fluids. They want to control where you pee. They want to test your pee. They talk about pee in campaign speeches. Some believe that the GOP President paid prostitutes to pee while he watched. Republicans have become the number one party, and I don't mean that in a good way.
Washington County officials recently put out feelers to neighboring counties concerning the merging of governmental services. This effort is aimed at reducing overhead costs. Washington and Ozaukee counties have already realized savings by combining their health services and are looking at other ways to save through consolidation.
In a July story on local TV, the Washington County Administrator speculated that even a complete merger of Washington and Ozaukee Counties is not off the table. This idea is not totally crazy. The two counties were a single entity in the past, only to part ways in 1853. Let's explore a few facets of a possible merger between Washington and Ozaukee Counties.
The combined county certainly will not be too unwieldy in size. At 233 square miles, current Ozaukee County is the second smallest in Wisconsin. Only tiny Pepin County is smaller. Washington is a little larger. At 431 square miles, Washington ranks 63 out of 72 counties in size. The combined Ozaukee-Washington County will still be only the 43rd largest Wisconsin county.
The two heavily-developed counties certainly are not tiny in population. Ozaukee, with 88,314 people, is the 17th most populous county in the state. Washington, with 134,296 people, is the 11th most populous. A combined county will become the fifth most populous Wisconsin county overnight. We will only be surpassed by Milwaukee, Dane, Waukesha, and Brown Counties.
The new county will have a median family income between those of Washington ($69,237) and Ozaukee ($76,433). The poverty rate (W-5.6% ; O-5.2%) and the median age (W- 42.1 yrs ; O-43.8 yrs) will also fall between the two counties. The combined county will be higher income, less poor, and older than the current Washington County.
I know that the proposed merger is aimed at cost savings. However, we should think long term. To avoid parochial arguments over the location of the new county seat, a new Court House could be built at the center of the new county. A beautiful and palatial county library could also be constructed. Diagonal lines drawn from the four corners of the combined counties meet in a rural area just northeast of Jackson. Land there should be cheap.
Unlike other high-population Wisconsin counties such as Milwaukee, Dane, Waukesha, and Brown, the new county will not be dominated by a single large city. The combined Washington-Ozaukee county will be dotted with a well-dispersed group of medium-sized cities. The largest municipalities (2010 census) are West Bend (31k), Mequon (23k), Germantown (20k), Hartford (14k), Cedarburg (11K), Port Washington (11k), Grafton (11k), and Richfield (11k).
What should we call the new county? Certainly, we can drop the name "Washington". There are already Washington Counties in thirty of the fifty states. The loss of one Washington County will not be mourned. Our new county should avoid a name so common that we often are often confused with twenty-nine others.
Naming the combined county "Ozaukee" is not that great, either. Ozaukee is supposedly from Ojibwe, meaning "people living at the mouth of a river". Not all that inspiring for a 21st century county.
Any of the names that one could construct from a combination of the two current county names are pretty lame, also. "Washington-Ozaukee County" takes way too long to say. The shorter "Washzakee" and "Ozaukington" don't exactly roll off the tongue.
No, I think that our new combined county needs a name that is unique, easy to say, and is fairly modern. How about naming the new county for one of the most effective Presidents of recent times? I am all in for "Obama County" ! I am sure that most local residents will agree !
