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 !
