Political Heat

"Wildly Gerrymandering"

2012-02-16T22:17:00.006-06:00

GOP emails reveal intent to redistrict illegally

The emails that Republicans tried their very best to conceal were ordered, yet again, to be released today. Here's one such email, in which it's revealed there's a "plain-as-day" intent to use gerrymandering techniques in a Hispanic part of the state: (click on image to enlarge)

It can't get any clearer than using the words "wildly gerrymandering" to get your point across. The Republicans were out to create a stronger map to their advantage, an act that is morally and legally reprehensible.

Sloppy journalism reveals Wisconsin's pro-worker values

2012-02-16T18:00:00.007-06:00

State flag not "union emblem," but contains positive elements of labor traditions

Recently, the website Politico published a story regarding President Barack Obama's visit to the Badger state, and his support for the union presence here.

There's no doubt that Obama likely supports the progressive uprising, but the author of the article, Donovan Slack, had a different take on why exactly it was more evident on that day than any other:

It's very clear what side President Obama is on here in Wisconsin.

Behind the stage where he will speak today are two flags: an American one, as usual, and right alongside it — and a flag for the local union, Wisconsin 1848.

Here's the scene as Slack saw it, with both the U.S. flag and the "union" one next to it (in blue):

Yep, that "local union" flag is in fact...the state flag of Wisconsin.

Whoops.

Knowing the different state flags isn't basic knowledge (did you know Ohio's flag isn't even rectangular?!). But describing a flag you're unfamiliar with as being a "union" flag without researching that claim first is sloppy journalism, lazy at its very best and indicative of a hidden agenda at its worst.

Yet, even within this tragic neglect of basic researching standards, there lies some truth to Slack's claim: the two men in the flag represent a "yeoman" miner and a sea-farer of our state's waterways. Other symbols -- a pic-axe and a shovel, an arm swinging a hammer, a plowshare -- are also depicted.

Though some of the industries from the time the flag was adopted have waned considerably, the two workers' inclusion in our state's flag (as workers, mind you, not corporate owners) reflects a state rich in labor history, even if it was designed prior to many important labor battles yet to be won.

In trying to tie Obama to the labor movement in Wisconsin, Donovan Slack definitely...well, "slacked" in doing the proper research. Yet in doing so, Slack opened up a discussion into the state flag itself, including its contents and their relevance.

Video Heat: Crossroads

2012-02-15T18:44:00.003-06:00

Do we invest in corporatocracy, or in Wisconsin? The choice is ours to make

As we edge closer to the impending recall election, citizens of Wisconsin must ask themselves: in which direction should we go? We stand at a crossroads, but our destiny made by our own hand.

By refusing to release documents, state GOP continues to keep us in the dark

2012-02-13T22:14:00.006-06:00

Republicans refuse to adhere to court order, keep 84 redistricting documents hidden from the public

The Journal Sentinel reported on Monday that Republican lawmakers are attempting to keep hidden 84 documents relating to the redistricting bill that passed earlier this year, despite a court ruling ordering them to release those documents.

Citing attorney-client privilege, Republicans are attempting to keep this information out of the public's eyes -- this, following revelation last week of another document that essentially told lawmakers dealing with the redistricting bill that what they heard their leaders say in public wasn't necessarily what the bill would eventually entail.

The attorney-client privilege is indeed an important one to keep private. No one is disputing that fact. But a judge has already ruled that the documents' importance to the public supersede that privilege, and that the Republicans (and their lawyers) must make them public immediately.

The Republicans have every right to dispute that ruling -- that is the way our courts work in a democracy, after all. Yet there's something telling in the fact that they refuse to go along with the order.

What is it exactly that they're trying to hide? What could be in those documents that isn't already public knowledge, that's potentially worse than the document that was released last week? These are the questions that have no answers, at least until the documents are put out into the light.

And those are the questions that are destructive to the democratic process itself. We already know that Republicans were hiding things before, telling the public one thing while legislating in an entirely different direction.

Keeping their constituents in the dark about what was really going on is bad enough. Refusing to release documents that a court has already ordered should be revealed indicates not only that the Republicans choose to behave in a discrete manner, but that they also don't care what you think once that fact has already been exposed.

Same-sex couples deserve marriage rights

2012-02-13T20:30:00.001-06:00

Reasons for restriction of marriage rights to gays, lesbians lack logical bases

Social issues have dominated the headlines as of late as the Republican nomination for president has heated up. One of the issues that continually comes up (thanks in part to candidate Rick Santorum's extreme views on the subject) is the issue of same-sex marriage.

In the wake of the GOP "conversations" on the subject, as well as passage in Washington state of same-sex marriage rights (and legislative passage of a same-sex marriage law in New Jersey), it behooves us to review the subject matter, to examine what's behind the debate and why same-sex partners deserve to have the same recognition that straight couples are afforded.

Background
Marriage is involved in two separate aspects of our society. On the one hand, there is a traditional sense of what a marriage is, usually viewed as a religious ceremony that links two individuals together as one. This is what is argued over when the right in this country talks about the "sanctity of marriage."

Yet there is a second version of marriage that's also important to keep in mind within the debate -- the secular, state-sanctioned marriage. No marriage, religious or otherwise, is valid in the state's eyes without a license granted to couples from the government. Upon issuance of this certificate (and agreement between the two parties involved), a couple is conferred basic contractual rights, including (but not limited to) visitation rights when one is in the hospital, rights of inheritance, rights to share health insurance plans, rights of custody, and so forth.

In fact, there are literally thousands of rights that are conferred to "married" partners, rights that aren't accessible to those who are in civil unions, domestic partnerships or other pacts that are offered to same-sex couples.

Flawed arguments
The arguments that opponents of same-sex marriage put forth often point towards a "protection" of one thing or another. Some arguments even try to connect homosexuality to other forms of relationships, connections that oftentimes fail to have any weight to them whatsoever once you truly look at them close-up.

The "slippery-slope" argument, for example, tends to believe that if you legalize same-sex marriage, then other forms of marriage -- such as polygamy, bestiality, etc. -- MUST become legalized as well through the same rationale that same-sex marriage would been legalized under. Some opponents of marriage equality also compare the practice of homosexuality to pedophilia, a comparison that is wholeheartedly without merit.

To combat these arguments, one needs only to look at what exactly a same-sex marriage would entail, and what specifically couples hoping to gain recognition are desiring: a same-sex marriage would create a state-sanctioned bond between two consenting individuals of the same sex. Compare that to what a "traditional" marriage is (a recognition of two consenting individuals of the opposite sex) and it's clear that the slippery-slope comparisons are outrageous ones to make:

A same-sex marriage is in no way going to lead to a polygamist marriage because both a same-sex marriage and a opposite-sex marriage limit the bond to two. The comparison between same-sex marriages and polygamist marriages is purely that both are unrecognized, nothing more.

Relationships involving bestiality aren't going to occur as a result of same-sex marriage either because the two are different, in that the latter requires both participants to be "individuals," not an individual and an animal, just as an opposite-sex marriage does.

So, too, is the comparison to pedophilia equally incomparable, seeing as same-sex marriage advocates are pushing for a relationship between two consenting adults, not a relationship that requires one of the participants to lack the facilities to give consent. You could make an equally convincing argument that opposite-sex marriages could also lead to pedophilia being recognized, as many cases of abuse occur between an older individual and a younger, opposite-sexed child as well. In both cases, the rationale lacks adequate argument.

Opponents of same-sex marriage also try to state that they're merely "protecting" the sanctity of marriage (more on that later), or "protecting" family values by limiting what relationships are recognized or not. But in many cases, families of same-sex households are just like children of any other family.

Scientific studies tend to agree: according to the American Academy of Pediatrics, "Children’s optimal development seems to be influenced more by the nature of the relationships and interactions within the family unit than by the particular structural form it takes."

The AAP adds, in another similar study: "There is ample evidence to show that children raised by same-gender parents fare as well as those raised by heterosexual parents. More than 25 years of research have documented that there is no relationship between parents' sexual orientation and any measure of a child's emotional, psychosocial, and behavioral adjustment" (Emphasis added).

Unsanctimonious -- and recognized -- marriages
The concept that marriage has always been sanctimonious is also a troubled view -- though likely to have been a part of many marriage ceremonies, and himself a married man, Martin Luther believed "[marriage] was a part of life and even a part of Christian life, but it was not a sacrament." Indeed, the religious pilgrims who came to America had similar views, as the Puritan Church (once it came to control Parliament in the Mother country) passed a law maintaining "marriage to be no sacrament."

Obviously, to a great many of people, marriage still IS a sanctimonious event, one that they choose to include their preferred religious belief within. But those words -- "choose" and "preferred" -- aren't accidental. In U.S. law, a marriage may have the blessings of a church (or other religious institution), but it cannot become valid unless the two partners enter into a state-sanctioned agreement as well.

And while it's true that a marriage may include a religious aspect to it, it's similarly true that a couple can purposely choose to omit such a ceremony from their vows as well. Couples who are atheists, or even couples who ARE religious but merely want to keep things simple, can wed at a courthouse or in a secularized ceremony, without any religious aspects whatsoever involved, and still have a valid marriage in the eyes of the law.

Conclusion
The reasons against same-sex marriage are important to those that want to preserve THEIR ideas of what marriage should be (some would even die for those ideas). But their ideas aren't the ONLY ones available -- indeed, couples have already formed same-sex relationships, living in a way that is already basically marriage but without the all-important recognition from the government that straight couples have.

What this debate amounts to, then, is ultimately discrimination in a state-sense. Churches are free to discriminate couples from marrying in their doors any time that they choose to do so -- there's no denying them that right, as doing so would interfere with the beliefs of that particular faith. They do it to this day even, with same-sex couples as well as straight couples who they deem living outside of that church's belief system.

But denial of the right to partake in a state-sanctioned event on the basis of being a gay or lesbian couple is, in effect, discrimination without merit, since the state is not permitted to discriminate on the basis of a particular group's belief. It's fine for the state to define what a marriage is in order to truly protect the interests of the state -- but no interests are being threatened whatsoever within a same-sex union.

The state itself has no right to tell a gay or lesbian couple that their relationship is less valid than a heterosexual relationship. As outlined above, there is no basis for that denial. And financially speaking, whether a person marries in a straight marriage or same-sex one doesn't matter. Either way, the same amount of benefits would be conferred onto that couple.

Is there a right to same-sex marriage? In the sense that there is also a right to opposite-sex marriage, there surely is. The benefits granted to married couples may change, but the right of any couple (be they hetero- or homosexual) to receive the recognition they deserve should not be infringed upon on through the government's hand.

Video Heat: One year longer, One year stronger...

2012-02-11T22:06:00.003-06:00

A message of thanks from Political Heat

A special message from Political Heat. As we approach the first year anniversary of the historic protests in Madison (and all across the state), we owe many thanks for those involved with this people-powered movement.

Union "pledge" the wrong route to take

2012-02-10T10:02:00.003-06:00

Restoration of union rights shouldn't be based on "if-then" functions

Some unions in the state are insisting that, whoever the eventual nominee against Gov. Scott Walker may be for his impending recall, they should pledge to veto any budget passed by the legislature that fails to restore collective bargaining rights for state workers.

Both of the Democratic candidates who have announced their intentions to run against Walker have weighed-in on the issue. Former Dane County Executive Kathleen Falk has made the pledge, while State Sen. Kathleen Vinehout has declined.

Pledges have become a recent fad within the world of electoral politics, mostly a fixture of the right but not unheard of to be part of progressive politics either. Signing onto a pledge gives a candidate a double incentive: they assure funds and a mobilized group of people will be willing to support them during their election run; and they lessen the chances of a primary challenge from within that group down the line.

The problem with pledges, however, is that they leave politicians restrained to act a certain way once in office. Indeed, it's the fear of retaliatory pressures from Grover Norquist's "no-tax" pledge that has prevented negotiation at the federal level among Republicans and Democrats over how to stave off a growing debt crisis.

The route taken by Vinehout, to disregard commitment to such a pledge (though not necessarily ruling it out as a possibility either), is the proper and nobler approach to take. We shouldn't restrain our candidates to behave a certain way through the use of this or any other pledge. Doing so not only restricts our lawmakers but also may alienate a large base of moderates, who don't want any recall candidate to appear as a pawn of the unions (a misconception, to be sure, but one that isn't easily dissuaded by the use of such pledges).

Furthermore, the pledge itself is unnecessary for Vinehout to make -- her commitment to restoring collective bargaining should be evident by the fact that she was one of the 14 state senators that went to Illinois to avoid filling quorum, thus stalling the bill that eventually removed those rights nearly a year ago.

Citizens should make electoral judgments based upon how candidates have acted in the past and what they say they'll work for in the future. We shouldn't limit any recall candidate to performing their job as governor in a strict "if-then" function. Doing so will hurt Wisconsin when that time comes, and is damaging politically to our own cause now.

Democratic women lead the way for recall effort

2012-02-08T16:55:00.006-06:00

Vinehout, Falk lead the way "Forward" for Wisconsin

State Sen. Kathleen Vinehout made it official today, announcing that she would run against Gov. Scott Walker in the impending recall election later this year.

Of course, she will have to survive a recall primary round with her Democratic colleagues first. Thus far, only one other Democrat has formally entered the race -- former Dane County Executive Kathleen Falk.

Though more candidates are likely to surface (Democratic as well as independent), it's encouraging to see the first two official contenders for the Democrats are both progressive women. In fact, this follows the trend from last fall's senatorial recalls, when five of the six Democratic candidates (and both of the successful challengers who won) were women.

This isn't to say that men aren't qualified to challenge Walker -- both genders are fully capable of producing sound candidates, and the idea that a man/woman can do better than the other is backwards thinking. But women are greatly underrepresented in our state, and having our first female governor come about as a result of this recall would only make the occasion that much more historic.

Regardless of who the eventual nominee may be, that two women (nay, two Kathleens!) are leading the way is a positive thing for gender equality in our state. It's one way that Wisconsin is showing it's ready to move "forward," especially after dealing with a governor who has moved us in the opposite direction in such a short period of time.

GOP lawmakers stifle democratic process, deliberately lie to the public

2012-02-07T16:28:00.005-06:00

Behind closed doors, legislative leaders plotted to purposely misinform voters

If you are still one of those Wisconsinites struggling to find legitimacy within the senatorial recalls set to commence later this year, listen up: aside from all the right-wing assaults on our values, and deliberate violations of rules and law within their chambers, there's now significant evidence that shows the Republican leadership intended to say one thing to the public while saying something entirely different behind closed doors.

In other words, Republicans were told by their leaders that they were going to lie to the people of Wisconsin on purpose.

It all involves the redistricting maps that Republicans rushed to pass earlier this year, plans that, in their haste to enact them sooner, were both flawed and disenfranchising to thousands of citizens.

The memo said in language that can't be misunderstood: "Public comments on this map may be different than what you hear in this room. Ignore the public comments." In other words, a clear intent to misinform and lie to the public.

We already knew that many Republicans have lied this past year in our state -- one needs only to hear Gov. Scott Walker speak for a brief moment to receive a fresh example. But this memo provides direct evidence that the leadership in our state's legislative body directed the party's caucus to purposely ignore their lies, to accept and even sign a loyalty oath of sorts promising not to reveal what was really going on within the lawmaking process.

For directly attempting to disrupt the free flow of ideas, an aspect inherent in every legitimate democracy, Republicans in the legislature deserve to be removed from office, either within the next scheduled election or in the upcoming recalls targeting four of its members.

Video Heat: The Scott Walker Two-Step

2012-02-06T13:46:00.002-06:00

Governor lies on issues of taxes, balancing the budget

The latest installment of Video Heat focuses on Scott Walker's claims that he's 1) balanced the budget and 2) done so without raising taxes of any kind. Both claims, it turns out, are flat-out lies.

Cuts to workers' pay (predictably) responsible for job losses in Wisconsin

2012-02-06T09:11:00.009-06:00

Study from a year ago foresaw job losses coming from Act 10

In March of 2011, shortly after Gov. Scott Walker and his Republican allies in the legislature forcibly passed Act 10 into law, UW economist Steven Deller predicted that the reduced purchasing power of state employees would create a loss of more than 20,000 jobs within the state of Wisconsin in the next year or two.

Following the publication of that study, there were three months of job gains and six months of continuous job losses. The net result was 20,400 jobs gone since the study's release, including 35,600 jobs lost since June.

It should also be noted that the three months of job gains came about during a time when Walker's predecessor's budget was still in play. Net job losses began in July, the first month that Walker's own budget was implemented.

It was also the first full month that paychecks for state workers saw diminished wages, following a three-month court battle over whether Act 10 was passed in a legal manner or not. After that court ruling, state workers had to contribute more of their own income towards their pension and health plans, both of which were already supplied by differed payments to those workers. The result of that reduction in pay contributed greatly towards a loss in jobs in the state overall.

In other words, the premonitions of Deller seem to have been fulfilled (or exceeded), regardless of whether you start from March, when the law was passed, or July, when it was implemented. Jobs have been lost, and a big reason why is because of the cuts in pay to state workers, which has in turn diminished their purchasing power.

It was clear from the beginning that Walker's "reforms" wouldn't do a thing for job creation, would actually have a negative impact towards the economy in the state. Neither tax breaks for corporations nor pay decreases for state employees can create jobs for Wisconsin -- demand for work is stifled by both.

Economist Steven Deller knew this right off the bat, but it doesn't take a doctorate in economics to see, right now, that things AREN'T working under Gov. Walker's watch.

Gov. Walker likely part of John Doe investigation

2012-02-02T18:20:00.005-06:00

Proximity to those arrested raises reasonable questions over Walker's involvement

UPDATE (Feb 3, 5:30 PM): Gov. Walker set to meet with prosecutors.

(Original post)

I have stayed relatively mum on the subject of the growing John Doe investigation, commonly referred to as "Walkergate" in some circles. The reason for this silence is that each new development that came out created new questions, never really any answers, and any assessment I could have made would only be speculation on my part.

Yet, with the latest round of arrests in the investigation (involving the illegal campaign activities of several county employees from the time Gov. Scott Walker was Milwaukee County Executive), there's ample room to speculate with some degree of certainty, to wonder aloud, "What exactly was Walker up to at that time?"

So what can we extrapolate from the latest arrests? The mere fact that Walker's proximity to those involved (both physically and politically) leads us to conclude that Walker himself is involved in the investigation in some way.

That doesn't mean that Walker is necessarily guilty (nor innocent). We can assume, however, that Walker's actions while he served as county executive (and campaigned for governor) are being examined closely, given the direction the investigation has recently taken.

It would be naive at this point to assume otherwise -- Walker worked mere yards from these people, who were engaging in illegal activities. It only makes sense that investigators would question whether Walker had a role in it as well.

When you take the time to think about it, that's a huge development. Previously, the question over the governor's role in John Doe was an enigma, one of those questions that couldn't be answered one way or the other. Now, it's clear that Walker has to be part of the investigation, again given the fact that he worked in the same offices as those who were arrested (not only that, but was also in charge of those offices).

There is still much unknown about the John Doe/Walkergate investigation, and much of the speculation is purely that: just speculation. We don't know of anyone's guilt or innocence at this point, let alone the guilt or innocence of names that have yet to be made public. But it's reasonable to believe, for reasons I outlined above, that Gov. Scott Walker is a main focus of the probe, if not the main focus.

GAB right to hold back on releasing recall petitions -- for now, at least

2012-01-31T10:05:00.005-06:00

Safeguards against intimidation of signers must be met before release

The Government Accountability Board has delayed publishing recall petitions online over fears of intimidation against people whose names appear within. Several adamant supporters of Gov. Scott Walker have encouraged such reprehensible tactics, openly declaring their intentions to use the list to inform employers that their workers support the removal of a pro-corporate governor.

Such concerns are legitimate to worry over -- participants on both sides have used inappropriate means of intimidation both direct and indirect, that have caused a lot of unnecessary headaches. But recent Facebook posts indicate that several conservative-leaning individuals are seeking to make recall signers' lives a living hell.

Democracy requires transparency, and those names deserve to be released for verification purposes. But if a sizable number of people, or groups of people, make it clear that intimidation is their aim, certain precautionary steps must be taken to ensure a safe, and open, process exists, before any releasing of names takes place.

First and foremost, employers should be barred from terminating an employee (or otherwise making their workplace a hostile environment) on the basis of their signing a recall petition. When violations like these occur, they should be met and received with strict disciplinary action, to discourage future incidents down the line. No one deserves to be in danger of losing their job due to political stances they make in their private lives.

Second, threats made directly to signers of the petition, by individuals and organizations determined to create fear and terror among law-abiding citizens, need to be taken seriously by every law enforcement agency within the state, from the local police force to the office of the Attorney General. Deterring such tactics should be a priority, especially when it involves the safety and well-being (mentally and physically) of citizens who simply want to take part in a democratic exercise.

As I've stated before, democracy requires openness, to ensure a fair process is being carried out for all, not just a singular side. But the flip side to that is that intimidation of others should be discouraged, with violators being properly punished for engaging in such vile acts.

To ensure an equal footing for both sides, the process ought to be open. But it should only be open when precautions to safeguard those with legitimate concerns are met.

UPDATE (Feb 1) -- The GAB has released the recall petitions:

The Government Accountability Board has posted more than 150,000 pages of recall petitions online. In a decision late Tuesday, board staff said that while people's votes are private and cannot be released, the signing of a recall petition is a public process and should be available for the public to access.

Video: Scott Walker and collective bargaining rights

2012-01-30T13:39:00.005-06:00

Introducing "Video Heat," a new segment on Political Heat involving web video production

In an effort to make the message of the recall a little more viable and understandable, I have created a new YouTube channel that will hopefully disseminate our message in a new medium.

Gov. Scott Walker is busy raising millions of dollars to create advertisements that will broadcast daily ad nauseum. If we're to defeat him, we're going to have to use our own skills to do so. If you want to create (or already have created) a video to help the cause, comment on this (or any future) post below.

Here's the first in what I hope will be a series of videos detailing the reasons why Gov. Walker should be recalled.

Obama's populist tone will win him re-election

2012-01-28T13:19:00.003-06:00

Making sure that the rich pay their share -- and framing the debate correctly -- will ensure victory for the president

Fighting against charges of "class warfare" following his State of the Union address earlier this week, President Barack Obama had some remarks regarding the American peoples' views on the rich on Friday:

"This is one of the biggest things I'm going to be pushing back on this year, this notion that this is somehow class warfare, that we're trying to stir up envy," Obama said. "Nobody envies rich people, everybody wants to be rich. Everybody aspires to be rich, and everybody understands you've got work hard to be successful. That's the American way."

This is precisely what needs to be said.

The poor don't envy the rich -- at least in the manner that class warfare is concerned. The debate over whether millionaires should pay a higher tax or not isn't about striking a blow to the wealthy in this country, but rather ensuring that our society remains intact, that those who benefited from a system that helped make them prosperous pay their fair share into that system as well.

Now, some might argue that making the rich pay more isn't "fair." But look at what the rich utilize to remain wealthy. If you're a business owner who has made millions on products you've distributed across the country, you're likely utilizing interstate highways more in one year than the typical American does in an entire lifetime. If you're a stock trader, benefiting on the businesses in which you invest in, you're also enjoying the spoils of a capitalist society in which those businesses are allowed to prosper, a society the government helps maintain.

The quote from Elizabeth Warren, Democratic candidate for the U.S. Senate seat Massachusetts (once held by Ted Kennedy), best sums it up:

There is nobody in this country who got rich on his own. Nobody. You built a factory out there - good for you!

But I want to be clear. You moved your goods to market on the roads the rest of us paid for. You hired workers the rest of us paid to educate. You were safe in your factory because of police forces and fire forces that the rest of us paid for. You didn’t have to worry that maurauding bands would come and seize everything at your factory, and hire someone to protect against this, because of the work the rest of us did. Now look, you built a factory and it turned into something terrific, or a great idea - God bless. Keep a big hunk of it.

But part of the underlying social contract is you take a hunk of that and pay forward for the next kid who comes along.

In other words, your wealth is yours to keep -- but to believe that it was created by your hand alone, to have this fanciful notion that you did it without any assistance from the public dollar in any way whatsoever, is foolish.

This debate will likely shape the entire presidential election season, once arguments over moon bases and the like come to an end on the GOP side. The populist tone that Obama is pushing will resonate with the American people, especially if he follows through on what he sets out to do.

I have no doubt that, with that message, Barack Obama will easily win re-election against whomever the Republicans eventually decide to be their candidate.

Frugality, Justice, Moderation, and Temperance -- nah, just Frugality (but not even that)

2012-01-26T20:28:00.005-06:00

Governor cites state constitution, omits key parts of what makes government tick

A quick word on another line from the State of the State address delivered by Gov. Scott Walker on Wednesday night. Walker touted a provision from our state's constitution (stating it twice to emphasize his point), implying that a strict, conservative approach to governance was the only way our state's founders had intended to rule:

Our heritage in Wisconsin is also built on fiscal restraint. One of the most important parts of our state constitution affirms that "frugality in government leads to freedom and prosperity for our people." That is worth repeating: "frugality in government leads to freedom and prosperity for our people." I believe our founders had it right.

There are two problems from that statement. First, Walker omits other important aspects of that constitutional provision, which seem to run counter to the kind of governor that he is:

The blessings of a free government can only be maintained by a firm adherence to justice, moderation, temperance, frugality and virtue, and by frequent recurrence to fundamental principles.

Emphases added.

It seems almost purposeful that Walker would leave out those OTHER values, especially those that I bolded: justice, moderation, and temperance.

But perhaps more damning than that even is Walker's insistence that he's "frugal." By what standard is he going by? If you're to measure him on spending, Walker definitely fails the "frugality" test: his budget increased spending by half a billion dollars from the previous biennium, an increase in spending by one percent. If you go by budget deficits, Walker fails there, too: his budget creates a GAAP deficit of $3 billion, a fact his administration admitted to just a few days ago, but which Walker failed to mention during his address on Wednesday.

In citing the state constitution, Walker attempted to make himself appear fiscally sound and in-line with Wisconsin's values. But in truth, the governor is neither of those things, running a government that disregards the very provision of the state constitution he himself cited.

Tax cuts to corporations (and saying "pretty please") won't create jobs

2012-01-25T20:07:00.000-06:00

Growing jobs in Wisconsin will require reinvigorating demand for goods and services within the state

Gov. Scott Walker made an ambitious request tonight in his State of the State address, asking small businesses across the state to add one new job each to their payrolls this year.

Walker, who is facing mounting pressure due to a recall campaign against him, made the plea amid six straight months of job losses for Wisconsin, a slide that began the month following passage of his budget bill late June of last year.

The governor's plan to grow jobs at that time involved billions of dollars in tax breaks to corporations in order to, in theory at least, give businesses the capital they needed to hire again.

But as I've noted before, capital alone won't create jobs in the state -- rather, capital must be coupled with demand as well, which creates a need for expansion of services or goods that a company produces, in turn creating an incentive for that company to grow its worker-base in order to meet that need.

Tax breaks won't fix that problem -- remember, capital is the end-product of demand, a goal to reach after an investment has been made by the business's proprietor. By handing out that "goal" without a proper incentive, it makes virtually no sense for a business to even consider hiring anyone, especially when doing so would cut into the newly-found capital that they've just gained.

Think about it: what good is it to grow your business when you're already getting money back for doing nothing? The answer is none: if you're getting "money for nothing" (in the form of a tax break, that is), you're unlikely to do anything in return.

Walker's plea to businesses to add one new job each in 2012 is a noble goal for the state -- but without proper demand, it will end up a goal that will become unrealized. To increase demand, Walker can't simply hand cash to corporations and hope for the best; instead, he needs to empower the middle class, to grow their purchasing power, which in turn will allow them to make purchases for goods and services within the state, thus growing demand -- the good, ol' fashioned way that capitalism intended.

Six months of this experiment were enough: it's time to part ways with the "tax cuts will create jobs" mantra that has failed our state, has failed to produce viable jobs growth within Wisconsin.

Pro-Walker rally misses the mark: it's "not working" for Wisconsin

2012-01-23T08:49:00.008-06:00

Nearly every issue touted at Wauwatosa rally hurts working-class Wisconsinites

A pro-Scott Walker rally took place in Wauwatosa, Wisconsin, this past weekend, where crowds were estimated to have included between 1,000-2,5000 people who feel the state is moving in the right direction.

Believing fully that "it's working," several conservative speakers -- including Lt. Gov. Rebecca Kleefisch, GOP U.S. Senatorial candidates Tommy Thompson and Mark Neumann, and Gov. Walker's wife Tonette -- gave impassioned speeches about why they supported the governor, who was notably absent during the entire ordeal.

How exactly "it's working," unfortunately, was exaggerated during much of the pep rally. For example, Kleefisch made a comment that anti-recall supporters should donate to the Republicans this year using some of savings from their property taxes, which she contends came about due to the reforms the Walker administration implemented.

However, that's not the whole story. It's true that tax levies went down, but on average property tax mill rates went UP, suggesting that in many communities across the state the rates went down due to lowered property assessments, not the reforms Walker put in place.

Other instances of the "it's working" mentality that Walker supporters point to are similarly untrue. The pro-Walker camp claims that the state is in a better business climate, and better able to create more jobs; and yet, the net number of jobs the state has "added" is actually a loss of 35,600 since the Walker budget was passed. The balancing of the budget that Walker constantly says his administration was able to accomplish was actually a budget deficit of more than $3 billion. And the claim that Walker was able to pass a budget without raising taxes is also a fallacy, as more than $70 million in taxes have been put in place for working Wisconsinites as a result of his policies.

You can't even look at Act 10 as an accomplishment without a caveat of some-sort. The Kaukauna school district, the "poster-child" of school districts that was able to create a huge $1.5 million surplus due to balancing its books utilizing the new rules ending bargaining, would have had similar savings had it implemented a teacher-friendly, union negotiated contract that was offered beforehand. In other words, Act 10 didn't do anything different, in terms of savings' amounts, than the previous collective bargaining arrangement had.

Many school districts, too, that used Act 10 also had to use one-time federal assistance in order to balance their budgets, aid that won't be available next year when many districts will face deeper cuts.

Greater budget deficits for the state, higher taxes for working families, an unnecessary cessation of workers' rights, and a plethora of other issues that don't benefit middle-class citizens of the state one iota (including billions of dollars in cuts to education and health care and other family services). The crowds in Wauwatosa were there to celebrate how "it's working." Unfortunately, they seemed unaware that it's only working for Walker and his corporate backers. For the rest of the state, it's simply "not working" at all.

December job numbers produce sixth straight month of losses (with graphs)

2012-01-19T16:10:00.007-06:00

What little gains did occur last year came about under the Doyle budget

The Wisconsin Department of Workforce Development released its preliminary job numbers for the month of December today. Unfortunately, the data suggests more of the same: jobs continue to decline in the state.

For the sixth straight month, Wisconsin lost jobs. About 1,700 jobs were lost in the month December, and the revised number of jobs lost in November was 13,600. In total, since the Walker budget passed in June, Wisconsin has lost more than 35,000 jobs.

---

What's remarkable about the job numbers is that the Walker administration continues to insist that their reforms are working. From the DWD report:

"The seasonally adjusted data also show that, compared to December 2010, the private sector gained 13,500 jobs, including 9,300 in manufacturing and 8,200 in educational and health services."

So from the start of the year, Wisconsin improved. But was that Walker's doing?

As the graphs above show, many of the job increases that DID occur over the course of the year happened in the first six months -- during the tail end of former Gov. Jim Doyle's 2009-11 budget, not Walker's.

Let's look at net job gains/losses for each governor, for two of the categories the DWD report listed in the quote above: Manufacturing, and Education and Health services.

What can we assess here? Under the last few months of the Doyle budget, Education and Health service jobs increased by nearly 8,000 jobs in 2011. During the next 6 months -- under Walker's budget -- that slowed to just under 2,000 jobs added, signaling a slower rate in growth within that sector.

In manufacturing, the end result was even worse: in the first six months (under Doyle's budget), there were 11,200 jobs gained. But in the last six months (Walker's budget), there was actually a loss in jobs within manufacturing, with nearly 6,000 jobs disappearing from that category.

A slowed rate of growth and a net loss in jobs...and these are the things the Walker administration is bragging about?

There is one more aspect of the job data that isn't getting as much attention. In total, the state lost about 1,700 jobs. But 3,900 jobs were lost in the private sector alone. Why is the net lower than the private sector losses? The answer: there was a growth of 2,200 public sector jobs, a category which has actually seen months of decline over the course of the last year (more than 10,000 public sector jobs were eliminated in 2011). As much as Walker would hate to admit it, the modest growth in public sector jobs probably made the headlines less harsh than they could have been.

The Walker administration continues to brag about the net gains from 2011. But those gains didn't occur while the governor's budget was in operation -- they occurred under the previous governor's budget. From the time that Walker's budget became law, however, Wisconsin has seen tens of thousands of jobs disappear.

In short, the reforms for job growth that Walker has implemented thus far aren't working at all. It's proof once again that under Scott Walker's leadership, "it's not working" after all.

Walker continues to court out-of-state corporate interests

2012-01-18T16:37:00.005-06:00

"Fundraising tour" raises questions about who Walker would ally himself with: the people of Wisconsin, or corporate interests

Gov. Scott Walker, certain to face a recall challenge within the next year (even he knows it), has been touring the nation in an effort to raise money to fund his campaign. Even yesterday, when organizers dropped off a million signatures requesting a recall for the governor, Walker was in New York, meeting with AIG executives and even chatting-it-up with Rush Limbaugh during his visit.

Two observable facts can be drawn from Walker's travels:

First, in order to fund his defense to the people of Wisconsin, Walker couldn't rely on much in-state support. Whether this is due to his unpopularity or not is unknown; but it's certainly reasonable to believe that Walker's inability to raise money in Wisconsin alone could be due in large part to a huge dissatisfaction among his constituency.
And second, it's rather troubling that Walker, who has received large sums of political donations from out-of-state interests previously, would actively pursue even more campaign cash from millionaires in Texas and disgraced corporate business entities. One has to wonder, having already proven he "takes the call" when the wealthy elite beckon him, whether Walker has the people of Wisconsin's interests in mind at all, or whether what Walker does is best for the Koch Bros. and the like instead.

It seems that, even when Walker tries to fight off his recall challenge, he creates more reasons for why it's needed in the first place. Walker's interests don't seem to lie anywhere near the people's -- rather, they lie with the corporatocracy he and several other conservative interests across the country are trying to establish.

If you want a governor who leads by the dictates of out-of-state corporate interests, then Walker is your guy. But if you, like at least one million other Wisconsinites, believe our state deserves a leader who pays attention to the interests of the people he (or she) serves, consider supporting someone else in the upcoming recall election.

My new favorite reality show...

2012-01-18T16:22:00.003-06:00

If you've got some time, stop over and watch the Real World: Government Accountability Board.

Democrats, recall organizers turn in 1 million signatures

2012-01-17T14:03:00.008-06:00

Recall thresholds met for Governor, Lt. Gov., and four Republican state Senators

Over one million signatures supporting the recall of Gov. Scott Walker were turned in to the Government Accountability Board today. Around 845,000 were turned in for Lt. Gov. Rebecca Kleefisch.

In all, nearly two million signatures were turned in for the recalls of Walker, Kleefisch, and four other Republican state senators who allied themselves with the governor's corporatist and anti-worker agenda. All of the recall thresholds were met.

Let's put this in perspective: in 2010, when Walker defeated Milwaukee Mayor Tom Barrett for the governorship, Walker won with 1.12 million votes. Conversely, the volunteers to recall Walker very nearly gathered the same number of signatures that got him into office in the first place (almost 90 percent).

The total represents 185 percent of the necessary number of signatures needed to initiate a recall contest. 46 percent of the signatures turned in would need to be deemed ineligible in order to prevent a recall from happening, a nearly insurmountable number for Walker supporters.

The total number of signatures gathered represents the largest number received per capita in recall election history -- for the entire country.

This is indeed a historic occasion. The recall challenge to Scott Walker, and the restoration of Wisconsin principles and values, made a giant leap today. The road ahead won't be easy -- but with hard work and determination, We the People will get our state back.

I’ve Been to the Mountaintop

2012-01-16T21:59:00.002-06:00

As you know, if I were standing at the beginning of time, with the possibility of general and panoramic view of the whole human history up to now, and the Almighty said to me, "Martin Luther King, which age would you like to live in?" — I would take my mental flight by Egypt through, or rather across the Red Sea, through the wilderness on toward the promised land. And in spite of its magnificence, I wouldn't stop there. I would move on by Greece, and take my mind to Mount Olympus. And I would see Plato, Aristotle, Socrates, Euripides and Aristophanes assembled around the Parthenon as they discussed the great and eternal issues of reality.

But I wouldn't stop there. I would go on, even to the great heyday of the Roman Empire. And I would see developments around there, through various emperors and leaders. But I wouldn't stop there. I would even come up to the day of the Renaissance, and get a quick picture of all that the Renaissance did for the cultural and esthetic life of man. But I wouldn't stop there. I would even go by the way that the man for whom I'm named had his habitat. And I would watch Martin Luther as he tacked his ninety-five theses on the door at the church in Wittenberg.

But I wouldn't stop there. I would come on up even to 1863, and watch a vacillating president by the name of Abraham Lincoln finally come to the conclusion that he had to sign the Emancipation Proclamation. But I wouldn't stop there. I would even come up to the early thirties, and see a man grappling with the problems of the bankruptcy of his nation. And come with an eloquent cry that we have nothing to fear but fear itself.

But I wouldn't stop there. Strangely enough, I would turn to the Almighty, and say, "If you allow me to live just a few years in the second half of the twentieth century, I will be happy." Now that's a strange statement to make, because the world is all messed up. The nation is sick. Trouble is in the land. Confusion all around. That's a strange statement. But I know, somehow, that only when it is dark enough, can you see the stars. And I see God working in this period of the twentieth century in a away that men, in some strange way, are responding — something is happening in our world. The masses of people are rising up. And wherever they are assembled today, whether they are in Johannesburg, South Africa; Nairobi, Kenya; Accra, Ghana; New York City; Atlanta, Georgia; Jackson, Mississippi; or Memphis, Tennessee — the cry is always the same — "We want to be free."

And another reason that I'm happy to live in this period is that we have been forced to a point where we're going to have to grapple with the problems that men have been trying to grapple with through history, but the demand didn't force them to do it. Survival demands that we grapple with them. Men, for years now, have been talking about war and peace. But now, no longer can they just talk about it. It is no longer a choice between violence and nonviolence in this world; it's nonviolence or nonexistence.

That is where we are today. And also in the human rights revolution, if something isn't done, and in a hurry, to bring the colored peoples of the world out of their long years of poverty, their long years of hurt and neglect, the whole world is doomed. Now, I'm just happy that God has allowed me to live in this period, to see what is unfolding. And I'm happy that He's allowed me to be in Memphis.

I can remember, I can remember when Negroes were just going around as Ralph has said, so often, scratching where they didn't itch, and laughing when they were not tickled. But that day is all over. We mean business now, and we are determined to gain our rightful place in God's world.

And that's all this whole thing is about. We aren't engaged in any negative protest and in any negative arguments with anybody. We are saying that we are determined to be men. We are determined to be people. We are saying that we are God's children. And that we don't have to live like we are forced to live.

Now, what does all of this mean in this great period of history? It means that we've got to stay together. We've got to stay together and maintain unity. You know, whenever Pharaoh wanted to prolong the period of slavery in Egypt, he had a favorite, favorite formula for doing it. What was that? He kept the slaves fighting among themselves. But whenever the slaves get together, something happens in Pharaoh's court, and he cannot hold the slaves in slavery. When the slaves get together, that's the beginning of getting out of slavery. Now let us maintain unity.

Secondly, let us keep the issues where they are. The issue is injustice. The issue is the refusal of Memphis to be fair and honest in its dealings with its public servants, who happen to be sanitation workers. Now, we've got to keep attention on that. That's always the problem with a little violence. You know what happened the other day, and the press dealt only with the window-breaking. I read the articles. They very seldom got around to mentioning the fact that one thousand, three hundred sanitation workers were on strike, and that Memphis is not being fair to them, and that Mayor Loeb is in dire need of a doctor. They didn't get around to that.

Now we're going to march again, and we've got to march again, in order to put the issue where it is supposed to be. And force everybody to see that there are thirteen hundred of God's children here suffering, sometimes going hungry, going through dark and dreary nights wondering how this thing is going to come out. That's the issue. And we've got to say to the nation: we know it's coming out. For when people get caught up with that which is right and they are willing to sacrifice for it, there is no stopping point short of victory.

We aren't going to let any mace stop us. We are masters in our nonviolent movement in disarming police forces; they don't know what to do, I've seen them so often. I remember in Birmingham, Alabama, when we were in that majestic struggle there we would move out of the 16th Street Baptist Church day after day; by the hundreds we would move out. And Bull Connor would tell them to send the dogs forth and they did come; but we just went before the dogs singing, "Ain't gonna let nobody turn me round." Bull Connor next would say, "Turn the fire hoses on." And as I said to you the other night, Bull Connor didn't know history. He knew a kind of physics that somehow didn't relate to the transphysics that we knew about. And that was the fact that there was a certain kind of fire that no water could put out. And we went before the fire hoses; we had known water. If we were Baptist or some other denomination, we had been immersed. If we were Methodist, and some others, we had been sprinkled, but we knew water.

That couldn't stop us. And we just went on before the dogs and we would look at them; and we'd go on before the water hoses and we would look at it, and we'd just go on singing "Over my head I see freedom in the air." And then we would be thrown in the paddy wagons, and sometimes we were stacked in there like sardines in a can. And they would throw us in, and old Bull would say, "Take them off," and they did; and we would just go in the paddy wagon singing, "We Shall Overcome." And every now and then we'd get in the jail, and we'd see the jailers looking through the windows being moved by our prayers, and being moved by our words and our songs. And there was a power there which Bull Connor couldn't adjust to; and so we ended up transforming Bull into a steer, and we won our struggle in Birmingham.

Now we've got to go on to Memphis just like that. I call upon you to be with us Monday. Now about injunctions: We have an injunction and we're going into court tomorrow morning to fight this illegal, unconstitutional injunction. All we say to America is, "Be true to what you said on paper." If I lived in China or even Russia, or any totalitarian country, maybe I could understand the denial of certain basic First Amendment privileges, because they hadn't committed themselves to that over there. But somewhere I read of the freedom of assembly. Somewhere I read of the freedom of speech. Somewhere I read of the freedom of the press. Somewhere I read that the greatness of America is the right to protest for right. And so just as I say, we aren't going to let any injunction turn us around. We are going on.

We need all of you. And you know what's beautiful tome, is to see all of these ministers of the Gospel. It's a marvelous picture. Who is it that is supposed to articulate the longings and aspirations of the people more than the preacher? Somehow the preacher must be an Amos, and say, "Let justice roll down like waters and righteousness like a mighty stream." Somehow, the preacher must say with Jesus, "The spirit of the Lord is upon me, because he hath anointed me to deal with the problems of the poor."

And I want to commend the preachers, under the leadership of these noble men: James Lawson, one who has been in this struggle for many years; he's been to jail for struggling; but he's still going on, fighting for the rights of his people. Rev. Ralph Jackson, Billy Kiles; I could just go right on down the list, but time will not permit. But I want to thank them all. And I want you to thank them, because so often, preachers aren't concerned about anything but themselves. And I'm always happy to see a relevant ministry.

It's all right to talk about "long white robes over yonder," in all of its symbolism. But ultimately people want some suits and dresses and shoes to wear down here. It's all right to talk about "streets flowing with milk and honey," but God has commanded us to be concerned about the slums down here, and his children who can't eat three square meals a day. It's all right to talk about the new Jerusalem, but one day, God's preachers must talk about the New York, the new Atlanta, the new Philadelphia, the new Los Angeles, the new Memphis, Tennessee. This is what we have to do.

Now the other thing we'll have to do is this: Always anchor our external direct action with the power of economic withdrawal. Now, we are poor people, individually, we are poor when you compare us with white society in America. We are poor. Never stop and forget that collectively, that means all of us together, collectively we are richer than all the nations in the world, with the exception of nine. Did you ever think about that? After you leave the United States, Soviet Russia, Great Britain, West Germany, France, and I could name the others, the Negro collectively is richer than most nations of the world. We have an annual income of more than thirty billion dollars a year, which is more than all of the exports of the United States, and more than the national budget of Canada. Did you know that? That's power right there, if we know how to pool it.

We don't have to argue with anybody. We don't have to curse and go around acting bad with our words. We don't need any bricks and bottles, we don't need any Molotov cocktails, we just need to go around to these stores, and to these massive industries in our country, and say, "God sent us by here, to say to you that you're not treating his children right. And we've come by here to ask you to make the first item on your agenda fair treatment, where God's children are concerned. Now, if you are not prepared to do that, we do have an agenda that we must follow. And our agenda calls for withdrawing economic support from you."

And so, as a result of this, we are asking you tonight, to go out and tell your neighbors not to buy Coca-Cola in Memphis. Go by and tell them not to buy Sealtest milk. Tell them not to buy—what is the other bread?—Wonder Bread. And what is the other bread company, Jesse? Tell them not to buy Hart's bread. As Jesse Jackson has said, up to now, only the garbage men have been feeling pain; now we must kind of redistribute the pain. We are choosing these companies because they haven't been fair in their hiring policies; and we are choosing them because they can begin the process of saying, they are going to support the needs and the rights of these men who are on strike. And then they can move on downtown and tell Mayor Loeb to do what is right.

But not only that, we've got to strengthen black institutions. I call upon you to take your money out of the banks downtown and deposit your money in Tri-State Bank—we want a "bank-in" movement in Memphis. So go by the savings and loan association. I'm not asking you something we don't do ourselves at SCLC. Judge Hooks and others will tell you that we have an account here in the savings and loan association from the Southern Christian Leadership Conference. We're just telling you to follow what we're doing. Put your money there. You have six or seven black insurance companies in Memphis. Take out your insurance there. We want to have an "insurance-in."

Now these are some practical things we can do. We begin the process of building a greater economic base. And at the same time, we are putting pressure where it really hurts. I ask you to follow through here.

Now, let me say as I move to my conclusion that we've got to give ourselves to this struggle until the end. Nothing would be more tragic than to stop at this point, in Memphis. We've got to see it through. And when we have our march, you need to be there. Be concerned about your brother. You may not be on strike. But either we go up together, or we go down together.

Let us develop a kind of dangerous unselfishness. One day a man came to Jesus; and he wanted to raise some questions about some vital matters in life. At points, he wanted to trick Jesus, and show him that he knew a little more than Jesus knew, and through this, throw him off base. Now that question could have easily ended up in a philosophical and theological debate. But Jesus immediately pulled that question from mid-air, and placed it on a dangerous curve between Jerusalem and Jericho. And he talked about a certain man, who fell among thieves. You remember that a Levite and a priest passed by on the other side. They didn't stop to help him. And finally a man of another race came by. He got down from his beast, decided not to be compassionate by proxy. But with him, administering first aid, and helped the man in need. Jesus ended up saying, this was the good man, this was the great man, because he had the capacity to project the "I" into the "thou," and to be concerned about his brother. Now you know, we use our imagination a great deal to try to determine why the priest and the Levite didn't stop. At times we say they were busy going to church meetings—an ecclesiastical gathering—and they had to get on down to Jerusalem so they wouldn't be late for their meeting. At other times we would speculate that there was a religious law that "One who was engaged in religious ceremonials was not to touch a human body twenty-four hours before the ceremony." And every now and then we begin to wonder whether maybe they were not going down to Jerusalem, or down to Jericho, rather to organize a "Jericho Road Improvement Association." That's a possibility. Maybe they felt that it was better to deal with the problem from the causal root, rather than to get bogged down with an individual effort.

But I'm going to tell you what my imagination tells me. It's possible that these men were afraid. You see, the Jericho road is a dangerous road. I remember when Mrs. King and I were first in Jerusalem. We rented a car and drove from Jerusalem down to Jericho. And as soon as we got on that road, I said to my wife, "I can see why Jesus used this as a setting for his parable." It's a winding, meandering road. It's really conducive for ambushing. You start out in Jerusalem, which is about 1200 miles, or rather 1200 feet above sea level. And by the time you get down to Jericho, fifteen or twenty minutes later, you're about 2200 feet below sea level. That's a dangerous road. In the days of Jesus it came to be known as the "Bloody Pass." And you know, it's possible that the priest and the Levite looked over that man on the ground and wondered if the robbers were still around. Or it's possible that they felt that the man on the ground was merely faking. And he was acting like he had been robbed and hurt, in order to seize them over there, lure them there for quick and easy seizure. And so the first question that the Levite asked was, "If I stop to help this man, what will happen to me?" But then the Good Samaritan came by. And he reversed the question: "If I do not stop to help this man, what will happen to him?"

That's the question before you tonight. Not, "If I stop to help the sanitation workers, what will happen to all of the hours that I usually spend in my office every day and every week as a pastor?" The question is not, "If I stop to help this man in need, what will happen to me?" "If I do not stop to help the sanitation workers, what will happen to them?" That's the question.

Let us rise up tonight with a greater readiness. Let us stand with a greater determination. And let us move on in these powerful days, these days of challenge to make America what it ought to be. We have an opportunity to make America a better nation. And I want to thank God, once more, for allowing me to be here with you.

You know, several years ago, I was in New York City autographing the first book that I had written. And while sitting there autographing books, a demented black woman came up. The only question I heard from her was, "Are you Martin Luther King?"

And I was looking down writing, and I said yes. And the next minute I felt something beating on my chest. Before I knew it I had been stabbed by this demented woman. I was rushed to Harlem Hospital. It was a dark Saturday afternoon. And that blade had gone through, and the X-rays revealed that the tip of the blade was on the edge of my aorta, the main artery. And once that's punctured, you drown in your own blood—that's the end of you.

It came out in the New York Times the next morning, that if I had sneezed, I would have died. Well, about four days later, they allowed me, after the operation, after my chest had been opened, and the blade had been taken out, to move around in the wheel chair in the hospital. They allowed me to read some of the mail that came in, and from all over the states, and the world, kind letters came in. I read a few, but one of them I will never forget. I had received one from the President and the Vice-President. I've forgotten what those telegrams said. I'd received a visit and a letter from the Governor of New York, but I've forgotten what the letter said. But there was another letter that came from a little girl, a young girl who was a student at the White Plains High School. And I looked at that letter, and I'll never forget it. It said simply, "Dear Dr. King: I am a ninth-grade student at the White Plains High School." She said, "While it should not matter, I would like to mention that I am a white girl. I read in the paper of your misfortune, and of your suffering. And I read that if you had sneezed, you would have died. And I'm simply writing you to say that I'm so happy that you didn't sneeze."

And I want to say tonight, I want to say that I am happy that I didn't sneeze. Because if I had sneezed, I wouldn't have been around here in 1960, when students all over the South started sitting-in at lunch counters. And I knew that as they were sitting in, they were really standing up for the best in the American dream. And taking the whole nation back to those great wells of democracy which were dug deep by the Founding Fathers in the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution. If I had sneezed, I wouldn't have been around in 1962, when Negroes in Albany, Georgia, decided to straighten their backs up. And whenever men and women straighten their backs up, they are going somewhere, because a man can't ride your back unless it is bent. If I had sneezed, I wouldn't have been here in 1963, when the black people of Birmingham, Alabama, aroused the conscience of this nation, and brought into being the Civil Rights Bill. If I had sneezed, I wouldn't have had a chance later that year, in August, to try to tell America about a dream that I had had. If I had sneezed, I wouldn't have been down in Selma, Alabama, been in Memphis to see the community rally around those brothers and sisters who are suffering. I'm so happy that I didn't sneeze.

And they were telling me, now it doesn't matter now. It really doesn't matter what happens now. I left Atlanta this morning, and as we got started on the plane, there were six of us, the pilot said over the public address system, "We are sorry for the delay, but we have Dr. Martin Luther King on the plane. And to be sure that all of the bags were checked, and to be sure that nothing would be wrong with the plane, we had to check out everything carefully. And we've had the plane protected and guarded all night."

And then I got to Memphis. And some began to say the threats, or talk about the threats that were out. What would happen to me from some of our sick white brothers?

Well, I don't know what will happen now. We've got some difficult days ahead. But it doesn't matter with me now. Because I've been to the mountaintop. And I don't mind. Like anybody, I would like to live a long life. Longevity has its place. But I'm not concerned about that now. I just want to do God's will. And He's allowed me to go up to the mountain. And I've looked over. And I've seen the promised land. I may not get there with you. But I want you to know tonight, that we, as a people, will get to the promised land. And I'm happy, tonight. I'm not worried about anything. I'm not fearing any man. Mine eyes have seen the glory of the coming of the Lord.

Recall reception scheduled for Tuesday, Jan. 17 at 5 PM at Monona Terrace

2012-01-15T14:38:00.003-06:00

Organizers come to Madison to celebrate democracy in action

This Tuesday, organizers will celebrate the turning-in of signatures for recalls of Gov. Scott Walker and Lt. Gov. Rebecca Kleefisch, as well as other senatorial recalls (including that of Sen. Maj. Leader Scott Fitzgerald). Throngs of organizers will descend upon the Monona Terrace Community and Convention Center, hopeful that their hard work will translate into the eventual ouster of the governor and his conservative allies.

The event will begin at 5 P.M. and will go until 8 P.M. on Tuesday, January 17. For those traveling from outside of Madison, the Monona Terrace is located at 1 John Nolen Dr, off of Lake Monona near downtown. (View a map here).

Radio personality Ed Schultz will reportedly attend the event as well. Schultz, whose broadcast is heard daily in Madison on the Ed Schultz Show, was instrumental in gaining national attention for Wisconsin protesters during the marches that took place last winter.

The protests were initially a response to Walker's assault on public employees' rights to bargain their contracts; but since that time, the governor has led the charge against several other issues that have typically defined Wisconsin, things like limited restrictions to voting, a tax scheme that rewards the rich and corporations while punishing the poor, unprecedented cuts to education and healthcare for the underprivileged, and so forth.

It is these values as well as others that recall organizers are hoping to preserve. Gov. Walker and his Republican friends in the legislature have made it clear that these values aren't off-limits -- that, in order to grow Wisconsin jobs, they must be eliminated or restrained. But the pro-corporate values of Gov. Walker and his friends haven't yet resulted in a single month of net job growth since his budget was signed -- indeed, there isn't much evidence available to suggest that these "reforms" will do anything like what Walker claims they will.

The destruction of these values, and the lack of anything substantially positive for the people of Wisconsin as a result of these values being diminished, is precisely why hundreds of thousands signed petitions to initiate a recall in the first place. Gov. Walker, as well as others, need to be held to account for their actions.

Join us on Tuesday to celebrate democracy in action, with good people working for a good cause as well.

Report of business creation for WI last year omits dissolved businesses

2012-01-14T13:41:00.012-06:00

New businesses created don't make up for net deficit in WI for 2011

At first glance, it seems as though there was a welcomed change in the direction Wisconsin was heading under the leadership of Gov. Scott Walker. But upon further examination, it's more of the same from his administration -- more spin to cover up more bad news.

A report released by the Department of Financial Institutions showed that there were more new businesses formed in 2011 than in 2010.

33,190 new businesses were formed last year, 732 more than the 32,458 new businesses that were formed in 2010, a total growth of 2.3 percent in the category.

That's a positive sign, albeit one that hardly justifies billions of dollars in tax breaks for corporations for such little change from the year before -- the 2.3 percent increase between the two years came as the state gave away $2.3 billion in revenues in the form of tax breaks. Regardless, it IS an improvement, and it should be treated as such, right?

Ordinarily, it'd be something worth cheering about. Unfortunately, the press release from the DFI and other news outlets fail to point out the fact that these numbers simply show the number of businesses created -- they don't mention any businesses that have dissolved or disappeared. When you look at those numbers, an entirely different picture is painted (PDF).

In 2011, 6,069 businesses filed Articles of Dissolution -- official documents signaling they no longer plan to be a business from that point on. But the big number comes from the number of businesses which faced Administrative Dissolution -- the state itself having to dissolve companies that were no longer in operation but failed to make that claim themselves. That number totaled 36,427 businesses, bringing the total number of businesses that "closed-shop" in 2011 in Wisconsin to 42,496.

To be fair, 2,259 businesses filed Certificates of Reinstatement as well, which are used to reinstate businesses that were shut down due to Administrative Dissolution. But that total still leaves the state with a net loss of 7,047 businesses last year.

This omission shouldn't be overlooked, by the media or the administration (PDF), and should be interpreted for what it is: a failure in terms of both business and job growth for the state of Wisconsin.

"Burdensome" costs are exaggerated by recall opponents

2012-01-14T11:21:00.001-06:00

For the price of a take-out value meal, you get the right of a recall

Folks who are against the recall on Gov. Scott Walker based on economic grounds make a case most everyone can relate to: the estimated $9 million cost is a burden to taxpayers, a burden that, according to this line of thought, is unjustly placed on the people of Wisconsin.

$9 million is a lot of money, but it's hardly the economic crisis that these critics make it out to be. Mike Tate, the chairman of the Democratic Party of Wisconsin, puts it in perspective:

It would take more than 7 recall elections to equal the cost of Walker's tax increase on seniors and working families. It would take more than 11 recalls to equal the tuition hike Walker foisted on University of Wisconsin-System students and their families. And Walker's $2.3 billion in tax giveaways to out-of-state corporations and the super-rich would pay for more than 255 recall elections. Wisconsin simply cannot afford Scott Walker any longer.

At the end of the day, no matter how Scott Walker and his Republican Party try to spin it, the people of Wisconsin called for this election. There is no price tag on democracy.

Emphasis added.

Those are great comparisons for the people of Wisconsin to consider...as is this one:

The number of paid workers in the state during the month of November was approximately 2.74 million individuals. The costs of the recall, at $9 million total, amounts to less than $3.30 for every individual earning a paycheck.

That's less than a value meal at your favorite take-out restaurant. When you think about it, having the right to recall government leaders, to have a people-powered democratic tool, is well worth the price of a cheeseburger, fries, and a small soda.

If you oppose the recall because you support Gov. Walker, fine. That's your right to do. But exaggerating the economic costs of a recall -- a process that every citizen of this state has the right to initiate -- is uncalled for, especially since its costs, when all is said and done, are relatively low.

Gov. Walker -- the "un-politician?"

2012-01-12T19:06:00.004-06:00

Walker, as a "straight-shooter-in-chief," doesn't live up to the label

In describing Scott Walker's governing style, state Sen. Glenn Grothman created a new word:

"Scott Walker is a rare politician who doesn't try to make everybody happy with other people's money," says Grothman, a Republican state senator from West Bend. "He's the best governor of my lifetime. He's the least 'politician-y.' He's able to say 'no' to people."

That assessment may blindside some people -- after all, Walker has polarized Wisconsin like no other political executive has in generations. But Grothman's description of the governor is meant to be a compliment.

What Grothman means is that Walker doesn't act politically -- he's not interested in striking deals or working with the other side in any way whatsoever. In other words, Walker's not "politician-y" because he refuses to believe that his job requires him to be a politician, at least when it comes to working with Democrats or moderate Republicans. Grothman views Walker as a "straight-shooter," or to borrow a soda marketing phrase, the "un-politician."

A lot of people welcome this type of leader -- they govern from their own consciences (supposedly), and don't try to cater to the ideas of their opposition. There's no questioning where they stand on issues because they make it clear in how they carry out their business while in office.

But the flip-side of the "un-politician" -- at least the kind that Walker is -- is their inability to reach across the aisle to get work done. They have an unapologetic, almost dictatorial demeanor that leaves those who voted against them (48 percent of the state, in Walker's case) out in the cold.

Besides governing in an unforgiving fashion, Grothman's admiration of the "un-politician" Walker is off-base for a second reason: Walker is no "straight-shooter." He puts on the facade of being up front with the people, but in reality his words are at best distortions of his "accomplishments," and at worst outright lies about how "it's working."

For example, Walker constantly touts that he balanced the budget while not raising taxes. Both portions of that statement, however, are misleading. Walker balanced the budget, but under terms he previously criticized his predecessor of following. He also cut the Earned Income Tax Credit for lower-income workers, a move that increases the taxes of those individuals.

The most visible example of Gov. Walker's "faux straight-shooter" attitude was the ending of bargaining rights for state workers. During the 2010 campaign, Walker briefly mentioned that he would consider, as governor, ending these rights -- but only for health care, never an all-out removal of rights that came about almost 11 months ago.

That's not being straight-forward with the people -- that's being conniving.

Being the "un-politician" certainly has its benefits. For Walker, at a time when the state wants wants a non-political leader (perhaps more than ever), it definitely helps. But Wisconsinites don't want an abrasive governor, either. They want a DIFFERENT KIND of "un-politician," one who is atypical, not because they are hyper-partisan like Walker, but because they will transcend partisan lines to get work done.

The type of "un-politician" that Grothman admires and Walker tries to emulate is wrong for Wisconsin -- and in the end, destructive towards its discourses.

The recall process transitions

2012-01-09T10:40:00.010-06:00

Round one of recall winding down: what's in store for round two?

Recall petitions are set to be delivered to the state's Government Accountability Board (GAB) next week, which means the first round of the recall process will be completed. It's unknown at this point how many signatures are yet collected, but both the Democratic Party and United Wisconsin are confident that the number will far exceed the required 540,208 needed to initiate a recall election.

So what's set to happen in the next part of the process? "Round two" will likely see three important aspects within it: educating the public, agreeing upon a candidate to challenge Walker, and fighting off legal challenges posed by Republicans.

With regards to that last bit, the state GOP is going to challenge many of the signatures found within the petitions. That will take many hours, if not weeks, of work -- and taxpayer dollars, thanks to a ruling by a conservative court in Waukesha County that has determined that the GAB must take an active role in weeding out the "fake" names. That ruling goes against state statutes, which place the burden upon those making the challenges, not the board itself.

The process of challenging petition signatures will likely extend the process beyond the timeline as proscribed by law. While the GOP is hoping that this will give them more time to fend off such a challenge, it may actually be beneficial to Democrats as well.

The Democratic Party has yet to push forward a strong candidate that most everyone can agree upon. Moderate state Sen. Tim Cullen has thrown his hat in, but his policy positions hardly inspire confidence in the eyes of the progressive base of recall organizers and volunteers.

Some names being thrown around include state Rep. Peter Barca, state Sen. Jon Erpenbach, former U.S. Congressmen Dave Obey and Steve Kagen, current U.S. Congressman Ron Kind, and others. Each candidate brings with them positive aspects that could help them win; each also has weaknesses that may or may not help them during the campaign.

Whomever Democrats choose, it should be someone that can deliver both a progressive and a populist message, that can reach the base of support as well as connect with most of Wisconsin overall. Walker has done a good job alienating most of the state, so this shouldn't be too difficult to do.

That candidate also has to be a good messenger -- he or she will need to be able to convey to the public why it is exactly that Gov. Walker is unfit to continue to serve. The third aspect of this next round of the recall will be our message, of why removal of the governor is absolutely necessary. This in itself won't be too difficult to achieve either.

If you're a Wisconsin resident, you're undoubtedly to be affected by Walker's "reforms." Walker touts his jobs record (claiming he created 16,000+ jobs in his first year), his cutting of taxes, and his ambitious Act 10 (the removal of collective bargaining rights) as giving localities the "tools" necessary to fix the state's economic mess.

But each of these claims come with a required disclaimer. The jobs added during his first year in office came about during a time when his predecessor's budget was still in play -- during Walker's budget, we've seen nothing but net job losses in every single month since it was passed.

Taxes that were cut were for corporations and the wealthy, while poor working-class Wisconsinites actually saw their taxes go up (property tax mill rates, on average, also went up).

And the major savings from Act 10? They came from the financial aspects of it -- increasing the contributions that public employees pay into their benefits packages -- and not necessarily the elimination of bargaining rights. Even then, many school districts across the state still depended on using federal dollars, due mostly to budget cuts from Walker (which created over a billion-dollar shortfall for education).

So where is it exactly "working?" At every point that Walker says he's succeeded, it comes with a caveat, a small (yet important) aspect of an issue that he's hiding from the people of this state. When that information becomes commonplace, when the people of Wisconsin start to understand that the words coming out of Walker's mouth don't reflect the true picture of problems the state is facing, it will be easier for the recall to become a successful endeavor.

The first round of the recall process is likely to be successful in gathering the required number of signatures (and then some). When we depart from that point in the process, we will need to know exactly what it is that must be done in order to make the entire thing a success. Picking a good candidate that can beat Walker, informing the public about Walker's purposeful assault on Wisconsin families in favor of corporate interests, and ensuring that we are up to task on defending each legal challenge that Republicans may make will all be major aspects to the second half of the process.

Gov. Walker neglects WI job problems yet again

2012-01-05T17:30:00.004-06:00

Jobs from Shopko-Pamida deal a drop in the bucket compared to net losses in past six months

Gov. Scott Walker and the Wisconsin Economic Development Corporation (WEDC) are celebrating a recent merger between Shopko and Omaha-based Pamida that will result in 120 jobs created in its corporate headquarters in Green Bay.

And celebrate they should. Any creation of jobs in Wisconsin is something worth being enthusiastic about, a positive step within a grim economy that needs all of the jobs it can get.

The problem is, however, that for every moment of positive job growth in Wisconsin that Gov. Walker touts as proof "it's working," there's massive layoffs that cancel that growth out, or worse yet overshadow that growth, creating a net loss in the process.

In fact, since Walker's budget passed last June Wisconsin has seen more net job losses than any other state in the country during the same time period, beating out its nearest "competitor" by tens of thousands of net jobs lost. Wisconsin was also the second-highest state in terms of massive layoffs (those greater than 50 employees), with California being the only state beating us out in that category.

This is not an area that we want to excel in -- job losses are a serious problem, so much so that Walker himself, in his campaign in 2010 and in his first State of the State last February, singled it out as the most important issue we had to face. Now, Walker is gearing up for another election, and scheduled to deliver another State of the State on January 25.

What do you think he will say? What do you think he'll tout as positive growth, and what will he omit concerning the decline in jobs our state has endured?

Walker will undoubtedly make the case that his "reforms" -- namely tax breaks for wealthy corporations and changes in tort laws that hurt the consumer -- have created positive potential for our state to prosper, instilling the conditions needed for business to start hiring.

But if we were to accurately assess Walker's performance thus far, really take an objective look at the State of the State over the past year, we'd see his moves as working against job creation for Wisconsin, noting that what little gains we did have took place under the last months of his predecessor's budget.

That's hardly something to celebrate -- in fact, it's an assessment that demonstrates Walker's reforms are failing to generate much of anything except for larger pocketbooks for some of his wealthiest campaign donors.

Walker should be candid with the people of Wisconsin. He should admit his reforms aren't working, and come up with a reasoned approach to generating growth in our state.

But that wouldn't be Scott Walker's style, now would it?

Walker ad full of lies, distortions -- and he's hoping you fall for it

2012-01-03T16:50:00.008-06:00

Ad attempts to cover up job losses, budget deficit and tax increases

Gov. Scott Walker, perhaps anticipating that recall organizers will indeed reach the 540,208 signatures needed to initiate a challenge against him, issued a new "pro-ME!" ad that touts the "positive" aspects of his tenure thus far.

Unfortunately for Walker (and really, for the entire state), the "positive" picture Walker describes is grossly exaggerated.

To an observer of the ad who knows the facts, it is a frustrating minute-long diatribe that makes you want to scream "YOU'RE SO FULL OF IT!" nearly every five seconds. To someone who might not have had the time to follow the events of the past year so closely, however, the ad is very convincing, with its friendly music, images of Wisconsinites hard at work, and crowds applauding Walker for all he has done.

Let's break this ad down a little bit, looking at some of the major points Walker hopes will convince the state that he deserves to stay in office. First, the ad itself:

Titled "Results," the ad is laden with several exaggerations, false claims, and items worth pondering over. Here's a few for you to consider...

When I ran for governor, I promised to rein in spending, eliminate the deficit, and hold the line on taxes. And you know what? That's exactly what we did.
Yet that's exactly what Walker DIDN'T do. Each of these items will be examined further down the line. But first, it should be pointed out that Walker left out the biggest thing he promised while he was campaigning for governor: that he would bring jobs to our state. Walker made a promise of 250,000 jobs by the end of his first term.It's interesting that Walker himself neglects to include that line in his opening statement, especially since it was the rallying cry of every Republican candidate, Walker included, during the 2010 midterm elections.
Thankfully, we wiped out a $3.6 billion deficit without raising taxes.
There are two lies within this single sentence. First, Walker didn't eliminate the deficit -- at least according to his own standards on which he campaigned on. Walker promised to balance the budget using generally accepted accounting principles. These principles require that you not push the debt further down the road, properly balancing the budget (and your debts) within the fiscal year.

But the governor didn't do that. In fact, Walker's budget is projected to create a $3 billion deficit under GAAP standards -- a larger deficit than what was projected to occur when Doyle passed his last budget.

During his campaign against Milwaukee Mayor Tom Barret, Walker portrayed his opponent as "Worse than Doyle." It appears that Walker's own budget fits that moniker quite fine on its own.

Now, consider lie #2: keeping taxes down. Walker's budget created a net tax reduction of millions of dollars (reducing revenues and forcing major budget cuts in the process). But those tax reductions went primarily to the rich and to corporations. And the reductions more than made up for the tax increases that Walker imposed on working Wisconsinites.

Gov. Walker reduced to a significant amount the Earned Income Tax Credit than many poor Wisconsinites depend upon. As per one example, a single mother with two kids would see her taxes go up two percentage points as a result of Walker's budget.
...government workers are now contributing to their health and pension benefits...
Except that government workers were already contributing to their health and pension plans. These plans are deferred payments -- that is, income these workers would ordinarily be earning but instead have determined they'd rather have in the form of benefits. What really happened was that Gov. Walker required a GREATER contribution -- which, in effect, is a cut to his employees' paychecks overall.
In the three years before I took office, Wisconsin lost 150,000 jobs...[but] since the start of the year, Wisconsin has added thousands of jobs.
Walker's statement here -- that the state lost 150,000 jobs in three years' time -- tries to imply that it was the fault of the previous (read: Democratic) administration. In fact, the loss in jobs was due to the national recession (which began under a Republican president).

Walker then takes credit for the entire year of 2011, stating that we've gained thousands of jobs since he took office. Problem is, the jobs that did grow this year all occurred in the first six months -- that is, while Gov. Doyle's budget was still in effect. Since Walker's budget passed in late June we haven't seen a single month of net jobs growth in the state. In other words, Gov. Walker is taking credit for jobs created during Gov. Doyle's budget cycle, leaving out the fact that Walker's budget has yet to do anything substantial for job growth in the state.

Walker closes out his ad the only way he knows how -- full of lies that misinform the audience to whom he is speaking to: "Instead of going back to the days of billion-dollar budget deficits, double-digit tax increases, and record job loss, let's keep moving Wisconsin forward." Yet within that sentence alone, Walker lies to you three times more: he 1) created a budget deficit under his own standards, 2) increased taxes on the working poor and 3) has produced job losses in the state that are greater than any other states' losses during the same time period.

Presented in this manner, Walker is clearly trying to manipulate you into believing he's actually GOOD for the state. The million-dollar question is, will the people of Wisconsin buy it? Only time will tell.

A New Year's retreat

2011-12-27T16:35:00.003-06:00

Don't expect updates for the next week

Unless there's a huge story involving something of enormous magnitude, you shouldn't expect much from me for the next week. I will be traveling around the state for a post-Christmas-road-trip-extravaganza that will take me from Madison to Appleton (with various stops in the Fox Valley region) to Minneapolis, all the way back to Madison again. Crazy times! For small, 140 character-based updates about things going on in my political mind, you can follow Political Heat on Twitter @PoliticalHeatWI (or click the link below).

Follow @PoliticalHeatWI

I'm hoping that I will arrive back in time to report on a Rose Bowl victory, with analysis of the Iowa Caucuses shortly after. Until then...

Happy New Year, everyone!

Why Walker's association with Grover Norquist matters

2011-12-26T08:25:00.004-06:00

Trip to "Tax Pledge" activist consistent with governor's tax hikes on working class Wisconsinites

Recently, it was revealed that Scott Walker attended the Christmas party of one Grover Norquist, presumably in an attempt to raise funds for the impending recall campaign for the Wisconsin governor.

The trip to New York was unannounced, kept hidden from the people of Wisconsin, until a blogger tweeted he had seen Walker at the party. The administration said that there was no need to keep tabs on the governor's "personal" calendar, that his "official" calendar was the only one that had to be kept up-to-date with the people.

It is perhaps prudent that the "official" office of the governor shouldn't divulge such information -- it may in fact be illegal to do so. But the governor himself ought to inform the public of his "personal" calendar when such events lead to him being out of state -- or include campaign fundraising -- especially when it's unknown to the people he represents what he's doing. There should be openness when it comes to politicians' fundraising activities, and Walker's actions have been anything but open (at least in terms of whether he's the one releasing it or not).

It's troubling still what the governor was probably doing during this particular trip -- but not all that surprising. It's a well-known fact in the political world what Norquist's organization, Americans for Tax Reform, represents: no tax increases ever within any level of government (a promise that isn't always kept intact within the organization itself). Gov. Walker signed the pledge during the campaign for governor in 2010, meaning he would oppose any and all tax increases -- including removal or diminishing of tax credits.

The pledge reads:

I, _____, pledge to the taxpayers of the (____district of the) state of ______ and to the American people that I will: ONE, oppose any and all efforts to increase the marginal income tax rate for individuals and business; and TWO, oppose any net reduction or elimination of deductions and credits, unless matched dollar for dollar by further reducing tax rates.

Emphasis added.

Unfortunately for Walker, he violated this pledge within the budget he passed this last summer, raising taxes on workers by millions of dollars.

Walker greatly reduced the Earned Income Tax Credit and other credits that were effectively increases in the amount the working poor had to pay toward their taxes. The administration countered that net taxes overall went down, and that reductions to credits didn't amount to tax increases.

Those arguments don't hold up to the tax pledge that Norquist and ATR had Walker sign -- the credits that Walker reduced were not "matched dollar for dollar by further reducing tax rates" (see emphasis above). So Walker violated the pledge, and is automatically slated to be attacked by Norquist and ATR, set to face the wrath of challenges at a primary election from his fellow conservatives, right?

Not so fast -- during the payroll tax debate, the American working class was slated to face an increase in taxes had Congress refused to take any action. For a time, it seemed like that was going to happen (until a two-month extension was passed and signed into law last week). So what did Norquist tell Republican lawmakers? He essentially said that the payroll tax hike wouldn't amount to violating the pledge he had them sign, indicating that his tax pledge only applied to the wealthy.

It stands to reason, then, that by raising taxes on the poor in the state, Walker doesn't violate Norquist's tax pledge. At least, that is until you consider the hypocrisy that such reasoning employs.

Walker raised taxes. Norquist said to his pledge signers "don't raise taxes, or else!" but he didn't really care when the taxes raised were on the working class. In the end, it is all a ruse designed to lower taxes for the rich, not the middle class.

Gableman's ethics put into question collective bargaining ruling

2011-12-23T08:06:00.003-06:00

Legal questions abound amid allegations of justice's wrongdoing

Wisconsin Supreme Court Justice Michael Gableman isn't known to be a particularly professional person, especially when it comes to the title he holds. So it isn't surprising when Gableman was slapped with an ethics complaint earlier this year, forced to defend his actions while serving the state of Wisconsin.

What was surprising was that, during the defense of his ethics investigation, Gableman's lawyers waived all legal fees for their client, itself an act of unethical behavior. Sitting justices of the court aren't allowed to receive gifts of this kind as they can be perceived as conflicts of interest later on down the road.

As it happens, Gableman's actions (in accepting the gift) have put into question one of the most important and contentious rulings rendered by the court this year.

When the law to strip state workers of their bargaining rights was passed this year through nefarious means -- being rushed through the legislature in violation of state open meetings laws -- it went to the courts to decide if such violations warranted blockage of the law itself. Judge Maryann Sumi, a Republican-appointed judge, found that rules were indeed broken, and as such the law deserved to be voided.

But the State Supreme Court reversed that decision, dangerously finding that when rules placed on the legislature are violated it's up to either house of the legislature (not the courts) to determine what course of action should be taken to remedy (or not) violations of conduct, essentially allowing them to police themselves on such matters.

The decision of the court was a slim majority, of which Gableman was one of the deciding votes, capable of tilting the verdict either way.

In light of his unethical behavior, Gableman's decision-making process is questionable by any rational-thinking citizen of this state. Yet, this matter is further complicated by the fact that the law firm representing the side that won the collective bargaining/open meetings decision was the very same law firm that provided free legal services to Justice Gableman during his ethics investigation.

The legal questions that abound by this situation provide stimulating discussion, to say the least. Do Gableman's actions indicate a violation of conduct? Does such a conflict of interest render any decision Gableman made as voidable, at least when it comes to decisions where this law firm was involved? And finally, if Gableman's actions do indeed leave specific decisions as questionable, would that be grounds to reverse any judgments made by the court where he may have held the deciding vote?

These are questions that are currently running through the mind of Dane County District Attorney Ismael Ozanne, who is considering seeking legal action against the ruling rendered on the collective bargaining issue under such circumstances.

Whether this results in his taking action or not, we can be sure of one fact: the actions of some conservative members of the state's Supreme Court are unbecoming of the offices they occupy. And they're doing a disservice to the people of Wisconsin.

Tax cuts, Walker's attacks on the middle class, expectedly hurts job growth

2011-12-21T18:13:00.006-06:00

When it comes to jobs, Wisconsin is the worst since Walker budget passed in June

Over at Jake's Economic TA Funhouse (I'll never tire of that title), there's even more evidence that Gov. Scott Walker's jobs initiative is failing our state. Not only was Wisconsin the biggest loser of November, but ever since Walker's budget passed, no other state has lost as many jobs as Wisconsin -- in fact, our state is more than four times greater than second-place Georgia in terms of job loss:

...despite Barca's misspeak about [Wisconsin being the jobs loss leader] for the second straight individual month (we're back at 1 month of "leadership"), he's right on another point. WISCONSIN KEPT ITS POSITION AS NUMBER 1 FOR JOB LOSS SINCE WALKER'S BUDGET WAS SIGNED IN JUNE. And no other state is close to how bad we've been.

U.S. job change June 2011- November 2011
Wisconsin -34,900 (-1.26%)
Georgia -8,600 (-0.23%)
Missouri -8,200 (-0.31%)
Minnesota -7,200 (-0.27%)
Montana -2.400 (-0.55%)

With numbers like those, even if the Department of Workforce Development's criticisms of preliminary numbers are valid, we're still the worst state in the union.

So why is Walker's jobs plan failing so miserably? Shouldn't billions of dollars in corporate tax cuts be creating jobs for the state? To put it bluntly, no: tax breaks for corporations don't create any incentive for job creation, at least on their own. At best they provide a means for companies that have demand but no capital to take a chance. But tax cuts won't create jobs without that demand being added.

Companies create jobs when they need to provide "more" of something -- more products, more services, etc. The greater need for this "more" creates a burden of extra work required for the business, which can be alleviated through hiring more workers. This is usually the result of greater demand on the part of those making purchases -- e.g. the consumers. Fortunately, with more demand also comes more capital, so the hiring of workers is usually a profitable, cost effective endeavor.

But direct tax breaks to corporations won't create that demand. Instead, they reward companies for doing what they've already done. They do NOT incentivize what we want them to do, which is create more work for those looking for it, because there's absolutely no reason to do so.

So we have to ask ourselves this singular question: when corporations are essentially handed money for doing nothing, is there any reason that they should create jobs, which will cost more capital, just for the sake of doing so? Of course not. The increase in capital for companies that have that demand, yet lack the ability to create more of a product, would make sense. But a blank check to corporations in the hopes that they will engage in a rare moment of benevolence is laughable -- they're looking out to increase their profits, won't add jobs just for the heck of it.

Yet Walker is putting his chips "all in" with the hopes that the $2.3 billion he's given to corporations through tax cuts will pay off. For some small businesses, it might...but only if they have demand for jobs and no resources. The vast majority of corporations in our state won't have that problem.

It's not surprising, then, that jobs in Wisconsin have failed to materialize. And with more and more consumers having less and less capital in their pocketbooks, it's equally unsurprising that job totals in the state are actually decreasing. Without that consumer spending, after all, there's no growth in demand, and thus no growth in the need for more labor.

Burden should be on challengers, not signers, for petition discrepancies

2011-12-20T17:23:00.005-06:00

Bills would increase incentive to vandalize petitions, deceive signers

With job numbers continuing their downward decline in the state, it's only natural that state Republican lawmakers do what they do best: ignore the issue entirely and focus on something else completely unrelated.

In this case, it's the recall. Not the recall elections against the governor and several state lawmakers themselves, but of multiple signatures on recall petitions, an issue that's upsetting Republicans because the burden of proof to verify recall signatures rests on them.

So to make their job a little easier, lawmakers like Republican State Sen. Glenn Grothman have determined to make multiple signatures an illegal act, punishable by up to six months of jail time. A similar bill submitted by Assembly Speaker Jeff Fitzgerald, also a Republican, would make the act a felony.

Of course, it's forgotten by those on the right who abhor these multiple signers that those doing so are simply trying to ensure that their names are counted. With the fear of anti-recall pro-Walker activists vandalizing petitions (openly threatening to pose as volunteers only to destroy real petitions later), it became a necessity for some signers to put their names on two or three different petitions if they couldn't know for sure that the petitioner was legitimate.

The bills proposed by Republican lawmakers would grant such vandals even greater reason to intimidate and deceive those hoping to sign a petition. By lawfully restricting citizens the right to sign multiple petition forms, any petition destroyed would almost guarantee that names would be dropped where they rightly belonged.

The burden of proof on removing multiple signers is right to rest upon those wishing to dispute such signatures. The laws proposed by Grothman and Fitzgerald should be dismissed.

Job losses from this year unacknowledged in DWD report

2011-12-19T01:18:00.002-06:00

Report's spin misses the big picture: Wisconsin is losing jobs under Gov. Walker's watch

With November's job numbers released last week, and with another dismal outcome from that release, the Walker administration decided to focus on a very different aspect in their report -- namely that preliminary numbers aren't always right (PDF).

"October was the fifth straight month and the eighth month this year in which the federal government overestimated the preliminary job loss numbers or underestimated job gains for Wisconsin," [Department of Workforce Development] Secretary Newson said.

Yet, the determination to spin the report this way fails to vindicate Gov. Walker's job-growth performance -- it's been horrific thus far. When you consider the fact that former Gov. Jim Doyle's budget was still in effect for the first six months of this year, a troubling statistic comes forth: there have been zero months of net jobs growth since Walker's budget became law in late June.

The downward trajectory presents another sordid stat: if the preliminary job numbers from November do stay the same, the net job increases from this year will only be roughly 3,900 jobs, or about 355 jobs added in the state per month. If we're to continue on this path, at the current rate Walker's campaign goal of 250,000 jobs -- which he promised to create -- would take more than 64 years to realized, or 16 terms total (15 more terms than Walker pledged last year).

That's a revision from last month, when I calculated it would take 71 years and 17 or more terms to complete. But that revision isn't due to any improvement in Walker's job performance -- rather, it's due to the revision in total jobs lost from October. (And remember: the number of jobs added per month and per year are, again, due to jobs that were created during the last few months of the Doyle budget while Walker was in office.)

The real story here isn't that preliminary job analyses are off, but that Walker's policies are failing to create jobs in the state. We're still on a downward spiral, losing jobs rather than gaining them since Walker's budget was implemented. No matter how they intend to spin it, the Walker administration can't escape that fact.

Pro-Walker "jobs" ad omits important details

2011-12-16T20:49:00.007-06:00

"Small business" billionaire distorts effects of Gov. Walker's "reforms"

The pro-Walker ads keep on coming, and as usual they continue to lack context that leaves the viewer unaware of just how misleading they really are.

"Chris," a "business owner", describes the "positive" things Walker has done for Wisconsin:

Gov. Walker is a friend of small business. He recognizes that 70 percent of the jobs created in this country and this state are by small businesses. He wants all the people in this state to be successful. It's comforting. And it’s been rare. So, it’s a refreshing change.

A lot of what the man in this ad says, like previous ads supportive of Walker, neglect to include relevant information about the subject at hand.

"Chris" is actually Chris Rebholz, CEO of Christopher Morgan Fulfillment Services. You've likely seen his products -- if you've watched a few infomercials. While they do hire some Wisconsin citizens, Rebholz's company imports most of its products through the use of Chinese labor.

From Uppity Wisconsin:

Of course, there is nothing wrong with infomercials, but the reality is that Wisconsin is hemoraging manufacturing jobs almost exclusively to China. And when customers buy from a TV ad or online, it also requires fewer jobs to get that product to the customer because there is no store and the jobs that go with a store.

In other words, if you were going to set up a business model with the fewest American jobs possible, it would be Chris Rebholz's business model. That's the guy... that Scott Walker chose to promote his job creation efforts.

But it isn't just that Scott Walker chose a man who uses Chinese workers to make his products. He's also a billionaire who thrived in Wisconsin's economic climate...long before Walker was governor.

From One Wisconsin Now:

The "business owner" featured in the latest Scott Walker television ad saw his business grow 1,300 percent during the administration of Gov. Jim Doyle, according to a self-professed claim in the Business Times from 2008.

It was under a Democratic governor, then, that Rebholz's company really thrived -- not under the "reforms" that Gov. Walker put into place.

The underlying fact that puts to rest anything that this ad tries to claim is that there hasn't been a single month of job growth since Walker's budget passed earlier this year. Sure, Wisconsin saw six months of growth during the first half of the year -- but that was under the last months of Gov. Jim Doyle's previous budget. Ever since Walker's budget was put into play, there's been nothing but net losses.

Walker's ads continue to distort the truth, to hide the things he doesn't want the people of Wisconsin to know about. Unfortunately for our governor, the numbers don't lie.

November job numbers out -- and a note on revisions

2011-12-15T17:19:00.005-06:00

Revised numbers raise questions, but still paint gloomy picture of Wisconsin job outlook

The Department of Workforce Development released its preliminary numbers on jobs for the month of November, as well as a revision of October's numbers.

In November, it was initially reported that Wisconsin had lost 9,700 jobs based on preliminary numbers. Those numbers proved to be too preliminary -- the revised numbers show Wisconsin *only* lost 2,400 jobs...an improvement from the original tally, but a loss in jobs nonetheless.

DWD Secretary Reggie Newson wasn't thrilled with this and other revisions that have occurred this year.

"The most troubling thing to me is the effects these initial estimates have on the perception of Wisconsin’s workforce," Newson said. "The monthly revisions show a much steadier trajectory with gains being higher and losses being much lower than the BLS' initial reports.

Newson is partially right about his criticism -- it's troubling that the estimates are off, sometimes by large margins. Estimates aren't meant to be exact, and most expect changes to occur, revisions to be made. But a revision of that size is something to look out for, cause for those who make the preliminary counts to assess their methods a little better.

Yet Newson is wrong on a different front:

"While there certainly is more progress to be made, we are moving Wisconsin in the right direction and laying the groundwork for the private sector to create jobs."

Um, not so much. Negative numbers are still negative -- a move in the "right direction" would include positive job numbers, making up for the losses we've thus far incurred since Walker's budget passed in June. (It's interesting to note that all of the positive job numbers in 2011 came about during the tail end of the budget passed by Walker's predecessor, former Gov. Jim Doyle, a Democrat.)

Newson acts as though those preliminary numbers are purposely put out to make Wisconsin look bad. There's no proof of this, however, other than his own assumptions. Preliminary numbers should be treated as such -- preliminary, and thus possibly mistaken. Yet, even though October's job losses were diminished, they still went in the same direction (negative) as was initially projected.

With that in mind, let's take a look at the November job numbers (PDF). Again, these are preliminary -- take that caveat for what it is.

This graph shows quite a dramatic loss from October to November. Preliminary numbers project a loss of more than 14,000 jobs in the state. If you're quick to dismiss those projections, keep in mind that the change from October's preliminaries and its revised numbers was a drop of 75 percent -- but still a loss. If you apply that same rate change to November's numbers, it's still a loss of more than 3,650 jobs. There's nothing to suggest a revision is imminent at this time, however.

So let's assess that graph a little more. All signs point to another month of job losses -- the fifth in a row, in fact, and the fifth one since Walker signed his budget into law. This probably isn't coincidental -- tax breaks without proper incentives won't create jobs, but this is still Walker's main method for "job creation."

Wisconsin's total jobs aren't the only indication of things souring on the Walker administration. Looking at manufacturing jobs across the state, it's clear that things within that sector are also doing poorly.

Though there were some gains in August, since that time manufacturing has dropped at a steady rate with no indication of improvement on its way.

What can we assess from these numbers? Secretary Newson's rant on the DWD release of November's job numbers undercuts the problem at hand: jobs are still leaving the state, despite the revisions that are being made. And while a lower unemployment rate looks good on paper, it hardly portrays what's going on in the state -- with less jobs and a lower rate, it merely implies that less people are looking for work.

The bottom line is this: nothing has changed (as far as general statements go) except the numbers. While the job numbers from October weren't as severe as initially anticipated, they were still negative. Walker's reforms continue to fail our state, and jobs in Wisconsin aren't growing.

Memo to Walker supporters: it's still not working

2011-12-14T21:46:00.006-06:00

Repeated claim by pro-Walker supporters ignores truths about "successes" of governor's initiatives

On the eve of a major announcement set to be made by those organizing the efforts against Gov. Scott Walker, I want to visit a common theme presented within nearly every defense that Walker supporters are giving in order to dissuade voters from signing and/or supporting the recall movement.

This meme can be summed up in two simple words: "it's working."

The repeated slogan of the pro-Walker camp carries with it a strong suggestion that Walker's reforms have actually benefited the state, have created a more prosperous Wisconsin than what we previously had. Proponents of the governor suggest that, had it not been for these reforms, we'd be in a worse place than we currently find ourselves in. The recall, in their minds, would undermine that position, destroy the fortuitous stature of our state created this year while under Walker's reign.

Yet reality suggests that Wisconsin isn't benefiting from these reforms at all. There's no substantial claim to make that "it's working" at all for our state...in fact, there's several counter-claims that Walker has yet to explain.

Where exactly is it "working?" Since Walker's budget passed in late June, Wisconsin has seen four straight months of job losses, totaling more than 27,000 disappearing overall.

More than $2 billion in cuts to education and Medicaid have strained students' abilities to learn and aid to those in desperate need.

The stripping of collective bargaining rights have had no significant impact on lowering our deficit, even in "celebrated" communities like Kaukauna (where similar savings were offered but ignored through concessions from the teacher's union before Act 10 was implemented).

Taxes, on both property and income, have increased for working families, and the budget that the governor claims was balanced wouldn't have been acceptable by his own standards a year ago while he was campaigning for the job.

Is this what Walker considers "progress?" This is what's meant by "it's working" in Wisconsin? Most would argue that this isn't "working" -- it's garbage, a spit in the face of those that have prided themselves on being true-blooded Wisconsinites for several generations.

Gov. Walker and his supporters who believe "it's working" are wrong. Walker is undeserving of the office he holds for many reasons. One of them is the continued insistence that what he's done for the state will have a positive impact for the future of Wisconsin. In reality, they're hurting the weakest among us, benefiting the wealthy corporations at the expense of the working class.

Federal appeals court strikes down WI campaign finance limits

2011-12-13T20:22:00.004-06:00

Campaign finance limits preserve rights of the disadvantaged to have equal access to the political process

The recent ruling by a federal court of appeals that lifts the $10,000 individual limit on campaign donations to third-party political action committees is nothing short of horrendous. It isn't a defense of speech rights, as the court that issued the ruling asserts. Rather, it's an expansion of the abuse of said rights that the wealthy and privileged classes hold over the vast majority of the American populace.

Speech rights are a wonderful thing, an ideal worth defending to the utmost degree. The freedom to speak your mind and to have your piece heard is something many of us take for granted in this country, a democratic tool we utilize daily without truly understanding that much of the world still lives without this basic right protected.

Yet, when abuses of that right (or of any right, really) restrains other significant rights of the people, restrictions upon that privilege, when administered in a way that preserves the basic functions of our most honored principles, are justly enforced. That's to say, when you start using your rights as a means to diminish someone else's livelihood, the government, as an arbitrator and nothing more, should step in to ensure that no abuse of any privilege should conflict with the properly used rights of others.

A legitimate argument can be made that campaign finance limits (on individuals and/or corporations) are such tools used to preserve the rights of those with modest incomes. While some courts may argue that such laws hamper the ability of the rich to disseminate their views, very little consideration is given to the working class individual who may only be able to spare $50 (or less) per year towards the political causes of their choosing. Despite their significantly lower incomes, these individuals deserve the same -- and equal -- political rights as those with 100 times their annual salaries.

And yet, we're somehow led to believe their rights are preserved when we require the poor to whisper their ideals and opinions, while those with the ability to contribute more capital towards political committees (like, for example, the Koch brothers) are granted the use of 10 megaphones lined up in a row to express their speech rights? The analogy is not that far off (in fact, it's likely short of what's now reality) -- the poor are at a indescribable disadvantage when it comes to how much "speech" they're allowed to utilize as compared to those, say, in the top one percent.

Reform is sorely needed in the form of a constitutional amendment at the federal level, to allow both national and state governments the ability to preserve speech rights for all Americans, not just those with deep pocketbooks. Democracy should never be for sale, an item to be placed on the auction block and available to the highest bidder. It belongs to everyone, equally, to take part in the political process, whether rich or poor.

The people of Wisconsin, and all across the nation, deserve much better treatment, a proper defense of their rights versus the abuse of power the wealthy may sometimes hold over them.

Candidate Cullen a pragmatic choice for governor

2011-12-08T16:18:00.004-06:00

Moderate Democrat considered a "cooperative spirit" who can work with both parties

Special note: The following is not an endorsement of any kind, merely some thoughts on the recent announcement made by Sen. Tim Cullen regarding his gubernatorial aspirations.

State Sen. Tim Cullen, a Democrat from Janesville, has made it official, announcing that he intends to run for governor when the petition drive against Scott Walker succeeds in attaining the signatures it needs to trigger a recall. He's the first Democrat to announce his candidacy.

Cullen is a moderate, a former State Senate Majority Leader, a successful businessman, and a former Secretary of the Department Health and Social Services in Wisconsin. He served in the State Senate from 1975 to 1987, returning in 2011 when he won election last year.

Often seen as someone who works "above politics," Cullen is well-known as a lawmaker who bridges the two bickering parties together. He has a good working relationship with Republican State Senator Dale Schultz, also a moderate, and was cited by Walker himself as cooperative in nature (during the infamous prank call earlier this year).

Cullen was also part of the group of 14 Democratic senators that left Wisconsin in order to delay passage of Act 10, the bill that dismantled collective bargaining for state workers. But while some of those senators could face scrutiny for "fleeing" the state, Cullen actually introduced a constitutional amendment proposing to prevent such a move again in the future.

Cullen's candidacy probably won't play well with the base -- his pragmatism and willingness to negotiate with Republicans isn't appreciated by much on the left. But in a state that's a murky "purple" rather than a distinct "red" or "blue," Cullen's supposed "weakness" could prove to be his greatest asset among the electorate overall, appealing to Wisconsinites who value that cooperative spirit that's been lost in recent years.

Tim Cullen isn't likely the ideal choice for the Democratic Party or its progressive base -- but he just might be the ideal choice for voters at-large across the state. We shall see.

Chris Rickert: certain (in his own mind), and wrong

2011-12-01T21:23:00.005-06:00

Wisconsin State Journal columnist wrong to believe Walker undeserving of recall

Chris Rickert, columnist for the Wisconsin State Journal, sparked a bit of controversy on Thursday through some very contentious claims.

His piece, entitled "Supporters of recall are certain, and wrong," makes a lengthy claim that numbers don't necessarily mean anything until the election occurs -- alluding to the 300,000 signatures that were gathered in the first two weeks of the recall campaign against Scott Walker.

Rickert also points out that, even if indicative of the majority, a sizable number of people don't necessarily make a movement "right" or justify a vote for/against someone.

Rickert's analogy examines the re-election of former President George W. Bush, who won handily against his Democratic opponent John Kerry (though to Wisconsin's credit, Kerry carried the Badger State):

Americans were getting killed in Iraq due to a poorly supported but greatly hyped allegation that turned out to be flat wrong. And here enough people were apparently OK with that to re-elect the falsehood's cheerleader-in-chief.

It's an assertion that most on the left would gladly agree with: Bush's war in Iraq, then a popular policy, was still wrong, despite his being re-elected president. I had written on the subject myself extensively while I was still at UW-Milwaukee -- our presence in Iraq was wrong, and we stayed there for too long a time as well. How Bush had been re-elected was a mystery to many ideological colleagues of mine.

That analogy aside, Rickert's column made another bold assumption, one that struck a nerve for many progressives throughout the state:

It's one of those weird ironies of life that majority rule is both a linchpin and a drawback of representative democracy. A man who dragged the country into an unnecessary war got a second term in the White House, and a man who's done nothing worse than employ conservative principles to balance the state budget is facing recall. (Emphasis added)

OK, Time Out -- did he really just say what I think he just said?

It isn't just that I disagree with Rickert's assumptions about the merits of the recall -- it's also that he's flat-out wrong. This isn't just about ideology...it's about much more than that.

The recall movement against Walker didn't take hold until after two big pieces of "conservative principles" (tort reform and tax breaks to the corporate elites) were passed in January. Even after these items were enacted (and a train plan derailed), the idea to recall Walker at that time was a joke more than anything else. Fighting against conservatism overreach, while a huge part of the recall movement now, wasn't the catalyst for what began this fight.

It took an attack on state workers to really get the movement going, not to mention a budget bill that blatantly attacked the middle and lower income classes, with several other pieces of legislation and failed policies, adding fodder to the fire.

Walker's "conservative principles" included: Stripping the rights of workers that have been in place for over half a century; a $1.6 billion budget shortfall for schools across the state; half a billion in cuts to health care; $2.3 billion in tax giveaways to the wealthy and corporations, meant to spur economic growth and job creation, that has fallen flat on its face; a drastic departure from voter rights in favor of unnecessary restrictions; and a demeanor from this governor that indicates he cares not for the common man, woman, or child in this state (unless they happen to be wealthy million- or billionaires).

None of these things can simply be called "employing conservative principles." This is a radical change from what is Wisconsin...and the recall is much more than a response to conservatism.

Rickert is right in one thing: the numbers game, while impressive at this point, won't guarantee victory. But he's wrong to assume he's the sole decider of what is right or wrong -- and while democracy, too, can't necessarily determine that either, it's still the best thing that we've got.

Violent acts against citizen democracy indefensible

2011-11-30T18:25:00.009-06:00

Actions perpetrated against recall organizers (and others) should be condemned

Political differences exist -- we shouldn't fret too much over this fact of life. But how we deal with our differences is of great importance to the preservation of our democracy.

There's no excuse for violence (rhetorical or otherwise) in political discourse, no reason for intimidation of any kind within the free exchange of ideas. Where's the value in it? What good does it do to debate with one another, only to win or lose that debate out of some unrelated fear rather than relevance to the topic at hand? Such deplorable tactics only serve to disrupt the examination of ideas and democracy itself.

Within our own state, such intimidating methods are sadly infiltrating our discourses regarding the recall of Gov. Scott Walker. Recently, these tactics have included the pu rposeful and celebrated ripping/shredding/burning of recall petitions (with legitimate signatures included), throwing soft drinks at signature gatherers, and even the swerving (and near collision) of vehicles toward those advocating for the removal of the governor (allegedly by a ranking member of that county's Republican Party).

The left isn't innocent in this mess either -- threats to lawmakers and the pouring of alcoholic beverages on their persons are nothing to take lightly, and correctly brandished as wrong when they occur.

But it seems that, with the stubborn refusal to play by the established rules (and the difficulties that stand in the way of changing those rules midway through the game), some on the right have taken to using other measures in the Badger State, apparently thwarting conventional democratic means of doing so, in order to "win."

These are not isolated incidents -- almost daily now, we hear of new events that cause headaches to recall supporters, including threats that not only affect them but their family members as well. Yet their growing familiarity is cause for alarm, and shouldn't become expected even if we have seen them before. Each new case of violence (both rhetorical and actual) is something that should be abhorred, never shrugged off as "more of the same" that we've already seen.

If we ever reach that point -- of familiarity of violence within our dialogues -- then our democracy, including citizen activism within it, is in grave danger.

Reassessing what we already knew: Walker never campaigned on ending bargaining rights

2011-11-29T16:47:00.006-06:00

Campaign focused on one aspect, not total eradication, of collective bargaining

A few conservative sites in the Wisconsin blogosphere have brought up a contentious opinion regarding Gov. Scott Walker, his removal of bargaining rights for state workers, and whether he campaigned on that idea or not in 2010. An assertion is being made on these blogs that, prior to what has been basic common knowledge up to this point, Walker DID indeed campaign on ending bargaining rights for state employees.

Take these two blogs as examples of that assertion. Tim Gray, of useyourgraymatter.com, and Steve Prestegard, of The Presteblog, have both made the claim that, not only had Walker campaigned on the subject, but that unions even knew about it at that point in time.

Gray referenced an article from the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, which stated:

Two leading candidates for governor [Milwaukee Mayor Tom Barrett and Scott Walker] say they could save taxpayers up to hundreds of millions of dollars a year by revamping the way schools and local governments buy health insurance for more than 200,000 public employees around Wisconsin.

...

What neither candidate highlights, however, is that their plans also will mean taking away unions' right to negotiate with their employers for their insurance carrier - a potentially explosive political fight.

(Emphasis added)

The other example, from Prestegard, looks at a flier from the American Federation of Teachers from 2010:

(Click to view a larger image)

The major aspect of the flier (for the purposes of the argument) is this little bit: "Walker supports a bill that would take away the right of unions to negotiate health care benefits."

A second flier from the 2010 campaign (this one from WEAC), provided by radio host Vicki McKenna (also available at Prestegard's site), made a similar mention of health care benefits being removed from the bargaining process:

What these two tidbits of information mean is that, yes, the unions knew that Walker was planning to take away some aspects of their negotiation rights. The emphasis here, however, is SOME. Not all.

It should be noted that both sources attribute the same idea: that Walker was proposing that negotiation be terminated when it came to health plans. Still, is that enough to say that the people of this state should have seen it (the "bomb" as Walker called his plan) coming?

Hardly. Walker campaigned on an idea of removing one aspect of bargaining, and then subsequently removed nearly all aspects of it. What's more, the Journal Sentinel article that was used above points it out as clear as day: Walker didn't exactly "highlight" the fact that his plan would end these rights for workers, as far as their health plans went. And as Capper notes at Cognitive Dissidence, Walker even testified to Congress that he didn't campaign explicitly on the removal of bargaining rights.

At best, you have Walker stating that he wanted to change how state workers' health plans worked. No mention was ever made of bargaining rights being removed in other aspects of their contracts.

Walker also implied that he'd keep collective bargaining in place, making cuts using furloughs if bargaining failed, never eliminating the bargaining process outright:

So where does that leave us? Believing that Walker would make greater cuts to the bargaining process -- making the jump from assuming he'd remove health care plans from that process, to nearly dismantling the process entirely -- is a foolish assumption to make. The assertion that these conservative bloggers make (that the people should have known better) is equally as foolish.

I liken it to this: It'd be like ordering a steak medium-rare from your favorite restaurant, getting a charred hunk of meat resembling what you ordered, and getting a quizzical look from you waiter as he says to you, "Well, you wanted it cooked, right?" In both cases (Walker "campaigning" on ending bargaining rights and the restaurant scenario) you have what was believed to be a smaller idea of what actually happened in the end.

Walker campaigned on removing one aspect of bargaining rights, and actually stated he was intending to use the remainder of the bargaining process to balance the budget, using furloughs where it didn't work. How one comes to the conclusion that that means what he REALLY meant was the total eradication of collective bargaining for state workers is beyond reasonable comprehension.

300,000 recall signatures collected in 12 days

2011-11-28T19:24:00.005-06:00

48 days remain to get less than half the signatures needed for recall

In an email to supporters, United Wisconsin made a breathtaking announcement. In less than two weeks, recall organizers have attained more than half of the required number of signatures needed to trigger an election against Gov. Scott Walker.

To put that in perspective, organizers now have 48 days to collect just over 240,000 signatures. Names are being taken down at a rate of more than 1,000 per hour.

Skeptics will remain, but it's clear that the momentum remains on the side of those looking to take Walker out of office. Exactly whom they will put up to go against him remains an unknown at this point -- but with numbers like these it's clear the people of Wisconsin want a change.

Pro-Walker ad misinforms and distorts the recall movement

2011-11-28T14:01:00.005-06:00

Ad ignores the realities that have plagued the state

The second commercial spot put out by the campaign to defend Gov. Scott Walker against a recall is a powerful ad, one that puts a schoolteacher on the side of Walker -- an ironic move since the teachers of this state have been largely against the ideas the governor has implemented. It's also an ad that marginalizes the recall campaign's reasoning behind why a recall against Walker is necessary.

Let's assess a little deeper what Kristi is saying.

"I'm not big on recalls..."

OK, let's stop there. The very man Kristi now supports benefited from a recall campaign to win the County Executive position he held before the governorship. He did so due to a scandal that the county was facing at that time, but even under the standards that some GOP lawmakers in our state are trying to force on us, the recall would never have happened. So if someone is against the recall because they don't LIKE recalls, they're clearly unaware of Gov. Walker's pro-recall history.

"...and I think that at this point in my opinion, and I'm only speaking from the 'I,' um, it feels a little like 'sour grapes.'"

As a schoolteacher, Kristi should know that the moral of "The Fox and the Grapes" isn't what she's describing it as. What Kristi is describing is a group of people upset with the outcome of an election. The moral of "sour grapes," however, is wanting something, not getting it, and then feeling as though you're better off for not getting it anyway. If we were to retell the classic fable the way Kristi the schoolteacher is trying to describe recall proponents, it'd be the fox upset with the outcome and then getting a ladder -- not making up some excuse about the grapes themselves, and walking away.

"It's, you know, 'we didn't get our way, and so we want to, to change the outcome.'"

This is the major concern with the commercial I have. Changing the outcome of an election -- it's quite an assertion to make. Yet the call to recall the governor didn't come until he made a drastic move, one that was NEVER campaigned upon. The governor never promised to remove workers' rights, never said he would gut education or state health care by billions of dollars (while simultaneously handing out billions to corporations in tax breaks). And he definitely campaigned on balancing the budget in a way better, not worse, than his predecessor (certainly not in a way that left us with a larger deficit than what we began the year with).

"The person that I'm going to stand behind and that is going to get my vote is the man or the woman that says what they mean, and means what they say..."

Again, Gov. Walker had a pretty big omission during his campaign last year. And if Walker means what he says, and says what he means, did he mean that he really thought about placing troublemakers within crowds of protesters earlier this year, intending to discredit the movement against his policies?

"...and it's not about being popular, you know, it's not about getting the votes."

Actually, it is. When you lose the confidence of your voters, you lose their respect and confidence in you. In Wisconsin, a recall exists so that voters can vote you out, if they so wish to do so. This entire ad portrays recall proponents as in the minority, as against what the people want -- when in fact, they are the majority.

"It's, this is what's right. Scott Walker said from the beginning, 'I'm going to do what's right for Wisconsin,' and he did. He did."

But in reality, he didn't. Walker's reforms and initiatives have failed to lower taxes for the average Wisconsinite (1, 2), have created a worse situation for our schools, have failed to increase our state's job totals (which have actually decreased by nearly 30,000 since his budget passed), and have restricted the voices of thousands of state workers who wanted nothing more than negotiation when it comes to their contracts. (Oh, and as I already mentioned, by his own accounting standards during the campaign in 2010 he failed to balance the budget.)

That isn't principled leadership. That isn't even good governance. That's failure beyond what anyone, even a schoolteacher like Kristi, can ignore.

United Wisconsin to make major announcement tonight

2011-11-28T13:35:00.004-06:00

Announcement may set the record straight on number of signatures gathered so far

The recall organization A United Wisconsin to Recall Walker is set to make a major announcement tonight:

It may have to do with the subject of this post that the Democratic Party of Wisconsin made today on their Facebook page:

It appears that there is no level too low for opponents of the recall to stoop to.

"Are" governor fails grammar, and the state overall

2011-11-28T12:38:00.007-06:00

Walker's grammatical slip-up provides proof that education isn't a high priority

The value that our governor has placed on education in Wisconsin can be summed up through the actions he's performed thus far.

Gov. Scott Walker's educational background itself is flawed. Walker failed to attain a college degree, becoming the first Wisconsin governor in 64 years to lack one; and while it isn't necessarily something that's required for the job, for a person who is meant to be the chief executive of our state, it seems like a no-brainer that he should hold some form of educational certificate beyond a high school diploma.

He made severe cuts to our state's public schools, and limited their ability to raise funds on their own, resulting in a shortfall of $1.6 billion dollars. The result of these cuts was that more class sizes grew and more programs were cut overall across the state.

Now we get this little gem: clear proof that our governor's grammatical abilities are substandard, at least to the level expected of someone in his office. A tweet of Walker's (which has since been removed by staffers) shows that the governor can't distinguish between the words "are" and "our," a lesson that is taught to elementary schoolchildren.

If Jeff Foxworthy is still looking, we may have his next contestant for "Are You Smarter Than a 5th Grader?" I'd tell the governor to go for it, but then again we don't need any more embarrassments from him, tarnishing the good reputation that this state once had for education.

A visual look at the jobs situation in Wisconsin (it's not working, Gov. Walker)

2011-11-23T14:31:00.000-06:00

Net jobs rate of change was better a year ago under Doyle

Late last week I examined the employment numbers that had just been released for the month of October. As I wrote, the numbers weren't too promising:

The Wisconsin jobs report for October has been released, and unfortunately the news is not so good. 9,700 jobs were lost last month, most of them within the private sector.

...

To reach Gov. Scott Walker's goal of 250,000 jobs created in his first term, it would take more than 71 years at the current rate we're going at, or 17 more terms than the one he promised it would require.

I also took a look at what was the driving force behind the jobs numbers -- or rather, what WASN'T driving a growth in jobs across the state:

Companies need capital to hire people, it's true, but they also need a reason to hire them in the first place. Demand is what supplies that need -- if a corporation has a higher demand for their good/service, they will hire a worker, if the capital to do so is available as well. But without demand, there's no NEED to hire anyone.

...

So as we go forth in trying to think of ways to help stimulate the economy, we should focus on what works best. Will a tax break for corporations, without proper demand for their goods or services being created, encourage businesses to hire more individuals? Or will putting money in the hands of workers, through freeing up their basic needs that they'd ordinarily need to concentrate their expenses on (such as health care, as one example), work?

I want to provide a little visual evidence behind what's already been said.

From January to June of this year, Wisconsin added roughly 31,000 jobs -- admittedly a good gain for the first six months. Yet in the four months following Gov. Scott Walker's budget bill passing, nearly all of those job gains were lost. What we ended up with was a mere 3,500 net jobs from the beginning of 2011 to October -- or just under 400 jobs created per month. Put another way, nearly 9 in 10 jobs that were created during the first half of this year were lost in the four months that followed.

As pointed out at Jake's Economic TA Funhouse, the true magnitude of last month's job losses can't only be described in numbers, but also in how horribly we did when compared to the rest of the country (not only this month but since June). Wisconsin lost the highest amount of jobs across the nation for the month of October (in both raw numbers and percentage lost). For an administration that once erroneously claimed to have created half the jobs in the nation in one month, it's going to be difficult to explain why things have soured so fast.

But this can't be blamed on the national picture overall, as the Walker administration has tried to do in the past -- most of the country saw gains in private sector employment. In fact, Wisconsin was just one of eleven states to see private sector job losses overall last month (PDF). Wisconsin has also lost more jobs than any other state since June of this year:

Most Job losses June-October 2011
Wisconsin -27,600
Georgia -19,100
Rhode Island -6,200
Missouri -3,800
Arkansas -3,700

Consider the net rate of change as well. Earlier this month I calculated the rate of change for Wisconsin between the months of January and September. Wisconsin's growth rate was .43 percent, comparable to former Gov. Jim Doyle's rate of change during that same period last year (.40 percent). But as of this month, a new calculation needs to be put in place.

The new job rate of change, from January to October of this year, is approximately .128 percent. Compare that to Doyle's rate of change (from January to October of 2010), which was .657 percent. In other words, the rate of change we had a year ago is over five times greater than the rate of change we're experiencing today -- meaning net job growth has slowed significantly over the past 10 months while under Walker.

A lot of ideas can be drawn from these visual representations of what's happening to jobs in our state. One thing that can't be drawn from it is a line we often hear touted by the Walker administration, over and over again. So the next time you hear someone tell you that "it's working," let that person know that, no, it's not.

Lawsuit seeks to change districts ahead of recalls

2011-11-22T17:30:00.004-06:00

Move to change district maps ahead of time political, illogical

Republicans in Wisconsin are suing to have their newly-drawn legislative districts in place if and when the recall elections occur next spring against several state senators.

The move appears to be completely political, not practical by any means, and would defy logic for what the purposes of recall elections are in the first place. Recalls exist to replace an unwanted representative within a sitting district. Once replaced, the newly-elected individual serves out the remainder of the term the previous representative would have otherwise completed, and thus representing the constituents of the previous representative's first electoral win.

We shouldn't move to new districts prematurely -- doing so would set a new precedent, one that unnecessarily disenfranchises thousands of residents. Conversely, should the challenges fail, or should some senators face no challenge at all, there's no doubt that these representatives would continue serving the same constituents as before -- under the same maps as were in play in 2010.

It'd be wrong, foolish, and in ways hypocritical to advocate for a move to the new districts earlier than scheduled when it wouldn't have occurred under ordinary circumstances. Had there been no need for recalls, there wouldn't be any lawsuit of this nature advocating the change ahead of time. And there shouldn't be one now.

How to create jobs? Step one: don't give "handouts" to corporations

2011-11-20T16:38:00.004-06:00

A quick lesson on how to increase demand, and thus the need for jobs, in our economy

A lot of talk is centering around how to create jobs in our state, especially in the midst of thousands of job losses Wisconsin has seen over the past few months. In October alone, Wisconsin saw a loss of nearly 10,000 jobs, mostly in the private sector, despite billions of dollars in tax giveaways and significant tort reform to corporations that were meant to spur growth.

Perhaps to assess how to better create jobs, we should re-examine the question, "Why do companies need workers?" The answer isn't terribly startling: To provide a good or service to people. Companies need capital to hire these people, it's true, but they also need a reason to hire them in the first place. Demand is what supplies that need -- if a corporation has a higher demand for their good/service, they will hire a worker, if the capital to do so is available as well. But without demand, there's no NEED to hire anyone.

So if a corporation receives a tax cut (added revenue), but no demand is created for them, where's the incentive to hire more people? There isn't any -- they'd be wasting money that they just received, using it for a reason they don't actually have. A better approach to generate more jobs is to create higher demand for a product, and the best way to do that is to provide a situation where everyday people are able to make purchases for those goods/services.

Services that are provided by the government to assist those in need do more than help the unfortunate -- they also "free up" the pocketbooks of the working class, which in turn allows them to purchase things like new TVs, or cars, or lawnmowers, and so forth. That's why tax breaks for the poor help stimulate the economy more than for the rich -- they'll actually USE that money for something to purchase. A tax break for a corporation doesn't improve the economy because (as I stated above) there's no need to spend money without a real cause.

So as we go forth in trying to think of ways to help stimulate the economy, we should focus on what works best. Will a tax break for corporations, without proper demand for their goods or services being created, encourage businesses to hire more individuals? Or will putting money in the hands of workers, through freeing up their basic needs that they'd ordinarily need to concentrate their expenses on (such as health care, as one example), work?

The latter idea more so than the former will generate job growth, since the working class as a whole will be more likely to spend their hard-earned cash on goods and services, creating both higher demand and revenue for companies to take hold of, in turn creating a need for more work.

Some thoughts on today's recall Walker rally

2011-11-19T20:59:00.004-06:00

Nearly 40,000 descend on the Capitol to help kickoff first week of recall

Among tens of thousands of Wisconsinites, I was part of the recall rally in downtown Madison today.

The event brought back memories of February, of when we marched in the streets daily against the atrocious budget repair bill that brought about the end of workers' rights for public employees in the state. The difference this time? Optimism -- we all know our goal, and we all know it's attainable.

In fact, more than 105,000 signatures have already been collected -- and that was before the rally took place today.

With one-fifth of the required signature threshold nearly already attained, it's quite possible that the movement could get more than what's needed by Christmas. Such a gift is surely on the wishlist of many in the state, a majority of which support the removal of the governor.

Wisconsin's October job numbers -- Walker reforms still not working

2011-11-18T23:08:00.005-06:00

Job growth and employment dismal since start of Gov. Walker's term in office

The Wisconsin jobs report for October has been released, and unfortunately the news is not so good. 9,700 jobs were lost last month, most of them within the private sector.

The updated numbers for September show that Wisconsin had a total of 2,757,200 jobs in the state. But from September to October, nearly 10,000 jobs were lost, dropping the state totals down to 2,747,500 (PDF).

Compare that to the beginning of the year, when in January Wisconsin had approximately 2,744,000 jobs. From that time on, we've seen a great fluctuating number of jobs in the state, swelling to a high of about 2,775,100 this past June. But since that time, Wisconsin's job numbers have dropped as much as they've gained -- the net total from January to October is only a gain of 3,500 jobs.

To reach Gov. Scott Walker's goal of 250,000 jobs created in his first term, it would take more than 71 years at the current rate we're going at, or 17 more terms than the one he promised it would require.

That's the total number of jobs created -- but how about the total number of employed in the state? Wisconsin did a little bit better here, growing the number of employed by 3,400 (from the revised number of 2,819,200 employed in September to 2,822,600 in October). But the net total from January to October is still marginal, a measly gain of 3,299 more individuals employed today than were at the beginning of this year.

Compare those numbers to the last year of Walker's predecessor, Democratic Gov. Jim Doyle's, term. From January 2010 to October 2010, Wisconsin saw a growth of about 17,900 jobs, and a growth of employment by 12,919 individuals. That's more than 5 and nearly 4 times greater than Walker's respective numbers during the same time period.

Defenders of Walker will contend that these job numbers reflect what's happening on the national stage overall, that the governor cannot be held accountable for outside pressures that affect his state's job numbers. Yet, when we look at the national picture, we see growth, not decline, for the nation last month.

The fact is, Walker's less-than-even-adequate job performance is his to own -- not Obama's, nor Congress's, nor the debt ceiling's, nor anyone else's. His failure to provide any decent jobs initiatives (during two "special sessions" even!) provides ample evidence of why he is a failure to this state within the realm of job creation.

Tax breaks and tort reforms for corporations won't solve Wisconsin's job woes -- only true demand, from people purchasing products or services, can create the need for work. Walker's ideas are lousy, and Wisconsin is suffering for them.

(Most job numbers from this post came from BLS.gov and the Department of Workforce Development)

Walker reforms didn't lower state tax levies

2011-11-17T17:19:00.005-06:00

Lower property assessments responsible for statewide tax levy decrease

Gov. Scott Walker, in the midst of a recall signature drive against him, is already coming out swinging, sending out TV campaign ads on Monday Night Football and claiming his methods are "working" for the state.

His latest talking point is that his reforms helped lower state property tax levies by more than $47 million this year. Because of this, many people are likely to see lower tax bills, in effect vindicating Walker's entire plan (in his own mind) to remove bargaining rights for state workers in Wisconsin.

"Our reforms are protecting taxpayers while keeping our schools great," Walker said.

Yet, besides the fact that the $47 million across the state only saves the average property owner $18 per household, there's a serious flaw in Walker's reasoning. When you take a look at the state's average mill rate -- or the rate per $1,000 that assessed property gets taxed at -- you actually see an increase rather than a decrease from last year to this year. In other words, school property taxes, on average, went up under Walker's reforms.

Here's the mill rate for the previous school year:

And here's this school year's mill rate:

Not a huge tax increase, on average, across the state...but hardly the enormous tax cuts that Walker is making them out to be.

"But how can this be?" you might be asking yourself. "How can tax levies go down while tax rates go up?" The answer to that question isn't so difficult to ascertain, especially given that it involves a crisis that's hitting the nation overall: property values are sinking across the state, and tax increases aren't increasing fast enough to keep up with the depreciating value of our homes. As a result, what looks like property tax cuts across the board is actually nothing more than a loss in revenue the effects of property assessments being lower this year than last.

Wisconsin isn't benefiting from any "reforms" Walker put into place; on the contrary, Walker is actually benefiting from lowered values on his constituents' properties. It isn't a reform of any kind that's responsible for the levy decrease, and Walker is hardly the "golden boy" of Wisconsin he'd like you to think he is -- rather, he's just the beneficiary of some amazing dumb luck.

Polling shows support for Walker continues to dwindle

2011-11-15T21:59:00.006-06:00

Nearly 3 in 5 Wisconsinites support Walker recall

A poll released today by Wisconsin Public Radio and St. Norbert College reveals just how disenchanted Wisconsin voters are with Gov. Scott Walker's job performance.

58 percent of state residents give Walker a disapproval rating. That same number supports his recall, while only 37 percent feel that the governor shouldn't face a special election.

The numbers are a sign of how dangerously close Walker is to losing his job. Should the petitioning phase (of gaining more than 540,000 signatures) be successful, Walker will have to do his damnedest to make sure that he looks better than his opponent. Whether he does so through positive marketing of his name or negative mudslinging of the Democratic candidate is left to be seen.

But it's pretty clear, at least I think, that the petitioning phase will be successful in meeting the signature threshold needed to force a special election. It will be surprising to see it fail in any way, especially with the numbers that were released today.

We must still take it one step at a time -- and we can't view this step as an "easy" one. But it will be successful, so long as we keep our eyes on the prize.

MPS still would have lost teachers due to Walker budget cuts (despite Act 10)

2011-11-15T11:15:00.007-06:00

Implementing "reforms" would have resulted in a net number of layoffs due to Walker's budget

A recent survey of school districts across the state shows that the budget cuts implemented by Gov. Scott Walker hurt schools more than helped the fiscal situation in Wisconsin (especially given that $1.6 billion in cuts were made against education while $2.3 billion in tax giveaways were granted to corporations across the state).

Most districts responding to the survey said they had to make cuts to both programs and personnel. More than 4 in 10 elementary schools in districts across Wisconsin said they saw higher class sizes as a result of the Walker budget, and 7 in 10 said they had to cut at least one program (some more than that) as well.

But many are critical of the survey -- some, including the Walker administration, place nearly all the blame on districts that approved teacher contracts without using the controversial measures implemented through the budget repair bill (which ended collective bargaining rights for state workers, including teachers). While many layoffs did come from those districts, losses in teachers and larger class sizes are still the fault of Walker's budget bill, not their choices to keep collective bargaining intact.

Let's take a look at Milwaukee Public Schools as an example. There were initially 334 teachers laid off in that district (70 were later recalled). That district was one that didn't adopt Walker's budget repair bill, meaning they still utilized collective bargaining agreements to create their contracts.

But that doesn't mean that teachers didn't budge on issues, didn't give up anything in their contracts -- on the contrary, teachers acquiesced to $94 million in concessions over the next two years, including agreeing to a pay freeze and additional contributions to their health plans (which was part of the budget repair bill anyway).

What MPS teachers chose not to do was contribute more to their pension plans. Had they done so, the district could have saved 200 teachers' jobs within the district.

That gives a hefty argument to the pro-Walker camp, who insist that adherence to the budget repair bill would have fixed things. However, anyone with basic math skills surely noticed one important thing: even if the teachers had implemented those changes, and 200 jobs were in fact "saved," there would still be between 64 to 134 teachers laid off within MPS.

So had teachers done everything Walker had demanded of them, the actual budget cuts to MPS would STILL have led to less teachers in the hallways, and thus larger class sizes overall.

Of course, one would assume cuts to the tune of $54 million this year alone (what MPS is dealing with) would result in a loss of staff in some way or another. But it appears that this type of logic goes past what the Walker administration can handle. That the rest of the state, too, is seeing losses in teacher numbers isn't so surprising either.

Let the recall begin

2011-11-15T00:01:00.001-06:00

Recall of Walker imminent, justified for a plethora of reasons

Today marks the start of a historic occasion -- today begins, in earnest, the recall of Gov. Scott Walker.

While recalls shouldn't be done on whims, shouldn't be taken lightly, or utilized for every member of elected office whom a minority simply disagrees with, in this instance removal is entirely warranted. Gov. Walker has, in essence, flipped this state upside down. He acted as a typical candidate for office last year...but once sworn in, he behaved as atypical as one could imagine him being.

Progressives weren't naive; they didn't expect Walker to take office and act in THEIR interests. Walker had the dual backing of social conservatives across the state as well as the financial support of the corporate elite (both within Wisconsin and beyond its borders). So it wasn't a surprise when tax cuts and tort reform took hold of his agenda.

What was surprising -- to the left, the center, and even some on the right -- was the removal of bargaining rights for state employees, disregarding over fifty years of precedence that every governor, Democratic and Republican, had previously respected.

From that point on, it was clear that this governor was against Wisconsin values. His removal of bargaining rights was just the start -- what followed was a complete reversal of what citizens of this state have come to revere about what makes it great in the first place.

Just some of the complaints against the governor:

He has proven himself a lackey to his corporate friends, and a cronyist in the worst way, appointing political allies and corporate donors' preferences to positions of power over more qualified candidates in various political administrative offices;
He has ignored our state's high value of a good education, making cuts to schools and limiting their ability to raise funds themselves by $1.6 billion, a move that has increased class sizes in more than 4 in 10 school districts;
He has similarly pushed aside the concerns of the elderly and disabled, capping funds to Family Care, a program that enables individuals to live a life of independence, creating more waiting lists for a program that was previously set to lift such barriers;
He has demanded half a billion dollars in cuts to Medicaid, a move which will remove more than 64,000 individuals from BadgerCare, a full third of which are children;
His promises on jobs have been thus far unfulfilled, revolting in fact, as unemployment has grown while job growth has barely exceeded the rate set by his predecessor from over a year ago;
And while doing all of these things, while serving as a corporatist lackey, stripping funding for education, removing hope for seniors and the cognitively challenged, defunding and removing from state health services tens of thousands of children, failing to create any relevant jobs as promised, and removing the long-respected rights of workers in Wisconsin, what has Gov. Walker done? He has, during a time when he justified all these cuts as "necessary" to balance a supposedly fragile budget, given $2.3 billion in tax breaks to the rich and corporations.

It's one thing to say cuts are needed to fill a $3.6 billion budget deficit -- to give $2.3 billion in revenue away and then justify even MORE cuts as "necessary" is an entirely different can of worms, a disgusting example of the kind of "leadership" that Gov. Walker thinks is the right direction for Wisconsin to take (though 57 percent of the state disagree, believe he's leading us in the wrong direction).

In less than one year's time, Gov. Walker has effectively dismantled the values that make Wisconsin what it is. Wisconsinites value a strong education; we tend to take care of our family members; we respect our public workers, understand their worth is necessary and too often thankless; and when sacrifice is needed, we understand the difference between a shared commitment versus demanding that the brunt of it be made on the backs of the working class.

A recall of Gov. Walker isn't simply justified, it's imminent. To question "why" we're recalling this governor is the same as saying you've been blind to the offenses he's committed for the past year. The recall of Walker should be, and will be, a successful endeavor.

Veterans Day 2011

2011-11-11T17:35:00.003-06:00

Honor those who have served and currently serve our nation

Today is Veterans Day, a day dedicated to the recognition of our service men and women whose enormous sacrifice for our country cannot be thanked enough. We honor these individuals for their courage and selflessness that is beyond extraordinary, beyond what is asked of any other citizen of our nation.

We may not always agree on the conflicts we involve ourselves in, for various political or moral reasons. And that is OK -- our leaders deserve a healthy dose of scrutiny when they propose to defend America from external threats (for at times these acts of defense deserve the utmost scrutiny one can give).

Yet, no one should overlook the tremendous and oftentimes thankless service our men and women in uniform have performed for us. It is through their work that our freedom remains defended, that our country stays safe.

On this Veterans Day, show respect for those who have defended our nation. You may not agree with their mission, but the dedication to their duties is an ideal that must be respected, for something more than just a "day" can suffice.

Survey shows Walker's budget did more harm than good to schools

2011-11-10T12:33:00.009-06:00

School districts wind up slashing programs, grow class sizes, to make up for losses

When Gov. Scott Walker signed into law his budget bill that cut education by nearly a billion dollars, many progressive minds in the state predicted that the resulting action would be a greater number of layoffs, larger class sizes, and cuts to programs within many school districts.

Turns out, they were right (PDF).

According to a survey conducted by Wisconsin Association of School District Administrators (WASDA) -- in which 82 percent of the districts asked to participate actually responded -- most districts in the state have seen a net loss in the number of teachers, administrators, and other staff as a result of the Walker budget passed in June. Nearly 90 percent of students in the survey are affected by this drop, with almost 70 percent of students affected by teacher losses alone.

As a result, class sizes have reportedly increased in more than 4 in 10 of elementary schools responding to the survey.

That's not the worst of it: two-thirds of districts surveyed said they were actually expecting to make the same budget cuts (or worse) next year. Indeed, half of the districts reported utilizing "one-time federal funds to offset even deeper cuts," an option they won't have in 2012 when they have to form new budgets. Less than 13 percent of school districts surveyed thought they would be making fewer cuts next year.

Without missing a beat, however, Gov. Scott Walker's office touted the reforms as "working."

"Even according to the WASDA's own data, 60 percent of districts have class sizes that are staying the same or getting smaller," Walker's spokesman Cullen Werwie said.

Such a lackadaisical approach to the problems our schools face is troubling for this governor to employ. Were it not for the aide of federal funds, even more schools would have faced budget crunches, resulting in higher class sizes in more districts than we're seeing today.

The large portion of schools growing their class sizes (it's actually 44 percent of districts in the survey) is nothing to sneeze at -- that's more than two out of every five districts facing higher class sizes.

Schools are also being forced to cut programs intended to help their students, especially those who need it most. Nearly 3 in 10 districts made cuts to foreign languages, more than 5 in 10 to career and technical programs, and nearly 5 in 10 districts made cuts to the arts, music, and physical education. Additional extracurriculars faced cuts in 1 in 10 districts, and a quarter of the state's districts saw increases in fees. 3 in 10 districts are making cuts to special education.

In all, nearly 7 in 10 districts are cutting at least one program; 45 percent of districts are cutting two or more; and in 28 percent of the districts, 3 or more programs will be canceled.

Less teachers for our kids. Higher class sizes in our schools. And less opportunities for our students to excel. Yup, Scott Walker's plans for our schools are "working" alright...working against the chances of your kid getting a quality education.

Ohio supports workers' rights -- will Wisconsin next spring?

2011-11-09T14:52:00.007-06:00

Recall election presents different challenges than citizens' veto in Ohio

Last night, in an unprecedented vote for workers' rights, citizens in Ohio chose to restore collective bargaining for state employees.

Similar in nature to the law passed in Wisconsin earlier this year, Ohio's law went even further, not only removing the rights of state workers (like teachers, social workers, prison guards, etc.) but also the rights of emergency response employees (such as police officers, firefighters and EMT, and so on).

But Ohioans rejected the measuring by overwhelming margins. Collective bargaining remains a protected right in the Buckeye State, meaning its governor cannot impose undue concessions without offering an agreeable package to his workers. Negotiation, not dictation, remains the preference of Ohio voters.

In Wisconsin, we're not as fortunate -- we lack the ability to force a citizens' veto on legislation we deem improper. Instead, we are able to recall specific officials, based on their conduct or their policies, with their removal contingent upon the majority's preference of an entirely new candidate within a special election.

That can make things more difficult. People can be upset with specific pieces of legislation easier than they can be with a singular politician. A recall isn't a yes-or-no vote on a singular issue, but rather a change in vision (if we support the challenger) versus an acceptance of the status quo (if we support the incumbent).

In Gov. Scott Walker, however, there's no need to worry -- he provides many reasons for a recall, beyond even what ignited the call for his removal. We've witnessed such a radical departure from our state's values from our governor that a recall isn't only justified -- it may well be necessary at this point, required to preserve a familiar ideal of what our state has represented for many generations.

It's not just the collective bargaining at this point -- it's a big part of it, but the issue has been overshadowed by a combination of factors presented by this governor, months of overreach that the people of this state are starting to recognize will hurt Wisconsin. Here's just a few to consider:

He has proven himself either inept or corrupt in surrounding himself with political allies, relying on his cronies or donors to his campaign for advice on whom to appoint for government positions. Walker has also ignored more qualified applicants (with plenty of experience, education, and other positive marks) in favor of his friends.

He has requested enormous sacrifices from working Wisconsinites, cutting by billions of dollars programs meant to assist those of modest means, including BadgerCare, Family Care, and the Earned Income Tax Credit, among others. The governor also forced education in the state to face a billion-dollar shortfall. Meanwhile, during this "necessary" budget crunch, the sacrifice has been anything but shared: Walker has cut taxes for corporations by hundreds of millions of dollars.

His major promise -- job creation -- has floundered, despite the tax breaks to the rich and tort reform to the corporate elite that he claimed could spur a quarter of a million jobs by the end of his first term. The number of citizens employed in Wisconsin is nearly unchanged since his first month in office.

These factors (and several others), taken on their own, might not be enough to warrant a recall; but taken together, in conjunction with the removal of rights for state workers, and Walker provides more justification than is necessary for his removal from office, with room to spare.

The case against Walker is clear -- and if the results in Ohio are any indication of how Wisconsin will vote, the governor should start planning for life after the governor's mansion, ahead of schedule.

It really IS a Christmas tree

2011-11-08T11:11:00.004-06:00

Focus of religious representation on public grounds should emphasize equality of faiths

The Holiday tree, as it's been called since 1985, has been a dazzling display within the Capitol rotunda that I've always looked forward to seeing for as long as I can remember. Of course, growing up in Madison, the Capitol itself fascinated me on its own. But seeing that tree, monumental itself when seen from the eyes of a child, always brought home the idea that Christmas was right around the corner.

Yes, I said Christmas. As a child (and I assume this is the case for children today), I never referred to the evergreen as a "holiday" tree. I called it what it clearly was: a Christmas tree. I still do, as an adult.

So when Gov. Scott Walker calls it a Christmas tree, it's ironically one of the few things I can agree with him on. I don't know if Walker is intending on promoting Christianity or not through his declaration -- if he is, then he's wrong for doing so -- but what I do know is that it's a Christmas tree, no matter what its official name may be.

As a liberal, this should irk me -- governments have no business promoting one faith over another. Were it the only display allowed in the Capitol, I'd be upset, even as a Christian, that other faiths weren't given the same opportunities to display their symbols of belief.

As it is, however, other forms of worship ARE granted areas within the rotunda to display their beliefs, including the Freedom From Religion Foundation's display that has, in the past, called religion "superstitious" and a device that "enslaves minds."

And that's fine -- all beliefs should be allowed to place their symbols on public grounds...if it's done in a way that's equal for all.

That's where the real concern lies. There are many questions we should ask ourselves on the subject. Are other faiths given the same treatment as Christians when it comes to their most sacred of holidays? Are Jewish groups allowed a sizable display in the Capitol during Yom Kippur? Are Muslims allowed to celebrate Ramadan in the rotunda for the entire month? Are atheists, too, granted a time comparable to the display of the Christmas tree to put up any thoughts they have on religion?

We shouldn't focus on what the tree is or isn't -- even under the moniker of "holiday," the tree is still a symbol of Christmas. We should instead focus on whether other religious (or non-religious) organizations are getting equal treatment from the state, if not during this time of year then during other times relevant to their belief structures.

If they're not, a clear religious preference has been established, a significant violation of the First Amendment on the part of our government. When that occurs, yes, I'll fight tooth and nail against displays of religion that exclude all others. But for now, I'm going to enjoy visiting the Christmas tree at the Capitol for another year -- and observe the other displays of religion presented to the public as well.

Concealed carry training no longer uniform under new rules

2011-11-07T12:52:00.005-06:00

Legislative committee removes four-hour training requirement for concealed carry permit holders

Today a Republican-controlled legislative committee removed the rule established by Wisconsin Attorney General JB Van Hollen to require gun owners seeking a concealed carry permit to obtain at least four hours of training.

The new standard will be anything but uniform: any training, for any amount of time (even a half hour or less, conceivably), will be acceptable to obtain a permit to carry a concealed weapon.

The move worries even Van Hollen, a Republican, who established the rules to keep things consistent and safe:

The effect likely will be that the state Department of Justice will accept any training certification submitted with an application for a concealed weapons permit, Van Hollen told the committee just before it voted on the matter. Thus, some people could wind up getting permits after a bogus instructor passes out permits after teaching a course that lasts just a few minutes, Van Hollen said.

Emphasis added.

Anyone who reads my posts on this site knows that I'm not a huge fan of concealed carry. Still, if it's going to be the law, I was at least amiable about the fact that a uniform amount of time spent training would be enforced, to require gun owners to have the training necessary to properly carry a gun on their person.

The move by this Republican-controlled committee puts us in an uncomfortable position -- instead of feeling some sense of safety knowing that an individual has had the proper instruction in owning a concealed weapon, many residents of this state will have to wonder privately to themselves whether a person in their proximity has had hours versus minutes of training.

I don't doubt that most gun owners are already going to already know the basics. But I do concern myself with people who don't understand how to properly handle a weapon, who don't take the responsibility seriously.

Gun ownership isn't something we should take lightly; and although a right to own or bear a weapon is one that is protected by our Constitution, it should also be a right that bears restrictions along with it, if necessary, to protect those that abstain from carrying out that right. We have restrictions to other rights -- speech, for example, isn't an absolute right (especially in the Capitol building itself, it would seem). So why is gun ownership considered a sacred cow to some people?

The removal of the four-hour requirement for training is wrong -- setting a specific time amount for training, uniform for gun owners across the state, was certainly within the scope of the law passed, and within the rights of the State Attorney General's office to impose.

Another interesting graph on unemployment in WI

2011-11-06T15:35:00.005-06:00

Unemployment rate lowered under Doyle, grew under Walker

More analysis of employment numbers between current Gov. Scott Walker and his predecessor, Gov. Jim Doyle. This time, let's look at the unemployment rate:

The rate of unemployment Wisconsin had seen included 16 straight months of dipping, starting at a 9.2 rate in January of 2010 and getting to its lowest point at 7.3 percent in April of 2011. From May to August, however, there was four months of unemployment increase. In September, the rate once again lowered to 7.8, an improvement of 0.1 percent.

Walker and his supporters have previously touted the accomplishments they've made in job growth for the state. But it's clear to anyone looking at this graph that the accomplishments aren't that stellar after all.

First off, the first dip in unemployment that Walker has taken credit for at the beginning of the year took place at the end of the sixteen-month streak that included twelve months of unemployment decrease under his predecessor. It's possible that Walker was simply riding Doyle's coattails during that time.

Second, when you total the number of months that unemployment has dipped in Wisconsin while under Walker's watch, you can count those four straight months, plus the month of September, for a total of five. However, during three of those first four months, unemployment actually plateaued, remaining at the same rate. The rate only dipped once during that time, in January (when Walker began his term), after which it stayed the same until April where it modestly dipped again, then increased for four straight months after that.

At best, Walker saw five months during his term where unemployment either dipped or remained the same. At worst, there were three months of nonconsecutive improvement, two months of nothing happening, and four straight months of an increase in unemployment numbers.

This is hardly anything for Walker to be proud of, much less base rationale on for a recall election against him.

See also:

Walker's net employment growth rate lower than Doyle's in 2010

2011-11-05T08:42:00.009-05:00

Net employment growth rate faster under previous governor's last year in office than under Walker's "reforms" year

Some more fun with numbers...

Last month I took a look at the employment numbers that Wisconsin had posted for the month of September. Comparing the number of employed Wisconsinites from that month to the beginning of the year, it was clear that not much change had taken place, that Gov. Scott Walker's "reforms" weren't putting Wisconsin back to work.

There's a stark difference, however, between the number of employed versus the number of jobs created. People can work two or three different part time jobs; and while that's only one person "employed," it still technically counts as three jobs created.

So let's look at these numbers. From this year alone (January to September), the number of jobs in the state has increased by 11,800 (click here to read why Walker's job boasting claims are misleading). Judging by those numbers, you might be inclined to believe that, even if not impressive, at least Walker's "reforms" are moving us in the right direction.

But is Walker really succeeding, or is he benefiting from dumb luck? Let's compare the numbers from a year ago, while Gov. Jim Doyle, a Democrat, was still in office. The comparison is important because Doyle and Walker employed very different methods during their terms in office. For example, Doyle didn't give hundreds of millions of dollars in tax cuts to corporations, didn't impose strict tort reform, and perhaps most important didn't remove the rights of state workers.

In January of 2010, Wisconsin had 2.7236 million jobs. By September of 2010, that number had increased to 2.7346 million -- a difference of 11,000 jobs.

Walker still has the slight edge over Doyle -- but the difference is marginal (11,800 versus 11,000). That's hardly an accomplishment worth celebrating. Remember, to get that higher rate (a rate that could have arguably remained in place with the same Democratic policies that Doyle used), we had to give hundreds of millions of dollars in tax breaks to corporations, in turn gutting billions in public services (such as health care, education, and care for the disabled and elderly), AND stripping workers of their rights.

To put it in a more visual way, look at this graph. Admittedly, the data only includes January and September of both 2010 and 2011, but that's meant to highlight the net result of jobs created during that time.

The green line is Doyle's net jobs growth during those months, and the purple line is Walker's. The lines, nearly perpendicular, show that there wasn't any rate change taking place -- implying that Walker's reforms did nothing to increase the rate at which jobs grew.

The rate of change during Walker's January-to-September time period in terms of job growth was 0.43 percent. Compare that to Doyle's rate (0.40 percent), and it's clear that the change isn't anything too spectacular.

Again, this is the change in job numbers: as far as employment is concerned, however, the rate of change is actually WORSE for Walker.

Again, the green line represents Doyle's last year in office, and the purple line Walker's first year in office, both through September. The rate of change for employment growth during Jim Doyle's January-to-September last year in office was .343 percent, resulting in a net growth of nearly ten thousand more employed Wisconsinites during that time.

Walker's net rate of change? Hardly noticeable. From January to September of this year, the total net growth in the number of Wisconsinites who are employed in the state is 18. Not 18 percent -- 18 TOTAL. The rate of change? .000638 percent, a rate that is 538 times lower than Doyle's net rate during the same time period in 2010.

Walker's reforms have benefited the wealthy corporations that have backed him from day one. The rest of Wisconsin, however, has been left behind. Not only have services been cut, education been gutted, and rights been stripped, but the effect on job growth has been minimal, at best. And his employment growth rates provide proof that his vision for Wisconsin is taking our state down the wrong path.

(All jobs data found at bls.gov)

Poll shows disdain for Walker, mixed feelings on recall

2011-11-02T16:16:00.006-05:00

State split on grounds for removal, but a clear majority disapproves of governor's job performance

A poll released this week demonstrates just how dissatisfied Wisconsinites are with the performance of Gov. Scott Walker, not even one year into his first term in office.

According to the results of the Wisconsin Policy Research Institute's poll, 56 percent of the state disapproves of what Walker has done in his first 10 months as governor. Only 42 percent approve of his job performance.

As far as a recall goes, Wisconsin is evenly split, within a statistical tie over the question of whether Walker deserves to be removed from office or not. 49 percent believe a recall is undeserved while 47 percent feel it should move forward. Four percent are undecided.

Though it appears a plurality doesn't want a recall to happen, viewed from a different angle a majority is either for a chance to remove Walker or is riding the fence on the issue (totaling 51 percent).

Again, the numbers are within a statistical tie -- but should a recall occur, the question of if he deserves to be removed will likely be overshadowed by the dismal job approval numbers he currently has. That is, when the actual election happens voters aren't going to be thinking about the recall itself, but rather the pros and cons of keeping Walker in power.

The polling data should worry Walker, who faces a recall threat when signatures on a recall petition equals 25 percent of the number who took part in the previous gubernatorial election.

Getting to that number (of more than half a million signatures) won't be a simple task. But it's clear through these poll numbers (as well as the general disdain of ordinary Wisconsinites when you merely mention his name) that Wisconsin is fed up with Walker, ready to give him "the boot" if the opportunity to do so presents itself, an event that is likely to occur given the numbers we're seeing today.

Month in Review -- October 2011

2011-11-01T19:57:00.005-05:00

United Wisconsin Madison office opens

2011-11-01T19:19:00.005-05:00

Some images and thoughts from the evening

I stopped by the United Wisconsin office opening this evening, not long enough to hear anyone speak but long enough to witness the enthusiasm of those involved.

Here are a few images from the early part of the night:

These images were taken at around 5 o'clock, shortly after the office opened. Though the images I took make the office seem rather empty, many more people came, and it was very difficult an hour later to even enter the building. I had to leave early, but it looked like the event was going to be one to remember, a great prelude to the signature process set to start in two weeks.

AP points out the obvious: GOP candidates ignorant on jobs situation

2011-10-31T12:42:00.007-05:00

De-regulation, tax cuts for corporations, won't fix the economy or unemployment rate

The belief that cutting taxes for the rich and de-regulating businesses will help our economic outlook is in fact a fallacy. Regulations that make sense, protect the consumer, and still allow the business to function are well worth having, if they serve a purpose. Removing regulations for the sake of "job creation" makes about as much sense as taking your vitamins and expecting dramatic weight loss. In both cases, you're not going to see positive results by doing those actions alone.

A recent Associated Press article lays this out in greater detail. Acknowledging the proposals by Republican candidates for president, the AP pointed out that many of their statements simply don't hold any weight to them whatsoever:

Consider proposed cuts in taxes and regulation, which nearly every GOP candidate is pushing in the name of creating jobs. The initiatives seem to ignore surveys in which employers cite far bigger impediments to increased hiring, chiefly slack consumer demand.

...

As for the idea that cutting regulations will lead to significant job growth, [Republican economist Bruce] Bartlett said in an interview, "It's just nonsense. It's just made up."

Government and industry studies support his view.

The Bureau of Labor Statistics, which tracks companies' reasons for large layoffs, found that 1,119 layoffs were attributed to government regulations in the first half of this year, while 144,746 were attributed to poor "business demand."

So layoffs were 129 times more likely to be due to poor business demand rather than regulation. In fact, layoffs due to "excessive government regulation" account for only 0.2 percent of layoffs altogether.

But what about tax cuts? Don't they create conditions that make it easier for businesses to grow jobs? Surely we should do whatever we can to get more money into the hands of "job makers!"

It might help some -- if corporations weren't already swimming in money:

The Republican candidates...are calling for tax cuts that would primarily benefit high-income people, who are seen as the likeliest job creators.

"I don't care about that," Texas Gov. Rick Perry told The New York Times and CNBC, referring to tax breaks for the rich. "What I care about is them having the dollars to invest in their companies."

Many existing businesses, however, have plenty of unspent cash. The 500 companies that comprise the S&P index have about $800 billion in cash and cash equivalents, the most ever, according to the research firm Birinyi Associates.

Emphasis added.

Getting money in the hands of "job creators" is important under ordinary circumstances. A business can't hire an employee without cash to pay for their work. But if these companies, who have more cash on hand than ever before, still refuse to make any more hires under those conditions, the problem clearly isn't a lack in capital.

Not even small business owners are citing regulation or lack of capital as a problem:

Small businesses rate "poor sales" as their biggest problem, with government regulations ranking second, according to a survey by the National Federation of Independent Businesses. Of the small businesses saying this is not a good time to expand, half cited the poor economy as the chief reason. Thirteen percent named the "political climate."

Emphasis added.

We need a more proactive approach to fixing the jobs problem in our country. Tax cuts and de-regulation alone won't solve anything. Businesses have to WANT to hire people, have to have a NEED to do so. Getting more money to corporations for the same amount of productivity they have expended previously creates no incentive for hiring more people. Why make that investment if you're bound to make more money for the same amount of workers you already had?

Reject the Republican talking points. They're not accurate, and won't do a lick of good for job creation in this country.

Premature changes to recall districts likely to fail

2011-10-31T10:32:00.007-05:00

Moderate Republican Schultz to vote against Lazich bill

A move to change the state legislative districts two years early, affecting who could sign recall petitions for several state senators, is not only political posturing of our electoral process but also a move that destroys the democratic rights of thousands of Wisconsinites.

Fortunately, it will not pass. Sen. Dale Schultz, a moderate Republican, has signaled he won't vote in favor of the bill. If every Democrat votes against the bill as well (an expected occurrence, seeing as it's a blatant partisan jab against their party), it will fail in the Senate.

The state senators in office that would have been affected by this change were meant to represent their constituents until 2012. But by preventing their people the right to sign the petitions, the bill would have essentially rendered them "representative-less." It would have disregarded their rights as voters to take part in the recall process (if they choose to do so) by saying that the person they elected is no longer their legislator, long before their official term as such had expired.

The bill proposed by Sen. Mary Lazich is an action that could conceivably give even more justification to the very recall elections she's attempting to obstruct. It is, after all, Lazich herself who stood to benefit most of all from this bill's intent, alongside her conservative colleagues, all of which would have seen their constituencies change in drastic ways due to the new (and controversial) legislative maps their party alone had crafted.

If this bill had passed the legislature, it would have reignited the outrage that recall petitioners currently hold against Republicans in the legislature. But just because it will fail to pass doesn't mean that it still shouldn't enrage state voters. Conservative forces in our state are attempting to change the rules in the middle of the game, attempting to hold onto power by any means necessary (even if that means destroying their democratic rights). This is but one example of their interfering with the democratic process -- more have come about, with more examples likely materialize as well.

Republicans like Lazich ought to be ashamed of themselves. Yet we should also take this opportunity to thank Republican Dale Schultz for his brave stand against partisan tactics that obstruct Wisconsin voters' rights. His principled defense of democracy should be celebrated by Democrats and Republicans alike.

Assessing reforms.wi.gov -- Part 3: The abuse of state resources

2011-10-26T14:32:00.009-05:00

"Reforms and Results" site hardly pretends to be a non-partisan, governmental resource

Having looked at some of the content found within it (part 1, part 2), it behooves us to analyze the purpose behind the "Reforms and Results" website itself. Located at reforms.wi.gov, it's clear that the site is a misuse of state resources for the purposes of political "campaigning." Tax dollars should never be spent to promote an individual for a political purpose -- but that's exactly what's being done on this state-run site.

The context of "Reforms and Results" frames the "accomplishments" that the state has seen (a questionable claim itself) as wholly-owned by Gov. Scott Walker, as goals reached by an individual and not by Wisconsin.

When Scott Walker was sworn in as the 45th Governor of Wisconsin on January 3rd, he told the crowd, "What is failing us is not our people or our places. What is failing us is the expanse of government. But we can do something about it right here, right now, today."

And he did.

How dramatic.

The spin on the site is deplorable as well, but typical for what a candidate for political office might use. For example, Walker -- er, uh, the state of Wisconsin -- touts the first six months of job growth as an accomplishment worth taking note of:

"During the first six months of 2011, the private sector in Wisconsin created nearly 40,000 new jobs"

But the site disregards three straight months of job losses following that, doesn't even include resources for attaining either statistic (for fact-checking purposes), and celebrates a job-growth number from earlier this year that has since been halved.

That's improper use for a site that is meant to provide a truthful analysis of the policies passed this year.

It's clear the site is nothing more than a promotional device for Gov. Walker ahead of the recall petition drive. It's about par for Walker, though, who has done similar things while County Executive in Milwaukee -- including taking a state-wide joy-ride on a Harley Davidson using taxpayer dollars in order to promote himself during a gubernatorial election year...or rather, as he put it, to promote "Milwaukee County."

But if you're still not convinced, consider what viewing the website would entail in any other media format.

On a television, it'd be a campaign ad;

On the roadside, a campaign billboard;

Read over the airwaves, a radio campaign;

In the mailbox, a campaign mailer.

No matter which way you put it, it can only be seen as a promotion of Walker, serving political gain, not educating the public on the issues involved.

The site even includes partisan jabs at the former governor, touting Walker's current accomplishments over what was done in the past. That's fine to point out -- on Walker's own dime. But playing a game of "I'm-better-than-you-are" is really something that shouldn't be a part of a state government's website.

Don't misinterpret what I'm getting at: the governor and the state are both free to promote themselves (together or separately) for the "accomplishments" they've performed. If it were otherwise, we might one day enter a situation of not knowing things that people in government do, good or bad. But self-promotion, uniquely timed after your opponents' recall intentions are announced, that omit remaining challenges your policies face, and exaggerate the "greatness" of your leadership, serves only one purpose: a political one.

Considered in every context offered, the "Reforms and Results" website, administered through use of Wisconsin taxpayer dollars, is political posturing, nothing more. It can hardly even be called a proper place to become informed about the issues involved as it is one-sided and blatantly subjective material in favor of Gov. Walker, without even a hint of consideration into what wrongs he's done.

It should be removed from the web, and an apology should be issued to the taxpayers of the state.

Read more:
Part 1: Jobs
Part 2: WI School districts and Act 10

Assessing reforms.wi.gov -- Part 2: WI School districts and Act 10

2011-10-25T11:54:00.001-05:00

Taxpayer-funded (campaign) site touts Walker's "accomplishments" for schools across the state, ignore complications

More analysis from the recent "Reforms and Results" site set up by ~~Gov. Walker's campaign committee~~ the State of Wisconsin.

The Kaukauna School District has been exemplified on the reforms.wi.gov website as being "saved" as a result of Act 10 -- the law that stripped state workers of collective bargaining rights, including teachers, in Wisconsin. What happened in the northeastern Wisconsin town of Kaukauna was seen as a miracle, vindicating the actions of Gov. Scott Walker for having held a firm line against unions that caused such a "problem" for school districts.

From the site:

Shortly after Act 10 took effect, Kaukauna emerged as an early example of how concessions can change the financial landscape of a school district, and now the board wants to be a leader in taking actions to reward its best teachers.

The school board took advantage of the Governor’s reforms and turned a $400,000 deficit into a $2 million surplus.

There are a few things wrong with that analysis, however (aside from the surplus only being $1.5 million). Kaukauna was facing a huge budget hole -- nearly $400,000 for this fiscal year. Because of Act 10, it's said, the district was able to make substantial savings in both curbing the amount of pay given to the teachers and faculty (forcing them to contribute more towards their health care plans) as well as other nuances that go along with budgeting (limiting sick day allocations, for example).

The problem is, that $400,000 shortfall wasn't the result of unions -- it was a projection based upon proposed cuts in Walker's own budget proposal, a prediction from Kaukauna on what it was about to lose as a result of the governor's steep cuts to education across the state.

From Badger Democracy:

The forecast Kaukauna 2011-2012 budget (PDF) (page 5) cites a revenue loss of nearly $2 million from state shared revenue - a result of Governor Walker’s budget impact on public school revenue cuts. Conveniently, this impact has been ignored as a basis of the deficit “crisis” facing the District. The District also faced an $840,000 loss in Open Enrollment (page 10) from students enrolling outside of the district and subsequent shared revenue adjustments. The summary shows a nearly $3 million deficit in revenue to expenditures before any adjustments are made (page 12).

Emphasis added.

What's more, there was an alternative solution presented to the school district, one that the teachers had submitted that was virtually ignored but would have given the district a $1.4 million surplus -- nearly the same surplus now being touted by the Governor and the Kaukauna School District.

From mykeystrokes.com:

But here’s the thing: The collective bargaining ban, in and of itself, was not responsible for achieving these savings and this surplus. As the Appleton Post Crescent reports, the teachers union had already offered up financial concessions that would have produced almost identical savings and an almost identical surplus.

After assessing the true effects of the original deficit in Kaukauna, and the ignored offer by teachers there, the spinning that the Walker administration has done on reforms.wi.gov, a tax-dollar backed website, is appalling.

But it's not the end of it: Walker ignores key aspects of Act 10 that have acted negatively for state workers. Focusing on teachers again, let's shift from Kaukauna and move to New Berlin. Earlier this year, after Act 10 became law, a revision to the teachers' handbook was bitterly debated, with severe penalties and new provisions added that were downright nasty.

Some of the changes include a new dress code (no skirts above the knees) and the removal of kitchen appliances (no microwaves, coffeemakers, or refrigerators). Others were more drastic than that, such as added hours for teachers -- 95 annually for secondary and 205 annually for elementary, the latter the equivalent of more than a months' work, all without any added compensation whatsoever. (Imagine being told that you had to work into your schedule an entire months' worth of hours within a years' time. Oh, and you won't be seeing a penny more in your paycheck [in fact, we're taking money from you, too].) Another provision "eliminates retirement insurance for teachers with less than 20 years in the New Berlin school system and who retire after 2021."

There's no doubt that money will be saved as a result of Act 10 -- we shouldn't try to say it won't be. But how those savings will accumulate will likely depend upon the benevolence of the local governments involved. As was the case in New Berlin, there wasn't much benevolence to speak of -- teachers were given an incredibly raw deal, in some cases being asked to work an additional months' time without any just compensation.

Stating that surpluses are created after severe deficits were made without explaining those deficits is also a grave mistake to overlook -- and a spin beyond epic proportions. It's improper to say that savings couldn't have been found had Act 10 never been implemented, as would have been the case had Kaukauna taken the teachers' proposal before passing their new teachers' handbook.

There will be savings found within the state's school districts -- savings that very well could have been found without having stripped the rights of thousands of workers. The ~~governor's campaign page~~ State of Wisconsin's Reforms and Results page is wrong to tout such savings without pointing out the effects of those changes on teachers' workplace conditions.

Assessing reforms.wi.gov -- Part 1: Jobs

2011-10-24T11:11:00.010-05:00

Taxpayer-funded website touting Walker's accomplishments only tells part of the story on jobs

The "State of Wisconsin" recently released a new website that touts the accomplishments this year under Gov. Scott Walker. The site, at reforms.wi.gov, looks a lot like a campaign website, using phrases like "How Governor Scott Walker's reforms are working for Wisconsin," implying that this site is about Walker more than Wisconsin.

That would be a clear violation of the law, as government resources cannot be used to promote a candidate for office. Walker isn't unfamiliar with such tactics, and may currently be under investigation for similar misconduct in the offices of Milwaukee County.

With Walker's recall set to begin November 15, it's almost as if Walker is trying to stop the movement dead in its tracks with talking points, supplied by the state of Wisconsin's taxpayers' dollars.

Looking past that just for right now, we should consider the points that Walker -- I mean, the state of Wisconsin -- makes on the site.

"During the first six months of 2011, the private sector in Wisconsin created nearly 40,000 new jobs."

That's an accurate assessment, and every part of that claim is factual. But it's a spin -- it disregards the remaining three months following Walker's -- I mean, "Wisconsin's" -- accomplishment.

In December of 2010, there were 2.7363 million jobs in the state. By June of 2011, there were 2.7751 million, an increase of about 38,800 jobs. But what happened after that?

A lot happened. By September, the number of jobs Wisconsin had decreased to 2755.8 million...a drop of 19,300 jobs, halving Walker's claims -- again, my apologies, "Wisconsin's Reforms Website's" claims -- of creating jobs for the year to 19,500 total.

All numbers are in thousands

But that assessment only tells half the story. The total number of jobs doesn't tell how many people HAVE jobs -- it doesn't discern from people who have two jobs or people who have multiple part-time jobs. When you judge Walker by the total number of Wisconsinites who are employed, things are flipped completely.

All numbers are in thousands

Except for a blip between February and May of 2011, when 20,000 additional Wisconsinites were employed, from January of this year to September, nothing has changed at all.

In January of 2011 we saw 2,819,301 people employed. In September, that number "grew" to 2,819,319, an increase of 18 more individuals employed.

So Walker's touting of his jobs is rather dull. We've seen a net increase of nearly 20,000 jobs in the state, and a net increase of 18 more individuals employed. Looking at the first six months only tells half of the story of Walker's "accomplishments," which again are being touted in a very campaign-like manner on the taxpayers' dime.

September job numbers out -- WI still not growing

2011-10-22T10:34:00.006-05:00

Since January, number of employed Wisconsinites has grown...by 18 people

During the campaign for governor, Scott Walker made the ambitious claim that he could create 250,000 jobs within his first term. Many people scoffed at the idea, but Walker credited it with being a major reason why he was elected governor.

In June, six months after he took office, the Walker administration announced that its projections would be lowered by about 70,000 jobs, and in September, Walker spoke to WISN's Mike Gousha about the promise he had made on the campaign trail.

Walker: My goal is to still get there -- my goal is to actually exceed that amount [250,000 jobs]. We’re still going to keep pushing.

Gousha: Is it going to be tough to reach that?

Walker: Oh, I think without a doubt.

In other words, Walker backed off slightly of his jobs pledge, framing it as more of a "goal" than a promise.

This week, the Department of Revenue changed it's projections again -- down to 136,000 jobs being added by the end of Walker's term.

It seems that every few months the projections just keep getting lower and lower.

In January, Walker pushed for a special session on jobs and got exactly what he wanted: tort reform and tax cuts for corporations. He got even more corporate tax cuts in the budget he proposed.

Now we're in a different special session on jobs. Aside from a slew of socially conservative bills that have nothing to do with job growth, Walker is yet again poised to get exactly what he wants -- more tort reform legislation and bills catering to special interests among them.

What have we seen as a result of similar legislation from January? Hardly any impact on jobs. In fact, with job numbers released this past week, it's clear that Walker's "jobs" initiatives aren't doing a thing to create more work for Wisconsinites.

When Walker took office, there were 2,819,301 people who had a job in Wisconsin. In September, that number went up to 2,819,319 -- an increase of 18 people employed statewide in nine months. The unemployment rate was at 7.8 percent, an improvement from August (7.9 percent) but still higher than January (7.4 percent).

The higher unemployment rate for Wisconsin bucks the trend that Walker had inherited -- in Gov. Jim Doyle's last year of office, Wisconsin saw its unemployment rate decrease every month, beginning at 9.2 percent in January of 2010 and ending at 7.5 percent in December of that year. That trend continued until April of 2011, after which Wisconsin saw increases in its unemployment rate while under Walker's control.

Wisconsin's rate has increased faster than the national rate, which has remained relatively stagnant since the start of the year, when it was 9.0 percent in January, to it's current position of 9.1 percent.

What can we draw from this? Walker's jobs session earlier this year didn't do anything to help the state. His job session that is currently taking place, with many of the same initiatives found within it, will likely have the same effect.

With Walker running things, Wisconsin won't see any improvement in its job numbers. It's just one of the many reasons why a recall of the governor is justified, among many, many others.

In trying to explain broken promise, Gov. Walker lies to the people

2011-10-17T19:08:00.009-05:00

"Extra credit" doesn't make up for broken campaign promise

In 2010, then-candidate Scott Walker made a lofty campaign pledge, that he would lead by example and pay the full amount of benefits changes he'd require of other state employees to pay, even before they (or he) would legally need to do so. But as the Associated Press pointed out, Walker didn't start making payments until he was obligated to earlier this summer, thus neglecting his pledge completely.

To me personally, this was a non-story: Walker DID screw up his campaign promise, but it wasn't a significant event. It could have been far worse: he could have paid nothing the first few months, requiring changes from other state employees but making no contribution himself.

However, that wasn't the case -- Walker made the same contribution he required of others. Yes, he broke his campaign promise, but it wasn't as if that promise significantly altered or affected Wisconsin in any way. In other words, Walker misled the people, but it's not the most damning thing he's done in the ten months he's been in office.

Yet Walker's response to criticism on the issue is something I take issue with.

From Channel3000:

Walker said he believes he exceeded the promise because he started making pension contributions in August at a higher percentage as required under the law than what he said he would voluntarily make starting in January.

That, in my mind, seems like a flat-out lie, further diminishing the character of "Eagle Scout" Scott Walker.

Here's two analogies I feel best explain the situation a little better. In the first, consider a student that has a project for school that is long-overdue. For months this project is never completed, and the teacher finally insists that the student turn in what he has. After discussing with the student potential grades for this project, the student offers to do extra credit assignments to make up for the lateness of his initial project.

Was the student's assignment late? And should he receive a worse grade for it being late?

In the second analogy, consider a person making payments on a loan. This loan isn't due for six months, but the person fails to make the scheduled payments on the monthly basis. Finally, on the day that the loan is due, the debtor surprises the creditor by paying it off completely, with interest.

Looking from the perspective of a credit rating agency, would this person receive a higher or lower credit score? Does their making the final payment mean that we can ignore the lack of payments from months before?

Again, as I've pointed out, Walker's broken campaign promise isn't as controversial as it seems -- it doesn't put Wisconsin in a worse-off state of being. Still, to insist that his promise wasn't broken because he's made additional "payments" to make up for that lost time is faulty logic: the governor promised within a set time-frame that he'd make those sacrifices, and he didn't.

At best, we can credit him with making up the difference in his paychecks following the law's implementation. But like the student who failed to turn his assignment on time (making up for it with extra credit), or the debtor who pays off a loan (without making payments for months beforehand), making up for a broken promise doesn't eradicate the broken promise itself.

Walker didn't make do on his campaign pledge to lead by example; and he's lying when he tells you that his extra contributions make up for his broken promises.

"Wisconsin can't wait"

2011-10-17T15:38:00.002-05:00

Reasons behind recall of Gov. Walker justified in new web video

A great video was released this week by the Democratic Party of Wisconsin. It highlights exactly why our governor, Scott Walker, is leading our state in the wrong direction.

A short rant on corporate greed, impact on society

2011-10-15T13:26:00.005-05:00

Resurgence in progressive movement isn't about ideology, but rather tackling corporate influence in society

Let's get this straight: I don't hate corporations. I think that some corporations, even most, do a lot of good for our society. They provide the products we use, the clothes we wear, the food we eat, and so forth. Those taking part in the Occupy Wall Street movement certainly utilize some of corporations' greatest technologies when they update their actions daily using smart phones and social media. Corporations aren't the enemy -- at least, some of them aren't.

This movement you're hearing about isn't about changing our economic system, isn't a call for socialism or anarchism or anything like that. Are there some socialists and anarchists among the crowds in New York and elsewhere? Sure, but they're not a majority. Even if they were, however, this is not what this movement is about.

This movement is about removing corporate greed and influence from certain aspects of our society.

Allow me to define that: there is a big difference between corporate greed and a corporation seeking to maximize profits. In the latter example, a corporation seeks to grow its consumer base by listening to their customers, creating products or performing services that they prefer, and cut costs when they're necessary to cut.

Corporate greed, on the other hand, is much more devious. A few examples might be in order to better explain it. It's when a health insurance company collects money from its customers and then denies them coverage based on acne a person once had or a rape that a victim once went through. It's when a business decides to reward its CEO and other members of the board with large pay raises when it requires its own workers to take pay or benefit cuts. It's when corporations openly lobby Congress or take part in our democratic process under the auspices of "free speech" in order to lessen restrictions on air pollution laws or child labor standards.

In short, corporate greed is different from a corporation trying to advance itself in that it seeks greed for the sake of profit in the short-term (without regard for their customers or others), and not for the sake of improving its product for the consumer and therefore its image in the long-term.

A corporation that makes it easier for the deaf or hard of hearing to hear their own voices is acting in a way that's going to promote their business in a healthy way; a business that raises the prices of life-saving prescription drugs in order to squeeze a couple hundred dollars out of grandma is not.

This isn't rocket science -- this is general knowledge, things that everyone should know and work to improve in our society. Sensible regulations on corporations, to restrict their influence in our elections and on our legislators, won't impede on their ability to collect a profit. If some within the corporatist right want to argue that "corporations are people," then those people within corporations, not the corporations themselves, should seek out their lawmakers as individuals, just as the rest of us do.

We don't need to fear socialism because that's not the issue here -- this isn't about socialism, liberalism, conservatism, or any ism (except maybe corporatism). It's about reasoned approaches to corporate influence in our lives, about how much a business or group of businesses, large or small, should take part in our discourses within our democracy. There are appropriate ways this can be done and there are inappropriate ways.

What we're witnessing in our society today is a plethora of inappropriate influence on the part of corporations. Again, not all corporations -- just the greedy ones.

Today's Daily Stat: Government regulation doesn't affect job numbers

2011-10-12T14:08:00.006-05:00

AP fact check shows that GOP claims of government "stifling" businesses are untrue

Government regulations -- specifically those formed under President Obama -- are costing Americans jobs, according to Republicans.

It's a repeated meme that never goes away: regulations aren't good for business, stifling growth, which in turn forces business to hold back on hiring new workers or even laying off the ones they currently have. It's a sad state of affairs, a reality we must bear to live with.

If it were true.

In fact-checking the GOP presidential debate that was held last night, the Associated Press did some real digging -- and discovered that government regulation isn't all-too responsible for much job loss at all.

In fact, businesses reported that layoffs the result of government regulation accounted for only two-tenths of one percentage point (0.2 percent) across the country. That means for every layoff based on government regulation there are 499 other layoffs that are based on some other criteria.

Government regulation wasn't even the top concern for businesses: consumer confidence was. The top complaint among businesses was that there wasn't enough customers, and thus not enough cash-flow, to warrant more hiring.

The belief that regulation somehow stifles business is baffling. Certain kinds of regulations can do this -- but with proper implementation, regulation doesn't need to hurt the businesses of American entrepreneurs, and thus doesn't need to hurt economic or job growth.

This is clearly the case within the Obama administration, as, once again, less than 1 in every 500 layoffs were due to government regulation. And that's also today's Daily Stat.

0.2 percent of jobs lost are the result of excessive "government regulation."

Recall of Walker warranted -- a short list of grievances

2011-10-10T21:28:00.005-05:00

Movement to remove governor adds up to one conclusion: Walker must go

The recall campaign against Republican Gov. Scott Walker will begin in just over one month from today. As the Democratic Party of Wisconsin has put it, "This is it. This is history."

The list of reasons behind the recall are numerous. Here's just a short list:

The termination of collective bargaining for public employees, ending more than fifty years of bipartisan precedent for this respected right.
The voter suppression/ID bill passed under the auspices of making elections more secure (a safeguard that is unneeded, a concern that is unsubstantiated).
Hundreds of millions of dollars in cuts to education, and restrictions on how school districts can make up for the loss, that "shorts" Wisconsin schools by over a billion dollars.
Cuts to BadgerCare (half a billion dollars) and waiting lists for Family Care (funding the program only for those already on it).
Tax breaks for the wealthy and corporate elite while actually RAISING taxes for the working poor.
An overall disregard for the people of this state (and even Democratic legislators who tried to reach him in Illinois) during the protests while answering "the call" from billionaire donors.
An added disregard for a major campaign promise of "jobs," setting up two "special session" supposedly dedicated to increasing employment in the state, but in actuality dedicated to greater tax breaks for the rich and tort reform, neither of which has grown employment numbers for the state (we've actually seen lower employment numbers since Walker has taken office).
Cronyism that has resulted in questionable conduct on the part of the governor; it has included hiring former staff members, Republican Party members loyal to Walker, and the family members of big-money donors to the chief executive, all over more qualified candidates for the positions being considered.

If the governor were guilty of one or two of these offenses, a recall might not be warranted; we might be able to live with him, to survive another three years of his tenure, and work for his defeat in 2014. But because of the combined weight of these grievances, because of the length of this list (which isn't even complete), a recall of this governor isn't just warranted but quite possibly required if we're to keep our state's prominence in this country preserved.

Wisconsin cannot survive for long under the conditions that this governor has put us into, that he will continue to put us into. If we're to restore our values, to restore the sentiment of what makes us proud to be citizens of the Badger State, Gov. Scott Walker cannot be in charge of the executive office. Wisconsin cannot wait -- Walker must go.

Support the recall movement, make a donation today, and volunteer to work towards Walker's removal in 2012.

Just felt like sharing...

2011-10-10T21:06:00.002-05:00

Another statement on the OWS movement

My Facebook status tonight:

Just so you know...I'm not a part of any "mob" (Eric Cantor, Republican House Majority Leader). I'm not "un-American" or even "anti-capitalist" (Herman Cain, GOP Presidential candidate). And I'm not going to "drag you into the streets and kill you" (Glenn Beck, conservative commentator). But I AM a part of the growing movement of people who are upset with corporate influence in our government and society. I am 99 percent.

To be fair, my other FB status updates have ranged from the recall announcement (more on that soon), to the various sporting events occurring tonight as well. Still, I just felt like sharing this sentiment with everyone who isn't a personal friend of mine on Facebook.

Democratic poll shows governor recall a strong possibility

2011-10-10T15:03:00.007-05:00

Recall will be difficult, but not out of reach: most in WI disapprove of Walker

A new poll released by the Democratic Party of Wisconsin shows that Scott Walker is vulnerable to a recall election.

More than half the state disapproves of Walker's performance as governor, and more Wisconsinites trust a Democratic alternative to Walker on issues important to the state.

Among the poll's findings:

- 52 percent disapprove of Walker's job performance, with 41 percent strongly disapproving
- Only 31 percent of Wisconsinites strongly approve of Walker, with his overall approval at 46 percent
- The Democratic option is considered the better choice on various issues, preferred by those polled on education (by 18 points), improving life for the middle class (by 15 points), and seen as more honest than the governor (by seven points)
- If a recall were held today, a majority of Wisconsinites would vote for the Democrat (51 percent) over Gov. Walker (42 percent)

What does this polling show us? Things are bad for Scott Walker -- but they don't necessarily guarantee victory for Democrats. Working towards a recall will be difficult, but it's not impossible, either.

If the required 540,260 signatures are collected, the next step will be convincing the public that the Democratic choice is the better of the two. Fortunately, if this polling is correct, things are already headed that way: most of the state sees that the direction Walker is taking Wisconsin is on the "wrong track" (52 percent).

"JOBS!" -- it wasn't the focus then, it isn't the focus now

2011-10-10T12:33:00.009-05:00

History shows that "special session," Walker's aims, aren't concerned with jobs

In 2010, when Republicans were trying to win a midterm election campaign in Wisconsin, including a gubernatorial seat that had opened up, the focus of their campaigns were clear: "JOBS! JOBS! JOBS! JOBS!"

Then they won. And that focus...changed a bit.

It started small -- in the form of tax cuts for corporations in the millions of dollars (OK, that's not really small). The promise was that these cuts would inspire businesses in the state to 1) hire more people and increase employment (with increased capital that these corporations would gain assisting in some way) and 2) for businesses out of the state to be lured to come to Wisconsin. Unfortunately, that didn't really happen, and Wisconsin ended up having a loss in employment numbers.

But that wasn't so bad: the focus was still there, right? Instead of "JOBS! JOBS! JOBS! JOBS!" the focus was simply altered slightly, to "TAX CUTS! JOBS! JOBS! JOBS!"

That may have been fine, except that it wasn't the ending of this "little" shift. An attack on workers' rights took center stage shortly thereafter, and the focus was lost for a long period of time.

Still, the focus was just slightly off-course: it became "TAX CUTS! DESTROY THE UNIONS!" Then, "JOBS! JOBS!" The promise of more employment opportunities in our state was still attainable, if just modified.

And yet, no job bills came. A budget was passed which included the largest cuts to education the state had ever seen, amounting to a billion-dollar shortfall for schools across the state. New caps to Family Care (a program designed to help elderly and disabled Wisconsinites), nearly half a billion in cuts to BadgerCare, and more tax breaks to the wealthy and corporate elite were all included in the values-changing budget proposal by Gov. Walker, eventually passing and receiving his signature earlier this summer.

So where were our priorities then? Clearly, the "jobs" mantra had disappeared entirely. It was replaced with "TAX CUTS! DEFUND EDUCATION! DESTROY THE UNIONS! MORE TAX CUTS! SCREW THE ELDERLY!"

Oh, and we musn't forget guns and voter suppression.

But then, lo and behold! Gov. Walker came to the "rescue" again! After a September where Republican lawmakers decided they only needed to schedule one day of actual work, the governor held a "special session" to jump-start the call for "JOBS! JOBS! JOBS! JOBS!" once more.

Except...we're falling into the same pattern again. There's the bill that would repeal the need to teach children a comprehensive lesson on sexual education. Another group of lawmakers feel there is a greater need in criticizing Madison police for doing their jobs during protests earlier this year. 16 of the bills in the special session appear to reward special interests that are allied with Republican lawmakers (read: their supporters/donors). Tort reform, which in no way would create any jobs whatsoever, is among those billed as part of the session.

The best part? The special session is set to start October 18...the same day the legislature was set to start its regular session anyway. Suddenly, this session doesn't seem so "special," does it?

What we need to realize about the Republicans in our state is that "jobs" were never their primary focus. Even in a special session dedicated towards job growth, it's not their true aim. Gov. Walker and his Republican allies aren't pushing for "JOBS! JOBS! JOBS! JOBS!" any more than they were the first time they said it, nearly ten months ago.

Giveaways for the rich and the corporate elite, "pet" conservative projects, and rewards for donors in particular are all that Walker has ever and WILL ever push for. The end result is that nothing from our state, nothing from our Republican-controlled government, will ever be focused on "jobs" while Scott Walker is our governor.

Wisconsin is open for business, all right: it's conservative-led government is for sale to the highest bidder. And all that talk about jobs? It's only talk.

"Occupy Wall Street" a genuine movement of the people

2011-10-09T15:10:00.007-05:00

Criticism of protests by right unwarranted, based out of misunderstanding of movement's aims

The protests on Wall Street and elsewhere across the country (including Madison) are symbolic of a people frustrated with corporate influence in our society.

Occupy Wall Street seeks to address these grievances, to set forward a push to limit this influence in a way that allows "We the People" to have a voice in our government once more. Corporations aren't inherently "evil" -- indeed, many have done a lot of good for our country, have provided countless services to consumers in a decent way.

But these protests aren't about those corporations. Rather, they're about the corporations that swindle the common person in favor of corporate profit; that provide minimal services, or none at all, while charging a large fee for that "service"; and that try to interject themselves into the national political conversation by spending millions of campaign dollars in our elections.

It isn't wrong to seek profit, to want a better outcome for the company you set up or are a part of. Such competitive spirit betters our society, creates a system wherein the consumer benefits, for the most part (when it's done right). But when the goals of corporations trample upon the livelihood of individuals, it's clear that things need to change.

A little bit of government regulation, done in a way that protects the consumer while doing no irreparable harm to the corporations in question, is completely justifiable. The father of capitalism himself, Adam Smith, wrote in "The Wealth of Nations" that, "When the regulation is in support of the workman, it is always just and equitable; but it is sometimes otherwise when in favour of the masters." (Smith also believed in proportional taxation, saying, "It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expence, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion.")

Such comments made today would be seen as sacrilege by the current makeup of the Republican Party.

Occupy Wall Street seeks to remedy the free market's overreach in a way that Adam Smith himself would find acceptable. It's also doing so in a democratic fashion -- indeed, the mantra of the movement is that it represents the "other 99 percent," a jab at the top 1 percent of income earners that own a disproportionate amount of the nation's wealth (42 percent in 2007).

But Occupy Wall Street isn't, as some commentators and politicians assert, "un-American" or "anti-capitalist", isn't a mob movement, and certainly isn't inspired by the White House by any stretch of the imagination. Dismissing these demonstrators in such ways is destructive to our discourse, ignoring throngs of protesters who are true American patriots exercising their First Amendment rights. This is a genuine movement of people, dedicated to preserving the vision of the American dream.

That vision is one where people, not corporate power, shape the future of our country...and it's a vision that every American should get behind.

Nation's job numbers out: mixed results, but overall positive

2011-10-07T11:22:00.005-05:00

More than 100K jobs created last month (and 99K more jobs in previous months' reassessments)

The employment data for the nation overall for the month of September has been released, and the news is pretty mixed.

The unemployment rate stayed at 9.1 percent, the same rate it has been since July, signaling a stagnant impasse.

Yet, when lookin at the raw numbers, job creation actually did better than expected. The country added more than 100,000 jobs last month. Though analysts say 150,000 jobs are needed to keep up with population growth, this month's numbers show that the economy is capable of getting back to work, though painstakingly slower than what we'd like.

There was other good news as well. Job numbers were also revised for August and July. The new data reveals that, in addition to the job numbers initially announced for those two months, 99,000 more jobs were created than what was originally thought.

Critics of the Obama administration will contend that the slower-than-needed job growth is proof positive that his economic policies are failing. But remember: when the president took office, he inherited an economy that had been losing more than seven times as many jobs than what was GAINED this September. Overall, since Obama took control, the nation's economy has recovered greatly, if slowly, since his stimulus went into action. To return to the failed policies of the previous administration, a move that the Republicans would happily embrace, would be a huge mistake.

It will also be interesting to see where Wisconsin will be in a couple of weeks, when its employment numbers are released. While the country has maintained a relatively stable unemployment rate, Wisconsin's figures haven't been so fortunate. The number of employed Wisconsinites, in fact, has decreased since Scott Walker became governor, dropping by thousands in a matter of nine months.

Hopefully, my continued doubts will be put to rest and Wisconsin's numbers will reflect the gains the rest of the country had. After all, when it comes to employing the state, I'd rather be wrong than be right, rather see people get back to work than have some sense of pride. However, I won't be holding my breath for too long: if the current trends continue, we're in for a messy September jobs report as well.

Some thoughts on the Confederate flag debate

2011-10-06T16:30:00.004-05:00

Governments should reject symbolism of hate, terror

Texas Gov. Rick Perry recently faced criticism for a position he took (while Lieutenant Governor) regarding keeping the Confederate flag within state institutions, including his state's Supreme Court building.

Let's deviate from the campaign politics for a moment and focus on the issue of the flag itself. Long seen as a symbol of intolerance, many white southerners see it instead as a historical artifact, a piece of their culture that is, in their minds, worth preserving.

But oddly enough, the Confederate flag flew for less than two years during the Civil War. Adopted in May of 1863, the design was actually the second for the fledgling rebel resistance, a part of the CSA for a shorter time period than the "Stars and Bars" design.

The flag held much more prominence, both today and then, as part of the resistance to the era of Reconstruction. Members of the Ku Klux Klan and other white supremacy groups proudly displayed the flag as a symbol of their dedication to southern values.

Though it was also a huge symbol during the war, it's significance changed from one of honor under General Lee, to one of despair and terror under Jim Crow. It's symbolism has remained this way for generations, especially for African Americans, up to the present day.

Historic symbols ought to receive respect, as should individual rights to freedom of speech. But when the symbols carry with them a weight of intolerance and subjugation, those individuals must understand the hate that their beloved artifacts hold in the eyes of others. A Nazi flag, for instance, is just another piece of cloth -- but the symbolism it carries with it is similarly one of dread and terror.

The individual has this right, can display these images if they so choose, understanding that they carry that historic weight with them. But these symbols, shrouded in such terrible traditions, should not be so readily embraced by a government, whose sole aim is to cater to everyone's interests, and not prolong a sentiment of fear and terror.

To limit number of recalls, limit the NEED for them

2011-10-04T14:07:00.008-05:00

Raising the threshold for signatures not the right direction to take

There are even more calls for changing the recall elections process, this time from conservative blogger James Wigderson.

Wigderson is concerned because, unless something is changed, Wisconsin could enter a never-ending election season:

So recalls have gotten easier and threaten to get easier still. If something is not done, we may enter a period of permanent election campaigning in Wisconsin.

To his credit, Wigderson recognizes the problem that comes with the proposed constitutional amendment authored by Republican Rep. Robin Vos. Says Wigderson:

Unfortunately, if we are limited to Vos’ parameters for recall, we are limiting ourselves to levels of conduct that should compel the Legislature to remove the member without waiting for the recall.

Precisely. An issue that shouldn't be partisan -- recalls serve a purpose beyond solely removing elected officials for misconduct.

But Wigderson's remedy is only slightly better than Vos's, if only because it doesn't limit the reason for a recall. Instead, he'd rather increase the already-high signature threshold to start a recall:

If the constitution were changed to allow a recall only in those cases where the organizers were able to get a majority of those who voted in the last election to sign the petition, then we would go back to limiting recalls to those cases that truly require them.

That, too, would severely curtail the number of recalls this state would see, but at the expense of creating an unrealistic threshold that would equal the amount needed to win an election anyway.

Conservatives in our state, whether they want to change the threshold for/the terms of a recall, miss the point entirely: Wisconsin doesn't HAVE to enter a constant state of election madness. Consider this radical notion: Why were the recalls initiated? Perhaps it was because lawmakers failed to listen to their constituents.

When hundreds of thousands of protesters are knocking at your office doors, pleading with you to vote "no" on a bill, what do you think the response is going to be when you ignore them?

It's not possible to vote every time in a way that will make your voters happy. But recognizing when it's in your best interest to do so is why the recalls were implemented in the first place: to remove lawmakers that fail to listen to the people in ways that go beyond the expectations of representative democracy.

It's not surprising that recalls, which were established as a Progressive-era response to "big money's" influence in politics, were initiated this year when "big money" called in a favor from Walker & Co. Voting your conscience is one thing, but voting your pocketbook (or your campaign coffers) is an entirely different can of worms, one that itself warrants a recall.

It's also deeply troubling that Republicans, who are all of the sudden concerned with the costs of recalls for the state, instigated a plan that increased their cost by hundreds of thousands of dollars by running "fake" Democratic candidates to force recall primaries -- not to mention the nearly $6 million in costs to implement an unnecessary voter ID law.

There's no need for changing recall process, either in the number of signatures needed or the reasons behind having a recall itself. If conservatives are concerned about "permanent election campaigning," they should focus on eliminating the need for them in the first place.

Daily Stat: seven states surpassed WI in employment rates

2011-10-03T20:51:00.002-05:00

Unemployment rates of seven states go from worse-to-better than WI in nine months

What do Alaska, Louisiana, Maine, Massachusetts, Montana, New Mexico, and Utah have in common?

They are all states that started out in 2011 with worse unemployment rates than Wisconsin, but have since bested our state's rate as of last month.

Wisconsin started out 2011 with an unemployment rate of 7.4 percent. August's unemployment numbers showed that we lost more jobs, and our rate of unemployment has actually climbed to 7.9 percent.

These seven states were struggling more than Wisconsin in January of 2011. Alaska's and Louisiana's rates were both 7.8 percent; Maine and Montana, 7.5 percent; Massachusetts, 8.3 percent; New Mexico, 8.7 percent; and Utah, 7.6 percent.

But unemployment in those states have all dipped, and Wisconsin's grown, since Gov. Scott Walker took office. Alaska went to 7.7 percent; Louisiana, 7.2 percent; Utah was at 7.6 percent (it saw no change); Massachusetts down to 7.4 percent; and New Mexico went down to 6.6 percent, a more than 2 percent drop. Maine and Montana both saw increases in their unemployment rate (7.6 percent and 7.8 percent, respectively), but the changes in their rates increased slower than Wisconsin's rate change.

That seven states have now surpassed Wisconsin in terms of unemployment should send a shock of reality to anyone believing that Walker's economic policies are working for Wisconsin. The sad truth is, they're not -- they're failing our state, failing our workers, and all while making Wisconsin less hospitable to families overall.

The seven states that have passed over Wisconsin since the start of January should make everyone in our state ashamed of our governor's failure to employ this state. Coincidentally, in case you were wondering...the number of states that Wisconsin has surpassed since January is a resounding zero.

And that's today's Daily Stat.

Number of states Wisconsin has done better than in unemployment numbers since January: zero.

(All unemployment data gathered from bls.gov.

Tort bill won't create jobs

2011-10-03T17:54:00.001-05:00

Bill would give preference to corporations over people

The first sentence of Sunday's Journal Sentinel article says it all:

People who successfully sue for injuries would earn a lower interest rate on their judgments than banks and credit card companies who take their customers to court, under a bill Gov. Scott Walker included in the upcoming special legislative session on jobs.

There are two things in that one sentence that need to be addressed.

First: personal injury or consumer credit victims who successfully sue would earn a lower interest rate of restitution (if the defendant failed to make their payments on time) under this bill than corporations would if the situation were reversed. Under one proposal, individuals would receive 4.25 percent interest, while corporations would receive the current rate of 12 percent.

That says a lot about Gov. Walker's intentions right there.

And second: this bill is included in the special session on jobs, which shows you that this "special session" isn't really all-too concerned about jobs at all.

The bill wouldn't do a thing to create jobs. It would put more money in the hands of corporations, who wouldn't be forced to pay higher interest rates, while at the same time preserving these corporations' own right to collect higher rates than the people themselves can attain. We've seen what corporations do when they earn more money -- they don't go out and hire people. They give their CEOs raises, whether they're warranted or not, and leave workers' pay stagnant.

This proposal also shows an incredible double standard: either corporations are people, or they're not. The insistence that they are works fine for conservatives when it involves corporate influence on elections. But when it comes to court-mandated interest rates in legal judgments, conservatives want corporations to pay less to the people, and get more from them. It's total hypocrisy. If we're to say corporations are people, then they should be treated just the same, and not given special treatment.

(Then again, I'm more apt to say corporations AREN'T people...in which case, they should be treated with more scrutiny than they are now.)

Tort reform is an issue that needs serious evaluation, but it's certainly not a job creator by any means. If it were, Wisconsin would be seeing more job growth instead of less right now -- Walker signed a bill limiting awards in injury cases earlier this year, and while we saw a slight spike in job growth, the number of Wisconsinites that are currently employed right now is actually lower than when he took office.

If Gov. Walker's idea of creating jobs is to limit the amount that victims of corporate abuse can attain in legal judgments, then our state is in worse shape than previously thought. Walker came out swinging hard for bipartisanship -- but what he really meant was more of the same he's been dishing out all along: more favors for his corporate donors, and more disrespect to the working class people of Wisconsin.

Demise of discourse on the right at dangerous levels

2011-10-02T14:48:00.004-05:00

Conservatives should reject extremism within their ranks
A crowd boos at a gay military service member that supports the recent repeal of "Don't Ask, Don't Tell." A man heckles the president, deriding him as the Antichrist, as he interrupts a scheduled POTUS appearance. Another crowd cheers enthusiastically when a GOP candidate suggests a hypothetical man in a coma who lacks insurance should be left to die because he has to live with his choices.

Is this the new base of the Republican Party?

These observations (and others like them) are important because they step away from the politicians for a moment and focus instead on the people who support them. This isn't to say that every Republican -- candidate or constituent -- acts in this manner. Indeed, I'd be willing to concede just the opposite holds true, that most Republicans or conservatives are level-head individuals willing to talk things out. But a growing trend among the most ardent of supporters on the right is the embracing of a more extreme tone of sentiment. These hard-right "warriors" are taking charge of their party, pushing aside level-headed alternatives for extremist attitudes and initiatives.

Like a football fan screaming "interference!" at the television screen on every down, conservative extremists, too, exhibit a fervor that's inexplicable, yet at times violently passionate. Any questioning of their character or policy positions is seen not only as too critical of their ideas but also as an attack on them personally, one that must be responded to in kind. Their defense mechanism is a rebuttal of rage, laden with claims that are easily thought up of on the spot without much care given towards factual evidence, personal bias, or integrity for that matter.

This isn't to say that liberalism doesn't have this element to it as well. Extremists exist on both sides of the political spectrum, and to ignore this fact would be comparable to the actions of those I'm trying to condemn. However, it's clear even to the most objective of observers that the extremists on the left aren't driving the policy of liberals in positions of power today -- that is, their influence on those "representing" them is hardly noticeable.

The same cannot be claimed on the right, where Republican candidates seem to be rushing towards supporting the lowest common denominator of conservative extremism, who are fast determining who is viable within their field of presidential candidates.

This mentality needs to be rejected, not embraced, by the right. I say this not as a liberal who'd obviously like to see my positions prevail over "theirs," but as a concerned citizen who is witnessing a breakdown of discourse in our society. The marketplace of ideas is one of America's greatest assets. When it falters, when one side determines it's "do-or-die" on many of the issues it supports, our country suffers for it, and compromise of any kind cannot be reached.

We must fight, ironically, for the preservation of proper argument in this country. It's a fight well-worth having, one that will benefit both liberals AND conservatives who are willing to engage in meaningful debate.

Month in review - September 2011

2011-10-01T09:25:00.004-05:00

Questions linger over Walker's call for bipartisanship

2011-09-29T20:37:00.004-05:00

After 10 months of chicanery, can we really take the governor at his word?

After ridding state workers of their rights to collectively bargain their contracts, a practice that has been respected for over five decades;

After cutting hundreds of millions of dollars in taxes for corporations, yet raising taxes through the elimination of a tax credit for working families in the state;

After dismal unemployment numbers over the course of past two months, including figures that demonstrate less Wisconsinites are working than when he took office;

And after all of this, after a series of bills that have nothing to do with job creation (voter ID, concealed carry, etc.), and after it has been revealed that Walker's own cronies have seen wage increases in their government-appointed jobs --

-- Governor Walker has finally decided to make jobs a priority.

Calling the legislature back into session (after a month in which they, too, tried to refuse to work more than a single day), Walker has called on Republicans and Democrats to work together to pass sweeping legislation designed to make Wisconsin a more employable state.

Of course, the last time Walker called a special session on jobs (back in January), we saw huge corporate tax cuts of over $140 million and a bill designed to end the rights of state workers.

Still, the call for bipartisanship is welcomed, and the need for more jobs in our state a serious issue to tackle. Even if we may disagree with the guy, the fact that he wants to shift the focus towards positive action in increasing jobs is something all politicians should aspire towards as well.

But exactly how serious can we take Walker? How can we take his word as sincere, after campaigning all of 2010 on jobs yet doing close to nothing on it for 10 whole months? And how can we expect him to contribute in a bipartisan manner after he worked in a dictatorial way those first 10 months, going so far as to threaten his political opponents in private with a Louisville Slugger?

I truly hope I am wrong on all of this, that the questions I bring up here are simply a mild case of paranoid skepticism. But given Walker's track record and limited commitment to both jobs and cooperation, can you really blame me?

We should encourage calls for cooperation whenever and wherever they come from. But we should avoid being naive as well, save ourselves from being duped and keep a wary eye on those whose record, like Walker's, has been anything but cooperative.