Curmudgeon's Corner

Data from the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration found that on an average day in 2006:

• Nearly 50,000 adolescents used inhalants;
• Nearly 27,000 adolescents used hallucinogens;
• Nearly 13,000 used cocaine;
• Nearly 3,800 used heroin;
• Nearly 8,000 adolescents ages 12 to 17 drank alcohol for the first time;
• Approximately 4,300 adolescents used an illicit drug for the first time;
• Around 4,000 adolescents smoked cigarettes for the first time;
• Nearly 3,600 adolescents used marijuana for the first time; and
• Approximately 2,500 adolescents abused pain relievers for the first time.

The 'good news' in this study was that fewer adolescents are using illicit drugs than in 2002.

All of a sudden, an average day doesn't seem so average anymore!

Senator Darling has announced that she'll hold listening sessions in the Germantown Public Library and in the Menomonee Falls Public Library on Saturday, November 17th.

The Germantown session is scheduled for 1:30 to 2:30PM and the Menomonee Falls session will be held from 3:00 to 4:00PM.

This is your chance to meet her and discuss issues and concerns.

Her opponent, Rep. Wasserman, has been going door to door discussing his positions.  Learn Senator Darling's positions face-to-face.

The tax and fee bug must be rampant in Wisconsin.  It seems to have found its way into Germantown's proposed budget.

A report in Germantown Now tells of this proposal in the words of trustee Mel Ewert.  Each trip to the local recycling center would cost us $1.00.  That would raise $45,000 each year according to Ewert.  He also said that there seems some disagreement amongst village board members as to whether this money should be used to help balance the budget or for recycling center costs.

A couple of questions come to mind:  Why is a $1.00 fee even being considered?  What will the addition of a fee do to the rate of use of the recycling center?

I suppose that the $45,000 would more than offset the increased pay voted for themselves by the village board.  Or it could be used to support the newly enacted automatic pay increase program for non-represented village employees.

The amount is small enough that it most likely would fly under most people's radar screen.  User fees are not unheard of and are fairly effective at targeting the actual user of a service as contrasted with making everyone pay for the service whether or not it is used by every citizen.

I believe that the disagreement amongst the village board members ought to be over whether or not this fee is appropriate.  Period.

My greatest problem with this proposed fee is that all citizens of Germantown are compelled to use the recycling center.  Why then are we supposed to pay an additional fee?  Why isn't this simply supported by property taxes that flow into the general fund of the village.

We've talked about 'slippery slopes' before.  When fees get started, they are almost impossible to stop.  Fees are only taxes disguised to limit criticism.  Fees are great tools for recreational programs, and for community educational classes, and so on on.  Fees are inappropriate for those rules with which all citizens must comply.

The Monday evening joint meeting of school and village boards included two guests from MATC.

Among the tidbits from those two presentations are these:

TIF District - If Germantown were to stay in the MATC district, it would actually receive a better break on its TIF districts due to the higher MATC tax rate being paid.  Really?

Secession - If Germantown is successful in its attempt to secede from the MATC district, MATC might have to continue to levy property taxes against Germantown due to the debt load being carried by MATC.  What?

MATC Performance - Graduation rates for those students completing 80% of elected courses in 2006 showed MATC at 66%, MPTC at 75% and WCTC at 82%.  The MATC representatives stated that, while this looked bad at first glance, they were actually very proud of the 66% rate given that they have 52,000 students and implied they serve some of the most under-educated students in the community.  (And at a cost that staggers the imagination.)  Huh?

Dual credit courses - Dual credit courses are those that are taught in high schools using technical college approved texts, approved high school teachers and subject materials.  These course credits are readily transferred to the technical college and advance the students' rate of completion while reducing the cost.  MATC has some 475 dual credit courses, while MPTC has 1,471 and WCTC has 1,439.  When asked why none of the MATC dual credit courses were available in the Germantown system, there was a noticeable silence from both the school district representatives as well as from the MATC representatives.  It was finally agreed that these courses relied on both sides meeting in the middle...which tells us that we've not reached out to them, nor they to us.  Our value proposition is what?

Current full time students - Seven high school graduates went straight from Germantown to MATC this school year as full time students (full time defined as carrying a load of 30 credits per year).  Only Seven?

FTE Students - MATC has some 13,000 full time equivalent (FTE) students in its entire system.  In 2007, 82 of those FTEs declared that they are Germantown High School graduates.  That appears to be about 6/10ths of one percent.  We have 6/10ths of one percent of the FTEs but we pay over 1.3% of the budget.  Wow!

Very few Germantown students are attending courses at the downtown Milwaukee campus.  It appears that very few Germantown students are relying upon MATC at all.  Is it possible that MATC has so oriented itself to the students coming from Milwaukee (which makes sense simply based on numbers), that the vast majority of our students find nothing of interest in the curriculum that can't be had elsewhere with a more convenient commute?  I suspect that both WCTC and MPTC have been more attuned to the needs of the workplace in the suburbs and beyond (which also makes sense). 

As each layer of this onion is peeled away, the picture simply gets sharper and sharper.  We are not doing well by our students nor our employers and citizens.  Students are voting with their feet and going elsewhere for their further education.  We may well be subsidizing the failures of the Milwaukee Public School system as MATC tries to prepare these young people to at least be able to find employment.

While I sympathize, that is not a burden our taxpayers should to be tasked to support beyond property taxes already levied and state support already paid.  We already support an excellent system in Germantown.

Even though the deck is stacked against us and our petition, we must pursue secession.  To do anything less would be to ignore the obvious and permit it to continue unchecked.

The boards of the school district and village met last night to discuss common issues.  Those common issues included the construction now taking place at Blackwood Creek across from the high school, the joint intent to push secession from the MATC technical college district, and the TIF district revenue shift proposed by the village.

There were no 'fireworks' as some had suggested; there were also no final decisions taken.

Representatives of MATC seemed 'lukewarm' to the TIF transfers, citing the 2003 transfer that they stated had lengthened the TIF district 3 life by two years.  The school board president, Michael Erdmann, discussed the fact that the school district would be able to reduce the tax levy if the transfer were not to occur.  The school district covers more taxing entities than just the village, so those entities need be considered, as well.

Village president Kempinski stated his hope that MATC would not be seeking 'retaliation' (my word) against Germantown's secession movement by not approving the TIF action.  There was no reaction visible on the part of the two MATC representatives when this statement was made, but I'm sure they've had practice.

The MATC secession discussion focused on the need for uniform positions on the part of the school district and the village (both agreed but neither offered to abandon its position) with attorneys for both the village and the school district present and speaking to the boards.  Since there is no haste required (the earliest date for a change in districts would be July 1, 2009 assuming the petition were filed at least ninety days prior to the end of 2008), both sides agreed to form a joint task force and to continue to work the issue. 

Issues that need to be fleshed out include the negative impact to MATC as well as the positive impact to either MPTC or WCTC if Germantown were to move.  The money we send to MATC is a small part of that budget, while the reduced amount that would flow to one of the others would represent a sizable increase to that district.  Beyond this are all the substantive issues concerning educational opportunities in the other districts as contrasted with MATC, and which of the other districts would seem the best potential overall partner. 

My take-away was this: 

I don't think the TIF deal is necessarily a slam dunk, although a new project soon to commence in TIF district 4 carries much promise. 

I continue to be all for the secession but am honestly skeptical as to the ultimate outcome given how everything appears stacked against us.  This is a highly political battle.  My estimate of the odds against our success would be in the range of 10-1, and that is probably being generous to our side.  We're playing with the 'big dogs' now! 

If there were any schisms between the two boards, they were well-controlled, almost to the point of being too saccharin.

You'll probably recall the 'hospital tax' that was removed from the state budget during the extended negotiations between the Republican Assembly and the Democrat Senate.  This was a contrivance that would've added a tax on hospital care with the ultimate result being that of receiving more than that amount in federal Medicaid funds.  The state would then use these federal dollars to increase the reimbursement levels on Medicaid patients (which would've increased the taxes again,too).

The largest hospitals in Southeast Wisconsin were in favor of this contrivance since they would benefit most having the largest Medicaid populations.  The Wisconsin Hospital Association (WHA) originally opposed this contrivance but later changed its position to one of favoring the tax.  I suspect they were forced into that changed position since the largest hospitals, which wanted this tax, are also the largest payers of WHA association dues.

The smaller out-state hospitals were simply overpowered in this internal WHA debate.  They were never going to see much, if anything, from the tax contrivance since they treat far fewer Medicaid patients than do the hospitals in the major metropolitan areas.

Medicaid reimbursements in Wisconsin were last increased some twelve years ago, and the hospitals say they now receive only $0.48 of every dollar billed.  The portion they 'write off' actually ends up as part of the fees being charged to non-Medicaid patients in subsequent years.  These write offs ultimately increase the cost of health care and, therefore, health care insurance for all those who still have that benefit.

Against this backdrop, why would anyone oppose the hospital tax? 

Us taxpayers are paying the cost of Medicaid already.  If this forced 'cost-shifting' from Medicaid to the private citizens (taxpayers, incidentally) had not been made necessary by poor government planning and higher than affordable medical care rates, the problem would not have happened.

The tax dollars to be collected would flow into general tax funds and, while they might be 'earmarked' for hospitals today, there is no guarantee that our lawmakers won't ultimately raid this 'hen house' for something even more attractive to them in the future.

Us taxpayers, by the way, also have paid the taxes to the federal government that would be used to fund this contrivance.

California's Governor Schwarzenegger came up with a similar scheme earlier this year, and that would've caused taxpayers in all other states to pay some $12 Billion annually to cover the cost of 'universal health insurance' in California.  The 'Terminator' could've terminated some of us taxpayers with that grand approach.

Then, of course, there is the old saw that basically says we're stupid if we don't get ours, too.  That seems to make sense except that, in reality, it never seems to work that way for Wisconsin.  Remember that our population growth isn't keeping up with that of California, for example.  We have far fewer members in the House of Representatives than does California.  That translates into things such as milk prices being better in California than in Wisconsin, for example.  It also means that California will get more federal money per capita than Wisconsin.  That is simply the way it works.

As our taxes continue to increase, and as our ranking as a 'tax hell' continues to grow, employers will not see Wisconsin as a desirable place to do business; that will cause employment to suffer; that will cause Wisconsin to need to increase taxes even more; and, more and more people will leave Wisconsin or never come to Wisconsin in the first place.

These schemes simply work to our detriment, even though they sound like a 'great deal'.  There are no 'great deals' that flow from taxes.  We are always the ones that pay the taxes...and there is never enough tax money to do all the good that needs doing.

This contrivance also promises to cause health insurance premiums to increase...which will cause fewer employers to find the money with which to pay, thus causing them to drop that benefit.  That could actually increase the number of Medicaid patients, too.

Sounds like a 'great deal' to me!

The answer to the Medicaid reimbursement problem is to increase the reimbursement fees with existing Medicaid funds instead of creating yet other ways to spend those same Medicaid funds that are already admittedly in too short supply.

The people who run our state have little or no concern for those of us who pay to have them running the state.  That is so apparent as to be a truism.

The tech colleges had already been given the ability to increase their take by 4%.  That is considerably greater than the inflation that had occurred, but it still wasn't enough!  The governor just had to take the cap away.  He said, "If technical colleges do not have the ability to respond to the rapidly changing needs of businesses in Wisconsin, economic growth will suffer".

Does anyone believe that excessive taxation spurs economic growth?

Michael Rosen, head of the MATC teachers union and a member of the state technical college board had this to say: "Governor Doyle again demonstrated his commitment to growing Wisconsin's economy through training and investing in the labor force today.  The veto he took today continues his commitment to that vision."

I suspect that Rosen is sincere with his statements.  The lockstep between the state technical college board and the Governor is very, very apparent.  Appointed boards tend to be that way, don't they?

By the way, the 4% cap would've pared an estimated $7.9 Million from the budgets already passed by the sixteen tech colleges.  Of that amount, MATC would've "lost" $3.9 Million.  Interesting that MATC is one of sixteen colleges (6.25%), while its share of the 'lost" tax money would've amounted to over 49% of the total.  Only two of the sixteen colleges had already come in under the 4% property tax cap.  That means that 13 colleges split the remaining 50%

Does this sound like a well-run and properly guided system to you?  It doesn't to me.

Does this send a solid and positive signal to employers?  I don't think so, no matter how much the governor and his team preach the same sermon.  We are an over-taxed state and we will stay that way.  We continue to elect those who can only think 'spending increase' and who do not have the phrase 'expense reduction' in their vocabularies.  Then, we step back and wonder why we get the same thing over and over again.

The author of the Lil' Abner comic strip may have had it right when he said (paraphrased), "We have met the enemy, and he is us".

Just when we thought it was safe to go back to living and working in Wisconsin, 'Jaws' Doyle used his 'Frankenstein' veto tool to rewrite the budget deal.

The 2% property tax cap magically became a 3.86% property tax cap for next year.  Doyle cobbled that together by using the current veto law to strike parts of sentences in order to find the numbers 3, 8 and 6 along with a couple of periods.

So, not only did MATC pick up the ability to go back to its 5% property tax increase, but all communities in Wisconsin received the Halloween 'treat' of raising property taxes as much as 3.86% instead of being required to limp along on only 2%.

Now, the state's Democrat-led Senate's new majority leader, Sen. Russ Decker, sits in control of the potential amendment to the state's constitution that would eliminate the 'Frankenstein' veto power used by Doyle.  Sen. Decker says that he hasn't made a decision about putting this amendment to a vote.  That would kill any chance of the constitutional amendment for another several years.

Welcome to hardball politics as played by the Democrats.  Still think that Colorado won't get the combined headquarters for Miller/Coors?  Our state's tax ranking just took another hit.  It wouldn't be a surprise if this fiasco were to lead to Wisconsin being dropped to 40th or 41st or worse next year in the raging battle to see which state can be the worst place to live and work due to taxes.

Thanks Governor Doyle.  Thanks Democrats.

Can you even begin to believe this? 

Governor Doyle has indicated that he is vetoing the technical college tax increase limiting them to a mere 4%.  He has reneged on his promise of no tax increases in so many ways as to be almost comical...but this is not funny.  It is a sad day for Wisconsin.  We will continue to lose population since jobs are leaving our state; we'll ultimately be down another seat in the House with the next reapportionment

It is imperative that we get an Assembly bill moving immediately to make the technical college system accountable to the taxpayers.  We need to get a companion Senate bill moving immediately, as well.  Call your elected representatives today and express your disgust, and get their commitment to move this forward!

The Republicans should be able to get this passed in the Assembly.  The Senate is a different arena given that it is controlled by the Democrats.  With Sen. Russ Decker now installed as the Senate Majority Leader, the likelihood that this will even get out of committee in the Senate is remote.  If we thought the former Senate Majority Leader was difficult with whom to work...'we ain't seen nothing yet'.

However, we need to establish, once and for all, that the technical college system is broken.  That can begin to be accomplished with a debate.

If anyone has had the idea that Democrats can be relied upon to control government spending in Wisconsin, they ought to be disabused of that notion by now.  The only ultimate solution is for the taxpayers, who are also the electorate, to dump the Democratic majority in the Senate while increasing the Republican majority in the Assembly.  Ultimately, we need to get a fiscal conservative into the Governor's office but that won't happen until at least the next election.  And, our track record is rotten on that score.

Once again, everyone who voted for Governor Doyle either loves more and more taxation, or they were hoodwinked.

Given this move by the Governor, what do you think our chances of leaving the MATC district look like today?

This travesty simply has to end!  And the voters...us...are the only people who can make that happen!

We see men and women in military uniforms on a regular basis as we go about our daily lives.  They might be in the grocery store or driving past us.  We see them, but do we take a moment to thank them?  If not openly, do we at least take a moment to think of their sacrifice and their service?

I hope we do that.  These are people who volunteered for this duty; they were not drafted to serve.  I hope we don't look away in disgust

There are many guard and reserve components that protect us every day.  Our National Guard traces its history back to the year 1636; before our country had formed, we had citizen militias protecting us.  Almost every one of us knows a family that has had a member who served in the Guard or reserves.  We have men and women serving in the marine reserves, naval reserves, army reserves, air force reserves, coast guard reserves and in the Army and Air National Guard.

Many of our guards and reserves are in Afghanistan and Iraq today.  They're found along our southern border, at the site of floods, hurricanes and forest fires.  They have been called to duty during blizzards to help people and animals.  They've been called to help bring peace to the streets during riots.  They fly air cover missions daily across our country.  They help protect our ports.

They've given of their time; they've spent time away from their families; they've endured the ugliness of some of our citizenry; they have paid with their lives.

These are not war mongers as some might think.  These are not ignorant Neanderthals as some might think.  These are men and women who know the value of freedom.  These are men and women who sacrifice for the rest of us, who are ready at the ring of the telephone to put on their uniform and defend us from whatever has befallen us; be that a forest fire, a flood, a blizzard, an attack that topples the Trade Center buildings or any other need.  They're ready to give their lives for us, and many have paid that price.

Isn't it amazing that some of our politicians who can't seem to stomach 'the military' are always ready to call upon the guard and reserves when it suits their purpose? 

I believe that the village board is planning to discuss the potential for advertising banners that would be stretched across Mequon and/or Pilgrim Roads. 

It seems that this would fly in the face of the village effort to control signage as to height, width, and location.  This was done to help maintain the ambiance of the village as well as to protect one business from another in terms of how well each sign could be seen.  We didn't want obtrusive signage, or so I thought.

How unobtrusive would a six foot wide sign stretching some sixty to eighty feet across either Mequon or Pilgrim Roads be?  What about the hazards created by gawkers not paying attention to their driving?

Where would this end?  I presume the intent would be to have these signs stretched across the roads for May fest, for example.  Would we then find it appropriate to have a banner for the football team going into tournament play?  If so, then what about girls tennis; or the track team?  Then what about the pink ribbon campaigns, or the "remember our troops" campaign?  What about the Warchix if they placed first in an event?  Where does it end?  What starts as one or two a year could easily escalate to one or two a month.  Everyone with a cause would desire a banner.

This is one Pandora's Box we should leave unopened.  We recently opened one that will almost certainly come back to bite us; we don't need another.

The reiteration of SCHIP (state childrens' health insurance plan bill) is about to be voted on by the U.S. Senate.  This is a slightly revised version of the bill that received a presidential veto a short time ago.

The Democratic majority has tweaked it a bit in hopes that enough Republicans will be moved to help override the next veto that is expected from the President.

It would be largely financed using a federal tobacco tax increase.

A college student has an interesting take on this bill.  Watch this.

Noting that the Washington county board had recently voted some funding to build a new building on the county fairgrounds, I was reminded of a really major 'peeve'.

Am I the only person in the county who can't read the scrolling messages at the bottom of the Fair Grounds sign along Hwy. 45? 

Who can possibly see the scroll driving at 65 miles per hour.  It is small; it is red; it scrolls too quickly. It should be large, white and somewhat fixed for a period of time...or, it should look like one of the new electronic billboards.

Can we find some funds to re-do that sign?  It was a waste from the beginning from my perspective.  I'd be interested in the process that led to this decision in the first place.  If that was the result of a consulting contract, we might have the opportunity to go back to that entity for redress.  It seems we received poor advice.

As it stands now, we'd be better off not using the sign; it is more likely to cause an accident than to communicate a message.

The Americans for Prosperity organization went after Wisconsin Senators and Assembly members with the question:  "Will you agree to sign a 'No Tax Increase' Pledge?

Those Senators who signed that pledge are: Alberta Darling, Glenn Grothman, Ted Kanavas, Alan Lasee, Mary Lazich and Joe Liebham.

Those Senators earning Kudos for sticking to their word are: Alberta Darling, Glenn Grothman, Ted Kanavas, Alan Lasee, Mary Lazich and Joe Liebham.

Those Senators earning a Shame on You for voting against their pledge are: No one.

Those members of the Assembly who signed the pledge are: Garey Bies, Donald Friske, Scott Gunderson, Mark Gundrum, Eugene Hahn, J.A. Hines, Mark Honadel, Joel Kleefisch, Bill Kramer, Frank G. Lasee, Thomas A. Lothian, Terry Musser, Scott Newcomer, Jim Ott, Don Pridemore, Roger J. Roth, Jr., Scott Suder, Robin J. Vos, Leah Vukmir, Sheldon Wasserman, Steve Wieckert, Jeff Wood, Robert Zielgelbauer and Rich Zipperer.

Those members of the Assembly earning Kudos for sticking to their word are: Garey Bies, Scott Gunderson, Mark Gundrum, Mark Honadel, Joel Kleefisch, Bill Kramer, Frank G. Lasee, Thomas A. Lothian, Scott Newcomer, Jim Ott, Don Pridemore, Roger J. Roth, Jr., Robin J. Vos, Leah Vukmir, Sheldon Wasserman, Steve Wieckert, Robert Ziegelbauer and Rich Zipperer.

Those members of the Assembly earning a Shame on You for voting against their pledge are: Donald Friske, Eugene Hahn, J.A. Hines, Terry Musser, Scott Suder, and Jeff Wood.

It is all too rare for politicians to keep their word especially in such a highly-charged atmosphere as was the budget debate and vote.  The governor certainly would've earned a shame on you since he promised no tax increases when he ran for office.  There would have been significant pressures brought to bear on these upstanding individuals during their respective caucus meetings leading up to the vote.  Politics is not for the namby-pamby.

Whether you think the pledge was good or bad, the people who kept their word are to be honored.  Let them know that you respect them for their integrity, and give very serious thought to keeping them in office.  They're rare.

On the other hand, those who broke their promises need to be reminded that you don't respect their integrity.

"Earmarking" is the term used to refer to a provision in legislation that directs funds to be spent on specific projects. Typically, legislators seek to insert earmarks which direct a specified amount of money to a particular organization or project in his/her home state or district.

This definition comes from one of the hundreds of websites dealing with what has become a major issue for taxpayers.  Earmarks appear to have originated in 1817 at the federal level when funds were specifically dedicated to a stretch of highway in South Carolina.  Now, earmarks are everywhere and used by most at the national and state levels.

Wisconsin, as you would suspect, is no exception.  Talkers and Bloggers have been on this issue for some time now reciting how much has been dedicated to this project or that project.  Most such projects seem to be on the frivolous side, while others appear to be, simply, unnecessary.

Our Governor has resorted to earmarks to obtain votes on bills near and dear to his heart..  Our legislators have resorted to earmarks to gain votes back in the home district in order to stay in office.  Some of us voters like the earmarks when they hit a favorite cause or 'need'.  If you were a bicyclist in West Allis, you'd probably be pretty happy with this budget since many tens of thousands of dollars are 'earmarked' for a bike path or trail.  If you're not fond of bicycling, you may simply ignore this expenditure or grouse about it and forget it by the next week.

We're also going to pave a parking lot for a township someplace, and we're going to expand a highway that doesn't need that for another ten years, and on and on.

The new budget for Wisconsin literally contains tens of millions of dollars for earmarks.  Those are your dollars and they're my dollars.  Why aren't we more aroused over this travesty?  Why are we willing to permit others to increase our taxes (or to fail to reduce spending) when this level of waste is rampant?

Every so often, it seems there is talk of ending earmarks.  That is, so far, all there has been...talk. 

Isn't it finally time for action?  Aren't we finally at the end of our rope?  Isn't there more than enough waste in the budget without adding to it with earmarks?

MATC will, if the newly agreed compromise budget is passed today, be limited to a 4% increase in its property tax levy over the next two years.

It had already passed a 5% increase hoping that would be permissible when the state budget was finalized.

MATC teachers' union president, and state technical college board member, Michael Rosen was quoted in the morning Journal Sentinel saying this is bad news for students and for economic development.  "It's going to cause the colleges to increase tuition and price out the workers who will be fuel for business expansion".

What do you do when your income doesn't support your expenses?  You and I reduce our expenses.  What has MATC done over its history when its revenue didn't meet its expense needs?  It raised its revenue by increasing taxes and/or tuition.

This statement is indicative of one of the major problems at MATC, and possibly with other tech colleges.  They simply do not consider balancing a budget by reducing expense.  Here are a couple of ideas for their consideration.  Either eliminate positions since that consumes something close to 90% of their total budget, or sell some land and buildings and lease those back from the new owners.  If their agreements do not permit 'permanent layoff' then offer a buy-out that can be spread over future years.

Businesses use these tools all the time.  Incidentally, WCTC just took its increase and had no problem living within its means.  It also just completed negotiations with its labor organizations and held increases to a very manageable level.

Why not MATC?

Now that it appears we'll have a budget approved for Wisconsin, I imagine that Senate Majority Leader Robson Decker will want to move ahead with the issue of elected officials receiving sick time benefits.

She mentioned some time ago that she'd consider that issue when the budget was done.  I'm sure she meant that when she said it.

Maybe this can serve as a reminder since that statement was made quite a while ago.  Senator Darling has been very receptive to such changes as memory serves.

Assembly leadership has apparently reached a bargain with the Democrats over a state budget.  We are still somewhat in the dark on all the subtleties, but from all reports this falls far short of what we fiscal conservatives were hoping to see.

Taxes and fees will increase over $1 Billion, closer to $1.4 Billion, with questionable new programs being included.  The program guaranteeing 'B' students access to further education upon graduation from high school carries an unknown future price tag.  It is possible that this could ultimately be voted down in a subsequent session, but that would seem very unlikely.

Cigarette taxes have, of course, increased by $1.00 to $1.77 per pack.  I described this some time ago as the killing of the goose laying those golden eggs.  As the cigarette tax increases, that forces more and more people to quit smoking...and the tax revenue stream dries up.  New Jersey recently increased its tobacco tax only to see revenue decline immediately thereafter; they had crossed the line.  Incidentally, this is a classic form of regressive taxation; it affects those typically least able to afford the tax.  How is it that the press doesn't seem to see this injustice?  Of course, the programs being supported by the cigarette tax will never go away, so we citizens get stung again when some form of taxes or fees will be increased to offset the 'loss' of tax revenue from cigarettes.

There are some 27 members of the Assembly who have signed a 'no tax increase' pledge.  Two of those are Democrats, and one of those is Rep. Wasserman who is running against Sen. Alberta Darling, proclaiming himself a 'fiscal conservative'.  He has already said that, while he did sign 'the pledge', he also took the Hippocratic Oath.  Naturally, he now tells us that the Hippocratic Oath trumps his 'no  tax increase' pledge.  He knew all along that the cigarette taxes were most likely going up, and he also knew what his position was even as he signed the pledge to draw favorable attention.

We need to watch carefully for the votes on this issue.  How many others will renege on their pledge?  The Republicans will pay the greatest price for backsliding, since Democrats are thought wise whenever they increase spending.

Finally, the abomination called 'Healthy Wisconsin' is very likely to come back as a free-standing bill after a slight face-lift.  That would've added another $1.5 Billion to state spending, so it promises a contentious battle all over again somewhere down the road.

We Wisconsinites have learned that there is only one time when we're relatively safe from our elected representatives...when they're out of session...and even that doesn't prove true on occasion. 

I was twelve when Max McGee became a member of the Green Bay Packers, so I grew up listening to and watching the games in which he played.  He was one of my all time favorite Packers; probably because he was Max, all the time.  His escapades became legend; and they appeared to have been real escapades, not something concocted by a press agent.

He was a solid receiver; he never danced or spiked a football that I can recall.  The article in today's Journal Sentinel sports section reminded me of the famous Lombardi locker room exchange.  Lombardi was fed up with his team and decided that he had to go right back to the basics.  Supposedly he began by saying, "gentlemen...this is a football".  Also supposedly, from the end of the bench came Max McGee's voice saying, "Coach, could you slow down a little; you're going too fast for us".  I have no doubt that occurred as reported.  Lombardi was said to have been forced to laugh at the remark.  No one else had the audacity or the nerve to pull that off; only Max McGee could've done it...and he did.

I bought an autographed jersey that had been worn by McGee while attending a Lombardi cancer foundation fund raiser many years ago.  It was autographed on the front and not the back, so it can't be displayed to show his name, number and autograph simultaneously.  We always talked about attending the North Hills golf fund raiser to find Max and ask if he'd re-sign the jersey...but we never got around to it.  Somehow it seemed that Max would always be around because he had been since I was twelve.

He apparently fell from the roof of his home and was killed.  What in the world was a 75 year old man doing on his roof?  Only Max would do something like that...and he did.  That is our loss and the Lord's gain.

Joel Dresang's article in the Saturday Journal Sentinel discussed Wisconsin's latest ranking in job growth.

We were ranked at 38th among all 50 states for 12-month job growth according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics.

We were recently ranked 39th worst of all 50 states in terms of our tax burden.

Is it possible the two rankings relate?  Could it be that employers are not starting or growing their businesses in Wisconsin because of the 'tax hell' that promises to do nothing but worsen?  Could it be that all the liberal 'do good' uses for the increased take from taxpayers has reached its point of no return, of actually diminishing the 'good' rather than increasing the 'good'?

Could it be that businesses moving from Wisconsin cause our job growth to stagnate?  Could the Miller/SAP headquarters move to Colorado prove the point if it occurs?

Or, will Wisconsin throw emergency 'gobs' of taxpayer money at the problem trying to win the fight with Colorado thus increasing the need for more and more taxpayer money?

Your guess is as good as mine, but the possibilities appear to me to be too great to continue to ignore!  The giant sucking sound I hear is probably just your and my money being sucked to Madison.