December 2005
December 29, 2005
A New Year’s resolution for anti-TABORites
By Bill Kraus
Adhere to the Dreyfus aphorism: Never underestimate the people’s intelligence or over-estimate their information.
Most people have only a vague idea of where their tax money goes. The reason is that the people who collect and spend it don’t tell them. It’s like a grocery story customer would get a receipt with one number on it or maybe (as in the case of the property tax) two numbers: food and booze.
In Colorado, for one state, and perhaps others as well, the property tax bill comes with a complete, detailed description of where the money goes:
Elementary schools: $100
High Schools: $50
Voc-Tech Schools: $25
Snow plowing: $1
Fire fighting: $3
Police protection: $5
Garbage Disposal: $2
Etc.
Etc.
You get the idea.
Getting this kind of detail on the state budget is more complicated and impossible at the individual taxpayer level, but more thorough communicating can and should be done. Corporate America does it routinely four times a year in their reports to their shareholder-owners.
These quarterly reports are made more explicit with charts. The most helpful is a kind of hourglass graphic that shows where the state’s money comes from and where it goes.
Such a graphic will surprise most taxpayers and astonish the rest. They will learn, for example, that the state doesn’t keep or spend most of the money it collects, that a lot goes to individuals for medical care and most of the rest goes to school boards and local governments.
The state does build a lot of roads, of course, cleans up the environment, runs a lot of goodies like hunting and fishing, but these are not the main event.
If the state published, let’s say, a detailed annual report, like every public business does, the people would know where their tax money goes. It is possible that they will say “too much” or “not there,” but they would at the very least say those things specifically based on knowledge rather than emotion or slogans.
And if they still want TABOR, then tell them that it’s a form of legislative abdication.
But try being more forthcoming first.
It might even work.
[permalink]
[0 letters]
December 23, 2005
The Big Lie
By Bill Kraus
The way the big lie works is the promulgator keeps repeating an untruth. It goes unchallenged by anyone who is at least as credible and authoritative as the perpetrator, and at some point in the course of time it becomes accepted as the truth.
It worked in Germany 70 years ago. It worked then because the challengers had been eliminated or silenced.
It is working in Wisconsin today.
The columnists at the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel wrote a story about the corrupting influence and devastation of money in politics. In the course of the story, they quoted Rich Judge of Governor Doyle’s staff, who said, "Certainly the governor is a leader on campaign finance reform," which, of course, he is not.
Governor Doyle has been nowhere on campaign finance reform. He has proposed no reforms. He is more an enemy of reform than anything. It is reliably alleged that he has covertly cut the legs out from under any comprehensive bill that seemed to be making even mild progress by convincing legislative leaders from his party to vote against it and to get the members of their caucuses to do likewise.
This, of course, is his privilege, as is his relentless piling up of campaign money. But he cannot have it both ways. Unless, of course, no one calls him on it. Because the paper let the Judge statement stand, it gave the lie the cloak of truth.
One of the principal reasons for a free press is to call power to account on the things they say and do.
The governor's office will point to his promise to sign the motherhood and apple pie proposal to strengthen the election and ethics legislation. That ain't campaign finance reform, baby. The reporters should know it. I know it. Rich Judge knows it.
But the only way the people will know it is if someone credible and authoritative tells them. Otherwise the small lie will grow into a big lie.
[permalink]
[0 letters]
December 17, 2005
In search of political Q-Tips
By Bill Kraus
Years ago, a veteran politician told me that while politicians at times seemed to be dumb, they were never deaf.
I think I have to ask him if that aphorism still prevails.
The people running Wisconsin seem to me to be in serious need of hearing aids.
They don't hear the 83 percent of the people who, when polled, think there is something seriously wrong with our campaign system.
If they hear the bleating of the reformers, which is questionable, they brush it aside.
Both of these evidences of audio shortcomings can be explained. One is not loud enough. The other, perhaps, too loud.
But what astounds me is that they do not seem to hear the very loud, repeated clanging of jailhouse doors.
They are slamming behind your peers, my friends.
Can you hear them?
Are you deaf?
[permalink]
[0 letters]
December 13, 2005
The War on Christmas
By Stacie Rosenzweig
Growing up, I was one of very few Jewish kids in my public elementary school. This wasn't a problem until fourth grade, when my music teacher supplemented standards like "Silent Night" and "Away in a Manger" with another song, possibly of her own pen, that read as a prayer.
I refused to sing, and eventually ended up in the principal's office. The teacher later dropped the prayer, added a short Hanukkah song to the pageant and made me a narrator. I consider that my first act of civil disobedience, but who knew I was firing what could have been the opening salvo in the War On Christmas?
We've all heard about Bill O'Reilly's Crusade, and the Battle Of The Misnamed Holiday Tree. But now, there's a new front: Operation Sue Those Godless Liberals. Conservative Christian groups, apparently having nothing better to do with their time and money, are threatening to sue two Wisconsin school districts for discriminating against Christianity, because they don't sing enough religious Christmas songs. One of their top complaints? That they're using the tune to "Silent Night," with different words (from a song pulled from a 1998 program). The schools do sing "Angels We Have Heard On High" (which I have really only heard sung in churches), and "Let There Be Peace On Earth," but this is not enough.
As a secular Jew, I'm not exactly sure what I'm supposed to do here. I have no problem with "Merry Christmas" (when it's actually Christmas, not in November) or "Happy Holidays." I'm not even looking at what words Target uses for their sales. I call that big evergreen with the lights a Christmas tree, even when it's on government property. I have no desire to be a soldier in this War On Christmas (and what would I do, anyway? Hypnotize O'Reilly into submission with my dreidel?).
I bet most of the non-Fox-News-worshipping world doesn't give a rip about this. Sure, they'd be uncomfortable if the music teachers were teaching their kids prayers from a religion not their own, as I was back in fourth grade, but nobody's accusing anyone of trying to do that. No, most people are just happy to see their kids singing their hearts out and to get a good deal on a new DVD player.
Season’s greetings, everyone.
[permalink]
[0 letters]
December 9, 2005
Unsolicited advice for Governor Doyle
By Bill Kraus
Now that the Republicans in the Legislature have assured your re-election by making you the last line of defense against guns, genetic stupidity, and all around bone-headedness, you can add yet another credential that will enhance your somewhat tarnished image with disappointed Dems, irascible Independents, and even recoiling Republican moderates.
You can become the champion of clean government and the tamer of the corrupting money monster.
You can do this without damaging your own re-election prospects, because you aren't going to need all that money you have been working so hard to raise.
You can go as far as you want to down the yellow brick road to cleaning up Wisconsin politics and government.
You can take the two-lane road proposed by Senators Ellis and Risser or you can propose the super highway that they are building in Connecticut, otherwise known as full public funding of all political campaigns.
You get that rare political opportunity of doing good while doing well.
And you don't even have to thank the Republicans who made this possible.
[permalink]
[0 letters]
December 8, 2005
A mess from Texas
By Jason Haas
Big judicial cases are not on most Wisconsinite's minds. Ask folks up here about "tort reform" and they'd wonder why you are badmouthing their aunt's dessert recipe. We don't see candidates for the bench pressing flesh or kissing babies at the county fair. It's supposed to be that way. The seven Wisconsin Supreme Court justices are elected once every 10 years in non-partisan April elections, insulated a bit from the changing winds of the day.
Why, then does Texas Republican Congressman Dick Armey want to change this?
According to a recent article in the Chicago Tribune, Mr. Armey's flag-waving special interest group FreedomWorks has a problem with Justice Partick Crooks' decisions on "tort reform and product liability cases." Crooks appears to have "angered business interests," a crime that has FreedomWorks vowing to drop $2 million on defeating Crooks in the next election.
Cameron Sholty, head of FreedomWorks' Wisconsin chapter, claimed in the article that Crooks had made "egregious rulings."
Does Crooks deserve to be overthrown by right-wing interests? My sense is that people in these parts don't care for strangers coming in and fiddling with our elections. And we certainly don't need FreedomWorks' cash tainting our politics.
[permalink]
[0 letters]
December 2, 2005
Asked and answered
By Bill Kraus
The question Ed Garvey asks is, “If Connecticut can do it, why can’t Wisconsin?”
The cynical answer is that the scandal in Connecticut ended up with the governor going to jail because of the corrupt political election process. In Wisconsin only legislators are on the slippery slope greased by the need for special interest campaign money.
But that’s an excuse not the reason.
There is a one word reason why reform came to Connecticut and isn’t coming to Wisconsin. The word is leadership.
Three people run the Wisconsin government: the governor, the state senate majority leader, and the speaker of the state assembly.
As, if, and when these three decide to de-corrupt our political campaign system, that will be done.
Reform cannot come from the bottom or from the outside. It can only be done from the top.
Instead of spending their political capital trying to change the cost of oil, which they can do little about, our leaders should be working to reduce the cost of getting elected (and the high price of not doing something about those costs) which they can do something about.
The role of the citizens in this play is that of a kind of Greek Chorus. We can keep asking the obvious question of the leaders and their followers: If you are not smart enough to realize that our democracy is in trouble, maybe you’re not smart enough to hold public office.
Leadership, anyone?
Let’s hope so.
[permalink]
[0 letters]
current
--------
September 2010
August 2010
July 2010
June 2010
May 2010
April 2010
March 2010
February 2010
January 2010
December 2009
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
June 2009
May 2009
April 2009
March 2009
February 2009
January 2009
December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
August 2008
July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
February 2007
January 2007
December 2006
November 2006
October 2006
September 2006
August 2006
July 2006
June 2006
May 2006
April 2006
March 2006
February 2006
January 2006
December 2005
November 2005
October 2005
September 2005
August 2005
July 2005
June 2005
May 2005
April 2005
March 2005
February 2005
January 2005
December 2004
November 2004
October 2004
September 2004
August 2004
July 2004
June 2004
May 2004
April 2004
March 2004