This has been entertaining to follow the back and forth the past few days. Notice how Scott Bauer from the AP continues to just regurgitate the spin and lies from Evers. Evers’ “guidance” was nothing of the sort. It was written as an instruction – one might even call it an order. I’m pretty sure that the Trump Administration wouldn’t arrest a sitting governor, but we can expect to see some government employees in cuffs if they follow Evers’ instructions.

MADISON, Wis. (AP) — Wisconsin Gov. Tony Evers said Friday that every American should be concerned about “chilling” suggestions from President Donald Trump’s top border adviser that he could be arrested over guidance the Democrat issued to state employees about what to do if confronted by federal immigration agents.

 

“I’m not afraid,” Evers said in the extraordinary video posted on YouTube. “I’ve never once been discouraged from doing the right thing and I will not start today.”

 

At issue is guidance Evers’ administration issued last month in response to state workers who asked what they should do if agents with U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement show up at their offices.

Evers’ guidance advised them to contact an attorney immediately and ask the officers to return if an attorney is unavailable. The memo also advises state workers not to turn over paper files or give ICE officers access to computers without first consulting the state agency’s attorney and not to answer questions from the agents.

He was never for the kids. He is always for the government bureaucracy. Always. Every. Singe. Time. Meanwhile, more and more Wisconsin kids will be disadvantaged because they can’t read, write, or do math like they should.

Gov. Tony Evers on Friday vetoed the legislation that would have restored learning standards and report card scores in the state.

 

“For many reasons, this is an untenable result for kids, for schools, and public education in Wisconsin,” Evers said in his veto message. “Most importantly, metrics for school scores and standards should be based on science, data, doing what’s best for kids, and improving student outcomes, not the whims of legislative party control or what is politically palatable for lawmakers in the legislature.”

 

The legislation would have restored Wisconsin’s standards to what they were the year before COVID, and realigned them with the Nation’s Report Card.

 

Wisconsin State Superintendent Jill Underly ordered the standards changed last fall. She claimed she made the change to “better reflect” what Wisconsin school kids are actually learning.

Wow. He’s not even pretending any more.

The latest look at Gov. Tony Evers’ budget puts a price tag on just how much the governor hopes to get out of tax and fee increases, as well as new “collections” from the state.

 

The Legislative Fiscal Bureau released the report Monday.

 

“In summary, the changes included in the Governor’s budget would increase net taxes by $2,223,493,200, and would increase net fees by $356,301,800,” the LFB wrote. “In addition, it is estimated that measures…to enhance the collection of current taxes would generate an additional $189,420,400.”

 

“Gov. Evers told all of us during his budget address in February that he was going to cut taxes. Yet, about a month later, we are now finding out the actual truth: Gov. Evers’ budget proposal is irresponsible and unsustainable,” Sen. Patrick Testin, R-Stevens Point, said on Monday. “The good news is Legislative Republicans won’t let that happen and will work hard to craft a fiscally-responsible budget that both addresses our state’s priorities and delivers meaningful tax relief.”

 

LFB reported that Gov. Evers is proposing 14 different tax increases, and 28 proposed tax decreases.

As we pray for those impacted by the fires in L.A., we also know that many of those who are losing their homes and possessions do not have fire insurance. One of the main reasons is that insurers have been prohibited from charging premiums that reflect the risk. Many of these people live in an area that has a historically high risk for fire and the increased urbanization and poor fire management policies has increased that risk. Despite this, insurers can’t increase premiums enough to make insuring those people viable. Why?

Proposition 103, approved by California voters in 1988, requires the “prior approval” of the state’s insurance regulator before insurance companies can implement property and casualty rates, including homeowner’s insurance.

 

“California has a consumer-friendly approach with Proposition 103, and the insurance industry hates it,” said Kenneth Klein, a California Western School of Law professor and expert on natural disasters.

 

Added Klein, “The insurance industry has been battling that proposition for a long time.”

 

Under Proposition 103 and other California insurance regulations, property and casualty insurance companies cannot take all the losses associated with one event, such as this year’s wildfires, and then simply put them onto next year’s rates. The state requires a longer-term trend, not a one- or two-year disaster impact.

California’s prop 103 did a few things to cap insurance premiums. It restricted insurers from passing on the cost of individual events by requiring them to only factor in the historical trend. It also prohibited insurers from creating risk models for the future. They were only allowed to look at historical data. Well, what happens when insurance customers are looking at future weather patters, the effect of urbanization, and policy choices that increase risk? Doesn’t matter. The insurers can’t use that data to set rates.

If insurers are looking at real actuarial data that calculates a risk and the premiums necessary to insure that risk, but they are not allowed to use that data or charge those premiums, what is the rational decision? They stopped insuring people, of course. Since Prop 103 was passed, numerous insurers have left California completely and many more dropped customers if the insurers couldn’t charge a rate that made insuring them worth it.

It’s gotten so bad, that California actually changed the rules at the beginning of this year to try to alleviate it.

The regulations that take effect Jan. 2 arose out of a broad agreement Lara reached with the industry that gave insurers regulatory concessions, including the use of the computer models, in exchange for a commitment by large insurers such as State Farm, Farmers and Allstate to write policies in neighborhoods prone to wildfires equivalent to 85% of their statewide market share. That would mean, for example, an insurer with a 10% share of the state’s homeowners insurance market would have to cover 8.5% of the homes in riskier neighborhoods as identified by the department. No such requirement currently exists.

It’s a cockamamy scheme cooked up by bureaucrats that probably won’t work in getting a significant number of additional people insured, but the story is that even in California, they realized that they have made it economically inviable for insurers to provide homeowners insurance and they are trying to do something about it.

All this to point out that here in Wisconsin, Governor Tony Evers is proposing that Wisconsin adopt direct ballot measures like California. Prop 103, which is leaving thousands of Californians uninsured and homeless, was one of these direct ballot measures. It was an idiotic policy that passed on an emotional wave of ignorance and hate of insurance companies stirred up by activists.

No, we don’t want this here in Wisconsin.

If you want to see why this is a bad idea, you need not look any further than California. A Republic with representative government is the least bad form of government. Straight democracy is mob rule. Thank goodness this proposal is DOA.

Wisconsin Gov. Tony Evers’ plan to let voters repeal and create state laws without legislative involvement met opposition on Monday from Republican leaders of the Legislature, who signaled that the idea is likely to be rejected for a second time.

 

[…]

 

Evers said on Friday that the state budget he plans to unveil next month will include a mandate that legislators take up a constitutional amendment allowing voters to petition for ballot proposals to repeal state statutes and create new ones. Evers made a similar proposal in 2022 for voters to repeal the state’s 1849 abortion ban, but Republicans killed the plan.