Tag Archives: Tony Evers

Wisconsin is Still Waiting on Evers to Call a Special Election for 7th CD

Heh.

Gov. Tony Evers says he is waiting for a recommendation from his legal team about when to call a special election for the congressional district being vacated by retiring U.S. Rep. Sean Duffy.

Evers told reporters Thursday that he doesn’t know yet if he will have the special election correspond with the state’s presidential primary in April. There is also state Supreme Court election that day.

[…]

The Democratic Evers said he is more concerned with finding a date that works well for that northwestern Wisconsin congressional district than one that might benefit Democrats.

Uh huh… it should take about eight minutes to check the law regarding calling a special election, pull out a calendar, and pick a date. And that date should be one of the regular election dates coming up so that it isn’t an extra cost for the taxpayers. It’s not that difficult if that is your only consideration.

If, however, you are waiting to see what Democratic candidates are jumping in, allowing party leaders to coalesce behind a favorite and get an organization together, and pick a date that gives the Democrats maximum advantage, then it takes a little longer to decide. It’s certainly Evers’ prerogative to use this duty in a way that gives his party as much advantage as possible. Let’s just not pretend that he’s doing otherwise.

Our rights are not ‘BS’

Here is my full column that ran in the Washington County Daily News yesterday.

Gov. Tony Evers is still pushing for the Wisconsin Legislature to pass new gun-control legislation and threatening to call a special session to do so. He went so far as to call people’s concerns over his gun-control measures as “BS,” as if adult deliberation and constitutional considerations are now unwelcome in Madison. At the risk of our governor stamping his feet and pouting, let us explore the legitimate concerns with his proposals.

Evers is advocating two new gun-control laws. The first law he wants is universal background checks. The concerns over universal background checks are not so much constitutional as practical. Under current law, any person who purchases a firearm from a gun store or licensed firearm dealer is required to pass a background check. This includes sale of guns at gun shows.

Current law does not, however, require background checks for a private sale or transfer of a firearm. Universal background checks would require that someone undergo a background check in virtually all circumstances. In some versions, this includes when a firearm is passed through inheritance, given as a gift, or even loaned. While probably not constitutionally prohibitive, such checks are monstrously unwieldy. It puts the burden of conducting a background check onto private individuals and criminalizes them if they fail to comply. In their worst derivations, universal-background-check laws require a firearm registry to track the movement and ownership of firearms. The cost and hassle of enforcement and compliance far exceed the usefulness of the law.

A red flag law is far more problematic. The premise of a red flag law is that people who are about to commit mass murder often exhibit troubling behaviors that could be reported so that government officials could confiscate their firearms before they do something bad. The problem with a red flag law is not even its flagrant assault on our Second Amendment rights. The problem it the fact that it tramples on our First, Fourth, and Fifth Amendment rights to get to our Second Amendment Rights.

Under a red flag law, a person’s First Amendment right to speak freely would be infringed. If a person makes some uneasy, outlandish, or even violent statements, the government could seize their firearms. For every mass killer who said something stupid and violent, there are a million other Americans who have said something stupid and violent and never acted on it. A red flag law would have the government cracking down on people for the simple act of saying the wrong thing at the wrong time in front of the wrong people.

Our right to be secure in our “persons, houses, papers, and effects against unreasonable searches and seizures” is protected by our Constitution’s Fourth Amendment. Under a red flag law, the government would be given the power to arbitrarily seize a person’s firearms because another person thinks they might be dangerous. Surely, such a low standard cannot be construed to be reasonable, or the notion of being secure in one’s person is rendered meaningless.

Our Constitution’s Fifth Amendment protects the people from being “deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process of law.” Under a red flag law, the entire point of it is that the government seizes the firearms without needing to actually convict someone of a crime. The person whose firearms are seized is utterly deprived of due process except for the process to get his or her firearms returned. Even then, the burden rests on the accused to prove that he or she does not intend to commit a crime in order to have the firearms returned. The shift of the burden of proof, coupled with the impossibility of proving a negative, undermines the rule of law.

With a red flag law in place, the government would bulldoze through at least three constitutionally protected rights before depriving a person of the constitutionally protected right to keep and bear arms.

When considering any proposed law, a good rule of thumb is to imagine the law being enforced by your worst enemy. Universal background checks and a red flag law could be brutally enforced by a despotic government and still not stop a single mass murder.

Governor Evers knows that the Republican Legislature is too responsible to pass these laws, so he has the luxury of posturing for the media. But the governor’s casual and crude disregard for the rights that these laws would trammel is precisely why they should not be passed.

Our rights are not ‘BS’

My column for the Washington County Daily News is online and in print. Go pick up a copy, but here’s how I sum it up:

With a red flag law in place, the government would bulldoze through at least three constitutionally protected rights before depriving a person of the constitutionally protected right to keep and bear arms.

When considering any proposed law, a good rule of thumb is to imagine the law being enforced by your worst enemy. Universal background checks and a red flag law could be brutally enforced by a despotic government and still not stop a single mass murder.

Governor Evers knows that the Republican Legislature is too responsible to pass these laws, so he has the luxury of posturing for the media. But the governor’s casual and crude disregard for the rights that these laws would trammel is precisely why they should not be passed.

 

Evers’ BS

Yes… concerns about constitutional rights enshrined in the 1st, 2nd, 4th, and 5th Amendments are just “BS.” I see that Governor Evers has the Leftist’s usual concern for civil liberties.

MADISON, Wis. (AP) — Democratic Wisconsin Gov. Tony Evers says Republican concerns over a pair of gun control bills he’s pushing is “BS” and he’s thinking of forcing lawmakers into a special session to take up the measures.

Evers said Thursday on WTMJ-AM if Republicans “gavel in and gavel out” without debating the bills they will pay the price at the next election.

Evers and Democratic supporters have pointed to a poll from last year showing more than 80% of Wisconsin residents support universal background checks.

Evers unveiled such a proposal last week. He also supports a “red flag” law to take guns away from people a court determines to be a risk to themselves or others.

Republicans have raised Second Amendment concerns and indicated neither will be taken up by the Legislature.

Funny. It looks like it is Evers who is unwilling to debate the bills.

Evers Says Barnes was “Truthful”

Liars gonna lie. And apparently our governor is cool with that.

After the reporter told Barnes that the governor had been asked the question, Evers leaned into the podium and said ‘‘I’ve talked to the lieutenant governor about all sorts of things, including this, and I feel confident that he’s been truthful.’’

Later in the news conference another reporter asked

Evers to explain why he thought Barnes had been truthful. Again Barnes jumped in before Evers could respond.

‘‘Hey, Mandela here,’’ he said. ‘‘I’m actually here.’’

The reporter said he was looking for Evers’ opinion, to which Barnes replied that the questionnaire came from his campaign staff.

‘‘That didn’t come from me,’’ Barnes said. He then added his name is in ‘‘the graduation book.’’

‘‘I was literally there. I didn’t just pop up and say ‘oh, hey, guys,’’’ he said. It wasn’t clear if he was referring to A& M’s graduation ceremony. Barnes last year posted photos of himself in a cap and gown at A& M’s 2008 graduation ceremony.

One of Evers’ media staff told the governor he could answer the question.

‘‘Right,’’ Evers said. ‘‘I believe those responses are responsible responses, and as a result I believe that he’s been truthful.’’

No More Sales Tax Holiday in Wisconsin

Thanks, Governor Evers.

Since back to school shopping can get pretty expensive, Wisconsin held its first tax free holiday for shoppers in early August last year. During that time, shoppers could buy select clothing, technology, and other supplies without paying the 5% sales tax.

“I think they should have the tax free weekend because it helps a lot of parents. Especially when they only have one income and grandparents have to help,” said Callahan.

[…]

But Democratic Gov. Tony Evers has confirmed that the state will no longer participate in the event this year. He said it was a one-time deal enacted under the former Republican Gov. Scott Walker.

“I think parents are going to be purchasing school supplies whether they have an incentive or not. I just don’t think the incentive actually worked,” said Evers.

I agree that the sales tax holiday doesn’t work as an economic stimulant, but it sure was nice for parents and teachers who are spending hundreds of dollars on school supplies.

One-Sided Task Force

Evers sure doesn’t take diversity into account when picking people.

MacIver News Service | July 25, 2019

By M.D. Kittle

MADISON, Wis. — “Titanic” didn’t need a spoiler alert. 

And it doesn’t take a genius to see where Gov. Tony Evers’ Joint Task Force on Payroll Fraud and Worker Misclassification — loaded down with Big Labor representatives — appears to be heading. 

The vast majority of  public members on the task force — five of six — are union leaders or have deep ties to organized labor, according to a membership list obtained by MacIver News Service. 

Even some of the state bureaucrats who round out the investigative panel are closely connected to Big Labor. 

Business advocates expressed concern about the outsized role labor looks to play on the task force. 

“If that’s the way the makeup of the task force remains, then I think that’s really unfortunate and a missed opportunity,” said Scott Manley, senior vice president of Government Relations for Wisconsin Manufacturers & Commerce. 

There is also concern from construction industry officials that contractors are being unfairly targeted. Misclassification of independent contractors occurs among janitorial services, Internet providers, and throughout the exploding gig economy, too. But the task force, at least based on the initial rhetoric, seems fixed on the construction trade. 

Governor Evers Considers Budget

Frankly, I hope Evers vetoes the entire thing.

Evers received the budget on Friday. He has until July 5 to decide what to do.

The Journal Times asked Evers’ office about specific provisions in the budget regarding transportation and education, along with several Racine County-centered provisions. Evers’ office did not specifically respond.

Evers’ office stated that the governor’s “team is reviewing the Legislature’s changes to the budget, and the governor looks forward to receiving the biennial budget bill as soon possible.”

The worst case scenario is that Evers vetoes out the few good things in this budget, like the tax cut, and leave the rest of the crap (massive spending increases, fee increases, etc.) in place. Wisconsin would be better off if Evers vetoes the whole thing and we revert to the previous budget. And then, perhaps, the Republicans will realize that their duty is to their constituents and not Evers and the Madison swamp.

—————————

One more thing… this is a big part of the problem:

“The reality is he’s the governor for four years, so you can either choose to argue 24/7, or set aside things that would cause arguments and focus on the things where you can hopefully find that middle ground,” Vos said.

What an incorrect vision of the job of the opposition leader. If Speaker Vos is just going to lead the Republicans to “set aside things that would cause arguments,” then what is the point? The entire point of having more than one party is that they DISAGREE and ARGUE about it. If Vos is just going to do his job with the goal of avoiding arguments, then he is the wrong person for the job.

 

Governor Evers endorses new era of moral depravity

My column for the Washington County Daily News is online and in print. Here you go:

On Friday afternoon, as people all over Wisconsin were getting ready to enjoy the first official weekend of summer, Gov. Tony Evers vetoed four bills relating to abortion. While it is easy to discuss the vetoes in the context of the political gamesmanship between the Republicans and the Democrats, to do so is facile and fails to fully appreciate the depravity behind the action.

The political angle is simple. In response to radical pro-abortion laws being passed by Democrats in states like New York, Republicans across the country are trying to pass laws to protect the unborn. Both parties are acting to solidify state laws should the United States Supreme Court overturn Roe v. Wade and cast the responsibility for regulating abortions back to the states.

But behind these bills are the lives of real people. Let us take the four bills that Evers signed one by one.

The first bill would have prevented taxpayers from funding abortion providers through Medicaid. The two political parties have been fighting over this for years. The Republicans argue, rightly, that people who are morally opposed to killing babies in the womb should not be forced to fund organizations that do so. Democrats know that Planned Parenthood is a major financial and rhetorical supporter of the Democratic Party, so they must keep the taxpayer gravy train flowing. Evers vetoed the bill.

The second bill would have required that abortionists provide information that a woman may be able to change her mind and continue her pregnancy even after the first dose of mifepristone, a drug used as part of a drug cocktail to cause an abortion. The information would have been provided as part of the documentation that is already provided by abortionists. Evers vetoed the bill.

These two bills are somewhat procedural and wonkish, but the last two are morally crystal clear.

The third bill would have prohibited a woman from killing her baby based on its race, sex, or disabilities. Evers vetoed the bill. In doing so, Evers affirmed that women should have the ability to abort her baby if she does not like the color of its skin, the baby’s sex, or if the baby is disabled in some fashion. If a mom really wanted a boy but the ultrasound shows a girl, Evers supports her choice to kill the girl and try again. If a baby is shown to have a malformed foot, Evers supports the mom’s choice to kill the baby. If a mom does not want a black baby, Evers supports her choice. In short, Evers supports a woman’s choice to kill her baby even for the most capricious and vain reasons.

The fourth bill passed by the Legislature and vetoed by Governor Evers would have ensured that a baby who survives an abortion receives the same medical care and treatment that any newborn baby would. Sadly, abortionists are very effective, so the odds of a baby surviving an abortion is very rare. But when it does happen, the baby is, by any definition used since the dawn of humankind, born. The baby is outside the womb as a separate human. As such, the baby is entitled to all of the same protection and care as any other person. The fact that the baby survived an attempted abortion is immaterial in terms of the baby’s right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.

Not according to Governor Evers. According to our governor, a baby who is born and survived an abortion can still be quietly murdered because the abortionist and mother intended to kill it earlier. In Evers’ moral universe, the mother’s desire to kill her baby, even after it has left her body, trumps the baby’s right to exist.

We have come a long way from the old Bill Clinton mantra that abortions should be “safe, legal, and rare.” Now the rabid pro-abortionists like Governors Evers support abortions for any reason — even for anti-disabled, racist, or sexist reasons — up until the time of birth, and even for a while after birth. The moral decrepitude inherent in such a political position is astounding.

Evers Makes Sure Babies Can Still be Killed if they are the “Wrong” Race

Or if the baby is the “wrong” sex or whatever. What a wretched human being.

MADISON (AP) — Wisconsin’s Democratic Gov. Tony Evers has vetoed four abortion bills passed by the Republican-controlled Legislature.

One bill Evers vetoed Friday would have imposed criminal penalties on doctors who fail to give medical care in the extremely rare circumstance where a baby is born alive following an abortion attempt.

Other vetoed bills would have cut off Medicaid funding for Planned Parenthood; prohibited abortions based on the fetus’ race, sex or defects; and required providers to tell women seeking abortions using the drug mifepristone that the process may be reversed after the first dose.

Evers Stokes Division with Legislature

What a stupid and easily-disprovable accusation for Evers’ mouthpiece to throw out.

BY SCOTT BAUER, Associated Press

OSHKOSH, Wis. (AP) — Democratic Gov. Tony Evers’ spokeswoman accused Republican legislative leaders Saturday of refusing to work with the governor’s chief of staff because she is a woman, leading the GOP lawmakers to call the charge “asinine” and “clueless.”

The back and forth came after Assembly Speaker Robin Vos and Senate Majority Leader Scott Fitzgerald detailed at the Wisconsin Republican Party convention what they said was a strained relationship with the new governor, who is in his fifth month in office. Vos called Evers “out of touch” and Fitzgerald said his office hasn’t figured out how to work with lawmakers.

“There’s a real disconnect on all different levels with this governor,” Fitzgerald said. Fitzgerald said he and Vos have only met with Evers twice for five minutes since January.

Evers “has communicated repeatedly to GOP leadership that they should work with his chief of staff, just like they did under the previous governor,” said his spokeswoman Melissa Baldauff. “That directive wasn’t confusing to them when the chief of staff was a man.”

Everyone who served as chief of staff under former Gov. Scott Walker, a Republican, was a man. Evers’ chief of staff is Maggie Gau, who ran his campaign and previously worked for Democrats in the Legislature.

“Vos and Fitzgerald are clearly uncomfortable or simply unwilling to work with a leadership team made up entirely of women,” Baldauff said.

Fitzgerald, in a statement, called the accusation “completely asinine.”

“The most powerful senator on the budget committee is a woman, and perhaps they’d know that if someone from the governor’s team was actually engaged in budget negotiations,” Fitzgerald said, referring to Republican state Sen. Alberta Darling.

Vos, in a tweet, pointed out that his chief of staff, communications director and policy director are all women.

“Evers staff – Clueless,” Vos tweeted.

Babies deserve society’s protection

Here is my full column that ran yesterday in the Washington County Daily News

The debate over abortion has taken a gruesome turn and Gov. Tony Evers is in the vanguard of a radical new front in the war on babies.

The dispute about when and if abortion should be allowed in our nation has generally come down to one’s opinion of when life begins, or, to put it another way, when a person becomes a person. Ardent pro-lifers, like myself, believe that life begins at conception.

From a religious point of view, most of the major religions teach that life begins at conception. From a scientific point of view, the moment of conception is when the parents’ DNA commingles to create a new, unique DNA. It is generally accepted that each person has unique DNA and it is a distinguishing characteristic of personhood.

When discussing when it should be allowed to kill a conceived child, those who do not believe that life begins at conception generally try to figure out a point upon the developmental trajectory when the child (or growth, or clump of cells, or whatever) becomes “viable.” Given that human children are unable to survive on their own without the aid of adults until several years after birth, the distinction of when a child is “viable” is utterly arbitrary. But virtually every pro-abortionist puts the point of viability before birth.

Some pro-abortionists put the viability demarcation at the point of pregnancy when the baby could survive outside of the womb with medical help. Some put it at when there is heart and/or brain function. Some put it at when the baby can feel pain. Some put it right up until the moment of birth. These arguments are old and well-worn.

At the root of the debate, however, was the notion of morality and human rights that we do not just kill people. We used to be able to agree that killing humans without the due process of law or an act of war was immoral and barbaric. This was especially the view when it came to killing babies. Pro-abortionists had always argued that abortion is not murder because it does not kill an actual human. Such a stance was a tacit acknowledgment that killing actual humans is wrong. Even the most pro-abortion people who support abortion up until birth would argue that an unborn child is still not an actual human deserving of rights and protections of law and society.

Not anymore.

In response to a wave of pro-abortion legislation being passed in states like New York and Vermont which would dramatically expand when and how abortions are allowed, Wisconsin’s legislative Republicans announced a bill that would protect babies who are born alive after a

botched abortion. Since medical professionals are already morally and legally obligated to protect life and even most pro-abortion people oppose killing babies once they are born, the Republican bill is just common sense.

In an earlier age, the Republican bill would have had broad bipartisan support. All it says is that if a baby is lucky to escape the womb alive during an abortion attempt, the medical personnel would be obligated to provide lifesaving care to the child. After all, once the baby is outside of the womb, we used to all agree that it was a child deserving of protection.

Immediately after the Republicans announced their Born Alive Abortions Survivors bill, Governor Evers rushed to tell anyone who would listen that he will veto the bill. Not wanting to admit that he supports killing babies, or at least letting babies die by withholding medical care, Evers has offered a couple of nonsensical excuses. He has claimed that the law is redundant and not necessary. If so, so what? It takes just as much effort to sign it as it does to veto it. Evers has also said that the law is not necessary because babies never survive abortions. The people who are alive today after botched abortions would take issue with Evers’ assertion. There is no data collected on how many babies have survived an abortion only to be left to die by an ardent abortionist.

Evers gave away the game in his response to President Trump’s comments about the bill during his recent Wisconsin rally. In response to Trump, Evers said, “To say that doctors in the state of Wisconsin are executing babies is just a blasphemy.” What a telling use of the word “blasphemy.” To blaspheme is to speak or act against God or a religious tenet. Evers is so exercised by Trump’s comments because the president had the audacity to blaspheme against the liberal orthodoxy where abortion on demand stands as a pillar of faith.

Even people who believe that life does not begin until birth should support the Born Alive Abortions Survivors bill. Sadly, abortionists are very effective and it is rare for a baby to survive an abortion attempt, but when they do, the least we can do is provide them medical treatment and a chance to live.

Babies deserve society’s protection

My column for the Washington County Daily News is online and in print. In it, I note the ghoulish shift in the abortion debate and our governor’s position as chief ghoul. Here’s a taste.

In response to a wave of pro-abortion legislation being passed in states like New York and Vermont which would dramatically expand when and how abortions are allowed, Wisconsin’s legislative Republicans announced a bill that would protect babies who are born alive after a

botched abortion. Since medical professionals are already morally and legally obligated to protect life and even most pro-abortion people oppose killing babies once they are born, the Republican bill is just common sense.

In an earlier age, the Republican bill would have had broad bipartisan support. All it says is that if a baby is lucky to escape the womb alive during an abortion attempt, the medical personnel would be obligated to provide lifesaving care to the child. After all, once the baby is outside of the womb, we used to all agree that it was a child deserving of protection.

Immediately after the Republicans announced their Born Alive Abortions Survivors bill, Governor Evers rushed to tell anyone who would listen that he will veto the bill. Not wanting to admit that he supports killing babies, or at least letting babies die by withholding medical care, Evers has offered a couple of nonsensical excuses. He has claimed that the law is redundant and not necessary. If so, so what? It takes just as much effort to sign it as it does to veto it. Evers has also said that the law is not necessary because babies never survive abortions. The people who are alive today after botched abortions would take issue with Evers’ assertion. There is no data collected on how many babies have survived an abortion only to be left to die by an ardent abortionist.

Evers gave away the game in his response to President Trump’s comments about the bill during his recent Wisconsin rally. In response to Trump, Evers said, “To say that doctors in the state of Wisconsin are executing babies is just a blasphemy.” What a telling use of the word “blasphemy.” To blaspheme is to speak or act against God or a religious tenet. Evers is so exercised by Trump’s comments because the president had the audacity to blaspheme against the liberal orthodoxy where abortion on demand stands as a pillar of faith.

Court Reinstates Appointees Who Were Illegally Ousted by Evers

Good.

The 4-3 order handed down on Tuesday by the court’s conservative majority wasn’t the final say in the lame-duck lawsuit brought by the League of Women Voters of Wisconsin. But the court found that all of the former Gov. Scott Walker appointees – including those whose appointments that were rescinded by Democratic Gov. Tony Evers – can return to work while the appeal of the case proceeds.

“As we are only at the early stage of this appeal and in the context of a motion for temporary relief pending appeal, we express no position as to whether or not any of the Legislature’s arguments will ultimately prevail,” the court wrote. “We cannot say, however, that the Legislature’s arguments have ‘no likelihood of success on the merits,’ as the circuit court did.”

Evers Appoints Campaign Supporters to UW Regents

Par for the course.

The appointments include Karen Walsh, of Madison, and Edmund Manydeeds III, of Eau Claire, both of whom will serve seven-year terms that begin May 2 and run through 2026. Evers also announced the appointment of a UW-La Crosse student.

Walsh spent more than 20 years working at UW-Madison. She and her husband donated $10 million to the UW School of Medicine and Public Health in 2015 to increase the size of the UW Hospital emergency facility. She currently serves as the director of a local family foundation dedicated to advancing human and animal health and welfare.

Campaign finance records show Walsh donated about $14,000 to Evers’ gubernatorial campaign, according to the Wisconsin Democracy Campaign.

Manydeeds previously served a term on the board from April 2010 through May 2017 under an appointment by former Democratic Gov. Jim Doyle.

Evers Vows to Let People Kill Babies

What a monstrously immoral man.

Wisconsin Gov. Tony Evers (D) promised to veto a “born alive” abortion bill if the GOP-backed legislation makes it to his desk.

The bill, introduced last week, hasn’t yet been voted on in any relevant legislative committees. Still, Evers told the Milwaukee Journal Sentinelthat he would veto the bill, citing existing protections and criminal penalties under Wisconsin state law.

“I think those protections already exist,” Evers told the newspaper. “We have all sorts of issues to deal with in the state of Wisconsin and to pass a bill that is redundant seems to be not a productive use of time. And clearly I ran on the belief — and I still believe — that women should be able to make choices about their health care. But this deals with a specific issue that’s already been resolved.”

That’s a BS excuse. If the law would be redundant, as he claims, then what’s the harm in signing it? The truth is that Planned Parenthood and the abortion fascists are pushing to have infanticide legal and Evers supports it too.

Foxconn Called First, Evers Alleges

If true, why didn’t he mention it last week when he started saying he wanted to reopen the contract? He’s flailing and betting that Foxconn wouldn’t see it in their best interests to contradict him in public.

An executive for electronics maker Foxconn first suggested revisiting the company’s $3 billion state incentive deal to reflect the company’s “evolving project” in Wisconsin, according to a letter written and released Tuesday by Gov. Tony Evers.

Evers Threatens to Renege on Foxconn Deal

Don’t screw up our state, governor.

Gov. Tony Evers said Wednesday that electronics maker Foxconn Technology Group is unlikely to employ 13,000 workers in Wisconsin as it has said it could and that the state’s deal with the company may need to be “downsized” as a result.

The structure of the deal already accounts for Foxconn missing their jobs obligation and protects the taxpayers. If Evers reopens the contract, he is dealing from a position of weakness. Foxconn doesn’t have to agree to anything else and could just walk away. While I’m sure that Evers and his lefty cohorts would be pleased with their self-fulfilling prophecy, it would be terrible for Wisconsin for a generation or more. It would mark Wisconsin as a state that won’t stick to their contracts for businesses around the world.

Feeling the weight of government

Here is my full column that ran in the Washington County Daily News yesterday.

April 15. A date that lives in infamy. As the date by which all Americans must submit their income tax forms to make sure the government has extracted enough hard-earned money to fund the bureaucracy, April 15 also serves as a good date to contemplate the cost of government. Given that this April 15 is on the cusp of Wisconsin’s biennial budget debate, it is also a good date to look at how much more costly our new governor wants to make our government.

According to the Tax Foundation, Tax Freedom Day in 2019 is April 16. That means that every dollar that every single American earned up until April 16 is needed to pay the nation’s total tax bill of $5.29 trillion. The nation’s total tax bill is more than the nation’s total combined bill for housing, clothing, and food. Big government isn’t cheap. In Wisconsin, Tax Freedom Day comes even later on April 19. The cost of Wisconsin’s government is still more than most states.

If Governor Tony Evers has his way, Wisconsin’s Tax Freedom Day will push later into the year like Illinois or New York. The governor’s budget proposal includes over a billion dollars in tax increases and would increase taxpayer disparity.

When the Supreme Court ruled last year that states can collect sales and use taxes on internet purchases, Gov. Scott Walker and the Republicans neutralized the tax burden for Wisconsinites by offsetting the new sales tax collections with an equal across-theboard income tax cut. Governor Evers would reverse that decision and give the entire tax savings to only those in the lowest tax bracket.

At the same time, Evers’ budget proposes increasing the Earned Income Tax Credit, a welfare scheme paid through the income tax system, and lower taxes in the lower tax brackets. All of these ideas would lower income taxes for those at the lower end of the income scale.

In order to make up for tax decreases to the lower brackets, Governor Evers would increase taxes on the higher brackets by forcing single people who earn more than $100,000 and couples who earn more than $150,000 to pay regular income taxes on their capital gains. This is estimated to increase taxes by $505 million on Wisconsin’s higher earners.

For some perspective, figures calculated by the Wisconsin Taxpayers Alliance show that income filers earning over $100,000 comprise about 12% of all income tax payers, but they pay over 61% of all income taxes in the state. Evers’ budget proposal would continue the effort to foist more and more of the cost of government on an ever smaller group of income earners.

Not content to only hammer individual taxpayers with higher taxes, Evers would also cap the Manufacturers and Agriculture Credit to a mere $300,000 of income for manufacturers. This is projected to result in a whopping $516.6 million in higher taxes on Wisconsin’s manufacturers.

Just in case anyone thought they might escape Evers’ tax increases, he also proposed to increase gas taxes by eight cents a gallon and then index the tax increases to inflation. That way taxes would automatically increase without politicians having to bother going on record to do it with a vote. This would raise taxes another $485 million through the budget term.

Governor Evers has made it perfectly clear how much he would raise taxes if he had the power to do so on his own. As the legislative Republicans formulate their budget proposals, they should begin with the mirror image of Governor Evers’ proposal. The Republicans should start with a billion dollar tax cut for all Wisconsinites and let the Governor try to negotiate from that starting position.

Wisconsin’s tax burden is not good, but it has been improving for the last eight years. Republicans should fight hard to maintain that trajectory for the benefit of all Wisconsinites.

Feeling the weight of government

My column for the Washington County Daily News is online and in print. It seemed appropriate on tax day to take another look at all of the tax increases that Governor Evers wants to impose on us. Here’s a taste:

Governor Evers has made it perfectly clear how much he would raise taxes if he had the power to do so on his own. As the legislative Republicans formulate their budget proposals, they should begin with the mirror image of Governor Evers’ proposal. The Republicans should start with a billion dollar tax cut for all Wisconsinites and let the Governor try to negotiate from that starting position.

Wisconsin’s tax burden is not good, but it has been improving for the last eight years. Republicans should fight hard to maintain that trajectory for the benefit of all Wisconsinites.