Boots & Sabers

The blogging will continue until morale improves...

Tag: Washington County Daily News

Protasiewicz’s record speaks

by | 0739, 16 Mar 2323 | | 3 Comments

Here is my full column that ran in the Washington County Daily News earlier this week.

The April election is looming and the battle for the balance of the Wisconsin Supreme Court is fully engaged. Fortunately, the voters are being offered a stark choice. Dan Kelly has a long and strong record of judicial restraint and conservatism. Janet Protasiewicz has an equally long and strong record of judicial activism and liberalism. Whichever candidate wins will determine the ideological color of the court for years to come.

 

A funny thing happens when liberals run for court positions. Irrespective of their past statements, actions, or documented history, every liberal suddenly transforms into a virtuous law and order hardliner. One is always best served by looking at a person’s actions instead of their words. Protasiewicz has been a Milwaukee County Circuit Court judge for almost a decade. Her record is extensive, and terrible.

 

In 2015 a Milwaukee man was convicted of two Class I felonies for Child Abuse-Recklessly Cause Harm. He was fond of flogging his three children with a dog leash for various transgressions. Class I felonies carry a maximum penalty of 3.5 years and a fine of $10,000 according to Wisconsin statute 939.50(3)(i) meaning that he could have been sentenced to seven years in prison and $20,000 in fines.

 

As reported by Wisconsin Right Now, Judge Protasiewicz stayed any prison time for him, meaning that he would not serve a day in prison if he resisted committing another crime. She sentenced him to nine months, yes months, of work-release jail and probation. Whipping kids does not rise to the level of giving someone prison time in Protasiewicz’s court.

 

In 2016 another Milwaukee man was charged with three felony charges for the brutal assault of his girlfriend. According to the criminal complaint, the man became angry after looking at her phone and proceeded to choke, punch, and kick her repeatedly resulting in severe bruising, lacerations, and lost teeth. Judge Protasiewicz signed off on a lax plea deal from an equally soft-on-crime Milwaukee prosecutor that threw out all of the felony charges. Once again, Protasiewicz stayed any prison time and sentenced him to six months in jail and probation.

 

Tragically, this same violent predator allegedly went on to murder the niece of the Milwaukee Common Council President before killing himself at the end of a careening police chase through the streets of Milwaukee. Had he been sentenced to prison for the original three felonies, he would not have been able to murder another woman.

 

In May of 2020, a 15-year-old girl was walking in Milwaukee when a man in a pickup truck pulled up beside her, grabbed her by the wrist, and forced her into the truck. He took her to a hotel, raped her, and tried to force her to become a prostitute. Thankfully, she escaped and notified police.

 

Originally charged with three felonies for kidnapping, trafficking of a child, and second-degree sexual assault of a child, Protasiewicz signed off on another plea deal that reduced the charges to third-degree sexual assault and child enticement. He was convicted and Protasiewicz then gave him time served for jail time and stayed all of the prison time. He was put on probation for four years. In other words, despite his long criminal history and kidnapping and rape of a child, he did not serve any prison time thanks to Judge Protasiewicz.

 

This monster has since been convicted of a felony for being a felon in possession of a firearm in Washington County. He is still free on the street thanks to a Washington County judge cut from the same cloth as Protasiewicz. For a multiple felon child rapist, Washington County Judge Sandra Giernoth, an appointee of Governor Tony Evers, sentenced him to six months in jail and then gave him time served. The guy is happily living in Milwaukee — free as a bird.

 

In another case, a Milwaukee woman was charged with felony child neglect after she starved her 16-yearold child to the point that he only weighed 42 pounds. The child died due to his mother’s abuse. The woman was convicted of the felony charge. At sentencing, Judge Protasiewicz once again stayed any prison or jail time and gave the felon time served. Despite starving her child to death in 2020, the woman is living free in 2023 thanks to Judge Protasiewicz.

 

When people talk about soft-on-crime liberal judges, Janet Protasiewicz is a prime example. She has been letting violent felons roam free for years because that is who she is. And that is who she will be if Wisconsinites elect her to the Supreme Court.

Protasiewicz’s record speaks

by | 0711, 14 Mar 2323 | , | 0 Comments

My column for the Washington County Daily News is online and in print. Here’s a slice:

A funny thing happens when liberals run for court positions. Irrespective of their past statements, actions, or documented history, every liberal suddenly transforms into a virtuous law and order hardliner. One is always best served by looking at a person’s actions instead of their words. Protasiewicz has been a Milwaukee County Circuit Court judge for almost a decade. Her record is extensive, and terrible.

 

[…]

 

In May of 2020, a 15-year-old girl was walking in Milwaukee when a man in a pickup truck pulled up beside her, grabbed her by the wrist, and forced her into the truck. He took her to a hotel, raped her, and tried to force her to become a prostitute. Thankfully, she escaped and notified police.

 

Originally charged with three felonies for kidnapping, trafficking of a child, and second-degree sexual assault of a child, Protasiewicz signed off on another plea deal that reduced the charges to third-degree sexual assault and child enticement. He was convicted and Protasiewicz then gave him time served for jail time and stayed all of the prison time. He was put on probation for four years. In other words, despite his long criminal history and kidnapping and rape of a child, he did not serve any prison time thanks to Judge Protasiewicz.

 

This monster has since been convicted of a felony for being a felon in possession of a firearm in Washington County. He is still free on the street thanks to a Washington County judge cut from the same cloth as Protasiewicz. For a multiple felon child rapist, Washington County Judge Sandra Giernoth, an appointee of Governor Tony Evers, sentenced him to six months in jail and then gave him time served. The guy is happily living in Milwaukee — free as a bird.

 

[…]

 

When people talk about soft-on-crime liberal judges, Janet Protasiewicz is a prime example. She has been letting violent felons roam free for years because that is who she is. And that is who she will be if Wisconsinites elect her to the Supreme Court.

Homeowners blockaded in Vilas County

by | 0852, 11 Mar 2323 | | 0 Comments

Here is my full column that ran in the Washington County Daily News earlier this week.

After years of wrangling through a convoluted mess of contracts, bad record keeping, broken promises, state, local, federal, and tribal laws, the Lac du Flambeau Band of Lake Superior Chippewa has decided to blockade dozens of non-tribal families in the dead of winter. In a dramatic escalation, tribal officials are demanding $20 million in order to lift the blockade.

 

The root of the issue rests in the 19th-century Dawes Act when the federal government broke communal tribal lands into parcels to be allotted to tribal families as private property in exchange for U.S. citizenship. Some of those private parcels wound up in the hands of non-tribal people through sale, foreclosure, and other means by which private property changes hands. Now, more than a century later, those private parcels are owned by non-tribal families who are being blockaded.

 

The conflict is over the roads that traverse tribal land to reach those private parcels. The easement by which the homeowners were granted permission to use the roads expired about ten years ago and a protracted negotiation began. The relevant parties are the Lac du Flambeau tribe, two title companies, the Wisconsin Town of Lac du Flambeau, the U.S. government, and the state of Wisconsin.

 

At the risk of simplifying a very complex legal issue that is imbued with generations of justified distrust and unethical behavior, the disagreement really is straightforward. When the easements expired, the tribe wanted money to grant new easements. The tribe also wants temporary easements to give them the latitude to renegotiate the payments every time they expire. On the other side, the title companies and town wants permanent easements, and they want to pay less money than the tribe wants. Both sides appear to have had their moments of bad behavior and have been unable to resolve the impasse.

 

Complicating the issue is the fact that the roads in question have been largely built with money from federal taxpayers. According to congressman Tom Tiffany, who represents the area, the tribe has received about $213 million in federal funding since 2013 through the Tribal Transportation Program. Since the roads received federal funding, the general public is supposed to have access, but tribal authorities argue that tribal law supersedes such federal requirements.

 

On January 31, in a grotesque escalation, the tribe blockaded the four artery roads with concrete blocks and wire. About 60 homes are sealed off from the outside world except for emergencies. Even then, tribal authorities must be called to open to roadblocks ahead of time. Some residents have been forced to abandon their homes entirely while others are having to use snowmobiles and sleds to cross the frozen lakes to get supplies, medical care, work, and attend school. With the spring thaw looming, they are weeks away from losing that frozen lifeline.

 

To lift the blockade, the tribe is demanding $20 million for a 15-year easement. This is an exorbitant sum for a simple easement, but the tribe seems content to hold non-tribal homeowners hostage in order to extort the sum. For comparison, the most recent offer that the tribe rejected was for about $1.1 million plus all future state gas tax revenues from the town for perpetual access.

 

The most innocent party in this whole dispute is the one suffering the most — the homeowners. They bought their properties in good faith and have been dutifully paying their taxes to maintain the schools, emergency services, and, yes, roads. Yet their property values have been obliterated, their lives are being disrupted, and their safety is being endangered.

 

The situation has reached a crisis point and real leadership will be needed to resolve it. It is unacceptable that one group of Americans should be blockading another group of Americans as a negotiating tactic in a legal dispute. This is not about sovereignty or some noble cause. It is about cold, hard, cash. If the tribe will not immediately lift the blockade and return to the negotiating table, the governor must step in to protect the homeowners from being used as hostages.

 

Time will tell what a fair resolution looks like, but any deal derived from the duress of innocent homeowners is illegitimate and an affront to justice.

Homeowners blockaded in Vilas County

by | 0743, 7 Mar 2323 | , , | 2 Comments

We have a hostage situation going on in Vilas County. I wrote a little about it for the Washington County Daily News. Here’s a part:

After years of wrangling through a convoluted mess of contracts, bad record keeping, broken promises, state, local, federal, and tribal laws, the Lac du Flambeau Band of Lake Superior Chippewa has decided to blockade dozens of non-tribal families in the dead of winter. In a dramatic escalation, tribal officials are demanding $20 million in order to lift the blockade.

 

The root of the issue rests in the 19th-century Dawes Act when the federal government broke communal tribal lands into parcels to be allotted to tribal families as private property in exchange for U.S. citizenship. Some of those private parcels wound up in the hands of non-tribal people through sale, foreclosure, and other means by which private property changes hands. Now, more than a century later, those private parcels are owned by non-tribal families who are being blockaded.

 

[…]

 

On January 31, in a grotesque escalation, the tribe blockaded the four artery roads with concrete blocks and wire. About 60 homes are sealed off from the outside world except for emergencies. Even then, tribal authorities must be called to open to roadblocks ahead of time. Some residents have been forced to abandon their homes entirely while others are having to use snowmobiles and sleds to cross the frozen lakes to get supplies, medical care, work, and attend school. With the spring thaw looming, they are weeks away from losing that frozen lifeline.

 

To lift the blockade, the tribe is demanding $20 million for a 15-year easement. This is an exorbitant sum for a simple easement, but the tribe seems content to hold non-tribal homeowners hostage in order to extort the sum. For comparison, the most recent offer that the tribe rejected was for about $1.1 million plus all future state gas tax revenues from the town for perpetual access.

 

The most innocent party in this whole dispute is the one suffering the most — the homeowners. They bought their properties in good faith and have been dutifully paying their taxes to maintain the schools, emergency services, and, yes, roads. Yet their property values have been obliterated, their lives are being disrupted, and their safety is being endangered.

 

The situation has reached a crisis point and real leadership will be needed to resolve it. It is unacceptable that one group of Americans should be blockading another group of Americans as a negotiating tactic in a legal dispute. This is not about sovereignty or some noble cause. It is about cold, hard, cash. If the tribe will not immediately lift the blockade and return to the negotiating table, the governor must step in to protect the homeowners from being used as hostages.

Rule of Law on ballot this April

by | 1930, 3 Mar 2323 | | 0 Comments

Here is my full column that ran in the Washington County Daily News earlier this week:

Over the next six weeks, you are going to hear pundits and activists insisting that the Wisconsin Supreme Court election is a battle for the future of Wisconsin. They are right.

 

Judicial conservative Dan Kelly and judicial liberal Janet Protasiewicz have very, very different approaches to the law. Kelly, who previously served on the Wisconsin Supreme Court, has a track record of judicial humility in which he rules according to the actual wording of the constitution and the law irrespective of the outcome or his personal convictions.

 

His approach to the law is one in which he respects the rights and responsibilities of the people and their representatives in the Legislative and Executive branches of government. Kelly believes in the Rule of Law, in which the law is applied as written and a judge’s role is to ensure that the law is applied correctly.

 

The Rule of Law is the critical foundation of a free society and underpins Western civilization. The Rule of Law is the principle that all people, from prices to paupers, are subject to the same laws. As John Locke put it in his Second Treatise on Government, “freedom of men under government is, to have a standing rule to live by, common to every one of that society, and made by the legislative power erected in it; a liberty to follow my own will in all things, where the rule prescribes not; and not to be subject to the inconstant, uncertain, unknown, arbitrary will of another man.”

 

It is the Rule of Law that protects people from arbitrary tyrannical rule. In a society where the Rule of Law is in force, the role of a judge is simply to enforce the law as it is written. If the judge thinks that the law is wrong, a judicial conservative is bound by duty to apply the law anyway because it is the role of the legislature to change the law – not the judge.

 

Janet Protasiewicz has a very different approach to the law. Protasiewicz is proudly embracing the “progressive” (read: socialist) label and is sharing her opinion on all sorts of issues that may come before the court. She has said that the state’s electoral maps are “rigged,” that a woman’s right to abort her baby is a decision that should “be made solely by her,” that Act 10 is “unconstitutional,” and she has a long record as a Milwaukee County Judge of coddling hardened violent criminals – including child sex offenders. Protasiewicz’s approach to the law is to use her position as a means to reach outcomes that align with her personal values and convictions irrespective of what the law actually says. It is the kind of judicial activism that obliterates the Rule of Law.

 

As if to try to assuage concerns about her vocal activism, Protasiewicz said on “Capital City Sunday,” “What I will tell you is that [for] the bulk of issues there’s no thumb on the scale, but I will also tell you that I’ll call them as I see them. and I’ll tell you what my values are in regards to [the abortion] issue, because this issue is so critically important.” In other words, Protasiewicz is telling us that when she considers the case before her to be critically important, as measured against her values, she is more than willing to put her thumb on the scales of justice.

 

This is the definition of judicial activism. This is not only grossly unethical, but also antithetical to the Rule of Law.

 

This election will decide the balance of the Wisconsin Supreme Court. If Kelly is elected, the court will have a majority of judicial conservatives who respect the Rule of Law. If Protasiewicz is elected, the court will have a majority of politically leftist judicial activists. It is that simple.

 

Under a politically leftist activist Supreme Court, we can expect them to put their thumb on the scales of justice when cases regarding the gun rights, victims rights, Act 10, school choice, right to work, criminal justice issues, election laws, and all of the other issues that are clearly written into the law by Wisconsin’s elected representatives. All of these issues are on the scale and are not safe under the rule of an activist court.

 

Is the future of Wisconsin on the ballot this April?

 

You bet it is.

Rule of Law on ballot this April

by | 0916, 28 Feb 2323 | , | 0 Comments

My column for the Washington County Daily News is online and in print. Here’s a part:

The Rule of Law is the critical foundation of a free society and underpins Western civilization. The Rule of Law is the principle that all people, from prices to paupers, are subject to the same laws. As John Locke put it in his Second Treatise on Government, “freedom of men under government is, to have a standing rule to live by, common to every one of that society, and made by the legislative power erected in it; a liberty to follow my own will in all things, where the rule prescribes not; and not to be subject to the inconstant, uncertain, unknown, arbitrary will of another man.”

 

It is the Rule of Law that protects people from arbitrary tyrannical rule. In a society where the Rule of Law is in force, the role of a judge is simply to enforce the law as it is written. If the judge thinks that the law is wrong, a judicial conservative is bound by duty to apply the law anyway because it is the role of the legislature to change the law – not the judge.

 

Janet Protasiewicz has a very different approach to the law. Protasiewicz is proudly embracing the “progressive” (read: socialist) label and is sharing her opinion on all sorts of issues that may come before the court. She has said that the state’s electoral maps are “rigged,” that a woman’s right to abort her baby is a decision that should “be made solely by her,” that Act 10 is “unconstitutional,” and she has a long record as a Milwaukee County Judge of coddling hardened violent criminals – including child sex offenders. Protasiewicz’s approach to the law is to use her position as a means to reach outcomes that align with her personal values and convictions irrespective of what the law actually says. It is the kind of judicial activism that obliterates the Rule of Law.

 

As if to try to assuage concerns about her vocal activism, Protasiewicz said on “Capital City Sunday,” “What I will tell you is that [for] the bulk of issues there’s no thumb on the scale, but I will also tell you that I’ll call them as I see them. and I’ll tell you what my values are in regards to [the abortion] issue, because this issue is so critically important.” In other words, Protasiewicz is telling us that when she considers the case before her to be critically important, as measured against her values, she is more than willing to put her thumb on the scales of justice.

 

This is the definition of judicial activism. This is not only grossly unethical, but also antithetical to the Rule of Law.

Upgrading Brewers’ stadium attracts bipartisan support

by | 1334, 25 Feb 2323 | | 0 Comments

Here is my full column that ran in the Washington County Daily News earlier this week.

As this column discussed last week, Gov. Tony Evers’ budget proposal is an unserious carnival of leftist fantasy policies and indecent spending. Legislative Republicans have already dismissed Evers’ proposal and are starting from scratch. One spending idea, however, appears to have bipartisan support: spending hundreds of millions of tax dollars to upgrade American Family Field.

 

The battle over tax funding to build a new stadium for the Milwaukee Brewers was a brawl that left deep scars in the electorate. The five-county sales tax to fund the stadium collected $605 million — about $342 per person — until it finally ended in 2020. While the Brewers have an undeniably positive economic impact, it remains disconcerting for some people to be forced to pay for a place for millionaires to play a game. Such funding, however, may be required.

 

American Family Field is owned by a state-created public agency named the Southeast Wisconsin Professional Baseball Park District and leased to the Brewers. The current lease runs out in 2030 and requires that the district pay for improvements to the stadium. While there is a contractual obligation for the district to pay for improvements, there is also a business development incentive for the district to make the improvements necessary to convince the Brewers to renew the lease for another couple of decades. If the Brewers do not renew the lease, the taxpayers will be stuck with having to do something with an unused baseball stadium. It is difficult to believe that any other professional baseball team would relocate to Milwaukee if the Brewers leave. The Brewers organization conducted a study and determined that the stadium needs an estimated $428 million in upgrades through 2043. The Wisconsin Department of Administration also conducted a study and estimated the upgrade costs at between $540 million and $604 million. The district currently has about $70 million in a reserve fund that was financed by the excess sales taxes collected before the stadium tax was ended. Governor Evers proposed to use $290 million in cash from the current projected budget surplus. This would give the district $360 million in cash that could be invested to raise sufficient funds for upgrades for the next two decades. His argument is that state taxpayers should pay for the upgrades and that using cash is more economical than financing it with debt.

 

Republican Speaker Robin Vos seems to agree with Evers that the taxpayers should pay for the improvement, but he has not said how much, what mechanism, or what other conditions may apply. Whereby Evers looks to shovel $290 million in taxpayer dollars into the district with no strings attached, Vos appears to want to structure a more comprehensive deal with the Brewers.

 

Either way, it is clear that there is bipartisan support, from the politicians, at least, to have the taxpayers upgrade the Brewers’ home field. Should we?

 

When it comes to spending hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars, we must set sentimentality aside. Wisconsinites love their Brewers, but that does not mean that we should use the violent coercive power of government to extract money from all state citizens to pay for it. Outside of the contractual obligations for the district to pay for upgrades required by Major League Baseball, any further taxpayer funding must be evaluated according to firm financial principles and projections.

 

Will the taxpayers’ investment provide a return to the people that makes it worthwhile? Are there other options? Could the district sell the stadium to the Brewers or another private group? What is the cost of doing nothing and the Brewers leave? Who is responsible if there are expenses not uncovered by the various studies? At the end of the day, even if the financial projections justify an investment by the taxpayers, can the people really afford it in this economic climate? Sometimes even good investments must be passed over because there are better ways to spend the money.

 

The taxpayers deserve a transparent, rigorous, detailed financial discussion before lawmakers spend hundreds of millions of dollars on a baseball stadium and obligate them to yet more decades of obligation to a private, for-profit company. The fact that Evers and Vos seem to agree on the need for funding the stadium should not be viewed as a bipartisan breakthrough. It should be viewed with skepticism and suspicion.

Upgrading Brewers’ stadium attracts bipartisan support

by | 0653, 21 Feb 2323 | | 32 Comments

My column for the Washington County Daily News is online and in print. Here’s a part:

Either way, it is clear that there is bipartisan support, from the politicians, at least, to have the taxpayers upgrade the Brewers’ home field. Should we?

 

When it comes to spending hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars, we must set sentimentality aside. Wisconsinites love their Brewers, but that does not mean that we should use the violent coercive power of government to extract money from all state citizens to pay for it. Outside of the contractual obligations for the district to pay for upgrades required by Major League Baseball, any further taxpayer funding must be evaluated according to firm financial principles and projections.

 

Will the taxpayers’ investment provide a return to the people that makes it worthwhile? Are there other options? Could the district sell the stadium to the Brewers or another private group? What is the cost of doing nothing and the Brewers leave? Who is responsible if there are expenses not uncovered by the various studies? At the end of the day, even if the financial projections justify an investment by the taxpayers, can the people really afford it in this economic climate? Sometimes even good investments must be passed over because there are better ways to spend the money.

 

The taxpayers deserve a transparent, rigorous, detailed financial discussion before lawmakers spend hundreds of millions of dollars on a baseball stadium and obligate them to yet more decades of obligation to a private, for-profit company. The fact that Evers and Vos seem to agree on the need for funding the stadium should not be viewed as a bipartisan breakthrough. It should be viewed with skepticism and suspicion.

Evers’ budget comes into focus

by | 2044, 17 Feb 2323 | | 0 Comments

Here is my full column that ran in the Washington County Daily News this week. Of course, Evers’ budget is in full focus now and the legislature has already, rightly, discarded it.

Gov. Tony Evers will release his executive budget this week as the first step in the state’s biennial budget process. This is Evers’ third executive budget. The previous two were mostly ignored by the legislature as unserious. Judging by the budget highlights that Evers is slowly dribbling out before the unveiling, the governor is remaining true to form.

 

Let us begin with the annoying and useless. In his continued quest to make driving a car more inconvenient in Wisconsin, Governor Evers wants to spend $60 million to “construct traffic circles, pedestrian islands, bump-outs at crosswalks, and other treatments that slow vehicle traffic.” Yes, the goal is to make traffic slower. He also wants to increase the fine for not wearing a seat belt from $10 to $25. Clearly the governor has his finger on the pulse of Wisconsin’s major problems.

 

Not to limit himself to being annoying, the governor is also proposing to undermine Wisconsin’s election system under the guise of safer streets. The governor’s budget will propose “Driver’s Licenses for All” to include illegal aliens. Not only would this devalue citizenship by effectively giving noncitizens the ability to vote, but it would fuel the devastating humanitarian disaster at our border.

 

The governor is also proposing a multipronged plan designed to jack up taxes and fuel the growth of local governments. Step one is to dramatically increase the money that the state gives to local governments by funneling 20% of all state sales tax collections to them through the shared revenue program. In the first year, this would total about $576 million and then fluctuate with sales tax collections thereafter. What will happen to those state government programs currently funded by that sales tax? Presumably, that gap will have to be filled with other state taxes.

 

Step two is a provision that mandates that no local government will ever receive less than 95% of the prior year’s allocation under the new shared revenue plan. The sales tax is a consumption tax that fluctuates with consumer spending. Under Evers’ proposal, however, governments would be protected if there is a downturn. How will that funding be made up if sales tax collections drop? With other state taxes, of course.

 

The final step is that the governor would allow all counties and any municipality with a population over 30,000 to impose their own sales tax on top of the state sales tax. Taken together, the governor’s proposals would fuel the growth of local governments with state taxpayer largesse, and then allow local government to increase taxes and spending even further with their own sales taxes. If there is anything that we have learned in Washington County, it is that a government will always find a way to spend sales taxes and then complain that they are broke.

 

The governor is also vexed that the Legislature occasionally (not often enough) exercises legislative oversight over his spending. This normal function of checks and balances in government that was designed by our founders to curtail the worst abuses of concentrated power has become too burdensome for the governor. That is why he is proposing to eliminate legislative review of stewardship projects north of Highway 64 and for any stewardship grant or purchase under $500,000. If you think that allowing the governor to have sole authority to give away money and make purchases is a recipe for corruption, waste, and graft, you are correct. If you think that Governor Evers is trustworthy, remember that there will be other governors.

 

Good government assumes bad people.

 

If there is a theme to Governor Evers’ budget, it is that government is living large in a time of plenty.

 

Even if the taxpayers are suffering under the yoke of taxation and inflation, no government program or employee will be left wanting. Every time there is a mention of “investing” or “supporting” or “addressing” or “improving,” there is an increase in government spending at the end of that sentence.

 

If the rest of Governor Evers’ budget looks anything like the parts of it that he has released to date, legislative leaders would do well to file it in the circular file and start anew.

Evers’ budget comes into focus

by | 0636, 14 Feb 2323 | | 6 Comments

My column for the Washington County Daily News is online and in print. Here’s a part:

The governor is also proposing a multipronged plan designed to jack up taxes and fuel the growth of local governments. Step one is to dramatically increase the money that the state gives to local governments by funneling 20% of all state sales tax collections to them through the shared revenue program. In the first year, this would total about $576 million and then fluctuate with sales tax collections thereafter. What will happen to those state government programs currently funded by that sales tax? Presumably, that gap will have to be filled with other state taxes.

Step two is a provision that mandates that no local government will ever receive less than 95% of the prior year’s allocation under the new shared revenue plan. The sales tax is a consumption tax that fluctuates with consumer spending. Under Evers’ proposal, however, governments would be protected if there is a downturn. How will that funding be made up if sales tax collections drop? With other state taxes, of course.

The final step is that the governor would allow all counties and any municipality with a population over 30,000 to impose their own sales tax on top of the state sales tax. Taken together, the governor’s proposals would fuel the growth of local governments with state taxpayer largesse, and then allow local government to increase taxes and spending even further with their own sales taxes. If there is anything that we have learned in Washington County, it is that a government will always find a way to spend sales taxes and then complain that they are broke.

 

 

Government mandates another vaccine

by | 0835, 9 Feb 2323 | | 0 Comments

Here is my full column that ran in the Washington County Daily News earlier this week.

The Wisconsin Department of Human Resources has released new vaccine requirements for children who attend child care centers and schools next year. In a previous era, perhaps a more innocent era, such an announcement would pass unnoticed and unscrutinized as a sensible precaution being enacted by government officials motivated by goodwill and informed by science. However, we live in a post-pandemic world where such trust in our government is no longer warranted — if it ever was.

 

The new requirements from the DHS make some minor changes to the timing of vaccinations that are already required and introduce a new requirement for children to be immunized against meningococcal disease, a leading cause of bacterial meningitis and sepsis, in the seventh grade with the meningococcal vaccine followed by a booster in the twelfth grade. Vaccine requirements are the rage nowadays.

 

The meningococcal vaccine was introduced in 2005 and has seemingly worked well. Although rare, meningococcal disease can cause devastating life-altering damage and death. Before the vaccine, there were usually between 30 and 50 cases per year in Wisconsin with several deaths, according to DHS data. Between 2012 and 2022, there were rarely more than 10 cases with just four deaths in a decade. In 2022, there was a single reported case.

 

Despite the rarity of the disease and the demonstrably effectiveness of recommending the vaccine, state government officials have mandated the vaccine for children. Why?

 

The short answer is that some unelected government health bureaucrat thinks that the vaccine is a good idea, so it should be mandated instead of allowing families to make their own informed health care decisions. It might be a good idea. Indeed, the data seems to show that the vaccine is a good idea for a lot of people. But is a mandate necessary?

 

Part of what is driving the new mandate is that state health bureaucrats are concerned about the drop in overall vaccinations. According to state date, the number of students who were compliant with required immunizations dropped by 3.2% last year as compared to the prior year. 88.7% of students complied with immunization mandates, but state officials are concerned about the increasing resistance to compliance.

 

A more reflective government health bureaucracy might recognize the underlying cause of the drop.

 

They have nobody to blame but themselves. We remember their behavior during the COVID pandemic. We remember the lockdowns that devastated lives.

 

We remember the public shaming. We remember the idiotic mask mandates. We remember forcing children to get unproven vaccines despite the infinitesimal risks of COVID for healthy kids. We remember being forced to stand in the snow to see loved ones in nursing homes through a window. We remember being forbidden to attend funerals to comfort the bereaved.

 

We remember it all. And we remember that it was all for naught. All of the physical, emotional, mental health, economic, and educational pain and suffering inflicted by these same government health bureaucrats far outweighed the negligible, if any, impact on mitigating the spread and effects of COVID. Yet their failures have not dampened their hubris.

 

The COVID pandemic unmasked the government health bureaucracies as often incompetent, sometimes corrupt, occasionally untruthful, unjustifiably arrogant, and heavily influenced by monied special interests like the pharmaceutical companies. In other words, they are subject to all of the same human failings as any other human institution.

 

The realization that our government health officials are human and may not be acting in our best interests has engendered a healthy skepticism of their recommendations and mandates. If you have a child entering the seventh grade, should you comply with the government mandate to get the meningococcal vaccine? Don’t trust your government. They have not earned your trust. Do your own homework and take responsibility for your child’s health care.

Government mandates another vaccine

by | 0747, 7 Feb 2323 | , | 1 Comment

My column for the Washington County Daily News is online and in print. Here’s a part:

The Wisconsin Department of Human Resources has released new vaccine requirements for children who attend child care centers and schools next year. In a previous era, perhaps a more innocent era, such an announcement would pass unnoticed and unscrutinized as a sensible precaution being enacted by government officials motivated by goodwill and informed by science. However, we live in a post-pandemic world where such trust in our government is no longer warranted — if it ever was.

 

[…]

 

Part of what is driving the new mandate is that state health bureaucrats are concerned about the drop in overall vaccinations. According to state date, the number of students who were compliant with required immunizations dropped by 3.2% last year as compared to the prior year. 88.7% of students complied with immunization mandates, but state officials are concerned about the increasing resistance to compliance.

 

A more reflective government health bureaucracy might recognize the underlying cause of the drop.

 

They have nobody to blame but themselves. We remember their behavior during the COVID pandemic. We remember the lockdowns that devastated lives.

 

We remember the public shaming. We remember the idiotic mask mandates. We remember forcing children to get unproven vaccines despite the infinitesimal risks of COVID for healthy kids. We remember being forced to stand in the snow to see loved ones in nursing homes through a window. We remember being forbidden to attend funerals to comfort the bereaved.

 

We remember it all. And we remember that it was all for naught. All of the physical, emotional, mental health, economic, and educational pain and suffering inflicted by these same government health bureaucrats far outweighed the negligible, if any, impact on mitigating the spread and effects of COVID. Yet their failures have not dampened their hubris.

 

The COVID pandemic unmasked the government health bureaucracies as often incompetent, sometimes corrupt, occasionally untruthful, unjustifiably arrogant, and heavily influenced by monied special interests like the pharmaceutical companies. In other words, they are subject to all of the same human failings as any other human institution.

 

The realization that our government health officials are human and may not be acting in our best interests has engendered a healthy skepticism of their recommendations and mandates. If you have a child entering the seventh grade, should you comply with the government mandate to get the meningococcal vaccine? Don’t trust your government. They have not earned your trust. Do your own homework and take responsibility for your child’s health care.

The Education Reformation sweeps America

by | 0800, 4 Feb 2323 | , | 21 Comments

Here is my full column that ran in the Washington County Daily News earlier this week.

Frustrated by chronically poorly performing government schools and a well-heeled government education aristocracy that has an agenda far removed from the priorities of parents, education advocates have ignited an education reformation that is sweeping across America. Once a pioneer in education, Wisconsin looks like it will be watching from the sidelines due to unrequited loyalty to a failing bureaucracy.

 

The education reformation is manifesting in several forms that are being lumped into the moniker of “universal school choice.” While the mechanisms differ, the concept is the same. Reformers are decoupling education funding from the government education industrial complex and crafting programs that fund education for children irrespective of their race, creed, religion, socioeconomic background, or school of choice. They are programs that fund students and not systems.

 

Last year, Arizona became the first state to pass universal school choice. West Virginia got close, passing a broad plan that provides educational choice to about 93% of their children. Already this year, Iowa has passed universal school choice. The states of Florida, Texas, Utah, Oklahoma, Arkansas, and Indiana are all advancing universal school choice and likely to pass some form by the end of 2023. Several other states are in earlier stages of considering universal school choice. It is conceivable that half of the United States will have universal school choice by 2025. Disastrously for Wisconsin’s children, our state is unlikely to be one of them. Gov. Tony Evers is a lifelong creature of the government education establishment and is vehemently loyal to defending the bureaucracy irrespective of its performance. He has demonstrated his willingness to veto any educational reform that threatens the entrenched power structure and is unlikely to shift his loyalty to children any time soon.

 

While the Republican majorities in the Legislature are strong, they lack the votes to overcome Evers’ vetoes without some legislative Democrats shifting their support to children. When Governor Tommy Thompson pioneered the original school choice program in Wisconsin, there was bipartisan support, and bipartisan opposition, for it. In today’s political landscape, it is unlikely that enough Democrats are willing to cross the yawning political divide to support kids.

 

The benefits of school choice have never been clearer. Dr. Will Flanders from the Wisconsin Institute for Law and Liberty has released his fifth annual “Apples to Apples” research study which evaluates student outcomes across government, charter, and choice schools while controlling for student demographics. This statistical methodology controls for the fact that government, charter, and choice schools have dissimilar student demographics to provide a clear comparison of performance. Notably, this year’s study uses public data from the 2021-2022 school year report cards from the Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction and is the first post-pandemic look at school performance.

 

The results are clear. According to the study, students in the Milwaukee Choice program are significantly more proficient in English Language Arts and math than their peers in government schools. Students in Milwaukee charter schools (still government schools that have been somewhat liberated from the crushing educational bureaucracy) also perform better than their government school peers, but only about half as much as their peers in choice schools.

 

In the statewide choice program, students in choice school also have better outcomes, but the benefit is not quite as pronounced as it is for kids in Milwaukee.

 

Tellingly, the data also bears out the well-known, if patently ignored, fact that spending has very little to do with performance in government or choice schools. This tells us two things. First, it tells us that once spending has reached a level that provides an adequate level of support for good teachers and a safe physical space, all of the additional spending is just waste. Wisconsin already funds education at a level where each additional dollar spent does not have any positive impact on student outcomes. That being the case, policymakers must ask themselves why they would force taxpayers to pay more when there is no measurable benefit to kids.

 

The second thing this data tells us is that it is the government school system that is retarding student performance. Choice schools operate with less money and produce better outcomes even after accounting for demographic differences in the student body. If the system is the problem, then why should taxpayers and parents be forced to continue to lavishly fund a failed system when demonstrably better systems exist?

 

I am well aware that such arguments rooted in data and genuine passion for educating children do not hold sway in the intellectually sclerotic mind of Governor Evers, but his term will eventually end and we cannot afford to lose another generation of kids to a failed government system.

The Education Reformation sweeps America

by | 1743, 31 Jan 2323 | , | 3 Comments

My column for Washington County Daily News is online and in print. Here’s a part:

 

While the Republican majorities in the Legislature are strong, they lack the votes to overcome Evers’ vetoes without some legislative Democrats shifting their support to children. When Governor Tommy Thompson pioneered the original school choice program in Wisconsin, there was bipartisan support, and bipartisan opposition, for it. In today’s political landscape, it is unlikely that enough Democrats are willing to cross the yawning political divide to support kids.

 

The benefits of school choice have never been clearer. Dr. Will Flanders from the Wisconsin Institute for Law and Liberty has released his fifth annual “Apples to Apples” research study which evaluates student outcomes across government, charter, and choice schools while controlling for student demographics. This statistical methodology controls for the fact that government, charter, and choice schools have dissimilar student demographics to provide a clear comparison of performance. Notably, this year’s study uses public data from the 2021-2022 school year report cards from the Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction and is the first post-pandemic look at school performance.

 

The results are clear. According to the study, students in the Milwaukee Choice program are significantly more proficient in English Language Arts and math than their peers in government schools. Students in Milwaukee charter schools (still government schools that have been somewhat liberated from the crushing educational bureaucracy) also perform better than their government school peers, but only about half as much as their peers in choice schools.

 

In the statewide choice program, students in choice school also have better outcomes, but the benefit is not quite as pronounced as it is for kids in Milwaukee.

 

Tellingly, the data also bears out the well-known, if patently ignored, fact that spending has very little to do with performance in government or choice schools. This tells us two things. First, it tells us that once spending has reached a level that provides an adequate level of support for good teachers and a safe physical space, all of the additional spending is just waste. Wisconsin already funds education at a level where each additional dollar spent does not have any positive impact on student outcomes. That being the case, policymakers must ask themselves why they would force taxpayers to pay more when there is no measurable benefit to kids.

 

The second thing this data tells us is that it is the government school system that is retarding student performance. Choice schools operate with less money and produce better outcomes even after accounting for demographic differences in the student body. If the system is the problem, then why should taxpayers and parents be forced to continue to lavishly fund a failed system when demonstrably better systems exist?

 

I am well aware that such arguments rooted in data and genuine passion for educating children do not hold sway in the intellectually sclerotic mind of Governor Evers, but his term will eventually end and we cannot afford to lose another generation of kids to a failed government system.

 

 

 

 

 

April ballot gets even more important

by | 0803, 27 Jan 2323 | , | 0 Comments

Here is my full column that ran in the Washington County Daily News last week:

Wisconsin’s April election is shaping up to be one of the most important spring elections in decades. Not only is there an election for the state Supreme Court that will decide whether the court retains its majority of constitutional conservatives or flip to an activist tool of leftists ideologues, but the Legislature has placed two important referendums on the ballot for the voters’ consideration.

 

The first referendum is an advisory referendum regarding work requirements for welfare recipients.

 

The question put to voters is simply, “Shall able-bodied, childless adults be required to look for work in order to receive taxpayer-funded welfare benefits?”

 

The referendum is only advisory, so it is more akin to a broad opinion poll of Wisconsin’s voters. The impetus for the referendum is to bolster support for planned Republican efforts to enforce welfare work requirements. Since Gov. Tommy Thompson implemented Wisconsin Works in 1996 which required welfare recipients to work or seek work and broke the cycle of dependency for thousands of Wisconsinites, the enforcement of the work requirement has eroded.

 

Gov. Tony Evers has used the pandemic to waive work requirements for some welfare programs despite continued low unemployment and Wisconsin businesses being unable to fill open jobs. There are ample opportunities to work for those who are willing, but Evers is using the pandemic as an excuse to stop enforcing a law that he opposes. As Republicans prepare legislation to reinstate work requirements for welfare recipients, they are hoping, probably in vain, that a strong show of public support will encourage Evers to agree.

 

The second statewide referendum on the April ballot is far more important. Article 1, Section 8(2) of Wisconsin’s Constitution currently prohibits judges from considering anything other than what it will take to ensure that a defendant will appear in court when setting a bail amount. The result of this prohibition has been that judges are hamstrung into granting low bail to defendants even when there is a glaring risk that the defendant will commit more carnage before their court date.

 

Way too many Wisconsinites have been victimized by criminals who were out of jail because of grossly low bail.

 

The referendum on the ballot asks the voters to amend the Constitution to allow judges to consider, “the totality of the circumstances, including the accused’s previous convictions for a violent crime, the probability that the accused will fail to appear, the need to protect the community from serious harm and prevent witness intimidation, and potential affirmative defenses” when setting bail for someone accused of a violent crime.

 

This is the final step in the process to amend the state Constitution. The identical question has been passed by two successive sessions of the Legislature and now the question goes to the voters for final approval. The governor does not have any role in the constitutional amendment process. Noteworthy is the fact that the question passed with bipartisan support in both houses of the Legislature in both legislative sessions.

 

If the amendment passes, it does not mean that Wisconsin judges will use their newly granted latitude to impose appropriately high bail for defendants who have a history of habitual thuggery. There are far too many leftist judges on the bench who will continue to coddle crooks with low bail. If Wisconsinites want to keep more violent offenders off the streets for longer, they will have to get to the polls and elect better judges. But the good judges will use their new power to protect Wisconsinites with higher bail for violent criminals and Wisconsin will be better for their diligence.

 

Wisconsinites who want a safer Wisconsin that takes crime seriously should vote “yes” to amend the state Constitution. Then they should vote for the conservative Supreme Court candidate to affirm their anticrime convictions.

April ballot gets even more important

by | 0756, 24 Jan 2323 | , | 0 Comments

My column for the Washington County Daily News is online and in print. Here’s a part:

Wisconsin’s April election is shaping up to be one of the most important spring elections in decades. Not only is there an election for the state Supreme Court that will decide whether the court retains its majority of constitutional conservatives or flip to an activist tool of leftists ideologues, but the Legislature has placed two important referendums on the ballot for the voters’ consideration.

 

[…]

 

The second statewide referendum on the April ballot is far more important. Article 1, Section 8(2) of Wisconsin’s Constitution currently prohibits judges from considering anything other than what it will take to ensure that a defendant will appear in court when setting a bail amount. The result of this prohibition has been that judges are hamstrung into granting low bail to defendants even when there is a glaring risk that the defendant will commit more carnage before their court date.

 

Way too many Wisconsinites have been victimized by criminals who were out of jail because of grossly low bail.

 

The referendum on the ballot asks the voters to amend the Constitution to allow judges to consider, “the totality of the circumstances, including the accused’s previous convictions for a violent crime, the probability that the accused will fail to appear, the need to protect the community from serious harm and prevent witness intimidation, and potential affirmative defenses” when setting bail for someone accused of a violent crime.

 

If the amendment passes, it does not mean that Wisconsin judges will use their newly granted latitude to impose appropriately high bail for defendants who have a history of habitual thuggery. There are far too many leftist judges on the bench who will continue to coddle crooks with low bail. If Wisconsinites want to keep more violent offenders off the streets for longer, they will have to get to the polls and elect better judges. But the good judges will use their new power to protect Wisconsinites with higher bail for violent criminals and Wisconsin will be better for their diligence.

What to do with Samaritan

by | 0902, 21 Jan 2323 | | 2 Comments

Here is my column that ran in the Washington County Daily News last week.

Washington County’s Samaritan campus is at a crossroads. The time for tough decisions is upon us.

 

What should county taxpayers do for the people currently housed in the crumbling edifice of neglected obligations?

 

The Samaritan Campus is a senior care facility owned and operated by Washington County that provides skilled nursing, assisted living, and a residential care apartment complex for elderly citizens who cannot afford private care. It is funded through Medicare and Medicaid with shortfalls being covered by county taxpayers.

 

The problem the county is facing is severe, but not unique. The cost of operating Samaritan is far exceeding the funding provided by federal programs. Further, the facility needs a major renovation or rebuilding that will cost tens of millions of dollars.

 

Last year, Washington County taxpayers were paying nearly $50,000 per resident (about $2 million) to cover expenses and that is without the expense of a new or renovated facility. The ongoing expense for county taxpayers is projected to continue to increase exponentially.

 

Some have floated the notion that the county could use available money from one-time funds like federal COVID relief funds or opioid settlement funds to rehabilitate or reconstruct the facility. This may be feasible in the short term, but it does not fix the long-term funding problem. Using one-time funds to patch a systemic problem simply obligates future lawmakers to fix something because current lawmakers lack the courage to act.

 

What is to be done?

 

First, we must ask ourselves some hard questions. Should county taxpayers provide elder care to citizens who cannot afford it? There is no constitutional prohibition or mandate for county government to provide such a service. If the citizens of Washington County want to subsidize care for seniors, it is a policy decision. To date, county citizens have provided this service, so there is an absolute obligation to the seniors currently being cared for at Samaritan. Whether or not the citizens should carry this obligation moving forward is a separate question.

 

The second question to ask ourselves is, assuming county taxpayers are committed to providing for the county’s impoverished seniors, should the county own and operate the facility to do so? Experience should guide our answer to this question. Our collective experience is that, with exceedingly rare exception, government is terrible at running things. Government is a convenient, often abused, mechanism for the forced pooling of resources to expend on collective needs, but is pervasively inefficient, ineffective, and unresponsive when in charge of operations. We can see this in action at Samaritan itself, where decades of poor management and neglect have forced the county to this crisis point.

 

In Wisconsin, only 36 Wisconsin counties currently operate senior care facilities according to the Department of Health Services. The other counties either partner with private facilities to subsidize senior care where needed or forgo the financial obligation altogether. Washington County should transition the current residents to private facilities and support that transition with adequate funding. Using the COVID relief or opioid settlement monies to fund this transition might be necessary.

 

Whether or not county taxpayers should, or can, subsidize senior care moving forward will take some further thought. In the current arrangement, the taxpayer obligation to seniors is capped by the number of available beds at Samaritan. It is a physical cap. If the taxpayers subsidize senior care in private facilities with flexible capacity, would such a program attract seniors from outside of Washington County and become an unsustainable drain on taxpayer resources? Such potential unintended consequences will need to be mitigated should the county decide to subsidize senior care indefinitely.

 

One thing is certain. The situation at Samaritan has become intolerable and inexcusable. The caregivers are doing tremendous work but they are understaffed and under-resourced. Washington County is falling short of providing the dignity of care promised to Samaritan’s residents. This year must be a year of decisions and action — not another year of kicking the can down the road.

What to do with Samaritan

by | 0858, 17 Jan 2323 | | 0 Comments

My column for the Washington County Daily News is online and in print. Here’s a part:

Washington County’s Samaritan campus is at a crossroads. The time for tough decisions is upon us.

What should county taxpayers do for the people currently housed in the crumbling edifice of neglected obligations?

[…]

The second question to ask ourselves is, assuming county taxpayers are committed to providing for the county’s impoverished seniors, should the county own and operate the facility to do so? Experience should guide our answer to this question. Our collective experience is that, with exceedingly rare exception, government is terrible at running things. Government is a convenient, often abused, mechanism for the forced pooling of resources to expend on collective needs, but is pervasively inefficient, ineffective, and unresponsive when in charge of operations. We can see this in action at Samaritan itself, where decades of poor management and neglect have forced the county to this crisis point.

In Wisconsin, only 36 Wisconsin counties currently operate senior care facilities according to the Department of Health Services. The other counties either partner with private facilities to subsidize senior care where needed or forgo the financial obligation altogether. Washington County should transition the current residents to private facilities and support that transition with adequate funding. Using the COVID relief or opioid settlement monies to fund this transition might be necessary.

Whether or not county taxpayers should, or can, subsidize senior care moving forward will take some further thought. In the current arrangement, the taxpayer obligation to seniors is capped by the number of available beds at Samaritan. It is a physical cap. If the taxpayers subsidize senior care in private facilities with flexible capacity, would such a program attract seniors from outside of Washington County and become an unsustainable drain on taxpayer resources? Such potential unintended consequences will need to be mitigated should the county decide to subsidize senior care indefinitely.

One thing is certain. The situation at Samaritan has become intolerable and inexcusable.

Wisconsin’s shifting tax burden

by | 1301, 14 Jan 2323 | | 0 Comments

Here is my full column that ran in the Washington County Daily News earlier this week.

The state of Wisconsin and local governments extracted the most taxes ever from Wisconsinites in fiscal year 2022. Wisconsinites had the lowest combined state and local tax burden in at least fifty years in fiscal year 2022 (FY22). Both of those statements are true according to a report from the Wisconsin Policy Forum. What does this mean for the upcoming budget debate?

 

Let us begin with the data. According to the Wisconsin Policy Forum (formerly the Wisconsin Taxpayers Alliance), total state and local tax collections for FY22 was $35.36 billion. That was an overall increase of 4.1% over the previous year and is the most taxes ever collected in a single year in Wisconsin. Of that, state taxes were $23.78 billion and local taxes were $11.58 billion. State tax collections rose by 5.1% over the previous year while local taxes increased by 2% over the previous year.

 

At the same time, personal income in Wisconsin has grown. In calendar year 2021, personal incomes rose 6.7% driven by federal COVID relief funds and some real wage increases. Since personal income rose faster than state and local tax collections, the tax burden, as a percentage of personal income, slumped to a record low of 10.1% since the Wisconsin Policy Forum began compiling records in 1970. It is not that our tax burden is decreasing. It is simply that the burden has the illusion of being lighter since our incomes are rising at a faster rate.

 

That is the data. What does it tell us? First, it tells us that the state and local government coffers are brimming with cash right now. Ignore the pleas of poverty from your favorite government entity. Many units of government have surpluses and will be using that as an excuse to increase spending in their next budgets. In state government, not even the Republican-led Legislature is talking about returning all surpluses to taxpayers.

 

Instead, they are talking about modest tax reductions combined with more spending.

 

Second, while tax burden as a percentage of personal income is decreasing slightly, personal income is still not keeping up with inflation. According to the U.S. Congress Joint Economic Committee, as of November of 2022, the annual cost of inflation for the average Wisconsin household since January of 2021, the last month we had a normal inflation rate, is $8,299. That is an 14.1% in household costs in less than two years. While personal incomes are increasing, the cruel cost of inflation is leaving Wisconsinites with less actual buying power every month.

 

Third, it could have been worse. The reason that state and local tax collections only rose 4.1% in FY22 is thanks to over a decade of relatively consistent tax policy discipline by the Republicans. Think back to the successive state budgets by the Republicans in the Governor Walker era and even in the previous budget when they kept the caps in local property tax increases, cut income tax rates, eliminated the state property tax, and dozens of other choices. These choices have resulted in slowing the rise of tax collections.

 

Thanks to Republican policies, state individual income taxes actually decreased by 0.7% in FY22 and net property taxes only grew by 0.8%. The aggregate tax collection increases were almost completely driven by an increase of 9.5% in state sales tax collections as a result of inflationary consumer prices. Corporate income tax collections were up a stunning 15.6%. Corporate income tax collections are thrice as much as they were in 2018. Interestingly, this increase is mostly due to more robust auditing of out-of-state businesses that was launched in the 2015-2017 state budget by, you guessed it, legislative Republicans and Governor Scott Walker. Corporate tax rates are not increasing, but the state is better at collecting what corporations are obligated to pay.

 

The decade-long effort by Republicans has resulted in a systemic shift of the tax burden from individual income and property taxes to consumption and corporate taxes. This has also resulted in record tax collections and annual state budget surpluses. Those surpluses are not the dividends of spending discipline, but of intelligent tax policies.

 

As state lawmakers consider the next budget, they should not take too much of the fact that the tax burden as a percentage of personal incomes is at a historic low. That metric must be understood in the context of the inflationary pressures on Wisconsin’s taxpayers from all angles and the overall cost of living in the state. Flush state coffers should be viewed as an opportunity to put more money back into the pockets of Wisconsin’s taxpayers to help them contend with the rising cost of living.

Wisconsin’s shifting tax burden

by | 0647, 10 Jan 2323 | | 1 Comment

My column for the Washington County Daily News is online and in print. Here’s a part:

The state of Wisconsin and local governments extracted the most taxes ever from Wisconsinites in fiscal year 2022. Wisconsinites had the lowest combined state and local tax burden in at least fifty years in fiscal year 2022 (FY22). Both of those statements are true according to a report from the Wisconsin Policy Forum. What does this mean for the upcoming budget debate?

 

[…]

 

That is the data. What does it tell us? First, it tells us that the state and local government coffers are brimming with cash right now. Ignore the pleas of poverty from your favorite government entity. Many units of government have surpluses and will be using that as an excuse to increase spending in their next budgets. In state government, not even the Republican-led Legislature is talking about returning all surpluses to taxpayers.

 

Instead, they are talking about modest tax reductions combined with more spending.

 

Second, while tax burden as a percentage of personal income is decreasing slightly, personal income is still not keeping up with inflation. According to the U.S. Congress Joint Economic Committee, as of November of 2022, the annual cost of inflation for the average Wisconsin household since January of 2021, the last month we had a normal inflation rate, is $8,299. That is an 14.1% in household costs in less than two years. While personal incomes are increasing, the cruel cost of inflation is leaving Wisconsinites with less actual buying power every month.

 

Third, it could have been worse. The reason that state and local tax collections only rose 4.1% in FY22 is thanks to over a decade of relatively consistent tax policy discipline by the Republicans. Think back to the successive state budgets by the Republicans in the Governor Walker era and even in the previous budget when they kept the caps in local property tax increases, cut income tax rates, eliminated the state property tax, and dozens of other choices. These choices have resulted in slowing the rise of tax collections.

 

Thanks to Republican policies, state individual income taxes actually decreased by 0.7% in FY22 and net property taxes only grew by 0.8%. The aggregate tax collection increases were almost completely driven by an increase of 9.5% in state sales tax collections as a result of inflationary consumer prices. Corporate income tax collections were up a stunning 15.6%. Corporate income tax collections are thrice as much as they were in 2018. Interestingly, this increase is mostly due to more robust auditing of out-of-state businesses that was launched in the 2015-2017 state budget by, you guessed it, legislative Republicans and Governor Scott Walker. Corporate tax rates are not increasing, but the state is better at collecting what corporations are obligated to pay.

 

The decade-long effort by Republicans has resulted in a systemic shift of the tax burden from individual income and property taxes to consumption and corporate taxes. This has also resulted in record tax collections and annual state budget surpluses. Those surpluses are not the dividends of spending discipline, but of intelligent tax policies.

 

As state lawmakers consider the next budget, they should not take too much of the fact that the tax burden as a percentage of personal incomes is at a historic low. That metric must be understood in the context of the inflationary pressures on Wisconsin’s taxpayers from all angles and the overall cost of living in the state. Flush state coffers should be viewed as an opportunity to put more money back into the pockets of Wisconsin’s taxpayers to help them contend with the rising cost of living.

Login | Register

Archives

Categories

Pin It on Pinterest