Boots & Sabers

The blogging will continue until morale improves...

Tag: Washington County Daily News

The Great Gaslight

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

Now that we are officially in a presidential election year and the Iowa Caucus looms, we can turn our attention to the campaign in earnest. It appears that we will be saddled with a rematch of Presidents Biden and Trump and the era of geriatric leadership will persist.

 

With an atrocious performance record and what appears to be an obvious history of corruption, Biden is determined to gaslight his way to re-election. He is going to try to convince the American people to trust his fiction instead of the observable obvious truth.

 

Biden’s first fiction is that the events of Jan. 6, 2021, was an insurrection. This fiction is key to Biden’s plan because it allows him to dehumanize Trump, specifically, and Republicans, generally. By othering Republicans, Biden relieves his supporters of the burden of respect and gives permission to win by any means necessary. The truth is that January 6 was a political rally and protest that spontaneously got out of control. The vast majority of the participants did not do anything other than exercise their 1st Amendment right to protest while a small minority got violent. An authentic and planned insurrection to topple our government would necessarily involve organization, the violent seizure of several organs of government, and an assumption of power by new leadership. Nobody has been accused, tried, or convicted of insurrection on January 6 because it was not an insurrection.

 

Biden is trying to convince Americans that January 6 was the most violent and deplorable riot in history, but Americans have been watching leftists disrupt governments burn down cities, and attack people for years. Biden does not care about our towns being burned down, but he desperately wants us to care about someone breaking a window in his town.

 

Language prime tool for living life on shared terms

My column for the Washington County Daily News is online and in print. I probably had too much fun writing it. Here’s a part:

As the final light bleeds out of 2023 and we await the new year, the thought of writing about a contentious political issue is repugnant to me. Instead, let us take a brief departure from our usual conversation and muse about the medium in which we converse.

 

As an incurable bibliophile, I am also, naturally, a logophile. Our language, whether written or spoken, is central to the human condition and culture. Without language, communication between humans is rudimentary. It is through our language that we communicate complex ideas and emotions. It is through our written language that we accumulate and preserve the knowledge of humanity so that that knowledge can be expanded upon by future generations. Language is the bedrock of philosophy, science, religion, culture, business, entertainment, and our entire social construct.

 

To know language is to understand a culture. Anyone who has learned a new language knows that it cannot be truly learned without understanding the culture that generated it. Language is replete with nuance and subtleties that are manifestations of how the language evolved. That is why some languages have words that others do not. The language is a reflection of, and creator of, the culture.

 

Language is full of nuance that is often transitory to the time in which it exists. Language evolves with the culture and new concepts come to the fore and others are abandoned to history. One of the reasons that I love to read old books is because it is reading parallel stories — the story that is the subject of the text and the story told in the language of the time in which it was written.

 

I find joy in reading or hearing a word that our common language has orphaned. Don’t tell my editor, but I have written entire columns for the singular purpose of having an excuse to use a rediscovered word. Sometimes a word perfectly captures the concept that one is trying to convey.

 

For example, this Christmas season, I have too often felt “crapulous.” Why weigh down a sentence explaining that I feel crummy because I ate too much when I could just say I feel crapulous? It is a perfectly descriptive word for the feeling being expressed.

 

As one who closely follows the actions of politicians, I witness far too many snollygosters and cockalorums who are too rigid in their old mumpsimus. I wish it were not so, but politics is often a rhetorical brabble. Our politics have been infected with a high degree of proditomania, but thankfully we have evolved away from settling disputes with a holmgang.

 

New words are entering our lexicon all the time. Some of them flare for a few years while others cement themselves into everyday use. “Hangry” perfectly describes a state of irrational anger driven by hunger, although it is curious that it evolved at a time of unbelievable historical affluence when real hunger is utterly foreign to most Americans. We get “MacGyver” as a verb from the television show and “padawan” from the Star Wars franchise.

 

The world of technology brings us the NPC (non-player character) as a pejorative and something worth sharing is grammable. While quiet quitting is something that remote work on a mass scale has enabled, it might also be caused by doomscrolling. It is also very common during March Madness as people spend their time engaged in bracketology.

 

Still, while I enjoy the evolution of our common language and appreciate its dynamism, this Christmas season affronted me with a development that I cannot abide. The ubiquitous use of the word “gift” is unconscionable. One did not “gift” something to someone. They “gave” to them. One was not “gifted” something. One was “given” it. “Gift” is the noun. In very rare and specific situations, “gift” can be a transitive verb. “Give” is the verb. “Given” is the adjective. There is no need to use “gift” in all circumstances related to the free transfer of goods or services. We already have appropriate words for all scenarios. Please use them appropriately.

 

Happy new year, everyone. May the new year bring you all joy and peace.

Endowed by our creator

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

As Christmastime envelops our nation in warmth and the faint scent of peppermint, I am reminded about how much it is a part of our shared American culture. As a Christian, I celebrate Christmas as the traditional birthday of my Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ. But the secular celebration of the Christmas season, imbued with family gatherings, the exchange of gifts, a shared soundtrack, movies, parades, sweet things, and sweet people, has become a distinctly American cultural touch-point that binds together families and communities.

 

Every group of people — whether it be a family, business, or a nation — has a culture whether they intend to have one or not. The United States is a very large country with beautifully diverse regional and local cultures, but there are several distinctly American common cultural elements that thread through our society. Those common cultural elements are waning in the face of neglect and intentional destruction.

 

The American culture is derived from our founding ethos rooted in European and American Enlightenment philosophy and frontier expansionism. It is a culture that celebrates the individual as a divine creation in which natural rights are innate and inalienable. This respect and adoration for the individual underpins much of American culture.

 

Because individuals are the foundational element of American culture, we created a system of government based on self-governance where individuals elect our leaders. Americans are reflexively anti-authoritarian because any concentration of power is a threat to the power of the individual.

 

Our respect for the individual explains Americans’ instinctive support for human rights. When each and every human is respected and honored as a unique and cherished individual, it is impossible to not support and respect the natural human rights of each individual. Those rights include, but are not limited to, the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.

 

Individual rights are the reason we have property and the rule of law. The right of an individual person to own the fruits of their own labor rejects the notion of collective ownership. The rule of law exists to provide a predictable and rigorous framework that protects individuals from the power of governments and other individuals who seek to deprive them of the free exercise of their natural rights and the disposition of their property.

 

The respect for the sovereignty of the individual and respect for individual natural rights is the very heart of liberty and our American love of liberty. What is liberty if not the love of individuals being free to conduct themselves as they wish without interference from their fellow humans? When one individual’s exercise of liberty threatens another’s, we surrender our personal violent power to the necessary evil of government to resolve the conflict through the rule of law.

 

It is our American love of the individual that breathes life into our culture of tolerance, multiculturalism, and respect for others. “Live and let live” has long been core to the American ethic. We have long striven for the ideal of equality and liberty where individuals of every race, creed, and religion are brothers and sisters in one family that we call “America.”

 

America’s historic respect for individuals is being assaulted. For over a generation, our schools have been contaminated with philosophies of collectivism, intersectionality, and neo-Marxism. These philosophies reject the sovereignty of the individual in favor of bundling people into groups of oppressors and oppressed, favored and unfavored, good and bad. In these philosophies, concepts like the rule of law, self-governance, and individual liberty are rendered obsolete and replaced with authoritarianism whereby chosen people rule by right in order to correct the perceived wrongs of history and any means are justified by the righteous ends.

 

If we fully lose our American culture of individualism, we will lose the philosophical support structure upon which our system of government, rule of law, and personal liberties are based. We already see it happening as collectivists are perfectly willing to erase our border, celebrate the raping and murder of Jews, arbitrarily transfer the earned wealth of millions to a few, and weaponize the judicial system to punish people who are members of the “wrong” group.

 

It is not too late, but it is getting close. I pray that everyone has a restful Christmas season to connect with family and friends as the beautiful individual people they are. Next year will be a pivotal year in the history of our nation.

Endowed by our creator

My column for the Washington County Daily News is online and in print. For the next two weeks it will be running on Saturday instead of Tuesday because of the holidays. Here’s a part:

Every group of people — whether it be a family, business, or a nation — has a culture whether they intend to have one or not. The United States is a very large country with beautifully diverse regional and local cultures, but there are several distinctly American common cultural elements that thread through our society. Those common cultural elements are waning in the face of neglect and intentional destruction.

 

The American culture is derived from our founding ethos rooted in European and American Enlightenment philosophy and frontier expansionism. It is a culture that celebrates the individual as a divine creation in which natural rights are innate and inalienable. This respect and adoration for the individual underpins much of American culture.

 

Because individuals are the foundational element of American culture, we created a system of government based on self-governance where individuals elect our leaders. Americans are reflexively anti-authoritarian because any concentration of power is a threat to the power of the individual.

 

Our respect for the individual explains Americans’ instinctive support for human rights. When each and every human is respected and honored as a unique and cherished individual, it is impossible to not support and respect the natural human rights of each individual. Those rights include, but are not limited to, the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.

 

Individual rights are the reason we have property and the rule of law. The right of an individual person to own the fruits of their own labor rejects the notion of collective ownership. The rule of law exists to provide a predictable and rigorous framework that protects individuals from the power of governments and other individuals who seek to deprive them of the free exercise of their natural rights and the disposition of their property.

 

The respect for the sovereignty of the individual and respect for individual natural rights is the very heart of liberty and our American love of liberty. What is liberty if not the love of individuals being free to conduct themselves as they wish without interference from their fellow humans? When one individual’s exercise of liberty threatens another’s, we surrender our personal violent power to the necessary evil of government to resolve the conflict through the rule of law.

 

It is our American love of the individual that breathes life into our culture of tolerance, multiculturalism, and respect for others. “Live and let live” has long been core to the American ethic. We have long striven for the ideal of equality and liberty where individuals of every race, creed, and religion are brothers and sisters in one family that we call “America.”

 

America’s historic respect for individuals is being assaulted. For over a generation, our schools have been contaminated with philosophies of collectivism, intersectionality, and neo-Marxism. These philosophies reject the sovereignty of the individual in favor of bundling people into groups of oppressors and oppressed, favored and unfavored, good and bad. In these philosophies, concepts like the rule of law, self-governance, and individual liberty are rendered obsolete and replaced with authoritarianism whereby chosen people rule by right in order to correct the perceived wrongs of history and any means are justified by the righteous ends.

Governor Evers’ shadow government

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

“Wisconsin’s open government laws promote democracy by ensuring that all state, regional and local governments conduct their business with transparency. Wisconsin citizens have a right to know how their government is spending their tax dollars and exercising the powers granted by the people.”

— Attorney General Josh Kaul, Wisconsin Public Records Law Compliance Guide 

 

Based on the principle that transparency in government is both a right of the people and an obligation of government officials, Wisconsin has some of the best open records laws in the nation. That is why it is so troubling to learn that our Governor, Tony Evers, has been hiding his official email communications behind an secret alias for years. What else is he hiding?

 

The news came to light a few weeks ago when Wisconsin Right Now, a conservative news and opinion outlet, learned that Governor Evers has been using the name of Hall of Fame Milwaukee Braves pitcher Warren Spahn’s name for the governor’s secret email address warrenspahn@ wisconsin.gov. According to a disclosure from the governor’s office, there are over 17,000 emails to and from the governor’s secret email address between 2017 and 2023.

 

Evers dismissed the disclosure as not newsworthy while pretending that using secret email addresses was normal government practice. As someone who has requested records for decades, the governor’s assertion is news to me, other open government advocates, and news agencies. Secret emails are not normal except for politicians who are trying to hide something.

 

Wisconsin’s Open Records Laws are clear and unambiguous. When someone requests records from a public official about a particular subject or time period, the official is compelled by law to provide all of those records irrespective of whether the records are from their official email account, personal email account, text, chat, or any other format. It is the content of the records that makes them government records and subject to disclosure – not the means of transmission. The fact that the governor has failed to disclose the content of his secret email account despite dozens of legal open records requests is a clear violation of the law.

 

This governor has a history of secrecy. In 2019, FOX6 had to sue the governor to get emails. FOX6 had filed a routing request for a couple of weeks of emails. They had a practice of this to just see what might turn up. The governor rejected the request claiming that the news agency needed to narrow the request to a specific search term. The governor’s novel interpretation of the law was ludicrous and against the law as written and practiced for decades. After FOX6 sued, the governor finally relented and released some emails. At that time, however, the governor did not disclose the governor’s secret emails as required by law.

 

Furthermore, during that imbroglio, Tony Evers scoffed at the request saying, “Oh, that’ll be pretty, pretty boring I’ll tell ya. If I do one email a day, that’s an extraordinary day… It’s pretty boring. I mean, I can’t remember sending an email all week.’ That is a lie. Evers knew at the time that he was using a secret email account that was averaging over nine emails per day for years.

 

Governor Tony Evers’ culture of secrecy is antithetical to good government. When politicians are acting above board in good faith, they do not mind the public looking at their work and communications. When politicians are doing wrong, they scurry in the shadows like rats. Evers is reflexively secretive and acts with the arrogance on one who has spent his life in government. In the case of his secret email account, he has clearly been violating the law by failing to disclose it in response to records requests.

 

Governor Evers’ shadow government

Boy, this story died quickly… so I’m bringing it back up. My column for the Washington County Daily News is online and in print. Here’s a part:

Based on the principle that transparency in government is both a right of the people and an obligation of government officials, Wisconsin has some of the best open records laws in the nation. That is why it is so troubling to learn that our Governor, Tony Evers, has been hiding his official email communications behind an secret alias for years. What else is he hiding?

 

The news came to light a few weeks ago when Wisconsin Right Now, a conservative news and opinion outlet, learned that Governor Evers has been using the name of Hall of Fame Milwaukee Braves pitcher Warren Spahn’s name for the governor’s secret email address warrenspahn@ wisconsin.gov. According to a disclosure from the governor’s office, there are over 17,000 emails to and from the governor’s secret email address between 2017 and 2023.

 

Evers dismissed the disclosure as not newsworthy while pretending that using secret email addresses was normal government practice. As someone who has requested records for decades, the governor’s assertion is news to me, other open government advocates, and news agencies. Secret emails are not normal except for politicians who are trying to hide something.

 

Wisconsin’s Open Records Laws are clear and unambiguous. When someone requests records from a public official about a particular subject or time period, the official is compelled by law to provide all of those records irrespective of whether the records are from their official email account, personal email account, text, chat, or any other format. It is the content of the records that makes them government records and subject to disclosure – not the means of transmission. The fact that the governor has failed to disclose the content of his secret email account despite dozens of legal open records requests is a clear violation of the law.

 

[…]

 

Furthermore, during that imbroglio, Tony Evers scoffed at the request saying, “Oh, that’ll be pretty, pretty boring I’ll tell ya. If I do one email a day, that’s an extraordinary day… It’s pretty boring. I mean, I can’t remember sending an email all week.’ That is a lie. Evers knew at the time that he was using a secret email account that was averaging over nine emails per day for years.

 

Governor Tony Evers’ culture of secrecy is antithetical to good government. When politicians are acting above board in good faith, they do not mind the public looking at their work and communications. When politicians are doing wrong, they scurry in the shadows like rats. Evers is reflexively secretive and acts with the arrogance on one who has spent his life in government. In the case of his secret email account, he has clearly been violating the law by failing to disclose it in response to records requests.

UW Regents Choose DEI Over Employee Raises

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

Many Americans were shocked by the militant antisemitism that erupted from our nation’s universities in the wake of Hamas’ evil murder, rape, kidnapping, and torture of Israeli civilians on October 7th. Some of us have watched the growing racial and religious hate growing in our universities for years, but the virulent display of hate by students and faculty has laid bare a malignant cancer in our culture.

 

The darker realization is that the bigotry we see on campuses all over our nation is being taught. It is the result of the incremental, but intentional, decline of our universities into schools that prioritize teaching people to be leftist activists instead of enlightened thought leaders. We see that prioritization on full display in Wisconsin.

 

The legislative Republicans, led by Speaker Robin Vos and undermined by Senate Majority Leader Devin LeMahieu, have been withholding money for employee raises for the Universities of Wisconsin until UW agreed to eliminate its Diversity Equity and Inclusion (DEI) staff. Although DEI is infused throughout the Universities, the UW currently has 43 exclusive DEI positions and about 34,000 total employees.

 

Despite the stated high-minded rhetorical ideals around DEI, it is part of the cancer in our universities. DEI purports to promote individualism and unique individual experiences. In practice, it devolves into categorizing people into arbitrary racial, ethnic, religious, gender, and economic groups, assigning a relative value to each category, and then encouraging separatism and discrimination. It fosters a culture of dehumanizing the “other” by assigning people to groups instead of engaging them as individuals. DEI programs favor racial segregation in dorms and learning spaces, quotas for admissions and hiring, and silences voices from unfavored people. As practiced on our UW campuses, DEI has long since left behind principles of tolerance and equality.

 

Furthermore, while some DEI professionals still try to adhere to classical liberal principles of inclusion, many of these DEI positions have become destination jobs for some of the most hateful, bigoted, and vile people in our society. Too many times when we watch another racist screed online, we see it coming from someone who has a career in the protected DEI club of academia.

 

Seeing this cancer growing in our state universities, Speaker Vos and his compatriots sought to use a financial wedge to force positive change at UW by withholding money for employee raises until the UW eliminated its 43 dedicated DEI positions. Last week, Vos caved and agreed to a compromise that I thought gave too much for too little.

 

In the sixteen-point deal, the UW would agree to freeze, not eliminate, its DEI positions in place. UW would also agree to adhere to rulings of the U.S. Supreme Court to not discriminate in admissions, pull back on racial discrimination for hiring, add a teaching module about freedom of expression, and implement an automatic admission program for Wisconsin’s top High School students.

 

In return for these modest concessions by UW that involve mostly doing things that they should be doing anyway, Vos agreed to open the financial floodgates and lavish hundreds of millions of dollars on UW to pay for employee raises, build a long-sought new engineering building, pay for several new building projects all over the system, and pay to demolish and remove 21 old buildings. That is a lot of construction for a UW with steeply declining enrollment.

 

Despite this surrender by Vos where UW got almost everything it wanted, the UW Regents voted to reject the compromise. What does this tell us about the UW Regents and the leadership of the Universities of Wisconsin?

 

In a $7.53 billion budget for the Universities of Wisconsin, the Regents always had budgetary room to pay for employee raises and buildings, but they prioritized DEI and administration. At UW-Madison alone, they have grown administration and support staff by 23 percent in the last ten years according to The College Fix. The instructional staff to undergrad ratio has stayed constant at about one to ten while there is now about one administrator for every four undergrads.

 

There was always budgetary room for employee raises – there still is – but the UW leadership decided to hold those raises hostage to put pressure on the legislature to agree to continue to fund DEI.

 

Is it any wonder that our universities have become cesspools of hate and division? The leadership and administration of those universities are making the choice to maintain and grow cancerous teachings at the expense of all else. We are regressing as a culture in terms of tolerance, acceptance, and inclusion and that regression is being led by our universities like the Universities of Wisconsin.

Unions sue to overturn Wisconsin’s 2011 Act 10

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

A group of unions have filed suit demanding that Wisconsin’s 2011 Act 10 be thrown out. They argue that the law is unconstitutional because it discriminates between public safety government employees and general government employees. Given that neither public safety government employees nor general government employees constitute a protected class in the state Constitution or in law, the case should be thrown out on its face, but it is probable that this is the beginning of the end of Act 10.

 

Since it has been well over a decade since Act 10 was passed, it is worth refreshing our collective memories about it. In 2010, Democrat Gov. Jim Doyle had declined to run for reelection after a series of scandals and gross mismanagement of the budget. The state was facing a massive $3.6 billion structural deficit. When Gov. Scott Walker and his fellow legislative Republicans were swept into office on a wave of discontent, they were immediately confronted with fixing the deficit. Act 10 began in a special session in early 2011 to fix the Democrats’ budget deficit. A structural budget deficit required a structural repair. At the time, roughly half of the $28.3 billion general fund budget (it was $44.4 billion in the most recent budget — up 57% — but that is for another column) was entitlements. Pension costs ate up 13%, shared revenue and K-12 spending was 15%, and all other state needs (universities, prisons, natural resources, etc.) were squeezed into the remaining 22%. Act 10 was designed to address the structural budget by restructuring the pension and local government parts of the state budget. The problem was that government unions had a stranglehold on that spending. In the days before Act 10, the powerful government unions organized to elect local school board members and other local elected officials. When it came to bargain for government employees, everything was on the table and the union officials were usually negotiating with people they helped elect. The taxpayers were not represented.

 

Act 10 did a number of things including restricting government union negotiations to just wages, required government unions to certify every year to ensure the employees wanted the unions’ representation, required government employees to contribute to their own health insurance and pensions, made elected official and political appointees equal to other employees for pensions, restructured some old debt, provided funding for corrections, and separated UW Madison from the UW System by giving it flagship status. It was an expansive and well-crafted law.

 

It worked. The budget was repaired and the tremendous budgeting that Republicans did throughout the 2010s led to the $7 billion budget surplus that politicians are arguing about today. It all started with Act 10.

 

Act 10 has also led to incredible savings for Wisconsin’s taxpayers. According to the MacIver Institute, which has been tracking the impact of Act 10 since it was passed, the cumulative savings stemming from Act 10 for Wisconsin’s taxpayers as of March of this year is $16.8 billion. Put another way, Wisconsin’s high cost of government would have been $16.8 billion more taxing had Act 10 never been passed.

 

Furthermore, the government employees who most opposed Act 10 have been voting with their feet. According to the Wisconsin Policy Institute, of the 983 public-sector unions in Wisconsin at the time of Act 10’s passage, only 318 successfully recertified and were still bargaining for employees as of 2021. Teachers unions are still the most active with 56.2% of them still active. At the other end of the spectrum, only 3.4% of county employee unions are still active. Government employees have been clear. The vast majority of them reject unionization just as most other Wisconsin workers. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, only 9.3% of Wisconsin’s workers — including government workers — were unionized in 2021.

 

That’s the rub. Follow the money. The unions suing over Act 10 have been decimated by the law because it allows workers to choose. The unions want to return to the bad old days when unions existed in perpetuity and government workers were forced to be members and pay dues. The unions were also able to shake down taxpayers for even more money like when the state teachers union founded a health insurance company and forced school districts to use it. All of that stopped with Act 10 and the river of taxpayer money that flowed into union coffers slowed to a babbling brook.

 

Despite the fact that Act 10 was litigated multiple times and ruled legal and constitutional every single time, the unions are suing again 12 years after Act 10 passed into law. Why? Because they and their Democrat vassals managed to elect a leftist activist majority on the Wisconsin Supreme Court. The unions and the Democrats are looking to get a return on their investment and reinvigorate the government unions by turning the taxpayer spigot back on full.

 

Sadly for Wisconsin’s taxpayers, they will probably get their way.

Unions sue to overturn Wisconsin’s 2011 Act 10

My column for the Washington County Daily News is online and in print. I thought we were done debating Act 10, but here we are…

A group of unions have filed suit demanding that Wisconsin’s 2011 Act 10 be thrown out. They argue that the law is unconstitutional because it discriminates between public safety government employees and general government employees. Given that neither public safety government employees nor general government employees constitute a protected class in the state Constitution or in law, the case should be thrown out on its face, but it is probable that this is the beginning of the end of Act 10.

 

Since it has been well over a decade since Act 10 was passed, it is worth refreshing our collective memories about it. In 2010, Democrat Gov. Jim Doyle had declined to run for reelection after a series of scandals and gross mismanagement of the budget. The state was facing a massive $3.6 billion structural deficit. When Gov. Scott Walker and his fellow legislative Republicans were swept into office on a wave of discontent, they were immediately confronted with fixing the deficit. Act 10 began in a special session in early 2011 to fix the Democrats’ budget deficit. A structural budget deficit required a structural repair. At the time, roughly half of the $28.3 billion general fund budget (it was $44.4 billion in the most recent budget — up 57% — but that is for another column) was entitlements. Pension costs ate up 13%, shared revenue and K-12 spending was 15%, and all other state needs (universities, prisons, natural resources, etc.) were squeezed into the remaining 22%. Act 10 was designed to address the structural budget by restructuring the pension and local government parts of the state budget.

 

The problem was that government unions had a stranglehold on that spending. In the days before Act 10, the powerful government unions organized to elect local school board members and other local elected officials. When it came to bargain for government employees, everything was on the table and the union officials were usually negotiating with people they helped elect. The taxpayers were not represented.

 

[…]

 

It worked. The budget was repaired and the tremendous budgeting that Republicans did throughout the 2010s led to the $7 billion budget surplus that politicians are arguing about today. It all started with Act 10.

 

Act 10 has also led to incredible savings for Wisconsin’s taxpayers. According to the MacIver Institute, which has been tracking the impact of Act 10 since it was passed, the cumulative savings stemming from Act 10 for Wisconsin’s taxpayers as of March of this year is $16.8 billion. Put another way, Wisconsin’s high cost of government would have been $16.8 billion more taxing had Act 10 never been passed.

 

Furthermore, the government employees who most opposed Act 10 have been voting with their feet. According to the Wisconsin Policy Institute, of the 983 public-sector unions in Wisconsin at the time of Act 10’s passage, only 318 successfully recertified and were still bargaining for employees as of 2021. Teachers unions are still the most active with 56.2% of them still active. At the other end of the spectrum, only 3.4% of county employee unions are still active. Government employees have been clear. The vast majority of them reject unionization just as most other Wisconsin workers. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, only 9.3% of Wisconsin’s workers — including government workers — were unionized in 2021.

 

That’s the rub.

 

Follow the money.

 

The unions suing over Act 10 have been decimated by the law because it allows workers to choose. The unions want to return to the bad old days when unions existed in perpetuity and government workers were forced to be members and pay dues. The unions were also able to shake down taxpayers for even more money like when the state teachers union founded a health insurance company and forced school districts to use it. All of that stopped with Act 10 and the river of taxpayer money that flowed into union coffers slowed to a babbling brook.

 

Despite the fact that Act 10 was litigated multiple times and ruled legal and constitutional every single time, the unions are suing again 12 years after Act 10 passed into law. Why? Because they and their Democrat vassals managed to elect a leftist activist majority on the Wisconsin Supreme Court. The unions and the Democrats are looking to get a return on their investment and reinvigorate the government unions by turning the taxpayer spigot back on full.

Republicans pass massive tax and regulatory relief bill

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

Overall, the Republicans bill is a meaningful effort to reduce taxes for working Wisconsinites, make it easier for Wisconsinites to work, and target assistance for needed professions like nursing, child care, counseling, and commercial driving. It not only puts billions of dollars into the economy, it makes it easier to for more Wisconsinites to earn a living.

 

Unfortunately for Wisconsin, Gov. Tony Evers vetoed everything. Wisconsinites will not get tax relief. Professionals moving to Wisconsin will still have to go through a laborious, expensive, and unnecessary credentialing process. Wisconsinites will not get financial help for expensive child care expensive. None of this is happening because Evers is pouting about not getting his way.

 

In his veto message, he repeatedly whines about wanting more government spending to expand the bureaucracy. He also contradicts himself saying that Wisconsin cannot afford a tax cut while simultaneously bragging about the massive budget surplus. Governor Evers called this thoughtful, comprehensive, compassionate Republican bill “completely unserious.” Sadly, it is completely serious that Wisconsinites are not going to get the tax and regulatory relief that they need because Evers and the legislative Democrats will not let it happen.

 

Wisconsin’s state government is bigger, more expensive, and more intrusive than it has ever been and Governor Evers and state Democrats want is to be even bigger, even more expensive, and even more intrusive. No wonder the state’s population is shrinking.

Meeting expectations in Wisconsin’s schools

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

The Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction has released the legally required district report cards for the 2022-2023 school year. If the results do not make you feel shame and anger, then you do not really care about education.

 

The annual report card measures school districts, and the schools that comprise them, on several factors including achievement on benchmarking exams, absenteeism, graduation rates, and relative improvement or regression from the prior year. Most of the score, however, is based on performance.

 

According to the report cards, the Milwaukee Public School District “meets expectations” with an overall score of 58. The West Bend School District also “meets expectations” with an overall score of 68.8. According to the results of the Wisconsin Forward Exam, 45.8% of students in West Bend and 15.8% of students in Milwaukee are proficient at English Language Arts. Similarly, only 55.1% of students in West Bend and 11.5% of students in Milwaukee are proficient in math.

 

Let us focus on the phrase “meets expectations.” Does the fact that less than half of the kids in West Bend can read or write meet their parents’ expectations? How about the fact that one in ten kids in Milwaukee can do math at their grade level? Does that meet their expectations? Do parents, teachers, and taxpayers in those districts look at these numbers, shrug their shoulders, and say, “meh, good enough”? Apparently, many of them do, but why does this kind of abysmal performance meet the state DPI’s expectations? And why do both districts meet the DPI’s expectations when Milwaukee’s scores are so much lower? Does the DPI’s lower expectations of Milwaukee reveal a soft bigotry?

 

The fact is that some of you have lowered your expectations so much that you are willing to accept sending ignorant, semi-literate kids into a world in which they are not equipped to be successful. The fact that that “meets expectations” is a stain on our society.

 

Furthermore, when one compares the spending per student to the report card scores, there is a slight correlation. That is, there is a slight negative correlation. The data shows that the more that a district spends per student, the more likely it is that the district’s overall score will decrease.

 

For example, the Slinger district spends about $13,730 per student and exceeds expectations. The Monroe District spends about $17,793 per student and just meets expectations. The districts are otherwise similar in terms of racial makeup, number of economically disadvantaged students, number of native English speakers, and other factors. Why is Monroe spending almost 30% more per student than Slinger to get worse results?

 

Money is not the answer to making education better in Wisconsin. In fact, the data shows that more money makes it worse. There is one thing, however, that has been providing a better education for tens of thousands of Wisconsin kids and the Democrats are trying to kill it.

 

School choice. For almost 35 years, some kids in Milwaukee have had the opportunity to escape their failed government schools where 11.5% of kids are proficient in math to go to a better school of their choice. That choice was expanded to Racine in 2011 and then statewide in 2013. These school choice programs have opened new, previously unavailable, doors to thousands of kids who are getting an education that meets their parents’ expectations – irrespective of whether or not the educrats in Madison think about their local government schools.

 

With the new leftist majority on the Wisconsin Supreme Court, a group of leftist Democrats have filed suit demanding that all three Wisconsin school choice programs be ended. The plaintiffs have asked for the Supreme Court to take up the case directly without letting the case work its way through lower courts. Despite the fact that school choice has been ruled legal and constitutional for over 30 years and in courts all over the nation, there is a very real chance that the leftist zealots on the Wisconsin Supreme Court may end school choice in Wisconsin by this time next year.

 

If the Wisconsin Supreme Court kills school choice, they will force tens of thousands of kids back into the government education gulags where ignorance and failure “meets expectations.” I am ashamed of our state’s poor government schools and angry that so many people find that they “meet expectations.” You should be too.

Wisconsin’s shrinking deer hunt

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

The fallen leaves, crisp air and smell of pumpkin spice can only mean one thing — the gun deer season is almost upon us. As legions of hunters head to the woods this Saturday, the future of the hunt is increasingly concerning.

 

The gun deer hunt is a keystone Wisconsin cultural event that binds generations together. It is also a practical and necessary function to keep Wisconsin’s deer population under control.

 

Absent most of their natural predators, controlling the deer population with hunting is important for the state. The largest reason is to protect Wisconsin’s large agricultural economy. Over the last 10 years, deer have destroyed an average of 108,158 bushels of corn per year. The deer are equally destructive to soybeans, alfalfa and other key cash crops.

 

The second most important reason why the deer herd must be controlled is to reduce vehicle collisions. Over the last 10 years, Wisconsin averaged almost 19,000 deer-vehicle collisions per year.

 

Thirdly, the deer herd must be managed to prevent them from outstripping the ability of the ecosystem to feed them, resulting in disease and suffering for the deer themselves.

 

Since the peak in 2000, there has been a steady decline in the number of deer hunters and the deer population has been rapidly expanding. The reasons are mainly demographic. Wisconsin’s population is shrinking slightly and aging rapidly. As hunters age, they eventually stop hunting for myriad reasons. Some stop because of health reasons. Some stop because their hunting groups dwindle and disband. Some stop because they change their lifestyle and hunting is no longer convenient. As older hunters increasingly hang up their blaze orange for good, there are too few younger hunters to replace them.

 

I am in the latter category. I absolutely loved the deer hunt for many years, but a change in lifestyle makes it no longer practicable for the time being. A successful hunt is one that is safe, fun and harvests some meat — in that order.

 

The statistics from the Department of Natural Resources (DNR) bear out the troubling trends for the hunt. Wisconsin hunters peaked in 2000 by harvesting almost 403,000 deer. Last year, they harvested just 176,476 deer and have not harvested more than 200,000 deer since 2012.

 

Consequently, the statewide deer herd has been rapidly expanding. The DNR estimated that there were 987,300 deer in 2009. Last year after the deer hunting season, they estimated the deer herd at 1.67 million. That is a 69 percent increase in the deer population in just 13 years.

 

How big should Wisconsin’s deer herd be? That is a matter of opinion. It is a balance. It depends on what one considers to be acceptable levels of agricultural loss and vehicle collisions. At the same time, the state wants to keep the herd large enough to support Wisconsin’s hunting culture while maintaining a healthy ecosystem with deer in it. The “right” size of the herd is debatable, but as the primary herd control mechanism dwindles, the ability of the DNR to control the herd at all is slowly slipping away.

 

As the number of hunters decreases, the DNR is going to need to adjust the regulations to encourage a greater harvest per hunter in order to keep up with the growing herd. Simply, the DNR will need to make it easier and cheaper for each hunter to harvest more deer.

 

For example, the DNR may consider increasing tag requirements or waiving them completely. If the goal is to harvest deer, who does it and where they do it is less important than the total harvest. The DNR may also consider making the number and types of zones and make it easier for hunters to hunt multiple zones. Rules on baiting could also be relaxed. Finally, as a last resort, the DNR may need to consider significantly lengthening the gun deer season like many other states.

 

Those considerations, however, are looming in the future. For now, be safe out there, hunters!

Wisconsin’s shrinking deer hunt

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

Since the peak in 2000, there has been a steady decline in the number of deer hunters and the deer population has been rapidly expanding. The reasons are mainly demographic. Wisconsin’s population is shrinking slightly and aging rapidly. As hunters age, they eventually stop hunting for myriad reasons. Some stop because of health reasons. Some stop because their hunting groups dwindle and disband. Some stop because they change their lifestyle and hunting is no longer convenient. As older hunters increasingly hang up their blaze orange for good, there are too few younger hunters to replace them.

 

I am in the latter category. I absolutely loved the deer hunt for many years, but a change in lifestyle makes it no longer practicable for the time being. A successful hunt is one that is safe, fun and harvests some meat — in that order.

 

The statistics from the Department of Natural Resources (DNR) bear out the troubling trends for the hunt. Wisconsin hunters peaked in 2000 by harvesting almost 403,000 deer. Last year, they harvested just 176,476 deer and have not harvested more than 200,000 deer since 2012.

 

Consequently, the statewide deer herd has been rapidly expanding. The DNR estimated that there were 987,300 deer in 2009. Last year after the deer hunting season, they estimated the deer herd at 1.67 million. That is a 69 percent increase in the deer population in just 13 years.

 

How big should Wisconsin’s deer herd be? That is a matter of opinion. It is a balance. It depends on what one considers to be acceptable levels of agricultural loss and vehicle collisions. At the same time, the state wants to keep the herd large enough to support Wisconsin’s hunting culture while maintaining a healthy ecosystem with deer in it. The “right” size of the herd is debatable, but as the primary herd control mechanism dwindles, the ability of the DNR to control the herd at all is slowly slipping away.

 

As the number of hunters decreases, the DNR is going to need to adjust the regulations to encourage a greater harvest per hunter in order to keep up with the growing herd. Simply, the DNR will need to make it easier and cheaper for each hunter to harvest more deer

Evers hands out your candy

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

Gov. Tony Evers announced that he is providing over 36 million tax dollars to pay for five building projects. The announcement highlights just how broken our government has become.

 

Our government is intentionally built with divided powers and checks on those powers. The Legislature makes law. The executive executes that law. The judiciary judges the correct application of the law. The entire apparatus was built for the express purpose of avoiding the concentration of power that always precedes tyranny.

 

In this instance, last year the governor proposed a list of building projects to be funded by the taxpayers. The Legislature, which has the responsibility and power to allocate taxpayer money, passed a capital budget that agreed with the vast majority of the governor’s building proposals, but not all of them. Unlike the federal government, state governments cannot print money. The state Legislature must prioritize spending and balance the budget.

 

That is how the process works. The governor suggests how to allocate the budget. The Legislature writes the budget. The governor then checks the Legislature with his veto power. Everyone moves on. Not this time. Governor Evers announced that despite not being included in the capital budget, he is going to spend over 36 million tax dollars to pay for five projects. How? The answer illustrates our broken government. First, the money Evers is spending is slush fund money from the 2021 American Rescue Plan Act. This was the $1.9 trillion waste passed by the federal government to “change the course of the pandemic and deliver immediate relief for American workers.” This gargantuan spending boondoggle fueled our current almost $34 trillion national debt and was a key contributor to the inflation and high interest rates that Americans are suffering with today. It is borrowed dollars that our grandchildren’s grandchildren will be paying taxes to pay back. The American Rescue Plan Act was a generational theft.

 

Sold as a “rescue plan,” the spending also created gigantic slush funds for state governors to spend at their personal discretion. This is the money that Evers is using to pay for building projects. Our government’s structure is supposed to prevent the concentration of power and arbitrary government, but the slush fund allows Evers to allocate money — a power expressly granted to the Legislature — without any oversight. Such arbitrary exercises of power are the stuff of dictatorships.

 

Looking past how the money got there and how the governor had the unfettered power to spend it, let us look on what it is to be spent.

 

$15 million for the Janesville Sports and Convention Center

 

$9.3 million for the Milwaukee Iron District new soccer stadium $7 million for the Green Bay National Railroad Museum expansion

 

$5 million for the Bronzeville Center for the Arts

 

$330,000 for the Door County Peninsula Players Theatre upgrades.

 

No wonder the Legislature did not agree to spend millions of dollars on these projects. Is it really the role of state government to fleece the taxpayers out of their hard-earned wages to pay for a soccer stadium in Milwaukee? Is expanding the National Railroad Museum in Green Bay worth making a young family in La Crosse cut back on groceries to afford their rent? I am sure that the Door County Peninsula Players Theatre is delightful, but it is difficult for an elderly couple in Hudson to enjoy when the cost of gas is over $3.00 a gallon. Budgets are about priorities and there was a good reason why these projects did not make the list.

 

At the end of this money train are people who will be paid to do these projects and the very few people who will make money off of the facilities. Watch where that money goes and how it is spent. Then we will all know why Evers chose these projects.

 

We see how broken our government is. The federal government shakes down future generations by borrowing money to spend on the present generation. This triggers inflation, responded to by jacking up interest rates, thus lowering the spending power and quality of life of the current generation. The money is allocated into gigantic slush funds for governors to spend at their whims, thus bypassing small-“r” republican governments at the state level and creating arbitrary government. Then the money is spent on governors’ pet projects that have little to no value for the taxpayers paying the bills.

 

The scheme is not about a better Wisconsin or a better America. It is about fleecing the many for the benefit of a few.

Evers hands out your candy

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

Gov. Tony Evers announced that he is providing over 36 million tax dollars to pay for five building projects. The announcement highlights just how broken our government has become.

 

[…]

 

In this instance, last year the governor proposed a list of building projects to be funded by the taxpayers. The Legislature, which has the responsibility and power to allocate taxpayer money, passed a capital budget that agreed with the vast majority of the governor’s building proposals, but not all of them. Unlike the federal government, state governments cannot print money. The state Legislature must prioritize spending and balance the budget.

 

That is how the process works. The governor suggests how to allocate the budget. The Legislature writes the budget. The governor then checks the Legislature with his veto power. Everyone moves on. Not this time. Governor Evers announced that despite not being included in the capital budget, he is going to spend over 36 million tax dollars to pay for five projects. How? The answer illustrates our broken government. First, the money Evers is spending is slush fund money from the 2021 American Rescue Plan Act. This was the $1.9 trillion waste passed by the federal government to “change the course of the pandemic and deliver immediate relief for American workers.” This gargantuan spending boondoggle fueled our current almost $34 trillion national debt and was a key contributor to the inflation and high interest rates that Americans are suffering with today. It is borrowed dollars that our grandchildren’s grandchildren will be paying taxes to pay back. The American Rescue Plan Act was a generational theft.

 

[…]

 

No wonder the Legislature did not agree to spend millions of dollars on these projects. Is it really the role of state government to fleece the taxpayers out of their hard-earned wages to pay for a soccer stadium in Milwaukee? Is expanding the National Railroad Museum in Green Bay worth making a young family in La Crosse cut back on groceries to afford their rent? I am sure that the Door County Peninsula Players Theatre is delightful, but it is difficult for an elderly couple in Hudson to enjoy when the cost of gas is over $3.00 a gallon. Budgets are about priorities and there was a good reason why these projects did not make the list.

 

At the end of this money train are people who will be paid to do these projects and the very few people who will make money off of the facilities. Watch where that money goes and how it is spent. Then we will all know why Evers chose these projects.

 

We see how broken our government is. The federal government shakes down future generations by borrowing money to spend on the present generation. This triggers inflation, responded to by jacking up interest rates, thus lowering the spending power and quality of life of the current generation. The money is allocated into gigantic slush funds for governors to spend at their whims, thus bypassing small-“r” republican governments at the state level and creating arbitrary government. Then the money is spent on governors’ pet projects that have little to no value for the taxpayers paying the bills.

 

The scheme is not about a better Wisconsin or a better America. It is about fleecing the many for the benefit of a few.

Republicans amend their way to secure elections

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

Wisconsin’s reputation for clean elections has suffered mortal blows in recent years thanks to the aggressive assault by leftists to undermine our election laws and procedures. Their efforts have been so successful that they are redoubling their efforts to bludgeon our electoral system into an instrument to extend leftist ideology.

 

Defending against the leftist onslaught, Republicans in the Legislature have been working to codify some key electoral protections into the state Constitution. Even constitutional protections are not safe from the activist leftist Wisconsin Supreme Court, but constitutional ramparts are stronger than statutory ones. The process to amend the state Constitution is long, but simple. Both houses of the state Legislature must pass the same constitutional amendment in two successive legislatures, then the amendment is submitted to the voters of the state. If the voters pass it, then the Constitution is amended. The process intentional excludes the executive and judicial branches, relegating the text of the Constitution the sole domain of the elected Legislature and the state’s electors. The Republicans currently have three amendments concerning election integrity working their way to the voters. The first proposed amendment would prohibit governments from accepting private money to manage elections and prohibit anyone except election officials from administering anything to do with running an election.

 

This amendment is in response to the “Zuckerbucks” that polluted our 2020 presidential election. Billionaire Mark Zuckerberg spearheaded an effort to pour millions of dollars and dozens of people into Democratic cities to “help” administer elections. This amendment would prohibit such activities and keep administering our elections the exclusive responsibility and authority of elected and appointed government officials. This amendment is up for its second vote this year could be on the ballot as soon as April for the voters’ consideration.

 

The second proposed amendment would change the state Constitution to ensure that only United States citizens can vote in Wisconsin’s elections. It is already the law in Wisconsin that only U.S. citizens can vote, but the Constitution actually states that, “Every United States citizen age 18 or older who is a resident of an election district in this state is a qualified elector of that district.” “Every” is the key word because it does not exclude non-citizens from voting. It simply says that every U.S. citizen can vote. It does not say that non-citizens cannot vote. Wisconsin state and local laws prohibit non-citizens from voting, but the Constitution does not.

 

Part of the leftist agenda is to get the millions of illegal aliens that the Biden administration has been helping flood into America to vote. They believe that the leftist agenda of opening the borders and providing welfare to millions of impoverished foreigners will be appreciated and reciprocated with their votes. Leftists throughout the country are pushing to allow non-citizens — illegal and otherwise — to legally vote in local elections to start. They have long winked and turned a blind eye to non-citizens voting illegally.

 

The amendment to ensure that citizenship means something and that only citizens can legally vote should be on the ballot for consideration by the voters in 2024.

 

The third proposed constitutional amendment is only on its first reading, so it will not be submitted to the voters until at least 2025. Several years ago, the Legislature and Governor Scott Walker enacted voter ID with wide public support. Protecting our elections by ensuring that people prove their identity and eligibility to vote by showing a qualified picture ID is a simple, common-sense, measure that remains very popular.

 

Like so many common-sense laws, Wisconsin’s leftists have been undermining the law and are counting on the newly minted leftist Supreme Court to throw out the law on some hogwash pretense. The leftists seem to want non-citizens and other ineligible persons to vote and voter ID puts a crimp in their agenda.

 

To try to protect voter ID, the third proposed constitutional amendment would enshrine it into the Constitution. Normally this is something that would be more appropriate for the statutes instead of the Constitution, but extraordinary times call for extraordinary measures. Hopefully the voters will have their say (again) on this issue in 2025.

 

All three proposed constitutional amendments are policies that enjoy wide public support, but nothing is ever certain in Wisconsin’s elections. Get out and vote.

Republicans amend their way to secure elections

My column for the Washington County Daily News is online and in printhttps://westbenddailynews-wi.newsmemory.com?selDate=20231031&goTo=A06&editionStart=West%20Bend Daily News. Here’s a part:

Wisconsin’s reputation for clean elections has suffered mortal blows in recent years thanks to the aggressive assault by leftists to undermine our election laws and procedures. Their efforts have been so successful that they are redoubling their efforts to bludgeon our electoral system into an instrument to extend leftist ideology.

 

Defending against the leftist onslaught, Republicans in the Legislature have been working to codify some key electoral protections into the state Constitution. Even constitutional protections are not safe from the activist leftist Wisconsin Supreme Court, but constitutional ramparts are stronger than statutory ones. 

 

[…]

 

The Republicans currently have three amendments concerning election integrity working their way to the voters. The first proposed amendment would prohibit governments from accepting private money to manage elections and prohibit anyone except election officials from administering anything to do with running an election.

 

This amendment is in response to the “Zuckerbucks” that polluted our 2020 presidential election. Billionaire Mark Zuckerberg spearheaded an effort to pour millions of dollars and dozens of people into Democratic cities to “help” administer elections. This amendment would prohibit such activities and keep administering our elections the exclusive responsibility and authority of elected and appointed government officials. This amendment is up for its second vote this year could be on the ballot as soon as April for the voters’ consideration.

 

The second proposed amendment would change the state Constitution to ensure that only United States citizens can vote in Wisconsin’s elections. It is already the law in Wisconsin that only U.S. citizens can vote, but the Constitution actually states that, “Every United States citizen age 18 or older who is a resident of an election district in this state is a qualified elector of that district.” “Every” is the key word because it does not exclude non-citizens from voting. It simply says that every U.S. citizen can vote. It does not say that non-citizens cannot vote. Wisconsin state and local laws prohibit non-citizens from voting, but the Constitution does not.

 

Part of the leftist agenda is to get the millions of illegal aliens that the Biden administration has been helping flood into America to vote. They believe that the leftist agenda of opening the borders and providing welfare to millions of impoverished foreigners will be appreciated and reciprocated with their votes. Leftists throughout the country are pushing to allow non-citizens — illegal and otherwise — to legally vote in local elections to start. They have long winked and turned a blind eye to non-citizens voting illegally.

 

The amendment to ensure that citizenship means something and that only citizens can legally vote should be on the ballot for consideration by the voters in 2024.

 

The third proposed constitutional amendment is only on its first reading, so it will not be submitted to the voters until at least 2025. Several years ago, the Legislature and Governor Scott Walker enacted voter ID with wide public support. Protecting our elections by ensuring that people prove their identity and eligibility to vote by showing a qualified picture ID is a simple, common-sense, measure that remains very popular.

 

Like so many common-sense laws, Wisconsin’s leftists have been undermining the law and are counting on the newly minted leftist Supreme Court to throw out the law on some hogwash pretense. The leftists seem to want non-citizens and other ineligible persons to vote and voter ID puts a crimp in their agenda.

 

To try to protect voter ID, the third proposed constitutional amendment would enshrine it into the Constitution. Normally this is something that would be more appropriate for the statutes instead of the Constitution, but extraordinary times call for extraordinary measures. Hopefully the voters will have their say (again) on this issue in 2025.

 

All three proposed constitutional amendments are policies that enjoy wide public support, but nothing is ever certain in Wisconsin’s elections. Get out and vote.

Universities of Wisconsin finally responds to declining enrollment

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

We see the numbers in the enrollment of the Universities of Wisconsin. Between 2012 and 2022, the universities enrolled 19,568 fewer full-time equivalent (FTE) students. That is a 12.6% decline in enrollment. The decline has not been uniform across the campuses as students increasingly show affinity for the premier campuses to the detriment of the others. UW-Milwaukee, of which UWM-WC is a part, saw a 25% decline in enrollment over the same decade. UWM-WC’s enrollment, by itself, declined 35%. It was down to just 260 FTE enrollments last year.

 

As an aside, it is worth noting that the Universities of Wisconsin decline in enrollment has been mitigated by their aggressive recruitment of non-residents. Between 2012 and 2022, the decline in resident (Wisconsin kids) FTE enrollment was 27,375 while non-resident enrollment increased by 9,981 FTEs. Over that period, non-resident enrollment increased from 15% of total enrollment to 25% of total enrollment.

 

Returning to UWM-WC, the writing has been on the wall for years. Since its peak enrollment in 2010, enrollment at the UWM-WC campus has been collapsing. The reasons for the decline have nothing to do with the quality of education provided or facilities. The reasons are strictly because of demographic shifts and student preferences for larger campuses. While the campus has been of value for the students who have attended it, it is not economically viable to maintain the campus to serve so few students.

 

Earlier this year, local leaders rallied to find a way to save the campus. A task force created by Washington County Executive Josh Schoemann drafted a high-level plan to merge UWM-WC with Moraine Park Technical College (MPTC) into a type of community college in an effort to shore up both institutions. The idea made it into the state budget that was passed by the Republican legislature with state taxpayers providing funding to facilitate the merge.

 

That part of the state budget was vetoed by Democrat Gov. Tony Evers as the institutions’ leaders clucked their tongues that the “right people” were not involved in manifesting the idea, ergo, the proposed merger was not a good idea. Frankly, I do not know that it was a good idea to prop up a failing institution by merging it with one that is doing better, but the local leaders and Republicans should be commended for trying to rescue the campus. The Democrats and leaders of UWM obstructed the rescue effort and simply wanted to continue to throw taxpayer money into propping up the status quo.

 

Ending in-person enrollment at UWM-WC, and the likelihood that it will completely close within the next couple of years, is long overdue. The Universities of Wisconsin have been slow to respond to the historic and projected decline in enrollment. Institutional inertia is a powerful force, but making small changes now helps eliminate the need for massive changes later.

Latest Milwaukee stadium deal is still terrible

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

The latest version of the plan for taxpayers to refurbish and upgrade American Family Field for the Milwaukee Brewers is up for a vote in the Wisconsin Assembly this week. The $546 million package looks headed for passage with support from the Republicans, Gov. Tony Evers, the Brewers, and Milwaukee Democrats. Apparently, if there is anything that unites Wisconsin’s political parties, it is to spend half a billion taxpayer dollars on baseball.

 

The issue is that the taxpayers have majority ownership of the stadium. The current deal with the Brewers is that the taxpayers are responsible for maintaining the stadium and keeping it up to date with the rest of the league. The current funding is inadequate to keep up with the upgrades that the Brewers want for the stadium. Therefore, our politicians want to spend hundreds of millions of dollars to upgrade the stadium in exchange for the Brewers agreeing to stay in Wisconsin for longer.

 

The current package includes $411 million from state taxpayers and $67.5 million each from Milwaukee County and the city of Milwaukee. The contribution from Milwaukee city and County has been reduced since the last iteration in an effort to get support from Milwaukee’s local politicians. In addition, the Brewers have agreed to spend $100 million on upgrades. Several weeks ago, this column criticized the stadium funding deal currently being debated and further criticized the Southeast Wisconsin Professional Baseball Park District, the government body that owns the majority of the stadium and manages its upkeep. I criticized the district for not monetizing the stadium on behalf of the taxpayers. I unfairly disparaged the district because the lease with the Brewers prohibits the district from using the stadium to generate revenue. For that, I apologize.

 

In the Brewers’ lease, the district (taxpayers) disclaims “all revenues generated by the operations of the Team or derived from the ownership of the Team’s Franchise, as well as from the operation of the Stadium Complex for the Permitted Uses.” In other words, even though the deal has been painted as the taxpayers acting as landlord and the Brewers as tenants, the Brewers actually get any revenue generated by the property.

 

All profit from sponsorships, concessions, concerts, restaurants, parking, or anything else goes to the Brewers. No wonder the team has ballooned in value from $225 million when the current ownership purchased it in 2004 to over $1.6 billion now according to Forbes. Will the taxpayers get any of that appreciated value if the team is sold?

 

As written, the stadium deal is terrible for taxpayers. They will spend $546 million to upgrade the stadium so that it can make even more money for the Brewers’ owners. In return, the Brewers will stay around a while longer. Unless, of course, the owners sell the team, in which case, all bets are off.

 

Before considering any funding to the stadium, conservatives should insist on the following. First, they should rewrite the lease to allow the taxpayers, though the SEWPBPD, to collect all profits generated by the stadium for non-Brewers activities. If the stadium is leased for a corporate event, concert, pro wrestling, political rally, or any other function that does not involve baseball, the taxpayers, who own the building, should receive the profits.

 

Second, the rent paid by the Brewers for the use of the stadium should be based on a revenue share arrangement for revenue generated during Brewers’ games and other baseball-related activities. These first two items will lessen, and possibly eliminate, the need for taxpayer support by making the stadium self-supporting. It will also provide reliable revenue to allow the SEWPBPD to continue to upgrade the facility for years to come.

 

Third, in the event that the Brewers are sold, the lease should require that the taxpayers are refunded the amount they have spent on the stadium. The value of the team has significantly increased in large part due to the wonderful stadium and the revenue it generates. The taxpayers deserve to have their generosity reimbursed instead of all of the net increase in value going to the owners. Alternatively, the Brewers could just grant the SEWPBPD an equity position in the team so that any proceeds from a sale would naturally flow proportionally back to the taxpayers.

 

Absent significant changes to the deal, it should be rejected. While politicians of both parties love to spend money and pose for pictures with the Brewers, someone needs to look out for the taxpayers.

Latest Milwaukee stadium deal is still terrible

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

Several weeks ago, this column criticized the stadium funding deal currently being debated and further criticized the Southeast Wisconsin Professional Baseball Park District, the government body that owns the majority of the stadium and manages its upkeep. I criticized the district for not monetizing the stadium on behalf of the taxpayers. I unfairly disparaged the district because the lease with the Brewers prohibits the district from using the stadium to generate revenue. For that, I apologize.

 

In the Brewers’ lease, the district (taxpayers) disclaims “all revenues generated by the operations of the Team or derived from the ownership of the Team’s Franchise, as well as from the operation of the Stadium Complex for the Permitted Uses.” In other words, even though the deal has been painted as the taxpayers acting as landlord and the Brewers as tenants, the Brewers actually get any revenue generated by the property.

 

All profit from sponsorships, concessions, concerts, restaurants, parking, or anything else goes to the Brewers. No wonder the team has ballooned in value from $225 million when the current ownership purchased it in 2004 to over $1.6 billion now according to Forbes. Will the taxpayers get any of that appreciated value if the team is sold?

 

As written, the stadium deal is terrible for taxpayers. They will spend $546 million to upgrade the stadium so that it can make even more money for the Brewers’ owners. In return, the Brewers will stay around a while longer. Unless, of course, the owners sell the team, in which case, all bets are off.

 

Before considering any funding to the stadium, conservatives should insist on the following. First, they should rewrite the lease to allow the taxpayers, though the SEWPBPD, to collect all profits generated by the stadium for non-Brewers activities. If the stadium is leased for a corporate event, concert, pro wrestling, political rally, or any other function that does not involve baseball, the taxpayers, who own the building, should receive the profits.

 

Second, the rent paid by the Brewers for the use of the stadium should be based on a revenue share arrangement for revenue generated during Brewers’ games and other baseball-related activities. These first two items will lessen, and possibly eliminate, the need for taxpayer support by making the stadium self-supporting. It will also provide reliable revenue to allow the SEWPBPD to continue to upgrade the facility for years to come.

 

Third, in the event that the Brewers are sold, the lease should require that the taxpayers are refunded the amount they have spent on the stadium. The value of the team has significantly increased in large part due to the wonderful stadium and the revenue it generates. The taxpayers deserve to have their generosity reimbursed instead of all of the net increase in value going to the owners. Alternatively, the Brewers could just grant the SEWPBPD an equity position in the team so that any proceeds from a sale would naturally flow proportionally back to the taxpayers.

 

Absent significant changes to the deal, it should be rejected. While politicians of both parties love to spend money and pose for pictures with the Brewers, someone needs to look out for the taxpayers.

Archives

Categories

Pin It on Pinterest