The 'virtual fence' that was approved by Congress to extend across hundreds of miles of the border between the United States and Mexico has been been put on hold indefinitely.

Why?  Well, it seems that the Interior Department has not signed off on the use of its lands.  These officials have refused to accept an environmental assessment that the towers, cameras, etc. would have no appreciable effect on the lands.

Even though the Department of Homeland Security has the authority to waive environmental laws for border security projects, it apparently does not extend to the virtual fence projects.  Sounds like the typical governmental bull!

An employee of a Florida hospital testified recently about the costs of treating illegal immigrants in one hospital.  You can watch the testimony by clicking here.

The citizens of this country finally prevailed on border controls, and yet the government continues to thwart this solution.  It seems like someone is a bit confused on just how this country works.  The people in these various departments are employed because we pay taxes to support their employment.  I am tiring of those within the system who pervert it to their own will.

As we watch the Summer Olympics, we see the pageantry and the heroics of the athletes from around the world. 

We don't see the oppression that has persisted for centuries in China and that continues to persist under the very noses of those who are walking the streets of Beijing.

TV cameras and microphones have been installed in all the taxi cabs and are remote controlled by the authorities to be sure that no one says or does something threatening to the regime.  130,000 police and soldiers are present ostensibly to protect the attendees.  They also help assure that the opposition will be suppressed during the games.

300,000 Chinese citizens augment the 130,000 people mentioned above as additional eyes and ears.  Reporters are subject to censorship.  Passports are summarily pulled from some reporters who have sought to broadcast by telephone back to their home countries.  That is a subtle form of reminder that the regime is in complete control and that one shouldn't forget it.

Against this backdrop, the President stood aligned with Chinese protestants this morning to deliver a few words of support.  We don't know what kind of persecution will follow when the reporters and TV crews leave, but we can remember the Tienanmen Square episode of a few years ago and draw upon those scenes of brutality to get some idea.

China is China.  Nothing more and nothing less.  It owns a big chunk of America.  It spies on us every day.  It works to find weaponry that can be used against us.  It still wishes to defeat us; if not on an actual battlefield, then in commerce.  We seem to forget these things, but they are critical.

Bus Instead of Drive...

The Riteway/WCCE bus to and from the State Fair is a great deal in my estimation.  I have become a convert after this my third year of using this service.  A pleasant ride down and back.  Buses every half-hour.  Clean.  Relatively inexpensive.  And, discounted State Fair tickets courtesy of All American on Mequon Road in G'town.

Future Drop-Out?

Soon after arriving, I had an experience that has haunted me since.  I do not mean to be offensive, but I suspect some will be offended.  I heard a man hollering and saw, some distance ahead, a mother and son (about 5 years old).  All were well-dressed and neat in appearance.  They were working on some problem the son was having and the son had dropped a near-life size Spiderman game prize on the street while this went on.  That father was furious that 'Spidey' was on the street (although the street was clean and dry for a street).  The mother, who had been quiet until the hollering began, also commenced to scream and berate the boy.  The boy looked bewildered and then began to cry, only provoking more hollering and the use of epitaphs that refer to one's mother derogatorily.  Both mother and father used this term in addition to telling the boy that he was "stupid".  Then, the father, apparently having done his duty, turned and left to go back in the direction of the inner fairgrounds eating his 'blooming onion' while the mother and son walked toward the exit on 84th street.  Mom continued to berate the son verbally.  I didn't see any physical involvement.  There was no intervention by fairground security if they were even aware.

This was a 'stomach-turning' display.  There is no other way to describe it.  It was so out of the ordinary for me that I was dumbfounded.  It was over very quickly for me (except for the images in my mind) but the little guy lives in that world 24/7.

Frankly, this immediately brought to mind another drop-out at the age of fourteen or so adding to the woes of the Milwaukee Public School system and society some nine years from now, if it takes that long, and if he survives that long.  What kind of future does that young man have if he continues to be raised and educated in his current environment?  Where did society take the wrong turn that created the environment that produced Mom and Dad?

Economic/Political Indicator?

There seemed to be less lugging of mops and brooms and other 'fair goodies' this year than last.  The hawkers had smaller audiences, if an audience at all.  I saw two political party booths: Democrat and Libertarian.  I may've missed the other major party's booth but I don't know where it was.  If it is any consolation, neither were over-populated at the time I passed them.  To think the people were all at the other party's booth is, however, to be naive.  I saw one Obama button being worn and that was by a person who had boarded the bus in West Bend.

That was it for this year's fair experience other than to say the weather couldn't have been better.  We again saw Rhonda and her husband performing at Rupena's renewing a friendship of my wife's.  I guess my overall experience of the fair was over-shadowed by that early encounter with the highly dysfunctional family.  That was a 'downer', to borrow a term from a younger generation, that I'll carry for some time.

Is 'perversion' too strong a term?  I don't think so.

The EPA has turned down attempts by the State of Wisconsin to relax the ill-conceived S.E. Wisconsin requirement for 'reformulated' gasoline even as we are virtually in full attainment.  That was probably dwarfed by comparison to the decision it announced that it was denying the State of Texas' request for a cutback on the amount of ethanol required to be blended with gasoline.

There is a radio commercial playing in our market that is sponsored by the ethanol lobby that makes the case, in essence, that we, who question the use of corn to make ethanol, are over-reacting and need to check our facts.  I am angered every time I hear that commercial, including this morning as it played while I was shaving...with a blade.  That could've hurt!

The simple facts are being ignored by the EPA, Congress and the President.  And, these aren't stupid people.  This is intentional ignorance.  Our food prices are going up, and it is caused in part by the insistence that ethanol be blended with gasoline even as us taxpayers pay the price for the ethanol support being paid on every gallon.  The other part of the increase is obviously that caused by the fact that Democrats have so far refused to relax their stance against oil drilling here and now.

Back to ethanol.  It is causing many cattle ranchers to reduce their herd size because they can't afford the feed to grow them for market.  The prices for chicken and beef are rising at a rapid pace.  I looked at flank steak a few days ago since it always used to be a relatively lower priced cut of meat.  That is a thing of the past.  I bought chicken breasts a few days ago and was astounded at the prices I saw on the packages.

I know that my mileage with reformulated gas is less than it was before that edict; about 10% worse.  I know that ethanol is much less efficient in terms of the energy it generates than is gasoline.  So, I am burning more and getting less.  A double-whammy in our part of Wisconsin.

The EPA stated that there was "no compelling evidence" that the mandate for ethanol is causing "severe economic harm".  That had to have been spoken by a federal employee who is reimbursed for his or her mileage...from our tax dollars  These people simply have no contact with reality, or manage to suppress the lessons they really learn in order to be a "dutiful servant of the people".

As if all this isn't enough to put me into a deep funk, I am confronted with the idiocy that is called political campaigning where people talk about wind power, sun power, and bio-fuels while not mentioning oil or coal or nuclear power.  How in the world are we supposed to leap forward a decade or more when technology is not yet even available to soften our landing?

We are in real danger of becoming a third world nation if the current policies are not changed and changed quickly!  Our economy simply cannot withstand the political assault it is under.  And this is not a political assault from another country...it comes from within.

So, I don't think calling the EPA the Environmental Perversion Agency is much of a reach. 

And I, for one, am very, very tired of the elected people we all put into office forgetting who it is they represent, and what it is we want.

If you were prescient and stocked up on the Forever Stamp while it was still available at $0.41, you may be able to say "Gotcha!"

A small news item caught my eye this morning.  The U.S. Postal Service (USPS) posted a loss of $1,100,000,000 for the quarter ended June 30th.  Yes, that is $1.1 Billion that was lost by the USPS, now a private organization.

The reasons cited were reduced mail volume (blamed on the slowing economy) and rapidly rising transport costs.

We can all understand that the cost of fuels that go into delivery have gone through the roof.  Everything delivered costs more, or soon will.  And, the economy has slowed.  Given the apparent political stalemate on drilling for oil here and now, fuel costs will likely do nothing but continue to increase.  Your Forever Stamps may prove to have been a really good investment since postage costs will almost certainly have to rise for us consumers.

I wonder, however, if there may be something more at work here.  Is it possible that we are watching the initial death throes of snail mail as we have known it for our lifetimes?  We know that more of us are computer literate today than ten years ago.  I think we would agree that use of computers and other communications devices will continue to accelerate.

Between telephones and other electronic communication media, and with delivery services available that have already taken most of the parcel post market, are we in the process of ending the use of delivered items that we walk to a mailbox to retrieve?  Simply look at the state of newspapers in our country today to get some idea of the potential impact.

Will there continue to be a USPS ten years from now?   Twenty?

If so, what will it look like and what will it do?  What will happen to all the brick and mortar that carries the USPS logo?  What happens to the tens of thousands of employees?

Could this really happen?   Did anyone ever ask that about horses and buggies?  Did anyone ever foresee air travel in the 1850s?  Did anyone ever foresee space travel in the 1930s?

Barack Obama has now decided that he needs to promise another round of stimulus checks that are discussed as being in the range of $1,000 for every family and $500 for individuals.  Now, of course, even in the federal government, money does not grow on trees.  This 'reward' for electing Obama and the Democrats has to be paid for.  After all, they apparently hold to the approach that all things done within the government must be "revenue neutral".  So, if money is going to be given to one person, it must be taken from somewhere else.

The 'somewhere else' in this instance is destined today to be a take-away from "big oil" through what is artfully called a "windfall profit tax".  A Wall Street Journal editorial today takes an intriguing look at the concept of such taxes including some individuals that seem to have benefited from windfall profits.. 

There is a certain arbitrariness to all this posturing. 

First, from whom or what will such money be taken?  Well, why not target those nasty "big oil" companies.  They are, after all, socking money away at record levels.

Second, what is it that constitutes a "windfall" profit?  Well, this one seems to differ with the magnitude of "big oil's" profit, so it really becomes whatever the Congress thinks it is...and it can be different when applied to different entities and/or at different times.

Third, doesn't this become very much a form of nationalizing parts of companies?  How does this differ from Hugo Chavez' approach in Venezuela other than in degrees?  Chavez decrees that the company will be 'nationalized' and seizes whatever assets exist for which he doesn't feel obligated to pay stockholders.  So if, for example, "big oil" earns a combined $10 billion, and if government decrees that it should've only earned $5 billion, the windfall profit tax levied is essentially consuming half the industry.  

Fourth, from whom is this "windfall profit" being taken?  Why, from the stockholders of the companies...and those stockholders are individuals, mutual funds, pension funds and so on.  Too many people are seemingly unable to work through this.  This money comes from them, goes to Congress and is re-distributed to other 'thems' after, of course, a few dollars are siphoned off to go to this or that pet project that gets tacked on to the legislation as it wends it way through the voting process.

Fifth, the oil companies simply pass the lost profit on to their customers in the form of increased prices to cover this unanticipated 'cost' that was levied against them.  You and me pay this at the pumps, and when we turn on our lights and heat our homes and buy food and other necessities since virtually everything is dependent upon oil at one or another stage in the process.

Could it be that there really is nothing to which we can refer as a federal give-away?  The federal government doesn't earn dollar one; it only takes from you and me.  If it doesn't have any money of its own, then it really is only re-distributing our money like an inefficient Robin Hood.  Robin didn't have the need for large sums from his takings such as Congress seems to have.

This sure sounds very much like socialism doesn't it?

A week ago, I Blogged about Chrysler ending its leasing operations, and suggested that GM and Ford were close to the same decision.  All this due in major part to the declining residual value of the trucks on lease.

GM announced a major hit in the last quarter with the loss of over $15 billion.  It is very near the precipice, in my opinion, where it will need to actively consider bankruptcy.  It has a market value today that is a mere shadow of what it was just a year or two ago.

And now, foreign auto makers are facing similar pressures although certainly not yet to the degree that U.S. auto manufacturers are confronting.  BMW announced that it will raise prices and reduce production to stave off the problems faced by others.  Nissan has begun to show signs of problems.

Our worldwide vehicle companies are in the throes of a major set of problems that could very likely result in fire sales or outright closures of some old-line companies.

A significant part of these problems can be traced back to fuel prices that have impacted our economy and those of other countries around the world.  The costs of fuel have driven down auto and truck sales.  This drain on spendable dollars has also taken a huge toll on the rest of our economy.

And, against that backdrop, what has Congress done about these problems?  Through the stalling tactics employed by the Democrat-controlled House and Senate, NOTHING has been accomplished.  They continue to say NO to oil, NO to nuclear, NO to coal.  They feel that we need to suffer to the point that we'll roll over and let them take us where they have intended to take us for years.

We are facing some of the most serious economic issues of several generations and our government thinks this is the 'medicine' we need to get our heads more properly attuned to their 'vision' of what the U.S. and the world needs to look like in the coming half-century.

If there is any 'good news' coming from Washington, it is the fact that the law-makers have gone on their August 'vacation'.  The bad news is that our government will remain paralyzed until after the new government is sworn in in 2009.

We cannot afford to simply sit back and watch this mess play out.  We need to drill here and drill now!  That signal will further depress the price of crude oil on the world market and begin the process of our economic recovery in a big, big way!  As a pundit said in the last day or two, it is really hard to install a wind generator on your personal vehicle.  It is really hard to wean our country from its primary source of vehicle fuel overnight...and it is absolutely a crime to force us into the coming series of bankruptcies to try to prove some point that is unsupported by science.

I cannot fathom what goes on in the minds of Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid.  I cannot believe that normal human beings have the kind of disregard for their brothers and sisters that these two seem to evidence.  I know that politics is referred to as a "blood sport", and I don't necessarily mind them spilling their own...

But I really have to draw the line when they metaphorically spill yours and mine and never even blink in the process.

Governor Doyle heard from his Wisconsin-based study group on carbon footprints, wind generators, etc., etc. a few days ago after it spent 16 months studying the 'problem'.  He recently defended his participation in the Midwest Regional Greenhouse Gas Reduction Accord Advisory Group (the acronym MRGGRAAG just doesn't work for me, by the way) by saying that the various regions across America have to get to work on the issues surrounding us without regard to what others may or may not be doing.

What is missing in all this rhetoric?

Our environment is globally-dynamic.  Remember the Mount St. Helen's ash clouds moving around the earth?  Do we see any continuing issues from that eruption other than (possibly) in the immediate vicinity?  How about forest fires?  Our small local, state or regional efforts to solve the perceived ills of the globe might be likened to the effort to drain Lake Michigan with a thimble.  The dynamic environment is pouring water into the lake all the while we're trying to empty it with our thimble and we think we're having a noticeable impact?

This is yet another vestige of the climate change/global warming/global cooling group.  There still is no scientific proof behind the myriad suppositions.  Nothing has changed since the last time we discussed this other than for the rhetoric to have been dialed up by the Gore groupies. 

Just as the United States threatens its own economy by thinking it needs to establish the magical 'cap and trade' marketplace when China and India and the emerging economies in the rest of the world ignore the issue, it is equally as damaging to Wisconsin and the Midwest to think that it can solve the 'problem' in the face of much greater odds.

Just because John McCain was unwise enough to voice support for a national 'cap and trade' plan for campaign purposes alongside Barack Obama, it still isn't true.  Al Gore notwithstanding, this is bunk...but I repeat myself.  I far and away prefer the 'preaching' of Representative Jim Ott (an accomplished professional meteorologist and student of the sciences).

The Governor's medicine threatens the patient far more than the perception of a 'problem' that has yet to be proved. 

Have I lost my mind?  I hope not.

My concern is this:  With gas prices dropping and now at the mid $3.80s per gallon, will we lose our impetus to keep the pressure on our elected officials to get more drilling going and to relax the myriad rules on new refineries?

We are a strange group, we humans.  We got used to paying $4.20 per gallon for regular for a week or two and now we're "saving" nearly $.40 a gallon.  We forget very quickly that only a year or so ago we were paying a dollar or more less for our gas.

We seem to forget that we were upset over ethanol and its impact on our mileage and on our food prices.

We seem to forget that reformulated gas is costing us more and causing lower miles per gallon.

Are we going to meekly go about our daily business now until prices go back up?  Are we going to give our politicians a 'free pass'? 

Are we going to let the presidential candidates avoid dealing with this issue...even though they'll make promises that'll probably be forgotten in a week or two?

Are we going to demand that our state representatives push hard to get the ethanol lobby off our backs?

Chrysler announced that it is getting out of the leasing business.  It cannot, apparently, find lenders that will continue to supply money to this part of its business.  Similarly, Ford and GM continue to burn through capital and will or are facing similar realities.

Leases of automobiles and trucks account for something on the order of 20% of the U.S. market.  The lease holders permit the monthly rental (lease) of the vehicle and expect to be able to recover the vehicle and resell it for more than they have invested in it.  This carries risk, and it is that risk that seems now to be threatening at least this portion of sales activities.  The risk is that the vehicles owned by the leasing company will lose value faster than the leasing company expected and that the leasing companies will be "upside down" when the time comes to sell off the vehicles that come off lease.

"Upside down" is a phrase that has become familiar to many consumers of autos and trucks.  That happens when the vehicle purchased devalues more rapidly than the loan repayments reduce the amount owed.  The term has typically been applied to the individuals who purchased a vehicle and learn, at the time they hope to purchase a new vehicle, that they are the owners of a vehicle for which they owe more than the vehicle is worth.  The SUV marketplace is full of "upside down" deals given the cost of fuel and the effect that has had on resale prices.

Where will this lead?  Well, it will certainly have a lingering effect on individuals who find themselves in an "upside down" situation.  They'll either suck it up, buy a new vehicle and take extended payment terms, or they'll drive what they have for another year or two or three.  The magic for the auto industry has been the short-sightedness of the typical consumer.  If we can afford the monthly payment, we do the deal.  We do not look out to the end of the term with any thoughts about where we'll be financially.  We just want new wheels and we're gonna' get 'em.

If consumers continue to be pinched with rising costs on virtually all fronts, something more will have to give.  If it is the purchase or lease of a new vehicle, that will continue to exacerbate the condition of the auto industry in general.  How much more resiliency is left in the auto industry?  What more will it take to actually cause a GM or a Ford or a Chrysler to go out of business?  

This discourse from a CNN interview of Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (D - California) by Wolf Blitzer on July 17th, concerning offshore oil drilling legislation, appeared in the Notable & Quotable block on the WSJ Opinion page a couple of days ago:

Blitzer:  John Boehner, who's the Republican leader in the House, he says you have to let this come up for a vote.  He says that you're walking your blue dogs, who are moderate and conservative Democrats, and other vulnerable Democrats off a cliff by not allowing this to come up for a vote, the offshore oil drilling legislation.

Pelosi:  Is that right?  Well, you know, just because John Boehner, who is my friend and whom I respect, says it, doesn't make it so...

Blitzer:  Are you afraid if this comes up for a vote in the House you will lose, given support for offshore oil drilling among these so-called blue dogs, or moderate Democrats, who will join with the Republicans?

Pelosi:  Afraid is not a word that is in my vocabulary...

Blitzer:  So let me get - will you allow this issue, offshore drilling, to come up for a vote on the floor of the House?

Pelosi:  We're going to exhaust our other remedies in terms of increasing supply in America by...

Blitzer:  So the answer is no?

Pelosi:  I have no plans to do so.

Here we see that there is a single reason for no vote on offshore drilling to reduce our dependency on foreign oil and to force oil prices down.  That reason is Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (D - California).  Sen. Harry Reid (D - Nevada) who is the Senate Leader need not risk his skin so long as she is willing to carry the water for the Sierra Club and other environmental groups paying the bills for many liberals in Congress.  She is simply not going to permit the vote to occur.  That's democracy from a liberal perspective, I guess.  Play by my rules or I'll take my ball and go home.

We really need to remember these kinds of attitudes and the obstructionist moves when we go to vote in both September and November, but especially in November.

We really need to get in front of the Democrats in both the House and Senate and let them know in no uncertain terms that we want an up or down vote on offshore drilling.  And we don't want some political gamesmanship that makes it seem as though there is such a vote; this must be a single item bill before both chambers that has no waffle language and no add-ons that can be blamed for a "no" vote by one of our elected Representatives or Senators.

They're either with us or they're against us!  It really is that simple.  This isn't a Democrat or a Republican issue; this is impacting everyone of us no matter our political persuasion.  It is costing thousands of jobs.  It is draining millions of bank accounts.  It threatens our economy far more seriously than did the trumped up mortgage 'crisis'.  That it would be blocked by the Democrats places the blame squarely on their shoulders, however!

Barack Obama is the presumptive Democrat nominee for President of the United States.  He and his campaign staffers, and much of the press, appear to also have concluded that he is the presumptive President of the United States. 

The audacity of Obama is yet again on center stage for all to see.  He has kowtowed what passes for the 'free' press and the big three networks have trailed along in awe of the new President.  His campaign staffers refer to him as President when they say things such as, "When the President speaks..." which they did in the last day or so.  His campaign staffers refer to him as President when they create the phony 'Seal' that appeared on the podium behind which he was speaking.  Nothing about this campaign is an accident except for when Obama speaks extemporaneously without benefit of scripting.

Obama gets a 'free pass' on all this because the press is in his back pocket.  Thank goodness there is a Fox News Network.  Were that not the case, Obama would already be living in the White House so far as public opinion was concerned.  The election is a foregone conclusion.  He will undoubtedly deliver his 'inaugural speech' in Denver at the Democrat Convention; why wait for January 2009 and the Inauguration?

The 'World Tour' has taken him to Afghanistan, Iraq, Israel and on to Europe.  He has become an expert on foreign affairs.  He is telling General Petreaus when and where to position troops.  He has already convinced most that he, alone, can resolve the domestic issues.  He is the 'whole package'.

Hard to believe that this is a person who got a law degree, served as an Illinois state senator and has been in the U.S. Senate for 143 days of actual Senate sessions (as Jay Weber pointed out this morning on WISN 1130AM).  He is obviously the gift of a lifetime to us citizens who apparently have been stumbling about in the darkened wilderness all this time.  How in the world have we managed to even feed ourselves without Obama's guidance?  And we thought that JFK was something!

He may become our President, but he isn't there yet.  I, for one, am sickened by the sycophant press.  I am angered by the lack of criticism for Obama's actions.  This man has changed more positions than most people hold to begin with.  Politicians are chameleons, but he is the master chameleon.  He has built one of the most effective campaign organizations ever seen in our country or the world, for that matter.  It puts the 'Clinton Machine' to shame.

It seems that we now elect our leaders based on their charisma alone without regard to their experience.  That will demonstrate the shallowness of us as a people if he prevails.  As always, we will get the government we deserve. 

While reading a Wall Street Journal editorial this morning, I was reminded of the insidious manner in which Washington causes change in America.  This editorial was titled "The Lawnmower Men" and dealt with the latest Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) epistle, a 588 page document.  In this latest EPA document released on Friday, the EPA lays out its vision for America's future.  The upshot of the document is that the EPA shows us exactly the degree of its "power grab" notions.

The document's future will rest with the next Administration and the next Congress.  It could be largely emasculated or it could be given the force of law and cause massive change in our land and in our economy.  It doesn't take too much 'vision' to see into the future so far as this is concerned.  If we have a President Obama and a Democrat-controlled Congress, these ideas and postulations will stand a very good chance of finding their way into your life and mine...into your wallet and mine.

A Supreme Court decision in Mass. v. PA in 2007 found that greenhouse gases are "air pollutants" under current environmental law, and the EPA was ordered to regulate if it determined that carbon emissions are a public danger.  This was a 5-4 decision with the liberal court members comprising the majority position.  How important elections are, huh?

The EPA has now shown just how it would like this court decision to look when put into practice.  It finds that cow flatulence is such a threat that herds of greater than 25 head would exceed EPA-proposed carbon limits.  The same goes for farms with more than 500 acres of crops.  It would regulate farm tractors and lawn and garden equipment.  Fuel efficiency standards would be increased even before the current set of standards is due to be met in our automobile and truck fleet.  EPA would develop regulations to standardize how airplanes can taxi on the ground.  Boat design would fall under EPA regulations.  Buildings, even those in existence, would be regulated by EPA. 

The rules are so broad and sweeping that the EPA was quoted as saying, "We expect that the entire country would be in nonattainment."

The fact that Congress has not found it within itself to accomplish various regulations in this arena notwithstanding, the EPA believes it has the power to impose carbon fees and that it might be able to establish the "cap and trade" program that would control every aspect of our modern lives.  This has to have excited those who believe the bunk fed to us by the global warming crowd as fact when there is virtually no science to support its theories.  The EPA's final ruling will come in the the era of the next Administration.

What about this "Hidden Government" I mentioned earlier?  The reality of all this is that there is a solid cadre of career bureaucrats in every agency in Washington.  We see that in the FBI where infighting can cripple the Attorney General of the moment.  We see it in the State department where the same happens to the current Secretary of State.  Ditto for the Pentagon, and so on.  In almost every instance, the career people have decidedly left-leaning principles and simply hunker down, and obstruct as best they're able during some administrations while waiting for the opportunities to surface during other administrations.  This is where many of the 'leaks' come from that keep the Capitol Hill press and talking heads in business.  These leaks are often prevented by law, but seldom do we see any punishment levied for the leakers...if we ever determine who those people are.

We have a "hidden government" and it is very powerful though virtually invisible to us 'fly-over' people who actually keep this country perking along.

Nancy Pelosi continues to amaze though I shouldn't be amazed by her any longer.  She is really a proven quantity by this time.  She has made up her mind that we'll simply not have any more oil because it is not good for us and she knows best what is and isn't good for you and me.  She maintains that more drilling will do nothing to lower the price of gasoline, jet fuel and diesel fuel, but she derides President Bush for not having already agreed to release some of our strategic oil reserves that would be a mere tiny blip on the radar scope of fuel prices and would do nothing to cause a decrease in futures prices.

She has led, and continues to lead, the effort in the House of Representatives to castigate the greedy oil companies, to threaten to take away their leases on the 68 million acres that have already been searched and determined to hold little that could be drilled economically, and to apply tax surcharges just to teach them a lesson.

Every action such as these does nothing but exacerbate the real problem and cost us money; it costs us more and more tax dollars and it costs us more and more as companies push their tax bills down to the consumer where all tax bills go to be paid.

More than two-thirds of the people in the United States (across all racial and political and economic strata) have told Congress to open up drilling and reduce taxes, but they won't do it because they know better.  We miserable Neanderthals called voters just need to pay whenever and whatever asked (told in reality) and trust that Congress will take care of us.

* * * * * * * * * *

Al Gore delivered yet another pronouncement to the politicos, the press and the masses yesterday, as well.  Jay Weber made, I thought, an excellent point on today's show on WISN 1130AM when he said that so much of Gore's emphasis on reducing our need for oil seems to hinge on electric power...none of which is generated by the use of oil.  Some is generated using gas to fire the gas turbine generators, some is generated by solar and some by wind power.  But, the vast majority is generated using coal-fired plants.

The idea that we should spend $3 trillion dollars in the next decade, scrap all the electric generating facilities we have now, string the power transmission lines necessary to get solar and wind-generated power to the point of use from the middle of nowhere, etc. simply defies imagination.  He maintains that we need to 'green' the world through our efforts and through our example.  China told us again within the past few days that it is not going to play that game.  China is going to continue its economic development as is India.  Yet the United States is expected to go 'green' at the expense of its own economic well-being when that will have no significant lasting impact on the global environment.  The $3 trillion doesn't begin to address the debt-service we're still going to be paying on all the facilities that we've ceased to use.

So, we are being told that we need to bankrupt our economy while we're abdicating our position of power in the world community...and we're to take Al Gore's word for it that this is the way of the future.  Reminds me of the old tune with the lines: Don't Worry, Be Happy.

Out of touch & out of control!

News reports indicate that Village President Tom Kempinski is considering asking the Board to approve a referendum that would appear on either the September ballot or the November ballot.  This referendum would deal with just how Germantown voters desire to fund some $2,000,000 per year in road repairs, if they desire to do so.  The choices apparently would be borrowing, increasing property taxes or a combination of both or none.

The referendum could be advisory or binding in nature.  Obviously, if advisory, the Board would then decide what, if any action it would take, but it would do so with some idea of the public's mood.  If binding, the results would stand as the electorate decided at least until the Board was reconstituted or until the Board found some other approach to achieve the end if that were possible.

If property taxes were increased by $2,000,000 annually, the increase in village taxes over 2008 would be some 20.5% without consideration for any other line item increases in the village budget. It is unrealistic to assume that all other expenses will remain constant.  If the amount were to be borrowed, the debt service would be part of the tax increase each year so that both the amount spent each year plus interest would be added to the tax bills over a number of years.

The village's portion of our total tax bill in 2008 was 24.52%; that share would climb to 30.67% if all other taxing units remained at 2008 levels which, unfortunately, is very unlikely.  The actual increase in total property taxes due to the village's portion of the total could be something in the range of 1% to 2% I would suspect.

Use of a referendum will please some people and anger others.  Some will say that this gives the voter the direct voice on specific items that they otherwise lack in representative government.  Others will say the referendum gives the Board a place to hide; still others will say that there should be no referendum.

There are several questions that come to mind about which you may wish to make your views known:

1.  Do we need $2 million worth of road repair every year?  For how many years?

2.  What portion of the village's road surfaces need to be repaired today? 

3.  Have past Boards avoided their responsibilities and not funded road repairs properly?

4.  Is a referendum a good idea or is it a convenient tool for a Board that doesn't wish to stake out a position that may be very unpopular?

5.  If this referendum appears on the ballot, what impact will that have on any issue the School Board may advance at the same time?

6.  If we are to see a referendum, should it be simply an advisory referendum or should it bind the Board to a specific direction?

What think you G'town?

A pizza-crust maker in Green Bay is coughing up $188,000 to be paid to 500 Hispanic applicants.  This employer, TNT Crust, is accused of having received 500 applications and of not hiring anyone as the result.

The U.S. Labor Department brought this action based on occurrences in 2001 according to news reports.  The action stated that the employer went to the extent of having Spanish language application forms prepared for the use of the Hispanics applying for jobs.  It apparently discriminated by also requiring that the applicants take an English test to assure that each would be able to communicate with the other employees and management.  It used the results of that testing to make its hiring decisions.

When did it become law in our country that we had to accommodate those who only spoke or read and wrote languages other than English?  If I seek an employee and the best-qualified applicant speaks Farsi but not English, am I to be compelled to hire that person even though there are no other Farsi-capable people in my organization or my customer base?

The motto of the United States is E pluribus unum.  That stands for "out of many, one" or words to that effect depending upon the translation from Latin.  We are great because we assimilated many diverse peoples into one.  And a significant part, if not the most significant part, of the reason for our success with that assimilation as a country is that we speak a single language across our country.  Radio talkers have hammered this theme over the past few days and are on point, in my estimation, although their commentary was aimed at a presidential candidate that thinks it a shame I can't speak more than my native language.  I embarrass him, but he embarrasses me as well so we're apparently even on that score.

If I am hiring people, I need to know that they are able to understand my direction and that I am able to understand their needs.  I cannot run a business if I am expected to provide translation services, or if I cannot communicate with my associates.  The idea that I have no control over the language capabilities of those I would hire is simply mind boggling.

The incrementalism of our socialistic government agencies takes yet another victim.  A pizza crust company in Green Bay found itself in the politically correct cross hairs of the Feds.

Only in America...unfortunately!

The people have spoken; loudly and clearly.  There is now a roughly two-thirds majority across all political lines that want oil drilling and refining capacity increases to commence immediately.  That two-thirds majority has had enough of the 'fluff' that passes for 'bipartisanship' in politics today.  That two-thirds majority fills its tanks every week and is very cognizant of the sacrifices it has been forced to make while its elected representatives in Congress dither.

Demagoguery has run rampant...even more so than has come to be the usual level of demagoguery in Washington, D.C.  We witness the daily back and forth of polite name-calling that passes for bipartisanship.  I have yet to be able to understand why it is that conservatives almost always end up on the wrong end of the 'bipartisanship stick'.  Why is it that a conservative-driven effort is demagogued by the liberals but a liberal-driven effort is almost always labeled a 'bipartisanship' effort?

Now we see an almost amazing display of partisan chutzpah with Nancy Pelosi's pronouncement yesterday that the Republican efforts to increase drilling are "a hoax" designed to take the peoples' minds off other Republican problems.  Even the poorly-equipped Senate Majority Leader, Harry Reid, has softened his rhetoric in the face of public sentiment.  But not the erstwhile Nancy Pelosi who is re-elected by her ultra-liberal San Francisco district by super majorities in the 70%+ range.

Nancy Pelosi will continue to be a member of Congress for so long as she wishes, and needn't give a whit about the will of the people...other than for the ultra-liberals in her home district.  How are these 'reigns of terror' to be dealt with under our constitution?  By the sacking of Nancy Pelosi as the Speaker of the House by the Democrats who elected her to that position.  Even Steny Hoyer would seem good by comparison!

The House Dems are frightened to death by the power of Nancy Pelosi.  So much so, in fact, that they willfully ignore their own constituents who are part of that two-thirds majority.  Unless and until the other Democrat members of the House of Representatives feel the real passion of their constituents on the subject of oil drilling and refining capacity, nothing will happen to improve prices at the pump on a long-term basis.  We have five of those people in Wisconsin.  We also have two Democrat Senators who might just seek a meeting with Nancy Pelosi to express their concern...if they have any real concern about what you and I pay for our gasoline.

The all too short and simple explanation is this:  they don't care about you and me except when we cast our votes.  And, they have come to understand that they'd have to commit some horrific act in order to be defeated after serving two terms in office.  They couldn't care less about you and me because they are beholden to Nancy Pelosi for their committee appointments and they know that she can influence their campaign funding situation come election time.

That is another thing that is problematic.  Our Members of the House of Representatives are in constant campaign mode.  They are campaigning for re-election even before being sworn in for the next term to which they've just been elected or re-elected.  The reverse problem exists with our Senators; they know that we have short memories so they can easily vote against our will for four years and then 'straighten up and fly right' for two years to get re-elected.  It has happened so regularly that we could nearly do away with re-election and simply wait for retirement to open a seat.

Now, we are looking at the very real possibility that the President and both houses of Congress will be under Democrat control.  We are looking at the very real possibility that both houses of Congress will also be 'veto proof' if the Democrats sweep as they suspect they will.

This seems to me to be too great a price to pay for the reminder that we shouldn't ever be so silly as to permit this to occur.  But...it seems we never learn.  It seems we love to be taught the same lesson over and over again.  It must be akin to our need to push on a sore spot or bite down on the tooth that aches.

In keeping with the protocol we have established, we'll lead with the response of Senator Darling to each question in this chapter.

 * * * * * * * * * *

What is your position on Ethanol mandates in Wisconsin?

Darling:  I oppose ethanol mandates!  I have asked our federal lawmakers to repeal the federal renewable fuel mandate and eliminate tax credits for ethanol production.  I have also asked the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to lift the reformulated gas (RFG) blend mandate.

Wasserman:  I am against Ethanol mandates.

* * * * * * * * * *

Wisconsin is now listed as only the 11th highest taxed state in the union.  Is this appropriate given the services we receive?  Are there ways that taxes can be reduced further and, if so, where do you think that can be accomplished?

Darling:  For way too long, Wisconsin was among the top ten of most highly-taxed states.  Wisconsin is now out of the top ten because legislative Republicans have successfully defeated billions in Democrat-backed tax hikes over the years.  While I am pleased that our tax rank is dropping, the state must start to spend less too.

Wasserman:  Based on the services we receive, I think we could be more in the middle of the pack.  We can do that by restructuring government and eliminating unnecessary layers of bureaucracy.  We also need to stop giving tax breaks to every individual who comes to Madison with a paid lobbyist.  Instead of increasing the complexity of our tax code and favoring the few instead of helping the many, taxes should be cut across the board.  We can all share in tax breaks.

* * * * * * * * * *

Is the UW system working as it should or are there problems that need resolution?  If problems, what do you see those as being?

Darling:  As a proud alumna of UW-Madison, I think it is important that our UW-System remain a top notch higher educational system that is a major driver of our state's economy.  That said, there have been far too many examples where the UW-System has wasted taxpayer dollars.  Everyone remembers examples like the $26 million spent on a new computer payroll system that didn't work and the $700 per month automobile allowances for chancellors.  While the UW-System is very important to our state, it needs to eliminate wasteful spending.

Wasserman:  The overall UW system is the third largest in the country, and I'm proud of it.  I graduated from the University of Wisconsin Milwaukee, and I'm very proud of my education and what it's done for me.  One area of concern is the administrative system for the UW itself, which needs to be cut.

* * * * * * * * * *

As always, our thanks go to both contributors for taking the time to respond to our questions.  And, we again encourage readers to pose their questions for future chapters in this 'debate'.

Barley Pop Pub closing?  Say it ain't so! 

I had the opportunity to get clarification on the story below from the Village Clerk several hours after posting the blog below.  She advised that the license for the Barley Pop Pub had been renewed earlier this month along with all the other establishments' licenses.  The issue concerning taxes owed must be resolved by the owners not later than June 30th according to Village Ordinance to prevent the loss of the current license.  Any establishment that has a liquor license must remain in good standing so far as building codes, taxes and fees and so on in order to avoid the suspension or loss of the license.  Village officials are powerless to make any concessions since the ordinance governs the situation.  Discussion did occur on the subject of amending the ordinance, however that did not result in any action being taken. 

My thanks to the Village Clerk for her clarification.

* * * * * * * * * * 

The liquor license of the Barley Pop is being threatened with non-renewal by the village unless back property taxes are paid by the end of June, and the owners say the Barley Pop may close if that happens.

The Barley Pop has been a fixture for nearly as long as I can remember.  I wonder how many of G'town's citizens have been in the Barley Pop at one time or another?  Probably a significant percentage and probably more than just once in awhile.

I don't recall hearing or reading of the occasional bar fight that I see reported every so often for other G'town establishments.  My food has always tasted fine; the portions are good; it isn't a gourmet stop, but it is a really good pub.  The non-smoking accommodations certainly point the way for an alternative to banning all smoking and the owners did that because they knew it would cater to most all the public.  I've always thought of the Barley Pop as being a well run business.

This business has been around for more than two decades.  I've not heard of this type of situation (unpaid taxes) regarding this business before.  I wonder just what the problem could be?  Could it be that the rising cost of food has slowed the business?  Could the cost of gasoline have depressed the business?  Every time I go into a grocery store, I'm reminded that food costs are rising regularly, and I know this has hit restaurants, as well.  It is not at all unusual to sit down and to be handed a freshly printed menu...with new higher prices.

We don't eat out as often as we did because the costs are going up and our budget is squeezed by other needs.  Maybe that has been the primary cause, or a major part of the problem, at least.

I hope that the owners and the village trustees can resolve this issue before we lose the Barley Pop.  It has become one of the icons of Germantown.  Our 'downtown' area doesn't need more empty store fronts.  Blight tends to lead to more blight and that isn't the mark of one of the thirty best places to live.

The question for today in our 'debate' between candidates LaSage and Melchert is this:

What specific existing state programs can be cut to stop the ongoing issues of budget shortfalls?

LaSage:  The reason that I am running for State Assembly is to return the Republican Party back to being the party that stands for smaller government.  My philosophy of good government is one in which bureaucracy is reduced and local control is increased, which leads not only to a need for less tax revenue, but it returns control and ownership back to the local level, where the people that have first-hand experience with local needs reside.  So while I understand that this office carries a great deal of responsibility, it is not power that I seek, but rather empowerment for our citizenry.

Further, my core belief is that budgetary shortfalls occur because the state fails to operate like a business.  When examining a budget, a business looks at all programs that yield little value.  For example, ethanol has been proven to be an ineffective product and thus state subsidies to encourage its production should be abolished.  Gas blended with ethanol causes even more financial pain at the pump and reduces fuel economy.  Furthermore, taxpayer funded incentives to produce ethanol leads to a government sponsored heightened demand for corn, which in turn contributes to higher prices at the grocery store.  All of this for dubious positive environmental impact, as ethanol needs to be transported on trucks, which of course use gas.

Another item that needs to be addressed is wasteful pet pork project spending.  One example of such spending in the state budget would be $250,000 for a Hmong cultural center in La Crosse.  While I fully support and have worked for preserving cultural heritage in our community, this is simply absurd.  With the state's budget over 1600 pages long, examples such as these abound.

If a deficit still exists after such review, a business would also tell each of its departments to put together proposals that cut spending across-the-board.  Upon making this directive, bureaucratic administrators will say that taxpayers' most valued programs will need to be cut.  When this demagoguery occurs, your assemblyman should call them out on it, telling them to go back to the drawing board and work harder.

In the midst of cash flow problems, a business would also look at the revenue side of the equation.  Presidents ranging from Democrat John F. Kennedy to Republican Ronald Reagan understood that tax cuts for individuals and businesses spurs growth, creating jobs that in turn yield more tax revenue.  What has worked at the federal level (when employed) should be implemented in Wisconsin.  Thus, I support a lower gas tax, as well as individual and corporate income tax rate reductions.

Finally, rather than monolithically telling citizens every program I feel should be cut, I look forward to engaging in an ongoing dialogue with district residents who can share their experiences and frustrations with state government bureaucracy and excess spending.  You can reach me on either my cell phone: (262) 573-6360, or via emailing jason.lasage@gmail.com .  By working together to put Wisconsin on the right track, our collective 24th district voice will be heard.

* * * * * * * * * *

Melchert:  We need to seriously consider a spending freeze for the next biennium.  A spending freeze would keep existing government offices and services in place, but would prohibit new spending.  Rep. Pridemore states that "This budget could almost be balanced with an across the board spending freeze that would allow the level of expected revenue to catch up with spending without any of the tax increases that democrats are proposing."  (http://donpridemore.com/BudgetTaxes/IsNoBudgettheBestBudget/tabid/70/Default.aspx)  A spending freeze may be unpopular, but a $2.3 billion deficit is immoral.

In addition, the budget has grown so much that we need to re-examine every dollar of government spending.  While Wisconsin is already under a form of "base budget review reporting", we need to introduce a more aggressive culture of spending restraint.  Instead of simply justifying expenses, let's require agencies to rank their spending priorities.  What expenses would each department cut if they only had 90% of their existing budget?  Would we lose essential services or would the reduction even be noticed?  Let's have a televised hearing on Wisconsin Eye as we justify to the state why we are going to spend each dollar of the $20 billion of your money.  While Jack Welch was criticized for his cost-cutting, he took GE from a $14 billion market value in 1980 to $410 billion in 2004.

By re-evaluating every dollar of government spending and implementing a spending freeze, we can restore fiscal accountability.