Archive for the ‘Wisconsin politics’ Category
Recalls, part 3 (the end, for now) — Wirch and Holperin Retain their Seats
Folks, the Wisconsin “recall summer” came to an end last night, with incumbent Democratic Senators Bob Wirch and Jim Holperin** retaining their seats, both in comfortable fashion. These two recall elections were the last of nine recalls that were scheduled between July and August, and the final standings were that seven incumbents won — three Democratic incumbents (all three of them; the third was Dave Hansen, who crushed his opponent on July 19) and four Republican incumbents — and two challengers won, Democratic Assemblywoman Jennifer Shilling in Lacrosse and Oshkosh’s former deputy mayor Jessica King, also a Democrat.
That means that none of the “Wisconsin 14” Democrats lost their seats over their actions of leaving the state in February in order to protest Governor Scott Walker’s “budget repair bill” which attempted to strip public employee union members of their rights. Two of the six Republicans who were recalled for voting in lockstep with Scott Walker and the Fitzgerald Brothers (Jeff, the Speaker of the Assembly, and his brother Scott, Senate Majority leader) regarding the “budget repair bill” and many other controversial issues, including taking $800 million out of Wisconsin’s public education budget, ended up losing their seats (the ousted Republicans being Dan Kapanke of LaCrosse and Randy Hopper of Fond du Lac).
Overall, what the recall season proved is that an incumbent Senator on either side, in general, has a serious edge over a challenger regardless of the nature of the dispute that has brought him (or her) to be recalled and have to stand for election once again. The recall summer has also proven beyond a shadow of a doubt that Wisconsin remains a 50/50 state — a state that neither Democrats nor Republicans can say solidly is behind their policies — which you’d think would make Wisconsin stronger rather than weaker in the days and weeks to come.
However, the reason I say that the recalls have ended “for now” is because I’ll be really astonished if we don’t see more recalls at the first of the year. The freshmen Republican Senators are eligible to be recalled as of January 3, 2012, as is Governor Scott Walker, and it looks more likely than not that Walker, and several Republican Senators who followed the party line, including my own Van Wanggaard of Racine, will be recalled. Further, there are some members of the Democratic “Wisconsin 14” who can be recalled, including the high-profile Senators Chris Larson of Milwaukee and Jon Erpenbach of Middleton — neither one of these Senators would be likely to get voted out, but the Republicans may well be able to get the signatures needed to force a recall election for all I know. (Note that the two newest members of the Wisconsin state Senate, King and Shilling, are not eligible to be recalled. They must, however, defend their seats in November of 2012, so they’ll have just over a year to prove their worth to their constituents.)
What adds fuel to the fire here is the new, gerrymandered map of political districts, which will make three Senate seats — including Alberta Darling’s district 8 and Wanggaard’s district 21 — much more safely “Republican.” Those new boundaries are expected to kick in for the November ’12 elections, which is why getting Wanggaard out is likely to happen sooner rather than later as his current constituents want him out, partly because he voted for that horrible map which will make his district part rural Racine county and part rural Kenosha county, excluding much of the city of Racine. Note that the “new” boundaries of district 21 would include Senator Bob Wirch’s house — yes, Wirch was “drawn out” of his own, home district 22 (which right now is the city of Kenosha, Kenosha County, and a little bit of Racine County) — so it’s possible Wanggaard might get recalled anyway no matter who his constituents are, as Wirch is extremely popular in Kenosha (city and county, both) and would be as likely to knock Wanggaard out of office as anyone, should he choose to do so. (Note that Wirch’s term of office also ends in November ’12; the only way he could hold his seat and keep his home is to have Wanggaard recalled, then challenge him for the seat. But it’s more likely Wirch will move to the “new boundaries” of district 22 than do that, providing the law holds up in court.)
The map is currently being litigated in Federal court by several former Democratic legislators, and may end up getting overturned. There’s a lot of stupid, petty political crap in there like chopping up the city of Milwaukee and putting it with four different districts (rather than the two it, mostly, has now) in order to weaken the urban influence, which is just as bad as putting the cities of Kenosha and Racine in one district (district 22) while putting the counties of Kenosha and Racine in another (district 21), but all of that may not actually violate any federal laws — as I’m not a lawyer, I cannot judge the merits of the lawsuit.
Because I can’t plan on the lawsuit overturning the gerrymandering — nor can any other political activist — my current plan is to keep working with the folks I know who want Wanggaard out, and get him recalled ASAP right along with Walker. That way, the people who voted Wanggaard in will still have a chance to get him out if they indeed wish to do so rather than many of them being forced into the “new” version of district 22 as the current, revamped map has it.
So as I said, the recalls are over — for now. But there’s still much to be done.
As Ed Schultz says on his MSNBC show, “Let’s get to work.”
——-
** Jim Holperin is the only legislator in Wisconsin history to survive two recall elections. He was recalled in 1993 as an Assemblyman, then won his race and was retained. This year, Holperin was recalled as a Senator, and was once again retained. So he’s either really good at what he does, really lucky — or, perhaps, both.
Recall Fever: Catch It
Today is the day, folks . . . it’s recall time, part 2, in Wisconsin as six Republican state Senators are facing the political fight of their lives. At the end of tonight’s vote, we will know if they’ve been booted out, or if they’ve been retained . . . who will be the victors?
I don’t live in a recall district, so all I’ve been able to do is watch what’s going on. But I know people are furious in Wisconsin; I know, for example, that in Kenosha County there’s a bunch of Republicans that are very strongly for Democratic state Senator Bob Wirch (who’s own recall election is next Tuesday). And I know that people of all parties, races, colors and creeds signed those recall petitions against the R Senators, that many independents are outraged by the Wisconsin Legislature and Governor’s shift to the hard-right, and that this is our first chance to show our Governor, Scott Walker, that we will not be pushed around in Wisconsin.
Look. I wrote a post back in November after the ’10 mid-term elections where I said that what happened then was not a mandate, but instead a repudiation of what was going on.
As I wrote back on November 3, 2010:
. . . the Republicans — including those in Wisconsin, where they won control of both the Assembly (the lower house) and the Senate (upper house) — are wrong when they think they have received a “mandate” to do anything. What they received was the gift of many Democrats who are angry at how Obama was selected in the first place, along with many who were flat-out frustrated at the policies of Harry Reid (who, inexplicably, held his seat in Nevada) and Nancy Pelosi (easily re-elected, but almost assuredly to retire as former Speakers rarely stay in the House after they lose their Speakership).
So if the Republicans think this is a mandate, they are wrong.
What this was, instead, was a repudiation of the tactics of the DNC on 5/31/08, along with a repudiation of Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, and the entirety of the Obama Administration in particular.
If the Republicans take the wrong message from this, and start cutting unemployment benefits, start cutting health care benefits that are already extant, and mess with Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security, Food Stamps, or any of the “social safety net” programs that are so vitally needed with the country as a whole having over 9% reportable unemployment (and more like 17% functional unemployment throughout the USA, with some areas having far more), they will be voted out in turn. (Emphasis added.)
I called it then, and I was right. (Well, right about everything except Pelosi retiring. She’s been an effective House Minority Leader.) Because just as the 2008 Ds overestimated their “mandate,” so did the 2010 Rs. And now, the Rs have reaped the whirlwind.
For those of you who do live in recall districts, get out there and vote — this is your chance to make your voice be heard. Do not sit this election out. Catch the recall fever instead.
1996 Petak-Plache Recall Race Holds the Key to 2011 Recalls
Folks, I live in Racine, Wisconsin, so I know full well what happened on June 4, 1996. But for the rest of you, here’s a quick primer.
In October of 1995, George Petak (R-Racine), Wisconsin state Senator from district 21, cast the decisive vote in order to fund the construction of Miller Park in Milwaukee (and keep the Milwaukee Brewers in Wisconsin) by allowing a five county “sales tax” of .01% to go into effect. (In case you’re wondering, the other four counties being taxed on behalf of the Brewers are Ozaukee, Milwaukee, Waukesha and Washington; the sales tax is expected to end sometime between 2015 and 2018.)
Now, Petak had said until the very last minute that he’d vote “no” on this. But then-Governor Tommy Thompson twisted his arm, Petak voted “yes,” and many in Racine County (including Brewers fans) were incensed because Petak hadn’t done what he said he was going to do. (In fact, the Racine Journal-Times’ headline the day after the vote was something like “Petak votes no,” giving us our very own “Dewey beats Truman” moment.)
This palpable anger over Petak’s “bait-and-switch” tactics was the main reason he was recalled, and the palpable anger over Scott Walker’s “bait-and-switch” tactics with regards to the state budget and most especially the fight over collective bargaining for public employee unions is the main reason why the six Republican state Senators have been forced to run in recall elections.
Experts, including political scientists, said in late 1995-early 1996 that Petak would never be recalled, because the two previous recall elections in WI history had retained the incumbents, but they were wrong. While experts, once again including political scientists, didn’t think that nine Senators (six Rs, 3 Ds) would end up having to defend their seats in recall elections — but again, they were wrong.
The reasons why Petak’s decision was controversial were:
1) Racine County had no county sales tax mechanism at the time whatsoever, and getting the mechanism in place in the short run cost more than any collecting of tax.
2) Racine County, while next to Milwaukee County, doesn’t get a lot of business visitors or tourist business from there, so any economic “help” coming from this would be negligible.
3) As previously stated, Petak had said he was opposed until the 11th hour, then switched his vote. This turned the anger over the idea of a county-wide sales tax into white-hot rage and led to Petak’s recall
4) And last but certainly not least, as the Wisconsin state Senate was comprised of 17 Rs and 16 Ds at the time Petak cast his vote, you can see why the big money came out in order to change the composition of the state Senate. Not to mention all the requisite highly-negative ads. (Why do they run those ads, anyway? They only rarely change an informed voter’s mind, and trust me — in Wisconsin, we are informed about these issues or we don’t bother voting.)
Petak, who was primaried by another Republican but fended him off, eventually lost to Democrat Kim Plache and was the first government official to be recalled in Wisconsin history.**
What I saw in 1996 is what I’m seeing right now with the recall efforts against the six Republicans who will face an election on August 9, 2011 (three days and a few hours from now). It’s an election being held at an odd time, where passions must be high to get voters to the polls. There’s lots of money coming in from out of the state and inordinate negative ads on television and radio, some of which bear little resemblance to reality. The control of the Senate is in question, as the Dems need only three of the six seats to “flip” to Democratic control (then to retain the two Democrats who were recalled and need to run on August 16, 2011). And the vitriol on both sides is so deafening it’s nearly impossible to tell who’s going to do what to whom at this point, as it’s now become an endurance contest.
However, there are some differences as well, those being:
1) We’ve never had nine Senators recalled in the same year before (3 Ds, one of whom has already retained his seat, Dave Hansen of Green Bay, and 6 Rs).
2) We’ve never had a Governor who’s this unpopular before. Walker’s been tied to all six Senators (for good or ill) due to all of these votes being taken on Walker’s behalf and due to Walker’s agenda. So these races are as much about Scott Walker as they are about the individual Senators.
3) And finally, the national Democratic and Republican parties have taken a far larger role in 2011 than I remember them doing in 1996. Both major parties seem to believe that if their side wins these six recall races, they’ll gain traction for the 2012 House, Senate, and Presidential races.
As to the tactics of what’s going on in order to get out the vote — well, quite frankly, some of it is highly disturbing. There are allegations that PACs favoring Sandy Pasch (a Democratic Assemblywoman from Sheboygan) gave out free food in exchange for a quick ride to the polls, which is wrong no matter who does it. (I’m all for giving out free food. And I’m all for voting. But the two shouldn’t go together.) Then, there are the allegations (noted in the same article) that the sitting Senator from district 8, Alberta Darling (R-River Hills), Pasch’s opponent, has colluded with outside PACs to send out fake absentee ballots with the wrong dates on them. Under Wisconsin law, doing anything like that — the collusion by itself, mind you — is against the law. While putting the wrong dates on the absentee ballots is just stupid. (Note that in the case of alleged wrongdoing with the “free food for votes” scam, Pasch herself had nothing to do with it.)
Next, in one of the recall races being held on August 16, 2011, the Republican challenger, Kim Simac, refused to debate incumbent Senator Jim Holperin (D-Conover) and didn’t tell anyone she wasn’t going to show up. Not a good move there, no matter how her handlers try to spin it (supposedly Simac “never committed” to this debate; I can’t imagine that excuse is going to go over well with the voters).
Back to the Rs — there’s Luther Olsen (R-Ripon), who said publicly that he was against the “fake Democrats” who entered the Democratic primary in order to give the Republicans more time to fundraise, yet then praised Rol Church, a long-time Republican Party activist, at one of his GOTV rallies. Not to mention that Olsen is the first R known to have Gov. Walker at one of his rallies (even if Walker may have come in via the back door) — most are keeping Walker away like the plague, knowing he’s “box office poison” due to Walker’s unpopularity (Walker is booed wherever he goes, including a recent appearance at the Wisconsin State Fair) — after saying that Scott Walker’s policies are “too extreme” for Wisconsin and saying he wishes he’d have voted differently back in February.
Vacillate much, Senator Olsen?
And let’s not forget state Sen. Dan Kapanke (R-LaCrosse), who said back in May of this year:
“We’ve got tons of government workers in my district – tons,” Kapanke said May 25 at the Cedar Creek Golf Club in Onalaska. “From La Crosse to Prairie du Chien and to Viroqua and to Ontario and to Hillsboro, you can go on and on and on. We have to overcome that. We’ve got to hope that they, kind of, are sleeping on July 12th – or whenever the (election) date is.”
During the candid chat, Kapanke said he was one of three Republicans in serious jeopardy of losing in a recall election.
The other two, he said, are Sen. Alberta Darling of River Hills and Sen. Randy Hopper of Fond du Lac.
“We could lose me. We could lose Randy Hopper in the 18th or Alberta Darling over in – wherever she is – the 8th, I believe,” Kapanke said.
Note this was before Luther Olsen’s recent nonsense, as I’d add Olsen to the list of seriously endangered R Senators.
At any rate, here’s how I handicap the upcoming races:
Sure to lose: Randy Hopper and Dan Kapanke may as well pack their bags and go home right now. They will lose, and they will lose big — Kapanke may lose by double-digits to Assembly Rep. Jennifer Shilling, while Hopper will lose by at least six or eight points to Oshkosh’s Jessica King.
Will most likely lose: Luther Olsen has done himself no favors, and is the third-most likely Senator to be packing his bags.
Will probably lose: Sheila Harsdorf has name recognition and has been better than the rest of the six Rs at answering questions and talking to her constituents. Still, she’s parroted the party-line at every turn and refuses to believe any of her votes were wrong for Wisconsin, while her opponent, teacher Shelley Moore, is the person who led the recall effort against Harsdorf. Providing Moore beats Harsdorf, it won’t be by much.
I sincerely hope this Senator will lose: Alberta Darling has big, big money behind her, and the ads in her favor far outweigh the ads against her. However, most voters in her district know that it was Darling who led the committee that first “vetted” Scott Walker’s budget-repair bill that eliminated collective bargaining for public employee unions. Darling, therefore, had all the power in the world to stop this mess before it started, but didn’t. She definitely deserves to lose, but if she does lose to Sandy Pasch, once again it won’t be by very much.
The wild card: I honestly do not know what’ll happen in the Robert Cowles-Nancy Nussbaum race. Cowles has kept his head down and has said very little about his controversial votes; the only reason I think Nussbaum has a chance, aside from the large amount of people who signed to get Cowles recalled, is because she’s a particularly strong candidate (the only stronger one among the six Ds is Shilling) and has articulated a clear vision about what she’ll do once she gets in there. (I think Nussbaum’s done the best job of this of all six Ds, though props go to King and Pasch for their clear and decisive answers in candidate forums and debates over the past several months.)
So there you have it; my gut says that four, possibly five of the Rs will be joining the unemployment line after the August 9, 2011 elections are over.
————
** I called it right away that Petak would be recalled; I was working as a cashier at the time, and I knew how angry people were over Petak’s last-minute vote switch. Even Brewers fans — I’m one — were livid due to the lack of a Racine County sales tax prior to that vote. Further, people were outraged that Petak would refuse to listen to his district, who were adamantly opposed in big numbers. This reason — refusing to listen to his district — is why Petak was recalled and Plache went to Madison in his place. It’s also why at least four of these Republicans will lose on August 9, 2011.
WI Senate Passes EB Bill on Party-Line Vote; Debt Ceiling Crisis Ends
Folks, I have two quick updates, though if you’ve been paying attention to US politics at all, you know full well that the debt ceiling crisis is over (for now).
First, the Wisconsin Senate passed a bill, 19-14, to agree with the Wisconsin Assembly that new claimants for unemployment will have to wait a week to receive benefits. This passed on a party-line vote, meaning 19 Rs voted for it, while the 14 Ds voted “no” because they don’t like the idea of employers being able to lay someone off for a week, then call them back, without those employees getting paid.
Now it’s up to Gov. Scott Walker (R) to sign this bill so people can start to receive their Extended Benefits. Many people have been out of EB since 4/16/11, and may only receive another week or two — yet any money beats no money at all, and this is something everyone who worked for an employer has paid into.** (If you are an independent contractor and have lost your job through no fault of yours, there’s still no remedy for you. As I am now an independent contractor, I completely understand.)
So now, we’re just waiting on Scott Walker to do his job and sign this bill. Let’s hope he signs it soon, as there are real people hurting in Wisconsin who need this money. (If he doesn’t sign it quickly, well, that’s just another reason to recall the man come January 2012.)
As for the whole debt ceiling issue, I am appalled by the final solution. I know that getting something done was better than nothing at all, but the problem with the solution is that it allowed the most radical, right-wing extremists in the Republican Party to basically hold up everyone else until they got what they wanted. These people ended up winning the argument because they refused to give in; they refused to do their jobs as politicians, trying to figure out what the “art of the possible” is and made everyone else figure out that the only possible action was to give in to these extremists even though giving in was the wrong thing to do.
My biggest problem remains this one: once you pay the Danegeld, how do you get rid of the Dane?
So we have not defaulted, but the world as a whole has been exposed to the ridiculously petty nature of our politics. And the world, it appears, dislikes it as much as American citizens do.
Hard to see any “winners” here, including the radical, right-wing extremists, even though they obviously feel they have won. One would hope once they go back to their states or districts and get a taste of how people are feeling, they will be rudely disabused of that notion, as according to this poll, 77% of Americans feel our elected representatives have “behaved like spoiled children.”
In my opinion, there are no winners in this process; the national debt is still there, and still really isn’t being dealt with, while the lack of revenue in this deal (or, in plain terms, raising taxes or at least allowing the Bush tax cuts to expire) doesn’t help anything, either. Further, if there was more of a focus on jobs, promoting ways of keeping people employed in order to perhaps keep the tax cuts that the businesses and the wealthy like, maybe we wouldn’t be quite as bad off as we are right now.
It seems to me that the folks in Washington, DC, have a very narrow view of the world. Perhaps they can’t help it; they meet up with wealthy lobbyists and wealthy business owners and mostly wealthy people day by day, right? (In order to fund their campaigns, they need these people to help them, because it’s become too expensive to stay in Congress once you’re there without the help of very wealthy people.)
But pegging the tax cuts to the amount of people these businesses employ seems like a very good idea — that way, people would be employed, thus more tax revenue overall would be flowing into the system. And that way, there’s an impetus for businesses that may be sitting on a lot of money (and many are; don’t kid yourself) to hire, in order to keep the tax breaks they love so much.
That, to my mind, would be a “win-win.”
————
** Note: A person I respect read me the riot act over Extended Benefits. All I know is what the folks at Unemployment told me; these are programs people have paid into, and their employers alike . . . I agree that no one ever expected people to have to stay on unemployment over a year. Nor that we’d still have over 9% reportable unemployment in the US of A, either, which makes it much more difficult to find work.
Back Issues, and a Few Thoughts on Politics
Folks, my back is really acting up at the moment. Which is not conducive to blogging or any form of writing — nor to a lot of editing, either, truth be told, though it is good for planning. But I can’t let the nonsense going on right now go by without a few comments, either . . . so here we go.
First, last night’s “face-off” between President Barack Obama and Speaker John Boehner was, to my mind, rather underwhelming. These two people obviously don’t like each other, don’t trust each other, would rather not have anything to do with one another, but have to work together to try to do the country’s business — and are failing miserably. I place more of the blame on Boehner than on the POTUS, partly because Boehner has been a Representative for a lot longer than Obama has been President, and partly because when the Republicans gained control of the House after the 2010 elections, they promised to create jobs — not do all this screwing around.
I keep wanting to ask Boehner, “Mr. Speaker, where are the jobs?” Because that’s what he, and by extension his whole party, kept saying, and that’s why they got elected — on a job creating platform. But once they got in there, they decided “job creation” really meant “protect the wealthy at all costs from any form of tax increase, no matter how benign.” And they’ve acted on the latter belief, insisting even though they should know better that this is what the American public wants them to do — then have pushed the real cost of lowering the deficit onto the middle classes and below, who can’t afford it and are already paying too much, proportionately, as it is.
Now, the Republican argument is that the lower 50% of income earners “pay no income tax at all.” That is, to an extent, true. However, we do pay FICA, where many high earners don’t, meaning we’re helping to sustain Social Security; we pay sales tax, and cannot tap into loopholes that get part of those taxes back as can the wealthiest Americans when they buy a new yacht or a second or third home in order to use it for two weeks a year on vacation. So proportionately, the lowest earners are paying more than the high earners, which in effect gets blood from a stone as low earners have very little to work with in the first place.
Then, with all the picayune nonsense going on in Washington, DC, I’m still having to put up with the Wisconsin Republicans in the state Senate screwing around. These guys have decided they will pass a bill that agrees with the state’s Assembly bill — that will hold one week of benefits from new unemployment claimants, starting on January 1, 2012 — on August 1, 2011, because that’s just one short week away from the recall elections for state Senators Darling, Cowles, Harsdorf, Kapanke, Hopper, and Olsen. The Rs have decided to do this because they think that’ll make their Senators look more compassionate, of all things . . . they like the timing, and don’t care that they’re making people who’ve not had any extended benefits since April 16, 2011, wait even more for their money.
Me, I find this behavior terrible. Shallow. Rude. Obnoxious. And reprehensible, too, because these Senators should know better.
The whole bit of difference between the two bills was there because the Senate Rs wanted to look more compassionate (the Senate voted 30-3 against withholding the first week of unemployment from people, knowing full well the Assembly would pass a different version of the bill so they’d be able to “have their cake and eat it, too.”), yet how compassionate is it to make people wait another week for their money?
Because, remember, this is a Federal program. The money is already there. The WI Rs are just sitting on it, perhaps collecting interest on it, rather than paying it out — so there’s no excuse for this whatsoever.
At any rate, this is why every single last R Senator in Wisconsin (with the possible exception of Dale Schultz) should be recalled — they’ve lost touch with the real people in our state, who are suffering. And only seem to care about the wealthiest people in the state, protecting wealthy corporations and their tax loopholes . . . then wonder why they’re all in danger of being recalled on the first available date (which for eleven other Rs is January 3, 2012; two are recallable now, Grothman and Lazich, and may yet end up recalled by the end of the year for all I know).
Dave Hansen Retained; US Reps dither in DC
Folks, I have two things to discuss tonight.
First, in the “grand opening” recall election, Dave Hansen (D-Green Bay) has easily defeated Republican challenger David Vanderleest. The Associated Press called the race with 47 of 72 precincts reporting; so far, Hansen has 13,675 votes to Vanderleest’s 6,191. Or, in other words, Hansen has 69% of the vote to Vanderleest’s 31%.
This recall election may or may not be a harbinger for the six Republicans who face recall on August 9, 2011 — remember, this was an election where the question was, “Do you wish to retain Dave Hansen, or not?” more so than, “How angry are you with Dave Hansen? Do you want him out?” And while the six Republicans certainly will have to face all three questions, too, my best guess is that the second two questions — i.e, “How angry are you with Alberta Darling? Do you want her out, or not?” (fill in the name of the other five Senators in place of Darling’s, here) — that will count far more in those elections.
Otherwise, I’ve been bemused for several days now watching the United States House of Representatives dither in Washington, DC. The Republicans there have proposed something called a “Cut, Cap, and Balance” plan that would cap the amount of federal expenditures to 18% of the Gross Domestic Product (what used to be called Gross National Product), which sounds good until you realize they’re talking about doing this for political advantage rather than to do anything good for the country at all. And the fact that the US remains in, if not an actual, textbook definition recession, in very bad economic straits does not help anything.
See, sometimes if you cut programs that work during a recession (or in this case, in very bad economic straits — a “jobless recovery,” in short), that is counterproductive. It adds more strain to the economy when you don’t make any provisions for people who are hurting. And it adds more strain on the economy when people can’t find work — the case all over the country, but worse in some areas than others — or are working far below their capacity, either in hours, in pay, or in most cases, both.
All I know is, that “Cap, Cut and Balance” plan will never pass the US Senate. And the House Reps know this — which means all of this has been political posturing, not anything that will do any good in the long run.
I’d rather the US House of Reps, Rs and Ds alike, concentrated on the “art of the possible” rather than play these ridiculous games. And right now, what’s possible is this — raise taxes on the top 1%. Close loopholes in the tax rates so corporations pay some taxes — it’s absolutely absurd that a big company like General Electric pays less in taxes than I do, and some companies pay even less than GE! And continue the troop draw-downs in Iraq and Afghanistan, bring those troops back home, and station them instead on the border with Mexico to help out there. (This way, there aren’t a whole bunch of soldiers joining the ranks of the unemployed, and they’re doing something vital and necessary, to boot. But we get rid of a lot of expenses that come from having a bunch of our folks overseas in the bargain.)
If the Republicans do all of that — or even if they do some of it, as we’re talking about the “art of the possible,” here — then I agree that changes to the Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security programs should be discussed, too. But at this time, the Rs have shown absolutely no willingness to raise revenue at all — not even by closing tax loopholes, which is the easiest thing in the world to do — which frustrates me greatly.
During a time of three separate wars — Iraq, Afghanistan, and Libya — we need all the revenue we can in order to keep funding those wars (even if they do start immediate draw-downs as I believe would be best for the country in many senses). Why the Rs refuse to close the tax loopholes is beyond me, because that would be by far the easiest thing to do — then they can work on instituting additional taxes on the top 1% to bring them in line with the middle class in this country (note that I’m not asking for draconian increases; I simply want to see something that’s comparable to what the middle class are paying, that’s all).
So far, the Rs in Congress — especially in the House of Reps — have shown no willingness to compromise whatsoever. Which makes me wonder: why did they even go to DC at all, if they were going to refuse to work on issues that are best for the country?
Surely these Rs don’t believe that defaulting on our debt as of August 2, 2011, is really the best thing to do, right? So taking that as an axiom, why is it these Rs don’t want to deal with what they know will work — raising some revenue, even if it’s only by closing tax loopholes or eliminating corporate subsidies for oil companies (the wealthiest companies ever to exist on this Earth according to more than one economist), speed up the troop draw-downs, and then and only then talk about cuts to essential programs that many Americans use — and need — every day?
Scott Walker, Wisconsin Republicans/Legislature, fare poorly in June 2011 Poll
As the recalls against the Wisconsin Republicans continue to gain steam, it’s time to take a look at the most recent poll, put out by the UW Badger Poll (TM) conducted by the University of Wisconsin Survey Center, link available here. It states:
. . . a majority of Wisconsinites are not happy with current state of affairs in the Badger state.
- 55% are dissatisfied with the way things are going in the state today, a new high for the UW Badger Poll.
- 81% said Wisconsin is in bad times economically and 50% expect it will be in about the same economic condition in the next 12 months, while 20% said things will get worse.
- Nearly two-thirds of Wisconsinites feel that state government is run for the benefit of a few big interests over that of all the people and can only be trusted to do the right thing some of the time.
- 59% disapprove of the way Scott Walker is handling his job as Governor.
- 60% disapprove of the way the State Legislature is handling its job.
- 56% disapprove of the job Republicans in the State Legislature are doing.
- 48% disapprove of the job Democrats in the State Legislature are doing.
- Wisconsinites overwhelming think the recall option in the state constitution is a good thing (78%), and 50% said the current recalls of state senators made them feel better about Wisconsin politics.
In fact, the only thing the Wisconsin Republicans can take any heart in is the following statistic, also from the recent poll:
- 59% of residents statewide preferred that the Democratic state senators remain in office rather than be recalled and 49% said the same of the Republican state senators.
Now, I went over this poll in depth, and what the folks said about the Wisconsin Rs is a little more nuanced; 46% want them out, while 49% believe they should be retained. (The poll did not ask people specifically about their own sitting Senator or representatives in the Assembly; they asked about the person’s overall feeling.) The margin of error for this poll was 4.9%, which means this particular thing is within the margin of error — still, that one last bit of data is probably the only thing that would hearten me if I were a Wisconsin R.
At any rate, this poll looks really bad for Scott Walker. And looks really good for his recall effort, which will start in November of this year.
Barb Caffrey's Blog 