Steve Nass (R-Whitewater), free speech advocate for everyone except legislative bloggers and Ward Churchill, is well-known in many circles for being the guy that complains constantly about the majority's actions but never bothers to offer any solutions. This is again evident in Friday's release from the Nass office, in which he discusses about Wisconsin's structural deficit.
At Nass' request, the Legislative Fiscal Bureau recently released a report projecting Wisconsin's structural deficit for the 2007-09 budget at $1.27 billion. That's over $400 million higher than what was projected by LFB in a memo released seven months ago. A good thing? Probably not. Does Nass deserve credit for calling this to our attention? Certainly.
This, however, is where the praise will stop.
According to his release, Nass suggests that "the continuing structural deficit and increasing pork-barrel spending in many state programs has directly prevented passage of real tax cuts and serious reforms to how government spends your money."
I suppose one would infer from Nass' chest-thumping that his solution to this budget problem is to cut spending. But it's hard to tell, because as usual, Nass doesn't explain which $1.27 billion he'd like to cut in the 2007-09 budget.
In honor of figurative language queen Judy Robson and Super Bowl week, I would now like to use a football metaphor.
I'm sure many of you have a friend like Steve Nass. He never wants to host the Super Bowl party, but he's always happy to show up at yours. He steals a seat in your favorite recliner when you get up to refill the chips. He grumbles about how your wings aren't very good, yet he always seems to have a few on his plate. He carps about your selection of beer but asks you to get him another at halftime. By the 4th quarter, he's nesting the whole bowl of chips beneath his left arm like a football, grousing about how the game has mostly been a letdown and that the commercials weren't very good and that he was expecting better. When the game finishes, he excuses himself to your restroom, throws up in your bathtub, and then shows himself to the door.
Steve Nass will never host the Super Bowl party because that means being responsible for making decisions. Sour cream or barbeque? Hot dogs or brats? Ranch or french onion dip? These are big decisions, ones that Nass can't handle. He is far more comfortable sitting back, shirking responsibility, and criticizing everyone else's decisions.
Nass has moaned loudly about the budget for years. He avoids being part of the solution because if he ever voted for a budget, he might actually have to defend it. In his current diatribe, Nass doesn't bother to identify a single state program that should be cut, let alone the combination of cuts necessary to get to $1.27 billion. In being deliberately vague, Nass manages to pander to fiscal conservatives who blindly follow his empty arguments while avoiding the wrath of people and groups who may disagree with any specific recommendations for elimination. In other words, Nass wants it both ways.
Even if the Legislature found $1.27 billion in cuts, I'm confident that Nass would still vote against the proposal, because it "didn't go far enough" or "there weren't enough cuts made" or "it's all done with Enron-style accounting tricks." If things are worse than expected, he'd brag that they would have been better if only people listened to him. If they're better than expected, he'd brag that they could've been even more superlative if only people listened to him. See his method? Complain loudly and always vote no.
Steve Nass is a dog that only knows one trick, and that's only if you count crapping in the middle of the Republican living room as a trick. I, for one, am surprised that John Gard and Mike Huebsch have not tied this dog in a sack and thrown him in the river yet. Both deserve credit for their remarkable patience, since most weeks Nass is a bigger headache for leadership than anything the Democrats are doing.
Surely if there is one Republican who must be delighted at the possibility of the Assembly Democrats coming back from the dead, it's Steve Nass. He whines, he complains, and he's short on real solutions. Minority status is tailor-made for guys like him.
At Nass' request, the Legislative Fiscal Bureau recently released a report projecting Wisconsin's structural deficit for the 2007-09 budget at $1.27 billion. That's over $400 million higher than what was projected by LFB in a memo released seven months ago. A good thing? Probably not. Does Nass deserve credit for calling this to our attention? Certainly.
This, however, is where the praise will stop.
According to his release, Nass suggests that "the continuing structural deficit and increasing pork-barrel spending in many state programs has directly prevented passage of real tax cuts and serious reforms to how government spends your money."
I suppose one would infer from Nass' chest-thumping that his solution to this budget problem is to cut spending. But it's hard to tell, because as usual, Nass doesn't explain which $1.27 billion he'd like to cut in the 2007-09 budget.
In honor of figurative language queen Judy Robson and Super Bowl week, I would now like to use a football metaphor.
I'm sure many of you have a friend like Steve Nass. He never wants to host the Super Bowl party, but he's always happy to show up at yours. He steals a seat in your favorite recliner when you get up to refill the chips. He grumbles about how your wings aren't very good, yet he always seems to have a few on his plate. He carps about your selection of beer but asks you to get him another at halftime. By the 4th quarter, he's nesting the whole bowl of chips beneath his left arm like a football, grousing about how the game has mostly been a letdown and that the commercials weren't very good and that he was expecting better. When the game finishes, he excuses himself to your restroom, throws up in your bathtub, and then shows himself to the door.
Steve Nass will never host the Super Bowl party because that means being responsible for making decisions. Sour cream or barbeque? Hot dogs or brats? Ranch or french onion dip? These are big decisions, ones that Nass can't handle. He is far more comfortable sitting back, shirking responsibility, and criticizing everyone else's decisions.
Nass has moaned loudly about the budget for years. He avoids being part of the solution because if he ever voted for a budget, he might actually have to defend it. In his current diatribe, Nass doesn't bother to identify a single state program that should be cut, let alone the combination of cuts necessary to get to $1.27 billion. In being deliberately vague, Nass manages to pander to fiscal conservatives who blindly follow his empty arguments while avoiding the wrath of people and groups who may disagree with any specific recommendations for elimination. In other words, Nass wants it both ways.
Even if the Legislature found $1.27 billion in cuts, I'm confident that Nass would still vote against the proposal, because it "didn't go far enough" or "there weren't enough cuts made" or "it's all done with Enron-style accounting tricks." If things are worse than expected, he'd brag that they would have been better if only people listened to him. If they're better than expected, he'd brag that they could've been even more superlative if only people listened to him. See his method? Complain loudly and always vote no.
Steve Nass is a dog that only knows one trick, and that's only if you count crapping in the middle of the Republican living room as a trick. I, for one, am surprised that John Gard and Mike Huebsch have not tied this dog in a sack and thrown him in the river yet. Both deserve credit for their remarkable patience, since most weeks Nass is a bigger headache for leadership than anything the Democrats are doing.
Surely if there is one Republican who must be delighted at the possibility of the Assembly Democrats coming back from the dead, it's Steve Nass. He whines, he complains, and he's short on real solutions. Minority status is tailor-made for guys like him.
0 comments:
Post a Comment