Cost estimate or scrap paper?

But hey, DOA got its damage estimate for the Capitol from a union employee, so it must be golden.

Madison — State officials' controversial courtroom testimony that protesters did more than $7 million in damage to the Capitol was based on a single handwritten page.

An open records request by the Journal Sentinel on the damage estimate turned up only one page of notebook paper listing costs written before the courtroom testimony. Other e-mails from state officials listing areas to check for potential damage also were released, but there were no others with any dollar figures written before the court testimony...

Department of Administration spokeswoman Carla Vigue said Wednesday that the single page written by state architect Dan Stephans and dated March 3 - the same day as the court statement - was the basis for the testimony. Stephans did not respond to a phone message left Wednesday.

Guess he'll be voting yes on the next congressional pay raise...

Someone tell Sean Duffy to lay off the stupid button.

Constituent: But a hundred and seventy-four thousand, that’s three times — that’s three of my family’s — three times what I make.

Duffy: Well our budget…I moved to cut by 5 percent. I did. You know what, I have no problem..let’s have a movement afoot. I walked into this job 6 weeks ago..um that I worked incredibly hard for. And I can guarantee you or most of you, I guarantee that I have more debt than all of you.

With 6 kids, I still pay off my student loans. I still pay my mortgage. I drive a used minivan. If you think I’m living high off the hog, I’ve got one paycheck. So I..I struggle to meet my bills right now. Would it be easier for me if I get more paychecks? Maybe, but at this point I’m not living high off the hog.

Maybe Duffy should've thought about his financial situation before he started porking his wife senza birth control because his version of Jesus told him it was better that way. Or maybe he should've gone to a real law school instead of that joke William Mitchell, a place that makes Hamline grad Michael Gableman look like John Marshall in comparison. Nothing worse than racking up a ton of debt attending a crappy school. Having six kids and borrowing money to go to a Tier 4 law school is not financially winning, and nobody made Duffy do any of those things.

All Sean Duffy has to do is wear a suit, look good, push the button he's told to push, then go home and eat a lot of shitty pancake breakfasts and not say anything profoundly stupid. And apparently that's too much to ask.

Supreme Court Rules Supreme Court Rules

Every time I read about the irrelevant Maryann Sumi try to assert some kind of authority in an administrative issue of another co-equal branch of government, I am reminded of the classic 1997 article in The Onion which perfectly captures the self-important viewpoint of the judicial branch.

WASHINGTON, DC—In a landmark decision Monday, the United States Supreme Court ruled 8-1 that it rules.

Justice Anthony Kennedy, writing on behalf of the majority, noted that "while the U.S. Constitution guarantees equality of power among the executive, legislative and judicial branches, it most definitely does not guarantee equality of coolness, and in this regard, the judicial branch kicks that which can be construed as total and complete ass."

"In the case of The U.S. Supreme Court v. Everyone Else (1997)," wrote Justice Clarence Thomas, "this court wins by a serious landslide."

According to the decision, the Supreme Court "rules and rules totally, all worthy and touched by nobody, in perpetuity, and in accordance with Article Three of the U.S. Constitution. The ability of the President and Congress to keep pace with us is not only separate, but most unequal. Fuckin' A."

Sumi's ruling (if you can even call reiterating one's previously unclear blathering a "ruling") is more proof of why trifling DA's and self-important circuit court jurists have no role in evaluating the co-equal nature of power between the executive, legislative, and judicial branches. Gee, go figure that a judge thinks she should have the power to tell the legislature how to operate. Is anyone surprised that a judge's ego would lead them to that conclusion?

Even if the Wisconsin Supreme Court ruled unfavorably, what could the court do if the legislative and executive branches refused to comply? A court - any court - deciding that it has the power of administrative review over the working processes of its co-equal partners is a very dangerous step that effectively elevates the judiciary above the other two branches of government. It would be like the Governor trying to nullify a court decision because he did not like the manner in which the court deliberated, or because he thought Justice A did not give fair consideration to Justice B's arguments.

The appropriate place for citizens to weigh in on the procedural matters of state government isn't in a courtroom. It's at the ballot box.

Larson staffer uses kids as props in staged efforts at civil disobedience

Seriously, Justin? Go play outside with your kids instead of hauling them into work and using them as puppets. Kudos to the Capitol Police for handling the event so tactfully.

Not broke. Just really, really in debt.

Or maybe the hope is that the money-printing fairies at Treasury and a forgiving President will make this $1.56 billion mess go away.

Wisconsin has borrowed $1.56 billion from the federal government in order to keep unemployment insurance checks coming, state figures show.

The state Department of Workforce Development, which is responsible for the unemployment insurance program in the state, confirmed the figure.

Wisconsin is not alone in owing money. As many as 30 states were forced to borrow money to ensure unemployment checks were getting to jobless workers. The money was made available to states as part of the stimulus bill.

The year 2010 was a busy one for the agency. More than 1 million initial claims were made in 2010, and an estimated 12 million weekly claims were made, according to agency figures.

I wonder if this means we'll get to hear more of Mark Honadel's half-assed idea for unemployment savings accounts?

Hopper? I hardly know her.

Ah, the humor in watching a public official's life away from home play out in the media.

In a statement to The Reporter, Hopper's wife, Alysia Hopper, said her estranged husband moved out of their Rienzi Road home in May 2010 and lives "mostly in Madison." Court records indicate that Randy Hopper filed a petition for divorce in August. Hopper's official Senate Web page lists the couple's home at W5192 Rienzi Road as the senator's official address.

In light of death threats against Randy Hopper and protests generated by Hopper's support and the support of other Republicans for the budget repair bill, Alysia Hopper said she wanted the public to know her husband no longer lives with her in Fond du Lac. Several websites have reported that Alysia Hopper approached protesters at her home Saturday and told them her husband no longer resides in the home.

Between this, Mike Sheridan, Russ Decker, Scott Gunderson's old in-district apartment, Joe Knilans living in a basement, Marlin Schneider living in Dane County for a generation while representing Rapids, on and on, maybe we should just scrap the residency requirements altogether. Heck, it works for Canada. Why not Wisconsin?

Principled when it's easy

So the GOP and its leadership are terrible, horrible, no good, very bad people for listening to 17 hours' worth of testimony in Finance, letting the Assembly Democrats repeat the same three sentences on the floor for another 61 hours, and then giving the Senate Democrats every reasonable opportunity under the sun to get a little something in exchange for their return.

But all of these local associations and their school boards, well, it's going to be totally fine for them to rush a bunch of labor agreements to a vote without affording the public any opportunity to see what is being discussed up until the agreement is hastily approved at some emergency meeting. And I'm guessing if there is a designated period for open forum during that meeting, the school boards will probably limit speakers to a fixed number of minutes and then move on to other business whenever they feel like they've heard enough.

And that's all going to be just peachy, because Scott Walker made them do it.

Must be tough to walk around preening like a bunch of sanctimonious blowhards for a couple weeks, only to shed the beliefs and morals you profess to hold dear the first second it's convenient.

Give us some of that money!

Canada on Strike
Tags: SOUTH
PARKmore...

As you might recall, the Canadians end their strike in exchange for $3,008 in gumballs and Bennigan's coupons which, depending on how recall-a-palooza turns out, might make Canadians $3,008 smarter than the unions and their Democratic senators.

Not about the money? Spare me.

My favorite argument proffered by the labor unions in the current budget standoff is that it's not about the money. I hear it so much in my comments that I thought I would speak about it briefly in a separate post. Look, they say, we've "conceded" on the pension and health insurance issue, so there's no need to press forward on the collective bargaining issue.

Yeah, right. Saying collective bargaining isn't about money is like saying it isn't also about power and politics. Anyone asking you to believe it's about only one or only the other is asking you to be stupid or naïve.

If it weren't about the money, perhaps the unions should tell Governor Walker that they'd also be happy to surrender their ability to negotiate wage in exchange for being able to negotiate working conditions. I'm guessing if they did that, it would take Scott Walker under three seconds to agree.

But they won't. And why? Because it's precisely about the money.

What humors me most is the perspective from which those who sympathize with the labor position approach this argument, like we're all a bunch of cigar-smoking cronies hiding in the back pocket of the Koch Brothers.

For the record, I work in one of the most heavily unionized private-sector occupations in the country. Virtually everyone in my field who earns a full-time employment at one place of work is a member of an AFL-CIO affiliate. My union card is in my top desk drawer. My local newsletter is on my desk. My monthly union publication is on my coffee table. I know well how labor negotiations work. I've seen parts of it as a legislative employee, and I've seen parts in my present profession.

It is precisely that exposure that would lead me, were I an elected official, to never trust a union rep any further than I could throw one. Asking local governments to take the word of their local associations on their willingness to give back compensation by their own goodwill is about the biggest fool's bargain since some Indians sold Manhattan for a pile of trinkets.

I appreciate the value of labor unions, especially for people who work in dangerous professions or in highly specialized fields. However, I also appreciate that while people in my field would like to earn more money, there's a recognition it has to be obtained through the voluntary generosity of others. We either raise ticket prices, sell more seats, or rely on increased philanthropic giving. And when that doesn't work, it usually requires concessions at the table. Many of my friends have seen their take-home pay cut by 15-20% in the last few years. Others have seen their employers fold entirely.

But the "generosity" of the taxpayer is endless, precisely because the politicians who negotiate the contracts don't have to ask them for more money. There's no risk in the public sector. Government's not going out of business, ever. There's always more money to be taken, either by raising taxes or cutting other programs that benefit those individuals in order to provide increased compensation for public sector employees.

So yes, this issue is about politics, and the political power of unions. But it's also about money. It's about the ability of public sector unions to generate the revenue necessary to secure the support of those with whom they negotiate directly.

If it's not about money, then labor unions don't need to negotiate wage. I eagerly await AFSCME and friends proving me wrong.

Time, why you punish me?

Like a wave bashing into the shore
You wash away my dreams.
Time, why you walk away?
Like a friend with somewhere to go
You left me crying...

Oh, Hootie. Even now your profound words shed light on the problems of the world.

The huge crowds of the opening weekends have dwindled considerably, even as organizers try to find bigger and bigger names to stoke attendance. Protesters have now been denied the opportunity to use an overcrowded and occupied State Capitol as a symbol of their resistance.

The visuals are no longer compelling, and absent violence or big crowds, there's nothing new to add to the story. You've got forty people hanging out in the rotunda, and their arguments are no different than they were three weeks ago. What was a compelling story two weeks ago is now an afterthought. The stories shift from the headlines to the sidebars, and then off the front page entirely.

People's opinions are all over the map, and seem very evenly split on many issues, between siding with Walker and siding with Democrats. But for the overwhelming majority of voters, these issues of collective bargaining are like campaign finance reform. People say they care, but at the end of the day, there are other issues they care about a lot more.

The vast majority of Wisconsinites have no direct stake in this discussion. They don't directly benefit. They aren't directly harmed.

It's easy for them to understand how more jobs, or better jobs, or an improved economy will help them. Asking them to understand why it's important for them to give more of their money to public employees? Any benefit there is a lot harder to explain. People might be sympathetic, but to expect that sympathy to swing their vote? That's a big leap of faith.

Bob Jauch is right. Senate Democrats can't stay away forever. They know it, and the Republicans know it. The Democrats' biggest enemy right now isn't Scott Walker. It's time. And nobody ever wins a battle against time.

Time passes. Casual supporters are stripped away. People's attention shifts elsewhere, and all that's left are a handful of diehards fighting a battle in which everyone else has lost attention.

GAO: Ethanol law reform could save $5.7 billion per year

Yes please.

(Reuters) - Reform of U.S. ethanol incentives could save up to $5.7 billion a year, a congressional watchdog said on Tuesday as ethanol critics called on Congress to let the tax breaks expire at the end of this year.

The tax credit will cost $5.7 billion this year and $6.75 billion in 2015 when corn-based ethanol is assured a 15 billion-gallon share of the motor fuel market. The GAO listed options ranging from keeping the credit, ending it or converting it to a variable credit keyed to crude oil prices.

"We urge you to let (the 45-cent a gallon credit) expire and resist calls for spending on infrastructure for conventional biofuels," said a letter to congressional leaders signed by 90 livestock, foodmaker, budget hawk, environmental and international development groups.

"At a time of spiraling deficits, we do not believe Congress should continue subsidizing gasoline refiners for something that they are already required to do by the Renewable Fuels Standard."

I wish someone would pay me to follow the law.

Megyn Kelly... kind of a b@#^%.

Think what you want of NY Rep. Anthony Weiner, but give him bonus points for calling Fox's Megyn Kelly out on a bad habit of many journalists today - launching into question-free soliloquies in interviews.



Apparently she'd rather be working for Fox in the evenings.

Mike Huckabee, the lovable nut

Mike Huckabee comes off as such a nice guy you almost don't notice the crazy in the stuff he says.

"One of the things that's troubling is that people see a Natalie Portman or some other Hollywood starlet who boasts of, 'Hey look, you know, we're having children, we're not married, but we're having these children, and they're doing just fine.' But there aren't really a lot of single moms out there who are making millions of dollars every year for being in a movie. And I think it gives a distorted image that yes, not everybody hires nannies, and caretakers, and nurses.

Most single moms are very poor, uneducated, can't get a job, and if it weren't for government assistance, their kids would be starving to death and never have health care. And that's the story that we're not seeing, and it's unfortunate that we glorify and glamorize the idea of out of children wedlock."

By this logic, we should stop showing Road Runner cartoons, because Wile E. Coyote is glamorizing the use of anvils and jet-powered roller skates to solve conflicts. Something tells me a poor single chick out there isn't going to get pregnant because she thinks she can be like Natalie Portman.

Protesters find new ways to waste taxpayer resources

Anyone with the least bit of common sense would have known this was a stupid idea.

Also in court, DOA chief legal counsel Cari Ann Renlund said the state received an estimate from a vendor that it would cost $7.5 million to clean up the damage done to the Capitol's marble walls from the adhesive and tape used to put up signs around the building.

As we see all too often from lefty protesters at G-20 summits and other intergovernmental gatherings, there seems to be a belief that freedom of expression includes the right to damage and destroy other people's property.

I'm all for opening the Capitol to protesters. But leave when the building closes and stop taping your s@#$ everywhere. Just hold your damn sign. Is it really that hard?

DINOs and RINOs

Maybe it would be easier on both sides to trade Dale Schultz for Tim Cullen. After all, Dale wants to be a Democrat, and Cullen already hung it up once and took a gig in a Republican administration.

As it is right now, Schultz continues to be coy in an attempt (as usual) to keep the focus on Dale Schultz, and Cullen appears more than happy to assert himself in a caucus that basically had to elect Mark Miller its leader by default. Wouldn't a trade save everyone some grief and worry?

Stop the killing.

I moved into my current home about 18 months ago. My rear property line is shared with my backyard neighbor. He's planted four pine (or pine-like) trees along the property line, presumably for privacy purposes years down the road.

Or rather, he's trying to plant them. The land between our streets, from one end of the block to the other, is sloped towards the property line for drainage purposes. Without fail, he has to replace at least two of them by the end of the summer, and at least two of them in the spring, because they spend a lot of time sitting in water. As you can see, coming into March and after a significant thaw in the last few weeks, tree #1 and tree #4 seem to be leading the race.

So do neighbors like this ever get less dumb? Or is he going to continue killing 4-6 trees per year ad infinitum? And will it ever stop being funny to me? This is my first adult venture into the 'burbs, so this is all new to me.

Everyone's a winner! (Kind of.)

These numbers from PPP probably go a long way towards explaining why both sides in the budget debate are so resolute.

Walker 47 / Unions 51
Walker 47 / Senate Dems 52
Dem Senators +0
Scott Walker -6

If anything, I'm kind of surprised that Walker's faring as well as he is considering the overall tenor of the discussion since his budget repair bill was released. Similarly, there appears to be a large percentage of the public that's willing to overlook a lot of bad behavior from Senate Democrats if they believe the cause is correct.

I'm sure all will be resolved once both sides recognize a simple truth. Wisconsinites think government is too big, but they don't want to cut any of it. They are okay with raising some taxes, so long as it's not any of the ones they actually pay. And they're totally okay with accounting tricks, even if it means leaving the bill for their kids.

In other words, they want Jim Doyle back.