I Can

|

Walker and Neumann: The race begins

The latest issue of Wisconsin Interest - the publication put out by WPRI - has a sit down interview/debate with Scott Walker and Mark Neumann moderated by Charlie Sykes and Marc Eisen. My first impression upon reading the article is that this is going to be a fun primary.

I'll go on record right now saying that I have no horse in this race. I'm inclined at this point to support Walker, but that owes more to do with the fact that I know him personally and that I believe him to be an honest and sincere man. I have no doubt that he is going to do what he believes is best for the state. I don't know Mark Neumann and have never met him, but I do know his resume and it's as impressive as Walker's. Not that any of this really matters. I have no influence in the GOP and my own thoughts are probably not going to sway anyone's opinion, but I wanted full dislcosure.

For the most part, the interview featured standard conservative Republican talking points. This isn't a criticism, it's just that both these men are sincere conservatives who believe in their positions. The interesting part of the interview came when they were both asked about the future of the GOP and what type of message it will take to win in 2010.

Walker's response was that essentially we need a new salesman. It isn't that the GOP message is broken or discredited, but that we have failed to communicate it and live up to it. There's a lot of truth to that statement. The Bush administration did a lot of damage to the Republican brand when it failed to live up to it's conservative "ideals." And when one looks at the Democrats who won in '06 and '08, many of them ran on platforms of fiscal responsibility and economic growth. If it's a problem with the spokesman, the case can be made. After all, look at Paul Ryan. He's wildly successful in a district that went decidedly for President Obama last year.

Neumann's response to the question of message vs. messenger was quite different. He argued that it most certainly is time for a new message - not new principles or values, but an update of the traditional conservative message. This is something that has been talked about frequently here at LiB and it's an appealing argument. Neumann focused on his background as a business owner and talked a lot about green energy and green jobs. He argued that we need to reach out as a Party and voice an alternate path to a cleaner environment than cap and trade or the Governor's global warming task force. He emphasized using the private sector and entrepreneurism to create jobs, improve the state's economy and help the environment. From a tactical standpoint, it makes a lot of sense. I think most of us agree that conservative principles - especially economic ones - are still popular, but we need update their application for a new generation that doesn't remember Ronald Reagan.

Throughout the interview there were a lot of subtle jabs at each other, nothing serious, but the two men are definitely feeling each other out and trying to pick the right critique to win the nomination. Neumann is going to stress his background as a businessman and a relative "outsider" to politics. I wouldn't expect him to talk too much about his time in Congress other than as a part of his breadth of experience. As for Walker, it's going to be his success in very liberal Milwaukee County and the fact that even though the County Board there has made life miserable at times, he has consistently put the conservative principles of lower taxes and less government into practice.

The big difference between the two will be the message they use to appeal to voters. It's far too early to tell and the odds are still heavily in Walker's favor, but this is exactly the kind of primary the Wisconsin GOP needs. We are going to get a battle over the future of the party and the Republican brand/message. No matter who comes out on top, I suspect that they will be in a much stronger position than without a primary challenge. We are going to hear ideas and specifics. The primary will force both candidates to lay out their full agenda to the public and that's a good thing.

I'm looking forward to it already. And please, go read the whole thing.

|

Dairying in Wisconsin

The Economist reports from the frontlines, dateline Stanley, Wisconsin.

|

Wisconsin fails in educating Black students

A report from the US Department of Education shows that black Wisconsin students have the lowest reading scores in the nation and "among the lowest" in math.

This is unacceptable. I've talked a lot here about creating a good climate for business in the state, but you know what else helps? An education system that works. Not a lot of companies are going to come to a state that can't educate their employees - let alone their potential employees' kids.

Fixing the problem is going to take a lot more than more money or repealing the QEO. We need real, total reform and we need to start finding solutions very, very soon.

|

This is not the way to do Business

We are undeniably in the midst of the worst recession in the last half-century. With luck, most of us will never see anything this bad again in our lifetimes. While Wisconsin's unemployment rate may be slightly better than the national average, there are parts of the state that are doing much, much worse. My hometown area is one of those places that is doing so poorly. In fact, I don't think it's much of a stretch at all to say that Beloit and Janesville are on the verge of economic depression if steps are not taken to improve the economic climate soon.

In that context, let's look at the tax and fee increases in the state's new budget. The total damage is set at $2.1 billion over the next two years and that does not include the $252 million worth of tax increases passed in the budget "repair" bill earlier this year. The lion's share of these taxes hurt small businesses and discourage large companies from locating production facilities in Wisconsin.

It makes no sense to me that we would pass these tax increases in the middle of a recession. Precisely when we need to encourage job growth and economic investment, we are punishing it. Rather than focusing on trimming the fat in state government and creating a climate in which business and job creation can flourish, we are doing the exact opposite. Let's just look at two real quick examples.

This budget increases taxes on anyone earning more than $225,000 a year. I know that for some it's fun to punish the "evil" or "idle" rich, but it's not usually the best policy. Many of those caught in this new bracket may not be business owners themselves, but they most certainly represent a good share of those in the upper levels of management in many companies. Do we want to punish the best and brightest and perhaps force many to leave the state? Also, we know that at least some small business owners will be caught in this bracket. I know we're a broken record here at LiB, but the more money taken out of a business owner's pocket, the less he/she is going to have to invest in their company. That means a loss in jobs.

Just to throw salt in the wound, the budget also closes a "loophole" on disregarded entities and the sales tax. The example in the Fiscal Bureau's analysis highlights - at least to me - the absurdity of the tax in the first place:

An owner entity could create a separate transportation company solely to haul products for the owner. In the absence of the separate company, the owner would owe tax on its purchases of trucks, trailers, and other hauling equipment. However, the separate transportation company would have qualified for the sales tax exemption for vehicles purchased by common or contract carriers.

So, what they're saying is that a "common or contract carrier" is exempted from sales tax in the purchase of all the things it needs to conduct business, but if a company - in order to cut down on the costs associated with contracting out their transportation needs - wants to create what amounts to a separate transportation division within its company, it gets screwed. Never mind the fact that jobs would still be created and the business may be able to expand, they're just trying to skirt the law and should be punished. After all, who needs jobs.

These are no small increases either. The two changes alone amount to $327.8 million dollars in tax increases.

There are a number of other bad provisions in this budget that create a massive problem for the state's economic and fiscal future. We have to find ways to attract businesses or at the very least encourage businesses to stay, but we aren't. Provisions like the elimination of the Domestic Production Activities deduction, the elimination of the deduction for "Thowback Sales," and the reduction of the Capital Gains tax exclusion account for another $377.3 million in new taxes and discourage investment and economic growth.

I know that individual cities and counties can offer great incentives to attract business - like Beloit did for Kerry Ingredients - but that is no way to create a postive business climate. We cannot create jobs or improve the economy piece by piece, we need to make the entire state a good place to work.

And like I said, there are a lot of bad things in this budget. Tomorrow I'm going to take on the issue of health care and how we are stifling reform and innovation.

|

Subtly Circling the Bowling Green

"The fence that surrounds the Bowling Green today is the original one erected ca. 1771."

You may remember the tale or image of the American colonists pulling down the statue of King George III as the revolution unfolded, melting the equestrian work to make ammunition.

Interestingly, the fence erected around the statue by the British in an effort to keep the colonists at bay survives to this day, near the tip of Manhattan amidst a grove of skyscrapers, silently ringing the Bowling Green, New York's oldest park.

|

The Secret CIA Program - That's It?

The nature of the secret CIA anti-terrorism program comes to light:

Since 2001, the Central Intelligence Agency has developed plans to dispatch small teams overseas to kill senior Qaeda terrorists, according to current and former government officials.

While ordering the CIA not to reveal the program to Congress is still a significant concern, I must say the nature of the program itself is less dramatic or controversial than I thought it was going to be given all the hoopla.

The way it was described, I thought the project would have been something far more sinister, something that would make it look as if the U.S. was stooping to some truly depraved level - such as authorizing the use of suicide bombers to go after terrorist leaders.

Notwithstanding all the international law issues and Jimmy Carter's non-assassination policy, I don't believe the American people as a whole will find the secret CIA plan all that odious.  In fact, it might look like a better, more pragmatic alternative to launching two full-out wars when dealing with a hard-to-grasp terrorist network.

Perhaps there are more repulsive details to emerge, but for now, I think the Democrats lose a good deal of wind they had filling their sails in the past few days.

|

Missing the point on boiling frogs

I read Paul Krugman's latest column in the NY Times yesterday, and I think he's beginning to lose it a little bit. He bemoans the fact that the nation's economy may be experiencing a jobless recovery - even though there is no hard evidence that we have entered a recovery of any kind as of yet - and that if we don't act soon people could be without jobs for months, even years. The problem is that his solution is another stimulus package even though only 10% of the last one has been spent.

Maybe, just maybe, we should let the first one be spent before we declare it a failure. And while we're talking about "boiling frogs," what about the coming fiscal crisis if we continue to add hundreds of billions of dollars to our debt each year? Won't that have a pretty damaging effect in the coming years?

But, what gets me the most is that Krugman then makes the leap that we also need to act now - yesterday would have been better - to pass cap and trade and save the planet. Well, there's only a couple problems there. First, that whole jobless recovery that he was afraid of? Cap and trade will only make it worse. The massive new penalties and environmental restrictions will only make our economy worse or at best prolong the recovery. Second, I have no idea how Krugman actually believes that we can "save" the planet.

I am all for conservation and reducing pollution, but the notion that human beings can destroy the planet is ludicrous. A quick look at history shows us the immense power of the planet. Ice ages followed by warmer periods. Great port cities of the ancient world now underwater or miles from the coast due to changing sea levels over several centuries. The planet is alive, I don't dispute that, so what makes anyone think that we can control it?

Also, from a logical standpoint, how would our own reduction of carbon emissions have any appreciable effect when India and China are exempt from the same standards?

But, if Krugman and other liberals are so obsessed with boiling frogs, maybe we should focus on the coming fiscal nightmare of our entitlement programs? Just a thought.

|

Don't worry

It's still all Bush's fault.

Poor Obama, being weighed down by W. I have this wonderful image in my head of a sort of zombie Bush hand reaching up through the ground, clinging to Obama's pants leg as the president bravely tries to struggle forward, weighed down by Bush's grip. But alas! he's unable to move quickly, because he's being held back by this undead evil...

|

Staten Island Ferry

|

Ironies in Sen. Herb Kohl's Sotomayor Confirmation Remarks

Wisconsin Senator Herb Kohl sent out his opening remarks from today's Judiciary Committee confirmation hearings.  

He seemed, generally, to embrace Obama's empathy theme and run with it.  Senator Al Franken, too, like many of the Democrats on the committee, tried to sound a rather annoying "populist Portia" note.  

But one passage in Kohl's speech stuck out to me:

Third, we want a nominee with a sense of compassion. This is a quality that I have considered with the last 6 Supreme Court Justices. Compassion does not mean bias or lack of impartiality. It is meant to remind us that the law is more than an intellectual game, and more than a mental exercise.

As Justice Black said, “The courts stand against any winds that blow as havens of refuge for those who might otherwise suffer because they are helpless, weak, outnumbered or because they are non-conforming victims of prejudice and public excitement.”

First, it's slightly odd to quote Justice Black, perhaps the court's most notoriously strict, straitjacketed textualist, after saying the law is no intellectual game or mental exercise.

Second, it's ironic to quote Justice Black, author of the much-despised majority opinion in the Japanese internment case, Korematsu, on helping the innocent "non-conforming victims of prejudice and public excitement."

I didn't find either of those ironies helpful.  But I do think one additional irony in Kohl's remarks made for a nice little rhetorical parry:

As Justice Thomas told us at his confirmation hearing, it is important that a justice, “can walk in the shoes of the people who are affected by what the Court does.”

See, even Justice Thomas wants empathy, therefore Sotomayor must be confirmed.  QED

|

Stricker wins another one on the PGA Tour.

I'm a golf-nut. I can't get enough of it and I just wanted to mention that my favorite golfer, Edgerton native Steve Stricker, just won for the second time this year on the PGA Tour. He finished the 36-hole finale on Sunday with a 3 shot victory. He's having an amazing year on tour and looks to be putting together the best of his career.

If you look at his stats, scoring average, putting, all sorts of things, he is usually at the top or very near it. But if you look at the stats that really matter - money won and FedEx Cup points (it's a season-long tournament) - Stricker is second only to Tiger Woods.

So, congratulations Steve on a great win.

|

Why I Don't Envy Rising 2Ls

For many law students out there, things are looking a bit like no man's land between the trenches, 1916.

How could it not...when tuition is being raised almost 25% at one law school...another school is trying to defer incoming 1L students...the recruiting options this fall for 2L summer positions are diminished, laughable, and, in some cases, nearly nonexistent...and even if you do land a summer job in an already reduced-size summer class, you may not start work until two years after graduation...and you will probably do so at a reduced rate of pay...with a great deal of debt?

|

All Aboard the High Line

And the crowd continues to go wild.

|

I-10 Tear Down in NOLA?

Planners, including former Milwaukee Mayor John Norquist, propose removing the elevated portions of I-10 in New Orleans over N. Claiborne Avenue.

I understand the history of the Treme and the community tragedy that followed the construction of the interstate.  But - and this may surprise some - I don't know that it's necessarily a good idea to tear down the portion over I-10.

I think it will take far more than mere removal of the interstate to revive the remnants of Treme on N. Claiborne's banks.  I also think it's convenient to have a swift way to get around the city - it would take forever to get certain places.  In fact, I'd go out on a limb and say that removing the elevated interstate might actually decrease the chance that some blighted areas down in the St. Roch, Treme, Desire, and Mid-City neighborhoods will get restored and revitalized because they will be even more inaccessible to the outside world.  

I welcome any dissent on the issue, though, and I look forward to researching the matter more thoroughly.

|

Cheney and the CIA's Secret Program

Pick up a newspaper.

|

Thoughts on Public Enemies

I saw Public Enemies last weekend, mostly because, as a Wisconsinite, I wanted to see how my native state was depicted in the film.

It wasn't a bad production - and it had its moments.  But overall, it didn't reach "great" status by any means.

My favorite part of the movie by far was the northwoods nighttime shoot-out and chase scene at Little Bohemia, a classic "Up North" lodge in northern Wisconsin.  It was fantastic, unsentimental, very pure - tommy guns, fedoras, giant pine trees, big fenders, and a rustic lodge in the middle of nowhere.

The banjo-influenced music that played as motif indicating yet another bank robbery was underway added a nice touch throughout the movie, but each robbery seemed too much like the last.

Dillinger's supposed Robinhood-like status with the common people was referred to and demonstrated at times, but it seemed largely unexplained, especially in the face of all the deaths he contributed to or caused directly.  The film lagged at points, too - perhaps reflecting the rolling, laidback uncertainty inherent in Dillinger's life - a strange sort of calm that arose from a desensitization to the everpresent tension and violence all around him.  There were too many half-explained characters as well.

Billie, Dillinger's part Menominee love interest, represented the most moving character in her mixed, but strong emotions, her attitude in the face of abuse, and her sense that life is a great river that can sweep you up and out of the eddies at any moment if you agree to run the rapids.

For someone who worked in the Wisconsin State Capitol building, it was neat to see J. Edgar Hoover ostensibly striding through the halls as if it were the U.S. Capitol, attending a committee hearing in what I knew to be the tomb-like North Hearing Room.

As one friend noted after the viewing, most movies make you empathize with the main character, no matter how unsavory, to the point that you feel you would almost like to be that character - or could see yourself being that character.  Not really the case in Public Enemies.  

There was no end game, really.  What was gained?  Perhaps a bit of freedom for a short time, but not much else.  But maybe that was supposed to be the point - that only in the turbulent uncertainty of a Johnny Depp-as-bank robber's life could one hope to taste, for just a few flickering moments, unadulterated love, wealth, and invincibility before it all came crashing down.

|

East River Sunrise

|

Of tremendous usefulness

If you haven't been popping over to Brian's Coffeehouse, you're missing out on a great deal of insight into what's going on in Iran right now. This is just a sample:

Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini's concept of velayat-e faqih never had wide and deep theological support, but during the past 30 years, it has won acceptance, even if only passive, as a cornerstone of Iran's political landscape. During the past month, however, that implicit authority has been weakened beyond repair. How many people, and I'm speaking specifically of Iranians, knew previously that the Assembly of Experts didn't just elect the Supreme Leader, but also had the power to supervise and if necessary remove him? How many people, both within the government and outside it, have become his enemies now that he has openly become theirs?

The authority of his office weakened, Khamene'i now relies almost entirely on open displays of physical power, a development which grows out of the increasing Ahmadinejad-era militarization of Iranian politics that may have played a role in last month's electoral coup to begin with.

There's much more at the link -- click it already!

|

An idea so crazy it just might work

You know, there are a lot of "solutions" to the "plague" of money in politics out there. Unfortunately, most of them require massive new bureaucracies or infringe upon constitutional protected free speech. But then there's this:

My conclusion: if you’re really serious about getting the money out of politics, then you’ve got to reduce the power of government. Less government power equals less incentive for anyone to spend millions of dollars trying to influence the government.

If you think about it, it makes a lot of sense. Lance makes an excellent point that if the goal is to discourage special interest groups from lobbying government or "buying" seats, don't make government the solution to all life's problems. It's one of those common sense ideas that sounds crazy because it's so simple.

Now, the reason I linked this post is the nice little back and forth with campaign-finance reform advocate Jack Lohman. Lance pokes a big hole in the logic of just about all campaign-finance reform proponents. Go ahead and take a look.

|

Empire State

|

Blood and oil in the Orient: looking at the state of play in Central Asia today, pt 1

Baku

With President Obama wrapping up a not-quite Napoleonic visit to Moscow, the moment seems right to take a long look into the shifting balance in Central Asia, and how American power stands there vis-a-vis Russia and China, the two other major players in the newest iteration of the Great Game.

The game is mixed for America right now, the players in flux as economic and political influence shifts. The shifts, though, are less than promising for American influence in the region.

The major reason for this is the economic downturn. The dollar's downturn has had nasty impacts in Central Asia, and right-wing conspiracy theories about the emerging Amero have fed into anti-American feelings and bred fear. The push by Russia and China to overthrow the dollar as the central currency of world trade is unwittingly bolstered by the likes of Lou Dobbs; currency fears are bolstering Russian and Chinese positions in Kazakhstan, a comparably Western-looking nation (if only comparably):

People still recount how fortunes were made and lost in that currency transition, and everybody wants to be on the winning side if it happens again. Secondly, the people of Kazakhstan and much of the world outside the US, always feel understandably vulnerable in their dependence on American currency. Finally, there is another important thing to mention – Russian television has jumped on the bandwagon, albeit with different motivations than those of Hal Turner and Lou Dobbs.

Analysts say that the likelihood of Russo-Chinese cooperation beyond some joint military excercises is low, but the current currency push may change that; it's not terribly likely, but it is something the Obama administration must keep an eye on as domestic stimulus efforts stagger on.

Then there's the oil game, perhaps the most volatile arena. After effectively losing control of major energy fields after the collapse of the Soviet Union, Russia has been trying to get back control of its near abroad -- places which, psychologically, are still Russia to many Russians. The Georgia war must be read in the context of Russia flexing its muscles to remind the Caucasian countries of its strength: Russian forces are so much closer to the Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan pipeline, the main non-Russian transit point for Central Asian gas and oil to Europe. The move has had the intended effect: Azerbaijan has agreed to ship gas to Russia in a move the Jamestown Foundation calls a wakeup call to Brussels and Washington.

Russian control of gas and oil flows to Europe has broader implications, giving it a stronger hand to meddle in Central Asian and Caucasian politics. What the Wall Street Journal calls "energy nationalism" makes Europe in many ways hostage to Russian interests; the EU becomes that much less able to respond strongly to Russian aggression as more of its oil and gas flows through Russia, and it is clear that "Russian leaders regard their energy assets as tools of foreign policy leverage and envisage a future in which resource competition may be resolved by military means."

On the other hand, the Nabucco pipeline appears to be moving ahead, creating another channel for hydrocarbons to flow to Europe through Turkey. This creates another benefit to the West, tying Turkey to Europe more closely. Building a Trans-Caspian pipeline would further bolster European energy security and create better ties with Central Asia.

As Russia continues to gather power vis-a-vis the EU, China is increasing its hand in the carbons markets of Central Asia. An Azerbaijani move to settle the issue of Caspian Sea borders may increase Kazakhstan's control of hydrocarbon reserves there; meanwhile, a new pipeline directs resources Eastward. Repressive Turkmenistan, is also building a pipeline to China. Doing deals with repressive and often corrupt regimes suits China, allowing it to move to control reserves politically out of reach of Western companies.

A last note should concern jockeying over the Manas air base in Kyrgyzstan. While the Kyrgyz originally planned to evict the US from the base, which is crucial for air support in Afghanistan, that decision has been reversed in a move seen as a blow to Russian interests in the region. La Russophobe claims that this reflects a broader pattern of countries trying to "swindle Russia in the coolest way" -- and there are significant examples of a Russian loss of control in the wake of the economic downturn. Moreover, I wonder if the Manas decision hasn't pushed Russia into its decision to open airspace to US planes bound for Afghanistan. But this doesn't necessarily play to American advantage, and as always, LR needs to be taken with a grain of salt.

coming up, part two: nukes and naivete

|

Be-Uighured

From a friend of the blog in Beijing:

Facebook has been blocked for the past two days. All of the articles reporting on the censorship are blocked as well. Have you read an article about this?  I assume it has to do with the violence in the Xinjiang province.

|