Taxpayers give Half a Million Dollars to Right Wing Lobbyists to promote hunting and fishing, which includes Mining, campaign concerts, and wetland development.

This is the most blatant political payoff and waste of taxpayer money yet from the Walker Authority. Seriously, nothing like in-your-face crass cronyism to desensitize the public for future grand giveaways just waiting in the wings.

I need to catch my breath.

jsonline: A controversial $500,000 grant for promoting hunting and fishing was recommended by a state committee  … The United Sportsmen of Wisconsin Foundation, a group with close ties to GOP politicians and other conservative organizations, is the only applicant for the award … a virtual lock on the money.

Here’s the most outrageous part; it has to be done fast:

Scott Gunderson, the committee chairman repeatedly said during the meeting that the agency was required by the state budget passed in July to quickly award the grant — one of the DNR's largest to an outside group planned in fiscal year 2014. "I think we have to follow the law," said Gunderson, who voted for United Sportsmen. "I never think it's a tough decision to follow the law."

The budget required the grant be given immediately. Amazing.

United Sportsmen has no history of doing the kind of training called for in the grant. The grant was quickly approved in May … Its language prevented most established conservation groups from applying for the grant.

Even some Republicans have a conscience:

Mark LaBarbera of Hazel Green, the sole member of the committee to vote against United Wisconsin, asked the group's president a number of questions about its finances, structure and qualifications, stressing that "people around here think this just doesn't smell right." Afterward, he said he wasn't satisfied with the answers as given. "I didn't think we had a clear enough answer that I could vote yes so I had to vote no."

This interesting note from Daily Kos about a comment from Greg Palast:

The Koch Operation, Americans for Prosperity, had its Chief set up a front called United Sportsmen of Wisconsin. United Sportsmen of Wisconsin, which appeared and then instantly vanished after the recall vote...

And now that these Republican lobbyists have the taxpayer money, it’s time to actually create United Sportsmen:

United Sportsman president Andy Pantzlaff said that his group would do a national search for a full-time executive director; and hire a full-time director of operations and part-time staffer to work on public policy.

They will serve their masters to promote other radical right wing lobbyists to spread propaganda in of all places, our schools:

The group would also bring programs such as the National Rifle Association's Eddie Eagle gun safety program into schools to try and change the trend of declining youth interest in hunting. "Failure is not an option," Pantzlaff said. "We have to try something new and innovative."

And like good Republican politicians who always say they're safe guarding taxpayer money:

The state budget includes no requirement that the grant be put out to competitive bid in the future...

Promoting hunting and fishing really means something else:

United Sportsmen of Wisconsin has been lobbying lawmakers in favor of sporting legislation such as the creation of a wolf hunt as well as bills to ease the way for a controversial open-pit iron mine in northern Wisconsin and to better enable development in wetlands … sponsored the Sportsmen Freedom Fest and Concert in Lake Delton with Americans for Prosperity and the National Rifle Association in October 2012, just ahead of the presidential election. United Sportsmen has apparently already received significant funds. In 2011, the group Citizens for a Stronger America reported in its tax filing giving $235,000 to United Sportsmen.

I hear crickets coming from tightwad conservative voting groups...teatards, anyone....? Here's both WISC TV and WKOW's coverage:

Republican overuse of saying “protecting taxpayer money” red flag!

Failed policy alert!!!

The way I see it, the constant drumbeat of the Republican Party’s now overused public assurance that they’re “protecting taxpayer money” means they’re covering up ineffective policy with a meaningless standby cliché.

We know this administrations borrowing is way up for transportation, taxpayer money is disappearing into the WEDC black hole and unemployment fund, and tax cuts too numerous to mention haven’t been paid for, so the only thing left is to repeat over and over?; “we’re protecting taxpayer money, ignore what we've really done.”

Of course I've got an example, and the reason I’m posting this alert. Check out the ridiculously obvious first two sentences of Alberta Darling's comments in the following press release:

The Co-chair of the budget-writing Joint Committee on Finance, State Senator Alberta Darling (R-River Hills) issued the following statement (on the new law to) help stop trafficking of food stamp benefits.

"I applaud Governor Walker for signing this important protection for taxpayers. Our job as lawmakers is to be good stewards of the taxpayer's hard-earned money…”

That’s all that matters. I know Sen. Darling's statement would have had my conservative friend at the first mention of “protection.” That’s as deep into this story as he’d probably go.

Her second paragraph starts with and repeats the theme:

“Fraud hurts taxpayers and the people who rely on these benefits.”

There's an insecurity here that should be pointed out.

When you hear Republicans say they're "Protecting Taxpayers," hide your wallet and run. Has Rep. John Nygren got a deal for Bill Board companies.

Finally, a fair and uniform law protecting billboard companies at taxpayer expense. Thank you Rep. John Nygren.

This amazing twist of logic, not to mention common sense and budgeting, is another example of Republican mismanagement. “Treating everyone fair” is an overused and mindless reason to pass regulation that’ll only cost taxpayers more in the long run.

Green Bay Gazette: Several area communities think the state is trying to steal their

The Three Stooges....?

authority over billboard placement.

A provision in the state budget that would change state law concerning billboards affected by state highway projects. The new law would allow sign companies losing signs to highway expansion to put up replacement billboards anywhere within a community, regardless of local ordinances, or otherwise require the community to compensate the sign company for its loss.

You read that right, community taxpayers will now have to shell out cash so a billboard company doesn't plop a sign any damn place in town it wants. It’s an “or else” deal for taxpayers.

Who would come up with something this ridiculous? Rep. John Nygren:

Under current law, if a nonconforming sign needs to come down because of highway expansion, its replacement, as new construction, would lose its exemption to local ordinance unless it went up on the same property as the billboard it is replacing. The new law would protect the exemption regardless of the location within the same community. The new billboard also would be exempt from size and height limitations imposed by ordinance and in fact must be the same size and same height or higher than the one it replaces, under the proposed law change.

“They can pull a sign off 29 because of a DOT project and stick it on 41 … or they could stick one on Cardinal and Dousman, unless we pull out our checkbook and pay,” said Paul Evert, administrator for the village of Howard, which has not permitted new billboards since 1989. “If we want to have a say, you’re telling us we have to pay.” Evert said that, a few years ago, the state once paid a sign company $70,000 for the loss of a billboard. “Even requiring the location to at least be on the same highway would have been helpful,” Evert said. “It can go anywhere.”

Taxpaying voters need to read the following and decide, is this the kind of thinking they want from their state legislator? And isn't it funny how when Republicans “clarify” something, taxpayers are on the short end of the deal, and on the hook?

Rep. John Nygren, R-Marinette, defended the proposed change. It was “intended to clarify that the DOT should choose the most cost-effective alternative between relocating or removing a sign,” Nygren said in a written statement. “My underlying goal is to protect the taxpayers and to ensure the DOT is following the law by treating employers, in this case a billboard company, in a fair and uniform manner.”

Protecting taxpayers by making them pay up or else is a good thing? “Protecting taxpayers” is the latest meaningless talking point con only a sucker would believe.

But that wasn't the only handout to bill board companies that taxpayers are going to feel:

jsonline: The budget bill changes the way billboards are classified for tax purposes. Milwaukee currently assesses billboards as real property parcels and includes the value of the permit, which allows billboard companies to operate them legally.

The net effect of the change in the budget bill is that billboards would be classified as personal property. That means, according to Barrett, that assessments of billboards in Milwaukee alone will drop from $76 million to $6.6 million.

"We share your goal to lower the tax burden throughout the state, but this provision will only reduce the tax burden for companies that are primarily based out-of-state while raising property taxes for Milwaukee-based businesses and homeowners," Barrett said.