Republican Presidential Candidates Promise to cut Taxes between $7 trillion to $10 trillion, while also Balancing the Budget by Paying Off Debt...with what?

In anticipation of the Republican attack on Bernie Sanders supposed budget busting plan to offer free health care and college education, let’s take a look at what they’re offering. Voxdotcom's headline nails it:

"We've lost sight of how wildly irresponsible the Republican tax plans are"

Here's a brief look:

Marco Rubio has promised tax cuts amounting to $6.8 trillion, Cruz $8.6 trillion, and Trump a whopping $9.5 trillion, according to the Tax Policy Center (and that's not including interest on the debt they would rack up!).

By comparison, the budget disaster we saw coming a mile away with the Bush tax cuts...

The tax cuts George W. Bush proposed during the 2000 campaign were $1.32 trillion — which would be $1.82 trillion in today's dollars. And taxes were higher in 2000 than they are today, and the country was running surpluses rather than deficits.

The misleading dopiness of a Balanced Budget Amendment: What should be a no brainer for even the most conservative tightwad, is anything but, because it sounds good:

It gets worse. Rubio and Cruz both support a Balanced Budget Amendment, so they can't just add their tax cuts to the national debt. They also support spending more on the military — up to $1 trillion for Rubio, about $2.4 trillion for Cruz. 

For example; even though Rubio's chances are slim, he's still in the race and has the backing of Scott Walker. Here's his exciting simple plan:

Marco Rubio announced that he'll pay for his tax cuts by doing something truly big: ending funding for Medicaid and for the Children’s Health Insurance Program — which 71 million Americans, or 22 percent of the country, rely on for health care. Impressive, right? The problem is that only gets Rubio about $4.7 trillion.

Rubio could find another trillion dollars by eliminating all education spending — Pell grants, the Department of Education, K-12 funds, school nutrition programs, Head Start, all of it. That gets him to roughly $5.7 trillion. Knocking out all justice spending could net another $561 billion. But there might be some political resistance to wiping out the FBI, the Drug Enforcement Administration, much of the Department of Justice, all United States attorneys, the entire federal judiciary, and the Federal Bureau of Prisons.

 And then to fulfill his balanced budget promise, he's got to get rid of the deficits that already exist and are projected to grow in the coming years.

Impossible? Yea. Cruz's out does Rubio's:

Cruz is proposing a full $8.6 trillion in tax cuts. To get there, he could start with everything on Rubio's list and then end all federal transportation funding. Goodbye, Coast Guard, Transportation Security Administration, Federal Aviation Administration, and Federal Highway Administration! And sorry, all you states relying on federal funds to build or rebuild your highways and ports! The problem is all that money only amounts to $935 billion. That gets Cruz to a cool $7.8 trillion, but his job isn't done yet.

The good news is that the $715 billion he could get from eliminating spending on veterans would pretty much close the gap. And who'll miss the Department of Veterans Affairs, the Veteran Benefits Administration, the Veterans Health Administration, or the National Cemetery Administration? Of course, there is one small problem Cruz has also promised to increase military spending by $2.4 trillion. And he's also got Rubio's balanced-budget problem.

Remember, they're doing this so Republicans won't have to raise taxes on the wealthy. And Trump's sketchy idea?

The projected US deficit for the next 10 years is $9.4 trillion. Passing Donald Trump’s $9.5 trillion tax cuts would more than double that total.

The federal government is expected to bring in about $21 trillion in individual income taxes over the next 10 years. Trump’s cuts amount to a 45 percent reduction from that projection … he's also promised to maintain funding for entitlements while increasing spending on the military. There's just no way to reconcile all that. Taken together, even the most sympathetic reading of Trump's plan dissolves into incoherence.

None of this even take into consideration spending on natural disasters that Republicans insist must be made up with cuts elsewhere.

Repeal the 17th Amendment, centralize Power in Red States, keep "the Harry Reid's of the world" out.

So what do Republicans do when big special interest money (thanks to their own beloved Citizens United decision), now controls all GOP politicians in congress? Do you try to get rid of the corrupting influence of money? Do you hold your elected officials feet to the fire? Do you try to reform the Republican Party and take it away from the radicalized right wing base?

Nope! Our Republican constitutional conservatives have decided to run from the problem, and go after their beloved Constitution, by getting rid of the 17th Amendment. What is it about their authoritarian urge to centralize power? Salt Lake Tribune:

The Utah Senate voted 20-6 to pass SJR2 ... It calls for Congress to repeal the 17th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, to allow people to directly elect U.S. senators.

Its sponsor, Sen. Al Jackson, R-Highland, says electing senators by the state Senate is needed because no branch of the federal government now represents the needs of state governments. A change would force senators to do that.

Jackson: "We repeal the 17th Amendment, we don't get Harry Reid anymore. We don't get the Harry Reid's of the world because guess what, most of the country is red! And I hate to make this a partisan issue because it's really not..."

My head is spinning.....

Apparently State Sen. Al Jackson isn't aware of the House of Representatives? And yet, Republicans love the influence of money so much, that it doesn't even occur to them to just get rid of it:

"Today, senators are more beholden to special interest groups than to their states" because those interests give them money for reelection, Jackson said. "It's time for our senators to come home every weekend and take direction from this body and from the House and the governor on how they should vote in the upcoming week."

Of course it took a Democrat to point out the one major flaw in their thinking:  

Sen. Luz Escamilla, D-Salt Lake City, disputed the plan's logic. U.S. senators are now the only lawmakers elected by all voters in the state, she said, and therefore are not affected by redistricting that she says may have favored Republicans in Utah. She said repealing the amendment would also take away power from voters.

Dumb Ron Johnson Says Fire him if you don't like him Blocking Justice Nomination.

Republicans are pushing a strict ideological agenda, which has nothing to do with you and me, the hapless voter. For instance:

Paul Ryan once said he'd be okay losing an election if he could pass something he knew was best for America, even if no one liked it.  Or the recent opens records request that found Republicans ignored overwhelming negative constituent feedback on very divisive bills, and passed them anyway.

And so it is with Dumb Ron Johnson, who'll block any supreme court justice nominee even if it cost him the race for his senate seat in November. So it doesn't matter if 62 percent of Wisconsin voters want the vacant U.S. Supreme Court seat filled this year? Who are these guys serving? WKOW:



Admitting to everyone again, Republicans want to fill the courts with conservative activist justices who legislate from the bench, a point the media doesn't want to focus on:

Johnson: "He’s got a track record. We know the type of justice he would appoint. We wouldn’t confirm that individual,” Johnson said. “Not acting is also withholding our consent, and that’s within our right.”

“America needs Supreme Court justices who share Justice Scalia’s commitment to applying the Constitution as written and to the freedom it secures.”

Oh, and I just ran across Sen. Mitch McConnell ripping into their now treasured Thurmond Rule, that states,  "judicial nominees should not be confirmed in the months leading up to presidential election." They do know this stuff is being recorded, right? 



(Hat tip to Mal Contends): The Republican eye roll response to the simple mention of the Koch brothers name doesn’t change reality and their roll in all of this. That slick insulting ad is part of the Koch's special interest campaign. Politicus USA:

A Koch-founded organization, the Wellspring Committee funds another Koch 501(c)4social welfare organization, the “Judicial Crisis Network.” The Judicial Crisis Network invested seven-figures for an ad buy that features a 30-second television spot entitled “Let the People Decide.” The television ad informs voters that:

“your voice in November is the only voice to express an opinion on the vacancy on the court left by the death of Justice Antonin Scalia. And Senator Kelly Ayotte agrees; the American people should decide. This isn’t about Republicans or Democrats it’s about your voice. You choose the next president. Call Senator Kelly Ayotte. Thank her for letting the people decide.”

Similar ads were tailored for other Republican senators and their respective states such as Charles Grassley in Iowa, Ron Johnson in Wisconsin, John McCain in Arizona, Mitch McConnell in Kentucky and Pat Toomey in Pennsylvania.

To answer the question why Republicans would ignore polls supporting Obama’s nomination to the court:

The Judicial Crisis Network was joined by another Koch-affiliated conservative group, FreedomWorks, that issued warnings to Republican senators to block any hearing on an Obama Supreme Court nominee or face the significant wrath of the Koch brothers for disobedience.

As many pundits and politicians have noted already, the people voiced their opinion three years ago on who gets to nominate the next Supreme Court Justice and they elected Barack Obama whom they knew would be President until January 20, 2017.

Dumb Ron Johnson says the American People should pick the next Supreme Court Justice? Can't find that in the Constitution....

Dumb Ron Johnson and his authoritarian power mad pals in the Senate hope to shut down once and for all any discussion about Obama's nomination for the next supreme court justice. It's done. It's finished. Get over it. Let's move on!

Republicans know they're this close to one party rule in this country, and keeping the conservative activist court intact is a major priority.

So here comes Dumb Ron Johnson, in another breathless panic over the possibility of discussing a change in the courts political leanings. Remember when Scott Walker ordered then Gov. Jim Doyle not to negotiate a contract with the public unions before he left office? Here we go again:

Asked whether pausing the Supreme Court nomination process could delay business in the Senate, Johnson said he hopes it won't.

"I think that's one of the reasons Leader (Mitch) McConnell (R-Kentucky) and Sen. Grassley came out and said, 'This is what we're going to do, now get over it.' Let’s move on. The Senate has spoken, a coequal branch of government. We’re not going to consider the nomination. We’re asking the American people to decide that and the next president. So now let’s start moving on with the other important things we must do for the American people."

"Let’s start moving on with the other important things," because having the proper balance on the nations court isn't a priority? Of course nothing else seems to be important enough in the Senate either.

"We're asking the American people to decide that..." wrong, since that misleading line is nowhere in the Constitution. And like everybody's been saying, the American people already decided when they elected Obama...twice. Here's the mind numbing nationalistic ad Johnson is running. Nothing shows contempt for his voters more than something like this:

According to a poll released Wednesday by Public Policy Polling, 62 percent of Wisconsin voters want to see the seat filled this year.

ObamaCare Exchanges give Providers Higher profits.

Update: The media played up UnitedHealth Groups publicity seeking threat to leave the ObamaCare Exchanges because they couldn't make as much money as they thought, boohoo, but as you can see here, they've been whining for some time.

Insurance giant UnitedHealth Group seemingly took another step closer to bailing out of Obamacare in 2017 ... UnitedHealth Group is the master of health care for profit. In 2004, United’s CEO William McGuire (an MD, woefully enough), received compensation of $125 million, obtained, you may be sure, by tens of thousands of denials .... UnitedHealth and CIGNA, funneled $86.2 million into the U.S. Chamber of Commerce in 2009 to pay for the Chamber’s multifaceted campaign to kill President Obama’s health reform legislation.

UnitedHealth Group was never a big player in the exchanges. Those that are do well. Insurers are making more in Wisconsin because the Walker administration isn't trying to control premium increases like other states...Minnesota is one. 

ObamaCare Marketplace Health Care Providers Profits Up: Providers are doing well, patients are doing well, so there's a lot to celebrate in southeastern Wisconsin. Remember, these are providers not insurers. JS Guy Boulton:

Health systems in the Milwaukee area have seen a sharp increase in profits since the expansion of health insurance through the Affordable Care Act. So far, the law has helped the bottom lines of health systems in the Milwaukee area. The same trend overall can be seen throughout the country. A key reason: Health systems are providing less charity care and incurring fewer bad debts. A slew of other factors — including health systems' work to control costs and become more efficient — contributed to the increase in profits in the Milwaukee area. Still, the numbers are telling:

■ Aurora Health Care's operating income was up 221% in 2014, increasing to $503 million from $156.8 million in 2013. For the first nine months of 2015, operating income fell slightly to $337.5 million when compared with the same period in 2014. But that was more than triple the operating income of $92.4 million reported for the first nine months of 2013.■ Wheaton Franciscan Healthcare's operating income was up 158%, increasing to $69.2 million compared with $26.8 million in its 2014 fiscal year.■ ProHealth Care's operating income was up 125%, increasing to $37.8 million compared with $16.8 million for its 2014 fiscal year.■ Froedtert Health's operating income was up 79%, increasing to $149 million compared with $83.4 million in its 2014 fiscal year.■ Columbia St. Mary's operating income was up 26%, increasing to $26.1 million compared with $20.7 million in its 2013 fiscal year.

At least some of those gains have come from the increase in people with health insurance, either through the subsidized health plans sold on the federal marketplaces or the state's partial expansion of its Medicaid program. For example:

■ Froedtert Health's bad debt expense fell by $40.2 million, to $33.2 million, while the cost of providing charity care fell by $14.2 million, to $7.6 million.■ Wheaton Franciscan's bad debt expense fell by $29.6 million, to $44.9 million, while the cost of providing charity care fell by $15 million, to $34.5 million.

At the same time, the health systems are seeing more patients, in part because people previously uninsured are likely to schedule an appointment with a doctor. Many people who have gained coverage have commercial insurance, which pays higher rates.

While Republican health care plans focus on supposed free market principles that maintain the expensive and abuse prone fee-for service model, real reform in logically moving away from that:

Health systems also are preparing for the expected move away from so-called fee-for-service — in which they are paid based on the services they provide — to new payment models that could put more focus on costs and quality.

McConnell exposes GOP push for Judicial Activism!

Sen. Mitch McConnell's bold move to admit Republicans have been lying all along about their opposition to judicial activism is stunning but refreshingly honest. We're now finding out that the nonpartisan "originalist" reading of the Constitution...is just the opposite.   

McConnell declared there will be no hearings on President Obama’s yet-to-be-announced nominee. Pretty similar to the decision to oppose any and all of Obama's agenda when he was first sworn in. But this move peals back the lie about hating activist judges legislating from the bench.   

CAP Action put together a long list of McConnell contradiction. Here are just a few:  

In his 31 years as a senator, Mitch McConnell has argued that the Senate must fulfill its Constitutional duty and vote on a president’s judicial nominee at least 24 times. All of these claims are in direct contrast to McConnell’s refusal to hold hearings for to replace the late Justice Antonin Scalia.

“My Republican colleagues and I honored Senate tradition. We followed the constitutional directive set forth in Article II, Section 2, that the Senate as an institution as reflected by the will of the majority of its Members, render its advice and consent on the President’s nominees. We put propriety over partisanship.” [3/9/2005]

“For the first time in history, a minority of Senators, on a repeated, partisan, and systematic basis, has prevented the Senate as a whole from discharging its constitutional obligation to provide advice and
consent on judicial nominations.” [3/9/2005]

“We need to recommit ourselves to the 200 year principle that in a democracy an up-or-down vote should be given to a President’s judicial nominees. It is simple. It is fair. It has been that way for over 2 centuries. And it’s served us well.” [4/14/2005]

“The stakes are high. The Constitution of the United States is at stake. Article 2, section 2 clearly provides the President and the President alone nominates judges. The Senate is merely empowered to give advice and consent, but our Democratic colleagues want to change the rules…. there would be the distinct possibility and in fact great likelihood, if this continues, that 41 Members of the Senate will dictate to the President of the United States who may be a member of the Supreme Court and other courts. We have made every effort to reach out and compromise, but our colleagues at least so far have refused. The only choice that remains is to hold a vote to reaffirm the traditions and precedents that have served this body so well for the last 214 years. Let us vote.” [5/19/2005]

For the first time in 214 years, they have changed the Senate’s “advise and consent’’ responsibilities to “advise and obstruct.” [5/19/2005]

By tradition, the President may consult with Senators. But the tradition of “consultation’’ does not transform individual Senators into co-presidents. We have elections for that, and President Bush has won the last two.” [6/9/2005]

“So even, you know, as you have a lame­-duck president, there is a historical standard for fairness when it comes to confirming judicial nominees.” [7/14/2008]

No. 1, we should treat Judge Roberts with dignity and with respect. No. 2, we should have a fair process. And No. 3, we should complete that process with either an up-or-down vote in time for the Court to be at full strength for its new term beginning October 3 of this year.” [7/20/2005]

State Rep. Bernier to Constituents worried about Schools: "We want more money, we want more money and we don't like this or that."

Our Republican one party authority apparently will no longer tolerate dissent.

Check out this rude and irresponsible response by Rep. Kathy Bernier. Time for someone to grow up and find work elsewhere, maybe with a little help from the electorate:

State Rep. Kathy Bernier (R-Lake Hallie) walked out of a Monday meeting with representatives of three local school districts, upset when an Eau Claire School Board member stated that Wisconsin’s economy compared unfavorably with Minnesota’s.

“Fundamentally, Minnesota is beating us,” said Wendy Sue Johnson, citing a Jan. 20 article written by state Sen. Kathleen Vinehout (D-Alma), who also attended the meeting. “Our (school) funding formula is broken,” Johnson added.

It looks like Minnesota is a bigger sore spot than Scott Walker is letting on. I'm pretty sure Bernier is also very frustrated defending the indefensible failure of supply side lunacy. 

Weirder still, Bernier has received similar complaints everywhere else, but instead of getting the message, she just got mad:

Bernier then got up to leave the “Breakfast with Our Legislators” session. “It is not helpful to compare Minnesota and Wisconsin,” Bernier said, remarking that this is what she experiences with Altoona, Eau Claire and Chippewa Falls each time she attends the districts’ breakfast.

Bernier later said she hears the same theme when she meets with representatives of the three districts: “We want more money, we want more money and we don’t like this or that.”

“This vile political speech is not helpful,” Bernier said before leaving. “Sweeping partisan statements coming out of a non-partisan member just ticked me off.”

Johnson said, “It’s clearly disappointing when our representatives are not willing to engage in conversations about the issues.”

Republicans return public confidence, integrity and cronyism back into our elections.

Just amazing. This by the way, this will only force Democrats to play their game of corruption. Nice:

The first announced appointee to the new state ethics commission is the secretary of the Republican Party of Wisconsin, state officials said Tuesday.

Critics said the appointment of Katie McCallum confirms their fear that the commission and its new counterpart, which will oversee elections, will be beholden to legislative leaders and partisan interests.

She was an aide to state Sen. Sheila Harsdorf, R-River Falls, and was a staffer for two former GOP candidates, Kurt Schlicht and Terrence Wall, and worked for the U.S. Department of Education and the Republican National Committee. She also is the daughter-in-law of former Republican Gov. Scott McCallum, according to a 2011 Capital Times report.

Jay Heck, director of Common Cause in Wisconsin, described McCallum’s appointment as “exactly what we feared.” 

We found out yesterday Scott Walker is stacking the UW Board of Regents with donors:

Scott Walker names campaign donor to UW Board of Regents ... a frequent contributor to his campaign fund, donating $9,639.68 since 2010.

Wisconsin Assembly rams Scalia Resolution down throats of objecting Democrats.

The way I see it, is Justice Antonin Scalia’s majority decisions are now costing people their lives (guns), and costing the nation its representative democracy (Citizens United). And I'm just scratching the surface. Scalia’s now legendary minority opinions proved he was an activist and partisan Justice, picking and choosing when to use his "originalist" partisan bias. Anyone who’s caused so much harm to so many people is not worthy of my admiration, that's for sure.

And yet, not surprising, Walker’s Republican legislature decided Scalia deserved “a resolution honoring the life and service of the late U.S. Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scali.” Republican Rep. Jim Steineke even tried to put his Democratic colleagues names on the resolution, which didn’t sit well with Rep. Cory Mason:

But some Democrats weren’t happy about the gesture. “I would be remise if I did not also acknowledge the harm that his words have caused to many of the people I represent,” complained state Rep. Cory Mason (D-Racine) who went on to cite a laundry list of Scalia’s opinions that he disagreed with. “Certainly his words and messaging around marriage equality are deeply disturbing.”

In the subsequent voice vote that followed, Democrats could be heard shouting “nay” to the passage of the resolution. The measure now heads to the Senate where it is likely to pass.

Impartial Judiciary? Are you Kidding? Republicans have been upfront about appointing conservative judges and justices. They're acting as if their activist "originalist" philosophy isn't already politically charged? Yet they'll tear down the idea of living Constitution that assumes the founding fathers didn't think of themselves as all knowing gods who could see into the future. I wonder if they knew of their infallibility? 

Democratic skepticism of the resolution centered around its closing clauses and the judicial philosophy of the jurist:

“Whereas, Justice Scalia forever impacted the law of the United States of America by eloquently explaining his philosophy in countless judicial opinions, including his majority opinions in D.C. v. Heller and Printz v. United States as well as his dissenting opinions in Planned Parenthood v. Casey, Atkins v. Virginia, Obergefell v. Hodges, and King v. Burwell; now, therefore, be it “Resolved by the assembly, the senate concurring, That the members of the Wisconsin legislature commend the ardent and remarkable service Justice Antonin Scalia gave to our country through his fundamental belief in the rule of law and for preserving the lasting consistency of our Constitution.

Citizen Action's "Radio Active" Milwaukee Campaign shakes up Walker wingnut media Lapdog Media Trackers.

Citizen Action has taken on the Herculean task of trying to get liberal talk radio into the Milwaukee market. JS:

...try to find the money to buy their own radio station and create a progressive format to give more voices a say. The effort is led by the grass-roots organization Citizen Action of Wisconsin.

Media Tracker's Brian Sikma's piece, "Citizen Action Declares War on Conservative Talk Radio," suggests any criticism or challenge to conservative radios monopoly in Milwaukee is a declaration of war. So much for Citizen Action's 1st Amendment right to speak out and call into question their market dominance.

You have to wonder why Sikma is so defensive. You'd think he had something to hide. Does he have a problem with competition, the supposed backbone of free market conservatism? The conservative media elite's radio monopoly in Milwaukee, and their liberal radio blackout, does need some explanation. But Sikma took a pass.

Sikma appearance on WPR's Joy Cardin Show should have been focused on the title of his article, "Citizen Action Declares War on Conservative Talk Radio." For 20 minutes, Sikma talked up diversity and a liberal presence, even though he called it a "war on conservative talk radio" in his article.

Oh, and did you know, Milwaukee's "diverse opinions" are only on the right:

"There is a diversity of viewpoints on a variety of issues. They might not be touting what might be considered progressive or liberal ideas, but when it comes to prescriptions for what conservatives in state government should do when it comes to looking at candidates for public office, there is certainly a diversity of viewpoints."

Right Wing Authoritarian Pretzel Logic: Sikma inadvertently admitted that the conservative leaning Milwaukee Journal Sentinel is actually liberal because it has at times been skeptical of Scott Walker's policies. So if the media isn't completely on board with Scott Walker's agenda, any analysis of the facts running counter to Walker must be politically charged liberalism? Here's Sikma reinforcing that idea:



Here's Robert Kraig's take on the situation in Milwaukee, and his response to ridiculous two right wing callers:

Another Law Abiding Gun Owner...until he wasn't....

Like the title says, gun owners are all law abiding citizens until they decide they're not. Tearing away all the regulatory safeguards that might have prevented carnage like this has been a right wing passion. Even if this mass shooting wasn't preventable, the growing U.S. gun culture and mind set is changing the way the public uses guns:   

Gun owner!

45-year-old Jason Brian Dalton has no record of criminal history, nor anything in his background "that would lead us to believe he was capable of this type of behavior," Kalamazoo Police Chief Jeff Hadley said.

6 people lost their constitutional rights all at once, and we can thank a pro-life constitutional conservative movement pushing deadly guns, the death penalty and unaffordable for profit health care.   

Picking targets seemingly at random, a gunman went on a hours-long rampage in Kalamazoo, Michigan, Saturday night, driving around the city and opening fire on unsuspecting victims at an apartment complex, a car dealership and a Cracker Barrel restaurant. Six people died, and another two were seriously injured — including a 14-year-old girl who had been pronounced brain dead but squeezed her mother's hand as doctors were preparing to harvest her organs, police said. She was then able to respond to questions by squeezing her mom's hand several more times, and was rushed into surgery.

 The injured will never really recover, physically or mentally.

This is part of the GOP's attempt to destabilize any expectation of public safety, keeping all Americans on edge and unsure. And despite that obvious message, gun advocates just keep feeding into that growing fear:

"He was a law-abiding citizen up until he pulled the trigger on the first victim," said Jonathan Southwick, owner of a gun store in Plainwell, 20 miles north of Kalamazoo. "There are no laws you could put into place to stop what had happened."

Mississippi Republicans say Voucher Accountability lies with Parents!!!

(Warning-strong language follows because this is getting ridiculous)

Republicans have been so successful dumbing down their base, that bullshit has the ring of absolute truthiness.

Thanks to Republicans in Mississippi, we now know how bad things are going to get with school vouchers.  I mean come on, are we really going to fall for the voucher con when it sounds as fucked up as the bill below?

When asked what the accountability measures were in the bill to ensure students were progressing educationally, Rep. Joel Bomgar, R-Madison, said the accountability was the parents.

“There is accountability in the bill, but the accountability that matters is the parents.”

I’m not making this up. Wait till you see what they said about testing…

The bill does not require students who receive the vouchers to take the achievement tests that are required of students in the public schools. Bomgar said student testing has not been effective in improving public education.

Take a deep breath, there’s more. The reporter tried to get another legislator to say something, anything, about accountability:

House Education Chair John Moore, R-Brandon, the primary author of the legislation, said the proposal does not include accountability measures now, they will be added later in the legislative process. “You can bet there will be some accountability in it.”  

Yup, later, can't think of anything right now. And with no testing or measure for success…what could go wrong with tutoring:

Vouchers also could be used for other purposes like hiring a tutor for homeschooling.

I’ve saved the best piece of bullshit for last; the original scheme that actually works around the intent of their state Constitution by making families the middle man, so they can spend the money on public education instead of the state:

Section 208 of the state Constitution reads no funds shall “be appropriated toward the support of any sectarian school, or to any school that at the time of receiving such appropriation is not conducted as a free school.” 

But Bomgar said the funds would be given to the parents and not the schools.

As dumb as that sounds, the courts went along with it.

Believing in the Voter Fraud Fairy.

When my conservative friend in Milwaukee called and asked me how I liked voter ID in the primary, he was smugly reminding me of how smoothly the GOP’s voter suppression scheme went. It was sad.

I asked him if he actually believed this whole voter fraud, voter ID scam, and he said he did. He seemed excited about creating the most convoluted restrictive system ever. It’s similar to seeing someone marvel at the latest Rube Goldberg contraption to fry eggs. 

Why make this constitutional right delegated to the states harder? I asked him if he’d be okay with a picture ID and defined hours to buy a gun? After all, the Constitution doesn’t say anything about retail sales.

But to Republicans, the inconvenience is the price of freedom (except when it comes to guns. Heck, we just got rid of the 48 hour cooling off period to buy a gun because it was inconvenient. Not surprisingly, a young woman was murdered by an angry guy who bought his gun within that 48 hour cooling off period).

I asked my conservative friend if he noticed any ads or billboards explaining the new voter ID requirements? He didn’t. That’s not suspicious? The fact that Republicans didn't give the Government Accountability Board any money to promote and explain the voter ID law to Wisconsinites should point to motive. Nope.

Here are a few other examples. The Daily Beast:

1. In North Carolina, the Republican-controlled legislature and Republican governor eliminated early voting days. In 2012, 900,000 voters cast their ballots during the early voting window. In 2016, that number will be zero.

2. Dale Ho, Director of the ACLU’s Voting Rights Project said, “We’ve litigated over Voter ID laws in a number of states—Indiana, Pennsylvania, Washington, North Carolina. In none of those states were government officials able to point to a single instance of in-person voter impersonation happening. But in every case we’ve had we’ve identified tens of thousands of people who don’t have photo IDs. There’s no evidence of voter fraud and plenty of evidence of disenfranchisement.

3. Ten years ago there were zero states with a strict voter ID law, and no states cutting back on early voting. All these laws started after the 2008 election, which saw record numbers of young voters and record participation by people of color” voting Democratic. 

4. Dale Ho explained: “And then, as if by coincidence, we have all these laws passed—25 in 2011-12 alone—that disproportionately impact young people, people of color, and poor people. That is, to put it mildly, suspicious. We do catch other kinds of fraud … an organization paid people based on the number of registrations they got, and people filled out Donald Duck and Mickey Mouse and so on. The point is, we catch them.”

But will that one fraudulent voter swing an election? It might be difficult:

Between 2000 and 2014, there were 31 reported instances of voter impersonation out of more than 1 billion ballots cast. But that means the odds of voter fraud are 1 in 32 million. By way of comparison, your odds of actually becoming president are 1 in 10 million.

Kansas Secretary of State Kris Kobach … prosecuted … all of three cases, none of which involved voter impersonation. In fact, all three appeared to be mistakes, in which senior citizens voted in two states by accident.

Not a single instance of voter impersonation. Bans on early voting wouldn’t even prevent these kinds of fraud; it’s not clear what they’re supposed to do, other than make it harder for working people to vote, and harder for get-out-the-vote operations to help people do so. In short, none of these laws prevent voter fraud. They prevent voting, mostly for Democrats. And thanks to new laws in four swing states, Virginia, North Carolina, Wisconsin, and Ohio, they might just prevent a Democrat from getting into the White House.

Modern Stone Age Republicans say Trains Bad!!!

The supposed "imagined" Republican war on Milwaukee got real with this little piece of retribution:

The state of Wisconsin and Milwaukee County would be barred from spending any money on a Milwaukee streetcar under a bill that cleared the (Republican) state Assembly Thursday night ... yet another glimpse at how far apart Wisconsin Republicans and Democrats stand when it comes to rail funding...

Is it any wonder Milwaukee is struggling to be a major contributor to the states economy? Republicans don't get it either, while admitting how much they hate the states largest city:

Republican Rep. Bob Gannon (R-Slinger) ... said the city is "the anchor holding back the ship of state as far as jobs is concerned."

Rep. Janel "boondocks" Brantjen

This disdain for mass transit - buses, trains, high speed rail - is idiotic, especially for those who've traveled to a city with street cars, subways or city wide rail systems.

But what really got my attention was this comment laughable, mind numbing comment from  Menominee Falls Republican Rep. Janel Brantjen, who called trains "anti-future," on Wisconsin Public Radio:

Brantjen: "Trains are the romantic fantasy of a European nation."

America is so "unromantic?" I wasn't the only one left breathless by "Boondocks" Brantjen's daffiness...

Democrats, like Rep. Chris Danou of Trempeleau, were at times incredulous during debate on the measure. "I honestly do find myself flabbergasted at times by the beliefs that I hear from the other side." 

So far today I've had fun substituting "trains" with other pretty common things. It's an easy way to complain about something...anything.  

The state is now being run by these backwards dullards, who can't make even make a comparison work:

Slinger Republican Rep. Bob Gannon called the streetcar a waste of money. "I don't ask you to fund my automobile," Gannon said.  "I don't want you to ask me, the citizens of the 58th Assembly District, to pay for your trolley."

Democrats said Gannon's remarks showed a misunderstanding of transportation funding, noting that automobiles rely on publicly funded roads and bridges. "When you get in your car, you do not pay the full price of that road," said Danou.

And after massive ineffectual tax cuts meant to starve the beast-like government, surprise, we don't have enough money to pay for economic development:

Republican Rep. Jesse Kremer of Kewaskum said, "This bill simply assures that we will not put any more strain on our existing state mass transportation system funding," said Kremer.

Again, these numskulls are charged with running this state...into the friggin ground.    

Republicans admit, taxpayers pay more to subsidize separate private for-profit school system.

For years local taxpayers have been paying extra for voucher schools, a parallel and separate school system, so other families could send their kids to them. Why isn't anyone getting pissed?

These glorified voucher Sunday schools take money from public schools, which then have to raises taxes via referendums to make up for the losses (besides state funding cuts). 

The "fellows" at the MacIver Institute have been denying it:

Taxpayer advocates assert that if a child leaves the public school district, the district no longer incurs an expense to educate the child, so the district shouldn't need to raise property taxes at all to make up for the lost state school aid.

Huh? The teacher, the classroom, the school, even transportation, all must get smaller and less expensive too, right? 

Rep. Jeremy Theisfeldt put it this way:

“…makes it an easy target to turn the choice program into the boogeyman and place all the blame there.”

Oops, Republicans today accidentally let it slip:

Under language in the 2015-17 state budget, those districts can compensate for those losses and more by raising property taxes. According to state fiscal analysts, 142 districts that lost $16.1 million in aid this school year raised their taxes to generate $21.4 million. Assembly Speaker Robin Vos proposed amending another voucher school bill to limit those property tax increases to the actual aid loss.

Not surprising, the major lobbyist behind this lunacy cluelessly chimed in, unaware the big secret was out:

Jim Bender, president of School Choice Wisconsin: "Unfortunately, some districts blamed school choice for property tax increases while simultaneously keeping the extra cash."

Yes, taxpayers are now paying for two school systems, and may not even know it.

Profit? Skimming?: And when schools look ahead and ask for a little more money to work with, just in case things do end up costing more or the state slashes funding, they can absorb it. To Republicans, that's called "skimming. Rep. Jeremy Theisfeldt called it "profiting." If that's what it is, he might have an issue with for profit private schools:

"The districts levied beyond the costs of the WPCP, profiting from students that are no longer enrolled, or never were enrolled in district schools."

The Republicans obsession to privatize, to turn a profit from the untapped commodity we call "kids," created this mess and parallel school system. 

GOP Immigration Debacle pushes Construction costs up, "causing builders to focus on High-End...Higher Profit" Construction.

The Republican stall tactic on immigration reform is focused mostly on one obscure goal; make the border “more secure,” whatever that means. And because no one knows, nothing will happen.

Even worse, the right wing is making immigration sound worse than it really is. Not surprisingly, under Obama (and because of the job purging free market disaster known as the Great Recession), the flow across the border has declined:

1. The number of undocumented workers in the U.S. has remained flat for more than five years.

2. The undocumented Mexican immigrant population is now 20 percent smaller than it was in 2007.

Developing policy and solving problems are not high on the GOP’s to-do list, because it costs money, the kind of money they want to giveaway in tax cuts. Which brings me to...

...The End of Affordable Housing? Housing is a huge part of the U.S. economy, but Republican efforts to wall off the border ignores immigration's impact on the cost housing and the cost of construction labor. While more Americans will find work in construction, fewer homes will be built that serve lower and middle class families. Policy should be written to protect U.S. and foreign labor, but don't hold your breath. RISmedia:

According to data from Pew Hispanic Center and the most recent Zillow Home Price Expectations Survey:

More than two-thirds of those surveyed said a slowdown in immigration will drive up construction labor costs. 40 percent said higher labor costs would cause builders to focus on high-end construction, which has a higher profit margin.

This is one domino falling out of many, that will be ignored and forgotten.

Republicans to expose John Doe Witnesses and their Statements. Anyone feel like talking now?

Are Republicans f**king power mad? In one of the most crass and intimidating efforts ever, in the name of “oversight,” Republicans want to expose witnesses and their statements, despite the promise of immunity and confidentiality in closed John Doe probes.  JS:

Republican lawmakers … want the (John Doe) records — and the power to arrest prosecutors and others to force them to testify before a legislative committee … AB845, would create a legislative committee with subpoena power and anyone who failed to show up could be arrested and brought before the committee to testify, the bill says“…to carry out the duties and powers" of the committee.

Ah, the POWERS of the committee. After shielding themselves from all future John Doe investigations, Republicans are now sending the message that if you get involved in anyway, and talk, they’ll call you before their committee. 

State Rep. David Craig (R-Big Bend), the lead sponsor of the bill in the Assembly, said the move is needed to ensure John Doe investigators and others in law enforcement are not abusing their power. "It's really secret areas of government that the Legislature really should have oversight over." 

Madison attorney Lester Pines questioned whether such a law would be valid, saying he didn't believe legislators could gain access to records that have been sealed by court order.  "They have no idea what they're doing," said Pines, a Democrat who in recent years has sued over a number of laws enacted by Republicans. "People testify in John Does under promises of immunity and confidentiality. 

And like everything else, Republicans are solving a problem based on a complete fiction:

Craig acknowledged that the proposal would allow lawmakers access to all of the records from the now-closed John Doe II. He said that considering the claims of predawn "paramilitary raids," lawmakers should be able to review how such probes have been conducted to determine whether there were "imprudent decisions by law enforcement."

At a public hearing Wednesday on the bill, Jim Palmer of the Wisconsin Professional Police Association warned that a number of the state's major law enforcement organizations have serious concerns about the proposal … the measure would likely compromise ongoing criminal investigations, undermine local control and limit law enforcement's ability to respond quickly in emergency situations.

Impartial Judiciary Dead, GOP Proudly Promises Activist Conservative Justices!

The thirst for power and a one party authority is unmistakable, and apparently knows no limits. 

What is antithetical to the intent of the founding fathers, and to the idea of having a nonpartisan independent judicial branch of government, is the Republican plan to replacement Antonin Scalia with a originalist conservative. And they'll block any attempt to supposedly poison the Supreme Court with a "liberal," a judge not on the same page as the Republican Party. Heck, they even got another chance to discredit Obama, by condescendingly telling him to wait for the next president. If this were President Romney, think they would wait till after the election?

Here's a clip that starts with Hillary Clinton's comments about the GOP's scheme to politicize the judicial branch, followed by Bernie Sanders and Chuck Schumer.



But its always been about political philosophy.

Scalia even bragged that he was an "originalist," a form of political conservatism that "believes" the Constitution's language is fixed to the time it was enactment. But that would require interpreting what the founders meant, which leaves it up to the imagination of the ruling party. Crazy?

Originalism, in all its various forms, is predicated on a specific view of what the Constitution is. Justice Scalia accepted this problem: "It's not always easy to figure out what the provision meant when it was adopted…I do not say [originalism] is perfect. I just say it's better than anything else". 

The Constitution contains no waiting period, no election year ban, no set "standard practice" to uphold, like the one Sen. Chuck Grassley claimed has been in place for the last 80 years. Real "originalists" huh? Here's Scalia on Fox News trying to make sense of his own philosophy:



Check out the discussion here between Scalia and Justice Stephen Breyer. You be the judge. Which form of constitutional reading sounds right?

Wikipedia: Any originalist or even a strict constructionist might apply the canon of construction, which presumes that when an author includes one example he intends to exclude others ... 

Contrast this with a "living constitutional" interpretation (liberal), which might find that, although the text itself only prohibits certain methods, those methods are examples of particularly unpleasant methods of execution; therefore, the text invites modern readers to extend its principle to those forms of punishment we now find particularly unpleasant.

I'm going with the living constitution, and here's the logical reason why:

Justice Breyer has) that constitutions are meant to endure over time, and in order to do so, their interpretation must therefore be more flexible and responsive to changing circumstances than the amendment process.

The Ninth Amendment is the exception in that it does establish a rule of constitutional interpretation ("The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people."). When interpreted using original intent or original meaning, it clearly protects rights which the founders had not thought to list explicitly—this could be interpreted as a direct rebuke to all Textualist or Formalist legal schools including originalism.

Justice Antonin Scalia...Dead.

The weak GOP presidential candidates just got a gift...

If there ever was a moment of Republican honesty, this was it. They are now admitting how they've been politicizing the judicial branch with partisan activist conservative justices for years, and intend to make it even worse by delaying Senate approval.

They never intended to defend the Constitution, but transform what it means by the conservative activist court.

The flurry of right wing tweets pictured here says it all, and shouldn't be forgotten during the campaign. In fact, a number of surreal pointblank promises to nominate the most extreme conservative candidates were made in tonight's GOP debate, but that's perfectly acceptable. Can't make that promise about nominating a "liberal" justice.

The absolute balls to think we should wait till we have a new president. Anybody falling this stuff:



The Huffington Post reports....

It took only a few minutes after news broke of Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia's death on Saturday for conservatives to demand that Senate Republicans block any replacement nominated by President Barack Obama. The most prominent reaction came from Conn Carroll, a spokesman for Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah), who sits on the Judiciary Committee -- through which any Supreme Court nominee must go.

The haste with which Scalia's death was reduced to a political battle was a bit alarming. What is perhaps more telling is the immense political importance that one man's death could have on our system of governance. Beyond the president, the death of a sitting justice on the U.S. Supreme Court has possibly the greatest ripple effects.

With a possible tie on the court, I wonder how many challenges we'll see from the lawsuit crazy GOP now that they don't have their sure thing anymore?

Hillary Clinton's strongest suit is her ability to take the fight the Republicans. Clinton's statement on Scalia frames the argument perfectly, using the Constitution against the conservatives.



This absolute nonsense was a crowd pleaser during the GOP presidential debate:

"It’s been standard practice over the last 80 years to not confirm Supreme Court nominees during a presidential election year,"said Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-IA) on Saturday.

Not quite, according to Voxdotcom:

Igor Volsky, a staffer at the liberal Center for American Progress, responded with a tweet listing justices who have been confirmed in election years:

Walker clings to myth of the "Wisconsin Comeback," still blames eviscerated enemies for "vengeance (that) knows no depths."

Scott Walker has made "vengeance" against his enemies a sick passion that "knows no depths."

Promising to "wreak havoc" was a real confidence builder for voters too.

Political "vengeance," redefined by Walker, resulted in the creation of a blacklist using the names on his recall petitions; union busting Act 10 "bomb" wasn't just a gift to his special interest corporate donors but a once and for all way to defund the Democratic Party; obliterating local control in Democratic state strongholds; and those liberal eggheads at the University of Wisconsin...well lets see what they'll do with massive cuts in funding.

Scott Walker projection just took another surreal comic turn, with the following fund raising letter. He's going back to the "I'm a victim" well again. If you're not enlightened by what Walker calls the true "progressive" movement of supply side, top down, one party rule, then you're an enemy of the state, who's "vengeance...knows no depths."

Walker's arrogance is on full display, believing angry donors will write out checks because his opponents "are gleeful about our 'Scott Walker for America' campaign debt?" That's a bragging point? What are we, five year old's? Maybe donors will wonder why Walker recklessly spent money he didn't have.

By the way, we're not exactly feeling the "comeback" (a term he plagiarized from someone else's campaign)? I think someone has a problem taking criticism.

As reported by Paul Fanlund in the Cap Times: 

Dane County Executive Joe Parisi (said), "I think (Wisconsin Republicans) made a deliberate decision that their main goal, despite the stated goal of creating jobs, was to destroy their enemies." Ah, but Republicans hate Dane County for the way we vote. And for them, politics, not the good of Wisconsin constituents, always comes first.