But what is CRG not telling us?

Yesterday Citizens for Responsible Government (CRG) sent out another wild-eyed rant in the form of a letter. It demands that people hurry up and call their elected officials. It focuses on a proposed ordinance in the City of Milwaukee related to the inspection of apartment buildings in two specific neighborhoods. If someone wasn't familiar with the characters involved at CRG, who knows what they would think about the hyperbolic rhetoric in the letter. Here is a small taste of the high minded dialogue on public policy that CRG apparently wants to foster (all caps, bolds, underlines and repeated use of exclamations belong to CRG):

• "WARNING! The City of Milwaukee Wants to Expand Their Bureaucracy…"
  
• "Rental Property Inspection Scheme"
  
• "…this is 'Big Brother' in its most Orwellian sense."
  
• "A new 'backdoor tax' scheme YOU pay."
  
• "Bureaucrats with the right to search your private living space…without a warrant!"
  
• "…perhaps unconstitutionally!"
  
• "Call City Hall…Do it NOW!!!"
  

In October, the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel did us the favor of describing the proposed ordinance without all of the "colorful" language (this time the emphasis is mine).

Under the proposal, to be reviewed by the full council at its Nov. 3 meeting, landlords would apply for an inspection by the city Department of Neighborhood Services to make sure each rental unit meets building and zoning codes.

The inspection will cost the landlord $85 per unit, with the certification for each unit lasting four years if no health and safety code violations are found after the initial inspection, said Art Dahlberg, department commissioner. If such violations are found, the landlords will be required to undergo annual inspections.

The ordinance would apply only in two neighborhoods with older rentals, and problems with code violations: an area near University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee, bordered by Edgewood Ave., Newberry Blvd., Cambridge Ave. and Hackett Ave., and the Lindsay Heights neighborhood on the north side, Dahlberg said. It would affect around 3,700 units.

That description clearly tells me that the proposed ordinance is specifically targeted at an area that has a history of persistent code violations. It doesn't seem to be the far reaching attack on our personal freedom and privacy that the CRG mailing would have us believe. So what is really going on here and why would CRG pick up this specific cause in the middle of their effort to advance Scott Walker's political career? What aren't they telling us in the letter?

One of the "two guys" behind CRG is Franklin resident Orville Seymer. It is no secret that he is also a landlord of rental properties, owns a rental property management business, and has also been a leader in the local Apartment Association. Therefore, it would stand to reason that Seymer could have a significant personal interest in fighting this ordinance (for example, does he own a property in the two neighborhoods directly affected by this proposed ordinance?). Did he help write the CRG letter? Given his own over-the-top rhetoric on this specific subject, it seems very likely.

So at what point should an organization let us know that one of the "two guys" running it may have a significant personal interest in the organization's latest crusade? I don't really care what CRG does internally, but shouldn't at least one of the "two guys" running the outfit at least ponder the possible appearances here?

So was it Walker incompetence, or hypocrisy?

Yesterday we learned that Scott Walker was so busy running around the state campaigning in his endless quest for governor, that he screwed up one of his 2010 budget vetoes. So, was it simple Walker incompetence or hypocrisy?

As it turns out, one of his vetoes actually subjects sheriff's deputies and jailers to eight unpaid furlough days next year. This is after Walker attacked Milwaukee Mayor Tom Barrett for managing the city budget like an adult and making the tough choice of furloughing police for only 2 days. Last I checked, 8 is 4 times as much as 2 (but Walker groupies could very well try to debate that). Given his attacks, it would seem that his actions qualify for hypocrite of the year, but we should withhold on our decision until we explore it a bit more.

Walker swears that he didn't mean to furlough those law enforcement officers for 8 days next year, honest! I could see why he would try to sell us that message given both his recent political attacks and his claim of making law enforcement one of his priorities in his 2010 budget. So if we simply take Walker at his word, then it would seem that his screwed up veto was just incompetence. Obviously that is not exactly a quality that you would like to see in someone that wants to run the entire state.

The only problem with the "incompetence-only" defense is that this is not the first time that Walker has screwed around with law enforcement in Milwaukee County. Anna Landmark at One Wisconsin Now has revealed, that in every budget but one Walker has "proposed cutting jobs from the Sheriff's Department and/or the House of Correction." So Walker attacks Mayor Barrett for two furlough days when his actions caused 8 of them AND he has a consistent record of cutting law enforcement jobs? That sounds like a hypocrite to me.

So which is it, Walker incompetence or hypocrisy? This is a hard decision and I think that I am going to take a page from Slippery Scott Walker's playbook. I'm going to try and have it both ways – I will say that it is both.

Walker Keeps Driving Down a Shameless Road

It doesn't take long to discover that Milwaukee County Executive Scott Walker is more than willing to use slippery rhetoric to position himself on all sides of any given issue. It has gotten to the point where you can simply fill in the blank on issues that he has been both for and against. Clearly, he will say and do anything to get a vote and win an election, no matter how shameless. The latest chapter in this tragic tale was just written the other day, when he tried to score political points by launching attacks over emergency repairs that are needed at the Zoo Interchange.

Walker was given undeserved headlines for making baseless accusations regarding the order with which the state has prioritized repairs for our busiest freeway systems. Walker alleges that this is an example of politics that "got in the way of good policy". Not only is this a breathtaking example of pot/kettle syndrome but even Walker admits in the story to having zero evidence to back the wild claim.

Responding to the wild Walker claims, Department of Transportation officials confirm that the priority list was based on a number of very objective pieces of information.

The pavement on the freeway was scheduled to be replaced in 2006-'10, and the corridor served as a major route for trucks and tourists, according to the DOT.

Plus, environmental work done in the north-south corridor in the '90s gave planners a head start in the engineering necessary to move the project from concept to construction. The work could begin in 2009, immediately after the Marquette job was finished.

By comparison, the environmental assessments and engineering necessary for the Zoo Interchange reconstruction put the earliest start date for that project in 2012. That would have left a two- to three-year gap, with no work done on the long-range freeway rebuild.

As in most cases, the wild Walker rhetoric does not match up with reality. In fact reality plus a quick history lesson fully exposes Slippery Scott's rhetoric on this particular issue. In 2007 State Transportation Secretary Frank Busalacchi released cost estimates and plans regarding the reconstructing of I-94 south of Milwaukee. Those plans included changes to the previous construction schedule on our highest priority projects. While Scott Walker is trying to score shameless political points on this issue right now, he was singing an entirely different tune in 2007 when the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel reported the following:

Busalacchi found support for his plan from Milwaukee County Executive Scott Walker and area legislators who regard the north-south corridor as a vital pathway for commerce and a link to the dollars available in the Chicago marketplace.

So what has changed since 2007 besides Scott Walker's position on yet another issue? Who are we supposed to believe, the Scott Walker of 2007 that endorsed the plan or the current one that is trying to glom on to any perceived controversy just to score cheap political points? If you want to hear an even newer version of Scott Walker on this issue, just wait for him to answer questions by voters that most frequently use southern I-94. I wonder what he will tell them when they ask why he no longer feels that their area is the number one priority?

The one road that I wish would finally crumble apart is the totally shameless one that Scott Walker keeps traveling down in his endless campaign for higher office.

Totally Random: Milwaukee County Budget

I only have time for a handful of rather random observations after the Milwaukee County Board voted on Scott Walker's vetoes for the 2010 budget.

In the first line of the story, the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel comments that Scott Walker "won half a loaf" regarding his vetoes. It may be a minor point but actually he "won" 38% of the "loaf" because 21 of his 34 vetoes were overridden by the board. Also it is wrong to claim that the board "backed Walker" simply because they didn't have enough of a majority to override some of his vetoes.

While I am talking about this "win/lose" approach, I would just like remind everyone that these decisions have quite an impact on real lives. So when Walker is quoted as bragging about "winning" on the veto to privatize housecleaning services, he is bragging about sending already lower-paid workers to the unemployment line. There is something wrong with looking at that as a "win" for anyone (other than the private contractors).

Walker provided more proof that his actions around this budget were (once again) more about his political future than about the well-being of Milwaukee County. The County Board barely finished the session and he was already trying to compare the Milwaukee County tax levy increase to that of the City of Milwaukee.

I was only able to watch the votes on vetoes 17-27 on the City Channel, but one thing was striking to me. The Walker Rubber Stamps on the County Board (Borkowski, Cesarz, Rice and Sanfelippo) just voted to sustain his vetoes and rarely made their case. The other supervisors often stood to make outstanding cases for their votes. It should be noted that of those Walker Rubber Stamps, Rice was the only one to slightly break ranks by voting against Walker three times.

Speaking of the Walker Rubber Stamps not defending their votes, the one time that I saw one of them say anything, was when Paul Cesarz decided to stand to advocate for parking meters on the lake. What does it say about him that (of the 10 votes that I saw), he stood only to advocate one of the most absurd measures in Walker's 2010 budget? Exactly what constituency was Cesarz standing to speak for, the parking meter lobby?

The adopted tax levy for the 2010 budget will be $263 million. Scott Walker and his CRG bullies were fighting tooth and nail against that evil number (or anything above $258 million). If he follows his pattern of behavior Walker will now proceed to use that same evil $263 million number as his own starting point for his budget next year. Apparently that increase won't be so bad after all, next year at this time.

Vetoes Targeting LGBT is All the Rage

It looks like Scott Walker isn't alone in issuing vetoes to make LGBT taxpayers second class citizens. One governor recently issued a veto targeting those "being gay dead".

Cue Colbert:

The Word - Skeletons in the Closet

The Colbert Report	Mon - Thurs 11:30pm / 10:30c
www.colbertnation.com
Colbert Report Full Episodes Political Humor U.S. Speedskating

Has Klauser Lost His Influence with Klauser?

Back in May I asked if former GOP big-wig Jim Klauser has lost his influence with the ever extreme Republican Party of Wisconsin. I asked the question because it seemed that the tea bagger types that increasingly control the RPW were not only ignoring his chosen candidate for governor but lobbing all sorts of insults at him in the process. But if recent right wing rumors are true, the new question should be whether Jim Klauser has now officially lost his influence with Jim Klauser.

The same right wing Walker groupies that were hating on Klauser for backing Mark Neumann, are now cheering the rumor that he is now removing his support from the very candidate he may have actually recruited. I have heard that Mark Neumann is not the easiest guy to work with and I know that his campaign has made some pretty dumb mistakes already, but is Klauser really flip-flopping on this? Word on the street is that he doesn't really like Scott Walker and that he was very much involved in finding an alternative to him. Whether that is completely accurate or not, we do know that he went on his very own media blitz for Neumann just before Walker's anticlimactic "special announcement".

If this is completely legit then maybe some introductions are in order: Teabaggers, allow me to re-introduce you to Jim Klauser. Jim, this is your new Republican Party. Now you may want to pick up that "Obama is the Anti-Christ" sign to make a better second impression.

Slippery Scott Doesn’t Want a Study

So Scott Walker vetoed a proposal to simply study the idea of treating Milwaukee County workers equally? From a totally cynical and hyper-political point of view (we are talking about Slippery Scott here) everyone understands exactly what he is doing. Both he and his various yes men have been trying to kill the idea based on their imagined figure of the benefits costing $4 million. An actual study on the subject would most likely confirm that they pulled that purposefully over bloated figure right out of nowhere. Then, heaven forbid, Walker may have to actually stand by his real reasoning for his actions.

As we already know, the City of Milwaukee decided 7 years ago to treat all of their worker's families equally. Seven years later, the city only expects equality to cost about $200,000 (if you really want to put a price tag on it). If the board overrides Walker's veto of the study, it will likely force him to confirm what we already know. His veto has nothing to do with numbers or financial matters at all and has everything to do with appealing to the right wing fringe dwellers and homophobes that make up too much of his base. A study would just prove their opposition is really about bigotry and Walker's is really about rank political maneuvering. I'm not sure that this veto came because Walker himself is a bigot, because frankly I am not sure that he really believes in anything other than advancing his own political career.

If this is really about the financial impact of benefits and not about anti-gay bigotry then why doesn't Walker and Company lead by example? Why don't they take their own families out of the Milwaukee County benefits system? Taxpayers would save money wouldn't they? That is the alleged goal isn't it? The last thing that we need in this kind of economy is offering more benefits to career politicians, isn't that right Scott? So lead by example and forgo the taxpayer funded benefits that you enjoy. Or do you think that you are just a little bit better than everyone else and their families? If you do, I wish that you would just get it over with and say it already.

Obviously I don't expect Walker to give back his own benefits for at least two reasons: 1. He apparently thinks that he should be treated better than the average county employee and 2. This veto is not about finances at all, it is totally about Slippery Scott's endless political calculations and endeavors.

UPDATE: It looks like issuing anti-gay vetoes is all the rage. Now a sitting governor has issued a veto against "being gay dead".

Slippery Scott Selling Snake Oil

In their reaction to Milwaukee Mayor Tom Barrett's announcement for governor, the Walker campaign responded with a little juvenile alliteration. I decided that two can play at that game, so I'm giving some alliteration right back. Naturally I think that mine is of a much higher quality because it doesn't just focus on one issue but goes to the (hollow) core of Slippery Scott's campaign.

Slippery Scott

If you are the average teabagging Republican that hates the Reinvestment and Recovery Act (federal stimulus), don't ask Slippery Scott what he really thinks about it. One minute he may tell you why he is saying "no thanks" to stimulus money and the next minute you will find him basing most of his budget on it. This is only one example of Slippery Scott trying to be on all sides of every issue. You could also look at his various positions on economic development and creative ways to bring jobs to the region. The list goes on and on and you simply can't keep up with the many competing positions of Slippery Scott.

Slippery Scott on Spending

Scott Walker stands before the right wing fringe and rails against big government and spending. He has the gall to do this even though spending in his own proposed budgets over the years have increased some 35%. Just from last year to this year Walker proposes over 6% in additional spending which is more than twice the rate of inflation! A good portion of that increased spending happens because of him frontloading three years of borrowing into one year.

Slippery Scott on Taxes

Walker and company constantly trots out the same tired rhetoric about tax cuts being a silver bullet for everything. If that really is his actual position then why all of the hate for the federal stimulus which includes the biggest tax cut in history? Does Walker have a problem with those tax cuts for some reason? Are those tax cuts a little too targeted to working people for Slippery Scott's tastes?

While we are talking about taxes, you simply can't ignore the fact that while Walker rails against them on the stump, his own budgets over time have proposed an 18 percent increase in property taxes. Even for those Walker groupies that don't want to look at his whole record in this way, Slippery Scott is playing a shell game when you look at it from year to year. One year he fights tooth and nail against what ends up being the adopted budget (and it's tax levy increase) but the very next year he uses that very same figure as his starting point for his next budget. If he really thought that the dreaded figure was so bad the previous year, then why is he using it as his starting point this year? A very slippery shell game indeed.

Stopping Slippery Scott as a Sport

I would like to conclude with a proposed sport, particularly for the true believer teabagging types. Go ahead, try to pin Slippery Scott down. If you really are a true hater of the federal stimulus, then ask him if he is for it or against it. If he says (or more likely suggests) that he is against it, then ask him why he is relying so heavily on it in his most current proposed budget? If you really hate "big government" and you think that we should not spend one more single dime, then ask him why each of his budgets increased spending. If you are a CRG member and you really fought hard with him last year against the county board's adopted budget, then ask him why he is now using those same numbers as his starting point for his budget this year? What the hell were you fighting so hard for last year if he is going to use that same number this year?

My guess is that if you really try to pursue these questions and really try to get a real answer, you will soon discover what so many of us already know. Slippery Scott is simply trying to sell you snake oil. Now how is that for some juvenille alliteration?

Timeout: Brandon Jennings

This blog is almost totally about politics but I had to share this video of Milwaukee Bucks rookie sensation Brandon Jennings. He scored 55 points last night against Golden State. This accomplishment is even more amazing when you consider that he didn't score at all in the first quarter. In the process he broke a Bucks rookie scoring record (previously held by Kareem Abdul-Jabbar) and became the youngest player to score 50 points in a game (previously held by LeBron James).