It’s that time of year again, when “state of the _____” speeches make the news and various elected officials talk about challenges and goals for the coming year.  Scott Walker delivered his “state of the county” speech today, as covered by this article in the Journal Sentinel.  Setting aside  the tone of the article (which focuses principally on whether Walker will run for governor instead of what he actually said) and looking at Walker’s proposals we see what will, unfortunately, almost certainly be a study in contrasts from what is proposed by Governor Doyle and the Wisconsin legislature.

Walker proposes tax policies, including a sales tax holiday and tax cuts for businesses, that would support economic recovery by giving taxpayers an incentive to spend and businesses greater flexibility to hire.  There is little doubt that Governor Doyle will not be open to such proposals when he gives his budget message tomorrow.  The governor has announced that Wisconsin will receive $3.5 billion of the federal “stimulus” money. It will be interesting to see whether our state representatives will face the same “pass this now or catastrophe will follow” rhetoric from Governor Doyle on the state budget as our federal representatives received from President Obama on the federal bill last week.  Where both state and federal budgets incorporate spending with reckless abandon, there is a chance for state and federal representatives advocating fiscal responsibility to take a stand and alert the public to the problems in each.

The Merriam-Webster’s Online Dictionary defines “could” as “suggesting less certainty.”  Keep that in mind.

U.S. Senators Herb Kohl and Russ Feingold issued a press release last Friday which touted their efforts to aid Wisconsinites by expanding a tax credit in the “economic recovery package” for purchasers of new cars and light trucks to also include motorcycles. In doing so, they suggest, Harley-Davidson sales will be boosted and jobs retained thereby helping Wisconsin workers. Well, not exactly.

The language used is more timid such as the press release subtitle which states the senators’ “request could (my emphasis) help motorcycle manufacturers” and a later quote from Senator Feingold indicating his pleasure that he “was able to help expand this tax credit to potentially (again, my emphasis) help Wisconsin workers.” Perhaps this is simply an effort to temper expectations or it might be recognition that incentives for consumers to purchase luxury goods right now may not be very effective. If consumers are hesitant to buy a new car due to their own financial or employment situation, an inability to secure an auto loan, or concern over an automaker’s viability, I find it unlikely that a new Harley-Davidson (or any other motorcycle) is at the top of their list. But I suppose I could be wrong and the senators could be right.

On Saturday, the Washington Post reported the results of an audit of highway projects conducted by U.S. Department of Transportation’s inspector general’s office. Don’t let that discourage you though; remember the government will be watching the stimuli dollars like a (fiscal?) hawk.

In this era of ascribing evil motives to anyone employed in the finacial sector, I was glad to discover this weekend that someone else has found the marketing and plot of “The International” just plain silly. Be sure to listen to the NPR interview.

That was one of the many interesting points made by Reince Priebus, state chairman of the Wisconsin GOP, who was featured today in a great article in the JS about the future of the Republican Party.

He talks about the need to reach out to young conservatives, his exciting experience helping electing former Maryland Lt. Gov. Michael Steele Chairman of the RNC, the state GOP’s plans to retake the state Senate, and the vulnerability of Gov. Doyle heading into 2010, among other things.

A past Happy Hour speaker, those of you who have had the opportunity to meet Reince know that he is an energetic leader with great ideas.  Wisconsin is lucky to have a conservative state GOP chairman who both understands the challenges the Party faces and at the same time realizes that there is an opportunity to reach out to those voters searching for conservative alternatives to “tax and spend” Democrats, both at the state and national level.

It’s Friday, so here’s a little entertainment and humor to kick off your weekend.

Mathematicians Discover Largest Number (& Obama Commemorates Fall of Communism)

The People’s Stimulus

Thanks to Don Boudreaux and Russell Roberts of cafehayek.com fame for finding these gems.

I was reading the Imprimis last night and a quote really caught my eye.  As the national debate centers around the “stimulus” package, it might do everyone some good to take a step back and reflect upon the events surrounding the Great Depression and FDR’s New Deal.  After six years of infusing huge sums of federal money into the economy via the Works Progress Administration, the Tennessee Valley Authority and the Civilian Conservation Corps, among others, FDR’s Secretary of the Treasury Henry Morgenthau had this to say:

“We have tried spending money, we are spending more than we have ever spent before and it does not work . . . We have never made good on our promises . . . I say after eight years of this Administration we have just as much unemployment as when we started . . . And an enormous debt to boot!”

That was May 1939.  The unemployment rate hovered around 20%.  Do we really want to repeat the same mistakes?

As Democrats have bickered over whether to spend stimulus money on condoms or on unneeded school buildings, one organization has stood up for common sense and economic freedom–Americans for Prosperity.  Be sure to check out their website.

AFP will have a Defending the American Dream summit on March 7, 2009 at the Midwest Express Center.  A number of CYPer’s will be there, and the speaker list looks awesome, including:

Paul Ryan,
U.S. Congressman

Steve Moore,
Wall Street Journal

Herman Cain,
The New Voice

Fred Kelly Grant,
Stewards of the Range

Scott Walker

When it comes to Scott, the rumors regarding his run for governor are anything but whispers.  Scott made a run in 2006 but eventually stepped aside to clear the way for Mark Green to take on Gov. Doyle, in the process winning the respect of many outside SE Wisconsin.  It was a classy move and one that certainly allowed Mark to increase his fundraising capabilities and focus his political attacks on Gov. Doyle. 

Now many are convinced it is Scott’s time.  With his record as County Executive, it is hard to argue Scott is not ready to make tough decisions at the state level.

Scott began his public career by winning a special election to the state Assembly in 1993.  He served in the Assembly until 2002, when he won another special election to serve as Milwaukee County Executive.  He won reelection in the spring of 2004 with 57% of the vote and in the spring of 2008 with 59% of the vote.  Those are staggering numbers for a conservative in Milwaukee County.  During his time as County Executive, Scott has repeatedly stood up to liberal county supervisors,  a hostile JS editorial board, and even Gov. Doyle, who takes every opportunity to weaken his potential political opponent in 2010.

While there are certainly many qualified potential GOP candidates for governor in 2010 (see Neumann, Van Hollen, Graber), Scott clearly has established a statewide network of supporters who have monitored his success in Milwaukee County. 

A tough primary challenge would present the same problems that were on display in 2006.  Assuming he seeks another term, Gov. Doyle will come into the election with a huge cash-on-hand advantage.  Scott’s challenge throughout 2009 will be to raise adequate funds to (a) send a message to potential primary opponents that he is the conservative candidate with statewide support and (b) position himself to take on the Wisconsin political machine that is Jim Doyle.

The honeymoon of the Obama presidency is now likely over.   Charles Krauthammer, on Friday, outlined the missteps.  He nominated people who did not pay their taxes; Tom Daschle didn’t pay his taxes on the influence-peddling that Obama was supposed to stop.

But Krauthammer is right to focus on the stimulus bill as a political shenanigan.  A small amount of it is actual stimulus that can be expected to jumpstart the economy.  Of the rest, what is not special interest pork (a sizable amount) is the down payment on the Obama fiscal agenda.  That Obama gets to sent the agenda is fine, but obviously not without full Congressional review and not under the guise of a crisis.  What is most alarming is that Obama has so quickly shifted rhetoric from ‘hope’ to ‘fear’, now claiming that without passage, the U.S. will sink far deeper into recession. 

In any case, Milwaukee made the article (as the posterchild for pork):

It’s not just pages and pages of special-interest tax breaks, giveaways and protections, one of which would set off a ruinous Smoot-Hawley trade war. It’s not just the waste, such as the $88.6 million for new construction for Milwaukee Public Schools, which, reports the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, have shrinking enrollment, 15 vacant schools and, quite logically, no plans for new construction.

We should all be proud.

I found this article in the National Review to be a good read. It’s no secret that the conservative movement, and more specifically the Republican Party, faces significant challenges these days.  With the hemorrhaging of federal and state seats over the last two election cycles, a new strategy is clearly necessary.

I believe that Michael Steele, who was elected as chair of the RNC last Friday, was and is the best choice to address these challenges, particularly the fact that certain demographics, most notably African Americans, have been de facto Democratic party locks for at least the last forty years.  However, the reason Steele is the best choice for the position has nothing to do with the fact that he is the first African American elected as party chair. Rather, he brings the much-needed experience of campaigning-and winning-as a conservative in a traditionally “deep blue” area of the country. Maryland is traditionally a Democratic party stronghold, but Steele won election as Lieutenant Governor there in 2002.  The 2006 and 2008 election results make clear that conservatives will not win back power in the federal government simply by defending “red” territory.  Steele’s experience and leadership could make a major difference going forward as conservatives recover and look forward to the 2010 elections.

In case you missed it, Rep. Paul Ryan appeared on UpFront with Mike Gousha yesterday morning. He discussed his concerns regarding the stimulus plan recently passed by the House. You can read more about his concerns and an alternative plan he supported in a recent press release from his office along with an Op-Ed in the Racine Journal Times.

In case you also missed it, Governor Doyle was Mike Gousha’s guest last Sunday in a two-part series. I was particularly struck by a comment the governor made – for its obvious sincerity – in which he stated he was “gonna have to make a lot of really hard decisions.” While he was specifically referring to potential state spending cuts, I couldn’t help but be surprised by the notion that the governor seemed surprised at the prospect of actually having to make tough decisions.

If you missed both of those conversations, you may have also missed yesterday’s roundtable on This Week with George Stephanopoulos. Rep. Barney Frank of Massachusetts, Chairman of the Financial Services Committee, suggested that the U.S. has suffered from an “extremism” in the recent past by “relying only on private sector activity and having too little government.” You read that right. Government (federal, state, and local) is apparently providing little or no services and our multi-trillion dollar federal budget is apparently “too little” to provide the services we need. As remarkable as those statements might seem, Rep. Frank’s admission that “it’s possible to have too much government” was even more surprising. If only George had followed that up by inquiring how much “too much” is.

FedEx founder and CEO, Fred Smith, expressed his fear that the “Buy American” clauses in the stimulus package would inhibit global trade and hurt Americans in the end. Rep. Frank responded by suggesting that until a stronger “social safety net” is in place, voters will continue to oppose free trade.  That seems to imply that while Rep. Frank understands the benefits of free trade and the dangers of protectionism, he finds even more compelling the fears of his constituents (no matter how irrational or unfounded) that globalization is harmful to Americans in the aggregate. Perhaps Rep. Frank is simply following the wishes of the “median voter” as described by Willam F. Shughart II in the following excerpt on public choice theory – if Frank is, then the case for free trade needs to be made more effectively to our citizenry.

Studying collective decision-making by committees, Duncan Black deduced what has since been called the median-voter theorem. If voters are fully informed, if their preferred outcomes can be arrayed along one dimension (e.g., left to right), if each voter has a single most-preferred outcome, and if decisions are made by simple majority rule, then the median voter will be decisive. Any proposal to the left or right of that point will be defeated by one that is closer to the median voter’s preferred outcome. Because extreme proposals lose to centrist proposals, candidates and parties in a two-party system will move to the center, and, as a result, their platforms and campaign promises will differ only slightly. Reversing 1964 presidential hopeful Barry Goldwater’s catchphrase, majority-rule elections will present voters with an echo, not a choice. If the foregoing assumptions hold, the median voter’s preferences also will determine the results of popular referenda. As a matter of fact, anticipating that immoderate proposals will be defeated, the designers of ballot initiatives will strive to adopt centrist language, in theory moving policy outcomes closer to the median voter’s ideal point than might be expected if decisions are instead made by politically self-interested representatives.