Gay Marriage Debate Exposes Bigger Problem with Government in General

Government, as currently set up in the United States, can not reward one group without punishing others. This is as much an undeniable truth as the fact that the Earth is round. Yet, no one wants to acknowledge this.

Supporters and opponents of gay marriage jammed a public hearing before the Senate and Assembly judiciary committees Tuesday morning to sound off. So many people flocked to the State Capitol that legislative pages had to herd them into two overflow rooms.

At stake is a constitutional amendment in Wisconsin banning same-sex marriage and civil unions.

Currently Wisconsin has no official state definition of marriage but state supreme court ruling and Attorney General opinion held that only heterosexual marriages are legal. In 2003 a statute to establish a state definition of marriage was approved by the Legislature but vetoed by Jim Doyle. This led the constitutional amendment being advanced.

Supporters say that the traditional monogamous husband-wife family is the bedrock of society. That it is in the best interest of children to be raised by their biological parents as a loving couple. That failure to protect the sanctity of marriage will lead to the erosion of other cultural norms and morals until the nation becomes a giant Sodom and Gomorrah.

It is impossible to disagree with the their intents. What one has to disagree with is the vehicle used to advance their cause. You can not legislate values and morality.

If they want to save the sanctity and dignity of marriage they need to also do something about wedding of actors, athletes, rock stars, and models. It's only a matter of time till we see Dennis Rodman and J Lo seeking a divorce.

Government can't legislate an end to married men having a mistress, government can't prevent single women from getting pregnant, government can't end gay men from shaking-up unless they want to crack down on all the college dorms and marine barracks where young men share common sleeping quarters.

Government can not force people into monogamous male-female couples. This isn't the goal of the pro-traditional marriage supporters (for lack of a better term). What they want to do is slow, stop or reverse advancement's made by gay rights advocates.

What gay right group's say they want is the same rights as a couple that heterosexual couples have when they marry. This is the

Faulk Right to Run

Dane County Executive Kathy Faulk joined the race for Wisconsin Attorney General and you should support her decision. The fact that Democrats are criticizing her proves she belongs in the race. The fact that Republicans are criticizing her proves she has a real chance of winning.

Democrats are criticizing her decision to run against Democrat incumbent Peg Lautenschlager. They claim that since campaign laws are made to protect incumbents that a challenger has little chance of winning. This means all the challenger does is weaken the incumbent by increasing the amount of mud thrown at them and the amount of money they have to spend to buy votes.

Republicans also are quick to destroy anyone who would challenge a partisan incumbent. Democrats claim to represent the blue class worker but they never let anyone point out that it is their own policies which force factories to move outside our borders. Republicans claim to be for lower taxes and less government but Mark Green will endorse a tax and spend liberal like John Guard or a hopelessly incompetent Scott McCollum as long as they are Republicans who can help him in obsessive goal of greater and greater power.

Republicans are criticizing Kathy Faulk as being too liberal and outside the mainstream. Problem is she isn't running to be make law but to enforce it. Why is Republican Paul Bucher concerned more concerned about political leanings than qualifications and abilities? Could it be that Paul is the one who's political views should be examined? This whole mess makes the case for making Attorney General a nonpartisan position with an open primary.

We should stand by those who are willing to say that just because someone is of my party doesn't mean that they are entitled to return to the job they are currently not doing. I wish Faulk could be made out to be a martyr, but she does have a County Exec job to fall back on if she were to lose. One also has to wonder how much of her campaign is her own desire to be on a larger stage than just that of Dane County?

Faulk's candidacy should be accepted as a win for Democrats who want to restore honor to the office and sweep the remains of state scandals out of their party. Anyone who chooses to run for public office should be embraced as a win for the electoral process. People should be encouraged to become involved in our political process. Democrats and Republicans should be shunned as long as they engage in discouraging people from running for office.

TABOR in Colorado Works

In Colorado, the people have spoken. Thanks to the Taxpayer Bill of Rights (TABOR). Without TABOR, the people never would have been asked.

On Tuesday, the state of Colorado held two statewide referendums. One of them failed: Referendum D, which asked for permission to borrow and spend up to $2.1 billion immediately.

The other referendum passed. Referendum C asked for permission to spend an estimated $3.7 billion in projected tax surpluses over the next five years. Tax collections above the revenue limit. A limit Colorado citizens enjoy because of TABOR.

Those are surpluses they expect to have, because TABOR’s spending growth limits are still in place, still working just as they’re supposed to. Had the voters said no, the state government would have sent those surpluses back to the taxpayers. TABOR works, contrary to what the left is saying.

That Referendum C passed means TABOR works. Because of TABOR, politicians have to ask their citizens – the people, whom our government is supposed to serve – for more money through referendums from time to time.

The lefty spin goes even further: some liberal outlets are claiming that TABOR has been “suspended” or even repealed.

Nothing could be further from the truth. Voters in Colorado didn’t repeal or suspend TABOR. They didn’t change it. They did not change or amend their Constitution. They didn’t raise any tax rates (in fact, Referendum C lowers income tax rates a little – those clever politicians!).

They simply said “no” to borrowing, and “yes” to letting the state keep and spend the extra tax money they collect.

TABOR limits the growth of government spending to the rates of inflation plus population. Any tax revenue the government receives in excess of this limit is surplus – they have to send it back to the taxpayers, unless they get permission to keep and spend it, instead.

Before TABOR, Colorado’s government would simply have kept and spent that money without asking their voters – the people they’re supposed to serve – for permission. They also would have likely raised taxes and borrowed more, because the politicians didn’t have to ask. That’s the system we have in Wisconsin right now.

In Colorado, thanks to TABOR, the people have the final say. The government there is limited – they can grow so fast, but not faster unless they get express permission from their voters to do so.

The people in Colorado have more say and control over their government than we in Wisconsin do. I want our citizens to have these same rights. The right to be asked before our government reaches deeper into our pockets.

Don’t you?

---------------------------------------------------------------------
Lasee’s Notes is a weekly column by Representative Frank Lasee, 2nd Assembly District, covering events in the Legislature and statewide

Wisconsin inches closer to tax revolt

Wisconsin State legislators talke like the budget for 2005-07 and property tax freeze show that they are taking action to correct the tax hell that is Wixconsin. The problem is that the property tax freeze highlights the vert actions state legislators should be enacting.

The Legislature has thrust a 2 percent cap on local government tax collections over the previous year, in the $52.9 billion budget Gov. Jim Doyle signed into law. According to polititicians a 2 percent increase is a “freeze” on spending. The outcome of this cap is predictable: people will lash out at City Hall. That will happen because City Hall has to limit it's growth and not being able to increase spending at a double digit rates is a cut according to politicians. Government can not cut employee costs becouse these public servants are of such education and income that they will be unable to find a way to meet all their expenses if they did not have pay and benefit packages well above the states median income. Since our village councils can't anger the burocrats - bThey actually vote!! - cuts will have to come in services.

When this happens don’t lash out at City Hall. These local problems were created by state government through the 2005-07 budget. I know it. I'm telling you so you know it.

This budget is a politican’s perfect plan: look like you’re tough on taxes but make somebody else take the pain.

It’s like a multiple choice test where this is the question:

Which tax cut hurts state government the least and makes legislators look best?
A. Property Tax
B. Income Tax
C. Gas Tax
D. Sales Tax

Answer: A.

Why A?
A property tax bill concerns four main categories: school taxes, city taxes, county taxes and technical college district taxes. State government controls income taxes, gas taxes, state sales taxes and other fees and charges.

A cap on the property tax bill affects local governments. That cap doesn’t change any of the taxes controlled by the state. It’s the state making local government to do the dirty work of cutting taxes. See the trick? It’s all legal.
But our legislators forgot something. People like caps on their income taxes. People like caps on the gas tax, too. People would really love to see the tax's they pay the state cut.

It's time for a real tax revolt in Wisconsin. We need to demand that the state government enact caps like they propose for villages.

And there’s plenty of fat to cut. A state that can break voter trust and spend five years of gas tax increases (about $150 million) on non-highway things during 2005-07 can take some cuts. A state that can increase state debt by giving legislators a 4 percent salary raise effective in 2007 can take some cuts.

Tax reform won't happen in Wisconsin when more voters become informed. Many voters already are informed, these are bureaucrats voting to keep their benifits, big business owners getting huge contracts and corporate welefare handouts.

We need more people to get informed. More people who need to know that Doyle, Guard, Democrat, Republican, none are looking out for them. More people need the information. They also need to demand that they enact true cuts, not political cuts but actual cuts in the pork. They need to then vote out those who refuse to quit the current drunken spending spree this state is on. They nee to find people to replace them who are not part of the system. Reject anyone who gives the standard vote for me becouse I'm a loyal Republican/Democrat. Vote for the independent becouse short of moving this is the only alternative to to the liberal tax and spend Republicrat alliemce.