Tax Shifts Provide Little Hope for Taxpayers

Lasee’s Notes

Here we go again.

Just a few short years ago, the Governor’s special committee on school finance floated the idea of expanding the sales tax to help fund schools. At that time 60% of the people in the state opposed the idea because they realized that this isn’t really about property tax relief. It’s just another way to get more money from all of us.

Less than two weeks after the Democrats took over control of the State Senate, Sen. John Erpenbach (Democrat from Madison) is expected to unveil a proposal this week that will increase sales taxes by nearly $4 billion ($4,000,000,000). Erpenbach’s plan will revoke most current sales tax exemptions on goods and services except those that are, in his words, “necessities of life.” He wants to use that money to pay for schools and take schools off property taxes.

According to Erpenbach, those necessities that will NOT be taxed are food, prescription drugs, health care services, and agricultural products.

Everything else from haircuts to dog grooming could be taxed under Erpenbach’s proposal. That includes gas and heating fuels, attorney fees, computer services, dance lessons, and even admission to high school sporting events. All of these things could be taxed if Erpenbach has his way. As a result, we would all pay more for the goods and services we purchase. In return we might pay a little less in property taxes.

Erpenbach’s plan is NOT tax relief. At best it is a tax shift. At worst (the most likely scenario) it is a TAX INCREASE.

To put this in perspective let’s say you or someone you know gets a divorce. Under our current system, the legal fees you pay your attorneys are not taxed. Neither is the fee you will likely pay an accountant to figure out your finances, the moving company you pay to move your stuff, or the realtor’s fee you pay to sell your house. Under Erpenbach’s plan you will pay 5% (5.5% in most counties) more for all of these services. In situations like this that extra five percent could cost thousands of extra dollars. In addition to being “nickeled and dimed” everyday with every purchase, with every service.

When our government forces us to pay taxes for a service or a product that we currently don’t pay taxes on, it is a tax increase. Will we really lower another tax by the same amount?

That’s the problem we need to fix. Unfortunately, without a constitutional constraint (the Taxpayer Bill of Rights) there is no way for the taxpayers of this state to trust their elected officials to fix our spending and taxing epidemic.

My answer is NOT sending more and more and more of our money to the government.
We need to prevent our government from freely reaching into our pockets and taking more without asking. And we also need to let our economy grow free of government intrusion, excessive taxation, and over regulation. Then and only then will we, the taxpayers, have any control over how much of OUR money government spends.

The question is where does Governor Doyle stand on all of this? He did NOT support the Democrats H.O.P.E plan last session that would have increased sales taxes to lower property taxes. Now that he has been elected for another term will he take the same stand?

Another question that we need to ask about this proposal is: what will the effect be on local control? Under our current system if a school wants more money they have to ask their taxpayers first before they offer another French class, build a new school or add more personnel. The point is that the taxpayers have the final say.

Under Erpenbach’s proposal will the Department of Public Instruction or another government agency be given that power? So every time a school needs more of our money will they have to call Madison and beg? Our current referendum system is working (as I’ve outlined in past columns). Do you really want to give our local control of schools and school budgets to a state agency? Under Senator Erpenbach’s proposal will we end up with one large school district for the whole state controlled by Madison?
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Lasee’s Notes is a weekly column by Representative Frank Lasee, 2nd Assembly District, covering events in the Legislature and statewide.

Wisconsin's Deer Hunt -- an Experience in Responsible Gun Ownership

Lasee’s Notes

Nearly 700,000 men, women, and children (12 and older) will don their blaze orange and take to Wisconsin’s outdoors with gun in hand for the annual deer hunt.

That means there will be nearly six times as many guns in our woods, forests, and fields this weekend as there are in the hands of our troops in Iraq (roughly 700,000 hunters compared to 140,000 troops).

The greatest part is that even with hundreds of thousands of guns in the woods, Wisconsin’s outdoors will still be a safe place to be (unless you are a deer). In fact, last year there were only 14 hunting related accidents (3 fatalities) during the entire 9 day gun deer season. That’s a little more than 2 accidents per 100,000 hunters and less than 0.2 fatalities per 100,000.

Why is Wisconsin a safe place to hunt?

There aren’t many hunting fatalities and accidents in Wisconsin because hunters accept the responsibility that comes with carrying a weapon into the woods. For the most part, these people are conscientious, safe, and well-trained in the proper use of a firearm. And for generations they have passed this tradition and the responsibility that comes along with it onto their children and their children’s children.

We also have one of the largest volunteer run hunter’s safety and training courses in the nation. In fact, we require any person born after 1973 to take the class before they can purchase a license. This especially helps those kids that don’t have a family member to introduce them to the outdoors get involved and to be safe.

Our safe hunt annoys gun-control groups that want to limit our Second Amendment rights. Every year when Wisconsin hunters take to the woods and have very few gun related accidents, it takes away from their push to outlaw guns.

As sportsmen and women we cannot rest on our laurels. We need to continue to find new ways to get our youth involved in the outdoors to protect our hunting heritage and the economic impact it has in our state.

Hunting is big business in Wisconsin. Our sporting heritage fuels a large part of the economy. Wisconsin deer hunters spend on average about $1,500 each season on gear, gas, eating, licenses, lodging and other costs associated with the annual hunt.
That’s more than a $1 billion dollar boost for our economy every hunting season.

If you are one of the 700,000 members of the “Blaze Orange Army” heading to the woods on Saturday morning cherish the memories that each new season brings and remember to take a young person hunting with you next time. They are the future and we need to keep them involved for the sake of our hunting heritage and the economic boost it brings with it.

Most importantly – be safe, happy hunting, and good luck!
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Lasee’s Notes is a weekly column by Representative Frank Lasee, 2nd Assembly District, covering events in the Legislature and statewide.

Budget Looney Toons.

What's up, Doc? CEO Bug's wags at Alderman Fudd and Supervisor Porky, brandishing his carrot like Gracho Marx's cigar. The he drops into Edward G. Robinson. "Now see here, you earmarks. We tossed you guys out, see. We gave you the big n-O. What part of N-O don't you get, see?"

Fudd, chuckling bashfully, whispers, "Welw, you see, Mistew Bugs, we awways thwow the Executive's budgets back with ouwr changes. We can't wubbew stamp 'em or the votews would think we wewen't doing ouwr job's."

It seems like forever since we have seen reasonable spending in a [Brown] County budget. Actually, it's been only a couple of years, but I'm speaking historically. Exec. Kelso seems to understand better than her predecessors that folks have been pinched in the pocketbook for so long, a 2.2% levy hike sounds like Heaven.

Don't get me wrong. A 2.2% levy hike is perhaps the absolute best anyone can do, given political realities. But isn't anyone else dreaming of a white Christmas, so to speak, when a freeze is really a freeze? When the levy is actually frozen, not the rate of levy grawth? When hell freezes over?

Seems like mostly good things are in order, perhaps with a request for candor's sake, that politicians stop touting levy RATE decreases, which means precisely nothing. Levy rate drops have been a curtain for may county/city Wiz to hide behind.

While it is clear that the County Exec. and the [Green Bay] Mayor are not hiding behind that curtain, they have done the REAL THING, slowed the underlying levy growth. It seems to have taken a state mandate to do it. This is a chance for our top civil servants to go Madison one better and beat the statutory "freeze." They have got to turn back Fudd and Porky, who have not held the line on spending, and apply traditional political chicanery of using ever-rising property values to heroically blather about holding down the lavy rate.

The politics of budgets is a cartoon of polemic distortion, Foghorn Leghorn struttin' 'round the barnyard, "AH say, ah say, son, who's takin' care of our beloved civil servants while the taxpayers are having their dues suspended? Ah say, what'll happen to all o' the and the salt of the earth folks they serve? The sky is fallin', son! I tell ya, run for the hills!"

Well over 40% of the entire budget goes to Human Services. The salt of the earth will be cared for, as well as the salt of the road. Most of that is state mandated. We couldn't cut them even if we wanted.

If you're sick of the Budget Looney Toons because they're just not funny, call your city councilman or county supervisor and them if they signed the no new taxes pledge of if they vant to raise your taxes now. The 2007 Budgets are holding the line on spending, below growth plus inflation. See http://www.co.brown.wi.us/ for entire script.

Fellow taxpayers, the fur has yet to fly on unfunded pensions and benfits. If we don't have civil servants willing to barter with the proverbial incumbents, Fudd and Porky, the sky will fall indeed. We don't want to make national news, like Florence School District a while back, being the first city to be forced into bankruptcy, or worse, state control. We're so far under that thumb already, we've got the imprint on our wallets.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Richard Parins, President Brown County Taxpayers Association

High Taxes Weren't Always a Problem

Lasee’s Notes

Today, many of us agree that high taxes are a problem in Wisconsin. Our taxes are chasing many of our best and brightest out. It also is making it difficult to get the best and brightest from elsewhere to come here, making it difficult for businesses to create jobs and to stay here. (A recent study from the Tax Foundation that ranked Wisconsin the 12th worst state for business taxes).

Many state employers are competing with businesses in other states and nations that have lower taxes and more favorable regulations which enable them to produce their goods and services at a lower price. According to the Wisconsin Taxpayers Alliance, we have already lost nearly $5 billion in net worth from businesses and high net worth individuals moving out of state.

Wisconsin has NOT always been a high taxing state. In fact, in 1961 (45 years ago) Wisconsin’s taxes ranked 18th highest in the nation. And for many decades prior, our taxing rates were in the middle of the pack.

Following record increases in the sales and income tax in order to provide property tax relief -- the Badger state’s low taxing trend ended abruptly in 1964 when we became the highest taxed state in the nation. Wisconsin has ranked among the top ten taxing states nearly every year since. In fact, we have been among the top five most taxed states 25 out of the last 40 years.

Why have our taxes continued to climb? Our high tax rates can be directly attributed to decades of overspending, over taxing, and over borrowing by state and local governments.

The problem is that unlike most states which choose to spend more on one government program and less on another (more on higher education and less on prisons or more on Medicare and less on roads) in Wisconsin we spend more on nearly everything government related. If a state does it, then Wisconsin does it, and it is likely we spend more on it than most other states.

Instead of prioritizing our spending, we spend more on nearly every government service offered. And we offer more government services than most other states.

For instance, we are one of the top three states for rails and trails. I like them. But, do we have to lead the nation?

What causes this?

Government officials cause this. Many of them support the big government approach and that is why they serve in government. They love to do evermore with their government. And the more government we have, the more services offered, the more useful and necessary many of them feel.

That is why many people in government oppose the Taxpayer Bill of Rights. They know that if they had to ASK the voters permission before they increased spending beyond a reasonable level, built the next great public project or start the next program, the answer might be no. That is a word they do NOT want to hear. Then to top it off they can’t just go ahead and do it anyway.

What can we do?

There is hope. A recent poll from CNN found that a majority of Americans believe that our government is doing too much.

When asked about the role of government, 54% of respondents said that our government is “doing too many things that should be left to individuals and businesses.”

That is the problem we face in Wisconsin. Our government is doing more than we can afford. Elected officials haven’t been able to change this. Perhaps it is time that our constitution does.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Lasee’s Notes is a weekly column by Representative Frank Lasee, 2nd Assembly District, covering events in the Legislature and statewide.

Who Pays for Healthcare Expansion?

Lasee’s Notes

Several county boards and municipal councils from La Crosse to Green Bay voted to place another advisory referendum question on Tuesday’s ballot. In addition to the numerous state political races, constitutional referendums, school referendums, and possibly a war referendum or two, voters in these areas will get to make another choice.

The question these local officials want to ask their voters is: “Should the Wisconsin Legislature pass a bill that will assure access to quality and affordable health care coverage for all Wisconsin individuals and families?”

On its face this question is a no-brainer. Who wouldn’t? Many of us would want our worries to disappear and our government to take care of our families. We must realize that no service our government provides is free.

When services are provided to people who do not have them now, the costs increase.Everything has a cost. And somebody has to pay for it. (I suppose that the government could just borrow for it, we have become quite good at that).

Expanding services to anyone who doesn’t have it requires taxpayers to foot the bill. Foot the bill for an enormous government program, with its own layer of bureaucracy, and another entitlement.

That includes those of us who are fortunate enough to have employer provided healthcare insurance, even if it is on a cost share basis. That includes those who pay for their own health insurance. Someone would be forced to pay more.

After getting wind of this in the paper, I sent letters to many of the local officials who voted to put the healthcare question on the ballot. I let them know that I think it’s a great to ask voters their opinion on issues, I suggested that they also ask the following questions:

• Should the Wisconsin Legislature pass a bill that will assure access to quality and affordable health care coverage for all Wisconsin individuals and families? Even if it requires tax increases?

• If the Legislature fails to implement this plan in the upcoming session should the municipality or county offer its own program? Even if it means increasing taxes for local residents?

As the old saying goes, “what’s good enough for the goose is good enough for the gander.” In other words, should the municipality or county step up to the plate and offer this benefit to their residents, even it means they will have to increase their local taxes to do so?

• Should all Wisconsin individuals and families be provided a free, high-quality lunch and dinner, delivered to either their place of work or to their home?

There are no free-lunches. And people know that increases in services are not free and someone has to pay (or borrow). Most likely once the government took over kitchen duty we wouldn’t get meals of our choice. We would get what ever is served.
For some they would be too hot and for others too cold.

Under a government run system, the timely access to quality healthcare that most of us currently enjoy could be in jeopardy. All we have to do is look to our neighbor to the North (Canada not the U.P.) to see how universal healthcare is faring.

According to the Fraser Institute an independent non-partisan think tank based in Canada, the average patient waits 17.7 weeks (over four months) for hospital treatment. Imagine having to wait over four months to get the care that you need.

In fact, in a recent ruling in reference to the country’s socialized healthcare program, the Supreme Court of Canada said, “waiting lists for healthcare services have resulted in deaths, have increased the length of time that patients have to be in pain and have impaired patents’ ability to enjoy a real quality of life.”

To make quality healthcare more affordable we need to make it more competitive. More like car, homeowners or life insurance. Increasing competition, information and allowing individuals to control their own healthcare destiny will improve our system and lower costs for most. We have proven tools like health savings accounts. We are allowing businesses and individuals to pool their resources and combine their buying power in order to purchase quality healthcare at a more manageable cost.

We must be very careful of what we ask for because we just might get it.

I wonder why none of these local governments are asking if they and the state should have an allowable government spending growth level that would require government officials to ask voters first before they spend more or raise taxes. Sometimes I think these same people who are asking about universal health care avoid other issues that they find less in common with their beliefs.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Lasee’s Notes is a weekly column by Representative Frank Lasee, 2nd Assembly District, covering events in the Legislature and statewide.