Everyone now knows the state is facing a large budget deficit heading into the next budget cycle.  The Legislature will, without question, pass some “revenue enhancers” (otherwise known as “tax increases”) to fill in some of the hole.

In making their case for higher taxes, Democrats in the majority will reach for the easiest tax increases they can find.  They’ll pick the low-hanging fruit, usually in the form of sales tax exemptions.  (A full list of exemptions can be found in chapter 77.54 of the state statutes.)  For instance, clay pigeons are exempt from sales taxes, as are dog haircuts.  So Democrats will give the public the impression that all we have to do is extend the sales tax to your puppy’s hairstylist, and presto! – budget problem solved.

Perhaps the most entertaining of these exemptions is the tax break for the purchase of bull semen.  That’s right – semen purchased for inseminating livestock is tax-free.  So it appears I’m going to stock up on bull semen before the Legislature starts taxing it and it gets too expensive.  This actually sounds like a pretty good deal for bulls around the state – with their seed in such high demand, they’ll start getting crateloads of adult bull materials delivered to their pens.  (Insert your own “beef stroganoff” joke here.)

Unfortunately, as one of my colleagues quipped, “this budget will not be solved on clay pigeons and bull semen alone.”  Each budget, the Wisconsin Department of Revenue issues its Summary of Tax Exemption Devices, which details how much each exemption saves consumers.  According to the DOR, the semen exemption shorted the state by $2.7 million in FY 06.  The clay pigeons exemption “cost” the state $200,000.  If legislators are looking to plug a chunk of the $5.4 billion budget hole by eliminating sales tax exemptions, they’re going to have to go after the big boys.

And what are the big ticket items?  Well, physicians and dental services are currently exempt, which saved consumers $495 million in 2006.  Eliminating this exemption makes health care more expensive for everyone in the state.  Food sales tax exemptions saved consumers $550 million.  The prescription drug plan cost the state $116 million.  Eliminate this exemption, and the senior groups might burn the capitol to the ground.  Sales of items to local school districts exempted $295 million – undo this exemption, and property taxpayers will have to pick up the tab for their school districts’ higher costs.

So while we can have fun nitpicking all the goofy tax exemptions within the code, the only substantive progress can be made by eliminating the really large exemptions.  And these exemptions are large for a reason – millions of people of modest means take advantage of them.  And that’s no bull.

Governor Doyle and legislative leaders tell us we have a $5 billion budget deficit, and that “tough choices” are going to have to be made.  Yet according to Doyle, none of those tough choices are going to involve reducing state spending in any meaningful way.  Instead, we’re going to see higher taxes on oil companies and hospitals, so we can get more “free” money from the federal government.  Not exactly a profile in courage.

What is truly amazing about this budget Kabuki theater we’re seeing at the Capitol is how the governor and legislators are acting as if they had nothing to do with the budget shortfall.  They pretty much say, “yeah, the economy is bad, and we’ll have to tighten our belts,” as if they bear no responsibility whatsoever for the current shabby financial state we’re in.

Imagine a bank robber going in and holding up a bank, and running off with a million dollars.  Then, imagine the same robber going in two years later and making off with two million dollars.  When the bank finally has to close, the robber holds a press conference blaming the whole thing on the bad economy.  The only thing the governor and legislature are missing are the ski masks.

Take a look at this Legislative Fiscal Bureau document.  On page 7, it details the structural deficit left to taxpayers by the most recent budget adjustment bill, passed earlier this year.  According to the Fiscal Bureau, the budget left a $751 million hole in fiscal year 2010 and an $883 million hole in 2011.  That adds up to a $1.6 billion budget deficit even before the housing market sunk the economy.

Page 8 continues to add up the state’s liabilities.  The $1.6 billion number above assumed a zero increase in school aids and medical assistance funds.  When these cost-to-continue commitments are considered, the budget hole balloons to $2.4 billion – before anyone even considered the current bad economy.  When the legislature passed the budget and the governor signed it back in May, they knew these numbers.  They also knew nobody would care.

But now, with the economy in a recession, sales and income tax receipts are dropping – which makes the deficit much larger.  And, as I demonstrated in a paper earlier this year, Wisconsin is completely caught with its pants down.  Our elected officials are the worst in the nation at planning for fiscal downturns.  We have virtually no rainy day fund and no minimum statutory balance to soften the blow when the economy goes bad.  Most states reserve between 5% and 10% of their general fund revenues to maintain programs when tax receipts fall.  But not Wisconsin, which holds less than 1% in reserve.  As a result, we’re driving our state’s economy on a flat tire – the axle is going to break in half, sending us careening into a ditch.

And you know whose fault that is?  It’s not the economy’s fault – it is Jim Doyle and the Legislature’s fault.  They have absolutely no one to blame but themselves.  In January of this year, I pegged the coming budget shortfall at $4.2 billion.  Months later, the Legislature purported to “fix” the budget hole, but in fact, they actually made things worse.  They can’t say they weren’t warned.

Given this shoddy record of fiscal management, it is amazing that they now stand before us, trying to convince taxpayers that they can “fix” this problem.  In fact, each budget they have passed has made things progressively worse.  Yet nobody in the legislature is willing to step forward and be a grown-up in this process.  The recession of 2001 apparently taught out legislators nothing – it’s going to be the taxpayers that learn the lesson.

Thursday night marked the premiere of the movie \”IOUSA,\” which is essentially being billed as \”The Inconvenient Truth\” for beancounters. Basically, the movie is an outgrowth of the Fiscal Wakeup Tour (which rolled through Milwaukee a few weeks ago), which makes tour stops around the country to warn people of the impending fiscal crisis the U.S. government faces.

Here\’s the trailer:

Being a bit of a budget wonk myself, I decided to go check it out. I headed over to the theater with my neighbor, who is comfortably rooted in the progressive wing of the Democratic party. (Although, oddly, we are almost identical on a lot of traditional parenting issues – calling parents \”Mr. and Mrs.,\” not wrapping children in body armor every time they hop on their bikes, etc.) The beauty of the movie, however, is that the message is bipartisan – despite the fact that we may have vastly different conclusions about how to fix the entitlement crisis.

Part of the appeal of the movie is that after tonight\’s showing only, the film\’s producers broadcasted a live roundtable discussion featuring many of the economic experts featured in the film. Unfortunately, this extra service cost us – it was only after I asked for my ticket at the counter that I realized it cost $12.50 to see. I thought it was more than a little ironic that it cost $12.50 (plus $9.25 for popcorn and a drink) to go see a movie that lectures me about being fiscally prudent.

As we walked into the theater, I was surprised – the place was packed, hardly a seat to be found. I had initially predicted that the viewership of a movie about government debt would make my public television appearances look like Ugly Betty by comparison. But it was actually pretty encouraging to see so many people willing to learn about government finance and the hole our entitlement programs will eventually put us in.

As I settled into my seat, I noticed a whole lot of white hair on the heads in front of me. This is relevant, because the upcoming entitlement crisis will likely never touch any of the old folks in the audience. It\’s the young people that should be most worried, yet \”Sisterhood of the Traveling Pants 2\” is out, so – can you really blame them?

I thought the movie was fairly ideologically balanced, although there certainly were points where it went out of its way to embarrass George W. Bush (many of them deserved.) For instance, they interview former Treasury Secretary Paul O\’Neill, who Bush appointed, then removed for disagreeing with him on tax policy. One would think the President has the right to have secretaries that fulfill their boss\’ vision. Yet, when interviewed, O\’Neill goes into detail about how Bush forced him to lie and say he was resigning, instead of just firing him outright. This happens in virtually every business, and isn\’t relevant to anything in any way, other that to make Bush look like a bad guy. It also means Paul O\’Neill is a weasel. But I digress.

Naturally, it being Madison, the crowd began to hoot, snicker, and hiss every time Bush\’s visage showed up on the screen. The lefty next to me honestly couldn\’t control himself. He actually gave Bush a double-middle finger when he showed up in the movie. What is it with these people that they can\’t sit and watch a movie without behaving like a six year-old?

As for the movie itself, it\’s pretty good. Could have used more nudity. Lots of charts.

The roundtable discussion following the movie, despite being a really cool idea, kind of dragged on a bit. At one point, Cato Institute chairman William Niskanen suggested raising the retirement age and privatizing a small portion of Social Security, which drew a rebuke from the obnoxious lefty sitting to my right. You would have thought someone slashed the tires of his Prius. But this brings up an important point – everyone is for fiscal responsibility and balanced budgets until it\’s time to be fiscally responsible or balance a budget. I mean, good grief – our Wisconsin Constitution requires it, and we can\’t even do it at the state level here.

The highlight of the roundtable was the fact that it was moderated by fiscal supervixen Becky Quick, of CNBC\’s \”Squawk Box.\” Sure, she may be reasonably ordinary by TV news standards, but after watching two hours of old guys and charts, her appearance felt like the Phoebe Cates pool scene in \”Fast Times at Ridgemont High.\” Here she is interviewing T. Boone Pickens:

Of course, if this movie is a big hit, we\’ll be better off as a nation. But even if people see the movie and understand its conclusions, I remain skeptical of what effect it will actually have. Of course, it\’s easy to tell people that they should \”hold their elected officials accountable\” and \”demand change.\” But the next time that actually happens might be the first.

For the most part, government and business are perceived as being in direct conflict with one another. Yet both generally have the same goal – maximizing their revenue. If you\’re a business, this is known as \”greed.\” If you\’re a government looking to pad salaries and benefits of your employees, it is known as \”compassion.\”

The connection between government and business runs much deeper than their mutual desire to vacuum out the contents of your wallet. Regular citizens often don\’t recognize the extent to which government is often dependent on business to swell their employees\’ nest eggs. In fact, governments heavily invest in private businesses, trying to make enough investment income to run more and more programs and fund increased post-employment benefits for their retired workers.

For example, the State of Wisconsin currently holds roughly $80 billion in the Wisconsin Retirement System, which funds health care and pension benefits for retirees. That\’s more than six times the amount the state collects in general fund (income, sales, business) taxes in any given year. And most of it is invested in the stock market, managed by the State of Wisconsin Investment Board. (Perhaps we should turn management of the portfolio over to State Senator Rob Cowles, who could double our state\’s earnings in a year by investing heavily in booty-related mutual funds.)

The State Investment Board is closely watched, and invests carefully – given the immense amount of resources at their disposal. In recent years, their investments have performed admirably.

But for other governments, things haven\’t gone so well. According to several Milwaukee Journal Sentinel reports, five school districts in Southeastern Wisconsin have seen the value of some of their recent investments drop by over $100 million. They claim they weren\’t fully briefed of the amount of risk they were taking on when they made the purchases, so they plan on filing a lawsuit to recoup their investment. Of course, it will be taxpayers who pay for the army of attorneys necessary to litigate such a lawsuit.

But as pointed out by the Journal Sentinel\’s initial watchdog report, none of these school districts hired an adviser before making investments in these risky funds (known as CDOs). One analyst from MorningStar, Inc. called the governments\’ investments \”reckless:\”

\”They require deep and skilled analysis to understand, and unless the municipality employs its own specialist with specific analytical capabilities, it should otherwise only hold such things if purchased for them by a professional asset manager,\” Eric Jacobson, a bond analyst for Morningstar Inc. in Chicago, said after reviewing the CDO prospectus. \”To buy an instrument of this type . . . without any special knowledge or ability, at the recommendation of a broker, is a very poor and arguably reckless decision.\”

In other words, school districts might have gotten a better deal by answering an e-mail offering a once in a lifetime Nigerian investment opportunity.

So here we have school districts making risky investments in, among other things, subprime mortgages, who now think they should be bailed out via lawsuit. And the only reason they can continue on with their legal action is because they have taxpayer money to fund the teams of attorneys needed to litigate the case. In effect, they can afford to spend good money to chase after the bad.

Of course, for the \”greedy\” investors such as yourselves, who may put aside a small amount every month to invest in a mutual fund in the hopes of one day making some money, this option is not available when your investments go bad. In fact, when these school districts spend more of your money to cover their assets, you will undoubtedly have less money to invest. Your higher taxes will be paying for the school district\’s spin to convince you that they didn\’t realize investments could actually lose value.

Let\’s hope none of these school districts teach investment strategy.

It often seems like the editorial boards at Wisconsin newspapers and their news divisions are inextricably linked.  You see a news article one day, then coincidentally see an editorial the next day arguing for whatever point of view you were supposed to glean from the news article.

But on rare occasions, it seems like editorial and news divisions within the same paper exist on different planets.  Take, for example, the outstanding Milwaukee Journal Sentinel story by Patrick Marley that showed up on Sunday which exposed the abuse of overtime by state correctional officers.  Time and time again, the Journal Sentinel editorial board attempts to convince us how higher taxes are necessary as a means to a better quality of life.  Yet, as Marley explains, the only quality of life being served by taxpayers in this overtime scam is that of the workers themselves.

From the article:

On every day he was scheduled to be off that month, he came in for an overtime shift. On two of those days, he worked double shifts.

But within days of each of those extra shifts, the sergeant called in sick. In all, he claimed four sick days that month. That meant he got hefty paychecks because of overtime, but still had time off.

That month wasn\’t unusual for the sergeant, who often volunteered for extra shifts. On 17 occasions in 2006 he called in sick shortly after working on days that he otherwise would have had off. He used almost four weeks of sick leave that year and cleared $117,764 with overtime, making him the state\’s fourth-highest-paid officer in 2006.

The scam is easy to explain – you merely use your sick time on days you weren\’t scheduled to work, and which qualify for overtime.  That way, you get paid time and a half for hours you never worked.  And taxpayers pick up the tab.

Of course, this heist was explained by this delicious quote:

Officers say there isn\’t widespread abuse of the system and note they work stressful jobs in institutions that are understaffed. They blame state officials for adopting laws that put more inmates behind bars without providing the funding necessary to hire enough officers.

Right… it\’s the state\’s fault for making them earn time and a half for hours they don\’t work.  And it\’s outstanding that they use understaffing as an excuse for not showing up for work.  Wouldn\’t it make more sense for them to be complaining about understaffing if they were actually required to show up to make their time and a half?  Instead, their actions seem to argue that the Department of Corrections has too much money, if they can swindle taxpayers that easily.

This report comes on the heels of a Wisconsin Taxpayers Alliance report that shows Wisconsin pays their public school teachers 50% more than the national average in benefits.  It continues to be clear that throughout government in Wisconsin, taxpayers are footing the bill for things that don\’t educate a single child or keep criminals behind bars.

Big news at the Capitol:

A toll-free hotline is now available for citizens to report fraud, waste, and mismanagement in state government. Call 1-877-FRAUD-17 or 1-877-372-8317.

(Dialing…)

\”Yes, hello? I have some waste in state government to report. I think it\’s a waste of my tax dollars to have someone sitting around all day answering the phones, pretending that the waste people call in and identify is going to make any difference in state government at all. In fact, isn\’t that why we provide every state legislator with their own 800 number? To take calls from concerned constituents?\”

\”Oh, and as long as I have you on the phone, I think the state health plan also should not cover the cost of toupees.\”

Comedian Richard Pryor once famously observed that \”cocaine is God\’s way of telling you you\’re making to much money.\” Similarly, large deficits are government\’s way of telling that they have too much money. Yet Wisconsin, despite running deficit after deficit during economic downturns, refuses to recognize it has a tax problem.

Even the simplest budget observer can understand why Wisconsin is always caught with its pants down when the economy goes bad. Most importantly, it doesn\’t put away any money in reserve to help mediate budget downturns. Secondly, it fixes these budget downturns with budget tricks – money transfers, one-time funding, delayed payments, and the accumulation of more public debt.

Perhaps most confusingly, Wisconsin government has a history of trying to ameliorate downturns by raising taxes. Let\’s think about why a deficit occurs – tax revenue to the state slows down because individuals are making less money. As a result, they pay less in income taxes, and buy fewer goods, which shrinks sales tax revenue. It would seem clear that raising taxes on these people would do nothing to correct their lowly situations – it only serves to maintain the bloated spending that the deficit is practically begging lawmakers to correct.

Predictably, Governor Jim Doyle\’s budget deficit \”fix\” proposal introduced Monday combines all the worst of the above budget strategies. The centerpiece of the plan is Doyle\’s proposal to implement a .7 percent taxes on hospitals, which would then presumably be matched with federal dollars. Doyle is so married to this proposal, he actually said \”There is no good argument against taking this step.\”

Well.

Naturally, this new tax would be passed on to health care consumers (sometimes known as \”sick people.\”) Ironically, Doyle recognized this phenomenon when he proposed his tax on oil company profits and included a \”no-pass through\” provision which prevented companies from passing the tax on to drivers. If Doyle didn\’t think the tax would be passed on to consumers, there wouldn\’t have been any need for the provision. The hospital tax is no different, and will serve to make health care more expensive – at a time when citizens list health care costs as their #1 concern.

Another problem with the hospital tax is its reliance on federal matching funds to plug the budget hole. The feds are often fickle when approving more federal funding to bail states out. This was in evidence in the 2003-05 budget, when Doyle wrote in hundreds of millions of dollars in Intragovernmental Transfer Program (IGT) funds to plug a Medicaid hole. As it turns out, Doyle\’s number was pure fiction, as the money never materialized. Naturally, the state refinanced some debt (opting to pay more long-term in exchange for a few immediate bucks) rather than making any substantive budget changes.

Doyle\’s plan also transfers $243 million out of the transportation fund and backfills that hole with – no surprise here – more debt. This is the same go-to maneuver Doyle and the Legislature utilized between 2003 and 2007, where they borrowed nearly $900 million to backfill the $1.1 billion transferred out of the transportation fund. When all the debt service on those bonds are paid off, taxpayers will have paid over $1 billion in interest – money they wouldn\’t have had to pay had the deficits been dealt with in a more fiscally prudent manner.

Doyle hysterically claims that his budget \”repair\” bill doesn\’t raise taxes. Yet consumers will be paying more for medical care, and drivers will be paying more in the future to pay off new debt incurred in the transportation fund. And government will continue to call plays from the same playbook that got us into this mess in the first place. The state\’s unwillingness to deal with its overspending problem in the past is a primary reason it is looking at a deficit now. And Governor Doyle\’s new budget \”fix\” bill will guarantee that the state will be staring at an even more severe problem the next time the economy dips.

Lately, we\’ve been talking a lot about the possibility of recession and what that could mean for the state\’s finances.  An economic slowdown would harm Wisconsin far more than it would other states, since our state doesn\’t have any kind of meaningful budget reserve on which to draw.  And if you don\’t believe me, I have 18 pages to prove it.

Naturally, it\’s going to be hard to set money aside when the state is trying to plug the shortfall that is almost certain to come.  As the old saying goes, \”you don\’t fix your roof when it\’s raining.\”  It would be much easier to set money aside during the good times – but since the state has never really recovered from the deficits caused by the 2001 recession, there really haven\’t been any \”good times\” recently.

As it turns out, the Legislature has recently contemplated the need to set money aside.  State Representative Eugene Hahn, who has announced he\’s not running for another term, has introduced Assembly Bill 329, which would dedicate one percent of state expenditures to a budget stabilization fund.  Apparently, responsible budgeting is reserved for people who don\’t have to worry about running again – which may be a decent argument for term limits.

In the grand scheme of things, Hahn\’s bill is fairly modest.  As the WPRI report points out, nationwide rainy day funds had reached $62.1 billion, or 10.9% of expenditures, by 2006.  Hahn\’s bill merely appropriated 1% of expenditures to assist in future budget crises.  Given, Hahn\’s bill has no chance of being signed into law as separate legislation – any money set aside would almost have to be done as a larger budget package.  But it is instructive to smoke out members of the Legislature who refuse to think ahead and save money for future downturns.

In May of 2007, the Assembly Committee on Ways and Means held a hearing on Hahn\’s rainy day fund bill.  Naturally, Hahn showed up to testify in favor of the bill.  Curiously, the \”nonpartisan\” League of Women Voters showed up to oppose the bill.  In their testimony, they compare the bill to the now-defunct Taxpayer Bill of Rights (TABOR) and say they \”oppose it as the antithesis of the real need of the State to increase its revenues.\”  They said that the bill \”contrasts with purpose of the \’rainy day fund\’ which is to ensure revenues are available despite shortfalls in tax and other revenue collection which are due to swings in the economy.\”

(To see an actual copy of the League of Women Voters\’ testimony, click here.)

Trying to parse such incoherence is impossible.  Basically, they\’re saying that the state\’s biggest problem is that they don\’t collect enough in taxes.  Yet even if they achieved their \”high tax utopia,\” (we\’re already there, incidentally) there would still be substantial deficits in times of declining revenues.  In fact, the more the state relies on taxes, the bigger the crash will be when a recession hits.  It appears that rather than using money saved up, they would much rather increase taxes during an economic downturn, which would further punish people who are out of work or making less in salary.

(By the way, ladies,  aren\’t you glad the League of Women Voters speaks for you? Apparently, a requirement of being a \”woman\” in Wisconsin is to push for more income and more spending.  Something Wisconsin husbands figured out years ago.  Am I right guys?  Hello?  Is this thing on?) 

Despite the fact that their position will likely send the state careening into economic discord, it appears they were convincing to a number of members of the committee.  When the committee voted on the bill in July,  it passed by an 8-to-5 margin:  Republicans Kerman, Lothian, Hahn, Jeskewitz, Wood, Pridemore and Strachota were joined by Democrat Bob Ziegelbauer in favor.  Democrats Steinbrink, Fields, Hebl, Toles and Kessler all voted to protect Wisconsin\’s standing as the worst-budgeting state in the nation.

———–

In other news, the Legislative Fiscal Bureau today estimated a $300 to $400 million shortfall in the current biennium.  My paper assumed a $408 million shortfall this biennium, based on the length and depth of the 2001 recession.  So it appears my estimates may be pretty close.  (In fact, the LFB memo essentially says they\’ll get back to us in February – so my $408 estimate may be enough to get me to the Showcase Showdown.)

In Governor Doyle\’s State of the State speech last night, he bragged that the state had \”cut spending, cut taxes, and deposited $50 million in a rainy day fund.\”  Set aside, for a moment, the laughable notion that this past budget cut taxes and spending.

In fact, Doyle was required to deposit that $50 million in the budget stabilization fund by a little-known law passed in Governor McCallum\’s 2001 budget.  The provision, tucked away in the 2001-03 budget, required half the state\’s unanticipated revenue be placed in the rainy day fund.  Had that provision not existed, I think we all know what the chances are that Doyle would have set that money aside.

So thank you, Governor McCallum.  Your assistance in writing Jim Doyle\’s talking points is duly noted.

Great news in the Overblown Political Theater department:

Rep. Nelson: Begins sit-in to protest budget impasse
10/18/2007

Contact: Rep. Nelson
608-266-2418 (office)
920-475-6221 (cell)

Democratic Assemblyman to remain in Assembly chambers, ready to work, 24 hours a day 7 days a week until budget passes

MADISON – Rep. Tom Nelson (D-Kaukauna) will begin a sit-in today at 9 a.m. in the Wisconsin State Assembly chambers.

Nelson will remain at his desk, ready to work, 24 hours a day, 7 days a week until a budget proposal is brought to the Assembly and passes both the Assembly and Senate.

The budget is 109 days past due and Wisconsin remains the only state to not have passed a budget.

And this is supposed to speed up the budget?  Who wouldn\’t want to see this train wreck evolve for the next month?  I demand full-time coverage on WisconsinEye.  After three weeks, he\’ll look like Ron Burgundy after his crash (complete with \”milk was a bad choice\” moment.)

Next time the Assembly is on the floor, look for introduction of a joint resolution memorializing Tom Nelson to put his shoes back on.  \”Mr. Speaker, unanimous consent to have Representative Nelson remove his Doritos from my desk.\”

Incidentally, while Nelson plays out this malodorous charade at his desk, he will continue to receive his state paycheck.  Why, you may ask?  Well, because state government is still spending the same amount of money it spent last year.

So, in a show of solidarity, I vow to ridicule Tom Nelson for 24 hours a day until the budget is passed.

As the state budget drags along over 100 days past due, you\’ll hear all kinds of rhetoric about how much damage the late budget is doing to the state.  In fact, the most damaging consequence the late budget has wrought upon our state is terrible political commentary.

Take this editorial by Neil Heinen of Madison\’s Channel 3.  In bemoaning the late budget, Heinen says:

The Wisconsin State Legislature has become dysfunctional, ineffectual, and counter-productive. It is an embarrassment and it is harming the state\’s reputation and image. And the few good public servants in its ranks can do nothing. It is time for fundamental change.

The most important change will only come with reform of the redistricting process and the way campaigns are financed. Currently, government is pretty much run by rabidly partisan legislative staff members whose jobs are basically to cater to special interest money and keep it flowing. There is no longer even a façade of caring for the interests of the citizens of this state or responsible public policy. Cash and reelection are all that matter.

However, those changes are a ways off yet. In the meantime, there must be limits placed on the ineptitude we allow during the biennial budget process. The system has to change. The best idea we\’ve heard is from University of Wisconsin professor John Sharpless who suggests giving the Legislature 90 days to pass a budget. If it fails, dissolve the Legislature and hold new elections. Would that we could to that today.

So he hits all the usual lefty talking points – the budget is being held up because of fundraising, legislators are too partisan, and on and on.  (I attempted to debunk the whole \”fundraising is holding up the budget\” talking point here.)  It\’s funny that he says legislators have given up on caring for the people – I would think that Assembly Republicans believe strongly that dodging $1 billion in new taxes helps regular people quite a bit.  Conversely, Democrats likely thought their universal health care plan (which held the budget up for months) helps people with no health insurance a great deal.

The real kicker here is his solution to the whole budget impasse.  Sure, let\’s just throw the Legislature out 90 days after a budget is due.  You don\’t think Judy Robson (the Senate Democratic Majority Leader) wouldn\’t want a new election right now?  The Assembly is barely in Republican control, and would likely flip to the Democrats.  So if one party were in control of one house and wanted to take a shot at gaining a majority in the other house, delaying a budget would be the most sensible thing to do.

Furthermore, he actually thinks holding an election during a budget is going to lessen the influence of money on the political process?  If anything, fundraising influence would explode during a mid-budget election.  So let\’s recap – campaigns are bad, so in order to clean up the budget process, we need to have more of them.  Maybe in order to stop sex predators, we should just let them babysit more often.

I realize giving this half-baked plan even a minute\’s worth of thought is a waste of time.  But asking our media to think through what they say shouldn\’t really be too much to ask.  Instead, we get obnoxious coverage by people incapable of stringing together a coherent point.