Careful What You Wish For (Historical Version)

They grow up so fast. One day, they’re just enormous expanses of unmapped land. The next, they’re states, and a hundred and sixty years old.

Wednesday, May 28, was the tenth anniversary of Wisconsin’s Sesquicentennial. The Badger State, Dairy State, home of Titletown and land of LaFollette is 160 years and two days old today.

We can all remember moments – in our lives, or in our children’s – when things turned one way or the other: when, with just a little nudge, we could have turned out differently than we have.

For example:

The Northwest Ordinance of 1787 – named because, at that time in history, the Great Lakes were considered “northwest” – set basic rules for shaping and creating new territories and, eventually, states.

The basic lines were thus: an east-west line touching the southernmost point of Lake Michigan; a north-south line intersecting that same point; and the Mississippi River up to its headwaters, and from there to Canada.

If you’re following along with your atlas, you can see that the then-future state of Wisconsin was intended to be bigger, and include Chicago, St. Paul, and a much larger share of the Upper Peninsula.

So what the hell happened?

Never be the last one to the dessert tray. That’s what happened.

In 1809 and 1816, Ohio and Indiana joined the Union. Going first, Ohio’s leaders convinced Congress to push their northern border 10 miles further than the Northwest Ordinance allowed.

Then Indiana did the same.

Two years later, Illinois joined the Union and, as Illinoyances often will, they pushed even further. Their northern border was set 60 miles north of the original line.

Granted, the Northwest Ordinance line would have given them zero access to Lake Michigan – an important economic asset – but, well, cry me a river. Lots of states don’t border Lake Michigan.

Believe it or not, these ad hoc and subjective changes to long-established U.S. policy caused a little tension.

When Michigan applied for statehood in the early 1830s, they demanded their southern border back – the 10-mile thick piece of land given to Ohio decades earlier. The “Toledo Strip.”

Michigan (still a territory) and Ohio stared daggers at each other across that disputed territory. They passed legislation to enforce their claims; formed militias to enforce their legislation; tried to arrest various functionaries of the other state and disrupt official business.

Seriously. It almost came down to a fight.

Finally, Michigan gave up in exchange for more Upper Peninsula. Because of then-unknown mineral deposits there, that turned out to be a good bargain.

For them, anyway.

James Duane Doty – longtime resident of future-Wisconsin and a real piece of work – began agitating for Wisconsin statehood even before the Toledo War. His proposal, a state named Chippewau (and, later, Wiskonsan), extended all the way to the Dakotas, and included a return to the original Northwest Ordinance lines.

That went over like a lead balloon, but set the stage for later.

Doty became territorial governor in 1841, and immediately renewed his push for statehood. He demanded a return to Wisconsin’s “original boundaries,” meaning those in the Northwest Ordinance. Moses Strong, another political leader in Wisconsin, declared that if restoration was denied us, Wisconsin would become a “state out of the Union.”

In 1842, Doty ordered Illinois land commissioners to leave what he called “disputed territory,” the northern part of Illinois, and he held a referendum among that area’s residents – a referendum that came back 2 to 1 in favor of joining Wisconsin.

Okay, so they voted that way because, by joining Wisconsin, they’d escape the taxes Illinois levied to pay public improvement debts. Don't quibble: the people had voted!

Whether Doty expected this to work, I don’t know. It never did. Wisconsin never got that part of Illinois or the U.P. back, and we didn’t get compensation for it as Michigan had. Our northwest border was pushed further in, just as the others were.

Dangit.

Or, maybe it's for the best. If we had gotten Doty's demands, both Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton could call Wisconsin – instead of Illinois – home. All those uber-liberal Wellstonians in St. Paul would be giving us, instead of Minnesota, heartburn.

Plus, I'd have grown up a Bears fan.

I guess things turned out pretty well.

Indiana Jones and the Overactive Imagination

My latest column is up over at FoxPolitics.net. I saw the new Indiana Jones over the weekend, and you just know I had to write about it:

That's Indiana Jones. The jacket, the whip, the unshaven weather-beaten face and lopsided grin.

The snakes. Why did it have to be snakes?

The hat. A man's shadow cast on the ground as he stoops to pick the hat up and place it securely onto his head, while a pair of trumpets crescendo and then fade through the theme song that any American moviegoer can whistle on reflex.

That's Indiana Jones, man. Even a half-attempt at Indiana Jones is still cooler than anything this side of the Rat Pack.

Go read the whole thing.

Democrats stick their heads in the sand

Rep. Paul Ryan, Wisconsin’s rising Republican star and conservative barbarian-at-the-gate, has a Big Idea. An ambitious, far-reaching, multi-point plan to deal with impending and interlocked crises in health care and entitlement spending.

A plan to save us from ruinous taxes or debt. To rescue staple benefits from certain collapse.

A plan that doesn't have a chance.

He calls it A Roadmap for America's Future. In a nutshell, it:

• Offers refundable tax credits of up to $2.500 per individual, $5,000 per family to pay for health insurance;
  
  
• Offers a voluntary investment of up to one-third of an individual’s Social Security taxes;
  
  
• Creates a new Medicare benefit that mirrors a plan currently available only to federal employees;
  
  
• Allows taxpayers to choose between the current tax system and a simpler two-tiered “flat” income tax.

These are good ideas. Fine ideas, offering people choices, and ownership, and a better chance to live long and retire wealthy.

Plus, according to the Congressional Budget Office, this plan keeps the federal government from going bankrupt. Believe it or not, Social Security and Medicare are growing. Fast. Over the next few decades, they will force enormous tax increases and/or terrifying amounts of debt. Either that, or those programs are going to end.

That's a simple fact.

Every American of working age and younger should support Ryan's plan or one like it: we’re the ones, after all, who will pay the taxes and debt. We’re the ones who will pay into the system all our lives, only to see it crumble and fall under its own weight.

Every retired or soon-to-be-retired American should support Ryan's plan or one like it: after all, it’s their children and grandchildren I just described. And it’s today’s retirees and near-retirees who face cuts in service, at a time in their lives when they’re far less able to make up for them.

This is a sweeping plan. A Big Idea. A big-picture new way of doing business that tacks away from reliance on government, bureaucracies, and the picking of taxpayers’ pockets.

Everyone should support it, or something like it. Because otherwise…well, the numbers speak for themselves.

Nevertheless, when all's said and done, this plan – like the ownership society – isn’t going anyplace. Ryan’s ideas are dead on arrival.

One of his re-election opponents (read: sacrificial lambs) shows us why:

"Why does Paul Ryan want to hurt the senior citizens of Wisconsin?" (Marge) Krupp, Democratic Candidate for Wisconsin's First Congressional District, challenged Ryan's proposal was working against the financial security of those that she wants to represent, "The seniors of this district count on a monthly Social Security check as part of their income and Paul Ryan is trying to undermine that." Ryan's plan calls for a privatization of Social Security services that some say could lead to a destabilization of the program.

Also proposed in Ryan's plan is a health insurance tax credit that would allow Americans to purchase a healthcare plan of their choice. Krupp again asked why Paul Ryan would issue such a plan, "This is the same kind of proposition that the Bush Administration has been giving the American people the past eight years, why is Paul Ryan trying to punish our working families and seniors?"

Why does he hate senior citizens? Why does he hate families? Why – oh Lord why – would he "allow Americans to purchase a healthcare plan of their choice?"

And why do I have this image in my head: Marge Knapp running in circles with her hands over her ears, yelling: “Lalalalala! I’m not listening! Lalalalala! I’m not listening!”

I have no idea what Marge Knapp looks like: in my head, she looks like Billy Crystal covered in foam rubber wrinkles.

Want to hurt senior citizens? Want to punish working families and seniors? Then listen to Marge Knapp. Stick your fingers in your ears. Bury your head in the sand. Refuse to face the fact – the fact – that Social Security and Medicare are sinking, and might drag us all down with them.

Do nothing, while entitlement spending squeezes us all out of a secure and stable future.

But, no, liberals and Democrats won’t admit that. They won’t face it. Democrats – in control of Congress and, quite possibly, the White House, won’t do anything about it.

Anything, that is, except stand in the way.

The Irresistible Force vs. the Immovable Object

My latest column is up over at FoxPolitics.net. A tiny sampling:

The irresistible force vs. the immovable object.

Both can’t exist at the same time. It’s a logical impossibility: if the force really is irresistible, it can knock down anything, so there can’t be such a thing as an immovable object. And vice versa.

Except…well, except in politics.

Go read the whole thing.

Sauk County, Wisconsin: Volunteer Opportunities Available in Fall, 2008

One we're not sure of; one we might lose; one we’d like back; and one we ought to keep.

Sauk County, November of '08.

Heading into a big election year with a lot at stake, we – conservatives, Republicans – are walking a tightrope, and we know it. Governor Doyle is entrenched; the State Senate is firmly Democrat; the State Assembly is Republican by…well, not quite a razor-thin margin, but not much more than that.

Republicans hold the Assembly 52 to 47. A net loss of only three seats will swing it – and with it, Wisconsin – into Democrat control.

So, let's see: Healthy Wisconsin, check. Higher taxes on businesses: check. Taxes on oil companies, real estate, rental cars, garbage, the internet. Check.

No limits on property taxes. Repeal of the QEO. An overhaul, if not outright repeal, of school spending limits.

In-state tuition for illegal aliens; Wisconsin as a “sanctuary state;” collective bargaining for UW employees; doubling, tripling, quadrupling of Stewardship Fund land purchases with no legislative oversight, and no public use rights.

Oh, let’s not forget redistricting. Re-drawing the district lines. That’s coming up pretty soon, too, and with complete control of the government, Democrats will make sure they stay in complete control of the government.

All that, and probably more. That's what we're looking at, should the Assembly go Democrat.

As if this being a presidential year – and Wisconsin, again, a battleground state – wasn’t enough.

So. If I were a conservative and/or Republican (and I am), I’d be rooting for Sauk County.

My home county contains parts of four Assembly districts: two open seats (both due to retiring Republicans); one freshman Democrat; and one well-entrenched Republican.

One we're not sure of; one we might lose; one we’d like back; and one we ought to keep.

The one we're not sure of:

Last week, Rep. Sheryl Albers (R-Reedsburg) announced she won’t be running for re-election after 17 years in office. Her district – the 50th , covering northwestern Sauk County, has re-elected her with consistently big margins. In 2006, she won with 57%. In 2004, she beat both a Democrat and a popular local Libertarian with 58%.

It's been a solid Republican district, but when one person holds the seat for that long, it could be that person – not the person's Party. Albers retiring means we'll find out just how Republican the 50th really is.

The one we might lose:

The other soon-to-be retiree is Rep. Gene Hahn (R-Cambria), who’s held the 47th AD (mostly Dane and Columbia Counties, but with a township and village in Sauk) for 18 years. He won handily in 2002, but since then has gotten by with squeakers: 50.4% in 2004; 50.3% in 2006.

Democrats think they can take it, and they may be right. The race to replace Hahn is already crowded: three Democrats, five Republicans, and one independent have filed so far.

The one we'd like back:

The only Democrat representing Sauk County won the 51st AD in 2006 by upsetting a long-time Republican incumbent with 53% of the vote.

That was Rep. Steve Hilgenberg (D-Dodgeville) winning over Republican Rep. Steve Freese. Before 2006, the 51st was re-electing Freese with totals in the upper 50s. That history of electing a Republican, plus the natural vulnerability of a freshman, means Republicans have a shot there.

Not much of a shot, maybe. But a shot.

The one we ought to keep:

The 42nd AD covers the northeastern part of Sauk County – Baraboo and the Dells. Rep. J.A. “Doc” Hines (R-Oxford) is running for his 4th full term in office.

Doc was one of very few Republicans to buck the Great Republican Slaughter of 2006, and improve his numbers. He won with 54% that year, compared to 52.4% in 2004. With a formerly unknown Democrat filed to challenge him…well, there's no such thing as a sure thing, but Doc's next best thing to it.

So. Predictions? The worst Republicans will do is 1-3. A net loss of two seats. The best? 4-0 is possible. Not probable, but possible. A net gain of one. Anywhere in between: that's possible, too. Sauk County could help a little, hurt a lot.

Like the bumper sticker says: think globally, act locally. That's what I'm gonna do.

Note: clicking on the maps above leads to bigger versions of those maps. For a pdf of Assembly districts statewide, click here.

This Time It's Bologna

My latest column is up over at FoxPolitics.net. An excerpt:

Look, a bologna sandwich is just a bologna sandwich. I can’t stand it. Wouldn't pay for it. Won’t eat it. But if I’m ever stranded on a desert island, one bologna sandwich will be worth a lot.

Restrict supply enough, and anything can be worth a fortune.

Read the whole thing.

Cheese on the Ticket, Part V

My newest column is up at FoxPolitics. Here's a taste:

Instead of choosing to back Obama – or Clinton, for that matter – and possibly ending up on the losing side, Feingold says he's happy either way: he just wants the nomination over and done with, before the bare-knuckle process hurts the Party.

Well, gee, he could help that process along…by picking a side. Campaigning for his chosen candidate. He’s well-known and respected among his Party’s true believers.

Everything says he should’ve endorsed by now, and that he should’ve endorsed Obama. So why hasn’t he?

Go read the whole thing.

Supremes Vote, Dems Whine on Photo I.D.

Indiana has a law that we don't. In Indiana, before you can cast a vote, you have to prove who you are with a photo I.D.

This is embarrassing. We've fallen behind Indiana.

Indiana's law achieved rock-like solidity this week, because the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that it is, indeed, constitutional. The vote was 6-3. One of the Court's "liberal" members wrote the majority opinion.

He's got faith in people, I guess. The other side doesn't. Writing in dissent, Justice David Souter made that clear.

The law "threatens to impose nontrivial burdens…and a significant percentage of those individuals are likely to be deterred from voting," the Justice writes.

"…the travel costs and fees necessary to get one…" are a burden, he says, and: "Poor, old, and disabled voters who do not drive a car, however, may find the trip (to the DMV) prohibitive."

Those Indianans who don't already have a photo I.D. "…are likely to be in bad shape economically," which means there's "no reason to doubt that a significant number of state residents will be discouraged or disabled from voting."

He left out the "Republicans are racists" argument. Other than that, all the talking points are there, and they all boil down to: the poor, elderly, and disabled are incompetent.

They simply can't do it, and how unjust of us to expect them to.

Think about it: an entire political species – Democratus Liberalus – which believes that some people aren't smart, ambitious, or competent enough to go and get a photo I.D.

And they're supposed to be the compassionate, caring ones.

It's enough to make one despair. Just give up hope entirely, abandon politics, pack up the family and drive away.

In fact, that's a great idea. Vacation. Get away from all this demoralizing sewage. Tonight, after dinner, I'll sit the family down to figure out where we're going.

Then we'll get online and make reservations – camping spots, fishing licenses, etc.

We'll make a list of everything we'll need (my wife loves lists), budget out how much it's going to cost. Let work know when I'd like to take some time off.

Then, about a week in advance, we'll start getting everything together. Organizing it before we cram it all into the van.

Phew. Tell you what, just thinking about all that work makes me think again. I know it's worth it. Our camping trips usually are. Still. What a pain.

Granted, a lot of people don't – can't – take vacations the way my family does. But, come on: everything we do, everywhere we go, we've got to make some preparations. Have certain things with us. Wallet, keys, phone, sunglasses. That's part of daily life. Planning ahead is part of daily life.

Just going shopping for food: you have to get there. You have to know what things you need. You have to pay for it. You have to carry it all back.

And everybody has to do that, one way or another. Regardless of age, income, physical ability.

Don't they? Are people not eating because the trip to the store is too big a burden?

Or are they finding a way – some way – to get food from the store to their homes?

I'll bet on the latter.

Hey, I hate going to the DMV, too. Taking time away from other things; getting there when they're open; filling out forms; standing in line; shelling out the money. I don't want to do it.

But I do. And so do you. Anyone can, with a small amount of planning ahead.

Certainly, between now and November, anyone could.

Now, we're making a few assumptions. Big ones. The biggest being: somebody who's so far out of society's path – so far that they don't have a photo I.D. – is actually voting in the first place.

And the next: that if they are voting, they're voting Democrat.

Well, okay, that's a pretty safe assumption. Which is why, instead of getting out there and reaching those people, helping them get the I.D. cards they need – and telling them, oh, by the way, don't forget to vote Democrat – Democrats whine and moan and stand in the way.

They wouldn't be standing in the way, if the I.D.-less masses were voting Republican.

But then, we wouldn't be whining and moaning. We'd be getting those people to the DMV.