FoxPolitics.net - Appleton, WI News - What's really going on in the Fox Cities

FoxPolitics.net Blogs

FoxPolitics News

Local/State Govt Links

Salaries

• Appleton School District, 2007-08
• City of Appleton
• Town of Grand Chute
• City of Menasha
• City of Neenah

Candidates

City of Appleton

• Elected Officials
• Salary Watch
• Directory
• Mtg. Agendas/Minutes

Advisory Board

Blogroll

Selected News Sources:
Business Jrnl of Milw
Christian Science Monitor
Daily Caller
Drudge Report
La Crosse Tribune
Milw Journal Sentinel
National Journal
New York Times
Public Policy Forum
Real Clear Politics
Stateline
The Hill
TPM
Washington Examiner
Washington Post
Washington Times
WI State Journal
Selected Blogs - from the Right:
American Mind
Blaska's Blog
Boots & Sabers
Charlie Sykes
Dad29
Freedom Eden
Heritage Foundation
Jerry Bader Blog
Life Voice
Marketplace of Ideas
Marquette Warrior
Natl Review Online
No Runny Eggs
Patrick McIlheran
Real Debate Wisconson
RedState
Rhymes with Clown
Shark and Shepherd
The Lote Tree
Vox Populi
Wall Street Jrnl, Opinions
WI State Jrnl, Opinion
Wigderson Library & Pub
Wisconsin Family Voice
WPRI
Selected Blogs - from the Left:
Big Money Blog
Blogging Blue
Brenda Konkel
Caffeinated Politics
Capital Times
FightingBob
Folkbum's rambles
Griper Blade
Huffington Post
Lost Albatross
MAL Contends
Mid coast views
Moneyed Politicians
One Wisconsin Now
Open Left
Playground Politics
Political Environment
Rock Netroots
Talk to Tony
Uppity Wisconsin
Waxing America

Today's Blog: Time for the Guv to morph into Chris Christie
My husband and I and a couple hundred friends watched in Green Bay as ...(more)

Search Archives

Blogs

Time for the Guv to morph into Chris Christie (6/28/2011)

Time for Gov. Walker to talk more about the cake (3/4/2011)

Today, reality hits home (3/1/2011)

FoxPolitics News going on hiatus (1/28/2011)

Brown County Executive candidate forum Feb. 8 (1/28/2011)

Education done right (1/27/2011)

To Obama, the ‘We’ is Government (1/27/2011)

(more)

7/29/2010
Mealy-mouthed editorials

I’m almost two weeks late on this, but when the Post-Crescent defends lousy budgeting practices, it’s an important opportunity for comment.

When the Wisconsin Legislature has transferred money out of the state transportation fund to plug holes in other parts of the budget, primarily education, critics have called it a raid and blatant mismanagement.

Taking from a segregated fund to cover shortfalls elsewhere is definitely not an ideal practice. It's shortsighted and can be dangerous if done frequently enough. But it does provide the state flexibility during tough economic times. Gov. Jim Doyle said the state was able to avoid deep cuts in education due to the transfers, which have totaled $1.2 billion since 2003.

In our view, the state should not ban transfers from this fund outright, despite calls for a constitutional amendment to do so from the Outagamie County Board and at least 10 other counties that plan to host advisory referendums in November.

…. While it's best to limit transportation money for bridges and roads, if the state has a glaring need someplace else, the Legislature should have the authority to dip into that fund.

That’s ridiculous. And bad policy. A segregated fund is a segregated fund. If there’s a “glaring need” (whose glaring need?), priorities need be ranked and funds gleaned outside of segregated funds. Now, I suppose we can grant the P-C a bit of slack in that a few days after the writing of this piece, the State Supreme Court declared the transfer from the Patients Compensation Fund unconstitutional. That’s a horse of a slightly different color, though surely wasn’t a tough one to see coming down the road.

As always, the Post-Crescent tempers its remarks with a “however…”

…. That being said, the Legislature needs to get a better handle on managing the state budget. Taking from the transportation fund should be a measure of last resort.

Duh. I guess. A mealy-mouthed editorial. And that’s your oxymoron for the day.

Jo Egelhoff, FoxPolitics.net

COMMENTS

I wonder why funds should be consindered segregated at all? Money is fungible. If a fee or tax is collected to offset a service and that service is not used or serves no purpose then the fee should be discontinued.

Dean Weichmann (Thu Jul 29 08:04:09 2010)

The state taxpayers have the government they deserve, as do those who support our pay-to-play system of government.

Funds that should be paying for schools and infrastructure have been given to special interests that fund the elections, and now you are complaining??? Get over it.

Jack Lohman (Thu Jul 29 08:20:03 2010)

As long as raising taxes or cutting services are politically infeasible this state (and others) will go from short term fix to short term fix. No different than the Feds who borrow from the social security trust fund. No one is willing to sacrifice their income for taxes or sacrifice their services. Period. And the politicians know it. Come up with a budget that raises taxes across the board and cuts services across the board and see what you get.

dave allen (Thu Jul 29 08:26:04 2010)

Perhaps it would be useful to introduce legislation that forbids the state to levy taxes or fees to cover budget shortfalls, and instead draws those funds from the legislative payroll, which is adjusted accordingly. And further that any budget surpluses be paid in full back to the taxpayers in percentages reciprocal to their previous year's tax bracket, while any unused programs/services are automatically discontinued and any funds designated for those programs/services are considered surplus. Why not make the people running the government the ones to foot the bill for their stupidity, ineptitude, or outright chicanery? It's the only job that continues to pay regardless of performance.

Andrew Ellis (Thu Jul 29 10:43:11 2010)

Indeed, Andrew. I agree 100% and have written about that at Politicians must have skin in the game.

Jack Lohman (Thu Jul 29 10:59:08 2010)

The demands put on legislators today are huge. Gone are the days where a legislator could maintain a true part time position and devote their time to the citizens as a public service for no pay. Legislators need to be paid. If you don't pay them you'll get either the corrupt or the independently wealthy. The citizens need to speak with their legislators, in person and at every meeting to get the voices heard. In the end, no law will force legislators to do what is right (whatever you think is right) only we the people can by being involved, knowledgeable, and vocal.

dave allen (Thu Jul 29 11:24:34 2010)

Dave, with a pay-for-performance system I'd pay legislators twice their salary if they'd reduce spending and taxes and eliminated the "legal" corruption. Illegal corruption still enlists jail time.

Jack Lohman (Thu Jul 29 11:29:47 2010)

The irony in this is that the state has mandated to counties and municipalities that they follow GAAP(Generally Accepted Accounting Principles) which does not allow them to transfer funds from segrated accounts.
In Outagamie County as in other counties, you cannot take money from a segrated fund(Landfill and the Airport are good examples) and put it into the general fund.
The state, however, has not policed themselves by adopting GAAP and continues to play games. In other words, "Do as I say and not as I do."
We would not be having this discussion if they had to abide by the same rules as everyone else. You should be asking your legislator or potential legislator what they are going to do about this discrepency and vote accordingly.
Mike

Mike Thomas (Thu Jul 29 13:38:51 2010)

And this is in the new financial bill? Wow. I can't wait to see the unintended consequences...

H.R. 4336: Fiscal Responsibility Act -- To provide that pay for Members of Congress be reduced following any fiscal year in which there is a Federal deficit.

Provides that, if there is a deficit in a fiscal year, then:

(1) any pay adjustment (including a cost of living adjustment) for Members of Congress scheduled to take effect in the succeeding calendar year shall be null and void; and

(2) rates of pay for Members shall be reduced by a specified percentage, but not below zero.

Specifies the mandatory pay rate reduction at:

(1) 5%, for the first year; or

(2) 10%, for any consecutive subsequent year that expenditures exceed revenues.Specifies conditions for restoration of the original pay rate, together with otherwise scheduled adjustments. Vests authority in the Director of the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) to make determinations of whether or not a deficit exists in any fiscal year. States that, in making any such determination, the Director shall exclude any budget outlays which directly relate to a military conflict that lasts over 30 days or that is in direct response to a terrorist attack on the United States.

http://dailybail.com/home/check-out-hr-4336-maybe-the-greatest-bill-in-congressional-h.html

Jack Lohman (Thu Jul 29 14:21:10 2010)

Wait a minute. I don't think that was from "the new financial bill..."

http://www.thomas.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d111:HR04336:@@@L&summ2=m&

Jack Lohman (Thu Jul 29 14:56:59 2010)

By the way, could you explain what "mealy mouthed" means?

Dean Weichmann (Sat Jul 31 09:28:08 2010)

Mealy-mouthed, per Egelhoff: A mushy definition, a mushy determination. Not taking a firm position on an issue - or taking both positions on an issue...

Jo (Sat Jul 31 13:39:39 2010)

Thanks for the explaination Jo.

I can't help but observe that you show a tendency to see the world in black and white and do not appreciate opinions that see the gray.

Dean Weichmann (Sat Jul 31 20:30:00 2010)

Accounting is mostly black and white - shouldn't be much gray. When a citizenry is talking about a municipal or state budget - or a family budget, for that matter - a "gray" policy is not good public policy.

Jo (Sat Jul 31 21:12:23 2010)

No trade-offs? Balance? Come on. Ours is not an "off-on" digital world.

Jack Lohman (Sun Aug 01 10:22:08 2010)

Jo, I agree that accounting is an issue that is "black and white" but we are talking about policy, not accounting.

Dean Weichmann (Mon Aug 02 07:37:52 2010)

Dean and Jack: We are talking about a budget. A policy that is meant to aid in wise, concise, balanced budgeting.

Jo (Mon Aug 02 08:06:06 2010)

Jo, we will never have "wise, concise, balanced budgeting" as long as the special interests want us to give them taxpayer money rather than spend it on schools and infrastructure. But we've been over that before.

Jack Lohman (Mon Aug 02 12:15:24 2010)

Post a Reply

Print this Article

Email Article to a Friend