Evers is going to raise your income, property, sales and gas taxes. There won't be any money left over for any hobbies.
If he does anything to mess up FoxxConn he’s one term and done for sure
He said he would look into that . Nothing .
Evers ? A liberal Dem Educator . Wonderfull . Going to be a long 4 years .
Get educated on the issues and you might just find yourself agreeing more with the blue and less with the red.
Don’t worry, no one is taking hunting rifles away anytime soon!
Best of luck to you the remainder of this hunting season. Hope your faith in Evers doesn't come back to bite you.
And for all of my fellow conservatives saying Evers is a lame duck b/c the Republicans control the state assembly and senate...he doesn't need them. He will legislate through the courts by appointing far-left liberal activist judges to every open appellate and state supreme court vacancy that comes his way over his term. Voter ID, Act 10, Foxcom, etc. will all go by the wayside and he won't need a single vote of the assembly or senate to make it happen.
Do you realize what a dollar a gallon extra would do to a lot of people?
Fixing roads is and bridges is needed. A gas tax is better than any alternative that’s been put forth. Yes it’s more expensive, but we would adjust.
Resources damaged from lax laws? High capacity wells in the state is a massive problem. Talk to some of the homeowners who have unsafe drinking water because of it. When you allow coporations to write their own regulations and don’t have oversight, the only thing on their mind is $ and PR.
Limiting guns and calling myself a hunter. Well that’s just silly. Common sense will tell you what guns should be available to the public.
Easy to have public forum courage and I full expect to be ripped to shreds on a Wisconsin hunting forum, but I really don’t think Evers will Hurt much of anything having to do with the outdoors. In fact he might help...
As for the other topics of conversation relating to politics, I will leave those off an outdoor forum.
A government big enough to give you everything you need/want is big enough to take away everything you have.
What I found interesting was in Walker's 1st election, there were thousands of Walker for Sportsmen signs on people's lawns, mine included. This election, there were zero. I did not like the fact that Evers was willing to answer questions posed in WON while Walker declined. Walker even declined after knowing Evers answered them and he could see the answers. I wonder how many sportsmen might have switched the party lines in this case? Walker is not an outdoorsman and that became apparent after he was elected. His hiring of Stepp really hurt him too. She was a mouth piece and she was abysmal.
I expect the Dems to become livid with the tax increases, especially the gas tax. Evers will be one and done. We can only hope.
Do you realize what a dollar a gallon extra would do to a lot of people?
I guess it would put them in the position of paying for the roads they use. If the people using the roads don't pay for them, where should the money come from? Gas tax is pretty good way to allocate the cost proportional to use.
Boggles the mind how former Gov Doyle ran an election on tax increases and won . And then proceeded to raise fees and taxes and run budget deficits and raid medical ins funds and transportation funds which the courts ruled illegal . And people voted him out . Walker cleans up the mess and made improvements in tax structure , schools and state economy in best condition ever. And the short memory low information voters vote in another who promise to raise taxes and spend us into economic Hell. He will be one and done. Just hope he doesn't leave office early because his replacement is a real piece of work that will make a joke of everything. There should be some minimum requirement to hold office above being brain dead!
With Evers I foresee higher license fee's shorter seasons and and hunting regulated to death along with everything else in this state.
I would not worry about more restrictions on hunting, we have other things to worry about.
To lighten it up a bit, maybe we can at least feel good about now having a governor who has a college degree???
Yes it is, however how do we keep those funds from being raided like Doyle did?
Link me up with how doyle did.
ARE YOU OK WITH INFRASTRUCTURE SPEENDING OR NOT? WHERE ELSE SHOULD THE FUNDS COME FROM?
Tell us your better idea.
“Trucks do the most damage to roads, will they pay their fair share? “
Trucks beat the roads because of weight and buy more gallons to make that happen. Capisce?
“How about those using electric or natural gas vehicles? “
Got numbers on how that plays? And so what anyway?
You may like your logic, but please do not attempt to impute your failures on others.
Now, try to wrap your mind around the FACT that roads wear out per vehicle*ton/ mile pounding on them. which is proportional to fuel consumption ...
tell us your alternative way to fund the roads.
thank you
The nonpartisan state Legislative Fiscal Bureau told us that in the state budget periods from 2003 through 2011, a net of $375.6 million was transferred from the Transportation Fund to the state's general fund. A report from the bureau said the transfers were made as part of an effort to balance the general fund, the state's main budget account.
Jim Doyle, a Democrat, was governor during that period. Walker has served since after his election in 2010. But it's worth noting that both Democratic and Republican lawmakers helped Doyle make the transfers to pay for schools and other programs.
Under Walker, for the state budget periods from 2011 through 2019, transfers have been made from the general fund back to the transportation fund totaling $1.28 billion -- more than repaying the $375.6 million and leaving the transportation fund with a total of $901.9 million more. The Injured Patients and Families Compensation Fund was hit for $200 million in the 2007-09 budget, to cite just one example, while the recycling fund has had about $75 million recycled from it since 2003.
Still, the state's transportation fund has been the hardest hit, with nearly $1.3 billion having moved on down the road to other uses. The 2009-11 state budget will transport another $66 million, at least, and the Department of Administration has the discretion to pull another $200 million from state agencies if it deems necessary.
The transportation fund - 92 percent of state dollars came from the gas tax and vehicle registration fees in the 2007-09 biennium, the DOT states - is supposedly set aside for maintaining and improving Wisconsin's transportation infrastructure.
Given the money's source, critics such as the Wisconsin Manufacturers & Commerce say the raids add up to a hidden tax on citizens.
And that's not all. To keep up with vital transportation projects, the state has replaced the cash by borrowing.
According to state Sen. Dale Schultz (R-Richland Center) last June, interest payments on additional debt during the next two years alone will be nearly $5 million, while the use of debt has risen so fast during the last six years that only 88 cents of every dollar paid in gas tax and other transportation fees actually flows to road projects.
The other 12 cents goes to pay the debt on past road construction, Schultz stated.
It's getting even worse. The 2009-11 state budget authorizes transportation bonding of $1.304 billion. That's an increase of $767 million in borrowing over the 2007-09 budget act, and that's on top of a 96-percent increase in the use of transportation fund supported bonds between 2002 and 2006, according to the Legislative Fiscal Bureau.
The blame game
So everyone agrees the raid-and-borrow strategy is not exactly healthy, to understate the point.
The question of who is responsible for the mess arose against this horrific backdrop, and ended up as a catfight between Fitzgerald and Decker, sort of like two toms fighting for the same fish fry.
Fitzgerald started it, saying he was distressed by the TV report.
"In the 2009-11 budget, Wisconsin Democrats raided $205.5 million from the transportation fund and diverted the money to their pet projects," Fitzgerald said. "The transportation fund, which is supported by the gas tax, is statutorily required to be used only for state road projects. It is incredible that Democrats are continuing to raid road funds and now it's being used to pay for things like fish fries and child care."
Once again, he said, Democrats have proven they think the gas tax is their private slush fund to pay for anything they want.
"Democrats' bad budgeting has already caused Wisconsin to be listed in the top 10 states facing fiscal collapse," he said. "It's no wonder that our fiscal ranking is so poor when the Democrats don't use common-sense budgeting techniques, whether it was funding millions of dollars of pork projects in the last budget or using gas tax money for fish fries."
Fitzgerald said such frivolous spending decisions created the state's budget deficit.
"We are heading toward a budgeting nightmare when bills come due in the next budget cycle," he said. "Something smells, and it's not the fish."
To Decker, it was all so much hypocrisy because, he said, Republicans themselves had a history of repeatedly raiding the transportation fund.
"In fact, the transportation fund is still hurting from some of their budget moves in the past, so now they are making up numbers about what happened in this budget to hide what they did," Decker said.
Indeed, he said, Republicans were in complete control of the Legislature for the 2003-05 budget, which transferred $675 million out of the transportation fund, and they were in complete control of the Legislature for the 2005-07 budget, which transferred $427 million out of the transportation fund.
"Over $1 billion was transferred out of the transportation fund while the Republicans were in complete control of the Legislature," Decker said. "The only money that came out of the transportation fund in this budget was the cuts that every agency had to make to balance the budget."
Decker said he welcomed the GOP's newfound interest in protecting the transportation fund, but said Republicans did long-term damage to the fund when they were in control.
Hook, line and sinker
So who is telling the truth, or is at least closer to it, and who is hoping citizens take their bait hook, line and sinker?
Well, casting a line into the reservoir of recent budget history quickly reels in some factual inaccuracies on both sides, though, generally speaking, Fitzgerald's claims are nearer to the mark than Decker's.
The truth is, though Republicans can share a slice of the blame, the raids fit most comfortably in the gaping pockets of Gov. Jim Doyle and his Democratic colleagues.
Armed with strong veto powers to rewrite state budgets, and with a substantial enough minority in the Legislature to withstand override attempts, between 2003 and 2007 the Governor and legislative Democrats found it as easy to raid the transportation fund as, say, to shoot fish in a barrel.
For one thing, while Decker's assertion that "over $1 billion was transferred out of the transportation fund while the Republicans were in complete control of the Legislature" is technically true, it is irrelevant because being in control of the Legislature does not necessarily translate into being in control of the budget.
The remark was meant to assign Republicans responsibility for the transfers during those years, but that's simply not true. It was Gov. Jim Doyle who proposed the transfers, and Republicans publicly criticized the proposals from day one.
As years went by, GOP resistance became more pronounced. It especially became marked after Doyle used his veto pen in 2005 to excavate $427 million out of the highway account.
As researchers at the Wisconsin Taxpayers Alliance have stated, the governor used the so-called Frankenstein veto - in which he could cross out words and numbers to create a new sentence from two or more sentences - to pare a 752-word section to 20 words sanctioning the transfer of the $427 million to the general fund to be used education.
That sparked a successful Republican push, led by state Sen. Sheila Harsdorf (R-River Falls), to amend the state constitution and curb the governor's Frankenstein veto power.
In April 2008, voters ratified the Republican-fueled amendment with 70 percent approval, though the governor could still cross out words within a sentence to alter its meaning, as well as delete single or multiple digits to create new numbers or remove entire sentences from paragraphs.
Finally, it should be noted, the $427 million created by Doyle's veto pen is the same $427 million Decker accused the Republicans of taking.
Back in 2007, interestingly, Doyle was more forthright than Decker was last week about who grabbed the $427 million in the 2005-07 session, admitting it was his work. In 2007, the governor told the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, without the veto schools "would have taken a $400 million cut that would have been a 'disaster.'"
In 2005, Doyle also said he was proud of the proposed raids on the transportation fund he was sending to the Legislature.
"My budget transfers $250 million from the transportation fund to support our investment in schools and other key priorities," he said in his February 2005 budget address. "With such a large transportation budget, and so many pressing needs in our state, it's the only responsible thing to do."
Why not override the veto?
So Decker wasn't telling a lot of the story about the origination of the raid proposal, or its creation through veto, and he omitted the Republicans' subsequent efforts to curb the governor's veto authority.
Still, if they were so opposed to the raids, why didn't Republicans - who did indeed control the Legislature in 2005 - simply override the governor?
The answer is, they may have been in charge, but it's virtually impossible in this state to override a gubernatorial veto, as Democrats themselves learned last week when they failed to upend Doyle on a DNR secretary appointment bill.
Between 1931 and 2001, in fact, there have been only 37 overrides of 2,405 partial vetoes of biennial budget bills, a 1.5 percent success rate, according to the Wisconsin Taxpayers Alliance. The last override occurred in 1985.
In 2005, the year of the infamous Frankenstein veto, the state Senate included 19 Republicans and 14 Democrats; the 2005 Assembly, 60 Republicans and 39 Democrats. The numbers did not realistically entertain a victorious override effort, which Rep. Mark Pocan (D-Madison) acknowledged candidly at the time, telling the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel that "Republicans had no chance of succeeding in any override attempt."
In May 2008, Republicans did try to overturn several of Doyle's line-item vetoes in the so-called budget repair bill, including a provision to eliminate the exclusion for any unused appropriations to the Department of Transportation from being transferred to the general fund.
With the vetoes, Doyle fashioned spending reductions of $270 million more than came to him, with $103 million of that coming from the transportation budget.
Republicans implored their Democratic counterparts to join them to protect road dollars.
"As part of that budget repair bill, the Assembly included a number of important safeguards to protect Wisconsin families and Seniors from the brunt of those cuts," Rep. Mike Huebsch (R-West Salem), said. "None of the budget cuts can come from the state's SeniorCare prescription drug program, none can come from K-12 education, and none can come from another raid of the transportation fund."
His words were in vain. Democrats controlled the Senate, while Republicans had only a five-vote margin in the Assembly. The override failed 60-36 in the Assembly.
After the attempt failed, Huebsch pointed out the party-line support of the transportation fund raid.
"I'm disappointed that we did not have enough votes today to achieve the two-thirds majority required to override, and I'm disappointed that a majority of Assembly Democrats chose to side with Gov. Doyle and the bureaucracy over our seniors, our property taxpayers and safety on our roads," he said.
Not much earlier than that, Republicans had also pushed to stop raids when Sen. Dan Kapanke (R-La Crosse) tried and failed to get the Senate to rescind proposed raids on both transportation and the Injured Patients and Families Compensation Fund.
Both motions failed on party-line votes of 18-15.
Republicans not blameless
So, overall, analysis of budget votes and actions shows Fitzgerald's comments to be rather consistent with past Republican actions, while Decker's accusation of hypocrisy is more far-flung.
However, that's not to say the charge is completely off the mark. There is evidence of Republican acquiescence, particularly early on. Simply put, despite their criticism, Republicans have signed off on some on the transfers.
In 2005, for example, Rep. Dean Kaufert (R-Neenah), then co-chairman of the Legislature's Joint Finance Committee, told the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel that Republicans "may have to buy into some of this stuff," meaning the raids of the segregated funds.
"There are programs in this state that need to be funded," Kaufert told the newspaper, while on the Senate side Fitzgerald said Republicans weren't "going to slam the door on everything the governor has done."
And they didn't.
It's worth remembering that, before the governor used his veto to siphon off $427 million from the transportation fund - the action so galling to the GOP - he had originally proposed a more modest transfer of $268 million. That included the $250 million he talked about in the 2005 budget address and an additional $18 million for the second year of the budget cycle.
That did not rile Republicans nearly so much. Indeed, the GOP-controlled Joint Finance Committee signed off on the $268 million raid, and the GOP-controlled Legislature approved it as well, so long as it was a one-time proposition and would be offset by, you guessed it, general fund bonding.
So opposition to raiding segregated funds and replacing that money with borrowed dollars turns out to have mostly been a matter of degree and rhetorical nuance on the part of Republicans, though the record clearly indicates it is a substantial degree and a significant nuance.
The policy differences on this matter are real, in other words.
And so last week's debate between Fitzgerald and Decker no doubt foreshadows a much larger discussion of the issue as the next budget approaches.
With a skyrocketing structural budget deficit, lawmakers will have much larger fish to fry than in the Verona debacle, a spectacle that in any case is not likely to be repeated: After the controversy erupted last week, the DOT announced taxpayers would not foot the bill after all but that the fish fry and child care would be paid for by an anonymous donor.
Walker may not have been the best for sportsmen, but he was great for Wisconsin.
What a lot of people don’t seem to understand about higher gas prices, easy to tell by the votes, is that they cripple the economy...more so in rural, low traffic areas, the areas that aren’t getting new roads every other year. Higher gas prices cause higher consumer product prices, now the family that would go to a local restaurant for a Friday fish fry can’t afford it, because the cost just to go to work has increased. Now that restaurant sees an additional impact over and above the increased product costs. Families will cut out more activities as this goes on to save money for necessities, further hurting local businesses, which in turn hurts local communities. My kids are in additional sports, outside of school programs, which has us spend money in other communities, from food to lodging. Those expenses will be cut, affecting other communities. Gas price increases are the quickest way to cripple local and regional communities! That was easy to see those affects during the Obama administration just a few years ago.
I think tolls on the few heaviest travelled roads would be a more effective tool, since most of the construction is in those areas anyway. One of the best things that got done for the roads budget, was eliminating the prevailing wage provision. There’s no reason for government to set the price that a company has to pay their employees for certain jobs, all that did was about double every project cost.
jrd's Link
Doorknob, you have all the answers yet you need me to provide you a link to Doyle raiding the transportation fund?? You just marginalized yourself into not being worth talking with. ***
so then, you don't have a link?
where would you and the economy be without roads?
The list could go on for days.
Raise the gas tax and here's what will happen...you evil individuals that drive a vehicle to work will get next to nothing for your pot-hole roads, but instead the $$ will be diverted to more worthy projects such as bike-trails, subsidized choo-choo trains, and buses...all things that inner-city types just love and need to move about. You guys that drive a gas-guzzling truck to work 8 or more hours a day should all go kill yourselves for killing our dear mother earth. Or buy a bike and ride 60 miles to work, because mark my words that's where your gas tax money will go!!!!
Well Evers will take the Fed money that Walker wouldn't so that will be a some of it. Not that it will go towards the roads like it should.
Use the tax money they are already collecting and prioritize projects.
Stop giving sweetheart deals to the road builders.
Absolutely not. I was told by a longtime county employee that the roundabouts were a big fed grant thing. States can get the money for them so they do.
To end sweet heart deals for road builders you have to get rid of the law prevailing wage. That would promote competition and lower contract costs. When the prevailing wages was put in, in 1964 there were no state inspectors on the job to check the work. Now there is and prevailing wage has cost the taxpayers plenty and become a crutch for the union workers to keep their high labor prices going. ***
sure ...that is on topic :)
Edit to stay on topic: additional roads mean more salt which concentrate deer liking salt along the roads increasing the spread of CWD and cause mayhem with vehicle collisions.
Your whole comment is off topic and my comment is in jest reply to your off topic comment.
Welcome to Bowsite/Roadsite
Just as I foretold.
thanks tweed, and jake, lets just forget any friction.
Fact is, I do not believe they have a CWD action plan at this time,,,,,,, and have not had one in a long time,,,,,,,
Let the Good Times Roll
HF43
So Cole was ripping on the Former Administration yet could not site one specific example.
This stuff is to good
HF43
Let's give Cole some time figure out how to proceed. DNR will probably step it up before too long. What do we want DNR to do about CWD? DNR didn't cause it, right?
The current CWD study was brought to you courtesy of the Walker Administration and will be completed in 2020. The FACTS are clear that in the new biennium budget Evers has allotted ZERO DOLLARS to the plight of CWD, nor have they offered any new strategies. So for the next 2-years the DNR will have no CWD funding support from the state of WI. These are cold hard facts.
Interesting that the # 2 priority is CWD (according to the Secretary nominee) has zero dollars in the budget. Even more curious was a quote from Mr Cole on March 7, 2019 from the Senate Sporting Heritage Committee where he said this concerning the departments approach to CWD "we're going to let the science come to us."
So clearly the new administrations plan is to adopt "a do nothing attitude" which is far more passive than before, so for the next two years they will take a wait and see approach in regards to CWD.
Your comment of "Let's give Cole some time figure out how to proceed" is laughable considering that Evers ran around the state complaining the Walker administration wasn't doing enough to combat CWD. Cole has been member of the NRB for nearly a decade even serving as the chairman and you make it sound like he just walked into this blind, as if its rocket surgery.
Just pointing out the hypocrisy of the political rhetoric of both men concerning the "New Independent Science Based DNR"
Yet nothing but crickets from the Lame Stream Outdoor Media, and Bowsiters who have been wetting themselves over CWD efforts in WI for the last 8 years. Can't say I recall where they ever adopted a wait and see approach with CWD, or is it just politics. For sure its the latter and you can take that to the bank.
HF43
But I agree with the Captain, and to tell you the truth I do not believe he has a clue on the outdoor arena, nor does he care,,,,, he put people in charge to do that for him, but if you think he has an interest? I do not,,,,,,,,,,
Now if CWD affected the school system, it would be different
As for the marijuana stuff, I decided to invest in the industry. I chose 6 companies to start with. I hope the US does what Canada did. There's a lot of money to make in the industry. The Farm Bill made hemp legal in the US. That was a good start for investors.
HF 43
Not true, when Evers gets his legalized pot and hemp farms, the war will start. We'll need to reduce herd populations as the deer will cause significant crop damage and there will be pot regeneration issues. Also, CWD will spread swiftly as we'll have a bunch of stoned deer peeing and crapping all over each other.
