What we have here is a failure to communicate

By Bill Kraus

Taxes have been a free-standing issue in our politics ever since George Bush 1 made his famous “read my lips” pronouncement in 1988.

Ever since then the political dialogue has disconnected the hated taxes from what they should be used for and at what spending level.

Listening to talk about taxes gives the impression that they are something onerous assessed by politicians for their own unspecified reasons or amusement.

To a very large extent this stupid non-dialogue is rooted in the failure of elected incumbents to communicate simply and lucidly about what the money is for (always debatable) and whether the spending level for what it is for is (a.) proper and (b.) affordable (really debatable).

Transitions and tribulations

By Bill Kraus

The Walker administration is in the midst of the ultimate political torture test. It's called the transition. It translates into 59 days in which the new administration must staff a governor's office, hire a cabinet, and put together a budget for this huge, complex, multi-billion dollar state enterprise. Madness.

The first priority is the urgent (as contrasted with important) one of dealing with the high profile issues and promises--the train, the state employees contracts, etc.--that come out of the campaign or are on the top of the pile on the governor's desk.

These will be pushed aside as the need to fund the really expensive stuff--medicaid, prisons, education, local governments--takes its rightful place on the top of the to-do agenda along with the ideas needed to deal with the gorilla in the room: jobs.

Campaign finance follies

By Bill Kraus

Let’s assume that there are no election statutes or rules. Let’s further assume that a bill is introduced which:

1. Requires candidates to reveal any and all contributions to their campaigns.

2. Limits the amount of money any contributor can give candidates, but not the total amount that can be collected and spent.

3. Authorizes Political Action Committees for people with common interests which can contribute up to a specified amount to candidates.

4. Allows candidates to contribute an unlimited amount to their own campaigns.

5. Allows corporations, unions, and other organizations to mount parallel campaigns for or against candidates.