Curmudgeon's Corner

Maybe bold is a bit overdramatic; these things are almost certainly going to occur during the next twelve months...and probably during the next twelve months after that.

HEALTHCARE COSTS CONTINUE TO RISE...Of course that will happen as it has been happening for a long, long time now. 

We'll know what our healthcare delivery landscape will look like as we move through 2008.  We will be in the process of building too many facilities and that will ultimately drive costs up at an even greater pace.  We'll see the consolidation wave cresting and then we'll effectively have a couple of behemoths.  And that will ultimately drive health care costs up at an even greater pace.  We'll have continuing debate over the governmental control of our healthcare; and that holds within it forebodings for us all if we take the seemingly 'easy' pathway to universal coverage.  Government will continue to blame health insurance companies while it meddles in the free marketplace to the detriment of us all.  Will we be able to work our way through this coming year in healthcare?

TAXES WILL CONTINUE INCREASING...Again, of course this will happen as surely as the sun rises in the morning.

Our governmental bodies from village to state to federal continue to spend at a pace that simply cannot be sustained without damaging the economy.  Programs once instituted never die.  If funding channels go away (read cigarette taxes), the programs are simply shifted to using 'general purpose funds'.  And, as if the idea of never killing off useless tax-funded programs isn't bad enough by itself, our various government bodies add new tax-funded programs willy-nilly.  Our state budget just approved carries with it unfunded future obligations of something in the range of a billion dollars for the next biennium.  Our federal budget carries within it the same type of mischief.  Our politicos are absolutely addicted to 'earmarks' and those infect state budgets as well as federal budgets.

EDUCATION WILL CONTINUE TO BE DEBATED...And this, too, is a virtual given.

The primary state teacher's union, WEAC, has still not extracted its payback for the massive support provided to the Governor and many elected representatives.  Look for the QEO provision to be attacked and possibly thrown out if Democrats gain control of the Assembly in addition to the Senate and Governor's mansion.  Milwaukee's system will continue to move in precisely the wrong direction so far as numbers of graduates, test scores and almost every other measurable area.  Germantown's petition to move from MATC to another technical college district will be heard by the state technical college board, and only a miracle will see that petition granted.  We will have been accorded our 'due process' but come to realize that appointed boards do not provide 'due process'.  Virtual schooling will continue to be assailed by the teachers' unions...even though union member teachers are employed in those programs.  Why you ask?  Competition seems to be a great idea in everything but education, where the establishment simply cannot tolerate the possibility that we'll come to realize the king has no clothes.  There will be more referenda, and those that are properly presented will be voted on their merits from the electorates' perspective.  'Properly presented' means that the referenda are scheduled during an existing election, and not on some obscure date calculated to bring out only the 'right' voters.  'Properly presented' means that teachers and administrators are not employing taxpayer money to make their case, and that all the facts are presented well in advance to permit reasoned public debate.

ELECTIONS WILL DETERMINE THE WILL OF THE PEOPLE...And that is truly the hallmark of our country.

Our state government will be re-shaped and a Democrat sweep, should that occur, will virtually assure the we'll have universal health care called 'Healthy Wisconsin Two', higher taxes across the board, and fewer freedoms as government sucks up more of the available air.  We'll have more tax and spend programs that will take on lives of their own, and conservatives will trudge through the political wilderness for another decade or two.  Our Governor, who promised this would be his last term, has apparently decided that we need him for another term of four years.  Of course we expected that since other promises like 'no tax increases' have been conveniently forgotten, as well.

The federal scene holds a similar scenario.  People will need to evolve beyond the still-controversial 'hanging chad' feelings.  There was no Supreme Court fiat involved in the Florida race; that was a contrived attempt by the loser to fan the flames and get into office because he 'deserved it'.  So, he then went on to exploit the 'global warming' thing instead, while emitting more pollution that a thousand or more normal folks.  We'll have a new President-Elect by year-end.  The Iraq war seems to be less and less an issue as the press finally tells a more positive story...that has been going on for much longer than has been told.  The attempt to convince people that we're in a recession seems to be failing, but Congress still tries to make that happen with tax legislation.  For the first time since 1952, we have a wide-open race on both sides of the aisle.  What will happen if a strong third party candidate 'suddenly' emerges...like the 'sudden' emergence of Mayor Bloomberg of New York (as has been rumored for months now)?  That will throw everything into the proverbial 'cocked hat' on both the Democrat and Republican sides.  Yet another reason why congressional seats are so important.

2008 promises to be a very exciting and rewarding year, just as all the other years I remember have held great promise coupled with the aura of excitement...if we can but sieze those opportunities.

May you and yours enjoy a most healthy, happy and prosperous 2008...no matter your politics!

Justice Louis Butler, a 55 year-old Milwaukean appointed to the court by Governor Doyle is running for his own term on the Supreme Court.  He is being challenged by two other candidates.  Those candidates are Burnett County Judge Michael Gableman and Sun Prairie attorney Charlie Schutze.

It is widely expected that this race will be an expensive contest that could be a bit on the rough side.  It is a critically important race for all who think of themselves as conservatives, self included.  Wisconsinites tend to re-elect judges at all levels in the state.  That makes every judicial race an important race.  The Supreme Court positions are, however, the very most important since it is here that the final direction of the state is often determined.  It is here, as well, that the economic well-being of our state is greatly determined.

The February 19th primary election will reduce the candidates from three to two.  Those two will then face off on April 1st and we'll know whom will sit on the highest court for the next TEN years.

Butler is, as one would expect, running on his record over the past four years.  In large part, the other two candidates are also running on Butler's record and that has created a rub.  Butler supporters think it unfair that the other candidates refer to Butler's vote on various issues since there were other justices voting with him on the same issues just as there were those who voted against him on those issues.  The other candidates point out that where there was a one vote margin of victory for one side over the other, it is very appropriate to suggest that Butler's vote was the deciding vote.  On a panel of seven justices, 4 to 3 decisions are not at all uncommon.  With the liberals' attempted marginalization of Justice Ziegler, 3 to 3 deadlock votes are not at all uncommon. 

Beyond all this, when did the vote of a justice become something that us citizens are not entitled to review?  How is it that a justice's voting record is not pertinent to the election process?

Butler is quoted as saying, " Our job is not to come in and solve all the problems of the world in one case".  Does that strike you as a defensive posture instead of a positive assertion of one's position?  It does for me, too.

Gableman is quoted as saying, "My philosophy is to apply the plain language of the law and not to look for ways that offenders may escape the consequences of their actions."  Does that give you the sense this is a no-nonsense jurist?  It does for me, too.

Schutzke says, "You don't have to be a judge to be a good Supreme Court justice.  I think you have to have a good legal mind."  That is certainly true, but I'm more comfortable with one who has the jurist' experience.  I believe that this is important no matter the political persuasion of the candidates.  And remember, the race for the Supreme Court is a political race contrary to candidates' protestations.  We just don't see the (R) or the (D) behind their names on the ballot.

The liberals are again trying to marginalize the major contributors to conservatives so that, in the event another conservative wins, they can try the "Ziegler Gambit" on that person, too.  Note that Justice Butler finally decided to pay attention to the sources of his contributions, as Zeigler has been pilloried about, at about the time he announced his candidacy.  He has not, of course, recused himself; that is apparently only appropriate for the conservative Justice Ziegler.   Note, also, that large contributors to the liberal candidates are never attacked by the supposedly non-partisan groups based in Madison.  Whatever it takes is exactly what they'll do as has been proved time and again.

Conservatives must recognize once and for all time that we do not play on an even field.  The tilt of the field is decidedly to the advantage of the liberal forces, due in large part to these two facts:  liberals never give up; liberals use whatever tactic is required.  The only way we blunt those forces is to turn out the vote, talk with our friends and neighbors, and make contributions to those whose positions we support.

Ten years is a long time.  And, if re-elected, twenty years is an even longer time on the bench.

This race is critically important! 

Wisconsin has had a program called BadgerCare in place for some time now.  It is the Wisconsin version of the federal SCHIP (State Children's Health Insurance Plan) program that was recently funded for another year+.  As we've discussed, somewhere between two-thirds and three-quarters of all premium dollars in that program in Wisconsin are spent on ADULTS.  Some 40,000 children who are eligible have never been enrolled.

Here comes BadgerCare Plus effective on and after February 1, 2008.  The goal is that this will assure that 98% of all children in Wisconsin will be covered.  That is a noble cause and no one disputes that.  I am troubled that those administering the current plan have been unable to reach out to the families of those 40,000 kids that have not been enrolled. I am wondering how we're going to be able to get to 98% with BadgerCare Plus if we were so unsuccessful with the current plan.  I take major exception with what this new program does cover, however.

It is available to all children regardless of the income of their parents.  Some parents with incomes too high to qualify for 'free' coverage will have to pay a monthly premium of as much as $68.00 for each child covered.  It has been established in the current program that for every two children enrolled in BadgerCare, one is dropped from private insurance coverage already being paid for by employers and/or parents.  Your tax dollars are actually causing people already covered to disenroll in order to get this better deal, and that is increasing the cost of these programs; a cycle that cannot go on forever.

BadgerCare Plus will cover all pregnant women with incomes of up to 300% of the Federal Poverty Level (FPL) or an amount equal to $51,510 for a family of three.  BadgerCare Plus will now be available to farmers and other self-employed people.  BadgerCare Plus will be available to parents and caretakers who earn up to 200% of FPL, or $34,340 for a family of three.

The Standard Plan is the same as the current coverage and features copayments from $0.50 to $3.00 based upon the services provided.  Those amounts are insufficient to cause anyone to think about the need before presenting for services.  That drives the overall costs higher and higher. 

A new Benchmark Plan is going to be available.  That will feature copayments of from $5.00 for prescriptions to $100 for in-patient stays.  Again, these copayments are insufficient to cause anyone to think about need.  Emergency cases are the exception, of course.  The Benchmark plan is available to families with higher incomes as well as to self-employed families.  The list goes on.

BadgerCare Plus is but another example of the incremental movement by those who think government is the answer to everything.  A program called the "Childrens Health Insurance" plan is being used to cover more and more adults.  It is being used even though disenrollment from private insurance coverage is being caused.  It is being expanded to cover more and more people.  The Federal Poverty Level number is being very conveniently multiplied by 2 or 3 times in order to be made available to more people with every iteration.

This is pure, unvarnished "Universal Health Care" in the early stages.  Surely we remember the parable of the frog and the increasing temperature of the water, don't we?  The frog eventually was boiled to death but made no attempt to leave the kettle.  While we citizens anguished over the failed 'Healthy Wisconsin' plan (which is coming back for another run), BadgerCare Plus was brought into existence with barely a whisper!  Our state officials proposed the relaxation of rules to the federal administrators, who love to be all important to everybody; the rules were relaxed for Wisconsin; and, BadgerCare Plus results.  And now the liberals who watched this happen are touting Wisconsin as the newest 'shining beacon' for healthcare.

That is what incrementalism is all about.  It has worked down through the centuries.  People eventually become accustomed to one level of entitlement, and then the next level gradually appears.  People get used to that level, and another is brought into being...until the frog is boiled to death.

An Op-Ed in this morning's Wall Street Journal by Mr. Leo Linbeck of Americans for Fair Taxation explores the proposal for a Fair Tax and discusses the opposition found amongst many in Congress.

First, this concept evolved from a market research study conducted more than ten years ago by a group of business leaders.  The study's goal was to determine what type of system to collect taxes would be most acceptable to citizens.  The result was a proposal that is now known as the Fair Tax and has been introduced as legislation in Congress.

The Fair Tax calls for a national retail sales tax.  This was the most acceptable approach to the majority of Americans and was found to be very beneficial to the economy of our country.  It would eliminate income taxes and payroll taxes (for Social Security and Medicare).  These taxes are very costly to collect, and are embedded in the cost of everything we purchase.  This would rid us of the tax code and the Internal Revenue Service, not to mention many lobbyists and those who make their livings telling those few of us who can afford their services how to avoid taxes.

(Since most states rely to one degree or another on federal tax law and the collection mechanism, this would impact virtually every state in the union.  Would life in Wisconsin become more bearable from a tax standpoint?)

Research has indicated that some 20% of all prices we pay today represent those embedded federal taxes.  Once those are repealed, the theory is that competition in the marketplace would cause prices to be reduced eliminating that portion of the cost of goods.

This type of tax would also eliminate the imbalance suffered by American producers when competing against the tax-free imports that populate the shelves and auto dealerships.  It would also eliminate corporate income taxes and capital gains taxes.  And, we all know that a corporate tax simply is passed on to consumers in the final analysis.  Again the theory is that our marketplace would become the best place in the world in which to do business.

Many fear that this type of tax would hit the poor and middle class the worst.  That wouldn't be the case with this proposal since a "prebate" check would be issued to all citizens to eliminate the impact on the those living in poverty and would give all taxpayers something of a reimbursement for the taxes they'd be paying.

The Fair Tax rate is proposed to be 23% on retail sales.  It would raise the same amount of money that the current tax system raises but at much reduced costs.  It would be levelled at all consumption at the final point of sale so there would not be the tiers of hidden taxes that we now pay as consumers.  It would expand our tax base in that the 'underground economy' would be taxed for all purchases.  Illegal immigrants would be taxed as would foreign visitors.

The Fair Tax eliminates all loopholes and tax avoidance gimmicks.  It eliminates all deductions.  What this would mean is significant.  Congress would no longer be able to favor its friends and punish its enemies through manipulation of tax law.  Income redistribution and social engineering using tax code would be things of the past.

The paragraph above shows why the 'vested interests' have been arguing against this concept and in favor of the mortgage deduction machinery being permitted to continue, according to Mr. Linbeck.  His reasoning, however, is this:  "wouldn't it be better for everyone to stop the IRS from withholding from paychecks; to see the price of new homes - and all other goods - drop by removing embedded costs; and to have interest rates fall as the savings rate increases?"

There have been a lot of tax proposals over the years, and most simply nibble around the edges of existing tax code and structure.  Our tax system has proved to be a big tool for use by the political class.  Witness the latest debates on 'AMT' (the Alternative Minimum Tax that has gotten so out of control as politicians dithered).  Our politicians will only get the message if enough citizens let them know this is what is desired.  Some candidates on the presidential stump have begun to talk about this.

How does this sound to you?  Would you be in favor or against?

May you know the true joys of Christmas and carry them with you throughout the coming year.

There have been many page views of the Blog concerning a full-time fire department for Germantown in conjunction with the poll now running in GermantownNOW on that question.  If you've not yet made your feelings known, please take time to scroll down after reading this and vote.

It seems that Blog may not have been clear enough in expressing my views that a full-time department would continue to need volunteer paid-on-call members.  These are not mutually exclusive concepts. The full-time crews would simply put a fully manned Engine Company (4 personnel) and Ambulance crew  (2 personnel) on the scene within the six minute average on a 24/7/365 basis, giving the volunteers time to get to the scene to augment the full-time crew.

Quite a few readers have gone the next step with their own comments, and those are always welcome.  Some comments have been quite emotional as you might expect, while others have been quite negative, also as you'd expect.  Among them are several that present, what to me seems, logical and pertinent information from the perspective of those who protect us at the risk of their own lives.  Some have given us the rationale behind the number of personnel required for various size dwellings involved in fire.  Please take time to read all the comments if you've interest.

One suggested that an Open Records request might serve to satisfy my curiosity as well as that of others.  That certainly is a possibility, although one I had hoped we wouldn't need to employ.  Maybe it is time that this approach be employed to try to gather the 'real facts' (as apparently contrasted to the imaginary facts) and get to the bottom of this situation.  Maybe it is time to request some help in that regard from the Citizens for Responsible Government (CRG) which is the group, as you may recall, that ferreted out the information on the MATC that we've quoted and referenced many times.

It seems to me that citizens should be able to gather information from elected officials without the need to go through the formalities of an Open Records request, but it also seems as though some expectations are unlikely to be realized without formalities.  In the end, there seems too much conflicting information not to go forward with such a request.

The recent discussions concerning our fire department brings to mind the question posed above, and in the new GermantownNOW poll found in the right-hand column of this page by scrolling down from this Blog.

In 2002, a study commissioned by the village to evaluate and make recommendations about the fire department was done by a private company named Tri-Data.  That company found that there were still 'feelings' amongst some members about the take-over of the department from the Germantown Fire Company some years earlier.  It also made some recommendations and did a comparison of Germantown's department to those of seven other similarly-sized communities in Wisconsin.

Among the recommendations were:

• the frequency of calls and the growth of the village indicate the need for additional full-time staff.
• the village should consider staffing at least one of the engines 24 hours per day.
• having four personnel on the first arriving unit makes it possible to start interior operations immediately upon arrival.

The study found response times of about 6 minutes during the day and slightly less than fourteen minutes at night.  This contrast was due to the fact that full-time respondents were on duty during the day while night calls were delayed as paid on call volunteers responded to the fire call and got to the scene.  As an aside, I'm told that a fire doubles in magnitude every minute; that suggests that a 14 minute response time would see a fire of 256 times greater magnitude than a 6 minute response.  These are very real 'life and death' issues and not just numbers.

I am unaware of anything having been done with this study's results although I may've not been privy to things simply as a member of the public.

In 2005, members of the fire department prepared a proposal for the village's consideration and sought to have the public vote on the recommendations through a referendum.  The referendum never occurred.  The recommendation followed the study's conclusions and sought approval to hire an additional 18 full-time firefighters/EMTs.  This would've allowed for three 24 hour full-time shifts seven days per week that would've assured a 4 person Engine Company and a 2 person Ambulance crew on duty at all times.  The volunteers would've still been required to augment these crews, but the initial respondents would've been able to enter a building for purposes of rescue, for example, in the seventh minute rather than the fifteenth minute.

The cost of the 18 full-time members was estimated to be about $75,000 each for a total budget impact of $1.35 million dollars.  At the time, that amounted to a rate of $0.72 per $1,000 of assessed valuation.  If your home were worth $250,000, the tax impact would've been about $180.  Not included was the fact that fire insurance rates would be expected to fall thus mitigating the tax increase somewhat.  Property loss would've likely been reduced with faster response times, and safety factors would've been increased significantly.

The study, as mentioned, compared eight similarly-sized communities (populations ranging from 16,000 to 20,000 people).  It found that these communities averaged 29 full-time employees.  Germantown pulled that average down considerably since it had four at the time.  Our population today is at about 19,400 people.

Do you think we should at least review the possibility of a full-time staffing increase?  Should Germantown citzens be essentially assured of a 6 minute response time 24 hours per day and 7 days per week?

Vote in the poll; let your thoughts be known.

Comment on this Blog.

Some light fare for today from an e-mail making the rounds.

Have you ever wondered...

• why we order double cheeseburgers, large fries and a DIET coke?
• why we're forced to buy hot dogs in packages of ten and the buns in packages of eight?
• why we have drive-up ATM machines with Braille lettering?
• why we never see the headline "Psychic Wins Lottery"?
• why abbreviated is such a long word?
• why lemon juice is made using artificial flavor while dishwashing liquid is made with real lemons?
• why there is no 'mouse-flavored' cat food?
• why the needle is sterilized before a lethal injection?
• why banks leave the doors wide open and then chain the pens to the counters?
• why we park our valuable cars outside and keep the junk in the garage?
• why women seem unable to apply mascara with their mouths closed?
• why the time of day with the slowest traffic is called 'rush hour'?

What are some of your "Have you ever wondered" thoughts?  Post them as comments so all can share with you.

This poem has been credited to a military person whose identity appears at the end.  I have not verified that information but thought the poem very well done:

The embers glowed softly, and in their dim light, I gazed round the room and I cherished the sight.  My wife was asleep, her head on my chest, my daughter beside me, angelic in rest.  Outside the snow fell, a blanket of white, transforming the yard to a winter delight.  The sparkling lights in the tree I believe, completed the magic that was Christmas Eve.  My eyelids were heavy, my breathing was deep, secure and surrounded by love I would sleep.  In perfect contentment, or so it would seem, so I slumbered, perhaps I started to dream.

The sound wasn't loud, and it wasn't too near.  But I opened my eyes when it tickled my ear.  Perhaps just a cough, I didn't quite know, then the sure sound of footsteps outside in the snow.  My soul gave a tremble, I struggled to hear, and I crept to the door just to see who was near.  Standing out in the cold and the dark of the night, a lone figure stood, his face weary and tight.

A soldier, I puzzled, some twenty years old, perhaps a Marine, huddled here in the cold.  Alone in the dark, he looked up and smiled, standing watch over me, and my wife and my child.  'What are you doing?' I asked without fear, 'Come in this moment, it's freezing out here!  Put down your pack, brush the snow from your sleeve, you should be at home on a cold Christmas Eve!'

For barely a moment I saw his eyes shift, away from the cold and the snow blown drifts.  To the window that danced with a warm fire's light then he sighed and he said 'It's really all right, I'm out here by choice.  I'm here every night.'  'It's my duty to stand at the front of the line, that separates you from the darkest of times.  No one had to ask or beg or implore me.  My Gramps died at Pearl on a day in December,' then he sighed, 'That's a Christmas 'Gram always remembers'.  'My Dad stood his watch in the jungles of 'Nam, and now it is my turn and so, here I am.  I've not seen my own son in more than awhile, but my wife sends me pictures, he's sure got her smile'.

Then he bent and he carefully pulled from his bag, the red, white and blue..an American flag.  'I can live through the cold and the being alone, away from my family, my house and my home.  I can stand at my post through the rain and the sleet, I can sleep in a foxhole with little to eat.  I can carry the weight of killing another, or lay down my life with my sister and brother..who stand at the front against any and all, to ensure for all time that this flag will not fall.'

'So go back inside,' he said, 'harbor no fright, your family is waiting and I'll be alright.'  'But isn't there something I can do, at the least, give you money', I asked, 'or prepare you a feast?  It seems all too little for all that you've done, for being away from your wife and your son.'  Then his eye welled a tear that held no regret, 'Just tell us you love us, and never forget, to fight for our rights at home while we're gone, to stand your own watch, no matter how long.  For when we come home, either standing or dead, to know you remember we fought and we bled, is payment enough, and with that we will trust, that we mattered to you as you mattered to us.'

LCDR Jeff Giles, SC, USN   30th Naval Construction Regiment   OIC, Logistics Cell One    Al Taqqadum, Iraq

Copyright December 7, 2000 by Michael Marks

(Thanks to Jeff Sawatzke, a fellow Blogger, for providing the proper attribution.)

Trustee James Langer has apparently tendered his resignation from Paid On Call status in the Germantown Fire Department.  This happened a few days ago according to sources.

This is a laudable first step on his part and the citizens should thank him for this action.

It does not, however, eliminate the fact that he has a perceived bias while continuing in his role as chairman of the Public Safety Committee.

President Kempinski should now make the rest of the decision and remove Mr. Langer from that committee.  Langer will still have his vote on issues that come before the trustees as a whole and could still be asked by the committee to lend his insight to its deliberations, but the committee's actions while he is still involved as either chair or member will be presumed tainted...whether or not actually tainted.

There has simply been too much of a questionable nature going on in this situation and this must be put to rest for the benefit of the entire community.  We're all too familiar with the phrase...perception is reality.

Thanks Trustee Langer for beginning the process of resolving this festering situation.  I hope that President Kempinski will take the last step in the next few days.

"Timing of gift questioned" was the headline of Tom Kertscher's column in the morning Journal Sentinel.  That may well be a classic understatement, although I'm sure Mr. Kertscher needs to remain less 'curmudgeonly' than do I.

This is a blatant attempt to grease the skids for the denial of Germantown's soon-to-be-presented petition to the state technical college board.  MATC has not presented "free" computers to any other community and yet it has done so twice now for Germantown.  This coupled with the recent appointment of Germantown's Superintendent to the MATC board certainly shows that MATC is where we need to be sending our money.  This provides the technical college board a 'hidey-hole' from which they can summarily dismiss our petition.

These so-called "free" computers carry a very heavy price in my opinion.  The property tax increase alone to be collected from Germantown citizens will be in the hundreds of thousands of dollars.  Let's say, for argument, that the increase in MATC's property tax collection will be $300,000.  If that were the case, then the "free" computers cost only about $15,000 each.  Too tough on MATC?  Okay.  Let's say they'll gather only $200,000.  Then each "free" computer will have only cost us about $10,000.  If we add the historic annual over-payment extracted from us without a voice, the cost is in the millions of dollars for "free" laptop computers.

Then there is this whole question of accountability.  Actually, there is a question as to UNaccountability.  How in the world is it that this frugally-run institution can come up with this kind of money when we didn't even request their assistance?  How is it that this appropriation didn't even require board approval?  How is it that WCTC actually sells its used computers at the end of their useful lives, let alone not giving "free" computers to communities in its district?

It appears this could well be validation that the inmates run this asylum.

No connection?  Please spare us the obvious truth-stretching.  Why else would we receive this largess at this time without knowing it was coming or even having made a request for such consideration?  Of course there is a connection.  To try to convince us otherwise gives us a very real look into the utter disregard with which us taxpayers of Germantown are held. 

We not only have no voice, we deserve no voice because we don't know enough to come in from the cold!

The Wall Street Journal editorial page likened the Democrat-controlled Congress to Delta House of Animal House movie fame.  As Delta House is being closed by the Dean, Otter says, "I think this situation absolutely requires a really futile and stupid gesture on somebody's part".  Bluto (John Belushi) replies, "We're just the guys to do it".

This Congress has accomplished miraculously little.  It has passed an increased minimum wage law.  Most of the lack of accomplishment can be traced to the division within the Democratic party although they would tell you it is due to Republican obstructionism.  The far left is still working to embarrass the president who has shown that he is anything but a lame duck.  He vetoes their spending largess, and they fail to override.  Yet, they come back time after time only to be defeated time after time.  Reid and Pelosi don't get along, and they've not been able to marshall support of their own party members on more than a handful of issues.

We have no funding passed as yet for the troops.  We have an Alternative Minimum Tax (AMT) that is now a very real extra tax for more and more 'middle class' taxpayers.  It was originally enacted to cause the super rich to have to pay at least something.  The Dems have tried to keep their pledge of no tax decreases without corresponding increases somewhere else (called the Pay As You Go rule).  The president continues to use his veto pen and the Dems continue to bang their heads on the same walls.

We have an abomination of a SCHIP program proposal (children's health insurance programs) that continues to push for more and more adults to be provided coverage.  The president vetoes every such effort and the Dems can't find a way around those vetoes, but they do not alter course and get this much needed program funding passed.

In the spirit of fair play, the president has finally found his veto pen.  He seemed to have misplaced it during the earmark explosion of the Republican majorities in Congress.

During all this, Congress' rating has been in the 20% range.  The president has increased to a rating in the mid-thirties.  The Democrats believe they are winning this fight, and yet the public, if polls are to be believed, disagrees with their assessment.  Two recent elections for replacement congressional representatives went Republican while all predictions said they would go Democrat.

Finally, the war (surge) seems to be going better and it is less and less an effective political issue.  Americans are again more concerned with things within our borders...as well as with the borders themselves.

Are the tea leaves realigning?

The silence from our elected officials and village officials is deafening, while the debate this situation has spawned continues to build. 

I've yet to hear from or receive e-mails from any elected official or village official.  It is difficult to imagine that they are not yet aware of this situation since they are a part of it and especially since I sent e-mails to both Mr. Kempinski and Mr. Langer.  It would be amazing to learn that they've not read the Blogs nor the many comments that have been posted by department members and citizens.  Do people cease to be voters and citizens when they opt to become Bloggers?

Another closed door session was scheduled for last evening and apparently that related to possible disciplinary action for five members of the Germantown Fire Department.  A note here:  not a single firefighter or EMT has violated the confidentiality requirement imposed by the Public Safety Committee Police and Fire Commission while it is obvious to me that some know much about the closed door sessions.  That certainly speaks to their sense of ethics and to their commitment to this community and its citizens.

I wonder if the Chief was invited to attend this session or the first?  I wonder if any of the five were represented by counsel?  I wonder if any were accompanied by their union representative?  I wonder when we'll learn what this has been about?

I wonder if this will prove to have been an example of the micro-managing that seems to prevail over the fire department?

I spoke with the chairman of the Commission several hours after this posting and this led me to make the changes you note.

That was the title of an article by Jeffrey Schmidt that appeared in the American Thinker publication on November 27th discussing the funding debates that are taking place in Washington over the Medicare program.  Then, today's Boston Globe carried an article that discusses the problems in the Massachusetts Connector healthcare program.  Both articles should chill you to the bone...and they should convince you that politically-driven healthcare is simply a bad idea.

The Medicare funding process gives us keen insight into what happens once politicians get to decide how much and what sort of healthcare participants receive.  There is some $390 billion available for coverage of the 40 million seniors and other beneficiaries of the Medicare programs.  The discussion involves everything from possible changes (reimbursement reductions) to the very successful Medicare Advantage programs, to reducing physician's fees to reimbursement amounts for various treatments and therapies, etc.

What has been absent in all this debate is this:  the process has not been about the best healthcare for Medicare recipients. 

It has been about the political process with political ends uppermost in the minds of the participants.  The politicans directly involved are worrying more about currying favor with some special interests, placating other special interests and punishing, yes punishing, other others.

Now, the other example:  the Massachusetts Connector healthcare program.  This program is run by the state politicians (they appointed the Board that actually holds the meetings, but we all understand that appointed boards are political organs).  It requires that every citizen, save a few, must have healthcare coverage by December 31st or risk penalties that include confiscating their tax return dollars.  Among other things, this mandate overwhelmed the system established by the state, truly a surprise :)

During the initial set-up of plans, the Connector board had to go back and browbeat the insurers to extract artifical premium reductions.  That hen has come back to roost.  The Connector staff has estimated that premiums for the several plans they designed will go up from 4% to 14% based on actuarial reviews given the costs that insurers have seen during this year.

However, the Connector can't afford this for fear it'll cause the program to fail.  So what to do, what to do?  They have an idea; let's go back and mandate premium increases of no more than 5%.  What'll this do?  Well, for starters, it is going to prove to the insurers that they were right all along, and that maybe they should think seriously about getting out of Massachusetts.  Golly, if we can't mandate more losses for the insurers, then we can either increase premiums (since no tax money is currently involved) or we can reduce benefits.  Can you spell R-A-T-I-O-N-I-N-G? 

These are two classic examples of what happens when we entrust our healthcare to politicians.  These are two excellent examples of what we can expect when "Healthy Wisconsin" is brought back to life next year as has been promised by the Democrats.  These plans simply invite trouble for us participants.  How is it that we can still insist on repeating the mistakes from which we should have learned our lessons?

Because the politicians see in this that which might well be the ultimate political control tool.  There are too many politicians who believe they are the solution to everything when, in fact, they're more often the problem.

Will we remember the lesson, or will the promise of universal healthcare win us over?  Will we trust the politicians with our healthcare future?   I hope the answer to that question is NO.

As stated in my most recent Blog, I have sought responses from both the firefighters and the Village officials involved in this situation.  I am bringing one side of those issues to you today since I've only had the opportunity/response from that side of this situation to date.  If and when the other side responds, I'll be sure to bring that information to the readers of this Blog.

I have visited with firefighters and EMTs over the past few days.  I have developed some opinions as the result of this admittedly one-sided debate.  I'll share the discussion points with you and try to make sense of what I've been able to pull together so far.

There are two points of view in the firefighter/EMT group of people.  One side is what I'll label as the 'traditionalists' and the other is what I'll call the 'young turks'.  There is a chief, Gary Pollpeter, who appears to be 'damned if he does and damned if he doesn't'.  I frankly don't know if it is possible for that man to ever be able to find support from all his constituencies simultaneously...and I don't know that this is necessarily his fault in every instance.  I have not found a full timer who doesn't express support, by the way.

The traditionalists are largely made up of those who were volunteers and are now part of the group known as 'Paid On Call'.  These folks have recently formed their own union.  (Curiously, the chief was not part of the negotiating team that put the agreement together.  Also curious is that this agreement apparently contains changes to what the full time people are permitted to do as an obvious protection to the POCs.  There is some confusion as to whether that agreement has actually been signed yet, but it appears that the pay scales have been put into place without that 'formality' and firefighter/EMTs have been told it is in place whether or not signed.)

The young turks are those who are full time firefighter/EMTs.  They also have a union.  They tend, with an exception or two, to have not been part of the traditionalists, who have been trained more recently and who are trying to move the department ahead, as they see that mission.  That would explain some of the distrust that seems to exist between these two elements.  I asked if this has shown itself in any way during actual emergencies and was told that was not the case.  The two segments appear to work well together although there is some concern expressed as to the abilities of some POC members to respond as necessary to protect their brother/sister members in an emergency situation.

There have been points of agreement between the traditionalists and the young turks, as evidenced when the recent proposal to move to a higher level of fulltime firefighter/EMTs was developed.  After the fact, it seems that some of the tradiltionalists changed their minds whether due to an epiphany or to pressure I'm not sure.  There is an apparent apprehension in the ranks of traditionalists that the young turks are working to eliminate them and their positions, while the young turks claim that not to be true and point to the fact that it is increasingly difficult to recruit new volunteers, and that volunteers are less responsive to calls than would be desired by the full time people.  They actually were quite pleased with the pay increase the POCs received recently.

There are quite a few different issues.  Among those are whether or not physical ability testing is appropriate.  There are traditionalists who might be in danger of being unable to satisfactorily complete the testing due to age if nothing else.  The young turks are younger by definition.  There is a schism as to whether or not professional firefighters and EMTs can continue to be permitted to serve if they do not participate in and successfully complete this testing.  Frankly, if there are those who can no longer do what might be necessary from a physical perspective, I would not want to have them trying to rescue me or anyone else.  I think the majority of Germantown's citzens would agree.

There seems to me to be a very real conflict of interest in terms of members of the Public Safety Committee.  Trustee James Langer, chairman of this committee, is a member of the Paid On Call (POC) firefighter's group.  Trustee Al Vanderheiden's brother Dick is a member of the POC firefighter's group.  Vanderheiden is a committee member.  I can imagine that the arguments in favor of this would claim that we need firefighter experience on the committee.  That may be, but I have to ask the question of just how either person is able to view each and every situation dispassionately, and how they can be anything but at least a little biased in their positions.  How can we have POC or full time firefighters sitting in judgement of the chief and department officers and other firefighters without some conflict being involved?  If they're recusing themselves from every vote, maybe that works except that the committee is somewhat emasculated in that event.  This gets to the point that President Kempinski made these appointments and can certainly 'unmake' them if he chooses.

There is a decided view that it is 'us' and 'them' in the department from what I've seen so far.  Examples of the seemingly picayune things that have been done include the edict that the chief must park his vehicle outside the building even though an unobstructed inside space is available.  How can the chief be expected to respond promptly if he has to fire up the vehicle and get out and remove snow and ice from the front and rear windows?  I have not been able to see the wisdom of the village requiring that he cease being paid some $325 to $350 per month allowance in return for using his own vehicle.  It is four wheel drive, he pays the insurance and all maintenance and fuel costs.  Now he'll be driving a rear-wheel drive sedan with hundreds of thousands of miles on it that is unable to drive off-road.  That will cost the village a great deal more than the previous allowance.  Is this a wise decision or is it some how a vindictive move to further anger the chief in hopes he'll just pack it in and walk away?

Firefighters feel that few Germantown citizens are aware that we do not have a full time fire department, and they believe that if that were known the majority of citizens would desire a full time department even at a higher tax cost.  We'll not know that since the trustees refused to permit a referendum to appear on the ballot in 2006 or thereabouts.

I learned that of the 42 POC firefighters, 37 are active members, 5 are inactive, 1 is on leave and 3 others are expected to quit entirely or take leaves.  That means there are 36 POCs available with that number likely to dip to 33.  I've asked if we could adequately man two large structure fires simultaneously without outside assistance.  The answer was an unequivocal NO.  I asked what the response in numbers was to the recent Ashbury complex garage fire and was told that there were 3 POCs who were present in addition to the full time people, and that Menomonee Falls provided three firefighters in mutual assistance.  Given current staffing and POC turn-out, we can put one engine on the road but that requires one POC person to report, which he usually does, but what if he is out of the village?

It has become apparent to me in my conversations here and elsewhere that this dysfunctional environment is not unusual especially in communities our size.  That having been said, I'd sure like to see us out from under that particular umbrella.

Again, please make comments voicing your opinion if you choose.  If you are a village official and wish to set something straight or add to the subjects referenced, please do so either by comment here or by e-mail to me above.

There has been an extraordinary response to the first Blog I posted following the publishing of an article in the Journal Sentinel concerning our fire department.  If you've not noticed, take a few minutes to read the comments that have been posted.

In addition to these postings, I've heard from others desiring not to be identified with their thoughts and experiences in this general area.  Among the repetitive themes are these...

• Chief Pollpeter is doing the best job possible from the firefighters' points of view (based on those who've made remarks).
• Trustee James Langer appears to have a conflict of interest in that he is a firefighter and is chair of the Germantown Public Safety Committee.
• Old timers in the department continue to be angry that the state forced the change in department structure and brought it under the control of the village and are taking that out on Pollpeter.
• The department has too few members forcing overtime to assure adequate coverage, and the trustees made a poor decision when they denied the populace the opportunity to vote on a referendum for department expansion.
• The new union is biased but that is expected from a labor organization.

In an attempt to get more information, I've sent inquiries to Village President Kempinski and Trustee Langer.  I have called a couple of fire department personnel and visited with others in the community.

It seems that the old bromide, where there's smoke there's fire, may be apt in this situation, but without more information to flesh out the various sides of this situation, we're still at the point of mere speculation.  I hope our elected officials will assist and I hope some of the fire department people will be more responsive given the obvious feelings that prevail.

One thing seems obvious however.  There is a problem that has caused some turn-over, and some hard feelings and may have begun to erode morale.  The other thing that seems to jump out loudly and clearly is this:  department personnel view themselves as professionals.  And they recognize that they serve the citizens of the community.

Tom Kertscher writes this morning in the Journal Sentinel about an ongoing investigation in the Germantown Fire Department.  This apparently involves Chief Gary Pollpeter, whose name we've become familiar with in past controversies.  It also appears to involve significant overtime pay for one part-time firefighter, Matt Karpinski, who worked 39 regular and 15 overtime hours per week in 2006.  He has already worked 818 overtime hours through November 8th of this year, which is more than his total overtime for all of 2006.

This seems to be about Chief Pollpeter finding a way to increase his full-time firefighter staff even though those requests have been refused by the village trustees.  Trustee Jim Langer stated that the overtime was an issue but further stated, "There's a big management issue there."  Pollpeter's raise has been held up by the trustees.

Pollpeter has been at odds with the trustees for some time.  He requested a referendum be placed before the voters that, had it been approved, would've authorized a more than double-sized fire department at a cost of $1,350,000 per year.  That referendum request was denied by the trustees.

The village Police and Fire Commission has been investigating an unknown number of Germantown firefighters and recently held a five-hour closed door meeting on "possible disciplinary action".  Another such meeting is scheduled for this coming Wednesday.

It seems upon reflection that our fire department has been involved in various disputes for years.  As far back as 1997, Pollpeter was ordered to attend management training classes because of complaints about how the department was being run.  The village trustees have been turned over during that time, so you'd think that any personal disputes would've been taken out of the equation if they were seated at the village board level.

Germantown citizens deserve to know exactly what the issues are, and that isn't possible when everything is done behind closed doors.  Few people are speaking but it is apparent that there is a big power struggle going on.  It seems apparent that this power struggle has been festering for some time.  It seems, as well, that the chief is deeply involved, and that members of the department are involved as well.

The Village of Germantown took over the private Germantown Fire Company in 1989.  That meant that the village was the ultimate power in all matters concerning the fire department.  Is it time for a thorough house cleaning in the department?  Is that what is going on behind closed doors?

If you're involved and wish to use this forum, comments are welcomed.  Maybe we can shed the light of day on the "issues".

The United States House of Representatives has passed H.R. 6, the misguided energy bill, by a vote of 235 to 181.  Two members of the House from Wisconsin voted against this bill:  Paul Ryan and Jim Sensenbrenner,  All the Wisconsin Democrats voted yes as did the RINO Tom Petri (R).  RINO stands for 'Republican In Name Only' as you'll recall.

This bill is now in the Senate and there were no predictions as to the outcome of that vote.  We can only hope it is defeated.

Just how is the bill so misguided?  Well, let's take a look:

• It fails to increase the supply of energy resources that exist in our own country in abundance and that exacerbates our need for foreign oil.
• It increases taxes on American companies by over $20 Billion, and that trickles down to you and me.
• It increases the minimum fuel economy for both cars and light trucks to 35 miles per gallon by the year 2020 and that raises the price of vehicles.
• It creates new 'green pork' by authorizing governors and local officials to issue tax credit bonds with very few restrictions on what that money can be spent on.  Examples of a couple of potential uses are the 'indoor rain forest' project in Iowa and the purchase of 'hybrid' snowmobiles in Aspen, Colorado.  Are you willing to trust Governor Doyle with this money-raising device?  or Mayor Barrett?
• It includes 'forestry conservation tax credit bonds' in the amount of $500 Million that appears to apply only to one parcel of land in Montana owned by a big private timber company.  Can you spell E-A-R-M-A-R-K?
• It repeals the domestic manufacturing deduction for exploring, extracting, and refining oil and natural gas here, thus leading to increasing imports, and higher prices for oil and gasoline.  That sounds like something we need, huh?

Finally, this 1,000 page bill that was released just a day before the vote was called (so as to permit careful study, I'm sure), lacks the language that would expedite the oil refinery permit process so that we could get more fuel to the marketplace more quickly.

I suspect that those voting in favor will have some pat answer to the question of why they did so.  It will sound something like:  "We can't permit the perfect to get in the way of the practical".  "We have to take what we can get when we can get it."

This is very much the story of the boiling frog.  Each incremental step raises the temperature.  We just let these things happen and keep re-electing those who make those votes.  They continue to take similar actions year after year.  We then wake one day and wonder how our country was plunged into such a deep recession for so long.  Finally, we frogs are cooked.

I had the need to drive to Chicago this morning.  I was amazed at the bottleneck that is still in place given the Illinois Tollway Authority's work on I-94.

I started for my 11:30AM appointment at 9:30am.  I went some three miles at the border of Wisconsin and Illinois in a 'short' thirty-five minutes.  By the way, signs announce that if you hit a worker, you'll be fined $10,000 and spend 14 years locked up; and the minimum speeding fine is $375.

After getting past Gurnee, IL I was slowing repeatedly for the myriad construction zones with 45 MPH limits until nearing O'Hare. The lines at the toll booths were equally as bad for those of us not using the I-Pass, and those lines weren't a lot better either.  (Please be nice to the people collecting the tolls; this wasn't their idea.) 

Fortunately, my lunch date had a flexible schedule and we met some forty-five minutes later than planned.  Had I been taking a flight out of O'Hare, I'd have been out of luck.  Even more reason to fly from Mitchell.

The return trip was much better since most of the construction delays are on the down-bound side of the Interstate.

Just a word to the wise. 

How many people do you know who, having been improperly denied their raise for two years, would have said what Police Chief Peter Hoell said?

Not very many, I'd venture.

I commend Chief Hoell for his attitude.  "Part of it was my fault because I have a really hard time asking for stuff for myself, and I really enjoy what I do working for Germantown". 

The chief left something in the range of  $5,000+ laying on the table, and all he can do is take part of the blame and gush about how happy he is doing what he does for his officers and us.

I hope we have his services for many years to come!