The proposed Wisconsin State Budget from Scott Walker includes a number of bad ideas. Among them is the idea that we should put tax dollars into a venture capital fund, for start up businesses. My objections are these:

I remember well, Earth Day I. Climate change was all the buzz, and as a Wildlife Ecology major, I was of course concerned. And yes, that statement in the title was a major theme. By then, I was already a member of the National Audobon Society, and a true believer in the environmental movement. And while I still have some concerns, let me briefly describe some the events that turned me around in terms of political and economic outlook.

Given April 9 in Lake Delton, as revised, expanded and amended:

As a short preamble, let me state that I do not think it is a good idea to put major policy initiatives in the state budget. Let them be more fully debated on their own merits. Republicans rightfully criticized this policy when Democrats did it, but if it was wrong when Jimmy Doyle did it, it is just as wrong when Scott Walker does it.

Given April 9 in Lake Delton, as revised, expanded and amended:

As a short preamble, let me state that I do not think it is a good idea to put major policy initiatives in the state budget. Let them be more fully debated on their own merits. Republicans rightfully criticized this policy when Democrats did it, but if it was wrong when Jimmy Doyle did it, it is just as wrong when Scott Walker does it.

I have thought that rather than taxing employers for the UC fund, we should tax employees. Why? Several reasons. First, some people are more prone to unemployment than others. Some are more inclined to get a job, so why tax employers for those who would game the system to stay unemployed longer?

Second, if employees paid the tax, it would demonstrate to them, that because of this mandated benefit, their wages are less. That way, they can actually see the costs to them, which at the present time, can only be inferred. Hey, we could even mandate that employers pay the employee more by the percentage that UC insurance now represents, so that employees' actual incomes do not go down. This would help make the lesson to the employee without it costing him anything on the front side, and we already mandate that employers pay this now, so no difference in cost to employers either.