SNAP! Limits for Legislators too.

Dear Wisconsin Republican Legislators,

I understand that your only concern with limiting the food items allowed to be purchased by FoodShare recipients is good stewardship of the hard-earned Wisconsin tax payer’s money.   However, FoodShare  recipients are not the only people living off the generosity of my tax dollar.  You too, who have been in public life for some time are also feeding yourselves and your families on my dollar.  And I want some accountability.

I would like to receive a monthly report that shows that no more than ¼ of your income was spent in ways I consider unwise.  I will give you some examples to help you develop a more healthy lifestyle and to adequately thank me as a taxpayer for my dollars.

Of course it goes without saying that there will be no shellfish, alcohol, or spices other than salt and pepper purchased for your family with my tax dollar.  Also since your salary is not for food only I believe I have the right, and responsibility, to help you make good decisions about how you spend the rest of your salary.

No vacations outside of Wisconsin.  Wisconsin is a lovely state and there is plenty to do here.  You should not take my tax dollar out of this state.  That is not what I pay you for.  Also, if you are keeping an apartment for yourself or second home in Madison I believe that must end.  You can sleep in your office or rent an apartment with other legislators.  You may have two automobiles:  one for you here in the city and one for your family back in your district.    Each must be used and at least five years old.  You do not need to be wasting my money on fancy new cars.

I understand that you are given an allowance to purchase food and necessities while you are in the capital city.  I would like to receive an accounting of where you eat and what you purchase when you eat out.  Again, I do not think I as a taxpayer ought to be paying for your beer or cocktails at lunch or dinner.  You are being paid to work, not drink.  And no one needs to eat a steak at a restaurant.  That is just too lavish.  Hamburger will fill you just as well and save me some money.  Actually you ought to be choosing only healthy food and setting an example for those SNAP recipients so perhaps it would be better if you just ordered a salad. 

Also you may not use your salary to send your child to a private school.  You are being paid with public dollars and those dollars should be spent only on public education.  This includes university.  There are many good choices for college education within the UW system and there is no need for me to pay for your child to go to some fancy out-of-state institution. 

I trust that you understand that these requirements are only for your own good.  I understand that at times legislators have not made wise choices with my tax dollar and in these hard times I cannot afford for you to make lavish, unwise choices with my money.  You may send me a monthly accounting of where and how you spend your income.  If I do not receive an accounting EACH MONTH it will be necessary to suspend your income IMMEDIATELY. After an acceptable period of time has passed you may reapply for your salary and I will decide if you have learned from this experience and may therefore make better choices in the future.

A citizen,

Ellen

Power Corrupts Paul Ryan

August 25

Paul Ryan claims to be proud of his pro-life record.  This is the record of putting forth bills that would that deny all women an abortion even in cases of rape (forcible, that is) or incest.  No exceptions.

Except maybe just one.

    

Paul Ryan’s proud, rigid pro-life record gets a little wobbly when he is confronted with the opportunity for more power.

    

All women, 12 year old girls or 50 year old grandmothers, who are victims of rape and unfortunately conceive would be forced to have that child according to Paul Ryan—except for now when Paul Ryan is running on the Mitt Romney ticket for vice-president.  

Mitt Romney says (at the moment) that he is in favor of a rape exception in his anti-choice plan.  And Paul Ryan is willing to support that exception now that the exception comes with a benefit to his political career.  

The child conceived during a rape is an innocent American he says (unlike the mother?), unless that child happens to stand between Paul Ryan and the Vice Presidency.  Then the abortion of that innocent is a “step in the right direction” according to Paul Ryan as he explains why his absolute, no exceptions law can wait while he gathers more power.

     

Rape is rape.  Abortion is a sad and tragic necessity sometimes.  And each woman ought to have the right to make her own decision regarding abortion.  I believe abortions ought to safe, legal and rare.

     

Paul Ryan showed us this week that his right wing, no choice, no exceptions abortion stance isn’t quite as solid as he’d like you to think.  Not if it comes between Paul Ryan (R) Wisconsin and Paul Ryan, the Vice President of the United States.

Rush Limbaugh is a Boor

This is rant. Rants are by their very nature not well thought-out, finely crafted pieces of writing: This guy really pissed me off this week.

This week the right wing "entertainer" Rush Limbaugh took on a young woman college student because she said something he didn't like.

At the request of elected lawmakers Sandra Fluke spoke to a small sub-committee about the cost, financial and physical, of not having insurance coverage for contraception. While she may be "an activist", in this case she was responding to an invitation, a request, from lawmakers to speak. She did not seek this particular podium. Rush called her a "slut" and a "prostitute" and demanded that if insurance companies were forced to provide contraception coverage for all women then " we ought to get something for it. She should post the videos online" so he could watch.

This man is a boor. A boor is a male pig that wallows in mud and slime and roots with his snout for the best piece of rotten refuse to feast on. Rush is a boor.

Sandra Fluke was brave enough to speak in a hearing room while Rush hides in his sound-proof, window-less, climate controlled booth while broadcasting his thoughts to the public. She had a few minutes in front of a few people, while he attacked her for hours with an audience of millions. What a brave and courageous American he is.

Rush will huff and say, “but I’m an entertainer”. I find nothing entertaining in name-calling and the degradation of women. If Sandra Fluke were his daughter would he find it “entertaining” to have his daughter called a slut on public airwaves? Would he find it entertaining to imagine “watching” the videos he “paid for”? Since when did slut and prostitute become entertaining names for women? No, Rush is nothing more than a schoolyard bully who makes millions and millions of dollars by taunting those less powerful.

Part of his remarks included poking at her parents, sarcastically wondering how “proud” they must be of their daughter for having so much sex. I wonder how proud Rush’s mother must be. Whether she is still living or has passed, I’m sure she can’t be very proud of the man her boy has become. I can’t imagine that she hoped for a boy who would bully girls and make a lot of money by belittling and berating people who can’t respond.

The rest of the republicans can’t seem to bring themselves to call out Rush for being a boor. The men who want to be Commander in Chief are not quite brave enough to say publically that calling women sluts is wrong and that Rush is wrong to do it. Rick Santorum could only respond with “that’s absurd” as though Rush is just being silly. While Mitt Romney said that Rush’s words are not the one’s he would have used. Does that mean it is okay with him that Rush degraded this young woman in public? That it is okay that he stated she sold her body for money? Rush just should have used better language? Really? I think both Rick and Mitt need to look further down than the “fire in their belly” and see if they have any manhood left. How can they defend us against a real enemy if they are not men enough to confront an entertainer? Or do they share Rush’s opinion of women as sluts, prostitutes and feminazies?

Today the Republicans are in a righteous snit because the Democrats are fund raising around this episode. Well, damn right. When women are being attacked and degraded on the public airwaves (which by the way women also pay for) then yes, something needs to be done. And while Rush makes millions doing this we will also need millions to stand up to the bullies and the boors who have once again decided to use women’s bodies as a battleground.

A letter to St Joseph

Dear , dear St. Joseph,

We have another open house tomorrow and I just wanted to remind you of a couple of things. Your statue has been buried in our back yard (as per the tradition) for 10 months. During that time you have endured being disinterred by the landscaper and replanted in the petunia bed. You have experienced one winter in Wisconsin, a hot dry summer and now another winter is upon us. I am happy to do our part in this tradition--give your statue a place of honor in our new home—but you’ve got to do your part and sell this house. If it doesn’t happen soon, well, I’m just sayin’, it’s a long time until the Spring Thaw and your toes aren’t going to get any warmer.

Reverently, Ellen

One path (sort of) to transparency in government

With just a little tweaking the recent Supreme Court decision to let corporations spend unlimited cash on political ads could just get us what we claim to want: honesty and transparency in our government.

I propose that all elected officials, from the President of the United State right down to school board members and alderpersons be required to wear uniforms to work.

These uniforms would have the name of the individual¹s corporate sponsor/owner written across the back (with perhaps an embroidered emblem on a front pocket). This way we citizens who are now only able to observe our government at work (because an individual can no longer actually participate in any meaningful way) will know exactly who is working for whom.

We would know which congressperson is owned by the National Rifle Association and which senators are owned by the oil companies or the health care industry. We would know when local decisions about liquor licenses are made who is doing the will of the Tavern League and which school board members have been purchased by the Chamber of Commerce.

If any legislation is inadvertently passed, there could also be a provision for the sponsoring corporation or industry to have the right to a slick, shiny cover on the bill. It might read "This war bill is brought to you by the Military Industrial Complex committed to bringing you more bang for your buck." Or "This health care bill is being brought to you by the health insurance industry. Remember, if you die sooner it will cost less."

Imagine the savings on staff time when there is no longer the need for anyone to spin any decision as "good for the future of our children." or "protecting our American Values." No more ackward posturing about fiscal responsibility or doing the will of the people. Americans would be able to see who is making our laws and why. We would know that the bottom line is, well, the bottom line.

If this works, we could soon move to a more efficient way of selecting our law makers. We could do away with costly elections altogether and simply have auctions. The highest bidder for any candidate would then own his or her very own "public official." This might be a little uncomfortable for any who remember enough of our history to recall the slave auctions, but I imagine that within a few years most of our historians will also have been purchased by universities, think tanks or publishers and that unfortunate comparison will fade.

Let¹s do away with the pretense that our lawmakers work for anyone other than those who have paid for them. Beginning with uniforms bearing company names and logos will make it clear and transparent just who owns which government officials and we can at last have some real honesty in government.