Dissecting WMC ad's deceptions, one by one

Apparently the GOP is quite scared of the perception that Gov. Walker's administration is failing on jobs and the economy, because front group Wisconsin Manufacturers and Commerce is out with a large TV ad buy that literally claims Wisconsin's economy is taking off like a rocket. I've been fortunate enough not to spot this ad, but I did notice WMC's release that goes with the ad, and I want to break down the claims they make.

“Wisconsin’s business climate has improved dramatically since 2011, and 94 percent of state business leaders say the state is headed in the right direction,” said WMC President\CEO Kurt R. Bauer.

Talk about meaningless, members of a Republican front group think that the Republican governor is doing a good job. And the majority of fans in green and gold in Lambeau on Sunday will be rooting for the Packers. These guys are already reaching.

Now onto the data, and the use of that data.

In July, Wisconsin ranked second in the entire nation for potential economic job growth, reported the Philadelphia Federal Reserve Bank.

I mentioned this survey when it came out 6 weeks ago, but there's a problem with WMC quoting that. There's been a Philly Fed leading index survey since then, and Wisconsin doesn't rank as high there.

Philly Fed leading index, August 2013
1. Ind. +2.77%
2. N.J. +2.77%
3. Miss +2.53%
4. Minn +2.35%
5. Maine +2.18%
...
11. Ohio +1.81%
12. Ari. +1.68%
T13. Ga. +1.62%
T13. Wis. +1.62%

Not exactly 2nd in the nation is it? But WMC does the classic lie by omission by using the prior survey, and not the one where Wisconsin falls 11 spots. There's another related lie by WMC later on.

...in July the Philadelphia Federal Reserve Bank reported that Wisconsin was No. 1 in the Midwest for potential economic performance.

But in August, Indiana, Minnesota, and Ohio were all ranked higher than Wisconsin, leaving us 4th out of 7 Midwestern states- the middle of the pack. WMC ain't gonna tell you that, will they?

Here's WMC's next claim.

And, Wisconsin outpaced Indiana, Iowa, Illinois and Michigan in wage growth, according to the US Bureau of Labor Statistics.

The best I can figure is that this comes from the most recent Quarterly Census of Employment and Wages, and this one could be true, as Wisconsin had the second largest weekly wage growth in the Midwest in 2012 under this survey at 4.8% (only Minnesota was higher at 5.1%). Of course what's not mentioned is that Wisconsin still had the 3rd-lowest weekly wage in the Midwest, and it was after a 2.5% drop in wages in Walker's first year in office- the 2nd largest drop in the Midwest. So while WMC's claim is technically true, it's leaving out the failure in Walker's first year, which helps explain the gain in year 2, since it's from a smaller number.

Here's the final WMC claim to take apart.

In June, CNBC reported Wisconsin ranked 5th in the nation for new manufacturing jobs.

Sounds impressive on its face. But it's not, because as the National Association of Manufacturers points out, in a growing economy, Wisconsin SHOULD be in the top 5 in America for manufacturing jobs.

States with highest % of jobs in manufacturing

Ind. 16.4%
Wis. 16.2%
Ark. 13.6%
Mich 12.8%
Ala. 12.7%

So for Wisconsin to be in the top 5 for manufacturing jobs is as impressive as saying we're top 5 for binge drinking- it's not a major accomplishment. And you know who should know this better than anyone? Wisconsin MANUFACTURERS and Commerce!

Well, you'd believe that if you thought WMC members had an actual clue about business and were something more than a greedy oligarch's club that's an arm of WisGOP. But they're not, and that's why they released this dishonest ad. And I also think they sense Walker's starting to slip in the polls, as reality is starting to sink in to the casual Wisconsinite, and they felt they had to try to drive home the propaganda to keep the big lie moving.

Too bad for them that Summer's ending, and we'll see the decline continue soon enough as those warm-weather jobs end. And WMC propaganda like this is going to fall flay because a whole lot of people like me aren't going to let their crap go unchallenged.

United Sportsmen scandal deepening

Jeez, you peel the skin off of the "United Sportsmen of Wisconsin" onion, and the stench is overwhelming. Gov Walker's role is funneling the now-revoked $500,000 grant to United Sportsmen is more direct than we knew as well.

Dee Hall and Mary Spicuzza of the Wisconsin State Journal have that story today.

Gov. Scott Walker's use of his veto pen on June 30 helped keep alive a $500,000 grant that the politically connected United Sportsmen of Wisconsin Foundation later won -- then lost when it was revealed the group misled state officials about its tax status and its president had been cited for illegal bear hunting.

Walker's budget veto removed the provision calling for federal funds to be used for the two-year grant, leaving intact language stating that the grant would come from state funding.

You can even go to the last 2 pages of the Governor's veto message and see it yourself. (note: I found this link through DOA site, after Walker's website scrubbed the veto message) Walker says he made the veto because he felt the federal Wildlife Restoration Act and Sport Fish Restoration Act would not be the places that these activities should be funded from.

As someone who has worked in the grant administration business, I can also tell you another possible reason for that veto- using state dollars can be a way around federal oversight. You see, when you have a federal grant, you generally need to show that this grant was distributed to a deserving entity and that this decision was done competitively and fairly. You also need to tell the feds what you're doing with the grant, and the feds then have the ability to look into you and the organizations that are carrying out the grant's activities. There also may be extra auditing and reporting duties that could set off red flags if the feds feel the funds are going to the wrong things.

When you devolve this into a grant to be administered by the state Department of Natural Resources, a lot of these requirements don't have to be in place, (although it can be if the state wants). And in the not too distant past, you could have civil servants with collective bargaining rights being the ones determining the grant, and therefore not be likely to be giving away political favors since they wouldn't owe any. However, if you have a DNR Secretary that's a former homebuilder a high school education and a "Chamber of Commerce" mentality" and whose organization previously looked the other way when GOP contributors dumped human waste all around Oconomowoc., there are fewer barriers to get around when it comes to throwing taxpayer money to a Koch electioneering group.

It's also hilarious to hear Walker spokesperson Jocelyn Webster try to blame the Legislature for inserting the provision. That kinds falls flat when you realize Walker TOOK THE ACTION TO MAKE THE VETO, so his office clearly knew what this was. If Walker's office was truly blindsided by this and missed this provision, there would have been no action taken, and we'd be changing a federal grant, not a state one.

Scotty and his handlers knew exactly what they were doing when they changed this to a state grant- they were making it easier to funnel money to his backers. This thing has real LEGS, folks, and you can bet United Sportsmen of Wisconsin aren't the only groups who have gotten taxpayer dollars after this administration reduced oversight of the funds.

By the way, we're continuing to find out more about United Sportsmen of Wisconsin....and less in some instances. The Journal-Sentinel and Jason Stein's and Patrick Marley's continued investigation into the group shows it to be even more shady than we even thought.

In statements with a donor in 2011, United Sportsmen represented itself as a nonprofit. But on Friday, the group said in a statement that it was a for-profit entity.

Either way, the group doesn't show up as having filed a Wisconsin income tax return — a basic step for both companies and charities that a half-dozen experts on accounting and tax law told the Journal Sentinel that United Sportsmen likely should have done.

You know, when you're changing your story, chances are quite high that you're not an ethical outfit. But I suppose when you're a Koch front group whose main members are former staffers of outgoing Assembly Majority Leader Scott Suder, a lack of ethics seems to go with the territory (heck, it probably helps!)

And the fact that United Sportsmen of Wisconsin hasn't filed taxes is kind of a big deal, because in order to dodge filing taxes, United Sportsmen of Wisconsin, has to be a 501 (c) (4) "social welfare" organization, and file appropriately. And the IRS says that in order for it to be a social welfare organization, it has to be working for more individuals beyond WisGOP politicians.

To be operated exclusively to promote social welfare, an organization must operate primarily to further the common good and general welfare of the people of the community (such as by bringing about civic betterment and social improvements). For example, an organization that restricts the use of its facilities to employees of selected corporations and their guests is primarily benefiting a private group rather than the community and, therefore, does not qualify as a section 501(c)(4) organization....An organization is not operated primarily for the promotion of social welfare if its primary activity is operating a social club for the benefit, pleasure or recreation of its members, or is carrying on a business with the general public in a manner similar to organizations operated for profit .

Seeking legislation germane to the organization's programs is a permissible means of attaining social welfare purposes. Thus, a section 501(c)(4) social welfare organization may further its exempt purposes through lobbying as its primary activity without jeopardizing its exempt status. An organization that has lost its section 501(c)(3) status due to substantial attempts to influence legislation may not thereafter qualify as a section 501(c)(4) organization. In addition, a section 501(c)(4) organization that engages in lobbying may be required to either provide notice to its members regarding the percentage of dues paid that are applicable to lobbying activities or pay a proxy tax. For more information, see Lobbying Issues .

The promotion of social welfare does not include direct or indirect participation or intervention in political campaigns on behalf of or in opposition to any candidate for public office. However, a section 501(c)(4) social welfare organization may engage in some political activities, so long as that is not its primary activity.

Doesn't really sound like United Sportsmen were following those rules, were they? It sort of begs this question.



I think it's about time we find out what United Sportsmen of Wisconsin REALLY does, and more impotantly, who's paying for them to do it. Especially now that they can't use $500,000 from the State of Wisconsin, like Scott Walker's veto pen would have allowed them to do until they got exposed.

P.S. - An astute reader pointed out in the comments section that Governor Walker's webpage has now scrubbed the veto message, so I used the DOA site to restore the link. Innnnnn-teresting.

Catching up on events in Fitzwalkerstan

It's been a busy week here, with houses to close on and birthdays to celebrate, so I wanted to recap a couple of recent

1. The corrupt debacle involving the Koch front group "United Sportsmen of Wisconsin" reached a head this week, with Gov. Walker's office deciding it had no choice but to keep the United Sportsmen from receiving their tailor-made $500,000 grant. This comes after a couple more Walker Admin screw-ups, including DNR Secretary Cathy Stepp claiming that there originally was no problem because United Sportsmen had followed all of the requirements laid out in the grant (of course they did, Scott Suder wrote the grant specifically for them). The Journal-Sentinel also described some additional sketchiness that came to light regarding the people that worked for United Sportsmen.

The Journal Sentinel reported last Friday that the United Sportsmen of Wisconsin Foundation Inc. appeared to be improperly claiming a federal tax-exempt status during the process of receiving a grant to promote hunting and fishing in the state.

The group, which has close ties to Republican politicians and other conservative organizations, now says its president, [Andy] Pantzlaff, was confused when he told state committee last week that United Sportsmen had been approved by the federal Internal Revenue Service as a 501(c)(3) nonprofit. However, United Sportsmen also had stated that on its letterhead in a letter to the state.

"Mr. Pantzlaff did not speak directly with the foundation's counsel concerning the 501(c)(3) status, and was mistaken about the exemption process," said a statement issued by the group. "There was no intent to mislead anyone and ... the foundation apologizes for any confusion caused by this misunderstanding."

Riiight, because Andy Pantzlaff can be trusted to follow laws. Especially involving the hunting and fishing duties he was supposed to be "educating" about.

Earlier Thursday evening, DNR chief warden Randy Stark confirmed that Andy Pantzlaff, the president of United Sportsmen, was cited for hunting with the wrong license in Langlade County on Sept. 11, 2005, and later convicted and fined. Stark said he couldn't immediately offer more details on the citation, which is a municipal violation and not a criminal one.

The violation involves the state fish and game laws that United Sportsmen would have been receiving taxpayer money to teach to new hunters and anglers as part of its grant.

Look, if I lied about things on a job application, not only would I be disqualified from the job, I'd be subject to jail time for fraud. Why isn't Andy Pantzlaff able to be prosecuted the same way for lying about United Sportsmen's 501(c)(3)'s status, and for not revealing his hunting-related conviction? C'mon JB Van Hollen, show me that there are real consequences for these guys for trying to grab taxpayer dollars under false premises.

Don't think that Walker allegedly asking the DNR to rescind the grant lets his administration off the hook for this fiasco. Walker had a chance to line-item veto this thing when his staff was going over the budget, but he didn't. He also is still planning to give Suder a hefty pay increase at his new administrator job at the PSC, so apparently Walker has no problem having people directly connected to the United Sportsmen mess in charge of this key position. The Walker Admin only did this because it was hurting Walker's standing with the public, and it begs the question about how many other similarly cronyist money shifts are going on with these guys. If we had a real media in this state, they'd be smelling blood in the water right now.

2. Speaking of unaccountable cronyist money-funneling, check out this article about the voucher students in Green Bay- where more than 90% of voucher recipients in the area's catholic schools already were taking classes at these schools.

Most of the 41 students coming into the Green Bay Area Catholic Education system using private school vouchers already are part of the parochial school system.

GRACE, the state’s largest Catholic school system with nine schools, split into three entities to apply for the new voucher program. Those entities, and Notre Dame Academy, learned last month they are part of the new voucher program. Notre Dame will have 10 students using vouchers.

All but three of the GRACE students already are part of the program, officials said. The small numbers are spread throughout grade levels, so schools won’t have to hire additional staff this year.

So in GB, the voucher program isn't causing students to attend different schools, and instead doesn't seem to be doing anything other than send taxpayer dollars to the Catholic churches that run these schools.

And if Assembly Speaker Robin Vos continues to get his way, these subsidized voucher schools won't have to face the same accountability rules every other type of subsidized school would have to, and money would continue to be poured into these schools no matter how badly they fare (in clear contrast to what they want to do to low-performing public schools). Democurmudgeon has a good breakdown of Vos's attempts to shut down any accountability measures for vouchers, and you might also remember how Vos told State Sens. Mike Ellis , Sheila Harsdorf and Glenn Grothmann at their pow-wow at Inn on the Park about how he could find $200 million in venture capital to start up new voucher schools.



And as I pointed out nearly 2 years ago when that video first came out, all of these politicians admit that poverty (or lack thereof) is a main driver behind school performance measures, but these Republicans don't care about reducing poverty or improving school performance as much as they care about how to funnel taxpayer money to the voucher advocates that fund their campaigns. The results of this first year of statewide vouchers is bearing this out, with most of the vouchers going to families that already were choosing private schools, and paying for them.

3. I was glad to see Public Citizen follow up on the Walker Administration's attempts to lie about the changes in insurance costs for Obamacare, and they have filed an Open Record request requiring the Insurance Commissioner's Office to "show their work", to reveal where the OCI came up with their claims of extreme increases in insurance costs due to Obamacare. I mean, the OCI didn't just pull these numbers straight out of their ass, so there has to be a trail of where the calculations came from, right? That's the way you handle politicized deceptions of data- you make these guys show their work, which will reveal the (usually intentional) flaws in the comparisons. It also means you won't need to wait for Politi-crap to give it a "halfway true" by allowing the Walker Administration to get away with using "average rates" when people don't choose based on averages, but instead will compare the costs that they'll have to pay for the level of coverage they need.

It's also interesting to note that Minnesota released their own study last week on what Obamacare will do for insurance rates, and it shows that in a state that had a similar high level of health care services to Wisconsin in 2010, Minnesota will end up having the lowest Obamacare exchange rates in the country. Of course, Minnesota chose to spend the time and effort to set up their own state exchange to better fit Obamacare to its current programs, but Walker threw that option away in Wisconsin, cynically turning down millions of federal dollars to help set up Wisconsin's own exchange, and deciding to throw Wisconsinites onto the one-size-fits-all federal exchange in an attempt to screw up Obamacare's implementation. Yet again, Minnesota is passing us by in taking care of its citizens, and running things in a more efficient and better way than we do in Fitzwalkerstan. And don't think people with career options in the Upper Midwest aren't noticing.

So there are some of your updates. We'll see if there's any fallout from these failed Walker policies in the next couple of weeks as the Legislature comes back into session, and Marquette Law comes out with another Walker approval rating poll.

Walker Admin keeps deceiving on Obamacare

The Wisconsin Office of the Commissioner of Insurance released a study yesterday on Obamacare, and even before I looked at the results, my BS detectors were going off like mad. I know that Wisconsin Insurance Commissioner Ted Nickel gave over $10,000 to Gov. Walker's campaign in 2010, breaking campaign finance rules in the process, and was a longtime insurance industry lobbyist before taking the position in Walker's Administration, so he isn't exactly a person to be trusted to give a straight scoop on how Obamacare will work.

  And sadly, Ted Nickel and company did not disappoint, as their study gives dire predictions of big increases in costs between 10 and 124 percent for people that go onto Obamacare exchanges and get a plan that has

  a $2,000 deductible that included drug coverage in the individual insurance market. We examined plans for a 21-year-old, a 40-year-old, and a 63-year-old. The rates were examined separately for Milwaukee, Eau Claire, Green Bay, Madison, Appleton, Wausau, Kenosha, and LaCrosse. The pre-reform plans are based on quoted rates effective July 1, 2013. Post reform plans are limited to plans from companies who have filed to participate in the federal exchange, and the averages will change if some insurers modify their service areas.

Sounds terrible and very unlike what we've seen from some other places! Why is that? T

  Because the comparison is BULLSHIT. Notice a few things are missing in the OCI release.

  1. What other items are in the insurance plans, and what are the limits in the coverage?
  2. What's the Obamacare plan being compared to? And are they the same coverage?
  3. Where does this total cost get derived from? Is it for an individual person, or is it an average?
  4. Can someone get a lower or higher level of coverage, and what's the change in that cost?

  As a former teacher, it's crap like this that explains why we ask students to "show their work." As of today, the OCI is still refusing to release the tables and insurance plans that these allegedly huge increases come from...which tells you that they know their release is bullshit, and that they are lying by omission.

  I wasn't the only guy to call this out for the deception it was. Citizen Action's Robert Kraig, who has been on top of the Obamacare changes in Wisconsin from day 1, let Nickel and company have it within 2 hours of the OCI's release, and illustrated the apples-and-oranges nature of the "study."

1. The rates released by OCI do not include tax credits which will be available to make health insurance affordable, and therefore do not report the true sticker price of insurance coverage purchased on the new marketplaces. It is misleading to only report average rates which do not take into account the generous premium tax credits. A recent report from the Kaiser Family Foundation shows that nearly half of consumers on the new health insurance marketplaces will receive tax credits which will on average a reduce the sticker price of a family plan at the silver level by 32% (or $2,672). The subsidies would reduce the cost of a bronze plan by 77%. (Note: OCI does not say what level of exchange plan is being used in its comparison).

2. OCI’s rate comparison does not take into account the quality of plans. An exclusive focus on premium rates does not reflect total consumer cost. The Affordable Care Act establishes quality standards for insurance plans. While this may increase premiums in some cases where the consumer currently has substandard coverage, higher quality coverage has lower out-of-pocket costs for consumers when they get medical care. According to Dr. Jonathan Gruber’s analysis of the Wisconsin insurance market released by the Walker Administration in 2011, 38% of plans fall below the minimum standards of ACA.

3. The rates released by OCI do not take into account preexisting conditions and other factors. Average premiums do not tell the whole story because rates that are low today are a product of a system that discriminates against people with preexisting conditions and against women. Rates are expected to go down for people with health conditions and for women. In addition, many who are denied coverage or cannot afford discriminatory rates will be able to buy coverage. The rates for plans offered on the new marketplace take into account the addition of consumers currently facing discrimination, the current rates do not.

Kraig also points out that this pattern of GOP operatives deceiving about Obamacare is a disturbing pattern in recent years, both nationwide and in Wisconsin. In Indiana, Governor Mike Pence's Administration compared all levels of Obamacare exchange service, including the most expensive services as an equal portion and then averaging the rates together,  an absurd measure when they should be comparing apples to apples, with a certain level of Obamacare service being shown next to the exact same menu of services in the private sector.  Not surprisingly, the Obamacare exchange premiums are competitive and often less than the private insurance when done this way- the same way the average citizen or business owner will make his or her comparisons of services.

Ohio's GOP Lieutenant Governor pulled the same deception as Indiana's, using an average of all Obamacare plans to claim Obamacare could nearly double costs, but conveniently not mentioning that the average Ohioan would often pay less in premiums and out-of-pocket costs. And the most egregious example of this deception came to light recently in Georgia, whose Insurance Commissioner bragged in a county GOP meeting that he would try to screw up Obamacare implementation, and Governor Nathan Deal's family and business partners  have been getting huge amounts of money funneled to them from a PAC of insurance scumbags demanding that he keep people from using Obamacare correctly in Georgia.

 

And of course, in the Koch/ALEC-run state of Fitzwalkerstan, we've seen our own set of lies about the Affordable Care Act. In addition to Ted Nickel's BS release this week, you might remember the cherry-picked study of Dr. Gruber's in August 2011 that former DHS Secretary Dennis Smith tried to use to claim Obamacare wouldn't work in Wisconsin, and  Gruber ended up calling Smith out for not mentioning Gruber's conclusion that Obamacare was a "great thing" for Wisconsin. Governor Walker also got into the act, repeating then-Secretary Smith's lies in a Washington Post op-ed about what Obamacare would do wrong-  lies that were quickly shot down by Kraig and others.

Beyond the false rhetoric, there are also Governor Walker's horrible policy choices related to Obamacare. This includes Scotty's foolish strategy of  turning down $37 million that would have gone toward the state's version of an Obamacare exchange, hoping that Obamacare would eventually be repealed (how'd that work out for you, Scotty?). Walker then refused to take the expanded Medicaid funds in Obamacare,  increasing the state's amount of uninsured as well as the cost to state taxpayers (the definition of a lose-lose policy).

   Then again, Scott Walker, Ted Nickel, and Koch-funded GOP dingbats don't care about how Obamacare can help the constituents who pay their salaries, or even if implementing it property would help their state's economy by removing uncertainties that come from uninsured people refusing to spend money on other items out of fear of going broke due to a medical emergency. These scumbags just care about striking their pose for the oligarchs that pay their campaign expenses, in the hopes that they can mess things up so badly they can exploit citizen frustration in the 2014 and 2016 elections.

It is a disgusting dereliction of duty, and the way they are trying to keep citizens from taking advantage of this program through their lies and sabotage is nothing less than treason, trying to injure the quality of life for the United States and its citizens in order to get...what? A few more campaign dollars and votes?

But it also goes along with my theory that "If you're lying on an issue, you're losing," and I do think the GOP is losing on the Obamacare issue because of their arrogance and refusal to come up with any type of solution to deal with health insurance issues other than "no Obamacare", and stand to fall even harder in 2014 than they did in 2012 as a result. I sure hope so, as these low-lifes must pay a price for their crimes and willful deceits.

On Labor Day- A few stats and pictures

On this Labor Day, it's important to take a look at the numbers, and get an idea why we're in the two-tier society that exists today.

Here's the first, giving you a look at wages as a percentage of GDP over the last 65 years. The trend is hard to miss.



And it isn't because people aren't working harder or better. In fact, productivity has kept going up since World War II, but wages stopped growing with it about 35 years ago.



So where'd this extra productivity go? Right into the pockets of CEOs and stockholders, as corporate after-tax profits have nearly quadrupled since 2000, and are 30 times larger than they were in 1971- which also happens to be the time that wages as a percentage of GDP were at their height.



Not surprisingly, this increase in productivity and profits going to corporates directly correlates to a decline in the number of workers that are in unions. This is especially true in the private sector, where the percentages of jobs that are in unions were cut in half between the mid-1970s and mid-'80s.



Gee, the decoupling of productivity to wage gains also happened around the same time as '70s and '80s union-busting. What a coincidence!

Know what else has sent the average worker into stagnation? The failed belief that unrestricted trade with countries with lower work standards ends up as a win-win for the United States. Democurmudgeon had a good link to an EPI study that included these stunning pictures.



So to review: in the last 40 years.

1. Wages as a percentage of GDP has fallen significantly.

2. There are fewer people in unions with the power to stop this trend, and demand more money

3. With fewer checks on their power, productivity gains don't have to translate into better wages, so they become profits into the pockets of CEOs.

 4. Unrestricted overseas trade has cost workers hundreds of thousands of jobs, and the threat of offshoring has also kept wages down.

  Sometimes correlation truly is causation, and this is one of those times. It's time to reverse the failing course of the last 40 years. Which mean we must have reps in Congress that demand FAIR trade, with parity in wages and working conditions instead of the race to the bottom that has benefitted no one but fat cats. And it means that unions and strict regulations on businesses are needed more than ever, to level the playing field and get more of those record profits into the hands of real people that'll use that money for useful items, instead of stock repurchases and dividends that benefit very few.

   So on this Labor Day, let's recognize that the U.S. economy is currently a losing game for the vast majority of people. And yes, changing the game will require a lot of this.

  

If you thought that Koch front group wasn't seamy enough....

Apparently the corrupt assclowns at United Sportsmen of Wisconsin can't even get their nonprofit application to set up their dishonest organization. You may remember these guys, who seem to be nothing more than a Koch front group with a whiff of Wisconsin election fraud in their history, but had a $500,000 taxpayer-funded grant for "hunting and fishing education" funneled to them by a Legislative earmark, and approved by Gov. Walker. Here's the high-quality follow-up on United Sportsmen's $500,000 slush fund , as the Journal-Sentinel's Jason Stein covered the DNR's Sporting Heritage Committee meeting on Friday where a majority decided to give United Sportsmen the grant, and Stein was given the latitude by his J-S bosses to describe what really happened.

[Committee member Mark] LaBarbera asked United Sportsmen president Andy Pantzlaff if he could provide a copy of United Sportsmen's letter from the federal Internal Revenue Service showing it had received tax-exempt 501(c)(3) status. Pantzlaff, who called into the meeting, said he could provide that with enough time.

As of Thursday, there was no entry on the popular website, GuideStar, that United Sportsmen had filed the annual reports that federally recognized tax-exempt groups are supposed to file with the IRS, though sometimes those reports can lag in being filed or posted to GuideStar. Pantzlaff didn't respond to a reporter's phone messages and email request for this information.

The drafting file for the budget bill shows that a lawmaker asked for a specific change to the grant motion so the group receiving the grant would not have to be recognized as a 501(c)(3) nonprofit.

In the legal memo released by [DNR Secretary] Stepp, her chief legal counsel Tim Andryk noted that, "(United Sportsmen is) not required by the statute to be tax exempt or be a sec. 501(c)(3) organization as inquired about at today's hearing, and thus a letter from IRS is not needed."

So because a certain lawmaker (cough- SCOTT SUDER -cough) made these changes to the grant, United Sportsmen can just pop up and get this grant while other qualified organizations are eliminated from consideration. How conveeeee-nient

Of course, if these guys at United Sportsmen can't be trusted to put in the right paperwork in time, why in the world should we trust them to carry out the "educational" functions of this grant? Especially when we already know the vast majority of this grant will pay for "consultants" like former Suder staffer Luke Hilgemann, who just took a job as the number 2 nationwide guy at the Kochs' Americans for Prosperity. Earlier, Hilgemann left Suder's legislative office to head up the Wisconsin version of the Astroturf group, and after Suder announced that he would leave the Legislature to get a big raise as a Walker appointee to the Pblic Service Commission, AFP-Wisconsin's page put up a nice "thank you" message to Suder, and said they were "looking forward to working with him" in his new job.

But I'm sure the fact that there are all these connections between Suder, Koch groups, and United Sportsmen with this tailor-made grant are total coincidence, and I really shouldn't be making that kind of stretch, should I?

Oh yeah, let's mention the other fun part of this United Sportsmen scam. It wants to be a 501(c)(3) organization - if it ever gets its documentation in (if you believe their cover story). As this website on this organizations notes, being a 501(c)(3) means

Strict rules apply to both the activities and the governance of these organizations. No part of the activities or the net earnings can unfairly benefit any director, officer, or any private individual, and no officer or private individual can share in the distribution of any of the corporate assets in the event the organization shuts down.

Further, lobbying, propaganda or other legislative activity must be kept relatively insubstantial[5]. Intervention in political campaigns or the endorsement/anti-endorsement of candidates for public office is strictly prohibited.

Being a 501(c)(3) also allows United Sportsmen to hide who their donors are, evade taxes, and even give a tax write-off to the people who fund. Which makes having this organization be a really good way to launder money to the campaign workers and GOP operatives that they'll hire for "educational" purposes.

And now us taxpayers are funding these guys for half a million dollars, with more to continue in later years unless specific legislation stops it. Sounds like Charlie Sykes has Exhibit A for his example of "A Nation of Moochers", now doesn't he? But somehow I'm thinking Chuckles won't really say much about this, given that this is the kind of cronyist grift he and his fellow Bradley boys LOVE.

As Sept. begins, where's the economy?

A couple of reports in the last week give us an indicator where things are in terms of the U.S. and Wisconsin economy. And it appears that growth continues for both, but with some warning clouds on the horizon.

First up is the strong upward revision to 2nd Quarter 2013 GDP, which rose from 1.7% on first reading, to 2.5% on the second. The biggest reason behind that revision seems to be a higher amount of exports than first thought, and slightly smaller imports. Good sign if you're in one of those industries, and consumption and private investment seemed to hold up well in 2nd quarter.

It also means that GDP remains on the continual increase that's been the pattern over the last 2 1/2 years.



That being said, the rate of growth over the last 12 months is less than we saw in 2012, and is back down in the levels of the middle of 2011- the last time we were facing a showdown over the debt ceiling.



In late 2011 and early 2012, we had strong GDP quarters, and bounced off of the sub-2% level. But third quarter isn't off to the best start, as personal income and consumer spending was tepid, and the new housing bubble showed signs that it may be starting to deflate. The stock market bubble is also indicating signs of popping, as August was the worst month for stocks since May 2012, with the S&P down over 3%.

Now, these weak reports are on the heels of strong reports earlier this summer, so it could be a one-time blip, with growth set to continue. But it's worth keeping an eye on, especially if Congress fucks around with the debt ceiling and federal budget in September (and they have to do something- the fiscal year ends on Sept. 30). It won't take much for this slowing to turn into a stall and a downturn.

That being said, the labor market remains strong, as unemployment claims are staying at their lowest levels in 6 years. Unadjusted claims have been down around 280,000 for the last 3 weeks, and are continuing to be down 10% year-over-year.

Wisconsin has been acting in tandem with this drop in claims, also down around 10% year-over-year, with claims under 8,000 in the time of year when they are traditionally the lowest. That being said, the numbers compared to the rest of the nation are sliding back up to the levels we had last year, as shown by the purple line in this graph.



And given that job growth this time last year was basically zero (1,700 private sector jobs total between June and November), and that a lot of the job "growth" in June and July was in seasonal jobs that are ending with the Summer, don't count on a blowout August Wisconsin jobs report. September probably won't be any great shakes either unless there's a radical change some time soon.

So while we're not in recession danger quite yet, I'm also not convinced the decent growth we've seen in the first part of 2013 will continue. Especially if the TeaBagger goofballs in D.C. try to do the bubble-world stupidity of screwing over Obamacare and/or shutting down the government in a budget battle. We're in a precarious spot in this recovery, without enough income or non-bubble growth to withstand an outside shock, and I'm worried it won't take much to end this 4-year-old recovery.

I don't want that, and I sure bet Scott Walker doesn't want that. Heck, he's already backing off on his 250,000 job pledge (with his staff hilariously trying to convince media outlets not to run the story, earning Walker nationwide ridicule). If this country falls into recession, Walker's claims of job growth and a balanced budget will both go completely down the drain, and his already-iffy re-election becomes very unlikely.

Hell, I wouldn't be surprised if that dope pulled the ripcord and decided not to run in 2014 if the economy turned bad in late 2013 and early 2014, because he knows a loss in the guv election would destroy his (delusional) chances of the 2016 GOP nomination, and a lifetime of wingnut welfare. Quitting would at least get him years on Faux News as a "contributor" and speeches among fellow oligarchs as part of the Sarah Palin Career Development Plan.