HE'LL ALWAYS BE "JOHNNY PAYCASH" TO ME

Last night I was out to dinner with our "Dinner Group" which meets once a month on a Sunday night just so that we keep in touch with some of our friends.

We went to Fanny Hill to the area which faces the river. Rich Schroeder was doing a "single" accompanying himself with guitar. Somehow, country artist Johnny Paycheck came up in our conversation, brought on, I think, by a song that Rich was doing. That brought back a a rush of memories to me, having performed as opening act for Paycheck twice; once at the Turtle Lake Casino, and a long time before that, at a resort way over in eastern Wisconsin. It's been so long ago now that I cannot remember the name of it for the life of me.

When I arrived, out back I could see Paycheck's big Silver Eagle bus, so I knew he had arrived. I found the owner, introduced myself, and he set up the parameters for my show; do a half an hour, no more, no less.

As show time approached, I was back stage giving the guitar a final tuning, when the owner walked up briskly with a panicky look on his face.
"How long can you go?" he asked. "What do you mean 'how long can you go'", I replied? "I mean, how long can you go. How much material do you have?"

So I told him I could probably do well over an hour if needed. He told me that was good because he couldn't find Johnny Paycheck! I knew Paycheck was on the premises; I had seen him crossing the restaurant earlier on his way to the men's room.

The owner then told me that I should do my half hour, then look over to the side of the stage. He pointed to where he would be standing. Then he said, ""If I go like this: (circular motion with his hand) it means keep going. If I go like this: (cutting across throat with index finger) it means you can quit. ... we'd better get started . . ."

So I went out and introduced myself to the audience and launched into my show. After half an hour, I glanced over to where he was supposed to be, and he wasn't there. so I continued on for another ten minutes and then glanced over again. This time he was there, frantically giving me the circular motion.

So I did another ten minutes, checked the side of the stage again and got the circular motion yet again! Now I was closing in on 60 minutes, doing one bit while thinking and wondering what I will do next, and I feel one of those cold, stress sweats break out and run down my back.

So I do another ten minutes, glance over and I get the "Cut" sign. So I do one more short bit, thank the audience and exit. I reach the owner. "What the hell's going on??"

"We couldn't find Johnny Paycheck", he says.
"Well, I know he was here. I saw him! Where was he?"
"He was on his bus."
"On his bus?? So, what was the problem?"
"Well, he wouldn't get off the bus until I paid him first . . . in cash!"

I just shook my head in wonder and walked away. From then on I always referred to Johnny Paycheck as "Johnny Paycash."

____________________________________

MY GRUELING PAYPAL, EBAY EXPERIENCE

This week I had my first bad experience with ordering a product through eBay. I ordered a "refurbished" N600 Netgear Router from dailysteals EBAYCOM at a considerably cheaper price than a new one. When it arrived, I called my friend Tom Wieseler who has a lot of computer tech savvy, to help me set it up; mainly because as a "refurbished" item, it did not include a set up CD, which made it's comprehension beyond mine.

Tom graciously gave up his week day evening and met me at the office. within a half hour, he had it set up and I was receiving the internet not only to my iMac, but to my Mac Notebook Pro and to my el cheapo Google tablet. However the internet signal would stay operative for one to two minutes and then freeze and not allow us to go further.

Thinking that perhaps he may have configured something wrong, Ttom went through the entire set up procedure again, making some minor adjustments, and again, the signal became operative to my laptop and tablet, but only for that minute or two before freezing up again!

At this point, we called Tom's son, Gabe, to see if he could come over to help us trouble shoot, which he graciously did. The two of them went through all the protocols together. By now I was mumbling aloud that I was certain that it was the router itself that was causing the problem, for some unknown reason. But the Wieseler boys continued to work at it, got it running a third time, and BAM! It froze yet again.

Now I was "fit to be tied" and thoroughly certain that it was a faulty router. After messing with it a while longer, they agreed with me and theorized that the folks at dailysteals had probably only tested it for about 30 seconds to see if it was functioning and then packed it as ready to ship.

I immediately contacted dailysteals through eBay's mail system and the next morning received permission to return the router. I was told to follow the instructions set up by eBay's returns department, so I clicked on that URL, and found out that because I had purchased it through PayPal's "Bill Me Later" system, I was considered a "guest" and could not use the standard easy course of returning the router for a refund. I, instead was told to go to my PayPal site and open a dispute with dailysteals that would then be settled by PayPal.

This I did, then e mailed dailysteals, asking for an RMA number (return authorization), which they supplied me with the following day, along with instructions to await a pre-paid address label from them. When I had purchased the router, the small print stipulated that if the item was to be returned, I would have to pay for the shipping myself. This being the case, why, then, would they be sending me a pre-paid label? I again wrote to them and asked if I had to wait for that label and couldn't I just mail it out yet that day.

It was then that by return mail they said I could do that, but if I did, I would have to pay for the shipping. I wrote back that I would, then, await the label, which arrived the next day. I affixed it to the re-packaged router, and took it to the postal substation at Festival Foods.

When I arrived there, they were busy with customers paying for their packages to be shipped, so knowing that my package was already paid for, complete with a tracking number they had provided, I simply deposited the package in the bin and left.

The next four or five days, I kept going to the PayPal resolution center to find my "dispute" but it was never there. Finally I called and spoke with a PayPal representative with a very heavy and difficult to understand accent, more than likely in India. I explained that I could not find the dispute listed. the representative asked me for the tracking number. I explained that I had not copied it down as it was already on the package and I didn't think I would need it. Did I, he asked, have a copy of the shipping label still in my "sent" or "junk" mailboxes. I told him that I did not because I dump my "junk" e mails and "sent" e mails regularly after about three days.

In that case, the agent said, he didn't think there was anything that PayPal could do about opening a dispute. Most disheartening.

So I e mailed dailysteals and explained that I needed the tracking number from the pre-paid label they had sent me. The next work day, I received an answer which totally ignored my request for a tracking number but said that the funds ($34.99) were being held by PayPal and that I needed to close the case.

Again I went to the resolution center, thinking that since PayPal is putting a hold on the money, the case will appear on the site. Wrong again.

I again contacted PayPal, spoke with another equally difficult to understand rep - explained the entire situation AGAIN; she asked me if I had kept a receipt from the postal substation. I told her that I did not as I had just dropped it off. Sensing the frustration in my voice, she assured me that she would do everything she could over the weekend to obtain the tracking number from the seller.

Then yesterday I got another e mail from yet a different person named Caprice, at dailysteals, telling me that she was in charge of settling this case and that she had, indeed, received the package.

So once again, I contacted PayPal and read that e mail to yet another operator. This time I had finally reached a woman (Faye) who knew what she was doing. Faye told me to stay on the line, that she was going to contact the seller by phone, and that we would settle the matter in a conference call. Once we got Caprice on the phone, it was all settled in less than five minutes, and I was assured that my account would be accredited with the $34.99.

So I would like to impart the knowledge that I gained from this grueling experience to anyone of you that buys items through eBay and/or PayPal.

1.) Don't buy the item through "Bill Me Later" unless you are absolutely certain that this is something that you have to get now because you really need it or it is on sale at such a bargain price and you are so short of cash that you will need the delay time to get the money together. To have to return something as a "guest" makes your transaction twice as difficult.

2.) Even if the seller sends you a pre-paid return label, always, ALWAYS get two things from the postal station when you ship it: the exact tracking number and a receipt.

3.) Do not dump any of the correspondence that may occur between you and the seller and be certain that if you do get a pre-paid mailing label, print out duplicate copies and store the one you don't use in a file folder in a safe place.

You are never too old to learn. And obviously you can teach an old dog new tricks!

________________________________________________________________________________

THE FIGHT TO SAVE SOCIAL SECURITY, MEDICAID AND MEDICARE

It is coming down to the wire. Since avoiding the government shutdown, a "super committee" has been formed to deal with the budget. Named the Murray-Ryan Budget Conference Committee, after Senate Budget Chair, Patty Murray, Democrat, Washington State, and Wisconsin's Congressional Representative, Paul Ryan, The group was formed as part of the deal to reopen the government and raise the debt ceiling. Murray and Ryan kicked off talks over breakfast this past Thursday morning.

Here’s what you need to know about the group, which the country will have a close eye on during the next couple of months:
1. It has 29 members. The bipartisan, bicameral group includes the entire Senate Budget Committee, as well as four House Republicans and three House Democrats. Here’s the full list:

House Republicans:
Ryan
Rep. Tom Cole (Okla.)
Rep. Tom Price (Ga.)
Rep. Diane Black (Tenn.)
House Democrats:
Rep. James Clyburn (S.C.)
Rep. Chris Van Hollen (Md.)
Rep. Nita Lowey (N.Y.)
Senate Republicans:
Sen. Jeff Sessions (Ala.)
Sen. Charles Grassley (Iowa)
Sen. Mike Enzi (Wyo.)
Sen. Mike Crapo (Idaho)
Sen. Lindsey Graham (S.C.)
Sen. Rob Portman (Ohio)
Sen. Pat Toomey (Pa.)
Sen. Ron Johnson (Wis.)
Sen. Kelly Ayotte (N.H.)
Sen. Roger Wicker (Miss.)
From Senate Democratic Caucus:
Murray
Sen. Ron Wyden (Ore.)
Sen. Bill Nelson (Fla.)
Sen. Debbie Stabenow (Mich.)
Sen. Bernie Sanders (Vt.)
Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (R.I.)
Sen. Mark Warner (Va.)
Sen. Jeff Merkley (Ore.)
Sen. Chris Coons (Del.)
Sen. Tammy Baldwin (Wis.)
Sen. Tim Kaine (Va.)
Sen. Angus King (Maine)
2. Nine of the Republicans voted against Wednesday's deficit reduction deal compromise, including Ryan. Of that deal the co-chairs of the bipartisan special joint committee said in a statement that "after months of hard work and intense deliberations, we have come to the conclusion today that it will not be possible to make any bipartisan agreement available to the public before the committee's deadline."

Not everybody on the committee supported Wednesday’s compromise. Ryan’s vote was the most interesting. He bucked his leadership allies to vote “no.” There are a couple of plausible reasons for his decision.
One is the weight he carries among House conservatives. They are very loyal to Ryan, and by standing with them on the vote, Ryan didn’t sacrifice any of his credibility. Instead, headed into the talks, he telegraphed a sort of I’ve-got-your-back message. Second, he’s the lead negotiator in this group. Stepping into talks fresh off voting for a bill that was tough for many Republicans to swallow, they weren't exactly coming from a position of strength.
The other eight Republicans who voted against the bill were Price, Black, Sessions, Grassley, Enzi, Crapo, Toomey, and Johnson.
This group is worth keeping in mind because they are the most conservative members of the panel. To take the pulse of how conservatives feel about emerging deals or sticking points, listen to what these lawmakers are saying.
3. Policy-wise, there is a lot of daylight between Murray and Ryan right now. Murray summed it up this way Thursday morning: “Chairman Ryan knows I’m not going to vote for his budget. I know that he’s not going to vote for mine. We’re going to find the two common — the common ground between our two budgets that we both can vote on. And that’s our goal.”
4. Get used to hearing “sequester,” “entitlements” and “revenues” a lot. A big part of the talks will be deciding what to do about the across-the-board spending cuts known as the sequester. Democrats don’t like them and Republicans like Ryan say there is a better way to cut spending. So how to replace them? Well, that’s where we are going to see disagreements. Look for Republicans to call for replacement cuts in entitlements spending. Democrats might be able to accept such cuts, but under that scenario would probably push for new tax revenue to offset them. Republicans won’t like this idea. This much we know: With a new round of sequester cuts set to kick in early next year, the clock is ticking.
5. It’s a “supercommittee” reunion of sorts. Murray, Van Hollen, Portman and Clyburn were all part of the 2011 deficit-reduction “supercommittee” that failed to reach an agreement. Will things turn out differently? Murray thinks so.
“The supercommittee goals were much broader, much larger. We have a challenge that’s been handed us to have a reconciliation between the Senate budget and the House budget, and those issues are all on the table. We’ll be talking about all of them. And our job is to make sure that we have put forward a spending cap and a budget path for this Congress in the next year or two or further if we can,” she said Thursday.

To my way of thinking, here are very few members of this committee who have any concern about poor and middle class Americans. However, the one strong voice on our behalf is Senator Bernie Sanders.

Today, Senator Sanders put out a plea for all of us to make our voices heard by this "super committee". In an e mail Sanders states:

They’re at it again.

Billionaires like the Koch Brothers, Pete Peterson, Stanley Druckenmiller and others are leading the charge to cut Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid.

If they succeed, millions of senior citizens, working families, disabled veterans and children will suffer. We must not allow that to happen.

Today, the middle class is disappearing, real unemployment is extremely high, poverty is increasing and working families throughout the country are struggling to keep their heads above water economically. Meanwhile, the gap between the very rich and everyone else is growing wider and wider and the wealthiest people and the largest corporations are doing phenomenally well.

WE MUST NOT BALANCE THE BUDGET ON THE BACKS OF WORKING FAMILIES, THE ELDERLY, THE CHILDREN, THE SICK AND THE POOR.

As Vermont’s senator, I have the honor of serving on the Budget Conference Committee which will be negotiating a new federal budget over the next few months -- and where I am fearful that a deal could be struck to slash Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid.

As the founder of the Defending Social Security Caucus, please stand with me and our coalition partners in demanding; “No grand bargain in exchange for cuts to Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid.”

Let’s be clear. Despite right-wing rhetoric:

Social Security is not going broke. According to the Social Security Administration, Social Security has a surplus today of $2.8 trillion and can pay out every benefit owed to every eligible person for the next 20 years.

Social Security has not contributed to the deficit. Social Security is funded independently by FICA taxes which are paid by workers and their employers.

The so-called chained-CPI, which recalculates how COLA’s are formulated, is not a “modest tweak.” If the chained CPI went into effect today, a senior aged 65 would receive $658 a year less in Social Security benefits when he/she is 75, and $1,100 a year less at age 85. Further, the average disabled veteran would lose tens of thousands of dollars in benefits over his/her lifetime.

Please stand with me today and demand that Congress and the President oppose any grand bargain which cuts Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid benefits.

When one out of four U.S. corporations pay nothing in federal income taxes; when Bush’s tax breaks for the rich remain in place for many wealthy Americans; when the U.S. spends almost as much as the rest of the world combined on defense, there are much fairer and economically sound ways to address the budget than cutting programs desperately needed by the most vulnerable people in our country.

Please stand with me and our coalition partners in protecting the future of Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid benefits.

Let’s go forward together. Thanks for your continued support.

Sincerely,
Senator Bernie Sanders


It is truly imperative for each of us to contact each and every representative and senator listed above. You can do this by going to this link:

http://www.americawantsnocuts.com/ssw/

Don't wait! There is only a short time to make our position known!

______________________________________________________________

THE REAL 'SKINNY' FROM A PROFESSIONAL IN THE HEALTH CARE BUSINESS

People that are frustrated trying to use the federal web site should know that they can also use the various state web sites as well as insurance brokers.

And something I wasn’t aware of, even if they qualify for and will get the federal subsidy, they can use the state web sites or insurance brokers. (I thought they had to use the fed site in that case…..)

I just spoke w/ a broker/friend who is able to enroll people……….and the advantage to using a broker is that they can help/advise/provide information about different policy options, whereas the “facilitators” (those that get certified for health care reform) cannot give any advice, they can only help people enroll.

You may have heard, or will hear (new talking point by Fox News and the Republicans) that “300,000 people in Florida are losing their health insurance due to Obamacare”. This is flat wrong!!! What is happening is that many employers that don’t want to spend the money to provide quality health insurance to their employees, enroll employees in what are called “limited medical reimbursement plans” (also called mini-meds). Similar to Aflac plans, they just pay a limited amount for each procedure an enrollee has. Legally they are not major medical insurance and don’t comply with insurance standards.

Example---they might pay $60 for a Dr. office visit…….which leaves the balance of the cost to be paid by the enrollee. Not too bad for a simple office visit, but for anything more complicated requiring lab work, pathology, hospital stay, surgery and the like, the amount paid by the employer is very minimal and the enrollee is left with huge bills.

These type of plans DO NOT QUALIFY as options you can buy to satisfy the health insurance requirement under health care reform, so if a person has one, they will still have to buy a qualified plan. That is why people and companies are cancelling them. Most of the people on these plans also have pre-existing conditions and can’t get coverage anywhere else which is why they enroll in them. Under health care reform, since there are no longer pre-existing condition limitations, these people will be able to get real insurance.

So they aren’t losing insurance due to Obamacare, they are dropping employers "limited medical reimbursement plans" because they can now get better plans under Obamacare.

Kirk Roebuck
Summa Health System


Just an aside regarding the ACA and health care reform……………….the problem with trying to educate people on it, especially the loons that watch FOX and follow the Republican talking points, is that they believe the lies and don’t want to listen to the rational answers, especially when the answer isn’t simply a 2 or 3 word sound bite.

Add to that that most people don’t even understand their own health insurance and want to be “hand held” whenever they have claims or need to use it. That has always been a big issue…..people need to understand their policies and actively participate in their health insurance……they need to be “smart consumers” of health care. That is a big change from the old days when most, if not all plans were basically a $100 deductible with the plan then paying 80% of the costs incurred.

That pretty much all started going away in the 1980s with the introduction of HMOs, PPOs and the many “hybrid” plans that grew out of the managed care boom.

So any time I hear someone whine and cry about either health care reform or their own insurance I immediately question them about their knowledge of it before I discuss it with them.

Kirk Roebuck
Summa Health System

CONSUMERS SHOULD CONSIDER USING LCENSED INSURANCE AGENTS AND BROKERS FOR HEALTH COVERAGE UNDER THE AFFORDABLE CARE ACT

As millions of consumers consider purchasing health insurance through the insurance marketplaces set up as part of the Affordable Care Act (ACA) - and as some face problems accessing the program because of failures of the government's website, they should be aware of an option they may not know they have: Consulting their local professional, independent insurance agent or broker for help in enrolling.

Consumers may already know that there are "navigators" paid by the government who are available to assist them in enrolling in policies under Obamacare. But they may not be aware that under the law, navigators cannot offer advice or recommend one policy over another.

Professional insurance agents, on the other hand, are free to offer a much higher level of assistance. Consumers don't pay for this service. In addition, in most cases, navigators are not required to be licensed or to comply with state-mandated continuing education requirements; they are also not required to maintain professional liability insurance coverage. Agents and brokers must be licensed and must comply with all of these requirements, along with all state laws and regulations.

Many independent insurance agents and brokers have already been trained and certified to assist consumers to enroll in health plans offered as part of the Affordable Care Act. They can also make consumers aware of insurance choices not available through the exchanges.

"Choosing a health insurance plan is a serious matter," said PIA National President John G. Lee. "it is a complex process that cannot be compared to purchasing a book from a website. Insurance is not a commodity. the implications of making a poor choice due to the lack of adequate knowledge include paying too much or getting inadequate coverage for yourself or your family. When it comes to health insurance, making an ill-informed decision can end up costing you your life's savings - or your life."

"Professional agents and brokers have the training and expertise needed to advise consumers about their insurance choices," Lee said. "We have always been licensed, regulated, and required to carry professional liability insurance coverage. We recommend that people shopping for health insurance - or any kind of insurance - make the smart choice and not leave anything to chance. Consult a local ACA Certified Professional Insurance Agent."

I will publish more tips and help as it is fed to me through Mr. Roebuck.


_________________________________________

WISCONSIN'S TEA PARTY GOVERNOR HAS GOT TO GO!! INSURANCE COVERAGE ALONE IS REASON ENOUGH.

“Wisconsin health insurance exchange premiums for single coverage will be on average 79% to 99% higher than premiums in Minnesota, before tax credits are applied,” according to a new report.

If you’re wondering why there is such a disparity in healthcare insurance costs between similar states like Wisconsin and Minnesota, it’s because Tea Party Governor Scott Walker rejected enhanced federal Medicaid dollars and Wisconsin Republicans decided not to implement more robust rate reviews. Translation: Republicans rejected money to expand Medicaid and Republicans choose not to oversee rate regulation (if this doesn’t ring a bell, when Republicans discuss it, they call their refusal to check corporation’s “freedom” and “free markets”).

These decisions may cost Wisconsinites $1,800 or more a year over what their Minnesota counterparts pay for health insurance. Wisconsinites will pay between 79% and 99% higher premiums before tax credits are applied, and the middle class will be hit the hardest. Some cities will pay as much as 136% higher premiums.



Citizen Action of Wisconsin released a new report documenting the vast differences between Minnesota and Wisconsin in the cost for health insurance on the individual insurance marketplace created by the Affordable Care Act.

• Wisconsin health insurance exchange premiums for single coverage will be on average 79% to 99% higher than premiums in Minnesota, before tax credits are applied. That is a difference of over $1,800 a year.
•The health insurance cost differential will be even worse for some major Wisconsin cities. Rates in La Crosse are 136% higher than the Minnesota average, rates in Eau Claire are 116% higher, and rates in Milwaukee are 112% higher.


• The cost gap with Minnesota has the biggest impact on middle class Wisconsinites because Affordable Care Act tax credits mitigate the impact on lower income people who buy insurance on the exchange.
Additionally, when Walker announced his Republican plan to reject Medicaid expansion under ObamaCare, he was warned that this would cost Wisconsin state taxpayers hundreds of millions of dollars. Walker, with his eye on 2016, was at war with President Obama and what better way to prove his conservative bona fides than by rejecting as much of ObamaCare as he could.

It’s not as if Walker can run on his job creation numbers or making a great climate for business. Wisconsin is failing in both departments under Walker. He’s got to be able to run as the guy who fought Obama and won — a feat he has not actually managed to do, regardless of how many times he and his BFF Paul Ryan blame Mitt Romney for the 2012 election loss. Reality plays a small part in Republican politics these days that Walker won’t be hurt by inventing his own world so long as he is the comic book hero who said No to the Illegitimate President.

Comic book narratives aside, the Walker administration is still confused about how this fiscal stuff works (sure Walker didn’t graduate from college, but that is no excuse — plenty of Americans can add and subtract without going to college). Walker’s secretary of health services, Kitty Rhoades, claims to believe that they didn’t walk away from money - the state will have more money by petulantly keeping the working poor off of Medicaid expansions at the fed’s expense.

This belief earned her a Mostly False from PolitiFact. It turns out, the non-partisan Legislative Fiscal Bureau says Walker’s decision is going to cost state taxpayers $119 million and could exceed $459 million through 2021.

Scott Walker justifies this by claiming to believe the federal government won’t come through with the money because of the debt (along this failed logic, why wait for anything to be proven – if you feel it, it must be – leadership by hysterical emotion of the mentally impaired has worked out so well in the past). To be fair, perhaps Walker knew of his party’s plans to tank the economy with a shutdown and threat to refuse to pay our bills. If so, conspiracy charges are warranted, immediately following the mandatory Republican math class.

The Walker administration champions their plan to instead drive the money to health insurance companies and health care providers. More transferring of the wealth to corporations, or “job creation” in Republican speak.

Minnesota also took ObamaCare up on the money provided to review rates – aka, oversight, but Wisconsin hasn’t. They’re cool with whatever the insurance companies want to charge citizens. Regulation is the death of corporate freedom, after all, and when corporations aren’t free to rob citizens, they allegedly won’t create so many crappy jobs that don’t pay a living wage.

Appeasement of the corporate beast is a must in Republican circles and so Wisconsinites are getting it again. No doubt Republicans will blame Obama for this, too, since they are loath to take responsibility for their own behavior, ideology and policies.

Thanks to Scott Walker, Wisconsin Will Pay Up To 99% Higher Insurance Costs was written by Sarah Jones for PoliticusUSA.

LATEST BILL IN STATE LEGISLATURE DESIGNED TO USURP POWERS OF LOCAL TOWNS, VILLAGES

PHOTO: State Senator Kathleen Vinehout and yours truly at "Save the Hills" meeting, Menomonie, WI, Saturday, October 19


State Senator Vinehout spoke to alert us to a bill that appears to roll back the ability of locals to control what happens within their boundaries, especially with regard to sand mining.

This legislation is aimed at taking away local ability to protect health and safety in communities; including locals’ ability to put limits on water quality, water quantity, air quality, use of explosives and road use contracts.

The Walker Administration has been very reluctant to provide adequate resources for the enforcement of existing laws to protect health and safety. Local rules are the last line of defense for people.

This bill is related to sand mines. However, in Senator Vinehout's preliminary discussion with Legislative Council attorneys, the bill is not specific to just non-metallic mining (sand and gravel extraction). For example, if a community sets rules in a way other than zoning (such as police powers) they may lose this authority.

The bill, which is currently in draft form but is expected to move very quickly through the legislative process, was just released late yesterday. Vinehout learned that there will likely be a joint hearing of the Senate and Assembly committees related to mining on Thursday October 24, 2013 at 9 AM in Madison. If it is at all possible, we should make plans to attend this hearing. The bill could potentially be voted out of committee at this hearing. THIS LEGISLATION COULD BECOME LAW IN JUST A FEW WEEKS.

The bill comes on the heels of other legislation that takes away powers from local people to control what happens in their neighborhoods. This is part of a larger pattern in Governor Walker’s administration. The bill appears to be written by mining interests – many of which are owned by out-of-state companies.

Everyone who cares about having a voice in what happens in their neighborhood needs to pay attention to this bill. It certainly appears to take away local ability to protect communities and gives sand mines the ability to run roughshod over local people.

It prevents all local authorities from passing protections for their own air and water quality and water quantity....

It prevents all local authorities from monitoring their own air and water quality and water quantity.

It further erodes local governments' ability to regulate frac sand mining, only giving them a say when it comes time to clean up the mess and even then, holding them to the lowest possible standard.

It prevents local governments' ability to control blasting in their communities.

It effectively prevents local governments from collecting funds from those - like frac sand companies - that destroy local roads.

The bill is circulating for co-sponsorship through Monday.

Kathleen strongly opposes the legislation and wonders why politicians in Madison should seek to control our local communities. They don’t live there.

I don’t know why any legislator from western Wisconsin would turn control over our land to politicians in Madison. We all need to contact our representatives on the mining committees and ask them the same question.

MY PET PEEVES AND OTHER OBSERVATIONS

I thought about posting this on Facebook but then decided that everyone would think I am a picky person, which I don't think I am, until it comes to language use.

My long time pet peeve is when people refer to a cap as a hat. In these two photographs, the top photo shows Robert One Man Johnson playing guitar and wearing a HAT.

In the lower photo, both my brother John and I are wearing CAPS. Anybody see the difference between the two? Well, of course, anybody with half a brain can see that a hat has a brim and a cap has a bill. Yet even big time writers will refer to players wearing "baseball hats". Baseball players would look pretty silly wearing ten gallon baseball hats, don't you think?

Yeh, I know it's a small thing, but it bugs the hell out of me because it is not correct nomenclature!

The other very strange misuse of the english language is something that I have begun noticing more recently and that is when a person is telling another person a story and wants to tell that person exactly what a friend of his said. Instead of saying: "So my friend says ..." it appears to be acceptable to say: "So my friend goes ...

What the heck?? People GO places, they SAY things, plain and simple. I think it sounds really ignorant for anybody to say something like this: "So I told him to stay off my lawn" and he goes "Well, excuse me, but there is a puddle on your sidewalk!"

I hear stand up comics use "he goes" on Comedy Central all the time. This morning I read the HuffPost online stories about the movie "Captain Phillips". In the article titled "Captain Phillips On What He Thought of 'Captain Phillips' (go to the following link to read it) http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/10/14/captain-richard-phillips_n_4098947.html

Scroll down to: What did Tom Hanks say to you when you guys met?
Phillips uses "goes" instead of "says" TWICE!

There. I said it. Now I feel better.

Just a couple of days ago I wrote an editorial after reading that the Wisconsin State Senate is about to pass a law which will give the legislature the power to decide where and how much sand mining should be allowed in the State of Wisconsin. Here is my opinion:


The two faces of Wisconsin’s Legislative Tea Party membership continues to come into sharper focus. This week, a reliable source in the Wisconsin legislature informed Ms. Edie Ehlert of the Crawford Stewardship Project that presently a bill is being crafted in said legislature which would give frac sand mining regulation to the state, taking away local regulatory power from towns and counties.

The bill would be a “uniform” nonmetallic mining legislation that would not be as stringent or specific as the regulations that organizations such as the Crawford Stewardship Project and others are putting into place in so many of our communities in an attempt to put a stop to the disfiguring and polluting of the beautiful state of Wisconsin that we know and love.

It would be useful if the state legislature would be setting minimum standards to which local community organizations could add more thorough and stringent standards if they wanted. However, it is quite obvious that this is not the intention of the legislation.

Instead, the current Republican controlled legislature which continually trumpets the rights of the individual over the controlling state and federal governments, clearly intends to usurp the powers that they so vehemently say belongs to the people.

It makes a person suddenly come to the realization that the only time the Tea Party Republicans currently in power in Madison shout “don’t tread on me!” is if they disagree with whatever legislation is put forth on the floor.

If it is legislation that will further fill their pockets with the monies of lobbyists and big money industries such as RGGS Land and Minerals out of Houston, Texas, as well as the Florida based Cline Group, which has secured an option for all mineral rights in the Penokee range, and it is what our Tea Party Governor Walker wants, well, then it’s good enough for them as well.

Where did you put that rubber stamp?

However, I sense that the wind is beginning to blow in a different direction now.

The legislature can only urinate on our collective leg and tell us that its rain for only a short time before we, the people, come to our senses.

There. I said it.

____________________________________________________