This post is dedicated to Dr. King, President-elect Obama, and progress.

Congratulations to President-elect Barrack Obama and Vice President-elect Joe Biden for winning the White House. The United States looks forward to positive and needed change and prosperity, and I have no doubt that this will be your legacy. This blog post is dedicated to the United States, and especially to you, Barrack Obama, Joe Biden, your families, and your friends.

I dedicate this post to Tim Russert’s family, friends, coworkers, and fans. May his legacy live on.

Today’s prices are $3.69 per gallon in my city. With an 18.4-cent per gallon suspension, I’d still be spending over $3.50 per gallon. So instead of paying what was a record-high $3.25 last year, I’m still spending more after a suspension. Let’s do the math.

Assume I I have a 12-gallon gas tank. At $3.25 per gallon, last year I was spending $39.00 to fill it up completely (assuming I could get to the gas station on gas vapors). At $3.69 per gallon this year, I should be spending $44.28. So I’m spending $5.28 more.

Now with a gas tax suspension, the price per gallon would be about $3.51 per gallon (I’m rounding for simplicity). The cost to fill a 12-gallon tank is $42.12. That’s a $2.16 savings. But compared to last year, I spent $3.12 more. That’s an 8% increase. Hmm, that’s not much of a savings, is it?

But there is an unintended cost increase that both candidates neglect to mention: vehicle maintenance costs. By suspending the gas tax, the federal government collects less revenue. Less revenue means less road maintenance and repairs (some of the local and state road construction funds come from the federal government). Less road repair means more bumps and potholes. And that means more wear and tear on your car. So you end up spending more to repair your car than what you saved by not spending much on gas. A $2.16 savings versus a $500 auto repair… I’ll spend $2 more per gallon, thank you.

If these candidates are serious about real solutions, they would be looking at paradigm shifts. Our society is far too dependent on each individual owning his or her own car and having the convenience to drive less than a couple of miles to do whatever.

As socially responsible people, it would help for us to start asking about things like alternative modes of transportation, teleconferencing, and learning ways to reduce the need for fuel. We’re beyond the point where we realize that we need more refineries. We need to consider other forms of fuel for generating electricity and heat.

Finally, we need to drive less and walk (or bike) more. Think about it: $0 per gallon.

Appleton Post-Crescent: Gas tax holiday mixes signals

Even though Wausau is in a less-populated area of the state, I agree at what these citizens wrote. I especially like Mr. Duffy’s comment: “the royal screwing the NFL is giving its loyal fan base hardly calls for government intervention – although a fan boycott of the NFL Network would do wonders.” That should be the first step of those of us who love football. If the NFL was really here for the fans, it would not have become so greedy as to create a cable network and limit access to the real fans.

I also agree with Mr. Lawrence: “As for Packer fans, they have been around since long before there was any TV coverage. As a matter of fact they have been around since before there was an NFL. If they could survive under those conditions I’m sure not seeing one game from the comfort of their recliner is not going to bring Western civilization as we know it to its knees.”

Instead of sitting my recliner during last Thursday’s Packers-Cowboys game, I went to my favorite watering hole and did something I hoped to achieve, and then some: I reconnected with some old friends and made new ones. Although it was unfortunate that the Packers lost, I still had a good time with over 200 fans. The atmosphere was almost as electrifying as Lambeau Field, and people were in good spirits. I didn’t need the NFL Network in my house to enjoy the game. I spent less money spent the local bar than for a special digital tier or the increased fee from my cable provider.

So when I read what the Wausau Herald readers had to say, I instantly agreed. State government needs to focus on the bigger picture, not what the deep-pocket lobbyists want. The video choice bill will only make things worse for the state; the local cable companies will find it more difficult to survive from the crushing blows of big cable and AT&T. And the state will be powerless to do anything about it because it didn’t write consumer protections into the bill.

My advice to legislators: get the big companies out of your pockets. Focus on the important issues, not the so-called “quick fixes” that will get you elected. Show substance, not glamour.

My advice to Governor Doyle: fix the state’s fiscal problems first. Veto the video choice bill. Fix campaign finance.

As for the NFL and its network, I hope it eventually sees the light… or, at least, the fans start talking with their wallets.

A few months ago, the Madison Metropolitan School District (MMSD) was prepared to name a new school after Hmong Freedom Fighter General Vang Pao. However, Pao was recently indicted in a failed coup attempt, and MMSD requested new names. I agree that the board should not name the school after such a controversial issue. After collecting suggested names, the board is now requesting comments.

Although I don’t have a huge stake in the school (yet?), I have some suggestions as to how the board should make its selection:

• Make it relevant to Madison.
• Make it relevant to education or something significant.
• Make it non-controversial.

Simple, right? Of course, my favorite recommendation is The Brain Dead Madison Metropolitan School Board Memorial Far West Side.

MMSD Web page: Comment on Submitted Names

The editorial references the Government Technology article, “Vanishing Act.” It’s an article about how funding is diverted from community policing to the war efforts and homeland security. As a result, crime is up (although, admittedly, there are other factors), and police departments are forced to revert to reactionary methods of policing versus the proactive benefits of community policing. Additionally, many police officers are also military soldiers and are now serving in the war.

I remember when the Clinton administration started funding community policing in the 1990′s. The situations that led to it were just as dire as they are now. People moved out of the cities as a result. President Clinton realized that we had to save our cities, in part because they are the backbone of the country’s manufacturing economy. I lived in Milwaukee at the time, and I watched it go from bad to worse to better. Milwaukee’s revitalization was due in part to community-based police officers that worked with the local citizens. When the police disappear, the citizens feel that they’ve lost the support of their city.

Moving to the suburbs is not the answer; you are only spreading the problem out there. Increasing taxes doesn’t resolve the matter either, because residents already spend a lot of money in taxes. It is up to community leaders, businesses, and residents to come up with creative solutions to dealing with this problem. We need to re-strengthen community policing and develop greater ties between government and communities.

Although the sentiment is a good cause (I would like to use alternative methods of transportation, including my bike), I don’t think the means are effective. So here are my problems with the ride:

1. We have not significantly reduced the number more cars on the road in three years since this group started.
2. This is a bit extreme… and illegal in my state.
3. You really don’t want to see my couch-potato butt in all its glory… it would be a very disturbing site; trust me on this.

For a meaningful way to promote less use of motor vehicles and to encourage people to ride their bikes more, I recommend the following:

1. Stay clothed; there are decent, not-too-expensive alternatives to the technical clothing that cyclists wear that also provide comfort.
2. Educate both cyclists and drivers on how to travel with each other on the streets; this should start at the school level and become incorporated in driver education courses, as well as offering adults a class.
3. Contact your legislators (local, county, state, and federal) to seek legislation to encourage more bicycle-friendly routes in urban and rural settings.

The only statement that riding naked makes is that some people are either really confident about their bodies, or that they really were meant to be clothed.

Wisconsin State Journal article: Nake truth exposes city failure

The League of Women Voters of Wisconsin explain in their press release that states that require a photo ID do not necessarily curb the problem of voter fraud. Furthermore, by requiring a photo ID at the polls, certain groups of people are less likely to vote. Although that is a cultural phenomenon, it is also a means of excluding people from a democratic process. It undermines exactly what our founding fathers fought for.

Thus, I oppose photo ID at the polls.

League of Women Voters of Wisconsin press release: Oppose Constitution Amendment for Photo ID

The Healthy Wisconsin Council, a council to address health care and other health issues, recently recommended increasing the state’s cigarette tax by $1 per pack to cover costs for increased health care costs, new health care programs, and anti-tobacco education.

Senator Mike Ellis (R-Neenah) opposes this, stating his press release:

“While a huge tax increase in cigarettes may pay off in the short run, over time as fewer and fewer people smoke, those revenues will taper off but the programs they support will continue to increase in cost.”

The senator is correct to a degree. But I urge all of the legislators out there to consider the goal of the tax. Is it to increase revenues for a new program? Is the program truly related to helping smokers quit, or are there other motivations behind increasing revenues? Or is it really to “encourage” smokers to quit?

The statistics indicate that when cigarettes cost more, less people smoke. Additionally, those that do smoke add greater costs to the health care cost burden because of the complications that are related to continuous bodily damage. But the statistics do not show the powerfully addictive nature of quitting smoking. I’ve heard from others that they found it easier to quit heroin or alcohol than to quit smoking.

Four years ago, the state used money from a tobacco lawsuit to plug a hole in its budget deficit. The money was intended to help people quit smoking. It certainly was not a self-sustaining fund, but it was large enough to help many fund programs that could help smokers kick the habit. Now that the money is gone, we need to know if the increased cigarette taxes will be used only for these purposes.

I liken this to what happened in the City of London when it imposed a toll for vehicles to enter. At £5 per vehicle per day, the city hoped to increase revenue while also decreasing motor vehicle traffic. Because the public was really upset with the cost, the city ended up only seeing traffic decrease; the last I read, the city did not raise the revenues it expected.

I agree with Senator Ellis’ point on increasing taxes for the sake of starting a new program. It’s irresponsible, and there is plenty of evidence that shows why it doesn’t work as a long-term solution. If it is used as a way to cover increased health care costs because of the burden of smoking, then we could be sending the wrong message to the health care companies: we are willing to pay increased costs. I don’t agree with that either. If we are using the funding to help smokers quit, then we are forcing them to subsidize their own programs, and I’m willing to accept that. Again, legislators need to seriously consider the true motivation for these increases before making their final decisions.

Ellis Blasts Call for Cigarette Tax Hike

Milwaukee Journal Sentinel article: Cigarette tax increase has support in Senate

Milwaukee Journal Sentinel editorial: Taxing what kills us