wauwatosanow.com
      
Rummage MapseHarmony
weather

43°

Partly Cloudy | 5MPH

NEWSROOM * CIRCULATION * ADVERTISING

Monday

March 2010

15

Community Blogs

State Sen. Jim Sullivan represents the 5th Senate District, which includes Wauwatosa, West Allis, West Milwaukee, Elm Grove and parts of Milwaukee and Brookfield. Sen. Sullivan, a licensed attorney who graduated from Marquette University Law School, strives to be an effective, thoughtful, consensus-building representative of his constituents.

Go to Sen. Sullivan's website

Comments
Santas Elf

Thank you Sully for your attention to detail in managing to align yourself with two issues both of which are totally irrelevant to today's circumstances.

More time wasted on legislation like this almost guarantees that Wisconsin will soon be a relevant place for Native Americans alone.

Try squeezing votes out of those dudes.

Peace!

StubbornOldMan

Why do I have the feeling that SB439 is just like photo-ID? Senator Sullivan gives testimony urging that SB439 should be enacted, but in the back of his mind, he knows that the (D) Legislature will kill it. If it happens to pass, then there's always the safety net of (D) Doyle's veto. Now, Senator Sullivan can rightfully say that he gave testimony on SB439, but the OTHERS in the Legislature or Governor's office failed to enact it. He IS in a campaign race, after all. It's perfect. In reality, I think this 'mistake' has generated enough outrage that SB439 will probably pass with ease.

Senator Sullivan said that "MOST OTHER STATES IN THE NATION" had already changed their tax codes to allow penalty-free Roth conversions but Wisconsin has not. Is it even remotely possible that (D) Doyle or the Democratic Legislature wanted to try to 'stick it to the rich people' by NOT allowing penalty-free conversions? If that's not the case, then why didn't Wisconsin change our tax code at the same time "MOST OTHER STATES IN THE UNION" did? There's got to be a reason.

Senator Sullivan, what is the name of the individual responsible for not updating our tax code as "MOST STATES" had done with respect to SB439? Was this person TOLD not to update it by (D) somebody else? Was it simply incompetence? Was it intentional? There's always more to the story than meets the eye. So many questions, so few answers.

Dotacus

Regarding SB 182: If you're going to make a change, why not make them both 2 years instead of 3? The details of the case will be clearer especially if witness testimony is involved, and it will be one less year for LAWYERS to charge fees. More time always meand more cost. This is yet another proposal that benefits the lawyers. I'm still hurting from my raised car insurance from the last round of pro-lawyer legislation.

Santas Elf

"Fairness to victims"?

What about fairness to perps?

I was just out a bit after 2:30 am driving in the ditch, minding my own business, when all of a sudden a couple red lights are all over me.

Next thing I know they got me cuffed and in the paddy wagon on the way down town. They didn't even begin driving in the direction of the hospital after I told them my blood sugar went low, and all I had on hand was a quart of Jim Beam.

Where's the fairness in that, I ask? I tell ya, nobody respects a veteran anymore.

Peace!

Post a Comment

Please login or register to post a comment.

Discussion Guidelines

Send Your Comment Reset
Looking for a used car, a new job or a place to live? Search our interactive online classified ads.

Community Ads: Jobs | Cars | Homes
Rentals | Personals | More

JSOnline Ads: Jobs | Cars | Homes
Rentals | Personals | More