“How did we get so politically divided? Well, it’s not because both sides have gotten more extreme...The left hasn’t moved much at all...the left is still against the war machine, still pushing for civil and voting rights, and still fighting the power of big corporations. But the right has moved far, far rightward.” Robert Reich (“Let’s Be Clear: Only the Right Has Become More Extreme Over the Last 50 Years,” Common Dreams, February 16, 2022)

Some people believe there is no difference between parties. All politicians are self-serving and corrupt. Others claim both parties are controlled by left, or right wing extremists who refuse to compromise and are responsible for legislative gridlock.

If people would just tone down the rhetoric and move to the center everything would be fine.
The problem with these opinions is that they are not based in reality. As Robert Reich correctly says (based on his more than 50 years of experience in politics) it is the right wing that has become increasingly extreme.

False equivalency – the notion that both sides are equally responsible – is not factual. There has never been the liberal equivalent of the KKK. There are no armed liberal militias preparing to take on the federal government. And there has never been a liberal demagogue in the White House equivalent to Donald Trump.

Last week I discussed how Republican control of the Wisconsin legislature has killed all sensible efforts to address the state’s needs and challenges. This article looks at two Republican actions that will have negative impacts on Wisconsin residents.

Impact of cuts to the
Affordable Care Act subsidies
The Affordable Care Act (ACA) subsidies will expire at the end of 2025 and the Republicans in Congress are refusing to extend them. As a result Wisconsin residents will have significantly higher health insurance premiums and out-of-pocket costs.

To make health insurance more affordable, the ACA created subsidies tied to the consumer’s income. Those subsidies were increased in 2021 under the American Rescue Plan Act and again extended in the 2022 Inflation Reduction Act.

The Republican budget bill (HR 1), that passed last June, made changes to ACA  that will make it harder, and more expensive, for people to keep their insurance.

According to the Office of the Commissioner of Insurance, 313,579 Wisconsin residents are enrolled in ACA health care plans and 277,125 received a subsidy. In 2025 the average subsidy was $664 per month, reducing the average premium from $771 to $161 per month.

The Kaiser Family Foundation (a health policy research nonprofit) estimates that nationally ACA subsidized enrollees’ will have monthly premiums more than double (increase 114% on average) due to loss of subsidies and tax credits.

Many current enrollees will lose eligibility entirely. Many more eligible people will not be able to afford coverage.

Fewer people having insurance will drive up the costs of “charity care” for providers, encourage younger, healthier people to drop coverage and increase insurance costs for everyone. No one will be better off. But Republicans don’t care about the negative impacts of their actions.

The bottom line is the ACA subsidizes insurance companies and is not what is needed for rational solutions to our excessively expensive for-profit system. A national, universal, single payer, public program has long been recognized as the only way to rationally pay for healthcare.

Another Republican boondoggle
to “create” jobs
Having learned nothing from the Fox-conn fiasco, Wisconsin lawmakers are pushing another bribe-the-company economic development scheme. This time it is a $150 million grant and $60 million in tax credits for a German company to locate a wood pulp plant to Hayward.

The wood pulp would be used to make jet fuel for airplanes (sustainable aircraft fuel or SAF). The grant would be backed with borrowing through the Wisconsin Department of National Resources’ forestry account.

Bribing companies, and trying to outbid other locations with “incentives,” has a long history of failure. If the economics of a business venture are good, companies can, and will, raise the money to make it happen. If not sound, no amount of subsidy will override this basic free-market, capitalist reality.

Government money spent for basic scientific research, education or general public infrastructure produces more economic development results than subsidizing specific companies, industries or risky ventures.

A major goal of the Republican support for this proposal is apparently a bailout for the forest harvesting industry. But, as I have written about in the past, forest harvesting is highly mechanized and employs very few workers. The environmental impact on forests is significant and other uses, like recreation and tourism, could produce more economic returns.

We are already over harvesting our forests. It is pretty obvious this project would have severe impacts on Wisconsin’s forests. Trying to power airplanes with wood fiber would be extremely inefficient and environmentally harmful while producing few jobs.

The history of bio-fuels indicates that the benefits have seldom lived up to the hype. There have been many problems with trying to replace petroleum fuels with plant- or waste-based substitutes.
Although technically feasible, these problems have limited the practical application and reduced the overall environmental benefits. Ethanol from corn is not as energy dense as gasoline so you have to burn more of it to get the same output. By the time you calculate the total cost and energy consumption to plant, harvest and process the corn (plus the associated pollution) the environmental benefit is pretty marginal.

Realistically there isn’t enough farm land to raise enough corn to replace fossil fuels.

Using the example of corn, the World Resources Institute says, “If the U.S. were to reach its stated goal of 35 billion gallons of SAF using ethanol...[it] would require 114 million acres of corn. That’s 20% more than the total area currently planted with corn in the United States for all purposes” (“Under New Guidance, ‘Sustainable’ Aviation Fuel in the US Could Be Anything But,“ World Resources Institute, May 9, 2024).

Moving to electric-powered cars and greater use of electric-powered mass transit would be more practical alternatives. High speed trains could reduce short distance air travel.

Republicans can’t find the money for health care, public K-12 education, funding for the UW system or community colleges, or cleaning up drinking water pollution – the public initiatives that actually do improve local economies.

We don’t need to waste money on more economic development boondoggles.