Milwaukee Biz Blog

The Impartial Justice bill passed Thursday by the Assembly and Senate easily qualifies as the most significant campaign reform in Wisconsin in more than 30 years. Not since 1977 has a reform approaching this magnitude been achieved in this state.

Wisconsin has been electing Supreme Court justices for more than 150 years, but in very recent years these elections have been turned into auctions. Passage of this legislation marks the beginning of Wisconsin’s return to the kind of high court elections that served our state extremely well for over a century and a half.

Our justice system is built on a bedrock principle. Judges aren’t supposed to belong to anyone. They are to be accountable only to the law and the Constitution. Every legislator who voted for the Impartial Justice bill today struck a critically important blow for that principle.

Thursday’s action was a timely and forceful response to the court majority’s outrageous decision last week to approve rules written by Wisconsin Manufacturers and Commerce and the Wisconsin Realtors Association allowing judges in Wisconsin to rule on cases involving their biggest campaign supporters.

The Impartial Justice bill does not address every cause of eroding public confidence in the independence of our courts and the fairness and impartiality of judges, and it does not solve every problem plaguing the Wisconsin Supreme Court. Other reforms – such as those proposed in Senate Bill 43 and Assembly Bill 63 – are surely needed. But this legislation does free candidates for the state’s highest court from the money chase and enables any who seek this office to vigorously campaign and communicate with voters without having to raise huge sums of private special interest money from individuals and organizations who may end up appearing before them in court.

 

Mike McCabe is the executive director of the Wisconisn Democracy Campaign, a nonpartisan government watchdog group. Additional information is available at www.wisdc.org.

I wonder if every American citizen who has jumped on the Al Gore bandwagon of global warming got just half as excited about our business climate, would Wisconsin be facing such high unemployment rates? Would Wisconsin be faced with so many businesses closing up shop and moving out of state?

First I must put forth this disclaimer. I do not believe in man-made global warming. I do, however, believe in climate change (there is a difference). If we are in a cycle of warming, then that's just the condition of the earth and the sun that we must assimilate.  This opinion has not come lightly. I have studied at least 100+ hours, listening to both the liberal and conservative sides.

But let's talk about our nation's business climate or more specifically Wisconsin's business climate. Wisconsin still has all the tools it needs to be a powerhouse in the Midwest, whether it be manufacturing, dairy, biosciences or mining equipment - Wisconsin has it all. But it seems we have forgotten the old 20-80 rule that 20 percent of our good businesses will provide 80 percent of our jobs and revenue. We must continue the great Wisconsin tradition to make it, mine it and milk it.

Cap-and-trade, also known as emissions trading, is a program to control pollution by providing economic incentives to businesses for reducing their pollutants. If the Wisconsin Legislature decides to embrace cap-and-trade and burden our businesses and our consumers, I am fearful that this will be the most lucrative governmental taxing scheme that we have ever seen. And to make it worse, government would soon become reliant on the revenue, and the original mission of helping our environment would become secondary.

Wisconsinites must begin to see that there is a difference between cap-and-trade, or "being green," and becoming energy efficient. Yes, we can become more energy efficient without sacrificing our economy. Think about it, and quickly!

 

State Rep. Mark Honadel (R-South Milwaukee) represents the 21st Assembly District, which includes the cities of Oak Creek and South Milwaukee and two wards of the City of Milwaukee. He serves as the Republican ranking member on the State Assembly Labor Committee.

Earlier this year, President Barack Obama and other political leaders in Washington, D.C., publicly admonished companies for - in some cases - overly lavish business trips.

These pronouncements unintentionally demonized legitimate business travel, which has had a devastating impact on tourism economies and the accompanying jobs throughout the country.

While a city in the nation's heartland such as Milwaukee has not seen the dramatic crash of familiar resort destinations, 70 percent of our $2.6 billion tourism economy (and 66,000 supporting jobs) comes from visitors on business travel or meetings and conventions and we're feeling the pain with hotel occupancies down in the low double digits over pre-recession levels.

Media reports of the president and federal government officials demonizing legitimate business travel earlier this year are still having a significant adverse effect on our economy. The Department of Labor reported that nearly 200,000 travel-related jobs were lost in 2008 and another 247,000 positions are expected to be cut by the end of this year

A new study by Oxford Economics and funded by the U.S. Travel Association and the Destination & Travel Foundation, makes a compelling bottom line case on the ROI of business and incentive travel.

Among the key findings:

• Executives cited customer meetings as having the greatest returns, in the range of $15-$19.99 per dollar invested.
• Executives identified the average return on conference and trade show participation to be in the range of $4-$5.99 per dollar invested.
• Companies would need to increase an employee's total base compensation by 8.5 percent in order to achieve the same affect of incentive travel, according to the executives.

Business meetings and conventions are important lifelines to learn new information, grow businesses and meet with colleagues face-to-face. It's important that we work to protect beneficial meetings, conventions and incentive travel because it makes good business sense. We need the president and our elected officials to again use the bully pulpit and take the lead on this.

 

Working together, we can stop the hemorrhaging. The message we need our political leaders and all of us working in the hospitality and tourism industry to state is quite simple: start traveling. Please spread the message!

David Fantle is vice president of public relations at Visit Milwaukee.

 

I oppose the nanny state.

During May 2006, I wrote the following about a bill the governor signed into law that I voted against that forces parents to put their children under the age of eight in booster seats when they ride in motor vehicles.

"With a stroke of his pen, the Governor expanded the nanny state in Wisconsin by creating an enforcement and logistic nightmare. Under previous Wisconsin law, parents could decide whether their children between the ages of four and eight should be placed in booster seats or seat belts. That was plain old common sense. Under the new law there are several changes. How are police supposed to enforce this? Will every officer and squad car now be equipped with a scale and a tape measure to determine whether Mom and Dad or Grandpa and Grandma are breaking the law? How are parents expected to know or remember the requirements? Will they have to keep a copy of the law in their glove compartment or tucked under the visor? What are large families to do? Baby seats and booster seats are rather bulky. Imagine trying to squeeze two, three, or four of them into one of the new smaller size cars or vans."

I added the following in an August 2007 column:
"The many separate requirements by weight and height for each age category are confusing. Burdens are placed upon large families and carpoolers. Booster seats can be expensive and so can the fines for law violators."

As New York Yankee Hall of Famer Yogi Berra once said, "It's déjà vu all over again."

The state Senate has approved Senate Bill 162 (SB 162) that would require children 10 years and younger on boats to wear flotation devices. The bill originally proposed covering children 12 and under. However, an amendment approved by the state Senate lowered the age requirement to 10 and under.

SB 162 stipulates that "a person may not operate a recreational boat that is less than 26 feet in length unless, during the time the boat is under way, every person on the boat who is 10 years old or younger is wearing a personal flotation device (PFD) or is in a cabin space or below the deck."

What does "under way" mean? According to SB 162, "A recreational boat is under way if it is not aground, is not anchored or moored, and is not made fast to a structure or to the shore." In other words, just about any time a youngster is on a boat, a life preserver must be worn.

There is more.

The state Senate approved Senate Amendment 1 to the bill that the Wisconsin Legislative Council writes, "provides a specific penalty for a violation of this PFD requirement by the operator of the specified recreational boat. Any person violating this mandatory PFD provision must be issued a warning notice instead of a violation for the first offense. Any person subsequently violating the mandatory PFD provision must forfeit not more than $50 for the second offense and must forfeit not more $100 upon conviction of a third or subsequent offense."

SB 162 expands current law that simply requires each boat have on it a personal flotation device for each person riding in or on the boat.

Follow along to see if you have heard this song before. The government intervenes, assuming the role of big brother. New rules and regulations are established. Violators are subject to fines.

Do you see a pattern? It’s called booster seats for boats or, the nanny state strikes again.
Everyone supports child safety. However, the state once again takes on the role of thinking for people and the role of decision maker. The state should stay on the sidelines, in this case the shoreline, and allow parents to think for themselves and make common sense decisions about their children’s safety.

State Sen. Mary Lazich (R-New Berlin) represents Wisconsin's 28th Senate District.

The entire Wisconsin banking community is pleased that the banking regulatory system worked as designed last Friday when the Department of Financial Institutions closed Bank of Elmwood, Racine.

Importantly, depositors were protected as there was a seamless transition to Tri City National Bank of Oak Creek. Wisconsin's banking community expresses its support to the affected employees, directors and shareholders of the Bank of Elmwood. 

Until last Friday, only 16 states, including Wisconsin, hadn’t experience a bank closure since Jan. 1, 2008, which tells us two things:  The conservative lending culture of Wisconsin banks has served our state and industry well; but also that economic conditions across Wisconsin are weak and because of that fact, banks will continue to face challenging times.

Banks didn’t cause this recession as so many believe. We also were not bailed out as so many claim. We didn’t make irresponsible subprime loans to people who didn't have the capacity to repay them. We didn’t speculate in investment instruments we didn’t understand, like credit default swaps and other derivatives. And we are doing our best to meet the demand for loans to qualified borrowers.

We understand our vital role as the foundation of economic development and job growth in every corner of Wisconsin and our nation. We want to make prudent loans to businesses in the communities we serve because if those businesses don’t succeed, neither will we.

We know that many people are angry and looking for someone to blame. But targeting that anger at banks is misplaced and counterproductive toward achieving an economic recovery.

Specifically, too many elected officials are leveraging the public's confusion over who caused this crisis to attack banks and push legislative agendas that will make a bad situation worse for our industry and, ultimately for the businesses and consumers we serve.

There is already a lengthy list of obstacles beyond our control impeding our ability to do what we do best; make loans to qualified businesses and consumers. Lawmakers need to consider the consequences of adding more burdens and costs on the very institutions they need to help rebuild our nation’s economy.

Whether we are local, regional or national banks, we rise and fall together. WBA and CBW pledge to redouble our collective efforts against legislation and other regulatory proposals that are only counterproductive to the banking industry’s ability to help with an economic recovery.

This joint statement was written by Wisconsin Bankers Association president and chief executive officer Kurt Bauer and Community Bankers of Wisconsin president and CEO Daryll Lund.

With the health care debate grabbing most of the headlines, you may not have heard much about the energy war in Congress. A California-Massachusetts team of legislators is pushing expensive regulations on carbon emissions that would be paid for by the industries and consumers of the Midwest.

Sens. Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.) and John Kerry (D-Mass.) recently introduced a bill similar to legislation that has passed the House. Like its House counterpart, the bill would result in a steep tax on coal, America's most affordable and plentiful fuel source. Reps. Henry Waxman (D-Calif.) and Edward Markey (D-Mass.) sponsored the House bill. It is no coincidence that they are also a California-Massachusetts duo.

Only 12 states use less coal as a percentage of electricity production than Massachusetts, which gets about 25 percent of its power from coal. Only three states use less coal than California.

Which states use coal? Michigan, Missouri, Minnesota, Iowa, Indiana, Kansas and Ohio use coal to generate more than 50 percent of their electricity. Wisconsin gets more than two-thirds of its electricity from coal.

How much would cap-and-tax cost you? The National Association of Manufacturers projects that nationwide cap-and-tax would cost each household an average of $1,248. But in Wisconsin, NAM found, cap-and-tax would cost each household more than $1,400.

After the Waxman-Markey bill passed the House, the National Mining Association produced a map that showed how cap-and-tax would impact individual states. States with the highest costs were shown in deep red; states with the lowest costs were shown in green. The result was striking. The map showed a deep sea of red, bracketed by a few green states on the West Coast and in the Northeast.

With costs like these for most of America, it is no surprise that a majority of people oppose this scheme. The opposition has led the bill's sponsors to attempt to rebrand their efforts. Instead of cap-and-trade, supporters of the Senate bill are calling their proposal "pollution reduction and investment." I think cap-and-tax is a more accurate and honest description.

A recent poll shows 65 percent of Americans want Congress to work on creating jobs. Cap-and-tax won't create jobs, despite a desperate insistence by the bill's supporters that government spending on so-called green jobs will stop the decline in employment that's miring our economy.

To understand the truth on green jobs, we need look no further than Spain. The Spanish government dumped $1.6 billion into green jobs last year and trumpeted 200,000 new jobs it said the subsidies created. But a study by an economist at Rey Juan Carlos University in Madrid showed that for every job created through green-job subsidies, up to 2.2 jobs were lost in other sectors. And Spanish taxpayers had to pay about $855,000 for each green job, most of which proved to be only temporary construction jobs. Spain's unemployment rate is currently above 18 percent.

Cap-and-tax isn't yet the law of the land, but carbon emissions fell 6% this year. How is this possible? It's a result of the recession. The Senate bill's goal is a 20% emission cut by 2020. As Kerry recently said: "We are effectively saying we need to go another 14 percent."

A bill like the one Kerry is pushing just might get us there. After all, a study of the House bill projected that it would cause 2.4 million job losses by 2030 and up to a 2.4-percent reduction in Gross Domestic Product. A prolonged recession of that magnitude likely would lead to the emissions cuts that Kerry is seeking.

This not-so-secret plan was spelled out in a report from a U.K. think tank. It advocated a "planned recession" to help meet steep carbon emission goals. The cap-and-tax bill that Democrats are pushing would have a similar effect, especially for those of us in the Midwest.

Rep. Jim Sensenbrenner (R-Menomonee Falls) is the ranking Republican on the House Select Committee on Energy Independence and Global Warming.

Democratic insiders believe Milwaukee Mayor Tom Barrett will decide not to launch a campaign to be Wisconsin's next governor, and some say Gov. Jim Doyle is "shopping" for another candidate to challenge Barbara Lawton for the party's nomination.

Lawton, who is Wisconsin's lieutenant governor, picked up her most impressive endorsement yet Monday, when former Democratic Party of Wisconsin state chair and congressional candidate Matt Flynn announced he will support her bid for governor.

"The next governor of Wisconsin needs to be someone focused on creating new jobs. Barbara Lawton will be that governor. She is a strong leader who will fight for the economic security of our families and focus on keeping people on the job," Flynn said.

Barrett has not yet declared publicly whether or not he will run for governor.

When asked if he had contacted Barrett to inquire about his intentions, Flynn replied, "No, but I have been in contact with a member of his staff. And I left him a message."

Flynn added, "I think very highly of Tom Barrett. He's a great mayor and would be a great governor, but I don't think he's running."

Winning the endorsement of a big hitter such as Flynn, who is an attorney and a partner at Quarles & Brady in Milwaukee, is a major coup for Lawton.

Flynn's endorsement adds to a growing roster of key Lawton supporters from Barrett's backyard, including: Milwaukee County Democratic Party chair Martha Love, state Sen. Jim Sullivan (D-Wauwatosa), and Milwaukee County Supervisors Peggy West and Marina Dimitrijevic.

"I'm honored to have the support of former Democratic Party of Wisconsin chair Matt Flynn," Lawton said. "From his service in the Navy to his work as chair of the Democratic Party of Wisconsin, Matt Flynn is deeply patriotic and has built and reinforced his life-long commitment to D/democratic ideals. I am proud to have the endorsement of such an influential leader in our state's Democratic Party."

 

Lawton's credentials

Like most lieutenant governors before her, Lawton, 58 has served the past seven years in virtual anonymity.

The liberal Capital Times in Madison calls Lawton "Wisconsin's green leader." She has been the chair of the Wisconsin Arts Board of the National Lieutenant Governors Association.

Lawton was the founder of the Greater Green Bay Area Community Foundation and the Multicultural Center, and she has served as an advisor to Entrepreneurs of Color and on various boards, including that of the Northeast Wisconsin Technical College Foundation. She also has served as a consultant to Wisconsin businesses expanding internationally.

Lawton, a graduate of Waterford High School, and husband Charles "Cal" Lawton have two grown children and four grandchildren. The Lawton family lived in Green Bay for more than 30 years. Their permanent home now is near Algoma.

She took office as Wisconsin's 43rd lieutenant governor on Jan. 3, 2003, and was re-elected in 2006.

 

Will a challenger emerge?

Although Lawton's relationship with outgoing Democratic Gov. Jim Doyle has been icy, at best, Flynn does not foresee any significant challengers in the primary.

"I think she'll be unopposed. I've been impressed that she's been excited about running right from the beginning," Flynn said. "There just simply is nobody else that I've heard of that is thinking of running."
However, longtime Milwaukee Democratic supporter Evan Zeppos expects another candidate will emerge to challenge Lawton. That challenger could come from the private sector, Zeppos said.

"I'd be surprised if it isn't a contested primary. I think it could be anyone who could raise money and anyone that could bring a fresh perspective to the Democratic primary. I think it could be someone who is not an elected official," said Zeppos, who operates a public relations firm in Milwaukee. "But it won't surprise me if someone who is an elected official or a former elected official, thinks, 'I could run.' Barbara Lawton hasn't raised a great deal of money yet. I just don't think it will end up being that she's the only Democratic candidate."

A private sector candidate could run on a pro-jobs plank without the political baggage that would be carried by a Madison-based Democratic insider, such as Lawton or Dane County Executive Kathleen Falk.

The Wisconsin gubernatorial race will be a top priority for both national parties and could likely attract a record $6 million to $8 million in political resources. The Obama administration is playing an interactive, if not interventional role, in the key Democratic primary races for 2010.

One Wisconsin Democratic insider, who asked not to be identified for this report, asked, "Will the White House settle for Barbara Lawton?"

Another Democratic insider said, "Doyle is shopping for another candidate. He does not think Lawton can win. I know he is. I'm aware that the governor is out there recruiting candidates."

 

Contested primaries are best

The traditional political wisdom is that contested primaries are beneficial to candidates because the process vets out the candidates and keeps them in the news cycle longer and more often.

Case in point: the presidential race of 2008. Democrats Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama beat each other's brains out in a long contested primary, keeping themselves in the headlines every day. Republican John McCain, who had sewn up his nomination relatively early, struggled to stay in the public's eye.

Campaign donors also can become complacent in an uncontested primary.

The Republicans in Wisconsin can be assured of a hotly contested primary, featuring rivals Milwaukee County Scott Walker and former Congressman Mark Neumann of Janesville.

Steve Jagler is executive editor of BizTimes Milwaukee.

If Wisconsin's economy was compared to a hospital patient, the patient would be on life support and the family would be gathering to consider end of life treatment issues. We have serious problems facing our economy, and policymakers continue to promote legislation that makes many of those problems worse.

It's time to call a halt. 

Objective measurements of Wisconsin's economy indicate a continuing trend toward deterioration of our economic base. Forbes Magazine's annual report, The Best States for Business, recently ranked Wisconsin's business climate 48th among the 50 states. Only Michigan and Rhode Island trailed our performance.

Wisconsin's ranking was down five slots from last year's 43rd ranking. This year even the business climates of Vermont and West Virginia ranked ahead of Wisconsin. That is not the kind of company we can afford to keep.

Ironically, our best ranking in the Forbes report is quality of life, which measures issues such as quality of schools and health care, crime, cost of living and poverty rates. However, the lowest ranking came in the category of growth prospects, the very means to pay for quality of life: projected job growth, income and gross state product growth, as well as business openings and closings, and capital investment. Wisconsin is in an economic race to the bottom, and it will impact the quality of life for all of our citizens when we can no longer afford to provide adequate government services.

The Wisconsin State Legislature is at a midpoint in its biennial schedule of deliberations. What they have produced, so far, is higher business taxes when businesses are facing unprecedented economic challenges, and an array of higher taxes and fees on individuals.

Using the cover of the recession, the Legislature and governor imposed $2.1 billion in new taxes, with over $1 billion of that amount coming from businesses and investors, and increased state spending by 6.2 percent. More modest spending would have negated any need for higher taxes.

On the regulatory side, things coming out of the Legislature aren't any better for the business climate. To date, the Legislature and governor have dramatically expanded penalties for employment discrimination claims, and the governor is recommending a package of state environmental regulations directed at global warming that will prove costly for both businesses and consumers.

Legislative committees are currently moving bills to regulate employers' ability to monitor office computers they own and are only provided to their workers for business purposes, create new protected classes of workers under state discrimination laws and a host of other bills that will negatively impact manufacturers and retailers. Legislation to index the state minimum wage passed the State Senate early on, and it is rumored legislation is circulating to resurrect the ill-conceived liability expansion provisions that were removed from the governor's budget bill very late in those deliberations. Not one of these bills will create or retain a job in Wisconsin.

In the midst of all of this, Wisconsin's Unemployment Insurance (UI) Trust Fund is running a deficit, which is likely to continue for several years as the economy recovers. It will be difficult to resolve the UI system's solvency problem internally through tax and benefit adjustments alone. What is really needed to return the UI system to solvency is solid economic growth coming out of the recession, with more Wisconsin workers receiving higher wages. Currently, we do not have state tax and regulatory policies that will achieve that. To the contrary, the Forbes business climate study says we are among the poorest positioned states for economic recovery. 

It is bewildering when listening to the Legislature deliberate bills that evidence so little concern for the impact of higher taxes and expansive regulations on the business climate. Ironically, there appears to be no focus among the majority party leadership on job creation initiatives - the party that often presents itself as representing the interests of workers. The recent Forbes release looking at a broad range of economic factors that impeded job creating in Wisconsin is a wake up call like no other.

Fortunately, it is not too late for business climate change in Wisconsin, but the governor and Legislative leaders must call a halt to expanding regulations on business, and reconsider the increased tax burden on business and capital formation imposed earlier this year. Draft legislation is circulating to roll back some of the more onerous tax provisions adopted earlier this year, and to create hiring incentives for Wisconsin employers. These measures deserve bipartisan support and prompt legislative consideration. 

Next year's election is shaping up to be a referendum on Wisconsin's business climate, and specifically on the willingness for Wisconsin's businesses and industry to create and retain jobs. Every legislative vote cast this session on a tax increase or additional business regulations will be the fodder of political debate across the state, both for the open gubernatorial office, and for all of the State Assembly seats, and the half of the State Senate who will stand for election in 2010.

Unless the actions of lawmakers change in the remaining days of the legislative session, a year from now, Wisconsin could be at the bottom of the Forbes business climate ranking. Business climate change must begin now.

Jim Haney is president of Wisconsin Manufacturers and Commerce (WMC), which represents 3,500 businesses in Wisconsin.

Forget Saturday's football showdown between the Wisconsin Badgers and the Minnesota Golden Gophers. Ignore the Monday Night Football game between the Green Bay Packers and Brett Favre's Minnesota Vikings.

The real cross-border game these days is all about biotechnology.

At least, that's the view from the newsroom of the Minneapolis Star-Tribune, which recently published a two-part series headlined "A bio border battle" and "Badger state tech boom." The stories call attention to Wisconsin's emerging technology sector - and even declare Minnesota an "underdog" in terms of catching up.

While it's human nature to perceive grass on the other side of the fence as greener, the Star-Tribune series (and a related blog item headlined, provocatively, "Wisconsin kicks our butt") is emblematic of a growing awareness about Wisconsin's ability to transfer research into start-up companies. After years of building a more entrepreneur-friendly economy, Wisconsin is finally moving beyond Rodney Dangerfield status and gaining respect.

Other examples in recent weeks:

• Nineteen Wisconsin companies were selected by the MidAmerica Healthcare Venture Forum to make on-stage pitches to investors who will attend the group's annual conference, which will be held Nov. 11-12 in Madison. The next largest contingent of companies from any one state is eight from Ohio.
  Springboard Enterprises, a national group dedicated to connecting women-led businesses with private equity capital, held its "All Things Life Sciences" conference this week in Madison, attracting investors from across the United States.
• A recent gathering of tech-based organizations in Chicago examined Wisconsin's experience with a five-year-old investor tax credit law in hopes of persuading the Illinois Legislature to follow a similar approach.
• The Wisconsin Early Stage Symposium, which annually gives start-up companies a chance to pitch their companies to investors, received more than 50 applications this year - including 10 from Minnesota, Iowa and Illinois. This tech-based matchmaking event will be held in tandem with the MidAmerica Healthcare Venture Forum in November.
• The premier of Manitoba, who will soon become the next Canadian ambassador to the United States, will visit Wisconsin in Oct. 15 to sign a protocol agreement with the state that highlights opportunities for growing tech-based businesses.

The Star-Tribune series was sparked by the move of several Minnesota tech companies to Wisconsin, which, while hardly an exodus, highlighted the lure of Wisconsin's investor tax credits and a generally healthy system of launching homegrown early stage companies. Some members of the Minnesota Legislature are now hoping to emulate Wisconsin's tax credits law.

 

There's some irony in Minnesota looking to Wisconsin as an example - because for years, Wisconsin's tech community looked with envy upon Minnesota. It is a state that built a medical device industry around companies such as Medtronic, Guidant and St. Jude, and which continues to attract far more venture capital in any given year than Wisconsin. Most important, per capita incomes in Minnesota and Illinois still outpace Wisconsin by at least $4,000 per year.

But outsiders sense momentum in Wisconsin, and perceive the process of creating and nurturing start-up companies here is more cohesive. The Star-Tribune quoted Pete Bianco of Halleland Consulting, a Twin Cities firm with corporate experience in Wisconsin, as saying: "You just get this sense of forward motion. Wisconsin is doing something right. I would like to see Minnesota do the same."

It's reassuring that people in Minnesota, Illinois and beyond are taking note of Wisconsin's tech-based economy, which has always boasted some of the world's best academic research and now has some impressive companies to match. But the end game in Wisconsin should not be about gaining a leg up on Minnesota, Illinois or any other neighbor. The real imperative is competing on a global stage.

The region that includes Chicago to the south and the Twin Cities to the west is the "I-Q Corridor," a place where ideas, innovation, intellectual property and investment combine to create interstate quality. It's a region that can compare itself with many others nationally - and which must compete with emerging economies in China, India and beyond.

It's productive and even flattering that some people in Minnesota and Illinois see Wisconsin's grass as being greener. But let's remember the real goal is a lawn big enough and green enough for everyone to play, work and prosper.

Tom Still is president of the Wisconsin Technology Council.

Chicago's failed bid to be the host of the 2016 Summer Olympics was a terrible loss for:
(A) Chicago
(B) Milwaukee
(C) The Midwest
(D) President Barack Obama
(E) America
(F) All of the above

The correct answer is (F). Make no mistake and accept no spin, the Obama administration suffered a substantial wound on this one. As I wrote last week, the president was making a serious political miscalculation by going to Copenhagen, Denmark, to accompany his wife and make a personal pitch to the International Olympic Committee on behalf of Chicago's bid to host the 2016 games - unless his administration had a strong premonition that his appearance would seal the deal.

By going to Denmark, Obama put his signature on the whole thing, win or lose.

As he prepared to fly to Denmark, Obama's critics pounced on him, saying he was taking his focus off of more serious things such as the economy, health care reform, the Middle East and Afghanistan. The critics implied that Chicago's Olympic pitch was not worthy of the president's time.

They were wrong. It was. And that's what makes the snub even more painful for … America.

Some of the shrillest critics rejoiced in Obama's failure. One giddy local talk show host even put a headline on his blog that read, "Barack, Michelle, and Oprah, Oh My!" For some, it has become more important that Obama fail than for their country to succeed.

And make no mistake, the Olympic fiasco is a failure for America, Obama and, to some degree, Milwaukee.

Don't think so? As the clock ticked down on the IOC's decision, I put out a call seeking comments from Milwaukee's business and civic leaders, some of whom lean politically to the left and others no doubt lean to the right. Every one of them was preparing to celebrate Chicago's selection to host the 2016 games.

They had no doubt whatsoever that the new development and infrastructure improvements of an Olympics in Chicago would spill over into southeastern Wisconsin. I asked them to share with us their thoughts if Chicago won the games and their thoughts if Chicago lost the games.

Of course, we posted their comments about Chicago's defeat on our web site.

Now, I'd like to share with you some of the comments they prepared for the moment had Chicago been successful in its bid. Taken in sum, they dramatically illustrate what could have been:

"Milwaukee will shine in the glow of the international spotlight placed on Chicago, and we will work to use that light to our economic development advantage. If it speeds up rail connections, all the better. Be the first time I rooted for a Chicago sports win!"
Tim Sheehy, president, Metropolitan Milwaukee Association of Commerce

"For too long, we've been unable to come to a decision on whether to expand our transit options, invest in our facilities, parks and public infrastructure. Well, in 2016, the world is coming to dinner and it is time for us to start to set our table. We can certainly host events and training facilities, athletes and visitors all in wonderful venues across our region. And we can also show the world that we can 'just do it' in Milwaukee and regain our place as a city on the move."
Julia Taylor, president, Greater Milwaukee Committee

"The games will be the most significant impact on our local economy in recent history as investments in Chicago will undoubtedly spill over on to infrastructure and amenities north of the state line."
Jim Villa, president and CEO, Commercial Association of Realtors Wisconsin

"The world's eyes are now squarely focused on Chicago and the larger region. There is no question that we now have a great opportunity at our doorstep to tell our story to the world."
Dean Amhaus, president, Spirit of Milwaukee

"Hopefully by 2016, we'll have a rebuilt I-94 corridor and additional rail options between Milwaukee and Chicago. Together with Mitchell International Airport serving as another gateway, we should be positioned to capture some of the Olympic excitement in the form of additional economic impact for the region."
David Fantle, vice president, Visit Milwaukee

"The Olympics will put metro Milwaukee and our Midwest region in the global limelight as a major destination and an economic contender. That visibility will translate into jobs and economic growth ... if we are prepared to capitalize on it."
Kerry Thomas, executive director of Transit Now

"We couldn't be more pleased by Chicago's win today. We've been supportive of Chicago's bid from the outset and now we look forward to working with the organizers, Mayor Daley and their entire team to see what supporting role Milwaukee can play in the games."
Milwaukee Mayor Tom Barrett

"Mitchell International Airport has already been called Chicago's third airport so we fully expect to bring thousands of Olympic visitors through the Milwaukee gateway And with Wauwatosa native Pat Ryan heading the Olympic effort for Chicago, Milwaukee has a great friend in the games who will look for opportunities for our community to get involved."
Milwaukee County Supervisor Scott Walker

"This Olympic decision is great news for Milwaukee County. I am pleased that President Barack Obama led our nation's final push to secure these games for Chicago. The total economic impact from the games is expected to be $22.5 billion. If we can capture just one percent of that impact, that's still a $225 million boost to the economy in Milwaukee County. Ten percent is $2.25 billion. The positive effect this will have on our economy and sales tax collections should not be underestimated.
Milwaukee County Executive Lee Holloway

"Commuter rail will allow our city to demonstrate to the world the assets and opportunities in Racine. Our chances of bringing Olympics tourists and Olympics spill off into Racine diminishes tenfold if we do not have commuter rail."
Racine Mayor John Dickert

"This economic impact will probably be bigger than a Super Bowl that the Packers play in. It's a unique situation. The Metra comes right into Kenosha, and (Olympic athletes') families may look to have their residences here and take the train right into the Olympic areas."
Kenosha County Executive Jim Kreuser

 

Ouch. The Midwest has never hosted the Olympics. And that's a shame.

Steve Jagler is executive editor of BizTimes Milwaukee.