海角大神

Today鈥檚 Washington Post has a聽front-page story about Wisconsin, a 鈥渟tate up for grabs鈥� as the print edition says, and 鈥渢he land of persuadable voters鈥� as the online version puts it.聽 I happen to have spent two days in Wisconsin last week, speaking to a variety of groups ranging from students to financial planners to newspaper editors.聽 Here鈥檚 a聽6-minute (easy-watch) TV interview I did聽for Wisconsin ABC affiliate WISN鈥檚 Sunday morning talk show,聽鈥淯p Front with Mike Gousha,鈥澛爋n the tough fiscal policy choices ahead鈥搕he election, the fiscal cliff, and beyond.聽 (The segment aired this past Sunday.)聽 If you want the background behind that quick summary, here鈥檚 a聽video of the one-hour conversation I had with Mike聽and a large, engaged audience at Marquette University Law School, before we taped the TV segment.聽 And here鈥檚 a聽video of a University of Wisconsin event I did聽(recorded by聽Wisconsin Eye) with some faculty from their public policy school, focused also on the fiscal cliff and beyond, with heavy emphasis on what tax reform鈥檚 role in deficit reduction should be.聽 The tax policy emphasis was natural given the expertise of the participants, but that shouldn鈥檛 discount the main point that tax reform is the only kind of fundamental reform that has any chance of significantly affecting the fiscal outlook in the next few years.

Based on my small sample of time with a decent cross-section of them, I find the hypothesis that Wisconsinites are 鈥減ersuadable鈥� and 鈥渦p for grabs鈥� a reasonable one, but I don鈥檛 think one should take that characterization as suggesting they are easily swayed by superficial things鈥搇ike the candidates鈥� body language during debates or the political attack ads.聽The fact that many Wisconsin voters do not vote consistently for one party over the other is testament to their looking more deeply beneath the candidates鈥� party labels, into the candidates鈥� true positions on issues of real substance.聽 Many seem puzzled that the candidates all like to talk the good talk about 鈥渇iscal responsibility鈥� yet seem to expend most of their energy attacking the ideas of their 鈥渙pponent鈥� that they do聽not聽agree with, rather than acknowledging and working on the bipartisan solutions that are possible given their common ground.聽 They want to know if the candidates鈥� talk will really work:聽 would a President Romney聽really聽be able to cut government spending enough to support lower tax rates (his prescription for longer-term economic growth), without on net聽hurting聽the middle class? Would President Obama in his second termreally聽be able to find enough revenue to pay for the new public investments he says the economy needs to grow, without admitting that tax burdens would likely have to go up for everyone, not just the rich?聽 Would either president be able to change the partisan, gridlocked environment in DC, in order to be able to affect the changes needed to get our economy back on a better path?

So, I think the typical 鈥減ersuadable鈥� Wisconsin voter will be listening to tonight鈥檚 presidential debates closely, for the substance of what the candidates say far more than their style.

The Post story聽sums up Wisconsinites this way, with a quote from Charles Franklin who directs the聽Marquette University Law School Poll聽of Wisconsin citizens:

I can vouch for that!