Visit coronavirus.gov for the latest information and resources on COVID-19 from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

Information from the Wisconsin Department of Health Services can be found here.

Be aware of potential price gouging and scams related to COVID-19. For more information from the Wisconsin Department of Agriculture, Trade and Consumer Protection, click here.

To connect potential volunteers and organizations addressing these pressing concerns, the United Way of Wisconsin, Serve Wisconsin, and the Wisconsin Volunteer Coordinators Association created the COVID-19 Response Initiative on the Volunteer Wisconsin website.

If you are looking for information on assistance for small businesses affected by the coronavirus pandemic, click here.

One of President Obama’s proposed solutions for the debt and deficit is something he calls the Buffett Rule, or Buffett tax. The President said that if you enact the principles of the Buffett rule, "not only do we pay for our jobs bill, but we also stabilize our debt and deficits for the next decade."

Here are some basic facts: During President Bush’s first term he ran deficits that totaled $0.8 trillion. During his second term his total deficits equaled $1.2 trillion. Now President Obama has been somewhat of an overachiever when it comes to deficit spending. During President Obama's four years his deficits totaled about $5.3 trillion. How much would the Buffett tax raise? The answer is $20 billion.

Now $20 billion does not stabilize deficits totaling of $5300 billion. I think the President of the United States has a duty not to mislead the American public. With his Buffett Rule comment, President Obama was misleading the American public. He continues to do it by implying that just making the rich pay their "fair share" will stabilize the debt and deficit. It simply won’t.

The most recent Democratic proposal in the Senate to increase taxes on the top 1 percent would have only raised $67 billion per year, when our deficit is about $1,300 billion.

I oppose tax increases because the federal government needs to be focused on economic growth. We shouldn’t do anything that would harm economic growth, because that’s the No. 1 component of the solution. If we’re going to create jobs we have to grow our economy, and we have to make sure that businesses have money available to reinvest, to increase wages, to pay for healthcare, and to fund 401Ks and retirement plans. When the federal government takes that money out of the pockets of small businesses, it severely hampers their ability to grow their business and create jobs – which we need to do if we’re ever going to get our unemployment rates down to acceptable levels.

Video courtesy of Chippewa Valley Community Television.

When the 2010 healthcare law was proposed, President Obama was concerned that it not cost more than $1 trillion. He also wanted to make sure that the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) not judge it as adding one dime to the deficit. So they implemented the law in a way that it would only start spending money in 2014, but not fully kick in until 2016. So they paid for four to six years of spending, but counted 10 years of revenue, taxes, fees and penalties, and also 10 years of supposed cuts in Medicare and Medicare Advantage. The cuts in Medicare were to come from provider payments. The cuts in Medicare Advantage were to come from benefits.

You can’t "bend the cost curve" by increasing taxes on medical device manufacturers, insurance plans and hospitals. But that’s what President Obama did. That’s why the cost curve has not been bent down on healthcare.

When they put that plan together, the CBO scored his healthcare law as actually reducing the deficit, but nothing can be further from the truth. I doubt there is actually going to be a reduction of deficit for the first 10-year window.

Furthermore, look what happens as you move the budget window forward. From 2013 to 2022, the 10-year cost of Obamacare will be $1.75 trillion - not $1 trillion, but $1.7 trillion. When it fully kicks in – from 2016 to 2025 – the law will cost at a minimum $2.4 trillion. That’s somewhere around $250 billion a year at least. If you just move the taxes, fees and penalties forward to that window, we’ve got about a $1.9 trillion dollar gap, or a deficit risk. Is President Obama’s proposal to take that out of Medicare?

It could actually be worse than this, because I don’t believe it will only cost $2.4 trillion. When the CBO estimated that cost, they anticipated that only 1 million Americans will lose their employer-sponsored care and have to access coverage through the exchanges. About 170 million people currently get their healthcare - their insurance - through their employer. Without the healthcare law most employers that are providing healthcare will continue to do that. They don’t want to expose the people that work with them to financial ruin.

Under the healthcare law however, the decision totally changes. Businesses will decide whether to pay $15,000 a year for a family plan, and try and comply with 15,000 pages of law and rules and regulations. That’s what we’re up to right now, 15,000 pages. The federal government has only begun to write the rules and regulations around the healthcare law. So businesses will need to pay $15,000 in cost, plus try to comply with 15,000 pages of regulation. Or does that employer decide to save money by paying the $2000-$3,000 penalty? And by doing so, they’re not exposing employees to financial risk; they’re making them eligible for huge subsidies in the exchanges.

Video courtesy of Chippewa Valley Community Television.

From 1993 to 2002 the federal government spent $17 trillion. During the past 10 years the federal government spent $30 trillion - almost doubling spending from decade to decade. The House budget proposes spending $40 trillion during the next 10 years. President Obama wants to spend $47 trillion. There are no overall cuts, just an attempt to reduce the rate of growth in spending so we don’t bankrupt this nation.

Video courtesy of Chippewa Valley Community Television.

The data used in preparation of this chart can be viewed here.

Video courtesy of Chippewa Valley Community Television.

In 1962, 68 percent of the federal budget was discretionary spending. It was appropriated annually and came under some level control of Congress. About 32 percent of the budget consists of entitlements - or mandatory spending - and interest on the debt. This year that’s almost reversed. We now have 35 percent of the budget called discretionary - that’s appropriated by Congress - and 65 percent of the budget which is entitlement spending and interest on the debt that just occurs automatically. In 10 years, if we continue on this path, only 25 percent of the federal budget will be discretionary spending. Fully 75 percent will be mandatory entitlement and interest.

Video courtesy of Chippewa Valley Community Television.

From 1993 to 2002 the federal government spent $17 trillion. During the past 10 years the federal government spent $30 trillion - almost doubling spending from decade to decade. The House budget proposes spending $40 trillion during the next 10 years. President Obama wants to spend $47 trillion. There are no overall cuts, just an attempt to reduce the rate of growth in spending so we don’t bankrupt this nation.

Video courtesy of Chippewa Valley Community Television.

The data used in preparation of this chart can be viewed here.

From 1993 to 2002 the federal government spent $17 trillion. During the past 10 years the federal government spent $30 trillion - almost doubling spending from decade to decade. The House budget proposes spending $40 trillion during the next 10 years. President Obama wants to spend $47 trillion. There are no overall cuts, just an attempt to reduce the rate of growth in spending so we don’t bankrupt this nation.

Video courtesy of Chippewa Valley Community Television.

The data used in preparation of this chart can be viewed here.

Video courtesy of Chippewa Valley Community Television.

The federal government is currently adding more than $1 trillion in new debt ever year. For now, this debt is being financed at historically low interest rates. Once interest rates return to historic norms - approximately 3.8 percent higher than they have been during the Obama administration - the cost of adding debt will climb dramatically. Congress will need to cut spending or raise taxes to finance this increased borrowing cost.

Video courtesy of Chippewa Valley Community Television.

Changes to Senate rules have made it easier for government to grow - and it has grown. The federal government expanded from two percent of Gross Domestic Product in 1903 to a peacetime high of twenty-five percent in 2009.

The data used in preparation of this chart can be viewed here.

On September 30, 1987 – near the end of the Reagan Administration – total federal debt stood at $2.3 trillion. Our federal government took 200 years to incur $2.3 trillion dollars worth of debt. In the 2011 debt ceiling increase, Congress gave the President approval to increase the debt ceiling by $2.1 trillion. I voted against that measure, but the federal government will use up that $2.1 trillion increase around Christmas of 2012. We will have gone through $2.1 trillion worth of debt in less than two years. It took 200 years to incur $2.3 trillion of debt, and we will incur $2.1 trillion dollars more in less than two years.

When President Obama came into office the national debt stood at $10.6 trillion. It recently surpassed $16 trillion, which is larger than the size of our economy - an extremely dangerous metric.

Here’s one way to think about this: If a family’s debt exceeds total income on an annual basis, and the family doesn’t have the assets to back it up – if they’re in debt over their head - how can they grow their "personal economy"? Every dollar beyond the basics goes towards paying off the debt.

The same thing is true for federal economy. It’s the same dynamic, on a massively larger scale. History tells us when that debt to GDP ratio exceeds 90 percent - and we’re over 100 percent - it harms the economy’s ability to grow out of that debt. President Obama’s budget estimates that our federal debt will grow to $26 trillion. I don’t think it will get to that point because I don’t think we’ll find creditors around the world that would loan us that money.

Video courtesy of Chippewa Valley Community Television.

Changes to Senate rules have made it easier for government to grow - and it has grown. The federal government expanded from two percent of Gross Domestic Product in 1903 to a peacetime high of twenty-five percent in 2009.

The data used in preparation of this chart can be viewed here.

The cloture vote is the method the United States Senate developed in 1917 to bring unlimited debate to an end. The Senate initially set the threshold to bring debate to an end at 2/3, which would be 67 senators in today’s Senate. In 1975 they lowered that threshold to 3/5, or 60 votes, which is our current level. Before this first cloture vote, the federal government was 2 percent of the economy - 2 cents of every dollar flowed through the federal government. At that time state and local governments represented 5 percent of our total economy so the total cost of government was 7 percent. Today the federal government is 24 percent the size of our economy - 24 cents of every dollar flows through the federal government. Add state and local government (about 16 percent) and we’re up to 40 percent which is the lower level of European-style socialism.

Video courtesy of Chippewa Valley Community Television.

On September 30, 1987 – near the end of the Reagan Administration – total federal debt stood at $2.3 trillion. Our federal government took 200 years to incur $2.3 trillion dollars worth of debt. In the 2011 debt ceiling increase, Congress gave the President approval to increase the debt ceiling by $2.1 trillion. I voted against that measure, but the federal government will use up that $2.1 trillion increase around Christmas of 2012. We will have gone through $2.1 trillion worth of debt in less than two years. It took 200 years to incur $2.3 trillion of debt, and we will incur $2.1 trillion dollars more in less than two years.

When President Obama came into office the national debt stood at $10.6 trillion. It recently surpassed $16 trillion, which is larger than the size of our economy - an extremely dangerous metric.

Here’s one way to think about this: If a family’s debt exceeds total income on an annual basis, and the family doesn’t have the assets to back it up – if they’re in debt over their head - how can they grow their "personal economy"? Every dollar beyond the basics goes towards paying off the debt.

The same thing is true for federal economy. It’s the same dynamic, on a massively larger scale. History tells us when that debt to GDP ratio exceeds 90 percent - and we’re over 100 percent - it harms the economy’s ability to grow out of that debt. President Obama’s budget estimates that our federal debt will grow to $26 trillion. I don’t think it will get to that point because I don’t think we’ll find creditors around the world that would loan us that money.

Video courtesy of Chippewa Valley Community Television.

Video courtesy of Chippewa Valley Community Television.

Video courtesy of Chippewa Valley Community Television.