Letters, Essays and More
2025
Get Informed and Vote Feb. 18 and April 1 From Joan Cervenka, Hayward
Stop Stealing Our Private Data From Mary Vitcenda, Exeland
immy Carter vs. Donald Trump—Compare and Contrast From Mary Vitcenda, Exeland
Team Players, Non Players, and the Dangers of Misguided Loyalty—Two Essays
Teams By Jim Bootz, vice chair, Sawyer County and LCO Democratic Party
The Republican Party’s NPC Problem—and Ours By Ezra Klein, New York Times Opinion
Letters
Get Informed and Vote Feb. 18 and April 1
Published Feb. 5, 2025, in the Sawyer County Record, Hayward, Wis., and Feb. 6, 2025, in the Ladysmith News
Author: Joan Cervenka, Hayward, Wis.
The upcoming Feb. 18 primary election is very important. Building awareness, spreading information and encouraging our friends and neighbors to vote is so very important during the coming [days and] weeks. Each and every one of us need to think locally.
It is of utmost importance to vote even when you believe there [will] be only one candidate running for an office or opening. There may be write-ins that can change election results. Get informed.
In February and April our small towns will be electing supervisors and chairs to govern with rules and regulations and allocate resources at the “lowest level”…the level that [a]ffects our daily lives. There will also be school board candidates.
the Wisconsin State Superintendent of Public Instruction (schools) will be on [some] of your ballots [in Sawyer County] on Feb. 18. This primary will determine who will be on the April 1 ballot. Since July 202, Jill Underly has been successfully fulfilling the job as State Superintendent of Public Instruction.
What concrete actions should you do now for the upcoming elections? First of all, check to make sure you are currently registered. Contact your local clerk or look online at https://myvote.wi.gov. Next, get informed and vote.
Editor’s Note
Learn more about the Feb. 18 primary election on our website at https://sclcodems.org/elections/#Primary
Learn more about the April 1 spring election on our website at https://sclcodems.org/elections/#Spring
Stop Stealing Our Private Data
Published Feb. 6, 2025, in the Ladysmith News
Author: Mary Vitcenda, Exeland, Wis.
Would you put up with your bank turning over your account numbers and other personal financial information to an unvetted outside party without the bank’s security clearance? What if your local health care provider released your medical records to random consultants the provider did not choose or control?
Now what if our federal government handed over your Social Security account number and payment records or opened up your income tax returns to a few people barely out of college who are not federal employees and did not get security clearances to view or share that information. Would you like it?
Well, that’s exactly what happened when billionaire Elon Musk and his boyish band of DOGE computer engineers forced access to the U.S. Treasury Department’s computer systems. Make no mistake. Musk is now able to steal from you and me to give our tax money to giant corporations and billionaires.
This assault on Americans and on our government has got to stop. Call or write, or better yet, call AND write Representative Tom Tiffany (202-225-3365) and Senators Ron Johnson (202-224-5323 ) and Tammy Baldwin (202-224-5653). You can email all three at https://democracy.io/#!/
THEN demand that they do their jobs and enforce the balance of power among our co-equal branches of government dictated by the Constitution. Tell them to keep the Legislative branch strong and the Executive branch in check. Tell them to stop Musk and his minions stealing from you.
Jimmy Carter vs. Donald Trump—Compare and Contrast
Published Jan. 22, 2025, in the Sawyer County Record, and Jan. 23, 2025, in the Ladysmith News
Author: Mary Vitcenda, Exeland, Wis.
As Donald Trump returns to the White House, I’d like to reflect on the recent passing of former President Jimmy Carter. While president, Carter bolstered Social Security, established the federal education and energy departments, and facilitated the 1979 Egypt and Israel peace agreement.
I admire these accomplishments, as well as his forward-thinking energy initiatives, including tax credits and research funds for solar panels and other renewable energy projects. These initiatives look even more important today given the devastating effects of climate change we face.
I also admire Carter’s commitment to human rights. He was an Evangelical Christian but not a Christian Nationalist. Jimmy Carter knew that real democracy called for the separation of church and state. He walked the talk of Jesus with sincerity and compassion. He was a man of morality and honesty.
On January 9, we witnessed former President Carter’s state funeral. Earlier that same week, we also witnessed the certification of the 2024 presidential vote for Donald Trump. This was a welcome return to the tradition of the peaceful transfer of power—so different from what we saw on January 6, 2021, when thousands rioted at the Capitol to stop the certification of the 2020 vote for Joe Biden.
I pray the tradition of peaceful transfer continues. I also pray that we can again elect a president who is an exemplary role model like Jimmy Carter. Only then will America indeed be great again.
Essays
Team Players, Non Players, and the Dangers of Misguided Loyalty—Two Essays
Teams
By Jim Bootz, vice chair, Sawyer County and LCO Democratic Party
Many years ago, I had a friend and co-worker named Andy. I can't think of a bad thing to say about Andy, or any reason to try. He was smart, easy to work with, had a great sense of humor, and never took himself too seriously. He was also a big fan of one particular NFL franchise. It's not important to say which team. This could apply to any team's fans, but to paint a clear picture, Andy had grown up in Green Bay and our workplace was in Minneapolis. If it helps, pretend he's a Cowboys fan.
When football season arrived, those of us who didn't share Andy's love for his team had come to expect from him an expression of team loyalty in ways that we found amusing. He wasn't quite at the level of a face-painter, but the gloating after a win was always to be expected. After a loss, on the other hand, we were anxious to hear what Andy would attribute it to. Sometimes, the refs blew a call. Sometimes, the other team cheated. And, once I believe there was even a suspicious coin toss before an overtime loss. It was a lot of different things, but it was never that they didn't play well enough or that the other team was simply better. The excuses he gave seemed almost tongue-in-cheek. He knew we didn't believe them, and I don't think he did, either. But that was the way in which he expressed his lifelong loyalty to that team, and it didn't hurt us any to let him. After all, it's just a game.
Some years later, I read a newspaper account of a woman, also a fan of that team, who had, incredibly, found herself in possession of an opposing team's play sheets. Those sheets scripted the first 16 plays of their upcoming game against her home team. She'd thought of returning them to the visiting team's coach, but at someone else's suggestion, they were brought to her team's headquarters. Her team, the Packers, had the decency to keep the play sheets out of their building and have nothing to do with [the sheets]. And every one of [the Packers] fans should have been proud of [their team] for it. Their foes, as well.
It seemed as if, by bringing it to their team, those fans had expected that such intelligence might be instrumental in securing a win. It was as though they felt they were at war and they had captured the enemy's battle plans and were delivering them to the general. I don't mean to cast aspersions on them, but I couldn't help but wonder how many fans are so devoted to their football team that they would happily encourage cheating in order to get a "win." And, how many of them actually would feel it was a win, as good as any other? Loyalty, when taken too far, overcomes decency, and harmless self-deception broadens to deceiving a great many others.
And yet, if we're still talking about the game of football from a spectator's standpoint, a fan's sense of fair play or a lack of it will not affect the outcome of the game. Again, to the spectator, it is just a game.
The kind of loyalty a sports fan shows for their team is sometimes transferred to other associations, as well. A partisan political preference can often be treated as an object of team loyalty. There are many things that are different about the two, but primarily it is this: Sports fans, whether they're lucid or delusional and regardless of their numbers, don't change the outcome of the game. But voters with fan-like adherence to a political party do affect the outcome. In which case, it's not a game.
One can remain happily ignorant of the poor play or lack of talent on their football team and still insist that they're going to win the Super Bowl in spite of it. It changes nothing. Contrast that with a voter who will turn a blind eye to party or candidate, determined not to hear or refusing to believe anything that runs counter to their undying admiration for them. In sufficient numbers, a vote changes everything. If a fan only wishes to hear good things about their football team, there are plenty of TV shows for that, on just about every local channel. Unfortunately, there are plenty of TV shows which a voter can turn to and hear only good things about their "team" and their candidate, and only bad things about the others.
Voting is a time to gain and employ wisdom. It's not a time to stick one's fingers in their ears and yell to drown out the reality of a deeply flawed candidate. It's not a time to be dishonest with yourself and others.
If you're habitually voting for your team, without concern for the best interests of yourself and your entire community, your loyalty is misguided. Elections are not a spectator sport. They're life-changing for millions of people and they deserve that level of consideration.
The Republican Party’s NPC Problem—and Ours
By Ezra Klein, New York Times Opinion
Excerpts
Edited transcript and link to full podcast on the New York Times website (requires subscription)
A few years back, the online right became enamored of a new epithet for liberals: “NPC,” short for “nonplayer character.” The term was lifted from video games, where “NPC” refers to the computer-controlled characters that populate the game while you, the live player, make decisions. NPCs don’t have minds of their own. They’re automatons. They do as they’re told.
“NPC” quickly became a favored dismissal for all those liberals with their Black Lives Matter and #MeToo hashtags, their Ukrainian flag icons, their “they/them” pronouns and antiracism reading groups. Liberals, in this story, thought what they were allowed to think, said what they were allowed to say. You might have seen the memes — featureless gray faces, sometimes surrounded by liberal icons. Elon Musk loved posting them.
Like any good insult, the NPC meme served a dual purpose. It contained a kernel of truth about its target. We liberals can be conformist. We can be too afraid to offend. We can be overly deferential to institutions. We can be cowed by the in-group policing we inflict on ourselves and quick to take up the cause of the moment. But the real purpose of the NPC insult was self-congratulation. The right was full of live players. You could see it in their willingness to offend, their mistrust of institutions, their eagerness to debate what liberals would not even say out loud. This became part of the Trumpist right’s self-definition: They were the nonconformists, the coalition that wasn’t made up of automatons. That’s what America needed. Live players.
And at this point, I’m willing to concede half the argument. American politics does have an NPC problem. Possibly a lethal one. But it’s not on the left.
. . . .
Democrats became champions of a government that didn’t work. I think that’s part of the reason Donald Trump won. Not the biggest reason he won, but when people feel that the government isn’t working, the party promising change beats the party rallying in defense. When Musk says that Republicans had a mandate for governmental reform, I don’t think he’s totally wrong.
But even Musk notes that the proof of the mandate is that Republicans control the House and Senate. So why not write some bills? Sure, Republican majorities are narrow, but bipartisanship wasn’t out of the question. Democrats were defeated and ready to deal. Their own voters wanted them to deal.
. . . .
If this were about policy, Trump and his team would have tried to go through Congress. They could have crafted much larger reforms using a wider set of powers, and they wouldn’t be facing down the courts.
But they didn’t want policy. They didn’t want to go line by line through U.S.A.I.D. and figure out what worked and what didn’t. They didn’t want to release a package of proposed spending cuts and debate their merits. They didn’t want to think through new civil service regulations.
They wanted power. They are trying to remake our system of government, not our laws. They have identified a weak point in that system, and they are driving a flaming Cybertruck through it.
That weak point is Congress. And the reason Trump and his administration might succeed in taking its power is that they have turned congressional Republicans into NPCs.
. . .
The framers of the Constitution got a lot right. But they got a lot wrong, and the biggest thing they got wrong was visible almost immediately: The founders imagined a political system free of political parties. Within a few years, they had formed their own political parties. For much of American history, though, the founders’ second assumption held. Geography kept American politics fractured because it kept America’s political parties fractured.
. . .
Parties that contained so many different places and ideologies could not act in lock step, and so bipartisanship was common.
. . .
That was then. In 2025, Trump is impounding money that Congress has appropriated, in clear defiance of that impoundment law. He is trying to erase agencies that Congress created. And while the courts are standing in his way, Congress is letting him do it. Congress is not fighting to stop the destruction of U.S.A.I.D., even though its current structure was created by a bill passed by a Republican-controlled House and Senate in 1998.
It’s astonishing. Republicans in Congress could demand that Trump cut them in. They won the election, too. It is their job to write these bills.
Agreement with Trump’s policy aims need not mean agreement with his power grab. But the most powerful branch of government — the branch with the power to check the others — is supine. It is not that it can’t act to protect its power. It’s that it will not act to protect its power. This is a nonplayer Congress.
. . .
It would be good for the country and for the Republican Party if Republicans displayed the values they once claimed to prize — a willingness to offend their own side, a mistrust of institutional authority, an eagerness to debate the questions that those in power do not wish to see debated.
But we’re seeing none of that. This is the NPC problem we actually face: a nonplayer Congress, driven by Republicans who serve Trump’s ambitions first. We are left relying on the courts, and that may work. But this is not the system working. It is the system failing.
These candidates are better choices for moving us forward
Oct. 2, 2024
Published in the Sawyer County Record, Hayward, Wis., Author: Mary Vitcenda, Exeland, Wis.
Living in the southern end of Sawyer County, I see lots of signs for Trump and other Republican candidates. I believe there are better choices for the good of people in our area, namely Kamala Harris for president, Tim Walz for vice president, Tammy Baldwin for U.S. Senate, Kyle Kilbourn for the 7th Congressional District, and Jeanne Bruce for the 74th District Wisconsin Assembly seat.
These progressive candidates support policies that will benefit all of us in Sawyer County. These candidates are committed to protecting our environment and ensuring we have clean water. They pledge to better fund our public schools, protect our voting rights, and strengthen rural health care services. These candidates also support access to reproductive services free from government intrusion. And none of them would cut Social Security or Medicare.
Wisconsinites agree with our progressive candidates in one public opinion poll after another. More than two-thirds of us favor more funding for public schools and oppose cuts to Social Security and Medicare. More than 70 percent of us also opposed overturning Roe v. Wade. It’s astonishing that our progressive candidates must fight to accomplish what should be the goal of every one of our elected representatives.
Kamala Harris, Tim Walz, Tammy Baldwin, Kyle Kilbourn, and Jeanne Bruce all offer hope for a better future for everyone and understand we must work together to achieve it. Think about this when you cast your ballot this fall. These candidates are better choices to move us all forward.
We need a serious leader like Kyle Kilbourn
Sept. 26, 2024
Published in the Ladysmith News, Ladysmith, Wis., Author: Mary Vitcenda, Exeland, Wis.
Those of us who live in northwestern Wisconsin desperately need a serious leader who understands the challenges we face in the 7th Congressional District. We need a leader who will bring fresh, energetic leadership to Congress.
Kyle Kilbourn will be that serious leader. He is the candidate we need to elect this November.
Kyle Kilbourn will work to keep our air and water clean. The incumbent representative, Tom Tiffany, does the opposite. He consistently opposes conservation measures and environmental protections. For example, he has voted to cut spending for environmental programs to their lowest levels in decades, including a 40 percent cut for the Environmental Protection Agency. (Maybe that’s why he’s often called Toxic Tom).
Kyle Kilbourn also will protect Social Security and Medicare. Compare that withTiffany, who helped write a Republican plan to raise the retirement age for Social Security. He also helped write a Republican budget that would gut Medicare by slashing billions of dollars from the program.
Medicare currently provides a guaranteed level of payment for doctor visits and hospital coverage. Tiffany supports making Medicare a voucher plan in which those guarantees would disappear. Vouchers would lead to reduced coverage, annual and lifetime caps, higher deductibles, and skyrocketing cost increases.
If you believe our Congressional representative should work on policies to help us thrive, rather than spend most of his time stoking fear, hate, and culture wars like Tiffany—vote for Kyle Kilbourn in November. (And remember you can vote early, too.)
No time for games—Vote ‘No’ on state constitutional amendments
July 18, 2024
Published in the Ladysmith News, Ladysmith, Wis., Author: Mary Vitcenda, Exeland, Wis.
Did you know a big election is coming up this year? In November, of course! But there’s an election on August 13 that’s also important to your community and your future.
There are two questions on the August ballot which, if passed, will change the state constitution for the worse. I’m voting no on both questions, and I urge other voters throughout Wisconsin to do the same.
A yes vote on these constitutional amendment questions would give the legislature sole authority over the distribution of federal money. A yes vote would also take the governor out of the picture. And that’s dangerous. Why?
Because the majority of legislators spend more time playing partisan games than governing. They gavel in and gavel out without working for our communities. For example:
· The legislature refused the governor’s call for a special session to take action during the Covid-19 crisis. Luckily, Gov. Evers was able to get $20 billion distributed to communities in need during the crisis.
· The legislature continues to refuse Medicaid expansion money—money that could insure up to 89,000 more Wisconsin residents.
· And just this year, the legislature blocked money to get toxic chemicals out of our water and tried to block the way money could be spent to keep hospitals from closing.
Clearly, the legislature plays games instead of helping our communities when they’re in need. So make your voice heard. Let’s come together and vote no on Aug. 13.
Vote for the man who honors vets
June 6, 2024
Published in the Sawyer County Record, Hayward, WIs. Author: Mary Vitcenda, Exeland, Wis.
We just observed Memorial Day, which honors soldiers who died in war. June 6th will be the 80th anniversary of the D-Day landings along the Normandy coast during World War II.
At this time, and during this election year when our thoughts turn to what kind of leadership we want, it’s appropriate to ask a painful, but necessary question: What did these soldiers die for?
Abraham Lincoln provides an answer in the Gettysburg Address, when he says the soldiers who died in that battle gave their lives so “this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom—and that government of the people, by the people, for the people shall not perish from the earth.”
Many Americans say “freedom” in response to the question about why our soldiers died in World War II. Or in the wars that followed, misguided though some of those conflicts might have been. So they understand part of Lincoln’s words.
But sadly, because of what I see in today’s divisive politics, I fear many Americans have lost sight of the rest of Lincoln’s remarks. I fear that many Americans have forgotten the idea of America, and the Constitution on which it was founded.
In remarks on Memorial Day, President Biden said the “truest memorial” to fallen soldiers are “the actions we take every day to ensure that our democracy endures—that the very idea of America endures.”
One action we can take is to vote in November for the presidential candidate who understands that our soldiers sacrificed their lives to preserve our freedom and our Constitution. We can also vote for the presidential candidate who pays tribute to the men and women of our military, not the one who disparages them.
President Biden says “May God protect our troops” at the end of every speech he gives. But according to John Kelly, Donald Trump’s former chief of staff, and other reliable sources, Trump called soldiers who died in World War II “suckers and losers.” Only one candidate truly honors the sacrifices of our military and is qualified to be our commander in chief, and that is President Biden.
Are Trump and Tiffany on your side?
Feb. 8, 2024
Published in the Ladysmith News, Ladysmith, Ladysmith, WIs. Author: Tom Vitcenda, Exeland, Wis.
Here’s a question for my fellow 7th CD citizens: Are Donald Trump and Tom Tiffany really working for you? Are they really on your side? Let’s look at some recent words and actions from these two candidates and decide.
Trump’s line
Trump said he hopes the U.S. economy crashes before the election so he can blame Biden and (he thinks) get back in the White House. Does an economic downturn, and all the suffering it would bring, help you?
Trump said he’ll be a dictator on day one of his hoped-for second term to prosecute, imprison, or even execute anyone he says is an enemy of his administration. Putting aside the issue of whether that’s a normal position for a U.S. presidential candidate to take—Does punishing political enemies help you?
Trump asked Republicans in Congress to oppose the bipartisan border security bill so Biden doesn’t get any credit for solving the problem. In other words, Trump doesn’t want to solve border issues; he just wants to blame Democrats for them. Again—does failure to implement more common sense border policies and control drug flow across the border help you?
Tiffany’s line
Not to be outdone by Trump, Tom Tiffany has voted against every bill that had input from Democrats. The bills that Tiffany has opposed include the Inflation Reduction Act, the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law (which includes a $1 billion grant to replace the Blatnik Bridge between Superior and Duluth), the American Rescue Plan Act of 2021, and (wait for it) the Consumer Fuel Price Gouging Prevention Act. That last vote is rich, given all of Tiffany’s whining about high gas prices.
As of late January, the U.S. House is refusing to advance a bipartisan border bill that many Republicans support, with some even saying it’s the best chance they’ll have to make some repairs to our broken immigration system. Given Tiffany’s past behavior, it’s probably safe to say he wouldn’t support the border bill if and when it comes to a House vote.
That would be interesting wouldn’t it? Watching Tiffany squirm about his choices. Should he vote for the bill and lose his big talking points about Biden’s so-called “open borders” and fentanyl smuggling across the border? Or should he vote against the bill along with his fellow Freedom Caucus members? If he chose the second option, well, that would just be more proof that he’s not out to help you.
It would also be more proof that Tiffany is all talk and no action. More proof that he’s not serious about governing (or representing constituents outside the MAGA cult)—and just wants to fight culture wars.
Think for yourself
Now, you don’t have to take my word for all this. If you want to see how Tiffany operates, I suggest you attend one of his town hall meetings. There you will hear with your own ears his constant mantra of division, mistrust of institutions, and outright hatred of government and government employees. Not to mention his unwillingness to listen to anything that comes close to another point of view.
I have been to two of his events and found them to be negative, divisive, condescending, and even bullying. Bottom line: Keep an eye on Trump and Tiffany. Listen to what they say. Watch what they do—and what they don’t do. Then ask yourself: Are they looking out for me and the best interests of the country? Or are they just looking out for themselves and their own interests?