Some Assembly-related election tidbits

According to the Wisconsin Government Accountability Board (GAB) “Candidates Registered by Office” report, things are about to get a little more interesting here in the south shore suburbs of Milwaukee.

In the 20th Assembly district, which in my opinion is very capably represented by incumbent Democratic State Rep. Chris Sinicki, Sinicki’s failed 2010 Republican challenger Molly McGartland joins libertarian Republican Kristan Harris to challenge Rep. Sinicki in November, setting up what should certainly be an entertaining Republican primary.

In the neighboring 21st Assembly district, Republican State Rep. Mark Honadel will have a Democratic challenger, as Bill Kurtz has filed the necessary paperwork to become a candidate. As a former resident of Rep. Honadel’s district, I’ve long hoped to see him unseated, and hopefully Kurtz can run the kind of campaign that’s going to be necessary to send Mark Honadel back to the private sector.

Kristan Harris supports your Fourth Amendment right to bear arms

Kristan Harris, the Republican challenger to Democratic State Rep. Chris Sinicki in the 20th Assembly district, wants his potential constituents to know he supports their Fourth Amendment right to bear arms.

Oh wait…what’s that? It’s the Second Amendment that gives citizens the right to bear arms?!? Since when???

Kristan Harris really REALLY does not like equal pay laws

I’m sure you’re probably wondering, “Who the heck is Kristan Harris?”

While you may not have heard of Kristan Harris until now, no doubt if you live in the 20th Assembly district (comprised of Cudahy, St. Francis, and part of Milwaukee) you’ll be hearing a lot about Harris, as he’s the Republican challenger to incumbent Democratic State Rep. Chris Sinicki.

According to the “St Francis and Cudahy Vote 4 Liberty & Kristan T Harris 4 Wi State Assembly” Facebook page, Harris is no fan of equal pay laws here in Wisconsin, arguing the young, minorities, the untrained are “weak economic actors” and should be allowed to work for $2.50 an hour, while arguing that it’s better for businesses if they’re allowed to pay women lower wages than men doing the same jobs, because that discrimination will allow the employers to turn a little extra profit.

My Stance on the “Equal Pay Law”
In economics there are people who are relatively weak. The disabled, the young, minorities, the untrained—all are weak economic actors. But like the weak animals in biology, they have a compensating advantage: the ability to work for lower wages. When the government takes this ability away from them by forcing up pay scales, it is as if the porcupine were shorn of its quills. The result is unemployment, which creates desperate loneliness, isolation, and dependency.Consider a young, uneducated, unskilled person, whose productivity is $2.50 an hour in the marketplace. What if the legislature passes a law requiring that he be paid $5 per hour? The employer hiring him would lose $2.50 an hour.
Consider a man and a woman each with a productivity of $10 per hour, and suppose, because of discrimination or whatever, that the man is paid $ 10 per hour and the woman is paid $8 per hour. It is as if the woman had a little sign on her forehead saying, “Hire me and earn an extra $2 an hour.”This makes her a desirable employee even for a sexist boss. But when an equal-pay law stipulates that she must be paid the same as the man, the employer can indulge his discriminatory tendencies and not hire her at all, at no cost to himself. Now this is an EXTREME case.Unfortunately it happens.. Now if we look at each other as our creator intended as “equals” we would not have this issue. Unfortunately this bill in my OPNION would INCREASE unemployment in a VIRAL manor. It would STRIP MINORITIES AND MANY OTHERS of jobs.This creates unemployment for women. So in my opnion THIS would be a VERY ANTI WOMAN/Law. I am suprised that Democratic Party would endorse such a Law.

Words can’t even begin to describe how incredulous I am after reading (and then re-reading) what Kristan Harris wrote, because he seems to be making an argument in favor employers/businesses taking advantage of the disabled, the young, and minorities by paying them whatever wages the employers/businesses see fit, simply because those individuals are “weak economic actors” in Harris’ opinion.

For the benefit of posterity, I’ve saved Kristan Harris’ screed in a screenshot below.