The Wisconsin State Journal has started something of a crusade to stop electing state Supreme Court justices and have them appointed instead. A guest commentary the State Journal published this morning echoing the paper's editorial position says the way judges are currently picked is becoming "increasingly dysfunctional" and "destructive of judicial independence and public confidence in the courts." No disagreement so far.
But then the column's author astounds with his conclusion that "(m)erit selection of judges is the only way to repair these problems."
The only way?
The first state Supreme Court election was held in Wisconsin in 1852 and for over 150 years elections produced a high court that enjoyed the citizenry's trust. It was not until last April's election that the public's confidence was profoundly shaken.
Given this history, why would anyone conclude that the "only way" to fix what's gone wrong with our system is to do away with elections? With all due respect to the State Journal's guest columnist, there is another way. Instead of taking away the vote, we could repair what's gone wrong with our judicial elections and restore them to good working order so they once again serve the state the way they did for a century and a half.
Appointing judges under a system like merit selection has its virtues but also conspicuous drawbacks, not the least of which is its elitist premise. And there is both good and bad that comes with electing judges. Wisconsin got a heavy dose of the bad in last year's election.
What the choice between appointing and electing judges comes down to is whether or not Wisconsin will continue to place its faith in its citizens to pick good judges to serve on our state's highest court, as we have for over 150 years.
I say let the people decide. But state Supreme Court elections are being corrupted. They're being taken over by powerful special interests and party bosses. They need to be reformed in a way that gives them back to the people.
All seven current members of the Supreme Court – from the most conservative justice to the most liberal – recently signed a letter calling for publicly financed judicial campaigns. This is incredibly significant. Our Supreme Court is not unanimous about much of anything. But the justices are unanimous about this. They support elections for the high court, but they want those elections cleaned up.
The public agrees. Polling done in Wisconsin by a leading Republican opinion research firm for the national Justice at Stake Campaign showed that 65 percent of state residents support publicly financed Supreme Court elections. When given arguments both for and against such reform, support for it went up to 75 percent.
Friday, February 15, 2008
Tuesday, February 12, 2008
WMC Takes Aim
The 30-second attack ads will air on TV closer to the election. In the meantime, Wisconsin Manufacturers and Commerce will busy itself softening up their latest victim – state Supreme Court Justice Louis Butler – with a multi-front offensive that includes broadsides like this YouTube video.
Tuesday, February 05, 2008
Low-Life Politics Catches High-Brow's Eye
A commentary entitled "Wisconsin: A case study in how corporations get the legislation they want" appeared recently on NiemanWatchdog.org, the Web site of the Nieman Watchdog Journalism Project of the Nieman Foundation for Journalism at Harvard University. The subject of the article is something we've written about again and again and again and again and again and again. And again. That something is Wisconsin's new cable TV law written by and for AT&T.
Monday, February 04, 2008
Troha Co-conspirator Gave To State Candidates
A third Kenosha businessman charged in a conspiracy that doled out more than $250,000 in illegal campaign contributions to win approval of a Kenosha casino made $9,815 in donations to Democratic and Republican state candidates and committees.
Achille Infusino was accused in a federal complaint with concealing the use of nearly $87,000 in corporate funds to make illegal campaign contributions to reimburse others for making contributions to state and federal candidates and committees from October 2003 until August 2006. He was also accused of accepting $7,500 in automobile lease payments in exchange for making contributions.
Infusino reached a deal with prosecutors to plead guilty to one count of participating in a conspiracy to commit campaign finance violations.
Infusino contributed $9,815 from 1998 through the first half of 2007 to state candidates and committees - most of it to Democrats - including $5,000 to the Assembly Democratic Campaign Committee, $1,465 to Assembly Minority Leader Jim Kreuser of Kenosha, $1,250 to Democratic Governor Jim Doyle, $500 to Democratic Assembly candidate Al Foeckler and $250 each to the State Senate Democratic Committee and Democratic Senators Robert Wirch of Kenosha and Jeff Plale of South Milwaukee.
He also contributed a total of $850 to two Republican candidates, including $350 to William McReynolds and $500 to Reince Priebus. McReynolds lost to Democrat John Lehman in 2006 for the 21st Senate District seat in Racine. Priebus, who is now the state Republican Party chairman, lost in 2004 to incumbent Wirch for the 22nd Senate District seat in Kenosha.
Achille Infusino was accused in a federal complaint with concealing the use of nearly $87,000 in corporate funds to make illegal campaign contributions to reimburse others for making contributions to state and federal candidates and committees from October 2003 until August 2006. He was also accused of accepting $7,500 in automobile lease payments in exchange for making contributions.
Infusino reached a deal with prosecutors to plead guilty to one count of participating in a conspiracy to commit campaign finance violations.
Infusino contributed $9,815 from 1998 through the first half of 2007 to state candidates and committees - most of it to Democrats - including $5,000 to the Assembly Democratic Campaign Committee, $1,465 to Assembly Minority Leader Jim Kreuser of Kenosha, $1,250 to Democratic Governor Jim Doyle, $500 to Democratic Assembly candidate Al Foeckler and $250 each to the State Senate Democratic Committee and Democratic Senators Robert Wirch of Kenosha and Jeff Plale of South Milwaukee.
He also contributed a total of $850 to two Republican candidates, including $350 to William McReynolds and $500 to Reince Priebus. McReynolds lost to Democrat John Lehman in 2006 for the 21st Senate District seat in Racine. Priebus, who is now the state Republican Party chairman, lost in 2004 to incumbent Wirch for the 22nd Senate District seat in Kenosha.
Friday, February 01, 2008
A Real Whogaveit
Supreme Court candidate Michael Gableman's latest campaign finance report lists four political action committee contributions totaling $12,750, but it's hard to tell where the money really came from.
The report shows he got a $1,000 contribution November 8, 2007 from the Wisconsin Realtors Association PAC. That's kind of weird because the Realtor's group has endorsed Gableman's opponent, incumbent Justice Louis Butler.
But the confusion doesn't end there. The address of what Gableman identifies as the Realtors PAC is actually the address of the Wisconsin Manufacturers & Commerce PAC. WMC, the state's largest business organization, is expected to put up millions of dollars to pay for negative ads, mailings and other outside electioneering activities to support Gableman.
Maybe Gableman's operatives slapped the wrong PAC name on WMC's contribution. The problem is another contribution, for $3,000, is listed as coming from WMC's PAC - Concerned Business and Industry. The trouble with that entry is the address listed for the WMC PAC is actually the address of Microsoft's PAC in Washington State.
It's anyone's guess what PACs gave these contributions, or if the contributions are even correct.
The report shows he got a $1,000 contribution November 8, 2007 from the Wisconsin Realtors Association PAC. That's kind of weird because the Realtor's group has endorsed Gableman's opponent, incumbent Justice Louis Butler.
But the confusion doesn't end there. The address of what Gableman identifies as the Realtors PAC is actually the address of the Wisconsin Manufacturers & Commerce PAC. WMC, the state's largest business organization, is expected to put up millions of dollars to pay for negative ads, mailings and other outside electioneering activities to support Gableman.
Maybe Gableman's operatives slapped the wrong PAC name on WMC's contribution. The problem is another contribution, for $3,000, is listed as coming from WMC's PAC - Concerned Business and Industry. The trouble with that entry is the address listed for the WMC PAC is actually the address of Microsoft's PAC in Washington State.
It's anyone's guess what PACs gave these contributions, or if the contributions are even correct.
Thursday, January 24, 2008
Not One Word
Governor Jim Doyle's State of the State Address last night was classic Doyle. Exactly what you would expect a by-the-book politician to say.
The speech was peppered with platitudes – "in Wisconsin, we are hardworking people . . . and when challenges arise, we meet them head on" – and was heavy on celebrity introductions. As inspiring as unbuttered toast, painfully few of the governor's nearly 4,500 words could even be generously construed as visionary and none qualified as passionate.
Speaking of none, the governor uttered not a single word on a subject that poll after poll shows is right up at the top of the list of concerns of Wisconsinites – shady government ethics and diseased politics. Concern over political dysfunction is the festering public anxiety lurking underneath the worries about every other problem facing our state, and the governor had nothing to say about it.
Just before the holidays, Governor Doyle called the Legislature into special session to deal with campaign finance reform. He showed last night how invested he is in that special session and how committed he is to reform.
The governor's words about the state of our state were eminently forgettable and will quickly fade from memory. What he left unsaid, however, speaks volumes about the man.
The speech was peppered with platitudes – "in Wisconsin, we are hardworking people . . . and when challenges arise, we meet them head on" – and was heavy on celebrity introductions. As inspiring as unbuttered toast, painfully few of the governor's nearly 4,500 words could even be generously construed as visionary and none qualified as passionate.
Speaking of none, the governor uttered not a single word on a subject that poll after poll shows is right up at the top of the list of concerns of Wisconsinites – shady government ethics and diseased politics. Concern over political dysfunction is the festering public anxiety lurking underneath the worries about every other problem facing our state, and the governor had nothing to say about it.
Just before the holidays, Governor Doyle called the Legislature into special session to deal with campaign finance reform. He showed last night how invested he is in that special session and how committed he is to reform.
The governor's words about the state of our state were eminently forgettable and will quickly fade from memory. What he left unsaid, however, speaks volumes about the man.
Friday, January 18, 2008
Butler Got Support From Former Opponent
Supreme Court Justice Louis Butler once got some unexpected support that most political candidates don't see - a contribution from a former opponent.
Butler's campaign records show he received a $100 contribution March 25, 2002 from then-Supreme Court Justice Diane Sykes. Butler, a Milwaukee municipal judge at the time, was running for a Milwaukee County Circuit Court judgeship. He won the race.
Interestingly, Sykes, who was appointed to the high court by former Republican Tommy Thompson in 1999 to fill a vacancy caused by a retiring justice, was challenged by Butler when she had to run for election in 2000.
Sykes won the election but left the state Supreme Court in 2004 before finishing her term when President Bush picked her for a federal judgeship. Democratic Governor Jim Doyle then picked Butler to replace Sykes.
That aside, a lot of people would view Sykes and Butler as ideological opposites with Sykes leaning right and Butler leaning left.
Butler faces election to his own term on the court April 1 against Burnett County Circuit Judge Mike Gableman.
Butler's campaign records show he received a $100 contribution March 25, 2002 from then-Supreme Court Justice Diane Sykes. Butler, a Milwaukee municipal judge at the time, was running for a Milwaukee County Circuit Court judgeship. He won the race.
Interestingly, Sykes, who was appointed to the high court by former Republican Tommy Thompson in 1999 to fill a vacancy caused by a retiring justice, was challenged by Butler when she had to run for election in 2000.
Sykes won the election but left the state Supreme Court in 2004 before finishing her term when President Bush picked her for a federal judgeship. Democratic Governor Jim Doyle then picked Butler to replace Sykes.
That aside, a lot of people would view Sykes and Butler as ideological opposites with Sykes leaning right and Butler leaning left.
Butler faces election to his own term on the court April 1 against Burnett County Circuit Judge Mike Gableman.
Thursday, January 17, 2008
A Fast Fall From Grace And A Slow Climb Back To Respectability
The chapter on Wisconsin in the new book, Democratic Renewal: A Call to Action from America's Heartland, begins with this: "Wisconsin was once known for clean, open and progressive government. Those days are gone. This is something state residents know in their hearts."Wisconsin has been robbed of its unique political culture and any claim of being worthy of the state's proud tradition of honorable government. As cultural change goes, it happened breathtakingly fast, over the course of a single generation. How it happened is chronicled in Democratic Renewal in painstaking detail. Political ills that we used to associate only with states like Illinois or Louisiana or New Jersey are now on prominent display here in Wisconsin.
The introduction of these pathologies has had the effect of homogenizing politics at the state level. Had a book like Democratic Renewal been written 20 or 25 years ago, the chapters on Illinois, Michigan, Minnesota, Ohio and Wisconsin would have been vastly different. Read this book today and you find that Wisconsin's story is virtually indistinguishable from the others.
Wisconsin was once known for clean, open and progressive government. Those days are gone.
Whether or not they can be brought back is up to all of us. Renewing democracy will not be easy and it certainly can't be done quickly. Understanding that up front can sustain us when frustration sets in. So can what Thomas Paine famously said: "We have it in our power to begin the world over again."
Tuesday, January 15, 2008
Going Nowhere By Design
The few items the Assembly and Senate plan to work on in 2008 is mostly stuff that both houses know is going nowhere.
Republican Assembly Speaker Mike Huebsch says the GOP-controlled Assembly will tackle proposals that benefit business and other wealthy campaign contributors, like tax credits, capital gains breaks, providing more money to startup technology businesses and making health savings accounts tax deductible. Even though some of these pro-business items were tossed to them by Democratic Governor Jim Doyle, the Senate, which is controlled by Democrats, doesn't seem enthused about anything in that pot.
The Senate Democrats plan on pushing a revision of their universal health care plan that was ditched during the budget because the Republican Assembly and Doyle didn't like it and it doesn't seem they like it any better now.
But working on stuff that goes nowhere has it rewards for both Democratic and Republican legislators.
The host of powerful special interests including business, manufacturing, health care providers, insurance and others that want the tax breaks and more state dollars or oppose broad health care and campaign finance plans contributed $3 million to Assembly Republicans in their last two election cycles, from 2003 through 2006. That's 71 percent of the $4.3 million in large individual and political action committee contributions Assembly Republicans accepted during the four-year period. And that doesn't count the additional millions of dollars spent of their behalf by special interests on independent expenditures and phony issue ads.
For Senate Democrats, labor, which is their biggest contributor at $475,720 from 2003 through 2006, numerous advocacy groups and left-leaning political organizations want universal health care. In addition to the direct contributions, labor and the Greater Wisconsin Committee probably will spend generously on independent expenditures and phony issue ads to help the Senate Dems keep their majority in November.
Republican Assembly Speaker Mike Huebsch says the GOP-controlled Assembly will tackle proposals that benefit business and other wealthy campaign contributors, like tax credits, capital gains breaks, providing more money to startup technology businesses and making health savings accounts tax deductible. Even though some of these pro-business items were tossed to them by Democratic Governor Jim Doyle, the Senate, which is controlled by Democrats, doesn't seem enthused about anything in that pot.
The Senate Democrats plan on pushing a revision of their universal health care plan that was ditched during the budget because the Republican Assembly and Doyle didn't like it and it doesn't seem they like it any better now.
But working on stuff that goes nowhere has it rewards for both Democratic and Republican legislators.
The host of powerful special interests including business, manufacturing, health care providers, insurance and others that want the tax breaks and more state dollars or oppose broad health care and campaign finance plans contributed $3 million to Assembly Republicans in their last two election cycles, from 2003 through 2006. That's 71 percent of the $4.3 million in large individual and political action committee contributions Assembly Republicans accepted during the four-year period. And that doesn't count the additional millions of dollars spent of their behalf by special interests on independent expenditures and phony issue ads.
For Senate Democrats, labor, which is their biggest contributor at $475,720 from 2003 through 2006, numerous advocacy groups and left-leaning political organizations want universal health care. In addition to the direct contributions, labor and the Greater Wisconsin Committee probably will spend generously on independent expenditures and phony issue ads to help the Senate Dems keep their majority in November.
Little Work, No Results = More Money and Job Security
Only two weeks into the New Year, Republican Assembly Speaker Mike Huebsch says there's no time left in 2008 for the Assembly to pass comprehensive health care reform or a statewide smoking ban in public places. He also says he's not sure there's time to bother with campaign finance reform, which would help address the problems behind those other issues.
Dealing with such issues would be a strain for a crew who met only 20 days in 2007 and is scheduled to meet sporadically between now and the end of May and then take off the rest of the year. By the way, legislators are paid $47,413 a year. When they are in Madison on business, those who live outside Dane County also get $88 a day in living expenses; legislators who live in Dane County get $44 a day.
Sadly, the real reason is they don't want to approve any public policy that irritates big business and other well-heeled special interests that will spend millions of dollars on campaign contributions to legislators and nasty advertising and other outside electioneering activities between now and the November 2008 elections.
If you need proof, it's no secret how business, manufacturing and other wealthy special interests feel about major health care reform.
Huebsch also says the proposed statewide smoking ban in public places faces an "uphill battle in this house and in the Senate." No wonder. The 52-member Assembly Republican majority has accepted $132,845, or an average of $2,555 each, from tavern owners from 2003 through 2006.
Only in the political arena do cutting work and accomplishing less get you more money and improve your job security.
Dealing with such issues would be a strain for a crew who met only 20 days in 2007 and is scheduled to meet sporadically between now and the end of May and then take off the rest of the year. By the way, legislators are paid $47,413 a year. When they are in Madison on business, those who live outside Dane County also get $88 a day in living expenses; legislators who live in Dane County get $44 a day.
Sadly, the real reason is they don't want to approve any public policy that irritates big business and other well-heeled special interests that will spend millions of dollars on campaign contributions to legislators and nasty advertising and other outside electioneering activities between now and the November 2008 elections.
If you need proof, it's no secret how business, manufacturing and other wealthy special interests feel about major health care reform.
Huebsch also says the proposed statewide smoking ban in public places faces an "uphill battle in this house and in the Senate." No wonder. The 52-member Assembly Republican majority has accepted $132,845, or an average of $2,555 each, from tavern owners from 2003 through 2006.
Only in the political arena do cutting work and accomplishing less get you more money and improve your job security.
Monday, January 14, 2008
Where There's Suds There's Smoke
Senate Democrats have changed a proposed statewide smoking ban in public places to cut a big campaign contributor a break, but some say the compromise still doesn't go far enough for the tavern industry.
The latest version of the bill approved by a Senate committee last week put the ban in effect in 2009, except for taverns and restaurants which would not be included until 2010.
Still not good enough, protests Democratic Senator Roger Breske, a former tavern owner and president of the Tavern League of Wisconsin. "The only way this bill should ever make it to the Governor's desk is with thoughtful compromise so that family businesses across Wisconsin are not wiped out almost overnight."
Between now and 2010 is hardly overnight. Might it be that Breske and others are really concerned about preserving the flow of campaign contributions from a large special interest contributor? After all, no further changes are needed to satisfy the general public. Polls consistently have put public support at about two-thirds for a smoking ban in public places.
The Tavern League, which wants bars exempted from smoking bans, and tavern owners contributed $294,745 to current legislators from 2003 through 2006.
Breske accepted $15,674 from tavern owners from 2003 through 2006, more than any other legislator. Second to Breske for tavern industry contributions among legislative Democrats for the period is Senate Majority Leader Russ Decker at $10,850.
Now Decker hints there may be further compromises, saying the committee's action "may lead us to a final compromise."
Republican Assembly Speaker Michael Huebsch doubts the smoking ban would go anywhere in the Assembly if it makes it out of the Senate. "It has an uphill battle in this house and in the Senate," he said in a recent interview.
Huebsch's 52-member Assembly Republican caucus which controls the Assembly collected $132,845 in contributions from tavern owners from 2003 through 2006 - far more than any of the other three caucuses.
The latest version of the bill approved by a Senate committee last week put the ban in effect in 2009, except for taverns and restaurants which would not be included until 2010.
Still not good enough, protests Democratic Senator Roger Breske, a former tavern owner and president of the Tavern League of Wisconsin. "The only way this bill should ever make it to the Governor's desk is with thoughtful compromise so that family businesses across Wisconsin are not wiped out almost overnight."
Between now and 2010 is hardly overnight. Might it be that Breske and others are really concerned about preserving the flow of campaign contributions from a large special interest contributor? After all, no further changes are needed to satisfy the general public. Polls consistently have put public support at about two-thirds for a smoking ban in public places.
The Tavern League, which wants bars exempted from smoking bans, and tavern owners contributed $294,745 to current legislators from 2003 through 2006.
Breske accepted $15,674 from tavern owners from 2003 through 2006, more than any other legislator. Second to Breske for tavern industry contributions among legislative Democrats for the period is Senate Majority Leader Russ Decker at $10,850.
Now Decker hints there may be further compromises, saying the committee's action "may lead us to a final compromise."
Republican Assembly Speaker Michael Huebsch doubts the smoking ban would go anywhere in the Assembly if it makes it out of the Senate. "It has an uphill battle in this house and in the Senate," he said in a recent interview.
Huebsch's 52-member Assembly Republican caucus which controls the Assembly collected $132,845 in contributions from tavern owners from 2003 through 2006 - far more than any of the other three caucuses.
Tuesday, January 08, 2008
Quote Of The Day
Heard through the grapevine that State Senator Glenn Grothman was on Mitch Henck's radio talk show awhile back and was asked whether he supports full disclosure of sham issue ads. These are the special interest-sponsored electioneering advertisements masquerading as issue advocacy that plainly support the election or defeat of a candidate but stop just short of using words such as "vote for," "vote against," "elect" or "defeat." They've effectively rendered meaningless Wisconsin's campaign finance disclosure requirements and contribution limits, not to mention the state's century-old ban on corporate campaign donations.
Senator Grothman's reply? "No, because some people don't like people to know that they're spending the money."
Senator Grothman's reply? "No, because some people don't like people to know that they're spending the money."
Friday, January 04, 2008
Thursday, January 03, 2008
One Versus Ninety-Nine
In an NPR story on new Louisiana Governor Bobby Jindal and his promised clean-up of that state's politics, it's mentioned that Jindal raised more than $13 million for his campaign.
Not a problem, one longtime Louisiana Capitol watcher told NPR. "You hope that if everyone buys him, no one owns him," he said.
He hopes.
His hope is a false one. In a system that's supposed to be government of the people, by the people and for the people, only a tiny percentage of the people are doing the buying. If you look at every last donor in the Democracy Campaign's searchable computer database of contributors to campaigns in our state, the total number of individuals you'll find represents about 1% of Wisconsin's voting age population. I'm sure it's pretty much the same in Louisiana.
There's the rub with the money in politics. If 1% buy our politicians, then that same 1% own them. And you know where that leaves the other 99%. Taxed, but not represented.
Not a problem, one longtime Louisiana Capitol watcher told NPR. "You hope that if everyone buys him, no one owns him," he said.
He hopes.
His hope is a false one. In a system that's supposed to be government of the people, by the people and for the people, only a tiny percentage of the people are doing the buying. If you look at every last donor in the Democracy Campaign's searchable computer database of contributors to campaigns in our state, the total number of individuals you'll find represents about 1% of Wisconsin's voting age population. I'm sure it's pretty much the same in Louisiana.
There's the rub with the money in politics. If 1% buy our politicians, then that same 1% own them. And you know where that leaves the other 99%. Taxed, but not represented.
Wednesday, December 26, 2007
Ding Dong, The Glitch Is Dead!
The Big Glitch, otherwise known as the state of Wisconsin's ill-fated contract with the global outsourcing firm Accenture to create a computerized statewide voter registration system, is history. The state Elections Board announced today it has reached an agreement ending the state's relationship with Accenture on the voter-list project.
A lot of time has been wasted and a whole lot of taxpayer money has gone down this rathole, but this deal does recoup some of the damages and allows the state to begin picking up the pieces and putting them back together so Wisconsin can have a voter registration system that works properly.
This should have happened a long time ago, but better late than never. This is a good day-after-Christmas present.
A lot of time has been wasted and a whole lot of taxpayer money has gone down this rathole, but this deal does recoup some of the damages and allows the state to begin picking up the pieces and putting them back together so Wisconsin can have a voter registration system that works properly.
This should have happened a long time ago, but better late than never. This is a good day-after-Christmas present.
Wednesday, December 19, 2007
Cozy With A Capital C
First, Attorney General J.B. Van Hollen decided that the Department of Justice he leads would not appeal the decision reversing Scott Jensen's felony convictions and granting the former Assembly speaker a new trial. Now he's saying that Jensen shouldn't be retried but rather the case should be settled through a plea agreement.
At the bottom of the story in today's Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, it says "Van Hollen conceded that he could indirectly influence Blanchard's decision to retry Jensen by denying the district attorney resources he had during the first trial, including the courtroom help of Assistant Attorney General Roy Korte, one of the Justice Department's most experienced prosecutors. "
Hmmm.
What makes all this more curious is the fact that the second in command at the Justice Department, Van Hollen's hand-picked deputy Ray Taffora, used to represent Jensen. Jensen hired Taffora and his law firm to negotiate with the prosecutor in hopes of ending at least part of the investigation. And Taffora's firm also was paid to negotiate a settlement with the state Ethics Board and Elections Board.
Before that, Jensen hired Taffora and his firm to help him and his fellow Assembly Republicans with legislative redistricting.
At the bottom of the story in today's Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, it says "Van Hollen conceded that he could indirectly influence Blanchard's decision to retry Jensen by denying the district attorney resources he had during the first trial, including the courtroom help of Assistant Attorney General Roy Korte, one of the Justice Department's most experienced prosecutors. "
Hmmm.
What makes all this more curious is the fact that the second in command at the Justice Department, Van Hollen's hand-picked deputy Ray Taffora, used to represent Jensen. Jensen hired Taffora and his law firm to negotiate with the prosecutor in hopes of ending at least part of the investigation. And Taffora's firm also was paid to negotiate a settlement with the state Ethics Board and Elections Board.
Before that, Jensen hired Taffora and his firm to help him and his fellow Assembly Republicans with legislative redistricting.
Monday, December 17, 2007
Are They Listening? Can They Hear?
State politicians are owned by the lobbyists and the special interest groups, don't give a whit about what average citizens want or need, and generally seem to rank somewhere between used car salesmen and child molesters in the public's estimation, according to the latest polling by the conservative Wisconsin Policy Research Institute.
A measly 2% of Wisconsin residents believe they can trust state government to do what is right almost all the time. Who determines what state government spends? Eighty-two percent say lobbying groups do and only 12% believe it's the voters. When asked whether the standard of ethics of members of the state legislature has changed over the last decade, only 6% think it has changed for the better, while 44% think it has gotten worse.
WPRI also asked state residents whose interests they think their elected officials represent the most – their interests, special interests or the politicians' own interests. A mere 10% think their elected officials represent the voters’ interests, while 43% think they're working for the special interests and 42% think state politicians are just looking out for their own self-interest.
WPRI concludes that "something extraordinary is happening in Wisconsin." Specifically, the group says: "Years of political neglect by their elected officials are beginning to have a serious toll on the confidence of Wisconsin residents in elected officials and their state government. The lack of optimism is seen in all aspects of life in Wisconsin today, whether it is the state’s economy, the ethics of state government and elected officials or the dominance of lobbying in the political process. Wisconsin residents are extremely unhappy and becoming more and more disconnected from their government and the state’s politics. . . . The issues of lobbying, state ethics and the state’s economy has never been more on the mind of Wisconsin residents. It would not be surprising if, in 2008, Wisconsin voters send a message that will be even louder than the one sent in 2006."
Are state lawmakers listening? Do they even care what the public thinks of them?
They'll answer these questions in January when they decide what to make of the special session on campaign reform.
A measly 2% of Wisconsin residents believe they can trust state government to do what is right almost all the time. Who determines what state government spends? Eighty-two percent say lobbying groups do and only 12% believe it's the voters. When asked whether the standard of ethics of members of the state legislature has changed over the last decade, only 6% think it has changed for the better, while 44% think it has gotten worse.
WPRI also asked state residents whose interests they think their elected officials represent the most – their interests, special interests or the politicians' own interests. A mere 10% think their elected officials represent the voters’ interests, while 43% think they're working for the special interests and 42% think state politicians are just looking out for their own self-interest.
WPRI concludes that "something extraordinary is happening in Wisconsin." Specifically, the group says: "Years of political neglect by their elected officials are beginning to have a serious toll on the confidence of Wisconsin residents in elected officials and their state government. The lack of optimism is seen in all aspects of life in Wisconsin today, whether it is the state’s economy, the ethics of state government and elected officials or the dominance of lobbying in the political process. Wisconsin residents are extremely unhappy and becoming more and more disconnected from their government and the state’s politics. . . . The issues of lobbying, state ethics and the state’s economy has never been more on the mind of Wisconsin residents. It would not be surprising if, in 2008, Wisconsin voters send a message that will be even louder than the one sent in 2006."
Are state lawmakers listening? Do they even care what the public thinks of them?
They'll answer these questions in January when they decide what to make of the special session on campaign reform.
Thursday, December 13, 2007
What Tipping The Scales Has Wrought
The state Supreme Court is in big trouble. It can't win for losing.
No matter how the Menasha Corporation tax case is decided, the public will never believe money didn't play a role in the outcome because Justice Annette Ziegler chose to participate even though a group involved in the case spent more than $2 million to get her elected. Justice Louis Butler also revealed he received a campaign donation from one of the attorneys working on the case.
And now the high court can't rule at all on a key economic development and land use case due to the fact Ziegler, who would have been the deciding vote, recused herself because of campaign contributions she received from the builders and the Realtors.
No matter how the Menasha Corporation tax case is decided, the public will never believe money didn't play a role in the outcome because Justice Annette Ziegler chose to participate even though a group involved in the case spent more than $2 million to get her elected. Justice Louis Butler also revealed he received a campaign donation from one of the attorneys working on the case.
And now the high court can't rule at all on a key economic development and land use case due to the fact Ziegler, who would have been the deciding vote, recused herself because of campaign contributions she received from the builders and the Realtors.
No wonder all seven justices signed a letter the other day begging the Legislature and governor to support publicly financed Supreme Court races.
Tuesday, December 11, 2007
The End Of The Beginning
The Legislature convened in special session briefly today and passed a joint resolution of both houses adjourning the special session on campaign finance reform until January 15. This was expected and is in keeping with the way the Democracy Campaign and others in the reform community believe the session should proceed.
Between now and January 15 reform plans need to be finalized and drafted for introduction as special session bills, public hearings need to be held and committee work needs to be done to set the stage for the full Legislature to reconvene the special session.
When the governor called the special session for December 11, many mistakenly interpreted that to mean lawmakers would vote on reform legislation today. Not only would that have been impractical but also highly inappropriate because the Legislature would have been voting on measures the public had not had a chance to review and comment on.
Any kind of meaningful overhaul of Wisconsin's broken campaign finance system can't be accomplished in a day. It's been 30 years since the last major reform. Even the most impatient among us can surely wait 30 days so whatever lawmakers do can be done right and done in full view of the public with plenty of citizen input.
Today was the start of the special session. How it began is not important. How it ends is what matters.
Between now and January 15 reform plans need to be finalized and drafted for introduction as special session bills, public hearings need to be held and committee work needs to be done to set the stage for the full Legislature to reconvene the special session.
When the governor called the special session for December 11, many mistakenly interpreted that to mean lawmakers would vote on reform legislation today. Not only would that have been impractical but also highly inappropriate because the Legislature would have been voting on measures the public had not had a chance to review and comment on.
Any kind of meaningful overhaul of Wisconsin's broken campaign finance system can't be accomplished in a day. It's been 30 years since the last major reform. Even the most impatient among us can surely wait 30 days so whatever lawmakers do can be done right and done in full view of the public with plenty of citizen input.
Today was the start of the special session. How it began is not important. How it ends is what matters.
Monday, December 03, 2007
Hypocrisy, Spoken In Code
Assembly Speaker Mike Huebsch responded to Governor Jim Doyle's call for a special session on campaign finance reform by saying he expects there will be a "thorough and informative debate in the Assembly" and reform ideas will "receive careful consideration in both houses of the Legislature."
Then he tipped everyone off about where he really stands when he said, "I share the concern of many Wisconsinites to the idea of changing the law to force them to pay for these campaigns."
Look for Huebsch and his allies to fiercely defend the ownership of our state government by the lobbyists and their special interest clients. Mind you, they won't come right out and say they have no problem with big donations from wealthy interests who expect lavish favors in return for their political gifts. They'll speak in code, like Huebsch did in his statement about the special session. They'll say they're bound and determined to prevent the general public from being forced to pay for elections.
I've said it before and I'll say it again: Wisconsin taxpayers already are forced to pay for state election campaigns. We pay through the nose every time our elected state representatives approve a new tax break, or lace a budget bill with a few more slices of pork, or sign off on a sweetheart deal on a state contract. We pay for every favor, we pay every time our state lawmakers reward one of their big donors.
Saying that campaign finance reform should be resisted because taxpayers shouldn't be forced to pay for elections is not only supremely hypocritical but also is an insult to the intelligence of the people of Wisconsin.
The general public gets it. Average folks understand that their elected representatives are owned by the lobbyists and the big special interest donors. And average folks understand they are paying dearly for this corruption.
The debate that will start in the Legislature on December 11 has absolutely nothing to do with whether the public pays for elections. We will always pay, one way or another. The real issue, whether or not the Legislature chooses to debate it, is ownership. Who will own our state government? The wealthy donors, or the voters?
Then he tipped everyone off about where he really stands when he said, "I share the concern of many Wisconsinites to the idea of changing the law to force them to pay for these campaigns."
Look for Huebsch and his allies to fiercely defend the ownership of our state government by the lobbyists and their special interest clients. Mind you, they won't come right out and say they have no problem with big donations from wealthy interests who expect lavish favors in return for their political gifts. They'll speak in code, like Huebsch did in his statement about the special session. They'll say they're bound and determined to prevent the general public from being forced to pay for elections.
I've said it before and I'll say it again: Wisconsin taxpayers already are forced to pay for state election campaigns. We pay through the nose every time our elected state representatives approve a new tax break, or lace a budget bill with a few more slices of pork, or sign off on a sweetheart deal on a state contract. We pay for every favor, we pay every time our state lawmakers reward one of their big donors.
Saying that campaign finance reform should be resisted because taxpayers shouldn't be forced to pay for elections is not only supremely hypocritical but also is an insult to the intelligence of the people of Wisconsin.
The general public gets it. Average folks understand that their elected representatives are owned by the lobbyists and the big special interest donors. And average folks understand they are paying dearly for this corruption.
The debate that will start in the Legislature on December 11 has absolutely nothing to do with whether the public pays for elections. We will always pay, one way or another. The real issue, whether or not the Legislature chooses to debate it, is ownership. Who will own our state government? The wealthy donors, or the voters?