Quite a few observers of Wisconsin politics were wondering where the state's largest teachers union was in this year's Supreme Court race. All the questions were answered with this ad sponsored by the Wisconsin Education Association Council. WEAC, the voters and the condition of our state's democracy all would have been better off if the union had kept everyone wondering.
What WEAC chose to put on the air is one of the trashiest political ads I've ever seen. Pure sleaze.
If you look at the issues WEAC works on, there's no mention of street crime. No mention of sexual predators. But yet that's what the union thought needed to be addressed in the Supreme Court race. And WEAC raised it in the most distorting, misleading and tawdry way possible.
The only thing that sets WEAC's smear campaign apart from the smear campaigns of the other interest groups trying to take ownership of our Supreme Court is that the teachers union has registered with the state and is filing reports fully disclosing its spending.
That's important, but it hardly makes this political drive-by shooting appear any less ugly.
Friday, March 28, 2008
Tuesday, March 25, 2008
The Hidden Lie
The University of Pennsylvania Annenberg Public Policy Center's latest Political Fact Check on the Wisconsin Supreme Court race focuses not only on Mike Gableman's Willie Horton ad, but also on the most recent ad by Wisconsin Manufacturers and Commerce that mangles the truth in what's been called the "letter from the grave" case.
The Annenberg Center spells out in considerable detail how WMC takes liberties with the facts and hypocritically ridicules Louis Butler for doing what the big business lobby says it wants all judges to do, which is adhere strictly to the constitution. But the critique doesn't touch on the more fundamental lie hidden beneath the surface.
Aside from how the truth is distorted in the letter-from-the-grave ad, the subject of the ad is itself deceptive because it conceals WMC's true motivations for wanting to influence the outcome of this year's high court race. Fighting crime appears nowhere on WMC's legislative agenda and nowhere on the group's agenda for reforming the legal system.
The reason WMC's campaign advertising fans the public's fear of violent crime is that WMC knows it can't very well square with the voters and say they want a court that will favor corporations in product liability cases or tax cases. The kingmakers at WMC know if they air an ad effectively saying "we want judges who won't hold corporations liable for defective products" or "we want a Supreme Court that won't make corporations pay the taxes they owe," the public will reject those messages.
WMC is not alone in keeping the public in the dark about the real reasons for opposing one candidate or supporting another. Not a one of the shadowy front groups has come clean and told voters what is really driving them to try to buy a seat on the Supreme Court. They know if they did they would lose.
So they spend their loot trying to scare the bejesus out of voters instead. In other words, they live a lie.
The Annenberg Center spells out in considerable detail how WMC takes liberties with the facts and hypocritically ridicules Louis Butler for doing what the big business lobby says it wants all judges to do, which is adhere strictly to the constitution. But the critique doesn't touch on the more fundamental lie hidden beneath the surface.
Aside from how the truth is distorted in the letter-from-the-grave ad, the subject of the ad is itself deceptive because it conceals WMC's true motivations for wanting to influence the outcome of this year's high court race. Fighting crime appears nowhere on WMC's legislative agenda and nowhere on the group's agenda for reforming the legal system.
The reason WMC's campaign advertising fans the public's fear of violent crime is that WMC knows it can't very well square with the voters and say they want a court that will favor corporations in product liability cases or tax cases. The kingmakers at WMC know if they air an ad effectively saying "we want judges who won't hold corporations liable for defective products" or "we want a Supreme Court that won't make corporations pay the taxes they owe," the public will reject those messages.
WMC is not alone in keeping the public in the dark about the real reasons for opposing one candidate or supporting another. Not a one of the shadowy front groups has come clean and told voters what is really driving them to try to buy a seat on the Supreme Court. They know if they did they would lose.
So they spend their loot trying to scare the bejesus out of voters instead. In other words, they live a lie.
Tuesday, March 18, 2008
Part-Timers Get $47K a Year Plus Expenses? Only In The Legislature
The Assembly spent only 27 days in session doing the public's business from the beginning of 2007 through March 13, 2008 because Wisconsin has a part-time legislature, according to Republican Assembly Speaker Mike Huebsch.
That's a revelation because being a Wisconsin legislator has been considered a full-time job since the mid-1990s, with a salary to boot.
It seems unlikely most Wisconsin residents think part-timers should get $47,413 plus an average $8,771 in food and lodging expenses a year. And by the way, Huebsch and other legislative leaders - Assembly and Senate Republicans and Democrats - voted 8-1 to increase legislative pay 6.3 percent to $50,438 in 2009.
Legislators make more than most people. The state's average personal income is $34,476 and we're betting most of the people that earn that and less are expected to put in 40 hours a week.
The Legislature worked little and accomplished little because powerful special interests like the insurance industry, big business led by the Wisconsin Manufacturers & Commerce, the construction industry, realtors and unions like the Wisconsin Education Association Council that gave legislators $7 million in 2005-06 to keep their jobs have told them not to address real solutions that may cost their pay masters.
Voters ought to show their outrage about this whenever they see these so-called policymakers between now and Election Day. Doggedly question why they did so little, why they worked only one month in 15 and why they should earn more than many Wisconsin residents who are real full-time wage earners.
Tell them to get back to work instead of throwing candy at you from a shiny parade car.
That's a revelation because being a Wisconsin legislator has been considered a full-time job since the mid-1990s, with a salary to boot.
It seems unlikely most Wisconsin residents think part-timers should get $47,413 plus an average $8,771 in food and lodging expenses a year. And by the way, Huebsch and other legislative leaders - Assembly and Senate Republicans and Democrats - voted 8-1 to increase legislative pay 6.3 percent to $50,438 in 2009.
Legislators make more than most people. The state's average personal income is $34,476 and we're betting most of the people that earn that and less are expected to put in 40 hours a week.
The Legislature worked little and accomplished little because powerful special interests like the insurance industry, big business led by the Wisconsin Manufacturers & Commerce, the construction industry, realtors and unions like the Wisconsin Education Association Council that gave legislators $7 million in 2005-06 to keep their jobs have told them not to address real solutions that may cost their pay masters.
Voters ought to show their outrage about this whenever they see these so-called policymakers between now and Election Day. Doggedly question why they did so little, why they worked only one month in 15 and why they should earn more than many Wisconsin residents who are real full-time wage earners.
Tell them to get back to work instead of throwing candy at you from a shiny parade car.
Monday, March 17, 2008
Gableman 'Willie Hortons' Butler
Michael Gableman must be desperate. Or else he's as sinisterly cynical as they come. Gableman's smear of Louis Butler – his opening salvo in the ad wars – is offensive on so many levels it's hard to know where to begin. The ad clearly and intentionally misleads viewers, playing fast and loose with the facts and leaning heavily on deceptive insinuations. And its not-so-subtle appeal to racism evokes memories of the infamous Willie Horton ad in the 1988 presidential campaign.
That's not all that's wrong with this ad. It commits the same act of violence against public understanding of the Supreme Court's role in our justice system that the interest group ads are committing. Virtually all of the advertising in this year's race creates the impression that fighting crime is the primary if not sole function of the Supreme Court, as if candidates for the high court were running for sheriff or district attorney. But the Supreme Court is not a sheriff's office or a DA's office. And it is not a trial court that is responsible for conducting trials and sentencing convicted criminals.
The public's knowledge of the third branch of government has long left a great deal to be desired. It surely will be worse after this election is over.
That's not all that's wrong with this ad. It commits the same act of violence against public understanding of the Supreme Court's role in our justice system that the interest group ads are committing. Virtually all of the advertising in this year's race creates the impression that fighting crime is the primary if not sole function of the Supreme Court, as if candidates for the high court were running for sheriff or district attorney. But the Supreme Court is not a sheriff's office or a DA's office. And it is not a trial court that is responsible for conducting trials and sentencing convicted criminals.
The public's knowledge of the third branch of government has long left a great deal to be desired. It surely will be worse after this election is over.
Friday, March 14, 2008
Lying...Er...Vying For Power
Even though state Supreme Court candidate Michael Gableman has been caught in a lie that he curiously will neither confess nor stop repeating, it is the phony front groups and special interest organizations that are doing almost all of the talking in this year's high court race and they are traveling the lowest of low roads.
Some of the ads peddle outright lies. One claims incumbent Louis Butler overturned a murder conviction despite overwhelming evidence of his guilt, but neglects to mention that new DNA evidence seriously undercut a key part of the prosecution's case. Both anti-Butler ads and anti-Gableman ads have gotten the facts wrong or have been found unfair or misleading.
But the dishonesty in the campaign advertising isn't limited to such twisting of the facts. A significant part of the deception is simply the subjects the ads focus on in the first place. By far the most common advertising theme is crime fighting. What these law-and-order ads don't tell viewers is that the Supreme Court deals almost exclusively with civil cases, not criminal ones, and almost all criminal cases are decided in lower courts.
What's more, the groups sponsoring these ads call them "issue advocacy," but more times than not the issues they are advocating on are not even on their agendas. Like most of the TV spots, ads launched by Wisconsin Manufacturers and Commerce focus on crime fighting. Yet if you look at WMC's legislative agenda, fighting crime is nowhere to be found. And if you look specifically at WMC's agenda for reforming the legal system, again there's no mention of making sure our streets and neighborhoods are safe.
Other big advertisers in the Supreme Court race are similarly keeping the public in the dark about their real motivations for backing a particular candidate. Their so-called "issue advocacy" is a hoax. They are trying to buy the court, pure and simple.
Some of the ads peddle outright lies. One claims incumbent Louis Butler overturned a murder conviction despite overwhelming evidence of his guilt, but neglects to mention that new DNA evidence seriously undercut a key part of the prosecution's case. Both anti-Butler ads and anti-Gableman ads have gotten the facts wrong or have been found unfair or misleading.
But the dishonesty in the campaign advertising isn't limited to such twisting of the facts. A significant part of the deception is simply the subjects the ads focus on in the first place. By far the most common advertising theme is crime fighting. What these law-and-order ads don't tell viewers is that the Supreme Court deals almost exclusively with civil cases, not criminal ones, and almost all criminal cases are decided in lower courts.
What's more, the groups sponsoring these ads call them "issue advocacy," but more times than not the issues they are advocating on are not even on their agendas. Like most of the TV spots, ads launched by Wisconsin Manufacturers and Commerce focus on crime fighting. Yet if you look at WMC's legislative agenda, fighting crime is nowhere to be found. And if you look specifically at WMC's agenda for reforming the legal system, again there's no mention of making sure our streets and neighborhoods are safe.
Other big advertisers in the Supreme Court race are similarly keeping the public in the dark about their real motivations for backing a particular candidate. Their so-called "issue advocacy" is a hoax. They are trying to buy the court, pure and simple.
Thursday, March 13, 2008
When A Supermajority Isn't Enough
The star of the show at today's "Unfinished Business" rally at the Capitol by the People's Legislature surely was former Department of Natural Resources Secretary and Wisconsin Wildlife Federation director George Meyer.
The one-time member of Tommy Thompson's cabinet issued a stinging indictment of the Legislature’s stonewalling of a bipartisan measure restoring independence to the DNR by giving the authority to appoint the agency’s secretary back to the Natural Resources Board. Under Thompson, the authority was taken from the board and given to the governor.
The state Conservation Congress overwhelmingly supports an independent DNR, Meyer said, and not a single citizen testified against the legislation at public hearings. The only opposition came from a handful of business lobby groups.
Meyer saved his most damning remarks for the end, when he said there's a “supermajority” of legislators who have either sponsored the legislation or voted for it, yet Assembly leaders have blocked a final vote. He said legislative leaders have acknowledged to him that the Senate-passed bill would get somewhere between 70 and 75 votes in the Assembly, but it will not be debated because of “business opposition.”
Friday, March 07, 2008
Robin In Boy Wonderland
Yesterday, an Assembly committee shot down a proposed ban on campaign fundraising during the state budget process. Committee chair Sheryl Albers, a co-sponsor of the legislation, voted against her own bill.
Even stranger than that was the reason committee member Robin Vos, a Racine Republican, gave for opposing the bill. Vos urged his colleagues not to "give in" to the "perception" that state lawmakers are corrupt. One of his compatriots, Waukesha Republican Bill Kramer, eagerly seconded that notion.
We've passed through the looking glass here. Politicians engage in the smarmy business of shaking down special interests for campaign donations while they are making budget decisions that directly affect those interests, but are indignant when anyone suggests these transactions are crooked. And then when 2% of state residents tell a conservative pollster that they trust state legislators to do the right thing and 82% say lobbying groups determine what the state spends money on, they say it's imperative not to "give in" to these mere perceptions and they kill a decidedly modest reform plan that takes a baby step toward changing the unseemly game they are playing.
Is it something in the water at the Capitol?
Even stranger than that was the reason committee member Robin Vos, a Racine Republican, gave for opposing the bill. Vos urged his colleagues not to "give in" to the "perception" that state lawmakers are corrupt. One of his compatriots, Waukesha Republican Bill Kramer, eagerly seconded that notion.
We've passed through the looking glass here. Politicians engage in the smarmy business of shaking down special interests for campaign donations while they are making budget decisions that directly affect those interests, but are indignant when anyone suggests these transactions are crooked. And then when 2% of state residents tell a conservative pollster that they trust state legislators to do the right thing and 82% say lobbying groups determine what the state spends money on, they say it's imperative not to "give in" to these mere perceptions and they kill a decidedly modest reform plan that takes a baby step toward changing the unseemly game they are playing.
Is it something in the water at the Capitol?
Thursday, March 06, 2008
Wednesday, March 05, 2008
Assembly GOP Helps Big Contributors At The Expense Of Autistic Children
Assembly Republicans bent on not requiring insurance companies to cover treatments for autistic children have accepted $2.5 million in campaign contributions since 1993 from insurance, business, manufacturing and banking interests that oppose the measure.
Instead, the Assembly GOP caucus supports a corporate welfare proposal that gives insurers a pass by putting $6 million in state taxpayer dollars into a program to help 325 autistic children on the program's waiting list. It doesn't help those who are not on the list or the one in 192 children born in Wisconsin with autism in the future.
The four special interests that oppose expanding insurance coverage for autistic children are among the Assembly Republicans' most generous benefactors. Their $2.5 million in contributions comprise 30 percent of the $8.41 million Assembly Republicans have accepted since 1993 from all 23 major special interest groups.
The most affected group - insurers - has contributed $1.26 million to current legislators since 1993. Assembly Republicans got $474,609, or 38 percent - the biggest cut of the four legislative caucuses.
Keep an eye on how they vote today on their pro-insurance industry change to Senate Bill 178.
Instead, the Assembly GOP caucus supports a corporate welfare proposal that gives insurers a pass by putting $6 million in state taxpayer dollars into a program to help 325 autistic children on the program's waiting list. It doesn't help those who are not on the list or the one in 192 children born in Wisconsin with autism in the future.
The four special interests that oppose expanding insurance coverage for autistic children are among the Assembly Republicans' most generous benefactors. Their $2.5 million in contributions comprise 30 percent of the $8.41 million Assembly Republicans have accepted since 1993 from all 23 major special interest groups.
The most affected group - insurers - has contributed $1.26 million to current legislators since 1993. Assembly Republicans got $474,609, or 38 percent - the biggest cut of the four legislative caucuses.
Keep an eye on how they vote today on their pro-insurance industry change to Senate Bill 178.
Tuesday, March 04, 2008
Wednesday, February 27, 2008
GOP Handler Biting Other Republicans In High Court Race
Supreme Court candidate Michael Gableman's campaign has been firing broadsides on numerous fronts in recent weeks and two longtime Republican Party soldiers are among the hits.
One of the targets of Gableman's Republican campaign manager Darrin Schmitz has been the Wisconsin Judicial Campaign Integrity Committee. The State Bar group was created to police the honesty of the candidates' comments, advertising and other campaign activities.
Schmitz says some comments in a series of emails among committee members in December and January shows the committee is a bunch of liberals who support incumbent Justice Louis Butler in the race. Schmitz says the emails disparage him and other Republican supporters and suggest strategies for pressuring Gableman to sign the committee's clean campaign pledge.
Ironically, the emails Schmitz cites came from the eight-member committee's two Republican members at the time - former GOP state representative and retired appellate court judge David Deininger and Republican campaign strategist Bill Kraus. Deininger has since left the committee, citing his workload as a member of the state Government Accountability Board.
Kraus served in the administration of former Republican Governor Lee Dreyfus between 1979 and 1982 and is a longtime Republican strategist. Before serving as an appeals court judge from 1996 through January 2007, Deininger was a Green County circuit court judge for two years and a Republican member of the state Assembly for eight years.
One of the targets of Gableman's Republican campaign manager Darrin Schmitz has been the Wisconsin Judicial Campaign Integrity Committee. The State Bar group was created to police the honesty of the candidates' comments, advertising and other campaign activities.
Schmitz says some comments in a series of emails among committee members in December and January shows the committee is a bunch of liberals who support incumbent Justice Louis Butler in the race. Schmitz says the emails disparage him and other Republican supporters and suggest strategies for pressuring Gableman to sign the committee's clean campaign pledge.
Ironically, the emails Schmitz cites came from the eight-member committee's two Republican members at the time - former GOP state representative and retired appellate court judge David Deininger and Republican campaign strategist Bill Kraus. Deininger has since left the committee, citing his workload as a member of the state Government Accountability Board.
Kraus served in the administration of former Republican Governor Lee Dreyfus between 1979 and 1982 and is a longtime Republican strategist. Before serving as an appeals court judge from 1996 through January 2007, Deininger was a Green County circuit court judge for two years and a Republican member of the state Assembly for eight years.
Friday, February 22, 2008
Swiftboating Our Supreme Court
All signs are indicating that this year's state Supreme Court race is heading somewhere between the low road and the gutter. If it's possible, a turn for the worse appears to be coming. The Democracy Campaign has learned that the PR firm that did a lot of the dirty work for Swift Boat Veterans for Truth in smearing John Kerry's military record is now involved in Wisconsin's Supreme Court race.
CRC Public Relations, headquartered in Alexandria, Virginia, was paid more than $282,000 by Swift Boat Veterans for Truth for consulting and media work. CRC is now working to arrange media interviews for Wisconsin attorneys Dan Kelly, Rebecca Bradley, David Simon and Don Daugherty to badmouth the Wisconsin Judicial Campaign Integrity Committee and talk up conservative candidate Michael Gableman.
CRC initially was refusing to say who hired them to plant stories favorable to Gableman, but CRC's Jennifer Fedor finally fessed up to Wisconsin Public Radio's Gil Halsted. She says the firm is working at the behest of the Federalist Society.
CRC Public Relations, headquartered in Alexandria, Virginia, was paid more than $282,000 by Swift Boat Veterans for Truth for consulting and media work. CRC is now working to arrange media interviews for Wisconsin attorneys Dan Kelly, Rebecca Bradley, David Simon and Don Daugherty to badmouth the Wisconsin Judicial Campaign Integrity Committee and talk up conservative candidate Michael Gableman.
CRC initially was refusing to say who hired them to plant stories favorable to Gableman, but CRC's Jennifer Fedor finally fessed up to Wisconsin Public Radio's Gil Halsted. She says the firm is working at the behest of the Federalist Society.
Tuesday, February 19, 2008
A Truth Every Bit As Strange As Fiction
John Grisham's latest thriller hits pretty darn close to home for members of Wisconsin's Supreme Court and the rest of our state's legal community, don't you think?
Friday, February 15, 2008
No Other Way To Fix High Court?
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.
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.
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.