Archive for the ‘Wisconsin politics’ Category
WI GAB Agrees 4 Senate Recalls Should Go Forward
Folks, there was one story tonight that demanded my attention: the Wisconsin Government Accountability Board has agreed that there were more than enough valid signatures submitted to recall Senate Majority Leader Scott Fitzgerald and State Senators Terry Moulton, Pam Galloway, and Racine’s own Van Wanggaard. All four are Republican legislators, and all four will face recall elections in the coming months (the current GAB estimate is May).
Here’s a link to the story:
But these figures are what should concern you, to wit: how many recall signatures were actually struck by the GAB after the Republicans challenged them?
The Committee to Recall Scott Fitzgerald submitted “about” 20,735 petitions to recall him; 16742 were required. The GAB recommended that 867 signatures be struck, which leaves more than enough signatures to recall him. (Note that the 867 signatures to be struck is less than 5% of the total signatures, which is considered to be a good percentage; this means the recall petitioners, all volunteers, did their best to make sure recall petitions were only signed by people who were eligible to sign.)
The Committee to Recall Van Wanggaard submitted 23,712 signatures; 15,353 were required. The GAB said 643 should be struck, including 11 signatures that apparently were gathered fraudulently by a well-known Racine Republican, Mark Demet (he’s not named in the Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel article, but the Racine Journal-Times has talked about the problems with Demet here); those latter signatures have been challenged by the Racine County Sheriff’s Department and charges have been filed against Demet. Obviously, there are more than enough signatures to recall Van Wanggaard and the recall will go forward. (And look at the percentage, again, of the signatures that were struck; here we’re talking about something like 3% of the total were invalid. Obviously the Rs were hoping for more invalid signatures than this.)
The Committee to Recall Pam Galloway submitted 21,022 signatures to recall her; 15647 were needed. The GAB said 1,658 should be struck. More than enough signatures remain to force a valid recall election (and once again, this is under 10% of the total, which is an excellent percentage).
The Committee to Recall Terry Moulton submitted 20,907 signatures; 14,958 were needed. The GAB said that 1,212 signatures should be struck, which leaves more than enough valid signatures to force a recall election (again, under 10% of the signatures were declared invalid).
So the first hurdle has been crossed; let the Senatorial recalls begin!
WI Redistricting: District Court says Maps Can be Redrawn, but Rs refuse; Trial to Resume Thursday
Folks, this isn’t much of a surprise; the United States District Court (Eastern Division of Wisconsin) today rejected the Wisconsin Legislature’s argument that they cannot re-draw the maps based on a 1954 state Supreme Court decision. The Legislature is dominated in both the Assembly and in the Senate by Republicans, so in essence it is the Wisconsin Republican Party that has refused as all along, as the Democratic Party and the few Independents in the state government at any level all seem to want to re-draw the maps. The Court gave the Legislature (the Rs) 5.5 hours today to reconsider their viewpoint; the Rs, predictably, have refused to re-draw the maps.
The only reason this is significant is that now the Republican Party’s refusal is on the record. Otherwise, nothing has changed from what I reported late last night; the Rs want the maps to stand, the Ds want the maps to be re-drawn, and the District Court seems mystified by the Rs recalcitrant behavior.
Here’s the link to today’s Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel story:
Here’s a relevant quote:
Because lawmakers and the groups suing them could not agree on a settlement, the case will go to trial at 8:30 a.m. Thursday on an accelerated schedule. The trial was expected to last three or four days, but the presiding judge said he wanted to complete testimony by Friday, even if it meant going into the evening.
On Tuesday, an attorney for the state, Dan Kelly, told the judges that lawmakers were open to making changes to the maps, but he argued that a 1954 state Supreme Court decision prevented lawmakers from making changes to the maps after they had approved them. The panel of three federal judges – which includes two judges appointed by Republican presidents – rejected that argument Wednesday, and told the attorneys to tell them that afternoon whether the Legislature would spend the coming weeks drawing new maps.
Republican leaders declined to do that, sending the case to trial.
The only real news here is that the Court will expect this trial to wrap up on Friday evening even if they have to stay quite late in order to get everything done. This means the Court will not allow the Legislature to obfuscate or delay any longer; these maps must be fixed by April 15, 2012, or things are going to get even messier than they already are.
As I said before, the only thing certain in all this is that the Rs don’t want to do anything. They seem willing to let this go to the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) because they believe they will prevail there due to the 5-4 split between conservatives/Republicans and liberals/Democrats. But this particular panel is made up of two conservatives/Republicans and one Democrat and they don’t agree with the Legislature; how can the Legislature be sure they’ll get more than two votes at the SCOTUS level? (Methinks they can’t, especially if the Supreme Court justices dislike the way the Legislature has behaved toward other judges the way I think is likely. It’s possible that SCOTUS may rule 9-0 against the Wisconsin Rs, even though they don’t seem to think that’s likely.)
Oh, one other tidbit in this article:
The case comes to trial just as Gov. Scott Walker nearly doubles the amount in taxpayer money that can be spent on outside attorneys assisting the Department of Justice. Documents released Wednesday show the cap on the contract with Reinhart Boerner Van Deuren is being raised from $500,000 to $925,000.
Those costs are in addition to the $400,000 that Republican lawmakers have committed to two law firms that helped them draw the maps.
So, did you get that? Walker is going to allow the Rs to get more state money to defend these terrible maps. Which is why his recall cannot come soon enough.
That’s it for today; trial will resume Thursday, and I’d expect we’ll get a decision on this matter by the middle of next week due to the time-sensitive nature of this problem. Stay tuned.
WI Rs Refuse to Re-Draw Maps; Trial Resumes Tomorrow
Here’s the latest regarding the trial going on in the United States District Court (Eastern Division of Wisconsin) — the Wisconsin Republicans, who control the Legislature, the Governor’s chair, and the state Supreme Court, have decided they “do not have the power” to re-draw the maps as the three-judge panel headed by Judge Stadtmueller asked them to do.
Here’s the link to the story at the Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel:
Now, as to the merits of the Republican argument? They are pointing to a 1954 Wisconsin state Supreme Court decision, which the Rs believe disallows any re-drawing of the district maps; the Rs say they would “like to” revisit the maps, but they just can’t. The reason this is such a big deal is that every ten years, these maps must be re-drawn; because the Rs won all three branches of the state government, there was almost nothing the Democrats could do to stop them from doing anything they liked. This is the main reason the Democrats sued.
Here’s a new quote from the updated story at the Journal-Sentinel:
The panel – which includes two judges appointed by Republican presidents and one appointed by a Democratic president – has repeatedly criticized Republican lawmakers in written orders for their secretive process for drawing the maps.
On Tuesday, presiding Judge J.P. Stadtmueller did the same shortly after hearing that attorneys for the legislators had released a new batch of emails Friday that they had not previously disclosed they had. The release of emails came a day after the court had ordered the lawmakers’ attorneys to make public a separate group of emails.
“The facts are the facts and what has occurred here is beyond the pale in terms of lack of transparency (and) secrecy,” Stadtmueller said. “Appearances are everything and Wisconsin has prided itself one generation after another on openness and fairness in doing the right thing. And to be frank we have seen everything but that in the way this case has proceeded.”
Now, the lack of transparency regarding e-mails may seem like a minor issue, but if you’ve followed along with my previous blogs upon the subject, you know it isn’t. The Rs have been chastised four separate times to date over their lack of transparency; as Judge Stadtmueller said above, this isn’t the right thing to do.
Here’s the deal, folks. What the Rs have done in Wisconsin reminds me of the old axiom that goes like this: “Power corrupts. Absolute power corrupts absolutely.” This is because they felt they could do anything they liked and no one would say anything to them over it. Even after hundreds of thousands went out to protest all over the state of Wisconsin last year over the high-handed, dictatorial way Governor Scott Walker went about eliminating collective bargaining for most public-employee union members, the Rs didn’t change their ways.
Now, the Rs have been sued because of the way these maps have been drawn. And they say they “lack the power” to change them even though they control all three branches of government.
I’m sorry. I don’t buy this argument, and I am really disgusted that it’s taken this three-judge panel to get the Rs to admit they really should re-draw these maps (but they just can’t).
As I said before, I fully expect the three-judge panel to be excoriated by the Rs in coming days. The Rs have a great deal of money and can put many ads on television; they’ll blame “activist judges,” no doubt, and hope that the people don’t realize that two of the three judges on the panel were appointed by Republican Presidents, including Judge Stadtmueller himself (appointed by Ronald Reagan).
What it seems to me the state GOP is hoping for is that the district court will rule against them; after that, they will appeal to the United States Supreme Court, and because there are five well-known conservative justices there, they figure they will get their way. (Two of the five, in particular, would seem to be sympathetic right off the bat — Clarence Thomas and Antonin Scalia — but it’s possible even they might find the way the Wisconsin Rs have behaved objectionable.)
But there’s nothing saying that the five conservative justices on the Supreme Court must back the Wisconsin GOP, now, is there? Because if all conservatives behaved the same way, wouldn’t you think this three-judge panel would’ve tossed this lawsuit summarily right off the bat, as two of the three judges on the panel are conservative-appointees?
It’s anyone’s guess as to whether or not these maps are going to hold up. But my hunch is that they’ll be overturned, even if they do get appealed to the US Supreme Court; eventually, these maps will end up being re-drawn by the courts. And providing these maps are indeed overturned, that will be a victory for the people of Wisconsin.
Surprise! Federal Judges Want Rs to Redraw WI District Maps
Folks, even I didn’t see this one coming.
The Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel, at this link, reports that the three-judge panel from the United States District Court (Eastern District of Wisconsin) has asked the Wisconsin Legislature (thus in actuality, the Wisconsin Republican Party as all three branches of government in Wisconsin are currently controlled by the GOP) to “consider re-drawing” the district maps that are currently in dispute by taking into account the problems Latinos and the Democratic Party have with the maps and fixing the problems accordingly.
The Journal-Sentinel reports:
The court gave the Legislature until 5:30 p.m. Tuesday to decide whether it wants to revisit the maps it approved last summer. If it does not, the trial challenging the maps will resume Wednesday. If lawmakers agree to take up the maps anew, the court would give them until mid-March to approve them.
Apparently the reason the judges want the Legislature to re-draw the maps (rather than go to trial) is because they honestly feel that the Legislature should draw the maps — just, perhaps, not these maps. (Or in science-fictional terms, “These aren’t the maps you’re looking for. Move along.”)
Here’s more from the article that discusses what presiding judge J.P. Stadtmueller thinks:
At the opening of trial, presiding Judge J.P. Stadtmueller said drawing district lines is the purview of lawmakers, and it would be best for them to put those lines into law. However, he said, the plaintiffs have raised significant issues, particularly on the treatment of Latino areas and in the way it moved hundreds of thousands of people into new districts. He said legislators should consider setting new maps with those concerns in mind.
Next is my favorite part of the article:
Stadtmueller and the others on the panel have repeatedly criticized Republican lawmakers for being overly secretive in how they drew the maps. Almost all lawmakers signed secrecy agreements about the maps and they tried repeatedly to prevent their aides from having to testify or produce documents. Those attempts were unsuccessful, and last month the panel ordered the Republicans’ attorneys to pay the other side $17,500 for filing frivolous motions.
Note that Stadtmueller said that the “one-day pause” should not be taken as an indication of how the three-judge panel will rule — but then again, does it really need to be, considering the fact that on four prior occasions, the three-judge panel has heavily chastised the Wisconsin Rs for backroom shenanigans and an absolute lack of transparency?
My take on this is simple: if the judges didn’t believe there were grounds to strike down these maps — and good grounds, at that — they wouldn’t have made this extraordinary offer to the Wisconsin Rs. Because the offer basically says this: “Fix the maps on your own. Or we’ll likely end up fixing them for you.”
The entirety of the Wisconsin Legislature, along with Governor Scott Walker (R), now have until 5:30 p.m. CST to make a decision as to whether or not they’re willing to re-visit these maps and attempt to re-draw them in a way that the court is likely to approve.
If I had to guess at what the Wisconsin Rs are going to do, though, my guess is this: they won’t re-draw the maps. They’ll instead go back into court tomorrow, and try to impugn the three-judge panel on every media station that will allow them to do so within the state of Wisconsin (and probably on national cable such as Fox News, too, no doubt) because somehow, these three judges will be seen as “activist liberal judges” who just want to cause trouble for the Rs because the Rs are sweet, innocent, and completely in the right in every way, shape, or form. The fact that two of these three judges were appointed by Republican Presidents, mind you, will go completely by the boards when it comes to the media, but I can assure you that the judges themselves know full well who appointed them, and why.
This is why if I were a Republican, I’d be calling my legislators — and the Governor, too, no doubt — and urging them to take this deal before it’s too late. Otherwise, the judges will not be pleased . . . and my best guess after that, considering all the chicanery that’s gone on over the past year-plus since Scott Walker and the R-dominated Legislature came to power, is that the GOP will end up getting its comeuppance in a way that party had never foreseen — otherwise known as, “By their fruits, ye shall know them.”
For the Fourth Time, US District Court Rules Against WI R-Controlled Legislature re: Redistricting Plans
For the fourth time, the United States District Court (Eastern District of Wisconsin) has ruled against the Republican-dominated Wisconsin Legislature and its attorneys over the new district maps the Legislature drew last year. These maps were drawn in secret, the public had only one day to comment publicly on them in Madison, and then they were passed by party-line vote in the Republican-dominated Legislature. No Democratic legislators had any input into these maps because the Republicans completely shut them out.
Worse yet, the Republicans, nearly to a person, signed non-disclosure agreements with attorneys in order to try to cloak their legislative business under the “attorney-client” privilege that’s commonly given to legal defendants.
But this did not work.
So, for the fourth time, the US District Court (Eastern Dist. of WI) has said that all the deliberations of the Republicans via e-mail with and without their lawyers (that is, communication to and from their lawyers, and communication among themselves) do not qualify as something that can be protected via attorney-client privilege. And the judges’ comments, once again, are scathing.
Here’s the link to yesterday’s story in the Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel:
And here’s a link to the actual order by the three district judges, two of whom were appointed by Republican Presidents:
http://media.jsonline.com/documents/redist-021712.pdf
Here are a few words from the judges’ decision that explained why they have ruled against the Republicans (again):
The documents produced by the defendants consist predominantly of a series of email messages discussing the support of certain Hispanic community groups for redistricting legislation and also discussing the floor debates on a pending bill.
In the Court’s view, it is quite apparent that these email discussions involve advice on political strategy, as opposed to legal strategy, and, therefore, are not afforded attorney-client privilege protection.
But wait! There’s more!
Without a doubt, the Legislature made a conscious choice to involve private lawyers in what gives every appearance of an attempt—albeit poorly disguised—to cloak the private machinations of Wisconsin’s Republican legislators in the shroud of attorney-client privilege. What could have—indeed should have—been accomplished publicly instead took place in private, in an all but shameful attempt to hide the redistricting process from public scrutiny.
OK, let’s have that last sentence again, shall we? With emphasis this time (as added by yours truly):
What could have—indeed should have—been accomplished publicly instead took place in private, in an all but shameful attempt to hide the redistricting process from public scrutiny.
What bothers the judges here is also what’s bothered me from the start regarding the redistricting process. Simply put: this should’ve been done in the full light of day, where Wisconsin voters would’ve had weeks to weigh in on what they thought of the districts (rather than only one day in Madison for people to hurry on up there and try to talk sense into the recalcitrant Rs). The Democrats should’ve been consulted even if the Rs had still refused to listen. And the actual redistricting itself should’ve been far less cumbersome than it’s turned out to be, which it would’ve been if the Rs had just done things openly rather than try to give themselves some sort of out via “attorney-client privilege.”
But let’s hear some more from the District judges, shall we?
In concluding that the documents at issue here are not privileged from disclosure, the Court does not mean to suggest that the attorney-client privilege is unavailable to government entities. It is simply not available in this instance because of the Legislature’s peculiar (and frankly unfortunate) decision in this case to so blur the lines between political, strategic, and legal advice as to make those lines practically disappear. In so doing, the movants—who, in fact, seem to act on behalf of only a portion of the Legislature despite their assertion that they act on behalf of the full Legislature (and, by extension, all of Wisconsin’s citizens)—have tried to hide the redistricting process from the very people whose rights are at stake in that process.
Amen! (I couldn’t have said it better myself.)
The judges continue:
And those very people, Wisconsin’s citizens, have paid through their tax dollars for the efforts ostensibly taken on their behalf. The Court finds it highly doubtful that any lawyer’s client would delight in having the documents and communications for which they have paid kept beyond their reach. Thus, in these particular circumstances, it would be inappropriate to shield from disclosure the communications provided to the Court for in camera review.
Now, did you note the language the judges used? “The Court finds it highly doubtful . . . ” is quite pointed language from a judge (much less a three-judge panel). But what about this next line? “. . . the Legislature’s peculiar (and frankly unfortunate) decision in this case to so blur the lines between political, strategic, and legal advice as to make those lines practically disappear” is practically acerbic, coming from a judge. And this next line — my favorite in the whole five-page order — “What could have—indeed should have—been accomplished publicly instead took place in private, in an all but shameful attempt to hide the redistricting process from public scrutiny” makes the point that the judges have had quite enough of this, thank you, so let’s get on.
All of this is why it’s noteworthy that the judges’ ordered the R-dominated Legislature and its hand-picked lawyers release all e-mail communications. Because, you see, the judges have obviously had enough — and for the fourth time, they’ve said so.
Sen. Wanggaard Recall News: Wanggaard will not debate former Sen. Lehman
Last week, former Senator John Lehman (D-Racine) said he would take on current Senator Van Wanggaard (R-Racine) in an upcoming recall election.** Lehman, who lost to Wanggaard in 2010, says he wants a series of public debates; however, Wanggaard says he has “no interest” in debating Lehman whatsoever and will “stand on his record.”
Please see this link for further details:
About the best Wanggaard says he’s able to do is this; if Lehman is willing to attend one of Wanggaard’s weekly town halls out in the Town of Yorkville (a very small, rural part of Racine County):
“If (Lehman) wants to attend one of my town halls, he can sure ask questions,” said Wanggaard.
In Lehman’s announcement Tuesday that he will run against Wanggaard in a likely recall, he said when he ran against Wanggaard in 2010, and was defeated by him, “Mr. Wanggaard never once would agree to an on the ground debate in Racine.”
There was a television debate and The Journal Times hosted an online forum, but no public debates where people could ask questions in person.
“They just avoided a discussion,” Lehman said in his announcement.
Lehman said he would like to see a series of debates. “I think people deserve that,” Lehman said.
When Lehman ran against former County Executive William McReynolds in 2006 for the Senate, he said there were about 10 debates.
. . . which just goes to show you how much McReynolds respected the public, and how much Wanggaard disrespects the public now.
Look. There are good Republicans in Wisconsin who currently hold high office (Sen. Dale Schultz, R-Richland Center, is one such Republican), and there are good Republicans who’ve held office in the past, including McReynolds. These are responsible people who believe in public debates, and want the public to be well-informed as to the nature of the decisions facing them.
For that matter, all six of the Republican state Senators who faced recall in 2011 allowed for public debates; one, Robert Cowles (R-Green Bay), didn’t have a debate, but that’s because his opponent, Nancy Nussbaum, had to deal with funeral arrangements due to the death of her mother on the day the debate had been scheduled. For obvious reasons, the debate was called off. (Let the record state, however, that Cowles was willing to debate. Wanggaard is not.)
So why is it that the 2011 Rs were willing to debate the D candidates who were running in recall elections against them, but Wanggaard is unwilling to debate Lehman now? (And for that matter, why was Wanggaard unwilling to debate Lehman back in 2010?)
Methinks Wanggaard knows that debates or no debates, he will be out on his ear — the first one-year Senator in the history of Racine politics. (Former Senator George Petak, R-Racine, held office from 1990-6, and was successfully recalled during the middle of his second term.) And that’s why his public stance — i.e., “No debates!” — is so wishy-washy at absolute best.
Were I Wanggaard, I’d want to go down fighting, so the constituents I’d represented knew that I’d at least tried to do my best by my own lights. But nothing says he must be smart or courageous, now, does it?
Anyway, as I’m one of Wanggaard’s constituents — not that he’s ever listened to me before, mind you — I want to say this to Senator Wanggaard:
Senator, it’s time to stop ducking the issues. Debate former Senator Lehman in a public forum. Take questions from your constituents. And be prepared to explain why, oh why, you voted against collective bargaining when you, yourself, have benefitted handily from collective bargaining in the past (and continue to benefit from it in the here-and-now due to your police retirement).
It’s not that you’ve benefitted that’s so upsetting, Senator — it’s that you don’t want anyone else to benefit now that you have. (Otherwise known as, “I have mine, so who cares about you?”) That, sir, is hypocrisy at its finest, and that is why we are so upset with you.
We don’t like hypocrisy in Racine, Senator. We don’t like it at all.
But you’re still allowed to explain yourself, and your actions, in a way that makes more logical sense than you’ve done thus far. So do yourself a favor, and debate Lehman; it can’t hurt, might help, and will at least make those of us who oppose you appreciate your willingness to stand up and face the music.
—————
**Note that while Wanggaard’s upcoming recall election isn’t a 100% lead-pipe cinch, I would put it at 99.9% likely due to the fact that over 24,000 signatures were turned in while approximately 15,400 were needed to recall Wanggaard. Not all of those signatures will be valid, but most will be; Wanggaard is headed to a recall election and he well knows it.
WI Recall Petitions: Far More than Enough to Recall Walker, Kleefisch, and Wanggaard
Today’s Wisconsin recall update is as follows, folks:
- Over 1 million signatures have been turned in to recall Governor Scott Walker. (Approximately 540,000 were needed)
- Over 800,000 signatures have been turned in to recall Lieutenant Governor Rebecca Kleefisch. (Approximately 540,000 were needed)
- Over 24,000 signatures have been turned in to recall State Senator Van Wangaaard (R-Racine). (Approximately 15,000 signatures were needed.)
Please see this link from today’s online version of the Racine Journal-Times for further details.
As for how these numbers compare? Well, with over 1 million signatures, it’s highly likely Scott Walker is going to be facing recall; considering recall organizers got nearly twice as many signatures statewide as needed, it seems very, very likely that Walker will be recalled and replaced no matter who his opponent is.
With regards to Rebecca Kleefisch, the main reason there weren’t quite as many people willing to sign to get her out (though still quite a high number at an estimated 845,000) is because she’s a cancer survivor, a former anchorwoman for one of the biggest news stations in the state (WISN-TV in Milwaukee, WI), and because as a few men of my acquaintance have said in the past, “What a shame about her politics; she’s cute.” (For the conservative men of my acquaintance, let me point out that Lt. Gov. Kleefisch is also Mrs. Joel Kleefisch, as she’s married to a state Assemblyman.)
As for Wanggaard, the fact that 24,000 people signed to get him out is historic; I believe this is more than the amount of signatures that had been gathered to recall George Petak (R-Racine) in 1996, and Petak was indeed successfully recalled and replaced by then-Democratic Assemblywoman Kim Plache. (I wrote about that historic election here.) While this isn’t nearly twice as many signatures as needed as seen in the statewide Walker recall, it is still a very high number of people who were willing to sign to get Wanggaard out of office. (If I were him, I’d be quite worried.)
As for what State Senator Wanggaard has to say about it? From a different article at today’s online Racine Journal-Times:
Wanggaard, R-Racine, said in a press release that for union bosses and Democrats today marks the start of the “do-over of their loss in the November 2010 elections.”
While others focus on recalls and politics, Wanggaard “will continue to focus on my efforts to help Wisconsin create and retain good-paying jobs,” he said in the release. “Recalls and further division do nothing to show job creators that Wisconsin has a stable business environment and continues to poison the well of politics.”
So did you catch that? Wanggaard says that people are trying to “do over” the 2010 elections. By doing so, he’s attempting to belittle the organizers of the recall effort against him, but it’s not going to work. (And notice, Wanggaard didn’t say anything about how “the people have spoken, but I intend to win them over,” which would’ve made far more sense and wouldn’t have demeaned those who’d signed the petitions against him.)
But at least Wanggaard commented at all (even if it was by a press release); so far, both Walker and Kleefisch have been unavailable for comment.
Oh, one more thing; it appears that State Senators Moulton and Galloway, and the biggest fish of them all, Senate Majority Leader Scott Fitzgerald, have also had more than enough signatures turned in to recall them. So all six recalls have completed their first phase; now it’s on to the Wisconsin Government Accountability Board and the courts to first verify the signatures, then figure out when the recall elections will be scheduled. (As always, I’ll keep you posted.)
————–
Personal note: This is bittersweet, as I really want to talk with my friend Jeff about all this. He knew I was active in helping Bob Wirch (D-Kenosha) retain Wirch’s seat; he knew I was planning to help work on the recall petitions against Walker, Kleefisch and Wanggaard. And he was very much in favor of this, because he felt all three of them deserved to be recalled — he even said so in our last conversation on 11/11/11.
I very much wish Jeff were still alive just so I could tell him about all this; even though I couldn’t do very much due to Jeff’s sudden death (nowhere near as much as I’d hoped or planned to do), I did gather some signatures and I did, personally, sign the petitions to recall all three individuals. I hope, wherever he is now, that he knows I did my best to get these three people removed from office, and that he’s happy that all three will, indeed, face recall.
And I’ll not even start on my feelings about how I wish I could tell my late husband Michael about all this, too. Because I know that he, too, would’ve been in favor; he’d probably have called this a “classic overreach” and have signed right along with me.
Randolph Brandt is right: Recall Van Wanggaard. Now.
Folks, Randolph Brandt is mad at my state Senator, Van Wanggaard (R-Racine), and he’s not afraid to say so. In a recent op-ed published by the Racine Journal-Times, Brandt excoriates Wanggaard for many of the same reasons I have, including:
- Being a former police union member and voting against collective bargaining.
- Being a former police union representative, yet still voting against collective bargaining.
- Criticizing the practice of “double-dipping” (where someone takes a pension in two places from various state entities), while benefiting from that self-same practice himself.
- Stripped $2M of expected state tax revenue from the City of Racine, meaning the City must either raise taxes or cut services (or, as seems to be the case, both).
- Cut over $16M aid to Racine’s public school system.
- Voted for district 21 to be “redistricted” as Racine and Kenosha counties, which usually tend to vote for Republicans, and district 22 to be comprised of the Cities of Racine and Kenosha, which tend to vote for Democrats.
All of this is bad enough, but the fact that Wanggaard doesn’t seem to see any of it as a problem is quite distressing. Brandt states:
Under a gerrymandered redistricting plan approved by the Republicans and scheduled to go into effect with the November elections, Sen. Wanggaard was to be rewarded with a nice, safe, new Republican-dominated district that’s designed to excise the City of Racine from its new boundaries.
With this plan, your supposed state senator, Van Wanggaard, won’t represent you at all anymore. He’ll exchange the Racine voters he’s failed to support in favor of a whole bunch of new voters in western Kenosha County instead.
Basically, he’ll desert us, the citizens of Racine, leaving us to suffer for his poor decisions.
As I’ve been saying this for months now, it’s good to know that at least one newspaperman agrees with me. (Brandt is the former editor of the Racine Journal-Times.) Brandt’s commentary explains what voters should do to Wanggaard (in essence, why Wanggaard should be recalled), and concludes with the following:
Don’t stand by and watch him be rewarded for this faithlessness to his Racine constituents, the Racine voters who helped elect him in the first place.
Stop him before he skips town, across that new, safe border he voted to establish for himself, just as he once negotiated the union contract that now pays his Racine city pension. Stop him, before he gets away, reneging on his civic debt to you, for you to pay yourself.
Recall Sen. Wanggaard while you still can, before he gets away with it, before he walks away, laughing at you — the citizens of Racine — well knowing he’s left you holding the bag, for his city pension, for his budget cuts, and for his hypocrisy.
So, did you catch all that? Brandt criticizes Wanggaard for Wanggaard’s hypocrisy — something I have railed against for months — and points out to the voters of Racine County that Wanggaard’s own actions have brought Wanggaard to this point, which is certainly the case.
You see, many people in Racine knew Van Wanggaard because Wanggaard was a long-time city policeman. Then Wanggaard was a County Supervisor. And finally, in a heavily Republican year, he squeaked out an election and won the state Senate seat — mostly because people felt they knew Wanggaard and that he wouldn’t vote against the best economic interests of the City of Racine.
Yet that wasn’t the case, was it?
Racine is still locked in a cycle of extremely high unemployment (we’ve been either first or second in the state, unemployment-wise, for years now), and Wanggaard hasn’t exactly done much about it except pay it some lip service. Yet Wanggaard has had a full year in office to have tried to do something — economic development, a bit of extra state aid, something — and he hasn’t done one blessed thing.
This is why I’ve heard from so many people in Racine, City and County, who’ve said variations on the theme of, “I expected better from Van.” Or, “What is Wanggaard’s problem? Doesn’t he realize we’re suffering? Doesn’t he care?”
I don’t know whether Wanggaard realizes it, cares about it, or whether we should’ve expected better from him. But I do know this: I was very proud to sign my name to Wanggaard’s recall petition, and I was glad to gather some signatures (not as many as I’d hoped) on behalf of his recall.
I fully expect that Wanggaard not only will be forced to a recall election, but he will be replaced by a Democrat once the recall election is called (probably former state Senator John Lehman, though no one has officially announced his/her candidacy as of yet), staged, and counted.
As he’s sown, so will he reap — and in this case, Wanggaard has reaped the whirlwind. As Senator Wanggaard deserves all of what is about to befall him, I cannot feel sorry for him.
Oh, yes. One more thing: May I be the first, Senator, to wish you well in your impending retirement from public life?
———
Note: From unofficial sources, it looks like state Senators Galloway and Moulton also will be recalled, while there’s still a chance to recall Senate Majority Leader Scott Fitzgerald. All signatures must be gathered by Saturday at 11:59 PM, so all I can say to those trying to recall Fitz is, “Good luck, God/dess bless, and may the wind be at your back.”
And, of course, Governor Scott Walker and Lieutenant Governor Rebecca Kleefisch will be recalled — easily — as I fully expect upwards of 850,000 apiece to recall (when 540,000 was the number required by law, that being 1/4 of the total vote of the last gubernatorial election) to be turned in on January 17, 2012 — four days from now. I’ll keep you posted.
Rep. Robin Vos (R) Calls Recalls “Frivolous” Because “They Cost Too Much”
Representative Robin Vos (R-Rochester) is at it again.
Vos doesn’t like recall elections, even though his own party, the Wisconsin GOP, went after three Democratic state Senators last year — Bob Wirch of Kenosha, Jim Holperin of Conover, and Dave Hansen of Green Bay. All three easily withstood their recall elections and were retained. (Maybe Vos only dislikes them because his own party lost when they attempted to unseat these three Democratic Senators. But I digress.) He believes they are too expensive, and asked Wisconsin’s Government Accountability Board how much it’s going to cost for the election to recall Governor Scott Walker and Lieutenant Governor Rebecca Kleefisch — as that’s a statewide election — mostly because he seems to believe that widely publicizing the estimated cost of the statewide recall election will somehow stop the recall process in its tracks. Note that the gubernatorial/Lt. Gov. recall election is estimated to cost $9 million according to Wisconsin’s county clerks and the GAB; this cost covers only one election, not with the sure-to-come primary beforehand. Supposedly, having Kleefisch on the ballot as is usually the case in any gubernatorial/Lt. Gov. election will cost more, something I highly doubt.
Please see this link for further details:
Worse yet, in this article, Vos calls the recalls “frivolous,” saying:
“People cannot say this is somehow worth the cost to have these frivolous recalls. It’s a shame we’ve come to this.”
I have news for Rep. Vos. He is misusing the word frivolous, which is defined by the Free Dictionary as:
friv·o·lous (fr
v
-l
adj.
1. Unworthy of serious attention; trivial: a frivolous novel.2. Inappropriately silly: a frivolous purchase.
Note that these recall elections, while they are expensive, have not been undertaken lightly. It takes a lot of effort to gather 540,000 signatures statewide in two months, which is what is required to recall both Walker and Kleefisch, as that’s 1/4 of the total votes cast for Governor in the 2010 election. And that effort, by its very definition, is the epitome of seriousness — in other words, Rep. Vos, no one would ever undertake such a grueling effort unless they were quite serious
So the first definition, that of being “unworthy of serious attention,” fails.
But what about the second definition, “inappropriately silly?” Do these recalls qualify for that definition, either?
No, they do not. Once again, the recalls may well be wrong in certain lights; certainly, they are in the eyes of Robin Vos. But one thing they are not is “inappropriately silly,” especially considering Vos’s own party, the GOP, supported the recalls of Holperin, Hansen, and Wirch last summer. (I guess we’re supposed to have short memories about that, huh?)
The main reason I see for Vos to do this is because it’s the only play the Wisconsin GOP has left, to wit: stall. Obfuscate. Cast aspersions on the people recalling Walker, Kleefisch, state Senator Van Wanggaard (R-Racine), and more — because it’s the only thing the Rs can do, as they’re very well aware that Walker and Kleefisch will be recalled. They’re also very well aware that Wanggaard will be recalled, and that other senators who are in danger of recall (including Senate Majority Leader Scott Fitzgerald and Senator Pam Galloway, R-Wausau) may have to defend their seats as well.
So the way I see it, the only reason Vos is saying and doing all this is because he knows his party will lose these recall elections. He’s the co-chairman of the Legislature’s finance committee — a very powerful leadership position — yet Vos has to know which way the winds are blowing in Wisconsin. The GOP’s days are numbered; it’s quite possible that the Wisconsin Assembly (lower house) will go solid blue next year due to the GOP’s overreach. And Vos’s own seat, which has been a safe Republican haven for at least twenty years, may even be in jeopardy because people are that angry over what the GOP has done.
I’m most unimpressed with Vos on these issues, and believe his logic chain, at best, is suspect. His understanding of the adjective “frivolous” is flawed. And he’s crying sour grapes because of how expensive the recalls are, when as Wisconsin Democratic Party chairman Mike Tate said here:
“The $9 million cost of a statewide recall election is great, but the cost of doing nothing is far greater. This undertaking is the biggest investment in the future of our state and families we can make.
It would take more than 7 recall elections to equal the cost of Walker’s tax increase on seniors and working families. It would take more than 11 recalls to equal the tuition hike Walker foisted on University of Wisconsin-System students and their families. And Walker’s $2.3 billion in tax giveaways to out-of-state corporations and the super-rich would pay for more than 255 recall elections. Wisconsin simply cannot afford Scott Walker any longer.
At the end of the day, no matter how Scott Walker and his Republican Party try to spin it, the people of Wisconsin called for this election. There is no price tag on democracy.” (emphasis mine — BC)
Agreed, though they way I’d put it is that Vos’s complaints about how expensive the recall elections will be are an attempted framing of the narrative that should not stand, as it is fundamentally flawed both on its merits and its ethics.
So let’s bring on the recalls already. Because whether Vos or the Wisconsin GOP likes it or not, what’s good for the goose is good for the gander; if the GOP can undertake recall efforts as they did last summer, they have absolutely no right to complain now. (Or as I said the other day with regards to Wanggaard’s impending recall election: “Them’s the breaks.”)
For the 3rd Time, Federal Judges Rule that WI Legislature Cannot Keep Redistricting Info from Dems
For the third time since December 8, 2011, a three-judge panel comprised of federal judges has ruled that the Republican-dominated Wisconsin Legislature cannot keep information regarding the redistricting process away from the Democrats who filed suit over it. The judges were obviously exasperated, saying that the GOP lawmakers are actually trying to hide the information from the public regarding the redistricting process and basically said that they will not stand for it.
Please see this link from the Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel’s January 3, 2012, edition for further details:
As for a relevant quote, how’s this for you?
“Quite frankly, the Legislature and the actions of its counsel give every appearance of flailing wildly in a desperate attempt to hide from both the court and the public the true nature of exactly what transpired in the redistricting process,” the ruling reads.
You don’t read language like this from federal judges every day, folks.
So here’s the deal. On December 8, 2011, and again on December 20, 2011, the three federal judges ruled against the Republicans. Yet the Legislature has refused again and again to turn over the documentation explaining why the redistricting was done so radically — instead, they just obfuscate while they dilly-dally, perhaps hoping that by sitting on their hands that the judges will just get bored and go away.
But that hasn’t happened.
Lest you think these are liberal appointees, think again. Judge J.P. Stadtmueller was appointed by Ronald Reagan. Judge Robert M. Dow, Jr., was appointed by George W. Bush. Only Judge Diane P. Wood was appointed by a Democratic President, Bill Clinton.
So we have two conservative judges who are most unamused by the Republicans; as another quote from the recent Journal-Sentinel article puts it:
In essence, the judges again found there was little the Republicans can keep from the plaintiffs, a Democratic group.
The panel of judges – two of whom are Republican appointees – gave a rhetorical smack to the GOP lawmakers and their attorneys.
The court “will not suffer the sort of disinformation, foot-dragging, and obfuscation now being engaged in by Wisconsin’s elected officials and/or their attorneys,” the ruling reads.
Once again, judges rarely are this angry, and even more rarely do they show their anger in this fashion.
So here’s the deal; the GOP redistricting plan appears likely to go down in flames. The Democrats who challenged it (none of whom are in office right now) did so on the basis that the new districts’ boundaries violate the Federal Voting Rights Act and the equal protection clause of the United States Constitution because of the way these new proposed boundaries would treat minorities and by how many people (well over 300,000) are shifted arbitrarily for what seems like little or no reason except for blatant political advantage.
The reason this is of interest to me, and to anyone in Southeastern Wisconsin, is simple: Van Wanggaard (R-Racine) is my current state Senator. He voted for Senate Bill 10 — that is, to get rid of collective bargaining for public employee unions, with the sole exceptions of police and fire personnel. And in exchange, he appears to have received a really nice benefit from the redistricting in that his new district 21 would include most of rural Kenosha County and most of rural Racine County — while the urban areas of Racine and Kenosha would become district 22.
District 22 is Bob Wirch’s district; he’s a Democrat. While I greatly admire Sen. Wirch and worked on his behalf last summer to help him withstand recall and be retained, I would prefer the boundaries to stay as they’ve traditionally been; district 22 is most of Kenosha County, including the City of Kenosha, while district 21 is mostly made up of Racine County, including the City of Racine. This arrangement means that both district 22 and district 21 are “in play,” so that a good legislator of either party can potentially win the seat of either district; it also means that the legislator who’s in office had better listen to the will of the people, or he or she will end up getting recalled and replaced.
This, currently, is the case with regards to Van Wanggaard in district 21. Signatures have been gathered, and there are more than enough to get Wanggaard recalled, I’m reliably informed — which means that the Racine office has, bare minimum, over 16,000 people who’ve signed to force Wanggaard to a recall election. (Signatures will be filed on January 15, 2012.) Wanggaard went against the will of his district in casting his vote for Senate Bill 10 — the stripped-down bones of Scott Walker’s “budget repair bill” minus any obvious financial verbiage — despite being a past member of the police union; worse yet for him, Wanggaard was a union representative way back when, something he probably hopes most people in Racine have forgotten. This was extremely hypocritical and is not something Racine voters are likely to forgive, which is why I firmly expect Wanggaard to be replaced as soon as the recall election is called.
Note that Wanggaard was very well aware that a Republican legislator had been recalled in district 21 before; this was George Petak, and I wrote about him and his recall race here. Which is why he probably had to be promised something in exchange for his vote; elsewise, why would he do it? And promising him a more favorable district 21 — one where he’d have a tougher time getting recalled, as the rural areas of both Kenosha and Racine Counties tend to be more conservative — was probably the likely thing that changed Wanggaard’s mind to vote in favor of SB 10.
So Wanggaard, the former union member, the former union representative, voted against collective bargaining. Then he voted in favor of the new redistricting plan later on; this passed on a party-line vote in the Senate, meaning all 14 Dems voted no, while all 19 Rs voted yes. (In the Assembly, a few Rs voted against it, along with almost all the Dems. But it was still a largely party-line vote.) And Wanggaard had to think he’d be less likely to be recalled this way.
But I have news; the people who voted Wanggaard in, including those voters in the City of Racine, are the ones who get the privilege of voting him right back out again (or possibly retaining him, though that doesn’t seem too likely an outcome). And that’s the way it should be.
So bring on the recall election for Senator Wanggaard, right along with the recalls of Governor Scott Walker and Lieutenant Governor Rebecca Kleefisch. All three will be gone within months. Then watch as the new, gerrymandered districts get tossed out via the federal court panel . . . so ultimately, Wanggaard will have ended up squandering his own seat for nothing. (Them’s the breaks, Van.)
Barb Caffrey's Blog 