Archive for the ‘Wisconsin politics’ Category
Update: Wisconsin state Senate Recalls, part 1.
Now, as for the recalls — first up was the primary election on 7/12/11 for the Democrats running against the six Republicans across the state. We had to have a primary because the Wisconsin Republican Party put up “fake Democrats” (what the Rs called “protest candidates”) to stall the Dems and give their own R Senators more time to raise money and fight the recall effort.
I’m pleased to report that the real Democratic candidates all won; most won easily, with Shelly Moore of River Falls having a relatively tough race against Isaac Weix of Menomonie due to the efforts of the St. Croix County Republican Party, which actively worked to get Republicans to vote in the open primary in an attempt to force Moore out. Moore won by the percentage of 54-46, with 17496 voting for Moore and 14990 voting for Weix with 97% of the vote counted in Senate district 10.
Here’s an overall look at the recall races from the Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel, with the insightful title of, “6 fake Democrats fall, setting stage for GOP recalls.” A relevant quote from the article:
Six fake Democratic candidates put up by the Republican Party to buy time for Republican state senators subject to recalls accomplished that job Tuesday, but none of them did the unexpected and knocked off a real Democrat.
Candidates backed by the Democratic Party won all six Senate primary elections, all but one of them by substantial amounts. They’ll all go on to face the Republican incumbents on Aug. 9, in an attempt by Democrats to regain control of the state Senate and put the brakes on Gov. Scott Walker’s agenda.
That the primaries were held at all is a function of the twists and turns of political strategy played out in recent months as the state broke into warring camps over Walker’s attempt to restrict collective bargaining for public employees.
The Republican Party forced the primaries to give its six senators facing recall another four weeks before facing a Democratic challenger, in order to allow them to take their case to the voters and argue that their work on the budget was good for the state.
Take a look at that last sentence again. Do you all remember the mantra, “Wisconsin is broke, that’s why we have to do X, Y, and Z.” (With X being the elimination of collective bargaining rights for public employee unions, Y being cutting $800 out of the public education budget, and Z giving tax breaks to corporations?)
Well, isn’t it hypocritical for the Rs, who claim that Wisconsin is “broke,” to force these recall elections into primaries using “fake Dems” to extend the process?
I mean, here the GOP forced these recalls because of these “fake Dems,” which has caused the state of WI to have spent at least $450,000 more money than needed to be spent on recall elections. Which makes this the next relevant question: how broke can be Wisconsin be if the Wisconsin Republican Party is willing to play games like this?
At any rate, the six real Dems now will face the six sitting Rs on August 9, 2011, to see who will take control of the state Senate. There will be one election already in the books by that point — state Senator Dave Hansen (D-Green Bay) will run next week, July 19, 2011, to attempt to hold his seat, and it’s strongly believed he will win easily — with two more to come on August 16, 2011, for the remaining two Democratic state Senators, Jim Holperin (D-Conover) and Bob Wirch (D-Pleasant Prairie — Pleasant Prairie is a suburb of Kenosha), to attempt to hold their seats. Providing all three Dems hold their seats, the six Democratic challengers will need to knock out at least three Senate Rs to take control of the state Senate.
Tonight was only the first step toward restoring a check on our currently all-Republican state government; we have more steps to come. Keep watching my blog for further updates, as I promise to “keep ’em coming” as long as there’s something to say on this topic.
Kenosha News Refuses to Print my Election Letter
The Kenosha News, in their infinite whatever, refused to print my election letter on the grounds that I’m not a Kenosha County resident, and that I’m not a subscriber to their paper. Yet as far as I know, their “Voice of the People” section (what most papers call the “letters to the editor”) does not contain anything that says you must be a Kenosha County resident or a subscriber in order to comment on current events or anything else — I’ve read the Kenosha News many times because I don’t live that far from the Kenosha County line and often pick it up at a local gas station.
At any rate, since the Kenosha News refused to print my election letter, I’m going to print it here, in its entirety; you see if you find it objectionable in any way, shape or form:
To the Editor:
Though I live in the city of Racine, I have a great appreciation for Senator Bob Wirch and wish he were my state Senator. Here’s why.
In 2006, Sen. Wirch discovered that Gateway Technical College (which had a $2.4 million budgetary shortfall at the time) had appropriated five million dollars of taxpayer money to create two private organizations. One of these was actually run for profit, but did the taxpayers of Wisconsin ever see a dime? No!
Without Sen. Wirch bringing this to light, we’d have likely had no idea about what had happened to that five million dollars.
At a time of unprecedented belt-tightening, we need Bob Wirch to stay in the Senate to make absolutely sure that our money is spent wisely; we can’t afford to waste a single penny.
During these unsettled times, where Republicans run “fake Democrats” in recall primaries to give themselves more time to raise money, and Gov. Walker told the “fake David Koch” that he’d seriously considered planting fake protestors in Madison to cause further unrest, we need Sen. Wirch more than ever. He’ll fight against bad budgetary decisions while continuing to fight for a transparent, honest and accountable government.
We need more people like Bob Wirch in the state Senate, which is why I urge you to please cast your vote for him on August 16, 2011.
Sincerely,
Barb Caffrey
Racine, WI
Now, what’s wrong with this letter? That I like Bob Wirch? (That’s what election letters are for — expressing your appreciation, or your disgust, for a candidate running for office.) That I think it’s great he’s been able to bring things to light that otherwise would’ve gone unknown and unheeded? That it’s under 250 words, which fits their guidelines? What?
Mind, if the Kenosha News had prominently said on their Opinion page that they do not, emphatically do not, accept letters from people who neither live in Kenosha County nor subscribe to their paper, then I’d not be as upset. I’d still not be happy about it, but I’d not be upset.
My letter to them in return after they said they were uninterested in my “voice” was something to the effect that I didn’t appreciate this, at all. And that as I live in Racine County — right up the road from Kenosha — it’s ridiculous to think I don’t know what’s going on in this election, especially as part of Bob Wirch’s district runs straight through Racine County.
I also sent a voice mail, which, while again polite and using no four-letter words, expressed my outrage over this. Emphatically.
So, now I know that at least one newspaper in this area doesn’t care what real people think about the important recall elections. And that’s not just bad, sad, or shameful — it means they’re unwilling to do their real job, which in part is to report on what real people in their area think about the issues at hand. Including this recall election.
Wisconsin State Journal’s editorial about recalls falls down on the job
Folks, I am livid after reading this extremely biased, slanted staff editorial by the Wisconsin State Journal, one of the best-known papers in the state. The WSJ has the nerve to say that recalls are bad because they extend the election cycle, and when, pray tell, will it end?
Well, I’ll tell you when it’ll end. When we finally have some responsible people in government who stop behaving like Wisconsin is their personal fiefdom and that the rule of law need not apply. As Grant Petty, writing for Madison’s alternative paper The Isthmus, wrote in his response to the WSJ editorial:
It was not simply that I disagreed with your position. I disagree with other publications’ positions all the time without necessarily feeling insulted by them. The straw that broke the camel’s back for me was that you had once again ignored or grossly oversimplified deep and important issues affecting Wisconsin while basing your position on superficial ones.
Petty goes on to say later on in the article that many things have caused the people of Wisconsin to recall their legislators (especially those of the Republican variety); these things include, but are not limited to:
- The lack of transparency in government, for the rule of law, and for the constitutionality of our courts by our elected officials.
- Creating new obstacles to voting in traditionally Democratic demographic groups (minorities, the poor, college students, elderly who don’t live in nursing homes)
- What Petty calls “blatant pay-to-play favors” for major campaign donors (including the one railroad exec. who pled guilty to an illegal campaign contribution of $49,000 to Scott Walker)
- A state Supreme Court that Petty calls a “rubber stamp” that was “bought and paid for by Wisconsin Manufacturing and Commerce,” a lobbying group that traditionally backs Republicans and conservative ideology. and
- Last, but not least, the overarching inaccuracies of the vote going back at least to 2004 in Waukesha County; Petty describes several troubling aspects of the vote in the 2011 judicial race between Justice David Prosser and challenger JoAnne Kloppenburg that changed the outcome of the election, starting with Waukesha County Clerk Kathy Nickolaus’s finding of 7500 votes over a day after the election had supposedly ended and continuing on with problems with the voting machines and electronic tape malfunctions that were never explored or explained (including one where the totals inexplicably read March 30, 2011, not April 5, 2011 as they should’ve; Barbara With, who observed the Waukesha County recount, explicitly made sure the Government Accountability Board knew about this and testified as to what she’d seen and heard and entered her picture of the faulty tape into evidence, yet the GAB, again inexplicably, refused to believe or accept this and left this testimony out of the official record).
Note that all of this — all — is why most people in Wisconsin, including a sizable minority of Walker’s own party, remains livid regarding the conduct of our current crop of public officials (mostly the recently-elected Walker and many of the Republican officeholders who are being recalled, including State Senator Alberta Darling). Petty said it extremely well, and I only wish that I’d have written this summation myself; this truly is why Wisconsin is upset and has recalled an unprecedented number of people (remember, before this year, only four people had ever been forced to run in recall elections, with two of them holding their seats while the other two, including my former Republican state Senator George Petak, R-Racine, lost).
As to why the WSJ decided to write a slanted, utterly biased editorial? Who knows? But I do know that whenever I read their paper online in the future, I will keep their partisan slant in mind and judge their reportage accordingly.
Other than that, I agree with Petty’s contention that we should be far more concerned with out-and-out election fraud in this state because we’ve apparently had problems now in Waukesha County since 2004 and nothing, but nothing, has been done about them and apparently nothing, but nothing, is going to be done about them because apparently the political powers who now run the state (all three branches of government are run by Republicans, remember, as I’ve stated before) like it the way it is even though most of the rest of us emphatically do not.
And that, my friends, is not only sad. It’s shameful, and should not be tolerated in what we so euphemistically call “a democratic state.”
Violence in the workplace — is it ever right?
Folks, it’s 2011, and I thought the answer to my title/question was always, “No” unless we were talking about something like World Wrestling Entertainment (WWE). Yet now I’ve heard the wildest array of excuses made on behalf of Wisconsin Supreme Court Justice David Prosser, who may have grabbed fellow Justice Ann Walsh Bradley by the neck on June 13, 2011.
Here’s a link to the first story that broke in the Wisconsin area:
http://www.jsonline.com/blogs/news/124537284.html
And here’s a link to the story regarding the two, ongoing investigations into what, exactly happened:
http://www.jsonline.com/news/statepolitics/124605454.html
A relevant quote from the latter:
Two agencies are investigating a claim by Supreme Court Justice Ann Walsh Bradley that Justice David Prosser put her in a chokehold earlier this month – an allegation Gov. Scott Walker on Monday called extremely serious.
Ah, but Scott Walker refused to say what, if anything, should be done just a bit further into the article:
Asked if the reports about Prosser’s behavior, if true, merited his resignation, Walker said: “I don’t even want to go down that path . . . other than to say that just based on the allegations that were made, I can’t overemphasize how serious I think the situation is there. Until we know what happened, I don’t think it’s best for anybody for me to comment on what the next step is.”
Now, I can guarantee that if the countervaling story that the Republicans have put out (that Justice Bradley somehow came at Justice Prosser and that’s why he put hands around her neck; this is the, “The victim is always to blame!” argument, in a nutshell, which I find both revolting and disgusting) is true, Gov. Walker would be calling for Bradley’s head on a platter and impeachment proceedings against her would probably already be underway in the Legislature. But as we’re talking about another Republican here — Prosser, as we all know, was once the Republican Speaker for the Assembly (Wisconsin’s lower house) before former Republican Gov. Tommy Thompson appointed Prosser to the bench — they’re going to proceed with caution in order to keep Prosser there as long as they possibly can.
Mind, nothing has been proven yet, and Prosser is innocent until proven guilty in a court of law — but if the facts are as Bradley has alleged (that Prosser put his hands around her neck in a chokehold), then Prosser should resign and seek immediate medical treatment for his anger management problem — bare minimum, that’s what he should do.
Now, as for a little political commentary: I am astonished and disgusted that anyone, ever, would try to say that violence in the workplace could be condoned due to a “hostile work environment” — that is, the Republicans don’t like it that much of the public is angry over what’s happened since Walker took office and instituted his new unpopular program (which he didn’t campaign on and didn’t warn anyone about beforehand). And the Wisconsin Supreme Court, though it has four Republicans/conservatives to only three Democrats/liberals, apparently feels the heat of this even though the Rs have the advantage — so apparently, because it’s such a difficult work environment, to some, what Prosser did in “defending himself” was justified, even though no one as of yet has all the facts in this case.
So, I want to ask this question: is it ever right to allow violence in the workplace? If so, under what circumstances would you allow it? Does political ideology really make that much of a difference to you as to whether or not someone should put hands on another inside the workplace, much less a man allegedly trying to choke a woman? (When most men are much taller and heavier than most women?)
I’ll be interested in any logical response to this — because so far, I’ve heard absolutely nothing that makes any sense with regards to defending Prosser’s alleged conduct except the rather weak, “It’s not like you think.” That’s just not good enough, unless we want to turn back into a nation of brutish thugs — and if that’s what you really want, as Yogi Berra once famously said, “Include me out.”
John Nichols said it best: in WI, no checks, no balances, exist.
Folks, all week I’ve resisted the impulse to post anything after the recent “victory” by Scott Walker and his allies on the Wisconsin Supreme Court. Please see this article from John Nichols at the Capital Times, who agrees with me that after this week’s decision, no effective checks or balances to the power of Gov. Scott Walker (R) may be seen to exist.
Then, see this extraordinary decision by the WI state Supreme Court, along with the incendiary dissents of Chief Justice Shirley Abrahamson and learned, scholarly judge N. Patrick Crooks.
Now, as for what I feel about all this?
After several days of reflection, I’m spitting mad. I believe that the four Rs on the court — including two who seem heavily tainted, Michael Gableman and the recently re-elected David Prosser — have not done the people’s business here. Further, they’ve made a mockery out of the whole “separation of powers” that is inherent in the United States Constitution and re-affirmed in the Wisconsin state Constitution — these four Justices appear to remember, always, that they are conservative Republicans first, and Supreme Court justices second. And, apparently, being a conservative R seems to trump everything else.
Justice N. Patrick Crooks, a renowned legal scholar, said on p. 11 of his dissent that:
The ready availability of a direct appeal by aggrieved parties makes this all the more puzzling. The majority does not really come to grips with the obvious fact that an appeal is an available remedy here. As many of the parties to these cases have argued, it would be a simple matter for an aggrieved party to intervene in this matter and file an ordinary appeal, which would proceed the usual way.
In other words, there was no need to create a precedent here, but the four Rs on the court did just that; they set aside Dane County Circuit Court Judge Maryann Sumi’s ruling in total, because they felt Sumi had overstepped her authority — yet her ruling was detailed, thorough, and took months to decide. Whereas the Supreme Court of the state of Wisconsin took only a few days.
Abrahamson’s dissent (most relevant parts quoted in Nichols’s article) is stinging, but Crooks’s dissent is even worse in a scholarly, non-argumentative way. Crooks seems completely dismayed with what’s occurred here; he doesn’t get it, and if people as knowledgeable about the court as Abrahamson, Crooks, and Justice Ann Walsh Bradley don’t get it, I suppose it’s not too surprising that I don’t get it, either. (Nor does Nichols seem to understand why the four Rs did this, except for purely political, rather than legal, reasons. While I hope that isn’t the case, it surely doesn’t look good at this time for those four conservative Justices.)
* * * * *
UPDATE: Blogger Rick Ungar of conservative Forbes magazine agrees with Nichols, and me, that this ruling is seriously messed up.
Relevant (unfortunately rather lengthy) quote:
While the State of Wisconsin has a lot on its plate in the recall department, I’m afraid they now have little choice but to consider taking a look at some of their Supreme Court Justices for similar action.
Not because the court handed down a ruling that will make people unhappy – but because the people of Wisconsin now have every reason to believe that their Supreme Court has been corrupted and their opinions subject to invalidation.
Make no mistake. This is not about a judicial philosophy with which I might disagree. Reasonable, learned judges can – and often do – apply the law to a fact situation and come up with different opinions and they do so in the utmost of good faith and their best understanding of the law.
However, the minority opinion issued yesterday in the Wisconsin Supreme Court did not charge mistaken application of law. The opinion charged perversion of the facts and the law to meet a desired result.
If this is true, this is court corruption at its absolute worst and the people of Wisconsin cannot permit this to stand.
Amen, brother!
* * * * * end update * * * * (Now, back to our regularly scheduled posting.)
Really, there was no need to create a precedent here; the Supreme Court should’ve taken its time and decided this case solely on the narrow merits — did the Fitzgerald Brothers (Jeff in the Assembly, Scott in the Senate) break the Open Meetings Law, or not? Justice Sumi said they did; the three Supreme Court dissenters appeared to believe Sumi had done her job thoroughly and that more time needed to be given, by them, to figure out whether or not Sumi’s judgment was inherently flawed. But those four Rs apparently believed there was no need for deliberation; Scott and Jeff Fitzgerald said the case needed to be decided by Tuesday night, and thus, perhaps not so coincidentally, those Justices decided that case by Tuesday night.
This is why the recall elections are so important. Right now the Court (judicial branch) is in the hands of the Republican Party, the Governorship (the executive branch) is in the hands of the Republicans, and the Legislature (legislative branch) is also in the hands of the Republicans. This is too much power for any given party, and it must not be allowed to stand.
That some Republican Senators, like Alberta Darling (who will face a recall election on July 12, 2011) and my own R Senator Van Wanggaard, seem to think this was a good result and have said so, quite loudly and vociferously, just shows how out of touch they are. And how badly they need to be recalled, because they just aren’t listening to their own constituents, the people of the state of Wisconsin.
We know that times are tough. There would have been hard choices to make, economically, this year for any Governor, and any Legislature. But the choices being made thus far have disproportionately affected the low-income folks, the disabled, children, senior citizens, and the unemployed. This is no way to run a government, and it is not the Wisconsin way to throw people out just because right now they are ill, or injured, or have no money, or can’t give you a campaign donation.
Whoever our elected representatives are, regardless of their respective offices, they should be trying to do the best they can for all the people of Wisconsin. Writing a budget that cuts $800 million from the public schools and gives tax breaks to rich people so they can send their kids to private schools is plain, flat wrong — yet people like Darling and Wanggaard believe that’s the right way to go.
The only thing we can do, as voters, is educate ourselves as to what our representatives are doing. And then, if we disagree with them, as we have the power to recall our duly elected representatives in Wisconsin if we feel they are failing to do their jobs by listening to us and acknowledging our concerns in some way — then, it’s time to first recall them, then vote them out.
Those of you who have a Republican Senator, if you disagree with him or her, kick your Senator to the curb. And if you have a Democratic Senator who is up for recall, and you don’t agree with him — then you also have the right to vote him out. But I’d rather you concentrated on the folks who have proven they aren’t listening — the Republicans, who control all three branches of Wisconsin state government at this time — and re-install the checks and balances we depend upon by voting in someone new in those races against the six Republican Senators.
Voting the Rs out is the only way — the only way — to guarantee that your representatives, Dem or R, will start to listen. Because if the people of Wisconsin send a message by voting out those who aren’t listening, that should finally make the others listen, or be voted out in turn. (And yes, Van Wanggaard, I’m looking squarely at you.)
Hot, humid weather here — WI Republicans Try to Cheat
While trying to survive the extremely hot, humid weather here in Southeastern Wisconsin (high today is expected to be near 100), I’ve been looking on with bemusement at the Wisconsin Republican Party’s latest bunch of dirty tricks.
How about this headline? “Wisconsin Republicans Want Allies to Run as Democratic Protest Candidates in Recall Election Primaries.” And they’re not even denying that they’re doing it! Here’s a link — now here’s a quote:
Stephan Thompson, executive director of the Republican Party of Wisconsin, said in a statement Monday that Republican state senators face recalls for doing their jobs, unlike Democratic senators who he says deserted their constituents for Illinois.
Thompson said the Republican senators are busy crafting a state budget, which puts them at a disadvantage to challengers to have time to campaign.
“Because of this disadvantage, and the outrageous nature of elected officials facing recall for standing up for a balanced budget, the Republican Party of Wisconsin has advocated that protest candidates run in Democratic primaries to ensure that Republican legislators have ample time to communicate with voters throughout their districts after the state budget is approved,” he said in the statement.
By doing this, Republicans would force the Democratic challengers to spend money on a primary instead of saving it for the general election. Spoiler candidates could also launch negative attacks on the Democrats while the Republican incumbents stay out of the fray.
So, the head of the Rs thinks it’s perfectly fine to do this. Hmm.
Next, here’s the Democratic Party of Wisconsin (aka WisDems) response, from the same article:
The Democratic Party called on Republicans to stop their “Nixonion dirty tricks” and scheduled a news conference Monday afternoon with Democratic Senate Leader Mark Miller.
And now, today’s news from the Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel, where Scott Fitzgerald, the Senate Majority Leader (R-Juneau), admits he was behind this idea all the way:
Senate Majority Leader Scott Fitzgerald fully endorsed the idea Tuesday of fielding fake Democrats in recall elections against Republicans in an effort to delay the general elections.
“It gives us another month to campaign,” said the Republican from Juneau.
Recall elections for six Republican senators are scheduled for July 12. If there are multiple candidates from the same party in any of those elections, the July 12 election becomes a primary election and a general recall election will be scheduled for Aug. 9.
Now, here’s the “money quote” (or in this case, the “money area”) of this article, which is a follow-up to Daniel Bice’s yesterday MJS article:
Fitzgerald said Republicans would be recruited to run as Democrats — likely in all six races — so that the elections would be pushed back a month. He said he was persuaded by campaign staff that it was a good idea and consulted with state election officials to make sure it was allowed.
And what, pray tell, is Fitzgerald’s motivation for this? Supposedly, it’s to get back at the Dems because they supposedly ran a “fake R” in the 2010 election against one of the Rs. Going on:
Fitzgerald said the idea was developed in response to a fake Republican running last year against Rep. Bob Ziegelbauer of Manitowoc. Ziegelbauer was a Democrat who long voted with Republicans; he quit the Democratic Party last year and ran for re-election as an independent.
A fake Republican ran in an attempt to split the vote between him and Ziegelbauer, giving the Democrat a chance to take the seat. The move didn’t work, and Ziegelbauer kept his seat.
Mark Jefferson, the state Republican Party executive director at the time, called that move a “nasty, cynical ploy.”
Of course, the Dems deny this.
Going on, Fitzgerald says that:
“Recalling senators for taking a tough vote is just wrong.”
He also said holding the recall elections were costly for taxpayers. By forcing primaries with fake candidates, those costs will only climb.
So, the recalls against Rs are bad, but the three pending recalls against Dems for doing their jobs by leaving the state to deny a quorum are good? How is this logical?
Then, Fitzgerald says that “recalls are expensive,” then turns around and says that they should force primaries with silly, stupid “fake Dem” candidates to cause an even greater expense? How does this possibly make sense, even in an alternate universe?
I’m sorry, Mr. Fitzgerald. You do not get to “have your cake and eat it, too.” You can either be for the recalls, as your party might get a few of the Dems out — or you can be against the recalls, as your party will probably lose a number of seats. But you cannot be both, and you certainly cannot say that “recalls are expensive” while doing your level best to lengthen the process and make it even more expensive, because that does not fly.
This just goes to show you that the Republican Party in Wisconsin cannot be trusted if they’re willing to admit to these types of “dirty tricks” — and no matter how hot and humid it is, there’s no excuse whatsoever for the latest bunch of horrible behavior.
And to Mr. Fitzgerald, personally, I will say only this — I hope every single last Republican who voted for Gov. Walker’s “budget-repair” bill gets recalled as soon as legally permissible (for most, it’s next January). Including you.
Odds and Ends — including the End of the WI State Supreme Court race
I have so many different things to discuss right now that I’ve decided to make this an “odds and ends” post — otherwise known as a “quick hits” post.
The first is that the race for the Wisconsin state Supreme Court has come to an end as JoAnne Kloppenburg conceded. The recount, which I viewed from the beginning as a mandatory one due to the closeness of the vote and the chicanery going on in Waukesha County in particular, brought her a few hundred votes closer to David Prosser but not nearly enough for her, apparently, to keep on fighting despite the hundreds of irregularities and errors found in Waukesha County alone. Ms. Kloppenburg is a very good lawyer and knows the law regarding recounts much better than I do, so she must’ve felt that it was unlikely she’d win a court case, so prolonging the race any further made no sense to her.
My reaction to all of this, however, is that while I found out by observing the recount in Racine County for a day that our election proceedings here are on the up-and-up, I really think the election was stolen and that Ms. Kloppenburg was the true winner. I cannot prove this, and it’s possible no one will ever be able to prove it — or maybe someone will after the fact, as some observers did in Florida after the Bush v. Gore incident, or in Ohio with the numerous problems there in the 2004 election — but it’s how I feel.
I also feel that the state of Wisconsin has missed out, because Ms. Kloppenburg had an outstanding record and would’ve made a great judge. Republicans, especially of the Scott Walker variety, liked to paint Ms. Kloppenburg as a “liberal,” but what she really was happened to be an independent, someone who’d worked for both Republican and Democratic Governors. We needed a centrist on our extremely polarized Supreme Court, and we didn’t get it — what a terrible day for Wisconsin, and what an awful thing to have to say . . . but it’s all true, and it’s sad.
Now onto a happier update. Vinny Rottino hit .373 in May for the New Orleans Zephyrs (the AAA affiliate of the Florida Marlins); this was after suffering a 1-for-26 slump to start the season. Rottino has stolen 7 bases, being caught stealing twice; he’s hit 20 RBI, 2 HR, has 10 doubles and one triple, and his current on-base percentage is .407. Rottino now appears to be playing every day in right field and is playing excellent defense and a fine overall game while putting together another quiet, but good season as a contact hitter.
Here’s a story from nola.com that was written on May 15, 2011, about the Zephyrs and the hot-hitting Rottino in particular:
Vinny Rottino continued his hot hitting Saturday night, and New Orleans Zephyrs relievers continued their shut-down pitching.
The result was a 5-4 Zephyrs victory against Tacoma at Zephyr Field.
Rottino, who has reached base in 21 consecutive games, drove home the go-ahead run in a three-run rally in the sixth inning and also scored two runs.
And here’s what Rottino had to say about it all, especially his 1-for-26 start:
“I never panicked,’’ he said. “That’s the key. I’ve gone through spells like that before at the beginning of the year. … Now I feel pretty good at the plate, just waiting for the pitcher’s mistake. That’s the main thing.’’
Rottino’s game is similar to someone like the Brewers’ Nyjer Morgan; he’s speedy (though not as speedy as Morgan), he plays excellent defense and has a strong arm, and he’ll rarely make mistakes on the basepaths. Rottino plays all positions except pitcher and second base (unlike Morgan) including catcher (though he’s more of an emergency catcher due to taking it up late) and would be an asset to any major league team whose General Manager is using his brain today.
Finally, there’s the Milwaukee Brewers update. They actually won their first game against Cincinnati last night and Corey Hart hit yet another home run, raising his season total to five. Hart’s still not all the way back to last year’s All-Star form, but he’s looking good in the outfield and is hitting steadily now, with some power . . . though I’m a big fan of Hart, the best thing about the ’11 Brewers is that so far, their pitching has been anywhere from OK to outstanding, with Shawn Marcum and Randy Wolf in particular pitching much better than expected. (Yovani Gallardo is still a little inconsistent, though his last two-three games have been great, and Zack Greinke is still rounding himself into form. As for Chris Narveson, while he’s a very nice man and can pitch, he’s had some really rough outings lately. And I keep thinking the Brewers would’ve been better off to keep Chris Capuano, who’s doing well for the Mets despite a 3-5 record because of how poor the Mets are playing as a team.)
So that’s it for updates . . . what I’d encourage you to do is to keep your eye on Rottino (when he finally makes it to the majors to stay, that’ll be one of the best human interest stories of the past several years as he’s now thirty-one years old and has been the apparent victim of what I like to call “age prejudice” as most teams would rather look at a really young guy than an older one with a steady batting eye and a steady presence in the field), keep an eye on the Brewers (especially their pitchers), keep an eye on Capuano, and watch for the upcoming Wisconsin recall elections in July.
Statewide Recount in Judicial Race ends today; Waukesha County’s vote total is in
Today, the necessary recount for the April 5, 2011 Wisconsin state Supreme Court judicial race has ended as Waukesha County has finally finished recounting the votes. David Prosser still won Waukesha County with a similar vote total to his previous, though JoAnne Kloppenburg picked up 310 votes statewide; as previously written here, and elsewhere, Ms. Kloppenburg won the rest of the state of Wisconsin (though she didn’t win every county, overall, she was the winner) while she lost, and lost big, in the reddest Republican county in the state, Waukesha County.
This means that unofficially David Prosser has won the election by just over 7,000 votes according to the Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel. Please see this article for further details:
http://www.jsonline.com/news/statepolitics/122364728.html
Here’s a relevant quote:
Waukesha County finished its recount Friday, two weeks after the state’s other 71 counties completed theirs. The county next was to deliver its totals to the state Government Accountability Board.
In Waukesha County, the results showed both candidates gaining votes – 68 more for Prosser, 19 more for Kloppenburg – yielding a net gain of 49 votes for the incumbent.
The board, which oversees state elections, plans to certify the totals on Monday, board attorney Mike Haas said. Kloppenburg would have until May 31 to file a lawsuit over the results.
So there it is; because of repeated and extensive problems in Waukesha County, including torn bags, bags without proper numbers (poll workers write totals and usually then bags are supposed to be left undisturbed until/unless there is a statewide recount), and ballots left in strange places (the worst of these issues wasn’t in Waukesha; it instead was in Verona, which is in Dane County — there, ballots were left out of a bag and on a table, reason unknown), the vote totals reported in Waukesha County remain suspect. While there also were problems in other areas in the state, Waukesha County’s violations were by far the most egregious, starting with County Clerk Kathy Nickolaus’s problems in getting the proper vote total for Brookfield notated into her computer until 36 hours after the April 5, 2011 election ended.
I don’t know what Ms. Kloppenburg and her campaign manager, Melissa Mulliken, are going to do. But if the problems in Waukesha are as bad as I have been led to believe (I am a member of a group called Election Integrity, which has been giving unofficial first-hand results from observers in Waukesha County and elsewhere), they may indeed file suit and I wouldn’t blame them at all.
Everyone wants to believe that elections are fair and are conducted on the “up-and-up.” But we’ve found since Nickolaus’s eleventh-hour revelation that there have been severe and systemic problems in Waukesha County for years, with nothing whatsoever having been done about it for whatever reason. This has made me seriously question whether or not we really do have fair elections in Wisconsin despite observing on April 27, 2011 in Racine, Wisconsin for the Kloppenburg campaign and believing that Racine County’s elections, themselves, have been conducted fairly. (Note if David Prosser’s folks had asked me to observe for them, I would’ve done it, though I proudly cast my vote for Ms. Kloppenburg in the April 5, 2011 election. I firmly believe Ms. Kloppenburg’s credentials, working for both Republican and Democratic Governors as one of the state Assistant Attorneys-General, are outstanding, and I believe that if she is ever freely and fairly elected in Wisconsin, she will make an outstanding Justice of the Wisconsin Supreme Court.)
The whole question now is, has whatever happened in Waukesha County tainted this entire election? (In my mind, that answer is a clear “yes,” but I don’t know how that would work in court.) And have there been enough problems in Waukesha County to warrant tossing out that entire county’s votes and making them vote again? Because that possibly would be the fairest way to go about it, with many observers in every polling place in the county, to make absolutely sure that every legitimate vote (for whomever) is counted properly. And Kathy Nickolaus, if she hasn’t resigned or been recalled by then, should play no part in this, just as she played no part in the state-wide recount . . . her job performance has been proven to be amazingly weak — and I don’t say that lightly — and she should count herself extremely lucky to have been gainfully employed, much less making $67,000 a year, considering how much she appears to have screwed up during her tenure on the job.
I believe this recount was a mandatory one — the only thing the state could do to restore any faith in free and fair elections — and I know the problems in Waukesha County have been proven to be extensive on a variety of counts. The only thing now is to see how it plays out, and I promise you, I will stay on this story and post updates as appropriate.
Brewers win, 4-3, as Greinke pitches well; recount update
Folks, tonight I’m glad to be a Milwaukee Brewers fan. Zack Greinke pitched well in his first appearance at Miller Park, going six innings, giving up two runs with no walks and getting nine strikeouts. This excellent performance, along with some unusually fine defense, was why the Brewers won tonight over the San Diego Padres, 4-3.
Note that the much-maligned of late bullpen pitched reasonably well also, with LaTroy Hawkins pitching a scoreless seventh, Kameron Loe giving up a run in the 8th due to a run scoring while a double play was in the process of being made, then John Axford picked up his sixth save by pitching a scoreless ninth.
Here’s a link to more about the game from the Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel story: http://www.jsonline.com/sports/brewers/121536504.html
As for tonight’s mandatory recount in the Wisconsin state Supreme Court election, held on 4/5/2011, a judge allowed Waukesha County two and a half more weeks to get its entire count done. But as Craig Gilbert of the Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel pointed out, JoAnne Kloppenburg has an uphill battle on her hands if she’s to win this recount with only Waukesha County remaining as it is known to be the “reddest” Republican county in the entire state.
Here’s the link to his story dated today, May 9, 2011:
http://www.jsonline.com/news/statepolitics/121496219.html
And a relevant quote from Mr. Gilbert:
With the recount in the April 5 Supreme Court race now complete in every county but Waukesha, JoAnne Kloppenburg has sliced a mere 355 votes off David Prosser’s lead of 7,316 votes, underscoring the extreme odds against Kloppenburg emerging victorious in the fiercely contested judicial contest.
In effect, Kloppenburg would have to gain 6,962 votes in one county – Waukesha – after gaining a tiny fraction of that in the recount of all the state’s other counties.
In those 71 counties recounted so far, Kloppenburg has made a net pick-up of one vote for every 3,873 votes cast.
In Waukesha County, she would have to make a net pick-up of one vote for every 18 votes cast.
And that math actually understates the improbability of a successful outcome for Kloppenburg because about 30% of Waukesha County has already completed the recount process. So far, there’s a net gain of 18 votes for Prosser.
But here’s the main reason why Kloppenburg had to pursue the recount, IMO:
Without taking Waukesha County into account, Kloppenburg leads in the other 71 counties by 712,910 to 660,366, for a margin of 52,544 votes.
So you see how close this election was, state-wide, right?
Here’s the rub:
But based on the election canvass, Prosser carried Waukesha County by 59,505 votes out of a total of 125,021 votes cast.
The problem is, the vote total is in question all because of Kathy Nickolaus’s actions not just in finally figuring out she hadn’t counted the Brookfield tally until a day and a half after the election had ended (and everyone in the state save the folks in Brookfield who knew their vote totals weren’t properly reflected in the count thought JoAnne Kloppenburg had won by about 200 votes), but in several previous elections.
As I’ve said before, there are problems in Waukesha County that go back not just to 2008, but actually to 2004. (See this link for further details: https://elfyverse.wordpress.com/2011/04/18/recount-necessary-for-one-waukesha-county-voting-irregularities-go-back-to-2004/) Seven years ago, there were problems. Again, five years ago, there were problems. Then three years ago, there were more problems, yet nothing was ever done by the Government Accountability Board, the Wisconsin state Senate or Assembly (or both), or anyone else, because despite all these systematic problems, apparently no one was paying attention.
If this recount has done nothing else, it has at least assured me that the voters of Wisconsin will be paying attention to Waukesha County for a long, long time to come. And that the way Waukesha County conducts their future elections had best be a whole lot better — more ethical, above-board, understandable, comprehensible, and transparent — than they have for the past seven years. Minimum.
Otherwise, as I’ve said before, we in Wisconsin will have no faith at all that our elections mean anything at all.
Barb Caffrey's Blog 