tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-31462382624036187132024-03-05T17:56:09.758-06:00Wisconsin Political FixCommon Cause in Wisconsin's BlogUnknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger299125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3146238262403618713.post-12821866247125479172019-07-13T17:38:00.000-05:002019-07-13T17:38:15.916-05:00“He’s a liar and the truth ain’t in him” – WILLIAM O. KNIGHT<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhXLLjGJyIu349S7DkE5W9D8wXCB4iHpnSELn3q42cUM364LJtNEf6s9KS3d1HIRnPuxa_2LvrSNVbWDgGWBNxOoVf9MRd8rwS_26Ubl9ffJAn6Q9mllLfi9XcnBc5C0M1I4H3B981GjvE/s1600/Frazier_670x470.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 0em; margin-right: .75em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhXLLjGJyIu349S7DkE5W9D8wXCB4iHpnSELn3q42cUM364LJtNEf6s9KS3d1HIRnPuxa_2LvrSNVbWDgGWBNxOoVf9MRd8rwS_26Ubl9ffJAn6Q9mllLfi9XcnBc5C0M1I4H3B981GjvE/s170/Frazier_670x470.jpg" /></a><i><br />
<span style="font-size: 95%; font-style: italic;">By </span>Tom Frazier</i><br />
<br />
I have been “involved” in Wisconsin politics for nearly 40 years, first as director of the Coalition of Wisconsin Aging Groups for 27 years, where I was CWAG’s paid lobbyist, and as a volunteer since my retirement a little over 10 years ago. I have seen a lot of changes over that time period and, unfortunately, the changes have not been good. <br />
<br />
The major changes have been pretty obvious, such as all the money in politics that was caused, in large part, by the U. S. Supreme Court decision in the <i>Citizens United </i>case that opened the floodgates for private corporate donations to political campaigns. This is bad enough just on the face of it, but is made much worse by the fact that most of it is made by wealthy donors who are able to hide these donations from the general public. This means that you do not know who made the donation, but the people running for office who benefit from them know damn well where they came from and who they owe for them. <br />
<br />
And to add insult to injury these secret donations are now being used to help judicial nominees either get elected (e.g. Wisconsin Supreme Court) or get appointed (e.g. the U.S. Supreme Court). So if wealthy individuals and/or corporations can’t get what they want through the legislative process, they can get what they want from the judicial branch of government. As you well know, the vast majority of us do not have enough money to influence elections or appointments. Our voices are muted. <br />
<br />
When I retired at the end of 2009, I thought things couldn’t get much worse. Boy, was I wrong. <br />
<br />
<a name='more'></a>The latest trick to take away power from the people is something called “voter suppression” and it takes several iterations. For example, Wisconsin has adopted one of the most punitive “voter ID” laws in the country, despite the fact that voter impersonation is for all intents and purposes non-existent. The objective is to suppress the votes, especially of minorities, elderly and disabled people and poor people, who might be more inclined to vote for Democrats instead of Republicans (if you don’t believe that this is partisan, simply ask which political party is passing these laws). Our voices are muted. Other forms of voter suppression include cutting back on the number of hours that the polls are open and reducing the number of hours that people can vote on evenings and weekends. <br />
<br />
Perhaps the most diabolical form of voter suppression is called “Gerrymandering.” This is where voting districts are manipulated so that one party (the one drawing the maps) is assured of getting a majority of their candidates elected or, more likely, re-elected, thereby maintaining a one-party majority. Again, our voices are muted. <br />
<br />
When I retired, I had just started to notice that state Representatives and Senators had a new standard for passing legislation or budgets—they no longer needed facts and data but it was enough to just believe that they were correct no matter what evidence might contradict that belief. And, even this has gotten worse, much worse. It has evolved into being okay to simply lie in support of what a politician wants; it doesn’t make any difference how many “fact checks” prove that it is a lie. The answer is to tell yet another lie. We have our President to thank for this abnormality. Our voices are muted by lying. <br />
<br />
My grandfather, William O. Knight, who was born in 1880 used to say that “he is a liar and the truth ain’t in him.” Lately, I have been thinking more and more about his old-fashioned statement and how seldom he said it. If lying is not illegal, then it is up to those of us who do not believe lying in any form equates to good government to stop electing liars who, as my grandfather would say, do not have the truth in them!<br />
<br />
<br />
<hr /><br />
<i>Tom Frazier is a member of the Common Cause in Wisconsin State Governing Board, and was the executive director of the Coalition of Wisconsin Aging Groups from 1983 to 2010.</i>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3146238262403618713.post-31573459674157326752019-02-15T14:16:00.000-06:002019-02-15T14:16:22.522-06:00The "Other" Wisconsin: Why Medicaid Expansion is the Smart, Compassionate, and Fiscally Responsible Thing to Do<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhXLLjGJyIu349S7DkE5W9D8wXCB4iHpnSELn3q42cUM364LJtNEf6s9KS3d1HIRnPuxa_2LvrSNVbWDgGWBNxOoVf9MRd8rwS_26Ubl9ffJAn6Q9mllLfi9XcnBc5C0M1I4H3B981GjvE/s1600/Frazier_670x470.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 0em; margin-right: .75em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhXLLjGJyIu349S7DkE5W9D8wXCB4iHpnSELn3q42cUM364LJtNEf6s9KS3d1HIRnPuxa_2LvrSNVbWDgGWBNxOoVf9MRd8rwS_26Ubl9ffJAn6Q9mllLfi9XcnBc5C0M1I4H3B981GjvE/s170/Frazier_670x470.jpg" /></a><i><br />
<span style="font-size: 95%; font-style: italic;">By </span>Tom Frazier</i><br />
<br />
If a man from Mars had watched Governor Ever’s State of the State address, and the Republican response given by Speaker Vos, I believe that he would have concluded that they were talking about two different states. <br />
<br />
In a way, they were. <br />
<br />
I think that Speaker Vos was talking about the Wisconsin where well-to-do individuals and corporations are thriving in our economy, and Governor Evers was talking about the “Other” Wisconsin where people such as children, minorities and lower income are not thriving and, therefore, need help with things like healthcare. Unfortunately, there are too many people still living in the Other Wisconsin and we need to stop ignoring them. <br />
<br />
Perhaps nothing illustrates this dichotomy more than the issue of Medicaid expansion that the Governor plans to include in his 2019-2021 state budget, and that the Speaker is adamantly opposed to. As a part of the Affordable Care Act (ACA) states could choose to expand the Federal/State funded healthcare program for the poor by increasing the income eligibility to 133% of the Federal Poverty Level (FPL). As an incentive the federal matching rate would be 100% for the first few years gradually decreasing to 90% in 2020 and beyond. This compares to the average Wisconsin rate of 58-59%. <br />
<br />
<a name='more'></a>According to the Legislative Fiscal Bureau, a nonpartisan legislative agency, Wisconsin could have increased federal funding by $2.8 billion and saved $1billion in state tax money if it had started full expansion (133% FPL) on April 1, 2014, the date the state started partial expansion (100% FPL). The savings results from the significantly higher federal matching rate that did not apply to partial expansion. <br />
<br />
I remember a time when previous Governors would have “laughed all the way to the bank” with a deal this good. <br />
<br />
Also, if you are thinking why people above the FPL should be eligible, it is because the FPL is very low with 133% being only $16,612 annually for an individual and $34,248 for a family of four. The Legislative Fiscal Bureau estimates that 76,000 more people (a little more than the population of the City of Waukesha) would be eligible for Medicaid healthcare under full expansion. <br />
<br />
Even though Wisconsin has missed the opportunity for the huge increases in federal funds and huge savings in state funds, there is still a big upside to expanding Medicaid in the 2019-2021 budget. Again, the Fiscal Bureau indicates that full expansion in the next state budget would add $793 million in federal funds and a savings of nearly $280 million in state tax dollars. The state savings could then be used for other state priorities such as transportation, education, or healthcare. <br />
<br />
Speaker Vos claims that Medicaid expansion is “socialized medicine” or “government run healthcare.” It isn’t either. Medicaid healthcare is provided by private doctors, clinics, and hospitals. Doctors may choose whether or not to participate in the Medicaid program. Just as Foxconn, a private corporation, could have chosen not to accept $4billion from state and local governments. In both cases, Medicaid and Foxconn, the government is contracting for something of value and if one is Socialism so is the other one. <br />
<br />
In 1962 Michael Harrington authored a book entitled <i>The Other America</i> that was a study of poverty in the United States. The book is credited by some people for influencing the development of healthcare programs such as Medicare and Medicaid. Now the issue of healthcare is back in the national and state spotlights because we need to improve upon what was initiated back in the 1960s. The benefits from Medicaid expansion to lower income families and the state are pretty obvious but as long as some politicians can’t see that there are thousands of Wisconsin citizens who live in the Other Wisconsin, where they are unable to thrive, it will be harder than it should be.<br />
<br />
Having access to healthcare will help them thrive if we are smart, compassionate, and fiscally responsible. <br />
<br />
<hr /><br />
<i>Tom Frazier is a member of the Common Cause in Wisconsin State Governing Board, and was the executive director of the Coalition of Wisconsin Aging Groups from 1983 to 2010.</i>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3146238262403618713.post-68752599337058755752018-12-02T22:43:00.000-06:002018-12-02T22:44:48.883-06:00Sore Losers and Lame Ducks Should Not Overturn the Will of the People<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgTDzYYQ1f4XUCTf9yuGNbPwhr3br2H_0rKUzwdD8utMUP1JNvEAqyWL247ElMFSUNMiOXGt70I8rnTLAX6NPbEue6quSWgTgXi5iDsKF-4LlH62xpP3gOzo-IwrWBMiHMgocnZG8jZeps/s1600/Roger+Utnehmer_120px.png" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 0em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgTDzYYQ1f4XUCTf9yuGNbPwhr3br2H_0rKUzwdD8utMUP1JNvEAqyWL247ElMFSUNMiOXGt70I8rnTLAX6NPbEue6quSWgTgXi5iDsKF-4LlH62xpP3gOzo-IwrWBMiHMgocnZG8jZeps/s1600/Roger+Utnehmer_120px.png" /></a><br />
<i>By Roger Utnehmer</i><br />
<br />
Sore losers and lame ducks are about to try to steal a Supreme Court seat, restrict voting in Wisconsin and subvert the will of the people expressed in the elections of Governor-elect Tony Evers and Attorney General-elect Josh Kaul.<br />
<br />
Republican legislative leaders are attempting to take power away from Evers and Kaul, rig the 2020 Supreme Court race to favor a conservative justice and make it more difficult for Wisconsin citizens to vote. The special legislative session starting Tuesday should be repudiated as the unconstitutional power grab that it is.<br />
<br />
<a name='more'></a>Legislators have drawn district boundaries so that less than 10% of the 132 districts in Wisconsin are competitive. That gives incumbents the advantage of protection and perpetuates the party in power. And years earlier, Democrats were just as corrupt when they had the power to draw district boundaries.<br />
<br />
Legislative leaders have stated publicly that spending $7 million of taxpayer money to move a Supreme Court election to March will benefit their conservative candidate. Combined with their effort to further restrict absentee voting, Republican legislators are shamefully making it more difficult for people to vote. Democracy is better served when more people participate in the process, not less.<br />
<br />
Restricting the power of a newly-elected governor as Republicans propose reeks of being sore losers. The same kind of power grab in North Carolina was ruled unconstitutional.<br />
<br />
The special legislative session should be canceled. Legislators need to respect the will of the people who elected Evers and Kaul.<br />
<br />
And at the very least they should leave legislating to regular sessions when the process is transparent and deliberative.<br />
<br />
<hr><br />
<span style="font-size: 90%; font-style: italic;">Roger Utnehmer is President and CEO of DoorCountyDailyNews.com, and a member of Common Cause in Wisconsin's State Governing Board. <br />
<br />
</span>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3146238262403618713.post-15518459948515846712018-09-03T12:52:00.000-05:002018-09-03T12:52:21.899-05:00Voters Needed to Save Democracy<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhgGXhaQBFJjDV4v_Ske5O7dl50q77P5Tc_vZghvrdZ4AJEQoAHv0aU2wRzCpU-wvR5QF-eh611q3Q7TY_zh5kSKjGTGTz1HKzB9mEt71S6REqKAATKoTwA_E3OoG8IB1uSrXr-ce0uiIw/s1600/Cal+Potter.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 0em; margin-right: 1em; margin-top: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhgGXhaQBFJjDV4v_Ske5O7dl50q77P5Tc_vZghvrdZ4AJEQoAHv0aU2wRzCpU-wvR5QF-eh611q3Q7TY_zh5kSKjGTGTz1HKzB9mEt71S6REqKAATKoTwA_E3OoG8IB1uSrXr-ce0uiIw/s175/Cal+Potter.jpg" /></a><br />
<span style="font-style: italic;"><br />
By Cal Potter</span><br />
<br />
There are some elections which prove to be more important than others in the operation of our democracy. One such election is this November. This importance will require voters truly concerned about the health of our nation's democracy to put the current state of hyper-partisanship, and too often single issue voting, aside and do some broader candidate analysis.<br />
<br />
Since the Citizens United court decision, with corporations now considered persons and unlimited campaign spending part of free speech, we have seen a flood of special interest money flow into campaigns, fueling the purchase of literally thousands of inane, purely character assassination media ads. At this writing, the Koch brothers alone have already spent over six million dollars trying to defeat U.S. Senator Tammy Baldwin. We must elect candidates who will stop this insane campaign spending, and return to elections which solve our nation's real problems.<br />
<br />
<a name='more'></a>Gerrymandered legislative districts have created a majority of safe districts drawn by politicians solely for their own job security, and which disenfranchise millions of voters who are not of the favored party in those districts. Rigged districts have often made the general election irrelevant, and the low turn-out primary the true election. In a contested primary, the winner with a single digit percentage of the total low vote cast can realistically become the officeholder. We need candidates who support non-politician drawers of the districts which respect voters, community of interest, and media coverage areas.<br />
<br />
Difficult to obtain voter ID cards, purged voter rolls, closed strategic polling places, purposely posted wrong voting information, and false postings aimed at creating further societal divisions and unrest, are all fully in place and operational in today's United States. Some of the latter, aided and abetted by Russian computer experts who even colluded with unscrupulous U.S. campaigns, are not only illegal but treasonous. There are hundreds of politicians in office today who have created this shameful situation, or at least sit by silently, only because these outrageous practices benefit them and their political party. We need candidates who will work to stop the above war on our nation's democracy, punish the offenders, and enact further voting enhancements and voter safeguards.<br />
<br />
Our democracy has been hijacked by selfish special and monied interests, turning our democracy from of, for, and by the people to one serving the few. The tools they have put in place to accomplish and perpetuate this condition are terrible and shameful. When you vote, cast your vote for candidates who will address and stop the practices and activities which are rotting away at our democracy.<br />
<br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: 88%;"><i> <b>Calvin Potter</b>, of Sheboygan Falls, was a Democratic State Representative from 1975 to 1991 and a Wisconsin State Senator from 1991 to 1999. He currently serves on the Common Cause in Wisconsin State Governing Board.</i></span>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3146238262403618713.post-32089058161594118352018-06-13T09:29:00.000-05:002018-06-13T13:28:08.577-05:00Wisconsin Government Infected With Political Equivalent of Emerald Ash Borer<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgTDzYYQ1f4XUCTf9yuGNbPwhr3br2H_0rKUzwdD8utMUP1JNvEAqyWL247ElMFSUNMiOXGt70I8rnTLAX6NPbEue6quSWgTgXi5iDsKF-4LlH62xpP3gOzo-IwrWBMiHMgocnZG8jZeps/s1600/Roger+Utnehmer_120px.png" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 0em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgTDzYYQ1f4XUCTf9yuGNbPwhr3br2H_0rKUzwdD8utMUP1JNvEAqyWL247ElMFSUNMiOXGt70I8rnTLAX6NPbEue6quSWgTgXi5iDsKF-4LlH62xpP3gOzo-IwrWBMiHMgocnZG8jZeps/s1600/Roger+Utnehmer_120px.png" /></a><br />
<i>By Roger Utnehmer</i><br />
<br />
All three branches of Wisconsin government continue to be infected with the political equivalent of the emerald ash borer. The Supreme Court, the Legislature and the Governor’s office are under the influence of far too much special interest money and the corruption it breeds.<br />
<br />
Our state Supreme Court refuses to adopt rules that would require justices receiving significant sums of money from special interests to recuse themselves from voting. When cases impacting those donors come before them, justices who benefit from massive expenditures should not vote on the case. An IQ exceeding room temperature is not required to question if a justice benefiting from millions of dollars of campaign spending really will be objective when voting on matters that impact the donors. It appears that special interest groups have discovered it is easier to buy a Supreme Court than a legislature.<br />
<br />
The Speaker of the Assembly, Robin Vos, took a four-day trip to London in 2017, accompanied by and paid for in part, by lobbyists for the pay-day loan industry. Vos claimed he did not discuss pay-day loans with industry lobbyists on the trip. A junket paid for by the insidious industry that preys on the poorest among us smells worse than the stale cigar smoke surrounding their secret deal-making meetings.<br />
<br />
<a name='more'></a>Robin Vos should avoid the appearance of a conflict of interest and pay for his own British vacation. The former speaker of the Ohio House of Representatives resigned after accepting the interest-group-financed travel.<br />
<br />
In Wisconsin, elected officials pick their voters rather than voters picking their elected officials. Taking the power to determine legislative district boundaries away from partisan politicians will be one step of many to restore trust to a troubled government. Reapportionment reform is long overdue.<br />
<br />
Governor Scott Walker holds an office once admired and emulated throughout America for progressive reform. Today it is referred to as a wholly-owned subsidiary of the Koch Brothers and big money special interests. Massive campaign donations, travel at a special interest-group expense by Robin Vos, and big money to elect Supreme Court justices are nothing but sanitized corruption.<br />
<br />
Call it what it is. The sanitized bribery of big money is infecting every branch of state government and threatening democracy more than the emerald ash borer is threatening Wisconsin forests.<br />
<br />
The day will come when Wisconsin voters remember our lost pride in Progressive tradition and clean government. The smell of corruption reeks from our state capitol. Bipartisan corruption, dependence on campaign cash, refusal of justices to recuse themselves from cases that involve their donors and a globe-trotting Assembly speaker who should pay for his own vacations will hopefully cause voters to finally get fed up and take action to make the sweeping changes Wisconsin needs and deserves.<br />
<br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: 90%; font-style: italic;">Roger Utnehmer is President and CEO of DoorCountyDailyNews.com, and a long-time member of Common Cause in Wisconsin's State Governing Board. <br />
<br />
</span>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3146238262403618713.post-7802055527645433522018-02-12T00:00:00.000-06:002018-02-27T09:26:50.465-06:00Stronger Judicial Recusal Rules Vital for an Impartial State Judiciary<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiK6Gf6yIrE1BIpLKMYxXAoLuRLX8MKE24O_FlfedUvBNgaGrA9SqtgL_5FOVKcoe07r2fiAI9bMsdl7NGyAg8hlp0H-pPXTecdPZdDvIWNa7YMqXh71F8Zhbq1jepKvybodogvjHcPBNk/s1600/Jay+Heck_Hi+Res.png" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1456" data-original-width="1066" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiK6Gf6yIrE1BIpLKMYxXAoLuRLX8MKE24O_FlfedUvBNgaGrA9SqtgL_5FOVKcoe07r2fiAI9bMsdl7NGyAg8hlp0H-pPXTecdPZdDvIWNa7YMqXh71F8Zhbq1jepKvybodogvjHcPBNk/s150/Jay+Heck_Hi+Res.png" /></a></div><br />
<br />
<span style="font-style: italic;">By Jay Heck</span><br />
<br />
Wisconsin, from statehood in 1848 to about a decade ago, in 2007, had a national reputation for having among the most respected, impartial, non-partisan, fair and trusted state court systems in the nation. Much of this was because there was a generally-held belief among all Wisconsinites of all political persuasions and ideologies that the courts should be “above politics as usual.” In order to maintain the confidence of the citizenry, judges and justices of the Wisconsin Supreme Court had to be scrupulously non-partisan and impartial and not be perceived as having been compromised by outside lobbying pressure, campaign contributions, or other political influence.<br />
<br />
For decades, this standard not only survived, but flourished and as recently as the early 2000’s the Wisconsin Supreme Court was held up by legal experts across the country as the “gold standard” for how Justices should be elected and serve once in office in a state supreme court. The Wisconsin Court of Appeals, the 72 county circuit courts and the hundreds of municipal court judges also were perceived as having the highest standards for impartiality, non-partisanship and fairness across the state. And while Wisconsin legislators fell into public disrepute in the aftermath of the worst political scandal in the state in a century – the Legislative Caucus Scandal of 2001-2002, the reputation of state courts were not only unaffected by the legislative scandal, but enhanced in their execution of equal justice under the law.<br />
<br />
<a name='more'></a>However, the landscape began to shift about a decade ago when outside special interest groups, for the first time, began to pour millions of dollars into the election of two State Supreme Court Justices, one each in 2007 and in 2008. The expenditures made by these conservative business organizations: principally the Wisconsin Club for Growth and Wisconsin Manufacturers & Commerce, proved to be pivotal, particularly in 2008 when an incumbent Justice on the Wisconsin Supreme Court was defeated in a nasty, vicious, scurrilous campaign in which a record amount of money was spent – more than $8 million. It marked only the second time in state history that an incumbent state supreme court justice was defeated for election.<br />
<br />
There had really been no recusal standard for justices or for other court judges receiving campaign contributions or benefiting from “independent” spending by outside interest groups up to that time because campaign money was not a significant factor in judicial elections. That changed with the 2007 and 2008 state supreme court elections. In 2009, in reaction to the unprecedented amount of money spend in the 2007 and 2008 elections, the League of Women Voters of Wisconsin petitioned the Wisconsin Supreme Court to adopt a recusal rule that would force a Justice to recuse her or himself from a case in which one of the parties in the case had donated $1,000 or more to a justice, either directly, or to an outside special interest group spending in support of that justice’s campaign for election to the State Supreme Court. It was rejected by a 4 to 3 vote of the Wisconsin Supreme Court. <br />
<br />
The following year, in 2010, the U.S. Supreme Court handed down its controversial <i>Citizens United v. F.E.C.</i> decision, which effectively opened the way for corporations and other outside groups to make unlimited expenditures in behalf of candidates, including judges. Despite this, and shortly thereafter, the Wisconsin Supreme Court voted 4 to 3 to adopt, verbatim, a recusal rule written by Wisconsin Manufacturers & Commerce and the Wisconsin Realtors Association, which said that Justices could choose whether to recuse themselves from a case but that receiving a campaign contribution of any size from one or more of the parties in the case need not disqualify them from hearing and adjudicating the case.<br />
<br />
In 2011, the Wisconsin Legislature and Gov. Scott Walker repealed the Impartial Justice Law, which had been enacted in 2009, and had provided full public financing of elections of candidates for the Wisconsin Supreme Court who voluntarily agreed to limit their total spending to $400,000. In 2015, Walker and the Legislature repealed longstanding prohibitions on campaign coordination between candidates and “independent” outside interest groups, thereby effectively eviscerating contribution limits for all elections in Wisconsin.<br />
<br />
The result of all these actions has been that much more money, most of it undisclosed and unregulated, is flowing into elections in Wisconsin, including into non-partisan judicial elections at all levels. It was in this context and very different and new political environment that 54 retired jurists from all over Wisconsin, including two former State Supreme Court Justices <b><a href="http://www.wisbar.org/NewsPublications/Pages/General-Article.aspx?ArticleID=25339">petitioned the Wisconsin Supreme Court about a year ago to adopt strong and clear recusal rules for Justices and Judges at all levels with specific thresholds that would trigger mandatory recusal from cases</a></b>. Wisconsin was found to have the fourth weakest judicial recusal rules in the nation and these retired jurists sounded the alarm.<br />
<br />
While Common Cause in Wisconsin and other reform organizations and individuals were permitted to submit <b><a href="http://www.commoncausewisconsin.org/2017/04/wisconsin-supreme-court-should-adopt.html#RecusalLetter">written comments in support</a></b> (or opposing) the petition, the conservative majority of 5 justices voted against conducting any public hearings on the petition. The two other justices voted to conduct them. Similarly, on April 20. 2017, by the same vote, the Supreme Court rejected the petition of the retired jurists and kept the current policy of self-recusal in place. <br />
<br />
But Common Cause in Wisconsin and the retired judges worked to “revive” the issue of judicial recusal in Wisconsin that had been seemingly buried with the Supreme Court’s action of April 20th. <br />
<br />
The result was placement of a <a href="https://www.jsonline.com/story/opinion/contributors/2017/07/28/heck-sensible-recusal-rules-needed-wisconsin/520191001/"><b>guest editorial on judicial recusal in Wisconsin’s largest daily newspaper</b></a>, and the organization and execution of three public hearings in Wisconsin’s three largest cities during the month of October, 2017: <b><a href="http://www.commoncausewisconsin.org/2017/09/ccwi-to-hold-judicial-recusal-town-hall.html">in Green Bay on the 2nd</a></b>, <b><a href="http://www.commoncausewisconsin.org/2017/10/judicial-recusal-town-hall-public.html">in Milwaukee on the 11th</a></b> and <b><a href="http://www.commoncausewisconsin.org/2017/10/tonight-in-madison-judicial-recusal.html">in Madison on the 24th</a></b>. More than 300 citizens attended and participated in the three public hearings and more than 1,000 more viewed and participated in them through Facebook Live. Thousands more citizens have viewed the videos of the public hearings, including the <a href="http://www.wiseye.org/Video-Archive/Event-Detail/evhdid/11939"><b>widely distributed and viewed program by<i> Wisconsin Eye</i></b></a>, the statewide video access channel/service, of the Madison public hearing. Two former State Supreme Court Justices, three former County Circuit Court Justices and a distinguished law professor and former candidate for the State Supreme Court joined CC/WI as panelists for the hearings.<br />
<br />
As a result, interest has been rekindled and elevated in the issue of judicial recusal in Wisconsin and it is a central issue in the upcoming April 2018 election to fill a vacancy on the State Supreme Court. Two of the leading candidates for the position announced their support for strong recusal rules at the CC/WI public hearings. One other, recently, has announced his opposition to stronger recusal rules, citing “free speech” concerns.<br />
<br />
Last October, after two public hearings on this issue had been held in the state, Public Policy Polling of Raleigh, NC polled Wisconsinites on a number of issues, including two on judicial elections and recusal rules, The answers to the two questions showed that 83 percent of Wisconsinites strongly or somewhat support greater disclosure of campaign contributions and spending in judicial elections, while only 10 percent strongly or somewhat oppose greater disclosure. Similarly, 82 percent of Wisconsinites strongly or somewhat favor the adoption of stronger recusal rules for judges while only 12 percent strongly or somewhat oppose them. <br />
<u>Clearly, citizens in Wisconsin support stronger election campaign finance disclosure and stronger judicial recusal rules</u>.<br />
<br />
Stronger judicial recusal rules have emerged as a front and center issue in the Supreme Court and other judicial elections in April. The fairness and impartiality of our judges depends mightily on their separation from the effect and influence of campaign contributors and outside, special interest campaign spending groups. You can advance this needed reform in Wisconsin by insisting that the Wisconsin Supreme Court, and judges at all levels support stronger recusal rules.<br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: 93%;"><i>Jay Heck is the executive director of Common Cause in Wisconsin, the state’s largest non-partisan citizen reform advocacy organization. <br />
<br />
For more information go to their website: <a href="http://commoncausewisconsin.org/">commoncausewisconsin.org</a> or call 608-256-2686.</i></span>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3146238262403618713.post-45555928169097109852017-12-22T15:47:00.000-06:002017-12-22T15:47:20.460-06:00Time to Defend Our Democracy<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhgGXhaQBFJjDV4v_Ske5O7dl50q77P5Tc_vZghvrdZ4AJEQoAHv0aU2wRzCpU-wvR5QF-eh611q3Q7TY_zh5kSKjGTGTz1HKzB9mEt71S6REqKAATKoTwA_E3OoG8IB1uSrXr-ce0uiIw/s1600/Cal+Potter.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 0em; margin-right: 1em; margin-top: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhgGXhaQBFJjDV4v_Ske5O7dl50q77P5Tc_vZghvrdZ4AJEQoAHv0aU2wRzCpU-wvR5QF-eh611q3Q7TY_zh5kSKjGTGTz1HKzB9mEt71S6REqKAATKoTwA_E3OoG8IB1uSrXr-ce0uiIw/s175/Cal+Potter.jpg" /></a><br />
<span style="font-style: italic;"><br />
By Cal Potter</span><br />
<br />
Russia extensively meddled to influence our political and social views, shown through thousands of social media/internet posts, many paid for in Rubles. This tactic is illegal, a modern attack on our nation, and the political hacks who aided and abetted this effort are also guilty of a crime. <br />
<br />
Putin and his oligarchy cronies have stolen billions of dollars from the Russian economy, diverting and laundering that treasure via foreign banks and investments. This theft is tragic for the Russian people, and a crime. Those who helped in this heist in any manner also engaged in criminal activity, and should be held accountable.<br />
<br />
The Mueller investigation into the above is essential for the rule of law and defense of our democracy. Failure to thoroughly investigate and prosecute these illegal acts would be a despicable derelict of duty, and disrespect of our national heritage.<br />
<br />
<a name='more'></a>Current White House and Congressional majority efforts to hinder and derail Mueller's work is another display that political partisanship takes precedence in today's politics. Through recent Republican political dominance, including successful gerrymandering of legislative districts, primaries have become the election. Officeholders in this environment say little against the President and the above crimes for fear of a primary challenge, and a resultant loss brought about by the votes of ardent Trump supporters in the Republican Party. <br />
<br />
Failure to support Mueller's investigation, discrediting our justice agencies, and raising false diversionary issues, should be seen as an insult to the American people and an affront to our democracy. Party politics gone mad is indefensible, and really a crime against the rule of law.<br />
<br />
Failure to address these wrongs will be a sign that our political system is more like a third world dictatorship than a shining example of how democracy and the rule of law should work.<br />
<br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: 88%;"><i> <b>Calvin Potter</b>, of Sheboygan Falls, was a Democratic State Representative from 1975 to 1991 and a Wisconsin State Senator from 1991 to 1999. He currently serves on the Common Cause in Wisconsin State Governing Board.</i></span>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3146238262403618713.post-57575791075918027012017-10-17T08:29:00.000-05:002017-10-17T08:29:05.282-05:00UW Study Documents Problems with Voter ID<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhXLLjGJyIu349S7DkE5W9D8wXCB4iHpnSELn3q42cUM364LJtNEf6s9KS3d1HIRnPuxa_2LvrSNVbWDgGWBNxOoVf9MRd8rwS_26Ubl9ffJAn6Q9mllLfi9XcnBc5C0M1I4H3B981GjvE/s1600/Frazier_670x470.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 0em; margin-right: .75em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhXLLjGJyIu349S7DkE5W9D8wXCB4iHpnSELn3q42cUM364LJtNEf6s9KS3d1HIRnPuxa_2LvrSNVbWDgGWBNxOoVf9MRd8rwS_26Ubl9ffJAn6Q9mllLfi9XcnBc5C0M1I4H3B981GjvE/s170/Frazier_670x470.jpg" /></a><i><br />
<span style="font-size: 95%; font-style: italic;">By </span>Tom Frazier</i><br />
<br />
It appears that people who thought that Wisconsin's strict Voter ID law would suppress eligible voters have had their suspicions confirmed.<br />
<br />
A recent (September 25, 2017) study by the University of Wisconsin indicates that 16,801 (11.2%) people were deterred from voting by Wisconsin’s Voter ID law and 9,001(6%) people were prevented from voting in the 2016 presidential election. The study also found that low income and minority voters were disproportionately affected with 21.1% of low-income voters deterred vs. 7.2% of higher income voters. Only 8.3% of white registered voters were deterred compared to 27.5% of African Americans.<br />
<br />
“Deterred” from voting is defined as (they) “lack qualifying ID or mention ID as a reason for not voting.” “Prevented” means that “they lack qualifying ID or list voter ID as their primary reason for not voting.”<br />
<br />
The study was conducted by mailing a survey to 2,400 nonvoting registered voters in Milwaukee and Dane County with a total of 293 (12.2%) surveys returned. The survey was funded by the Office of the Dane County Clerk, so no questions were asked about political party or who they voted for. People responding to the survey were asked about gender, race, income and exposure to Voter ID information. They were also asked to respond to reasons for not voting such as, unhappy with choice of candidates, vote would not have mattered, transportation problems, did not have photo ID, told at polling place that ID was inadequate, couldn’t get absentee ballot, and problems with early voting. <br />
<br />
<a name='more'></a>This study adds to other studies and significant anecdotal evidence that Voter ID in Wisconsin is a barrier to eligible, legal voting. In April 2016, I reviewed internet stories about people who had problems being able to vote because of Wisconsin’s Photo ID law and was able to easily find four stories of such people. So, I did an internet search of “voter fraud in Wisconsin” and while I found very few examples of fraud, I did find some interesting things. The one actual example I found was from a 2014 story about a man who had voted twice for Alberta Darling in her 2011 recall, and five times for Scott Walker in his 2012 recall. The Wisconsin Election Commission website states that its staff had surveyed prosecuting attorney offices after the 2008 General and Presidential election that revealed a total of six criminal complaints alleging voter fraud (quite a few less statewide than the UW study found in two counties). And I found a 2017 <i>Chicago Tribune</i> story about 60 17-year olds voting illegally in Wisconsin’s 2016 presidential primary. The prosecutor in the county with the largest number of such voters (Kewaunee) chose not to charge any of the 17-year olds because he said they honestly had thought that they could vote if they turned 18 before the general election in November.<br />
<br />
Another article quoted Judge James Peterson of the U.S. District Court in Madison who struck down parts of Wisconsin’s Voter ID law saying that there is “utterly no evidence” that in-person voter impersonation fraud is an issue in Wisconsin. He also wrote in his ruling, “To put it bluntly, Wisconsin’s strict version of voter ID is a cure worse than the disease.” But Governor Scott Walker says the number of fraud cases is beside the point. “All it takes is one person whose vote is cancelled by someone not voting legally and that’s a problem” he said.<br />
<br />
I would ask, conversely, does he not think it is a problem if one person (or thousands) who is eligible to vote is prevented from voting? To paraphrase Ronald Reagan “Mr. Walker (and legislators) tear down this invisible (but effective) wall that keeps thousands of eligible voters from exercising their constitutional right to vote.” <br />
<br />
<br />
<hr />
<br />
<i>Tom Frazier is a member of the Common Cause in Wisconsin State Governing Board, and was the executive director of the Coalition of Wisconsin Aging Groups from 1983 to 2010.</i>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3146238262403618713.post-4294416639548058832017-08-28T09:56:00.000-05:002017-08-28T09:56:50.753-05:00Redistricting Reform & Judicial Recusal<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgTDzYYQ1f4XUCTf9yuGNbPwhr3br2H_0rKUzwdD8utMUP1JNvEAqyWL247ElMFSUNMiOXGt70I8rnTLAX6NPbEue6quSWgTgXi5iDsKF-4LlH62xpP3gOzo-IwrWBMiHMgocnZG8jZeps/s1600/Roger+Utnehmer_120px.png" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 0em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgTDzYYQ1f4XUCTf9yuGNbPwhr3br2H_0rKUzwdD8utMUP1JNvEAqyWL247ElMFSUNMiOXGt70I8rnTLAX6NPbEue6quSWgTgXi5iDsKF-4LlH62xpP3gOzo-IwrWBMiHMgocnZG8jZeps/s1600/Roger+Utnehmer_120px.png" /></a><br />
<i>By Roger Utnehmer</i><br />
<br />
Two branches of Wisconsin government are suffering the moral equivalent of emerald ash borer disease.<br />
<br />
Like far too many once-beautiful trees throughout Wisconsin, the state legislature and Supreme Court are in danger of losing their luster.<br />
<br />
Government derives its power from the consent of the governed. An informed electorate will never consent to the reapportionment and recusal corruption that’s plaguing the Wisconsin legislature and Supreme Court.<br />
<br />
Every ten years the legislature, taking into account the most recent census data, re-draws district boundaries for the state senate and assembly. That practice has resulted in Wisconsin legislators picking their voters instead of Wisconsin voters picking their legislators.<br />
<br />
It’s called “gerrymandering” and Wisconsin is among the most gerrymandered states in the country. When several hundred thousand more state-wide citizens vote for Democrats in state assembly races than Republicans and Republicans keep more than a two-thirds of the seats, the electoral process is as diseased as a dying emerald ash tree.<br />
<br />
<a name='more'></a>Legislators have drawn district boundaries so that less than 10% of the 132 districts in Wisconsin are competitive. That gives incumbents the advantage of protection and perpetuates the party in power. And years earlier, Democrats were just as corrupt when they had the power to draw district boundaries.<br />
<br />
The solution is essential to democracy. It’s time to get the drawing of legislative district boundaries out of the hands of legislators and into a non-partisan entity like our Legislative Reference Bureau, as is done in Iowa today.<br />
<br />
The second decaying branch of state government is the Supreme Court. Just a few years ago the Wisconsin Supreme Court was a model admired throughout America.<br />
<br />
Today, the carcinogenic influence of special interest money and the refusal of court members to adopt a strict recusal standard put in jeopardy that long-standing tradition of fair, impartial justice.<br />
<br />
Special interest groups on both sides of the political spectrum have dumped millions of dollars into Supreme Court races. Spending is spiraling to several million dollars a race. Yet a majority of current justices have refused to adopt rules that would regulate when they recuse themselves from voting on matters brought before the court by major campaign donors.<br />
<br />
Who in Wisconsin would believe they can receive a fair, impartial hearing before a justice who accepted, or benefited from, millions of dollars in campaign contributions or dark money expenditures on their behalf? <br />
<br />
Justices who take money from special interest groups or benefit from their spending should not vote on cases in which those donors are involved. If Wisconsin citizens are to have faith in their court, recusal rules need to be adopted. Only two of seven sitting judges are of that opinion. Justices Shirley Abrahamson and Ann Walsh Bradley stand head and shoulders above their colleagues when it comes to this common-sense contribution to confidence in the court.<br />
<br />
Solutions are simple. Move drawing of district boundaries to the non-partisan Legislative Reference Bureau. Stop voting for legislators who oppose reapportionment reform. Join Common Cause, the good-government group that allows me to be among the members of their board of directors. Refuse to vote for a Supreme Court candidate who does not endorse common-sense, confidence-restoring recusal rules.<br />
<br />
The opportunity cost of continued business-as-usual is the death of public confidence in our institutions of government. That’s a cost that will not be paid if more speak out today in support of reapportionment reform and recusal rules for the Supreme Court.<br />
<br />
That’s my opinion. I’d like to hear yours.<br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: 90%; font-style: italic;">Roger Utnehmer is President and CEO of DoorCountyDailyNews.com, and a member of Common Cause in Wisconsin's State Governing Board. <br />
<br />
</span>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3146238262403618713.post-91820449350483579052017-04-25T07:00:00.000-05:002017-04-25T09:55:46.044-05:00Money Doesn't Talk, It Screams<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhXLLjGJyIu349S7DkE5W9D8wXCB4iHpnSELn3q42cUM364LJtNEf6s9KS3d1HIRnPuxa_2LvrSNVbWDgGWBNxOoVf9MRd8rwS_26Ubl9ffJAn6Q9mllLfi9XcnBc5C0M1I4H3B981GjvE/s1600/Frazier_670x470.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 0em; margin-right: .75em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhXLLjGJyIu349S7DkE5W9D8wXCB4iHpnSELn3q42cUM364LJtNEf6s9KS3d1HIRnPuxa_2LvrSNVbWDgGWBNxOoVf9MRd8rwS_26Ubl9ffJAn6Q9mllLfi9XcnBc5C0M1I4H3B981GjvE/s170/Frazier_670x470.jpg" /></a><i><br />
<span style="font-size: 95%; font-style: italic;">By </span>Tom Frazier</i><br />
<br />
As a registered lobbyist for almost 27 years and an unpaid, volunteer lobbyist for the last seven years, I have witnessed some major political changes, most of them not good. <br />
<br />
One such change is obvious and that is the ever increasing influence of money in political decision-making. This influence was growing already when I retired at the end of 2009, but then the Supreme Court ruling in January 2010 in the <i>Citizens United</i> decision opened the floodgates for that influence. This 5-4 decision said that money was free speech and allowed for-profit corporations, non-profit corporations and unions to spend unlimited amounts of money on political campaigns, including ads favoring one candidate over another. <br />
<br />
The recent attempt by Speaker Paul Ryan and President Trump to pass the repeal and replacement of the Affordable Care Act (aka “Obamacare”) is an example of how bad the influence of money has become. The replacement, the American Health Care Act, contained a $1 trillion tax cut, primarily for the benefit of the wealthy, funded largely by a cut of $880 billion in Medicaid funding. This was an intentional strategy on the part of Ryan to make it easier to provide even larger tax cuts to businesses when Congress and the President moved on to tax reform. In an interview with Fox Business News on March 15, 2017, Ryan said:<br />
<blockquote>“A trillion dollars…that’s 10 percentage points on rates for businesses. It takes the corporate rate from 35 to 20 [%]. That’s why doing this [health care] first makes tax reform that much easier to accomplish.”</blockquote>Providing large tax cuts to those who don’t need them at the expense of huge cuts in health care for the most vulnerable (elderly, disabled, and children) is, I believe, cynical bordering on unconscionable. <br />
<br />
<a name='more'></a>The second big change that I have observed over the last seven years may be a little less obvious, and that is the trend of politicians making decisions based on their personal opinions and beliefs which, more often than not, are contradicted by facts. For example, at the state level, Governor Walker and politicians who wanted to give Medicaid long-term care money to private, for-profit insurance companies (in the 2015-17 state budget) kept insisting that Medicaid long-term care costs were out of control and would bankrupt the state Medicaid program. The facts from the Department of Health Services showed that increases in Medicaid spending were due to acute and primary care spending, not long-term care spending. The belief persisted long after the facts were presented. <br />
<br />
At the federal level, you may recall that President Trump promised not only to repeal and replace Obamacare, but that the replacement would provide better health care, cover everyone, and cost less. But when Ryan’s replacement -- which was a lot worse, not better -- was in trouble, Trump jumped in, attempting, in my opinion, to show that he could “close the deal” completely ignoring his promise to make it better, and causing the most harm to the people he promised not to leave behind—the people who voted for him. Our President has elevated making decisions on opinions to an art form. <br />
<br />
We must dilute the undue influence of money in politics, starting with full and public disclosure of political contributions and spending—even the <i>Citizens United </i>decision didn’t prohibit that and if people’s intentions were good they would not feel it necessary to hide their “free speech.” <br />
<br />
I doubt that we can stop the fact that "money talks" but, by eventually overturning <i>Citizens United</i>, we can lower the volume back to talking instead of screaming. <br />
<br />
<hr /><br />
<i>Tom Frazier is a member of the Common Cause in Wisconsin State Governing Board, and was the executive director of the Coalition of Wisconsin Aging Groups from 1983 to 2010.</i>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3146238262403618713.post-66892575375539810752017-03-06T12:56:00.000-06:002017-03-06T09:49:08.990-06:00Gerrymandering: Unconstitutional and Unaffordable<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhXLLjGJyIu349S7DkE5W9D8wXCB4iHpnSELn3q42cUM364LJtNEf6s9KS3d1HIRnPuxa_2LvrSNVbWDgGWBNxOoVf9MRd8rwS_26Ubl9ffJAn6Q9mllLfi9XcnBc5C0M1I4H3B981GjvE/s1600/Frazier_670x470.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 0em; margin-right: .75em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhXLLjGJyIu349S7DkE5W9D8wXCB4iHpnSELn3q42cUM364LJtNEf6s9KS3d1HIRnPuxa_2LvrSNVbWDgGWBNxOoVf9MRd8rwS_26Ubl9ffJAn6Q9mllLfi9XcnBc5C0M1I4H3B981GjvE/s170/Frazier_670x470.jpg" /></a><i><br />
<span style="font-size: 95%; font-style: italic;">By </span>Tom Frazier</i><br />
<br />
“Gerrymander” is defined as: “To divide (an area) into political units to give special advantage to one group.” It was named after Elbridge Gerry, Governor of Massachusetts, who in 1812 signed a law redistricting state election districts. One district in Essex County was described as looking like a salamander, thus the word “Gerrymander” was created by combining the names. <br />
<br />
Wisconsin has one of the worst cases in the country of using gerrymandering to give “special advantage to one group” – in this case Republicans in the state legislature. But gerrymandering is a bi-partisan problem according to Jay Heck, executive director of Common Cause in Wisconsin. The two worst Democratic states are Rhode Island and Maryland, while Wisconsin and North Carolina comprise the two worst Republican states Heck reports. The big difference is that Wisconsin is the first such state to have a three-judge federal appeals panel rule that Wisconsin’s redistricting law “constitutes an unconstitutional political gerrymander.” The panel voted 2-1 to direct the state to develop a new redistricting plan and have it in place by November 1, 2017 for the 2018 elections.<br />
<br />
<a name='more'></a>Wisconsin has one of the worst cases in the country of using gerrymandering to give “special advantage to one group," in this case Republicans in the state legislature. But gerrymandering is a bi-partisan problem according to Jay Heck, executive director of Common Cause in Wisconsin. The two worst Democratic states are Rhode Island and Maryland while Wisconsin and North Carolina comprise the two worst Republican states Heck reports. The big difference is that Wisconsin is the first such state to have a three judge federal appeals panel rule that Wisconsin’s redistricting law “constitutes an unconstitutional political gerrymander.” The panel voted 2-1 to direct the state to develop a new redistricting plan and have it in place by November 1, 2017 for the 2018 elections.<br />
<br />
After the 2010 elections that brought Republicans in majority control of both the state Assembly and Senate, they had control of the redistricting process and hired private attorneys to develop redistricting maps. This was done in secret without any Democratic participation and, so far, the taxpayer cost of developing and defending the maps is $2.1 million. Now, instead of carrying out the appeals court order, more very expensive lawyers are being hired to appeal the case to the United States Supreme Court, also at taxpayer expense.<br />
<br />
Judge Kenneth Ripple, one of the three-judge panel, wrote “There is no question that Act 43 was designed to make it more difficult for Democrats, compared to Republicans, to translate their votes into seats.” For example, in 2012, Republicans got 48.6% of the statewide vote but won 60 seats in the 99-seat Assembly. Democrats in 2012 received 51.4% of the vote but only won 39 Assembly seats. “The evidence establishes, therefore, that even when Republicans are in an electoral minority, their legislative power remains secure," Ripple wrote. <br />
<br />
One simple solution to this partisan gerrymandering is called the Iowa plan that was enacted into law in 1980 by a Republican governor and a Republican-controlled Iowa Senate and House. In Iowa a non-partisan state agency draws the maps, following specific guidelines, that are then voted up or down by the Iowa legislature. Senate Bill 13, introduced in Wisconsin, would direct the Wisconsin Legislative Reference Bureau, a non-partisan Legislative agency, to draw electoral maps. This would give Wisconsin the trust and confidence of its voters in our electoral system. And, it would be free; no need to pay expensive lawyers.<br />
<br />
Of course “power corrupts” and Republicans will not easily give up their “special advantage” just as Democrats in Rhode Island are unlikely to give up their power.<br />
<br />
For over 200 years gerrymandering has been recognized as giving unfair advantage to one group over another. To me, the moral of Wisconsin’s gerrymander story is that unconstitutional gerrymandering is not only unfair, but it is very expensive for taxpayers. In a time when we are hearing about “rigged elections," we incorrectly think of individual voters casting illegal votes at the polls. But in Wisconsin and many other gerrymandered states, the election is rigged well before anyone casts a vote because gerrymandering predetermines the winner in most districts.<br />
<br />
Elections are supposed to be free and fair, but – until we get rid of gerrymandering – they will be neither in Wisconsin. We need a change!<br />
<br />
<hr />
<br />
<i>Tom Frazier is a member of the Common Cause in Wisconsin State Governing Board, and was the executive director of the Coalition of Wisconsin Aging Groups from 1983 to 2010.</i>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3146238262403618713.post-43459061921890316842016-07-06T18:02:00.000-05:002016-07-07T08:19:58.289-05:00The Wisconsin Legislature is a Vastly Changed Institution<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhgGXhaQBFJjDV4v_Ske5O7dl50q77P5Tc_vZghvrdZ4AJEQoAHv0aU2wRzCpU-wvR5QF-eh611q3Q7TY_zh5kSKjGTGTz1HKzB9mEt71S6REqKAATKoTwA_E3OoG8IB1uSrXr-ce0uiIw/s1600/Cal+Potter.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 0em; margin-right: 1em; margin-top: 1em;"><img border="0"src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhgGXhaQBFJjDV4v_Ske5O7dl50q77P5Tc_vZghvrdZ4AJEQoAHv0aU2wRzCpU-wvR5QF-eh611q3Q7TY_zh5kSKjGTGTz1HKzB9mEt71S6REqKAATKoTwA_E3OoG8IB1uSrXr-ce0uiIw/s175/Cal+Potter.jpg" /></a><br />
<span style="font-style: italic;"><br />
By Cal Potter</span><br />
<br />
After having served a total of approximately 24 years in the Wisconsin Assembly and State Senate, I often hear commentary that the political<br />
atmosphere during my 1975-1998 service is in major contrast in agenda, behavior, and the reason for serving in political office to that found today. The same observation is being made by those who have served in Congress over a number of decades.<br />
<br />
I have not been a part of the Legislature for about the last 18 years, and thus cannot provide a first hand account of internal operations today, but I am told by those who are still there after many years that things are very different. I do have vivid recollections of the makeup of the Assembly during my early years, and particularly impressions of my first year, 1975. The most vivid image I have is the number of members who were of a more mature age, and had (or still did) served in local government as town, county, or school board members, or in some other unit of local government. The presence of those with that background had them be very task oriented, and not strongly partisan agenda driven. Their local government experience gave them a real worldview that government was to serve the people, and to try to address the problems we face, in spite of our differing political philosophies. So, while there were partisan differences on what should be done, and how much spent on the effort, no one felt a need to stall government for any valid reason. The state budget, in some form, needed to be passed as there were local units of government waiting for printouts as to what school aid, shared revenue, or road aid levels were to be expected so they could in turn prepare their budgets.<br />
<br />
<a name='more'></a>With a task-oriented view prevalent, meetings of legislators of both parties were scheduled to try to find common ground. Discussion and compromise on every one's part was possible. Standing committee meetings, especially executive sessions where bills were prepared for advancement to the floor, constructive input was valuable from those who had real world and local government experience. Compared to today's more recent assault on the local ability to zone or control certain activities, the overall guiding principle was local control. Private group agendas, trying to circumvent various local regulations, were secondary to preserving the ability of local officials to do their job in doing what was best for their area.<br />
<br />
The loss of government as a problem-addressing and solving mechanism has brought the demise of special study committees such as those compiled over many years by the nonpartisan service group the Legislative Council. These special topic study committees were a respected off-session expectation. Membership usually totaled 15-20 members, with a combination of legislators and public members holding expertise in the topic being studied. Out of these numerous committees each session came suggested legislation, which received priority treatment in the following session due to its respected origin. Gone today, due to special interest domination and self-serving legislators, are those public serving studies and solutions for which we are all at a loss.<br />
<br />
Socially, while Democrats and Republicans generally dined in separate groups, the commonly used favorite Madison restaurants found frequent conversations and greetings exchanged between party members while in those establishments. Civility and a sense of comradeship was a code of conduct. No one felt inhibited, or was discouraged, from being seen or communicating with a person of another political party. Legislative staffs from both sides of the aisle frequently interacted and held friendships. When traveling to a function, it was not out of the question to carpool with a legislator of a different party.<br />
<br />
Many serving in today's Congress and state legislatures seem to have lost the feeling that serving the common good is why they should be holding public office, and that somehow partisan agendas and interests take precedence. Special interest and partisan agendas are the driving force. A younger group, without a history of local government service, has often accepted a view that government is the problem, and that private selfish interests need to be given more reign in what decisions are made. Education, on all levels, resource and environmental protection, local control, and many other areas, now take a back seat to serving partisan and moneyed interests. A self and private serving attitude has also brought us legislative agendas seeking to protect those with this new mentality, with unregulated campaign financing, gerrymandered safe legislative districts, and restrictions placed on investigations of political misconduct being part of the current legislative legacy.<br />
<br />
All Wisconsinites are worse off as a result of this transformation. While not perfect, politics and state government was better back then. We should think about how we devolved over the years and take corrective action to get back to where we were, when the peoples’ interests came first.<br />
<br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: 88%;"><i> <b>Calvin Potter</b>, of Sheboygan Falls, was a Democratic State Representative from 1975 to 1991 and a Wisconsin State Senator from 1991 to 1999. He currently serves on the Common Cause in Wisconsin State Governing Board.</i></span>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3146238262403618713.post-38497046967475914192016-05-31T09:21:00.000-05:002016-05-31T09:21:02.238-05:00 Read "Ringside Seat" by Tim Cullen<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgTDzYYQ1f4XUCTf9yuGNbPwhr3br2H_0rKUzwdD8utMUP1JNvEAqyWL247ElMFSUNMiOXGt70I8rnTLAX6NPbEue6quSWgTgXi5iDsKF-4LlH62xpP3gOzo-IwrWBMiHMgocnZG8jZeps/s1600/Roger+Utnehmer_120px.png" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 0em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgTDzYYQ1f4XUCTf9yuGNbPwhr3br2H_0rKUzwdD8utMUP1JNvEAqyWL247ElMFSUNMiOXGt70I8rnTLAX6NPbEue6quSWgTgXi5iDsKF-4LlH62xpP3gOzo-IwrWBMiHMgocnZG8jZeps/s1600/Roger+Utnehmer_120px.png" /></a><br />
<i>By Roger Utnehmer</i><br />
<br />
Former Wisconsin Governor Tommy Thompson will be recorded as the second-most effective executive in state history. The reasons are apparent in a recent book by a two-time state senator and Thompson cabinet member, Tim Cullen, "Ringside Seat."<br />
<br />
Cullen served in the state senate from 1975 to 1986 when be was appointed the highest-ranking Democrat in the cabinet of Gov. Thompson. Cullen returned to the state senate for one term after a long career in the private sector, retiring in 2015.<br />
<br />
(Full Disclosure: I knew Tim Cullen when I worked for Republican State Sen. Clifford "Tiny" Krueger in the mid '70's and we continue a friendship today serving together on the Board of Directors of Common Cause-Wisconsin. Tim, in "Ringside Seat," calls "Tiny" the greatest senator with whom he served.)<br />
<br />
His book is an insiders' look at the best and worst of our political system. Cullen writes a critical portrayal of Wisconsin's current governor, Scott Walker, accusing Walker of dividing a state rather than uniting it and of pursuing an unneeded and divisive attack on public employees to fuel a presidential campaign.<br />
<br />
<a name='more'></a>"Ringside Seat" portrays Thompson as a statesman, winning a narrow victory in 1986 and committing to a center-right government that included political opponents. Thompson appointed Cullen to head the largest state agency, the Department of Health and Social Services. Thompson wanted to show the people of Wisconsin that the state would be governed well, that he was governor of all the people, not just those who voted for him. Thompson's margins of victory increased significantly in future elections as a result of reaching out to political opponents and pursuing a policy of inclusion.<br />
<br />
Thompson and Cullen are both social gospel Catholics. The welfare reform adopted during the Thompson administration became a national model and reflected the compassion and decency of a governor and his cabinet secretary.<br />
<br />
Cullen denounces the insidious influence of special interest group money in political campaigns. He is just as direct in his criticism of the role of the Wisconsin Education Association Council (WEAC) as he is Wisconsin Manufacturers and Commerce (WMC).<br />
<br />
According to Cullen, Wisconsin is losing a distinguishing characteristic of good government. He points out that twelve governors from 1951 to 2001, six from each party, kept Republicans from governing too conservatively and Democrats from governing to liberally. He cites Walker as breaking that pattern in ways that will damage the state. Republican and Democrat governors came and went. <br />
<br />
People saw the basic values of a strong majority of citizens were not disrupted or attacked. Not so, Cullen says about Walker who demonizes opponents, drops "bombs" and articulates a strategy of "divide and conquer."<br />
<br />
Liberals reading Cullen's book will help better understand those with whom they do not agree on policy and politics. A local elected official will better understand how to unite a divided electorate, build consensus and promote open government. A millennial will better understand the opportunity their emerging optimism, engagement and non-judgmental values bring to creating a more positive future in politics.<br />
<br />
So, if Tommy Thompson is not Wisconsin's most effective governor in history, who is? In my opinion, it would be Robert LaFollette, Sr. LaFollette and his Progressives authored the Wisconsin Idea, created workers compensation, unemployment compensation, the Public Service Commission, open primaries, recall elections and are responsible for Wisconsin's tradition of open, clean, honest government. Reading "Ringside Seat" will give those who tarnish that tradition the historical perspective that is, unfortunately, missing with many.<br />
<br />
That's my opinion. I'd like to hear yours.<br />
<br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: 90%; font-style: italic;">Roger Utnehmer is President and CEO of DoorCountyDailyNews.com, and a member of Common Cause in Wisconsin's State Governing Board. <br />
<br />
</span>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3146238262403618713.post-7792480649550684942016-05-21T10:56:00.000-05:002016-05-21T10:56:20.127-05:00Wisconsin's Real Voting Problems<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhXLLjGJyIu349S7DkE5W9D8wXCB4iHpnSELn3q42cUM364LJtNEf6s9KS3d1HIRnPuxa_2LvrSNVbWDgGWBNxOoVf9MRd8rwS_26Ubl9ffJAn6Q9mllLfi9XcnBc5C0M1I4H3B981GjvE/s1600/Frazier_670x470.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 0em; margin-right: .75em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhXLLjGJyIu349S7DkE5W9D8wXCB4iHpnSELn3q42cUM364LJtNEf6s9KS3d1HIRnPuxa_2LvrSNVbWDgGWBNxOoVf9MRd8rwS_26Ubl9ffJAn6Q9mllLfi9XcnBc5C0M1I4H3B981GjvE/s170/Frazier_670x470.jpg" /></a><i><br />
<span style="font-size: 95%; font-style: italic;">By </span>Tom Frazier</i><br />
<br />
Two recent reports, one from the League of Women Voters of Wisconsin and one from Common Cause in Wisconsin, sheds light on Wisconsin’s voting problems. And the problems do not include people impersonating other people in order to vote illegally which is the problem that is supposedly addressed by Wisconsin’s photo ID law. In fact, impersonating someone else in order to vote is already illegal; it is a felony which is probably why so few people attempt it. <br />
<br />
The League of Women Voters Report was compiled based on placing 103 trained volunteers in 202 polling places to observe a range of problems in voting related to the April 5, 2016 election. For most voters everything went smoothly with observers reporting that “poll workers were professional, helpful, and respectful of voters.”<br />
<br />
There were, however, enough problems reported to raise significant concerns about the integrity of the voting process in the state.<br />
<br />
There were problems reported that poll workers in some locations did not know the rules associated with all the recent changes in voting laws. For example, voting officials incorrectly telling potential voters that the address on the photo ID (e.g. a driver’s license) had to be the same as their current address. <br />
<br />
<a name='more'></a>Other problems included understaffed polling sites, not understanding the law related to provisional ballots, over 300 individuals not able to register or vote for lack of proof of residence, young people and first-time voters not having acceptable ID and therefore not able to vote, and people leaving the polling place without voting because the registration and/or voting lines were too long. Recommendations to correct these problems include increasing the number of polling staff, improving election official training, developing better polling site management (e.g. having a Greeter at a site can help things go more quickly and efficiently), and increase and target voter education. <br />
<br />
The report from Common Cause in Wisconsin may be even more disturbing.<br />
<br />
Common Cause says that due to gerrymandering only one in ten legislative races for state Assembly and state Senate is competitive (defined as within 10 percentage points, e.g. 55% to 45% or closer). In the November 2016 election this means that only 12 out of 115 Assembly and Senate seats meet the 10 point definition of competitive.<br />
<br />
Before redistricting (gerrymandering) took place in 2011, 23% of Assembly and Senate races were competitive in the 2010 election. Through this process legislators create district maps that make majority party seats “safe” and deprive voters of any real choice in 90% of state elections. Common Cause’s solution: Adopt Iowa’s non-partisan plan for developing fair voting maps. <br />
<br />
The argument most espoused for the photo ID law is that we need to prevent voter fraud even though there is almost no evidence of it. If even one person votes illegally it affects the integrity of the whole process for all legal voters.<br />
<br />
Conversely, the same argument applies: if even one legal voter is kept from voting it has the exact same affect. Based on extensive anecdotal evidence and the League Report, it is clear as day that way more than one legal voter has been denied the right to vote and we need to fix the problems. The solutions seem relatively simple—adopt the Iowa plan for redistricting, and allow voters who lack the required photo ID or other requirements, such as proof of residence, to sign an affidavit swearing or affirming that they are who they say they are and are eligible to vote.<br />
<br />
I remember when we were proud of high voter turnouts and clean elections in Wisconsin. We must return to those days and make it even better by guaranteeing, not that we prevent one illegal voter, but that we assist all eligible voters in exercising their constitutional right. <br />
<br />
<hr />
<br />
<i>Tom Frazier is a member of the Common Cause in Wisconsin State Governing Board, and was the executive director of the Coalition of Wisconsin Aging Groups from 1983 to 2010.</i>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3146238262403618713.post-79821784411671875512016-04-21T13:38:00.000-05:002016-04-21T13:38:37.044-05:00Democracy and Republic Depend on Voting<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhXLLjGJyIu349S7DkE5W9D8wXCB4iHpnSELn3q42cUM364LJtNEf6s9KS3d1HIRnPuxa_2LvrSNVbWDgGWBNxOoVf9MRd8rwS_26Ubl9ffJAn6Q9mllLfi9XcnBc5C0M1I4H3B981GjvE/s1600/Frazier_670x470.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 0em; margin-right: .75em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhXLLjGJyIu349S7DkE5W9D8wXCB4iHpnSELn3q42cUM364LJtNEf6s9KS3d1HIRnPuxa_2LvrSNVbWDgGWBNxOoVf9MRd8rwS_26Ubl9ffJAn6Q9mllLfi9XcnBc5C0M1I4H3B981GjvE/s170/Frazier_670x470.jpg" /></a><i><br />
<span style="font-size: 95%; font-style: italic;">By </span>Tom Frazier</i><br />
<br />
We have now had two elections in Wisconsin under the law requiring a photo ID, and the results are not encouraging. Consider the following examples:<br />
<br />
<b>1.</b> An older female voter in Stevens Point who was well know by an election inspector for 20 years, and by four out of five poll workers at her polling station, was denied the right to vote because she did not have a driver’s license or photo ID.<br />
<br />
<b>2.</b> A grandmother in Dane County who came to her polling station with her granddaughter, a first time voter, was turned away because her driver’s license had expired and, because she had lost her job and couldn’t afford to get it renewed. <br />
<br />
<b>3.</b> An older African-American man in Milwaukee who applied to the DMV for a free photo ID was turned down after waiting for five months because the name on his out-of-state birth certificate did not match the name he had used his entire life. He was told he could correct his name through the Social Security Administration or go to court to legally change his name. The irony is that this man voted without incident in the formerly Jim Crow South only to be disenfranchised when he moved to Wisconsin. <br />
<br />
<b>4.</b> An 89 year old woman who has been voting since 1948 and had served on her Village Board since 1996 cannot get a free photo ID because her maiden name is misspelled on her birth certificate which would cost $200 to correct. She says “No one should have to pay a fee to vote.” <br />
<br />
There are other problems with the law, including the fact that the Wisconsin Legislature did not appropriate any money to educate voters about the new law, DMV offices have limited hours (e.g. just 31 of 92 offices maintain normal Monday through Friday business hours), and the reason cited for the new law (i.e. voter impersonation) is virtually nonexistent. In a court case challenging the law, Judge Lynn Adelman said “The defendants could not point to a single instance of known voter impersonation occurring in Wisconsin at any time in the recent past.” Adelman’s decision invalidating the law was reversed by the U. S. Court of Appeals. <br />
<br />
Recently, Congressman Glenn Grothman created quite a controversy when he said that he thought Republicans could win the Presidential election because Hillary Clinton was a weak candidate and “now we have photo ID and I think photo ID is going to make a little bit of a difference as well.” It is probably no coincidence that then State Senator Grothman also was quoted when the Legislature passed a law eliminating early voting hours on nights and weekends as saying he wanted to “nip this in the bud” before early voting spread to other parts of the state. <br />
<br />
While as many as 300,000 voters in Wisconsin, by some estimates, may lack a valid photo ID for voting, another major negative impact on voting is redistricting (a.k.a. Gerrymandering). By fixing election district boundaries, thousands of votes are meaningless because the incumbent is in a “safe” district. Districts must be politically competitive for everyone’s vote to be equal. <br />
<br />
I have always thought of voting as a scared right. My dictionary defines Republic “as a state in which the supreme power rests in the body of citizens entitled to vote and is exercised by representatives chosen directly or indirectly by them.” Democracy is defined as “a form of government in which the supreme power is vested in the people and exercised by them or by their elected agents under a free electoral system.” Unfortunately, I can only conclude that we are, at best, not meeting those definitions and, at worst, deliberately tampering with those definitions. In either case, we must not allow our right to vote to be taken away or our form of government will be neither a Republic nor a Democracy. <br />
<br />
<hr /><br />
<i>Tom Frazier is a member of the Common Cause in Wisconsin State Governing Board, and was the executive director of the Coalition of Wisconsin Aging Groups from 1983 to 2010.</i>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3146238262403618713.post-15270541416202067932016-03-28T13:06:00.000-05:002016-04-07T22:46:11.188-05:00Bill Kraus: Book Review of Dark Money by Jane Mayer <span style="font-style: italic;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgSQAc1owESXPs25-jqC8qljQEhUu2HEt_N93CzlsJxwGF4kBPTL-EYGoPSv_kolK5Ytw5a2A8-AdVZHdnPsur9JUEJXhkzi5STOWYTPSHuebpvVWmYlCgo0owOWBsSzSy6utvPTStddQ8/s1600/Bill+Kraus+120px.png" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 0em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgSQAc1owESXPs25-jqC8qljQEhUu2HEt_N93CzlsJxwGF4kBPTL-EYGoPSv_kolK5Ytw5a2A8-AdVZHdnPsur9JUEJXhkzi5STOWYTPSHuebpvVWmYlCgo0owOWBsSzSy6utvPTStddQ8/s1600/Bill+Kraus+120px.png" /></a></span><br />
<span style="font-style: italic;">By Bill Kraus</span><br />
<br />
To get to respectable book length the author had to load up with bios of the billionaires and their forebears and tell you at tiresome detail where they got all that money.<br />
<br />
Skim that.<br />
<br />
What’s interesting is what they have been doing with that money to set the mostly domestic agenda and see that it is supported by bought and paid for legislators in the states and in the Congress. <br />
<br />
The almost opening paragraph of the book is about inauguration day in 2009. Obama was taking the oath of office. The billionaires were gathering in California to set a strategy which would defeat Obama—failed—to make his life difficult—succeeded—and to take over statehouses across the country to get their views [called anachronistic totalitarianism by Bill Buckley] into the law and laws of the land—really succeeded.<br />
<br />
Their timing couldn’t have been better.<br />
<br />
<a name='more'></a>In the wake of the Watergate reforms and their unintended consequences the baby boomers became indifferent to and/or disdainful of politics, politicians, and ultimately government itself. That boil is being lanced in the presidential campaign this year, but has been festering for almost 40 years, an era of non-participation when the parties powers dwindled to the point that they were somewhere between shells of their former selves or merely labels. All hat no cattle.<br />
<br />
The citizen activists who had run the parties and spent an inordinate amount of time and energy marginalizing the extremist minorities went away. <br />
<br />
The extremists stayed and took over the memberless, inconsequential parties. The power shifted mostly to legislative leaders who slated candidates and funded campaigns with the billionaires money.<br />
<br />
The net effect of all of this was that politics became marketing and money became even more important than it always was. Money enriched the professionals who were now fully in charge of campaigns and who advertised their candidates way to victory with 30 second sound bites directed to the voters who had retreated from the playing field and were in the stands reading their various hand held devices. <br />
<br />
The billionaires with their dark money walked in and took over either directly or through third party campaigns. <br />
<br />
At one point in <i>Dark Money</i> a high riding billionaire told his peers that all they had to do to control elected representatives was threaten a primary challenge and they will start “wetting their pants.”<br />
<br />
Money went from being an important part of campaigns to being the end all be all. And the billionaires with their agendas and their bank accounts were there to supply it. <br />
<br />
Then along came the outlandish campaign of 2016 with its interesting side effects. The money race is still very consequential, but The Donald is being praised for using his own money, and Bernie is following the Elizabeth Warren lead and raising serious big money in small bites. In ways large and small money and where it comes from, what and who it buys is in the spotlight instead of in the dark.<br />
<br />
The baggage that slows Hillary’s run to the nomination is mostly distrust and the that distrust is closely tied to where and how she is getting her money.<br />
<br />
Jeb who had and spent more money than anyone withdrew.<br />
<br />
And Jane Mayer wrote her book.<br />
<br />
Is it still all about the money? Probably. But maybe not the billionaires' money.<br />
<br />
Even though we are way beyond poor boy campaigns, we are catching onto dark money and who is giving it and why. The supreme court which is obsessed with free speech has consistently said they think the money/speakers should be disclosed. This would chase away many donors and purify the rest. But what would really change the system is stigmatization. What if all that money used to buy votes costs more votes than it buys? <br />
<br />
We never really had a government of, by, and for the people. At its best we had a government of the elite, by the bureaucracy, and for the people. This became a government of the money, by the incumbents, and for the money. <br />
<br />
Jane Mayer’s book and the presidential campaign of 2016 may get us back to of the elite, by the bureaucracy, and for the people.<br />
<br />
Like in baseball batting .333 is pretty darn good.<br />
<br />
<i><span style="font-size: 98%;"><br />
Bill Kraus, a former top adviser and strategist to Wisconsin Governors Lee Sherman Dreyfus and Warren Knowles, is the Chair of the State Governing Board of Common Cause in Wisconsin. You can reach him at GOBKraus@gmail.com</span><br />
</i><br />
<br />
<span style="font-style: italic; font-weight: bold;">Follow Bill Kraus on:<br />
<br />
</span> <a href="http://twitter.com/wmkraus"><img alt="twitter / wmkraus" src="http://labs.creazy.net/twignature/img/wmkraus.gif" /></a><br />
<br />
<br />
Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3146238262403618713.post-82736278410751299572016-02-22T15:57:00.001-06:002016-02-22T16:02:58.169-06:00The days of dark money and dirty advertising are dying<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgTDzYYQ1f4XUCTf9yuGNbPwhr3br2H_0rKUzwdD8utMUP1JNvEAqyWL247ElMFSUNMiOXGt70I8rnTLAX6NPbEue6quSWgTgXi5iDsKF-4LlH62xpP3gOzo-IwrWBMiHMgocnZG8jZeps/s1600/Roger+Utnehmer_120px.png" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 0em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgTDzYYQ1f4XUCTf9yuGNbPwhr3br2H_0rKUzwdD8utMUP1JNvEAqyWL247ElMFSUNMiOXGt70I8rnTLAX6NPbEue6quSWgTgXi5iDsKF-4LlH62xpP3gOzo-IwrWBMiHMgocnZG8jZeps/s1600/Roger+Utnehmer_120px.png" /></a><br />
<i>By Roger Utnehmer</i><br />
<br />
The days of dark money and dirty campaign advertising are dying in America.<br />
<br />
We can thank the core values reflected by the emerging millennial generation for the most significant improvement in political discourse since the emergence of the Progressive Party a century ago.<br />
<br />
Millennials reject bombast, hype, exaggeration and most of the negative characteristics of political <a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiV4rwixGGNt5I0XX6jcWP2S8HgnULajCVPOQo5k07sUygn-3gJsyJyZjIfWQa08EXqRSIdtlDRs_tl3VnbI2pp_rughaKDGWbHTrobFd3Bi1STR0nUHXYzBDpnZeQDtNvoqngXBYaPwtY/s1600/Millennials+protest.png" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 0em; margin-left: .5em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiV4rwixGGNt5I0XX6jcWP2S8HgnULajCVPOQo5k07sUygn-3gJsyJyZjIfWQa08EXqRSIdtlDRs_tl3VnbI2pp_rughaKDGWbHTrobFd3Bi1STR0nUHXYzBDpnZeQDtNvoqngXBYaPwtY/s200/Millennials+protest.png" /></a>expression in America today. They dream, desire fairness and are race and gender agnostic. That means discrimination will die the same death as dark money and dirty campaign ads.<br />
<br />
The surging Sanders support, the Trump phenomenon and the inability of the largest super pac in history to keep Jeb Bush in the presidential race are reasons for optimism. <br />
<br />
Negative ads do not move millennials. The more Hillary Clinton attacks Bernie Sanders the higher he rises in the polls. Donald Trump's self-funded success without television creates the new post-millennial paradigm. Jeb Bush and his super pac spent more than $150 million on negative tv ads. The millennial rejection of dark money buying dirty ads will render thse ads ineffective and obsolete in future races.<br />
<br />
Our television screens and mail boxes will soon be sanitized by the elimination of the dirty ads that no longer work.<br />
<br />
Millennials respect authenticity. They reject the content of political ads that moved generations before them. Their greatest and most profound impact will come from their congenital commitment to fairness. The millennial generational affinity to fairness as a core value will impact the 2016 election and those to follow.<br />
<br />
A campaign finance system rigged and corrupted by dark money is not fair.<br />
<br />
Civil service and merit selection being replaced by political cronyism and patronage is not fair.<br />
<br />
The concentration of political power in caucus leadership at the expense of political independence is not fair.<br />
<br />
The emasculation of collective bargaining power is not fair.<br />
<br />
Having to boil drinking water in Kewaunee County, as if it were a third-world slum, is not fair.<br />
<br />
College debt so high graduates cannot afford a car payment much less a home mortgage payment is not fair.<br />
<br />
And an immigration policy that prevents millions of people from experiencing a God-given right of self-determination is not fair.<br />
<br />
Millennials make me proud and optimistic that are best days truly are ahead of us.<br />
<br />
They are restoring civility, fairness, decency, authenticity, civic engagement and dreams to the political discourse of America. And that's very good news.<br />
<br />
That's my opinion. I'd like to hear yours.<br />
<br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: 90%; font-style: italic;">Roger Utnehmer is President and CEO of DoorCountyDailyNews.com, and a member of Common Cause in Wisconsin's State Governing Board. <br />
<br />
</span>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3146238262403618713.post-90742762855896477762016-01-13T13:49:00.000-06:002016-01-13T13:49:16.012-06:00Happy New (Voting) Year!<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhXLLjGJyIu349S7DkE5W9D8wXCB4iHpnSELn3q42cUM364LJtNEf6s9KS3d1HIRnPuxa_2LvrSNVbWDgGWBNxOoVf9MRd8rwS_26Ubl9ffJAn6Q9mllLfi9XcnBc5C0M1I4H3B981GjvE/s1600/Frazier_670x470.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 0em; margin-right: .75em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhXLLjGJyIu349S7DkE5W9D8wXCB4iHpnSELn3q42cUM364LJtNEf6s9KS3d1HIRnPuxa_2LvrSNVbWDgGWBNxOoVf9MRd8rwS_26Ubl9ffJAn6Q9mllLfi9XcnBc5C0M1I4H3B981GjvE/s170/Frazier_670x470.jpg" /></a><i><span style="font-size: 95%; font-style: italic;">By </span>Tom Frazier</i><br />
<br />
Recently I received an interesting email from an Aging Unit Director from northern Wisconsin who had the City Clerk talk to a group of 18 seniors about the photo ID requirements for voting which are in effect for 2016. Of the 18 older adults, three (17%) did not have a valid photo ID. Fortunately, the next election is not until April 5, 2016 so there is time for them to obtain a “Wisconsin Identification Card” from the Division of Motor Vehicles' service center. <br />
<br />
While this was just a random meeting of older people and not a scientific sample, I think the 17% figure could be close to the percentage of older people who may not be able to vote in 2016 unless they get a valid photo ID prior to April 2016. There are approximately one million people in Wisconsin aged 60 and over and even if only 60% of them vote that translates into over 100,000 seniors (17% of 600K) who may not be able to exercise their right to vote in 2016 under existing Wisconsin law. <br />
<br />
I urge the Wisconsin Aging Network (three Area Agencies on Aging, 72 County Aging Offices, and 11 Tribal Offices) and every organization that works with older persons to do what this Aging Unit Director did by providing expert, accurate information about the photo ID that is required to vote in 2016. This information is available from many sources, including Common Cause in Wisconsin, League of Women Voters of Wisconsin, Area Agencies on Aging, and County and Tribal Aging Units to name a few. Of course, one meeting is not enough—we need to reach older voters through every possible means, such as media, newsletters, trainings, and having information available wherever older people may be gathering. <br />
<br />
<a name='more'></a>Despite my somewhat pessimistic outlook, most people already have the required ID in the form of a valid Wisconsin driver’s license, passport, Tribal ID Card, U.S. Military Photo ID Card, Wisconsin Identification Card, or Certificate of Naturalization. If a person does not already have a valid photo ID, then a Wisconsin Identification Card can be obtained for free at a Division of Motor Vehicles service center at locations around the state. To qualify for such a card a person must prove four things: Name and Date of Birth (e.g. a certified Birth Certificate), Proof of Identity (e.g. Social Security Card), Proof of Citizenship (e.g. U. S. Birth Certificate), and Wisconsin Residency (e.g. a Utility Bill). If you do not have all of these items you can still get a photo ID—just check with DMV or Aging Office to see what other options are possible. <br />
<br />
I am confident that the Wisconsin Aging Network will do a great job in reaching out to the older adult population to inform them of the photo ID requirement and what needs to be done to obtain the necessary ID. But we will not reach everyone, especially if I am close in terms of the potential numbers that may be impacted by this new voting law. So we need to do one more thing during the April 2016 election—we need to document and draw media attention to those cases where older persons did not have the required ID and were refused the right to vote, even where the person may have been a voter for 50 years or more. <br />
<br />
By identifying and making public problems with the photo ID law it will help spread the message about the law so that other people understand what they need in order to vote in the fall elections. And, maybe, just maybe, such examples will be embarrassing enough to persuade the Wisconsin Legislature that some changes in the law may be needed. <br />
<br />
<br />
<hr /><br />
<i>Tom Frazier is a member of the Common Cause in Wisconsin State Governing Board, and was the executive director of the Coalition of Wisconsin Aging Groups from 1983 to 2010.</i>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3146238262403618713.post-78005927312799264932015-11-18T08:27:00.000-06:002015-11-18T08:27:32.030-06:00Extraordinary Bad Decisions<i><br />
</i> <i><span style="font-size: 95%; font-style: italic;">By </span>Ann Grewe</i><br />
<br />
Our clean government in Wisconsin just received two additional blows this November, setting the scene for corruption and partisan decisions in the future.<br />
<br />
Government Accountability Board (GAB) was composed of six retired judges, including our own Judge Thomas Barland, who served as Eau Claire County Circuit Court Judge until his retirement in 2000, then continued to serve as Reserve Judge and an independent mediator, arbitrator and court referee, while also serving as an active member of the GAB.<br />
<br />
We have been so fortunate to have a nonpartisan, highly ethical organization such as the GAB charged with ensuring that elections, campaign finance, ethics and lobbying were all conducted according to the laws of Wisconsin. Their website, <b><a href="http://www.gab.wi.gov/" target="_blank">www.gab.wi.gov/</a></b>, uses clear language and short sentences to spell out the standards of behavior for everyone connected with Wisconsin’s government.<br />
<br />
Just passed during November’s extraordinary session of the Assembly were the GAB destruction act (AB 388) which splits the GAB into two new boards staffed with partisan appointees and ends the GAB’s ability to investigate alleged wrongdoing by public officials -- such as the GAB-approved probe into Governor Walker's aides and associates that put six of Walker’s staff in jail.<br />
<br />
A law passed in October now exempts the crimes that jailed Walker’s staff from being investigated under the state’s John Doe process. (John Doe investigations are done to determine whether a crime has occurred and, if so, by whom.)<br />
<br />
A second bill just passed, campaign finance deform (AB 387) allows unlimited campaign contributions from a range of sources, permits corporate contributions to political parties and legislative campaign committees, and boosts contribution limits to candidates. It also makes clear that candidates may coordinate with so-called “issue advocacy groups” that need not disclose how they raise or spend money to influence Wisconsin voters.<br />
<br />
All these bills combine to allow political corruption to take root and flourish in Wisconsin. Credit our Republican governor and Republican majorities in Wisconsin’s Senate and Assembly for these extraordinarily bad decisions.<br />
<br />
<hr /><br />
<i>Ann Grewe is a concerned citizen from Eau Claire, Wisconsin.</i><br />
Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3146238262403618713.post-12173270770579343052015-11-11T09:52:00.001-06:002015-11-11T09:59:31.019-06:00A good week for bad government... mostly<span style="font-style: italic;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgSQAc1owESXPs25-jqC8qljQEhUu2HEt_N93CzlsJxwGF4kBPTL-EYGoPSv_kolK5Ytw5a2A8-AdVZHdnPsur9JUEJXhkzi5STOWYTPSHuebpvVWmYlCgo0owOWBsSzSy6utvPTStddQ8/s1600/Bill+Kraus+120px.png" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 0em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgSQAc1owESXPs25-jqC8qljQEhUu2HEt_N93CzlsJxwGF4kBPTL-EYGoPSv_kolK5Ytw5a2A8-AdVZHdnPsur9JUEJXhkzi5STOWYTPSHuebpvVWmYlCgo0owOWBsSzSy6utvPTStddQ8/s1600/Bill+Kraus+120px.png" /></a></span><br />
<span style="font-style: italic;">By Bill Kraus</span><br />
<br />
<br />
In a week that the legislative-led state government added to its “protect the majority and the incumbents” proposals, a lawsuit about gerrymandering took a step toward a hoped for Supreme Court appearance.<br />
<br />
The legislature completed it’s defanging of the Government Accountability Board by bringing partisan management in and getting Kevin Kennedy out of election and ethics oversight and investigation.<br />
<br />
Another pro-incumbent move was to open another tap for the flow of money to power. <br />
<br />
Gerrymandering, which is the machete of incumbent protection, wasn’t discussed.<br />
<br />
There will be no movement on the issue by the legislative leaders who are now fully in charge of running state government. The governor’s role is secondary and docile. He doesn’t have to initiate. He will sign whatever he is sent.<br />
<br />
But over in the federal courthouse, a lawsuit had a hearing before three federal judges who were asked by the 7th District Court of Appeals to rule on a motion by the state of Wisconsin to dismiss a plan which would make gerrymandering, like racially motivated discrimination, a sin.<br />
<br />
<a name='more'></a>At the hearing one of the participants commented that gerrymandering, not unlike pornography, is something that we recognize when we see it, but we have trouble defining it. <br />
<br />
The aggrieved plaintiffs offer a plan which proves that the redistricting process has the effect of denying representation to large numbers of voters and suggests a formula that shows when gerrymandering exists, how it wastes votes, how many voters are made irrelevant because of it.<br />
<br />
So far so good. But our tendency to cluster economically, racially, chronologically can also be politically as well. We gerrymander ourselves. We make our own votes for legislators irrelevant.<br />
<br />
This is hard to overcome without gerrymandering in reverse. I, for one, have lived in three places where I never cast a vote for a member of any Assembly who shared my political views and biases who had a prayer of being elected. <br />
<br />
That was my fault and my choice.<br />
<br />
What computer-driven packing and cracking gerrymandering does is extend my fate to places where it didn’t exist. Kenosha and Racine are the best current examples. When those counties were also Assembly districts, they were politically competitive. What gerrymandering did was make the cities of Kenosha and Racine an Assembly district and the rural parts of those counties another. A Democrat was sure to win one of those districts, a Republican the other. <br />
<br />
Simple.<br />
<br />
What has been added to the mix statewide is another kind of gerrymandering where in a large minority of Assembly districts the Democratic candidates will get as much as 90% of the vote and the majority of the Assembly elections will go to Republicans by smaller but convincing margins. <br />
<br />
The winners are not chosen by the voters on either side. The candidates chose their districts and their voters. <br />
<br />
This can be undone. But only, say the courts, if there are criteria legislated that the courts can use to mandate the undoing. <br />
<br />
The plaintiffs offer up a way to measure gerrymandering. The state says there is no constitutional basis for what the plaintiffs offer and are asking the court to dismiss the suit. <br />
<br />
My hope is that the process itself will bring judicial attention and ideas to the subject and to the fact that letting legislators make districting decisions is akin to letting convicted felons decide on their own punishments. <br />
<br />
Perhaps common sense will raise its ugly head and the judiciary will take notice of the collateral damage that excessive gerrymandering is doing to too many voters rights. <br />
<br />
The legislators and their hyper-empowered leaders are not going to do this. The courts are the last, best, maybe only hope. <br />
<br />
A decision by the panel will be forthcoming. If they dismiss the suit, an appeal to the Supreme Court will be made. If they reject the state’s request for a dismissal, a trial on the merits will ensue. This, too, will be appealed to the Supreme Court.<br />
<br />
It has been suggested that the Supreme Court is hoping for a case meritorious enough to allow them to act. <br />
<br />
This could be it.<br />
<br />
<br />
<span style="font-style: italic; font-weight: bold;">Follow Bill Kraus on:<br />
<br />
</span> <a href="http://twitter.com/wmkraus"><img alt="twitter / wmkraus" src="http://labs.creazy.net/twignature/img/wmkraus.gif" /></a>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3146238262403618713.post-69353650932610347912015-10-21T13:34:00.002-05:002021-06-24T09:43:08.791-05:00WI GOP seeks access to unlimited secret money, end to nonpartisan oversight<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjgq0gtx2IIRm5d96jH0rgLknqARHZ_2971O66MMuYTb_QyhWssFWQ8xWy2D7o-jAd4pf7AUiavcDfJ_b-9SnPovXnVqrHJ5clVUYPsxktR_nDaCPie9FhnsPSQjHevJ18rIase3U9vl_E/s1600/profile+oct+2015.png" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 0em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjgq0gtx2IIRm5d96jH0rgLknqARHZ_2971O66MMuYTb_QyhWssFWQ8xWy2D7o-jAd4pf7AUiavcDfJ_b-9SnPovXnVqrHJ5clVUYPsxktR_nDaCPie9FhnsPSQjHevJ18rIase3U9vl_E/s130/profile+oct+2015.png" /></a><br />
<span style="font-size: 95%; font-style: italic;">By Sandra Miller</span><br />
<br />
Today, our State Assembly votes on legislation to both dismantle Wisconsin's nonpartisan Government Accountability Board (GAB), and significantly expand the corrupting influence of out-of-state, secret cash in our elections. The State Senate is expected to do the same next week.<br />
<br />
If passed and later signed into law by Governor Walker, these two measures will most assuredly wreak havoc on democracy in Wisconsin:<br />
<br /><b>
Assembly Bill 388</b> decimates the GAB – the agency that ensures we have clean, fair elections, while enforcing our campaign finance, ethics and lobbying laws. AB 388 scraps the current GAB, replacing it with two separate commissions: one focusing on ethics, the other on elections.<br />
<br />
And the board's nonpartisan judges? Gone!<br />
<br />
Instead, these two agencies will each consist of six partisan, political appointments – three Republicans and three Democrats. <br />
<i><br />
Hmmm... sounds like a recipe for deadlock.</i><br />
<br />
Well… the GOP Leadership <b><a href="http://host.madison.com/wsj/news/local/govt-and-politics/some-recoil-at-using-fec-as-model-for-elections-overhaul/article_471a3f0c-a4e6-547f-b0f1-00b9188d303f.html"><i>did say</i> that the model for their "new and improved" GAB was the Federal Election Commission</a></b> – an agency that, by its chair's own admission, <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2015/05/03/us/politics/fec-cant-curb-2016-election-abuse-commission-chief-says.html"><b>is both dysfunctional and deadlocked</b></a>.<br />
<br />
<a name='more'></a>What about the GAB's independent funding source for investigations into political corruption? Gone!<br />
<br />
Instead, the new "toothless" GAB will have to go to the legislature for approval of funds needed to investigate legislators.<br />
<br />
<i>Wait––what?!</i><br />
<br />
Moving on…<br />
<br /><b>
Assembly Bill 387</b>. A total re-write of Wisconsin's campaign finance law that, among other things, legalizes the formerly illegal campaign coordination between a candidate and s"so called" issue advocacy groups.<br />
<br />
You know, those groups with names like "People for a Better Tomorrow" who run (phony) issue ads, like "Candidate 'A' hates Wisconsin Cheese! Call Candidate 'A' and tell her to stop hating our cheese!"<br />
<br />
They don't ever <i>say</i> "Vote for Candidate 'B'" or "against Candidate 'A.'" But you get their meaning.<br />
<br />
Why do these groups have to be so cagey about their real agenda? <br />
<br />
Because keeping away from the vote for/vote against-type language allows them to qualify as an "issue ad" group. <br />
<br />
And what's so special about being an issue ad group? <br />
<br />
By advocating for an <i>issue</i> while depicting a candidate (rather than advocating directly for a candidate), these folks have no limits on the money they can spend trying to influence an election <i>and</i> no requirement to disclose where their money comes from. <br />
<br />
And this is exactly what makes AB 387 so frightening.<br />
<br />
This legislation will let candidates – who <i>do</i> have campaign contribution limits <i>and</i> donor disclosure requirements – work side-by-side with issue ad groups in order to get elected, essentially giving candidates access to unlimited campaign cash, while keeping the public in the dark about who is influencing both our elections and (subsequently) our elected officials.<br />
<b><br />
So how do we fight back against this seemingly insurmountable wave of unregulated money and influence?</b><br />
<br />
First. Don't lose heart. There are some Republicans in the State Senate who are not on board with the GAB overhaul bill. <br />
<a href="https://secure2.convio.net/comcau/site/Advocacy;jsessionid=4B4A961A451D15BDE527C274449B0AEC.app212a?pagename=homepage&page=UserAction&id=969&autologin=true&AddInterest=1195" target="_blank"><b><br />
</b></a> <a href="https://secure2.convio.net/comcau/site/Advocacy;jsessionid=4B4A961A451D15BDE527C274449B0AEC.app212a?pagename=homepage&page=UserAction&id=969&autologin=true&AddInterest=1195" target="_blank"><b>So contact your legislators and tell them how you feel about this. Be passionate. Be heard.</b></a><br />
<br />
Next, make sure you – and <i>every<i></i></i> eligible voter you know – is registered to vote and has one of the required forms of photo ID to cast a ballot.<br />
<br />
And then – come election time (presidential or not) – vote.<br />
<br />
If we want to save our democracy, this is how it's done.<br />
<br />
<hr /><br />
<span style="font-size: 90%;"><i>Sandra Miller is Director of Information Services and Outreach for Common Cause in Wisconsin</i></span><br />
<br />
Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3146238262403618713.post-38152626590200198302015-09-09T19:47:00.000-05:002015-09-10T16:30:50.935-05:00Roger Utnehmer on Nonpartisan Redistricting Reform in Wisconsin<i><br />
The following is a statement made on Wednesday, September 9, 2015 by Common Cause in Wisconsin Board Member Roger Utnehmer at a press conference in Green Bay on recently-introduced legislation to end partisan gerrymandering in Wisconsin:</i><br />
<br />
<blockquote><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgTDzYYQ1f4XUCTf9yuGNbPwhr3br2H_0rKUzwdD8utMUP1JNvEAqyWL247ElMFSUNMiOXGt70I8rnTLAX6NPbEue6quSWgTgXi5iDsKF-4LlH62xpP3gOzo-IwrWBMiHMgocnZG8jZeps/s1600/Roger+Utnehmer_120px.png" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 0em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgTDzYYQ1f4XUCTf9yuGNbPwhr3br2H_0rKUzwdD8utMUP1JNvEAqyWL247ElMFSUNMiOXGt70I8rnTLAX6NPbEue6quSWgTgXi5iDsKF-4LlH62xpP3gOzo-IwrWBMiHMgocnZG8jZeps/s1600/Roger+Utnehmer_120px.png" /></a>Common Cause is a citizens lobby that advocates for clean open government and campaign and redistricting reform.<br />
<br />
Being a broadcaster for 38 years has made me a fiscally-conservative capitalist and a socially-liberal progressive.<br />
<br />
I’ve voted for Republicans and Democrats.<br />
<br />
I crammed four years of college into seven working for a Republican state senator and ran for the assembly in 1974 as a Republican.<br />
<br />
My background makes me like a lot of people in Wisconsin, the political middle-ground, people who can support Republicans on fiscal issues and Democrats on social issues.<br />
<br />
People like me make the case that redistricting reform, preservation of the Government Accountability Board and over-turning Citizens United are bi-partisan issues.<br />
<br />
The message I have today is simply this; the most patriotic civic engagement people can make today is to become involved with Common Cause and support redistricting reform.<br />
<br />
<a name='more'></a>Common Cause believes voters should pick their elected officials instead of elected officials picking their voters like we do in Wisconsin today and that when only one in ten legislative elections in 2014 were competitive, we need redistricting reform.<br />
<br />
Only nine of 99 assembly races and three of l7 senate races were considered competitive, defined as a margin of victory of ten points or less.<br />
<br />
Common Cause believes that democracy is in trouble when only 10 percent of legislative races are competitive.<br />
<br />
Common Cause believes the Government Accountability Board, created with bi-partisan support and respected throughout America, should be preserved and protected from partisan attack.<br />
<br />
Common Cause believes that special interest money and corporate campaign cash should be repudiated, and if not eventually rejected by Congress and the courts, at least be regulated and reported.<br />
<br />
So I ask you to join me as a member of Common Cause. <br />
<br />
Become part of the solution.<br />
<br />
Stand with Republicans and Democrats throughout Wisconsin who endorse Senate Bill 58 because you, too, believe Wisconsin can be as clean, open, honest and respected as it once was and again should be.</blockquote><br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: 90%; font-style: italic;">Roger Utnehmer is President and CEO of DoorCountyDailyNews.com, and a member of Common Cause in Wisconsin's State Governing Board. <br />
<br />
</span>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3146238262403618713.post-3823111624983755712015-09-01T11:34:00.001-05:002015-09-01T11:41:12.562-05:00Wisconsin as Russia<span style="font-style: italic;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgSQAc1owESXPs25-jqC8qljQEhUu2HEt_N93CzlsJxwGF4kBPTL-EYGoPSv_kolK5Ytw5a2A8-AdVZHdnPsur9JUEJXhkzi5STOWYTPSHuebpvVWmYlCgo0owOWBsSzSy6utvPTStddQ8/s1600/Bill+Kraus+120px.png" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 0em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgSQAc1owESXPs25-jqC8qljQEhUu2HEt_N93CzlsJxwGF4kBPTL-EYGoPSv_kolK5Ytw5a2A8-AdVZHdnPsur9JUEJXhkzi5STOWYTPSHuebpvVWmYlCgo0owOWBsSzSy6utvPTStddQ8/s1600/Bill+Kraus+120px.png" /></a></span><br />
<br />
<br />
<span style="font-style: italic;">By Bill Kraus</span><br />
<br />
<br />
“In Russia, the law was not there to protect citizens and people, it was there to aid authorities. The law was not meant to be used by citizens, but by the state.”<br />
<br />
This quote is from the book RED NOTES by Bill Browder (Yes, that Browder. His grandfather was Earl Browder, the face of the Communist Party in the United States for many years in the middle of the last century).<br />
<br />
The context is unimportant.<br />
<br />
What is important is that it calls to mind a series of laws enacted and proposed in Wisconsin in recent years.<br />
<br />
<a name='more'></a>The first example was the law that removed the indictment and prosecution of then Speaker Scott Jensen from the traditional Dane County jurisdiction to his home county of Waukesha.<br />
<br />
The result of that move was a non prosecution.<br />
<br />
More recently the future of the Government Accountability Board, which was created by overwhelming votes of both houses and whose mission is to oversee the election processes and the ethics of those who win elections, is under a kind of indictment itself.<br />
<br />
The charge is that the board is fundamentally doing what it was created to do.<br />
<br />
Is the proposed revision meant to protect “citizens and people” or “aid authorities?”<br />
<br />
The answer seems to be obvious.<br />
<br />
A parallel recommendation is in the works which would exempt public office holders from a long standing process called a “John Doe” which is intended to pursue suspected wrongdoing by anyone and to keep the investigations secret to protect the suspects from unproved assertions that become public before trial.<br />
<br />
Since this proposal deals only with those in power, it is clearly not meant to protect “citizens and people.”<br />
<br />
And, of course, the most egregious “not meant to protect the people” at all example is gerrymandering which protects incumbents and legislative majorities.<br />
<br />
Case closed.<br />
<br />
<br />
<span style="font-style: italic; font-weight: bold;">Follow Bill Kraus on:<br />
<br />
</span> <a href="http://twitter.com/wmkraus"><img alt="twitter / wmkraus" src="http://labs.creazy.net/twignature/img/wmkraus.gif" /></a>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3146238262403618713.post-58970789598797968322015-07-21T00:00:00.000-05:002015-07-21T00:00:01.475-05:00The game is rigged<span style="font-style: italic;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgSQAc1owESXPs25-jqC8qljQEhUu2HEt_N93CzlsJxwGF4kBPTL-EYGoPSv_kolK5Ytw5a2A8-AdVZHdnPsur9JUEJXhkzi5STOWYTPSHuebpvVWmYlCgo0owOWBsSzSy6utvPTStddQ8/s1600/Bill+Kraus+120px.png" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 0em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgSQAc1owESXPs25-jqC8qljQEhUu2HEt_N93CzlsJxwGF4kBPTL-EYGoPSv_kolK5Ytw5a2A8-AdVZHdnPsur9JUEJXhkzi5STOWYTPSHuebpvVWmYlCgo0owOWBsSzSy6utvPTStddQ8/s1600/Bill+Kraus+120px.png" /></a></span><br />
<br />
<br />
<span style="font-style: italic;">By Bill Kraus</span><br />
<br />
<br />
The massively anti-government 2015 state government budget is almost law.<br />
<br />
It is hard to find anyone who isn’t offended by something in this radical document.<br />
<br />
The losers range from the entire education establishment where the iconic UW system took a large hit and the vaunted public education apparatus got a combination of competition and less money down to the people who wanted to cross some railroad tracks to get to their favorite fishing hole.<br />
<br />
I asked the then Secretary of the Department of Administration Mike Heubsch whether there had been any pushback from the legislature. This was early. He said “no.”<br />
<br />
This changed somewhat as the budget worked its way through the Joint Finance Committee and the individual legislators began to hear from their constituents about the harm being done to traditional Wisconsin institutions and values. <br />
<br />
<a name='more'></a>There were modifications and mild rebellions. I got the feeling that the legislators were getting the grief and the governor was getting on a plane for Israel. Loyalty only goes so far even in the mostly safe precincts of the state legislature.<br />
<br />
In the last series of elections 132 legislators were elected to the Assembly and the Senate. Only 12 of them won by less than 55% of the vote. Another 22 won by less than 60% and more than 55%. Their were 50 legislators who got over 90% of the vote in their latest elections.<br />
<br />
It’s true that no legislator no matter how popular and secure likes complaints from their friends and neighbors. <br />
<br />
But not many really have to worry about losing their jobs.<br />
<br />
The complaints that didn’t fall on deaf ears didn’t really end up making very dramatic changes in the budget.<br />
<br />
The only short term remedy for this kind of unresponsiveness is having more seats and incumbents at risk. The route to that is redistricting reform.<br />
<br />
A few lonely reform organizations and fewer brave majority legislators have not been able to get a hearing on redistricting that would make more districts competitive, more votes count, and more incumbents more responsive.<br />
<br />
The game is clearly rigged. Redistricting is a mild unrigger. <br />
<br />
What would happen if all the losers in the 2015 budget wars were to rally around the idea of dispassionate redistricting? <br />
<br />
More than would happen if they don’t.<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<span style="font-style: italic; font-weight: bold;">Follow Bill Kraus on:<br />
<br />
</span> <a href="http://twitter.com/wmkraus"><img alt="twitter / wmkraus" src="http://labs.creazy.net/twignature/img/wmkraus.gif" /></a>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3146238262403618713.post-75084668850780217502015-06-15T10:12:00.002-05:002015-06-15T10:13:47.729-05:00It's all about the money, stupid<span style="font-style: italic;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgSQAc1owESXPs25-jqC8qljQEhUu2HEt_N93CzlsJxwGF4kBPTL-EYGoPSv_kolK5Ytw5a2A8-AdVZHdnPsur9JUEJXhkzi5STOWYTPSHuebpvVWmYlCgo0owOWBsSzSy6utvPTStddQ8/s1600/Bill+Kraus+120px.png" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 0em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgSQAc1owESXPs25-jqC8qljQEhUu2HEt_N93CzlsJxwGF4kBPTL-EYGoPSv_kolK5Ytw5a2A8-AdVZHdnPsur9JUEJXhkzi5STOWYTPSHuebpvVWmYlCgo0owOWBsSzSy6utvPTStddQ8/s1600/Bill+Kraus+120px.png" /></a></span><br />
<br />
<span style="font-style: italic;">By Bill Kraus</span><br />
<br />
<br />
Former Governor Lee Dreyfus’s golden rule for politics: Those who have the gold make the rules.<br />
<br />
The Wisconsin Democracy Campaign recently published a <b><a href="http://wisdc.org/top-interest-group-spenders.php" target="_blank">list of the top “rule makers” in Wisconsin over the last 4 1/2 years</a></b>. In total this group contributed $116,671,117 during that period to advance their interests by promoting ideas and candidates or by criticizing opposing ideas and candidates. <br />
<br />
Many of the groups' interests are obvious. The state’s largest business organization is on the list. It doesn’t represent all the state’s businesses or even all of its own members, but it isn’t required to disclose which businesses contributed to its political communications. The National Rifle Association is, surprisingly, on the list. Who knew they needed to spend money to get their way?<br />
<br />
<a name='more'></a>Most of the spending was by groups with apple pie and motherhood names, including the biggest single spender The Greater Wisconsin Committee which put $27,600,000 into the game. The names We Are Wisconsin, The Club for Growth, Americans for Prosperity, and Citizens for a Strong America are only vague indicators of the interests of these contributing groups. The Democracy campaign’s release reveals a little or a lot about most of these organizations. One large player is the American Federation for Children which is headed by three former speakers of the Wisconsin Assembly and whose agenda is promoting and expanding education by voucher-supported schools.<br />
<br />
The side effect of all this spending by well-endowed interest groups is obvious. The comparatively small contributions by individuals don’t really count for much anymore. The game is increasingly rigged and it’s rigged to favor big money and what big money favors.<br />
<br />
Despite the fact that small money doesn’t count, votes are still the ultimate weapon. Votes count even more if they are cast against money and against the way the money wants them to be cast. <br />
<br />
But to make votes count the voters must know more about the agendas and interests of those who are ruling by money. They also must know if the people they do vote for are really representing them or are beholden to the big money that they believe is what got them elected.<br />
<br />
This is not all that easy to find out. The contributors to these monied organizations and interest groups are not disclosed like the contributors to candidates and their organizations are. <br />
<br />
Disclosure legislation that is regularly proposed and just as regularly ignored by the incumbents who are the presumed beneficiaries of the golden rule would provide this information to voters.<br />
<br />
Voters who want to know who is really calling the shots these days can ask the candidates who are asking for their votes whether they support more disclosure from these new rule makers. A caution: only a “yes” answer to this question means yes; all other answers, no matter how positive sounding. like “it sounds good to me” or “my staff is looking into it” really mean “no.”<br />
<br />
<br />
<span style="font-style: italic; font-weight: bold;">Follow Bill Kraus on:<br />
<br />
</span> <a href="http://twitter.com/wmkraus"><img alt="twitter / wmkraus" src="http://labs.creazy.net/twignature/img/wmkraus.gif" /></a>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0