Army in Worst Recruiting Slump in Decades
to try to keep tainted DeLay money
At least two House Republicans have figured out how to return money to Tom DeLay, the ethically challenged GOP leader who had to step aside after being indicted on corruption charges this week.
Meanwhile, back in the Badger State, , Green has received more than $29,000 and Ryan more than $25,000 from DeLay's political action committee.WASHINGTON — At least two Republicans in the House of Representatives say they will return money to Rep. Tom DeLay's political action committee now that the
former majority leader has been indicted for allegedly conspiring to violate Texas campaign fundraising laws.
Reps. Jeb Bradley of New Hampshire and Heather Wilson of New Mexico said they would return contributions from Americans for a Republican Majority, the political action committee DeLay started to help elect GOP candidates to Congress. Known as ARMPAC, it is separate from Texans for a Republican Majority, or TRMPAC, which is at the center of the charge against DeLay.
ARMPAC, which has not been charged with wrongdoing, has given nearly $3.5 million to House and Senate candidates since 1998, according to the non-profit Center for Responsive Politics, which tracks campaign cash. It has contributed $250,000 to candidates running for re-election next year.Bradley, in his second term, was the first to renounce DeLay's money. He said he's returning $15,000 contributed in 2002 and 2004 to "remove any questions that may arise about contributions."
Wilson's campaign committee will give back $10,000 contributed for her 2006 campaign. She isn't returning nearly $38,000 she's received since 1998.
[Campaign Manager Mark]Graul said Green legally could not return the donations.First of all, the money didn't come from DeLay's campaign committee, it came from his political action committee, so no one would expect a check to "Tom DeLay for Congress." It most llikely could be returned to the PAC if Green wanted to find a way. It is complicated a little by the fact that Green took hundreds of thousands of dollars in federal PAC money, including DeLay's, then laundered it by transferring $1.3-million to his state campaign fund to run for governor. State and federal laws are different -- but where there's a will there's a way.
"If we wrote a check to 'Tom DeLay for Congress,' we'd be in violation" of federal law, which sets limits on the size of gifts to federal campaign committees, Graul said.
Also, Graul said, "that money has been since spent, so there is no contribution to return."
But Ryan said Thursday, "There is nothing to give back; it was two campaigns ago."Joe Wineke, Democratic Party chair who called for Green and Ryan to give back the dirty money, checked a little farther. (Surprised that he didn't take them at their word?) Wineke had suggested that if he couldn't return it, Green should give the money to charity, but Green said that wasn't legal either.
"It would be illegal for us to give that back," Ryan added. "I'm not interested in breaking the law, either."
Congressman Mark Green misled the people of Wisconsin by saying there was no way he could get rid of the money. Yet, according to Wisconsin State Statutes 11.25(2)(b), Green could give the money to a nonpartisan campaign to increase voter registration or participation. [What is Wineke saying? Green's goal is to keep people from voting, not increase turnout.--Xoff.]
“It’s time to stop the misleading statements, come clean, and return this ill-gotten money,” said Joe Wineke, Chair of the Democratic Party of Wisconsin. “If Congressman Green really wanted to, he could donate this money today. Mark Green has already given enough money to Tom DeLay by contributing to his legal defense fund. He should take advantage of this opportunity to give this money to an organization where it will be put to good use.”
But the Federal Elections Commission (FEC) said today that campaign contributions from DeLay can be refunded, despite Ryan’s claims that it would be illegal. According to the FEC, a refund to DeLay’s committee would not be considered a contribution, so it would not be subject to federal PAC limits candidates must otherwise abide by during a calendar year.
“Paul Ryan doesn’t need to worry about breaking the law, because the FEC has said it’s perfectly legal for him to return this questionable money back to Tom DeLay,” Wineke said. “Congressman Ryan should show the people of Wisconsin that he doesn’t condone the corruption and scandal that have plagued Republicans in Washington by immediately returning DeLay’s dirty money."
who dare to vote their consciences
Wisconsin Right To Life, which seems to own a majority of Wisconsin legislators lock, stock and barrel, couldn't believe that some of their wholly-owned state senators actually had the courage to vote for an amendment the "right-to-life" extremists opposed.
"It is difficult to express the sadness we feel that three pro-life senators believe it is morally acceptable to create human embryos via cloning so that they can be used in biomedical experiments that will kill them," Susan Armacost, legislative director of the group, said in a news release on Thursday.Darling, who sponsored the amendment, also voted for final passage but somehow escaped their wrath and was not mentioned in the release.
"Well prior to the state Senate votes on AB 499, Wisconsin Right to Life made it crystal clear to every senator that we would consider a vote for the Darling amendment to be a vote against the bill itself, regardless of how a senator might vote on final passage," she added. "We consider the key vote in regard to AB 499 to be the Darling amendment. The vote on that amendment shows which senators are comfortable with creating human life for the express purpose of destroying it for medical experiments."
The three senators named in the news release are Sens. Michael Ellis, R-Neenah; Jeffrey Plale, D-Milwaukee; and Robert Cowles, R-Green Bay. All three, despite their support for the therapeutic cloning exemption, voted for the full ban after the amendment failed to muster enough votes for passage...
Armacost said in an interview that her group called the three senators on the carpet because each had pledged in a pre-election questionnaire that they would not support cloning for any purpose.
"That's why we're so shocked and saddened," she said. "Obviously on this issue they just feel it's acceptable to create human life and destroy it."
During debate this week on the cloning bill, Sen. Fred Risser, D-Madison, said that his Republican colleagues were afraid to oppose the legislation because of the intimidation tactics of Wisconsin Right to Life.
Dusk is falling outside the Walker residence as Scott Walker, back from a tough day of cracking down on lazy judges, is greeted by his wife.
In his 2006 budget address to the County Board, Walker did not mention his pension-funding plan but said he did not want to let the ongoing cost of "horrific" pension sweeteners approved by former County Executive F. Thomas Ament force additional trims in crucial county safety-net services.
Milwaukee County saw a flood of retirements in 2004 under the new benefits. That, pension-fund investment losses early in the decade and previous underfunding of the annual contribution by Walker, Ament and the County Board have pushed the 2005 requested contribution to $45.9 million. Walker proposes to fund $19.2 million of that, about 42% of the amount requested by the Pension Board.
Walker portrayed the underfunding of the annual pension payment as a way to spark debate over trimming pension benefit levels for county employees, as he proposed recently.
But unless that benefit change happens, the underfunding would mean that county taxpayers will actually pay more for the Ament-era pension enhancements. That's because the pension fund would charge the county for the $27 million shortfall, with interest tacked on, in taxpayer contributions to the fund in future years.
Walker wants a related change that would spread that repayment over 30 years, compared to the current five-year payback.
"Wow," said Pension Board Chairman Walter Lanier, who expressed surprise at the size of the shortfall. That board will study the impact on the viability of the fund, he said.
Supervisor Richard Nyklewicz Jr., chairman of the County Board's Finance Committee, called the pension contribution shortfall "irresponsible."
Supervisors will be hard-pressed to replace the $27 million pension contribution shortfall without cutting county services. Under the state's new limits on local taxation, Milwaukee County can raise property taxes by only $8.5 million, or 3.7%.
Walker took another gamble of sorts by putting only $19.2 million in the budget to cover the county's pension obligations, far short of what is needed. Walker is hoping county unions will agree to concessions in their pension benefit levels in new labor contracts. We hope he's right since, as Walker says, the pension enhancements passed under his predecessor are costing the county a bundle and may eventually force the county to make even deeper cuts in service and staff in the future. But we would also hate to see the emphasis on the pension givebacks threaten other concessions the unions might agree to on health insurance, which could also save a lot of money.
wants to educate more Wisconsin kids
"I do know that it's true that if you wanted to reduce crime, you could -- if that were your sole purpose, you could abort every black baby in this country, and your crime rate would go down." -- Bill Bennett, former Secretary of Education, author of "The Book of Virtue" and conservative poster boy, in a radio interview.
Quick, what do Steve King, Mark Neumann, and John Gillespie have in common?
Problem is, record shows he's not partisan
The right wing and Republican radio is coming to Tom DeLay's defense in their usual fashion -- trying to slime the prosecutor in the case, Ronnie Earle. DeLay called him "an unabashed partisan zealot," and Charlie Sykes was warming up to go after Earle this morning, but I got to my destination and turned off the car radio, so didn't hear it. Fox News predictably jumped right in, echoing DeLay's false claim.
Prosecutor Takes Aim at Both Sides of Aisle
Although DeLay calls Ronnie Earle an 'unabashed partisan zealot,' others say the Austin district attorney shows no favoritism.
By Scott Gold, Times Staff Writer
HOUSTON — In the 1980s, Jim Mattox was the attorney general of Texas and one of the most powerful figures in the state — mentioned as a future governor and, maybe, more. Today, he is a real estate lawyer.
A turning point came in 1983, when the district attorney in Austin, Ronnie Earle, indicted Mattox on bribery charges. He was acquitted, but the damage was done. Mattox had spent $300,000 on attorneys. His political career began to peter out.
"Ronnie Earle had visions of grandeur," said Mattox, now 62. "He was using it as a stepping stone."
Two decades later, Earle is going after another powerful Texas politician, and the defense is no different. When he indicted U.S. House Majority Leader Tom DeLay on Wednesday, the Texas Republican lashed out at Earle, calling him an "unabashed partisan zealot."
Just one hitch: Earle may be a Democrat, but, he said, so were 12 of the 15 politicians he has indicted over the years, including Mattox. Even Mattox said Wednesday that Earle long had targeted people on both sides of the political aisle, roiling the halls of power in Austin — and now Washington — at every turn.
"He had a very negative impact on my life," Mattox said. But in DeLay's case, he added, "I think Earle is carrying out his responsibility."
Fred Lewis, director of Campaigns for People, an Austin group that works to reduce the influence of money on government, called the politics-as-usual defense the "standard response" here to an Earle indictment.
"Every single person he has indicted, Democrat or Republican, has claimed politics," Lewis said. "That's what people don't understand. I think Ronnie Earle has just done his job. The people that are criticizing the indictments don't know one thing about Texas law or the facts. And frankly, they need to be quiet and let the criminal justice process work."
Republicans are hardly convinced of that, and they accused Earle on Wednesday of wasting tax dollars with a "politically motivated and manufactured indictment" — and of sapping public resources at a time when they are needed to recover from Hurricane Rita.
"He is a small man with a big grudge," said Republican Party of Texas Chairwoman Tina Benkiser. "And that is a dangerous combination. He's abusing the very system he was elected to protect."
Earle has taken pains to project a squeaky-clean image, at one point even accusing himself of a misdemeanor when he discovered that his campaign finance reports had been filed late. Still, he has not always remained above the political fray.
Earle recently said that being called partisan by DeLay was akin to "being called ugly by a frog." At a Democratic fundraiser in May, he called DeLay a "bully." And he has said that ambition and outrage over what he sees as an illegal fundraising scheme devised by DeLay and his associates prompted him to postpone his retirement to prosecute the case.
Raised on a ranch in Birdville, Texas — which had a population of 107 when he was born and hasn't grown much since — Earle worked as a lifeguard as a youth, participated in student government and earned the rank of Eagle Scout.
He was elected to the Texas House in 1972 and became the Travis County district attorney in 1977. Under Texas law, that office also controls the public integrity unit responsible for prosecuting alleged misconduct by politicians, regardless of where they live in the state.
GOP activists have sought to take that power away from Earle, but haven't succeeded.
Within a year of taking office, Earle indicted former Texas Supreme Court Justice Don Yarbrough on perjury charges; Yarbrough fled to Grenada, and eventually served time in a state penitentiary. Earle also went after a state treasurer, state House speaker and several Democratic legislators, winning convictions or plea bargains in each of those cases.
George Shipley — a political operative who worked for the late Bob Bullock, a Democrat and one of the most powerful figures in modern Texas politics — said Wednesday that over the years Earle had taken plenty of heat from Democrats in Austin.
Earle went after Bullock — who was last elected as George W. Bush's lieutenant governor — on several occasions, although he never brought an indictment. Bullock routinely described Earle in terms that are "not printable in a family newspaper," Shipley said.
Still, Shipley said, Earle is not prone to conducting witch hunts; he recalled occasions when Earle sent GOP legislators letters reminding them that it was poor form to step off of state-owned airplanes wearing golf cleats and carrying their clubs.
"Ronnie is a maverick," Shipley said. "The argument that he is a hard-charging partisan with a hidden agenda is not supported by the facts."
One time, however, Earle brought now-U.S. Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison, a Republican, to trial on ethics charges. He dropped the case at the last minute — something GOP activists seized upon as proof that he was trying to humiliate Hutchison because of her party affiliation.
"Nobody would ever accuse Ronnie of being nonpartisan," said Alan Sager, a professor at the University of Texas in Austin and the chairman of the Travis County Republican Party.
Today, Sager said, Earle is merely going after DeLay in an effort to hurt the Republican Party and President Bush. And while DeLay's immediate response was to attack the prosecutor Wednesday, Sager said, the congressman would have a more definitive defense at trial: the 1st Amendment.
"This is a case of free speech," he said. "We're not talking about people who committed crimes. We're talking about people who were involved in political campaigns and were spending money.
"Ronnie Earle wants to criminalize political activity."
One Republican says he'll give it back
This is news:
Tom DeLay gets away with his corruption because the vast, silent majority of the Republican caucus doesn’t give a damn about clean government. They all benefit from Mr DeLay’s shenanigans, either directly, like Messrs. Green and Ryan, or indirectly, by leveraging all that money to strengthen the Republican majority in Congress. Google “Texas redistricting” and you’ll see what I mean (”Georgia redistricting” and “Ohio redistricting” will yield similar results).Two hundred fory-one sitting members of Congress have taken money from DeLay's committee. Here's a list.
Is the Hotline's Blogometer stealing my stuff? From its Sept. 28 edition:
KATRINA RESPONSE: No One Wins The Blame Game -- You Only LoseExactly, as this post on my Blame Game board game explains, it's a game nobody wins. Try as you might, you'll never get out of New Orleans. But if you buy a game it will help hurricane victims.
to extremists on stem cell research
State Sen. Alberta Darling took a courageous and compassionate stand on Tuesday.
In his final Earth Day message last April, the late Senator Gaylord Nelson denounced the Bush administration plan to open the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge to oil drilling, saying it was like burning the furniture in the White House to keep the first family warm.
Two Wisconsin soldiers were killed and a third was injured by shrapnel when a roadside bomb exploded as they drove past in Iraq.
Molly Ivins says George W. Bush has broken the first commandment of governing: Thou Shalt Not Steal the People's Money. She says he has brought us beaucoup fraud, waste and abuse, not necessarily in that order.
The witness list for Brian Burke's upcoming trial is now public, and your humble scribe, Xoff, is one of 169 potential witnesses listed.
So the governor's barbecue for the news media, it turns out, cost about $400. About 20 or so people reimbursed the cost of the food, so that's maybe $140-200 that came back. Net cost, worst case, is maybe $250.
The New York Times, in a page one story, discusses the latest double whammy to befall Hurricane Katrina victims -- a tougher new bankruptcy law. Wisconsin's hero, Rep. F. James Sensenbrenner, has managed to single-handedly insure that victims will get no relief from the new law, by refusing to even hold a hearing to consider it. Not heartless, though, the Journal Sentinel says. Just wrong.
Storm Victims May Face Curbs On Bankruptcy
By MARY WILLIAMS WALSH
and RIVA D. ATLAS
When Congress agreed this spring to tighten the bankruptcy laws and crack down on consumers who took on debt irresponsibly, no one had the victims of Hurricane Katrina in mind.
But four weeks after New Orleans flooded and tens of thousands of other residents of the Gulf Coast also lost their homes and livelihoods, a stricter new personal bankruptcy law scheduled to take effect on Oct. 17 is likely to deliver another blow to those dislocated by the storm.
The law was intended to keep individuals from taking on debts they had no intention of paying off. But many once-solvent Katrina victims are likely to be caught up in the net intended to catch deadbeats.
Right after Hurricane Katrina struck, several lawmakers - mostly Democrats but including some Senate Republicans - suggested that storm victims along the Gulf Coast should get relief from the new law's stricter provisions, which are intended to screen filers by income and make those with higher incomes repay their debts over several years. Under the old law, which remains in effect until mid-October, many more filers can have their debts canceled quickly in federal bankruptcy courts.
But House Republicans, who fought off a proposed amendment that would have made bankruptcy filings easier for victims of natural disasters, said there was no reason to carve out a broad exemption just because of the storm.
Representative F. James Sensenbrenner Jr. of Wisconsin, the chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, rejected the notion of reopening the legislation, saying it already included provisions that would ensure that people left "down and out" by the storm would still be able to shed most of their debts. Lawmakers who lost the long fight over the law, he said, "ought to get over it," according to The Associated Press.
A White House spokesman, Trent Duffy, said the administration "doesn't see a lot of merit" in calls to delay the law's effective date but was considering making allowances for hurricane victims.
David Olsen, the Jefferson alderman who dared to vote against Wal-Mart, lost his recall election today.
Chris Micklos gives Waukesha DA Paul Bucher the benefit of the doubt, and concludes that some intern must have written the flippant letter to AG Peg Lautenschlager that's discussed in the post below. Bucher wants paper to do his job.
Surely, a man of your stature—the duly elected District Attorney of Waukesha County and candidate for the highest law enforcement post in the state—would never write such an infantile and unprofessional missive as the one attributed to you and dated September 26, 2005. Between the sarcastic tone, the condescending language, and the use of such childish phrases like “just so you know”, the letter—had it actually been written by you or with your consent—would indicate an individual without the personal maturity or professional integrity to drive an ice cream truck, much less serve as District Attorney of one of Wisconsin’s largest counties.I think Micklos is on to something. Bucher should investigate, find the culprit who wrote that letter, and see that he (or she) never works for him again.
Republicans are chortling over an exchange between Waukesha DA Paul Bucher and AG Peg Lautenschlager, whose job he's seeking. They think Bucher scored some real points. I think he comes off looking like someone asking the newspaper to do his job.
From: Press.Releases@WhiteHouse.Gov
Subject: POOL REPORT #2, 9/26/05
Date: September 26, 2005 7:36:57 PM EDT
Reply-To: Press.Releases@WhiteHouse.Gov
Pool Report #2, 9/26/05
Late on this day of self-restraint in fuel consumption for federal officials advised by the president to avert “non-essential travel,” the president departed from the White House South Lawn driveway by motorcade at 6:51 pm EDT on a rainy evening.Here's the stated purpose: a “farewell dinner” for Gen. Richard Myers at the NW Washington, DC, home of Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, a stately brick house, with two main stories and three dormer windows in the slate roof on a third floor. We had no actual sighting of the president, however, and cannot vouch for his accompaniment.
This motorcade was marginally shorter in the SUV category - five - than the one that traveled to the Energy Department today, with six SUVs. But it was longer in vans, four tonight, compared with three this morning. Two limos, of course.
The motorcade obeyed some traffic signals along Connecticut Avenue, then blew through others north of the tunnel, then obeyed again, and turned onto a lovely residential street.The 'cade delivered the president chez Rumsfeld at 7:01 pm, and the pool hunkered down for a hold in the shelter of the vans.
Mark Silva
White House Correspondent
Chicago Tribune
Hat tip: Wonkette
I was a little disappointed that Bush still hasn't produced the cardigan sweater.
I guess my news judgment is slipping.
Milwaukee County Sheriff David Clarke, who wants oh-so-badly to be a Republican but knows he can't be elected as one, takes a hit from Joel McNally in a Capital Times op ed piece.
Even worse news for Clarke is that former Municipal Judge Vince Bobot is considering running against Clarke as a real Democrat. Bobot, a former Milwaukee police officer, was the candidate who caused the most trouble for Clarke in his disastrous run for Milwaukee mayor.Bobot and Clarke both ran poorly in the mayoral primary, in which Tom Barrett and Marvin Pratt emerged as the top two. But in a Democratic primary -- and with Republicans prevented from crossing over because of a GOP primary for governor -- Clarke could face a real test. Whether Bobot is the one to do it remains to be seen, but he is beginning to beat the bushes and test support, and so far no one else has emerged.
Bobot was the whistle-blower who challenged Clarke's failure to initially submit a paltry 1,500 valid signatures on nomination papers. An extremely lenient City Election Commission allowed Clarke to correct his nomination papers after the deadline so he wouldn't be dropped from the ballot.
Not only does Bobot have experience in law enforcement and on the bench, but he's also a big, friendly likable guy. Clarke clearly is struggling with his orientation as a Republican trapped in the body of a Democrat.
hiring based on religious views
"One of the questions I like asking people - and it's not are they born again - but I like asking people, just so I can get an idea of their understanding of their religious views is, if you die today and were standing before the judgment seat of God and God said, 'Why should I let you into heaven?' what would you say?"
If I'm going to have somebody working in my office, it's nice to know where, how they view their relation to God, whether entrance into heaven is something they earn or if it's a free gift."
-- State Sen. Tom Reynolds, explaining why he asks those questions in job interviews for prospective staff.
"This is not harmless chit-chat," the Journal Sentinel says in an editorial. "These are questions that have no place in the context of interviews or the workplace."
But if House Republicans have their way, those are the kinds of questions teachers may be asked when applying for jobs with Head Start.
Rep. Mark Green, who's running for governor, and Reynolds, the state senator, are not that far apart on the issue.
In a broad update of the Head Start program, the House voted Thursday to let preschool providers consider a person's faith when hiring workers — and still be eligible for federal grants, the AP reports.
The Republican-led House said the move protects the rights of religious groups, but Democrats blasted it as discriminatory. The debate over religion overshadowed the main parts of the bill, which had drawn bipartisan support.
The vote on the amendment allowing the religion-based hiring was even tighter. It passed 220-196, with support from 10 Democrats, none from Wisconsin. All four Wisconsin Republicans -- Mark Green, F. Jim Sensenbrenner, Paul Ryan, and Tom Petri -- voted for the amendment. One of the Dems, Ron Kind, was absent. Roll call.
"[M}ost of the debate Thursday was not about oversight. It was about religion and civil rights. The Republican plan would, for example, allow a Catholic church that provides Head Start services to employ only Catholic child-care workers, and to reject equally qualified workers of other religions.," the AP reported.
"This is about our children, and denying them exemplary services just because the organization happens to be a religious one is just cruel," said Rep. Virginia Foxx, R-N.C.
Democrats and Republicans offered different interpretations of whether the Constitution, federal law and court rulings protected — or prevented — federally aided centers from hiring based on religion.
"Congress should not be in the business of supporting state-sponsored discrimination," said Rep. Alcee Hastings, D-Fla.
The House bill, which had sailed through the Education Committee without controversy, would reauthorize the Head Start program through 2011. A similar measure in the Senate is pending.
The Senate bill does not include the religion-based hiring provision, although the language is likely to be offered as an amendment when the bill comes to a vote, as it was in the House.
she's now a criminal, too
By Daniela Deane and Petula Dvorak
Washington Post Staff Writers
Cindy Sheehan, the grieving California mother of a soldier slain in Iraq, was arrested today while protesting the Iraq war outside the White House.
Sheehan, whose 24-year-old son Casey was killed last year, and several dozen other protesters staged a sit-in on the sidewalk on Pennsylvania Avenue after marching along the pedestrian walkway, the Associated Press reported. Police warned them three times that they had to move along before making arrests, the news agency said.
"The whole world is watching," protesters chanted as Sheehan was led to a police vehicle.
Sheehan and some 200 other protesters sat in circles on the sidewalk,apparently courting arrest. Hundreds more people rallied in Lafayette Park, across Pennsylvania Avenue.
Sheehan's arrest came after a massive antiwar demonstration Saturday in Washington which drew more than 100,000 people -- the largest such demonstration since the Iraq war began in spring 2003. A demonstration supporting the war drew roughly 500 people Sunday.
Sensenbrenner vote on Katrina relief
Democrat Bryan Kennedy, who's challenging Rep. F. Us Sensenbrenner for Congress again next year, has unveiled a new television commercial which you can view here. It began airing today, is scheduled to run a week, and a fundraising campaign is underway to keep it on the air.
The Journal Sentinel editorial board has chastized the Wisconsin Democratic Party for calling Rep. F. Jim Sensenbrenner "heartless" for his vote against aid to victims of Hurricane Katrina.
F. James Sensenbrenner, as a member of Congress, has the opportunity to do something in his official capacity. But he has refused.I've seen no evidence since then to suggest that I was wrong. Maybe he's had some privqte chats with the editorial board, but Sensenbrenner has done nothing to demonstrate any compassion for the victims, and has continued to oppose any relief, even in the bankruptcy laws. He has complained about accountability, but proposed nothing to improve it, He just voted no. In a radio interview, asked if he was uncaring, Sensenbrenner said he cared about money being spent wisely.
I don't know what he has done personally to help victims. I hope he has been generous. He certainly has the means, if he chose, to write a million dollar check. Maybe he and Cheryl are preparing their extra rooms right now to take in some survivors. I hope so.
But it is his role in the House of Representatives that is at issue.
His title is Representative. But who does he represent?
Does his vote represent the people of his district?
Are we to believe that the people of Cedarburg, Whitefish Bay, Shorewood, River Hills, Wauwatosa, West Bend, Mequon, Brown Deer, and other communities in his district wanted him to vote no?
Do you think the people of his district want to turn their backs on the survivors of Katrina?
Of course they don't.
So who is it, exactly, that Representative Sensenbrenner is representing?
It's not the Republican Party. Only 11 Republicans voted against the bill. It's certainly not his leader, President Bush, who asked for the money.
I'm hard-pressed to explain. Any possible answer seems too callous to be true.
Is he representing the super-rich, who stand to benefit from proposed tax cuts that may never happen now because of the cost of Katrina? You'd like to think not, since he is one of the potential beneficiaries of the tax cut.
If and when he explains himself, I suspect we will learn that he is representing some misguided, esoteric principle that only he can understand.
A Journal Sentinel Sunday editorial goes on at some length, and in some detail, about why the Republican obsession with photo ID cards for voters won't solve any of the real problems with Wisconsin's election system.
compare to Walker's $19,000 in freebies
The Sykes-McBride Mutual Admiration Society has collaborated to raise questions about a cookout Gov. Jim Doyle held for the Capitol press corps last week. They ask: If some of the reporters got a free sandwich, isn't that the same as Milwaukee County Exec Scott Walker giving out free tickets to Milwaukee attractions?
Let's talk for a minute about the freebies that Walker, a candidate for governor, gave to people who were not in the news media, during his now-famous Harley tour of Wisconsin media markets last month.It's probably because he doesn't want to know the answer. The thing is, it is illegal as well as unethical for a candidate for office in Wisconsin to give anything of value (beyond an emery board or a football schedule) to a voter.
Walker's main defense has been that the whole trip was to promote Milwaukee tourism, not his campaign for governor, and that he was giving free tickets to the news media to help bring tourists to Milwaukee County. He also pointed out more than once that the county and state ethics boards and state election board had told him it was OK.
The ethics and elections boards signed off on the premise that the tickets were going to the media. But what about the non-media tickets? Who got them? Was that OK, too?
Let's start with who got free tickets, from documents released in an open records request:
Kutter Harley-Davidson, Janesville -- 8 NASCAR, 4 Summerfest, 6 State Fair, 2 US Bank golf championship.
Kegel's Harley-Davidson, Rockford -- 6 Art Museum, 4 Mexican Fiesta, 12 NASCAR, 5 Children's museum, 6 State Fair, 2 Irish Fest, 10 Indian Summer, 2 Pettit Ice Center.
Kathy Kopp, executive director, Platteville Chamber of Commerce -- 10 Indian Summer, 4 Pettit Ice Center, 4 Art Museum, 4 Zoo, 5 Children's Museum.
George Krueger, Platteville Area Industrial Development Corp. -- 4 NASCAR, 2 State Fair.
St. Paul Harley-Davidson -- 10 Indian Summer, 2 US Bank golf, 8 Parks, 5 Children's Museum, 4 NASCAR, 2 Mexican Fiesta.
GM Tomahawk Plant -- 4 NASCAR, 2 Summerfest, 2 US Bank golf, 2 Indian Summer.
OK, those are not media outlets, agreed? Some are listed as businesses. But people -- owners or employees, probably -- not businesses, ended up with the tickets.
Did any agency ever tell Walker it was OK to give freebies to people (if they live in Wisconsin, the term would be voters)?
Well, no, because he didn't ask them that question.
recall vote nears in Jefferson
Tuesday is election day in Jefferson, where Wal-Mart supporters have forced a vote on whether to recall Alderman Dave Olsen, who voted against an annexation to clear the way for a superstore.
Keep Olsen on council
The City of Jefferson has one of those election rarities next Tuesday: a vote to recall Alderman Dave Olsen. Recall elections are a safety net under our system of government, typically reserved for situations in which an elected official has violated or otherwise lost the public trust.Unfortunately, they are being used more and more in attempts to remove elected officials who have offended some special interest faction or another. Such is the case in Jefferson. Councilman Olsen is facing a recall not for malfeasance in office or some infraction, but for having the audacity to vote the way he thought best represented his constituents.
The Walworth County district attorney's office found the main charge in the recall petition against Olsen - an alleged violation of the state's open meetings law - to be without merit. Following an informal review, Wisconsin's attorney general also found no violation.
For people who understand the intent and letter of the open meetings law, these decisions weren't a surprise. The intent is that the decision-making process leading up to government actions occur in the full view of voters. Olsen's "crime," in this case, was to cede his question time to fellow Jefferson citizens at what was listed as an "informational meeting" with Wal-Mart officials. This was the only public participation that took place at the meeting and, as the Walworth County assistant D.A. pointed out, the public notice of the meeting did not limit who would be involved with the discussion.
The next night, Olsen cast one of three deciding votes against annexing land from the Town of Jefferson into the city - land that was proposed for the Supercenter, but not committed for by Wal-Mart. The property owners seeking the annexation of the Town of Jefferson property submitted the open meetings complaint.
Soon, a group led by two ardent pro-Wal-Mart advocates, called the "Coalition for the Best Jefferson," circulated a recall petition listing an unspecified open meetings violation, as well a catch-all line claiming that Olsen "failed to act in the best interest of Jefferson."We often find ourselves on the opposite side of issues from Mr. Olsen, but his is one of the public's most accessible members of the council. He doesn't deserve having to face a whispering campaign concerning charges that died quickly when exposed to the light of day.
If this is really about Wal-Mart, which we believe it is, then the petitioners should have said so in the document. Of course, it is possible that then they might have had trouble gathering enough signatures if that had been stated up front. If there were other reasons for forcing the recall, they should have been specified so they could have been addressed publicly.
We believe the public tolerates differing opinions if they are honest ones. Those who try to punish or silence people whose opinions they disagree with often harm themselves more than their target. They spend so much time circling the wagons that they forget the direction the wagon trains was taking in the first place. Unfortunately, of late, some in Jefferson have forgotten these simple truths.
We recommend keeping Dave Olsen on the council next Tuesday. More importantly though, we'd like to see a full slate of candidates on the ballot - including Chris Havill - when Olsen's and other aldermanic seats are up for election next spring...just a few short months away.
Unintended consequences
As readers of this column know, we have thought all along that a Wal-Mart would not be a positive impact on the area's future. In other places, people also feel that way, with Stoughton being the most recent community to turn down annexing land for the mega-retailer.Earlier this year, we felt the majority of the Jefferson Common Council punished us for our editorial opinion by moving its legal notices from the Daily Union to a newspaper with a much smaller Jefferson circulation and higher legal advertising rates. We think they though that move would cause us to cut back our coverage. Well, obviously, it didn't.
On top of that, since the council moved the legals, our Jefferson circulation - as of Sept. 21 - has gone up 153 copies a day.
The law of unintended consequences still holds.
CRG Network generally opines in favor of recalls regardless of the reason and would very likely have offered our assistance to the Petitioners had they requested it. Recalls are somewhat analogous to the "vote of confidence" procedure in parliamentary systems but with a significantly higher standard for initiation, especially in Wisconsin. They also are self-limiting in that they ultimately reflect the will of the people. Recalls for poor reasons rarely, if ever, succeed.
Nevertheless, we are troubled by the fact that the petition in this case bore a reason for recall that was ultimately proven to be untrue. State statutes do not require the reason to be true and many reasons for recall can never be proved or disproved. However, the integrity of the recall process requires that if the reason given is a simple matter of law that can be adjudicated in a reasonable amount of time, Petitioners should make every effort to wait for final adjudication before proceeding or select a different reason for recall. Given the flexibility of the statutes, this is not an unreasonable burden.
We also are concerned that a recall petition was offered primarily because citizens, regardless of their beliefs, were given a chance to speak. While we sympathize with citizens who felt deprived of the opportunity to offer opposing points of view, we question whether any of the citizen input had a measurable effect on the outcome of any votes. Although we do not condone such practices, at worst, we see this as a case of being politically outmaneuvered. Any Wal-Mart advocate on the Common Council could have also arranged to yield their time as well.
Regardless of the above, CRG Network still believes wide latitude should be given to all Petitioners and, despite serious reservations about its reasons and execution, would not suggest this recall be halted. Moreover, given that the recall election will proceed as scheduled, our opinion is already rendered moot. We would, however, caution all citizens of the City of Jefferson to carefully examine their motives before voting, especially if you signed the petition under the false impression that a violation of state law was committed. You have all been given another chance to speak. Do so in the most informed way possible.
"When you visit a place like Jefferson, Wisconsin you are on the front lines of America's class war. Working people are losing this war, as privileged elites arrange the rules to perpetuate their own advantage." -- Bill Moyers.The struggle over Wal-Mart in Jefferson has been going on for more than a year. This transcript from the Oct. 22, 2004 "NOW" with Bill Moyers on PBS explained the split in the community. With a recall election scheduled for Tuesday, spurred in large part by Wal-Mart backers, it seems like a good time to revisit the story. Sylvia Chase is the reporter.
SYLVIA CHASE: . . . [T]here is another Arkansas traveler bearing down on them: Wal-Mart. Wisconsin has become saturated with them -- Jefferson has 10 stores little more than a 20-minute drive away. Yet, Wal-Mart intends to put down roots in this Jefferson cornfield -- a 150,000 square-foot supercenter, groceries included.
DAVE LORBECKI (at Wal-Mart meeting): My question is do we really need another super Wal-Mart center every 10 miles apart?
SYLVIA CHASE: A town meeting grew tense whe
