McBride Forgets, Apparently

Keeping Bill's blog up to the founder's standards is a big responsibility, so I would be remiss if I didn't point out the following apparent contradiction over there on the right side of the Blogosphere:

On Saturday, January 28th, Jessica McBride posted an item on her blog with this title:

If you have to use the word "apparently", people, you don't have the story; will you now report on Doyle's strategist this hard?

McBride was objecting to a Milwaukee Journal Sentinel story about a free NBA basketball ticket that is at the center of a political fracas involving Mark Graul, campaign manager for Mark Green, member of Congress and Republican gubernatorial candidate. She also called for equally tough reporting on Doyle campaign strategist Rich Judge. Here are the few graphs: the quotation marks are mine, to separate the posted material from my remarks.

"From Sunday's Milwaukee Journal Sentinel hatchet job on Mark Graul, strategist for Republican gubernatorial candidate Mark Green (a story that had 8 times as many words as the paper's original news brief on Travelgate), comes this lead (*my emphasis in bold):

"Mark Graul, campaign manager for U.S. Rep. Mark Green, Republican candidate for Wisconsin governor, apparently took an improper gift from a lobbyist while working as the congressman's top aide.

"If you've got to use the word "apparently" in the lead, it means you don't have the goods. And if you don't have the goods, it's highly unfair to write a lead like this. I know this trick; I worked at this newspaper. You don't stick the word "apparently" in a lead unless you aren't quite sure what you are saying is true, or you know you can't quite prove it. So you want to imply it as heavily as you can, but you soften it. If you aren't quite sure what you are saying is true, it's highly unfair to hang a big story on it in such a dramatic fashion."

OK. The blog goes on...Anyway: I get the point. I worked at the paper, too. Which is why the lead sentence from the following story stored in the paper's online archive caught my attention. Again, the quotation marks are mine.

Executive sought details in August

By JESSICA MCBRIDE and STEVE SCHULTZE of the Journal Sentinel staff
Last Updated: Jan. 17, 2002

"County Executive F. Thomas Ament apparently knew details of his sweetened pension at least by August - two months earlier than he has previously acknowledged."

'Nuff said, apparently.

Pistol-Packers Lose, Public Wins

Good thing the concealed gun-carrying gubernatorial veto was sustained and the issue is buried for a while (until it's resurrected in wearisome, fearsome campaign ads).

Let's tell our legislators to get focused on substance - - health care reform, job creation, education improvement, energy and water conservation - - that affects people's lives in Wisconsin.

Concealed carry has always been a fake, wedge issue whipped up by the political Right as fear-based politics to energize its base. The public isn't made safer with handguns and other deadly weapons carried in pockets and purses and briefcases.

Denial on Climate Change, Again

Here's something to think about as gas hits $2.50 a gallon and the Bush administration continues to roll back environmental policy from clean air to national forest protections.

Benign neglect, you say? But wait! The administration is actually taking action: It is silencing NASA's top climate change expert, according to The New York Times, continuing its head-in-the-sand, pro-Big Oil War on Science.

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/01/29/science/earth/29climate.html

Keep in mind that the Bush-Cheney apologists on conservative talk radio claim that human beings could not possibly cause climate change. The administration flacks' proof (sic) is that cloud-seeding efforts to produce rain have failed.

Hold that nonsequitur in place as you read the Times piece, knowing that alot of people think they are hearing facts on conservative talk radio.

Any wonder that there is a growing body of credible evidence about the reality and danger of climate change - - but that it is being ignored by administration policy makers and their ideological echo chamber?

The wrong answer to the health care crisis

In tonight's State of the Monarchy, King George will be touting something called Health Savings Accounts (HSA's) as the answer to everyones anxiety about rising health care costs.

Here's just a snapshot of Bush's record on health care over the last five years.

-The cost of family health insurance is rising faster than wages. Average premiums have increased 71 percent, growing from an average of $6,348 in 2000 to $10,880 in 2005. (Kaiser Family Foundation and the Health Research & Education Trust, September 2005)

-Deductibles are increasing. The average in-network deductible for the most common type of health plan has grown 85 percent for single coverage, an increase from $175 in 2000 to $323 in 2005. The average deductible for family coverage for the most common type of health plan is now $679. (Kaiser Family Foundation and the Health Research & Education Trust, September 2005)

-Drug prices are escalating. Prices for commonly used brand-name drugs have been rising faster than the general inflation rate since 2000. Prices for these brand-name drugs increased 6.1 percent in 2005, twice the rate of inflation. (AARP, November 2005)

-Rising health costs increase the chances that patients will receive large medical bills that they simply cannot pay. Medical reasons – such as illness or injury or large uncovered medical bills – contributed to about 46 percent of personal bankruptcy filings. (Himmelstein et al., Health Affairs, February 2, 2005)

-Health care spending is also consuming a larger share of the nation’s economic output. National health care spending, which represented 13.8 percent of the gross domestic product in 2000, has risen to 16 percent. (Health Affairs, January/February 2006)

HSA's are also Green and Walkers answer to our health care crisis as it is for just about every Republican. Why? Because the health care industry that funds their campaigns like them.

They sound great but here's the reality when it comes to HSA's.

HSAs provide the most benefit to those who need it least – the wealthy who can already afford health coverage. HSAs primarily benefit upper-income people while providing little or no benefit to middle- and low-income families struggling to afford health coverage. It is upper-income people who have the resources to maximize their contributions to an HSA each year and who receive the greatest tax advantage from doing so. For example, an upper-income person in the 35 percent income tax bracket would be able to deduct 35 percent of their HSA contribution. But someone in the 15 percent income tax bracket – who is more likely to have difficulty affording health coverage – would only be able to deduct 15 percent of their HSA contribution. Ninety-four percent of the uninsured are in the 15 percent, 10 percent, or zero percent income tax bracket and would receive little or no tax benefit from HSAs. (Commonwealth Fund, April 2005) If the President proposes to increase the amount of money that individuals can deposit into an HSA, he will only further advantage the wealthy (who have the resources to make additional deposits) while neglecting low-income people (who do not have the extra funds to put into an HSA).

HSAs increase out-of-pocket costs, harming those in less-than-perfect health and people with modest incomes. HSAs are a lure to encourage people to switch to a high-deductible health plan (e.g., a deductible of at least $1,000 for individual coverage and at least $2,000 for family coverage). Administration officials and conservative economists advocate high-deductible plans because they believe people are over-insured and should be spending more of their own money on health care. But promoting high-deductible plans means asking people with chronic health conditions and other medical conditions to pay more for their health care. A recent survey found that people with “consumer-driven” health plans (i.e., a high-deductible plan with an HSA or a health reimbursement arrangement) are significantly more likely to avoid, skip or delay health care because of the cost and are more likely to spend more of their income on health care than people in more comprehensive health plans. (EBRI/Commonwealth Fund, December 2005) The people who most need and deserve assistance with their health expenses – the sick and those with low incomes – would actually be worse off under the President’s plan.

HSAs could increase premiums for comprehensive health coverage. The widespread use of HSAs and high-deductibles plans could segment the insurance market: the young and the healthy would likely disproportionately switch to HSAs with high-deductible plans while older and sicker people would want to remain in low-deductible health plans. This kind of risk selection would hurt older and sicker people. The greater the number of the healthy and wealthy who switch to HSAs and high-deductible plans, the higher the premiums will rise for the older and sicker people who want to retain their comprehensive coverage. Providing a tax deduction for high-deductible plans, as the President has proposed in the past, would increase the likelihood of this risk segmentation and its premium-escalating effect on comprehensive health plans. (Commonwealth Fund, April 2005)

Providing a tax deduction for high-deductible plans would actually increase the number of uninsured Americans. To expand the use of HSAs, President Bush has proposed in the past to provide a tax deduction for the high-deductible plans that accompany HSAs. But this type of tax deduction would adversely affect employer-based health coverage and, according to MIT economist Jonathan Gruber, would likely cause a 350,000 person increase in the number of uninsured Americans. Gruber’s analysis also found that the tax deduction would not be well targeted: 87 percent of those who would take advantage of the deduction would already have health insurance. (Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, May 10, 2004)

HSAs will not lead to substantial containment of health care costs. Proponents of HSAs and high-deductible plans argue that exposing people to more out-of-pocket health costs will make them more careful consumers of health care. But unlike most other goods and services, patients typically do not have the specialized knowledge to determine what health care services they need and often do not have the time to compare prices before seeking care. Information on price and quality of health care services is not available to most patients. Moreover, HSAs and high-deductible plans would do nothing to restrain the cost of expensive treatments, which would be covered by the high-deductible plan and are largely responsible for high health spending: only 21 percent of total health spending falls below the minimum deductible for an HSA (i.e., $1,000 for an individual and $2,000 for a family). (Commonwealth Fund, April 2005)

Let's hope the media in Wisconsin begin asking Green and Walker questions about their failed approach to health care reform. Not only is it one of the top issues on the mind of their readers (voters) but health care reform is going to be a big issue in the race for Governor. On no single issue could the choice be as clear as on health care.

Gladys Walsh and the Dept. of All

Headline: Doyle cancels travel contract
Award to travel firm dogged administration

Gladys Walsh was a little old lady who appeared faithfully every session in the early 1970s to deliver a single message to the Joint Finance Committee: "Abolish the Department of Administration."

Miss Walsh -- this was an era before the title Ms. was invented -- dressed like my eighth-grade teacher. She wore Navy blue flowered print dresses and hats, and looked over her rimless glasses at committee members as she lectured them in Political Science 101.

She argued that the Department of Administration was an unconstitutional agglomeration of power in a single state agency, a creature whose appetite for power had been fed by the Kellett Commission of the late '60s, which created the Department of Natural Resources and various other agencies with long names, from smaller agencies with fewer powers.

But DOA was above them all, in charge of creating the state budget for the governor and generally running the show. In the days when Pat Lucey was governor, the governor had to say "Please..." to a lot of state agencies, which were mostly independent fiefdoms run by boards that the governor could influence as he appointed his people.

DOA was the only agency that was clearly under his control. In those days, Joe Nusbaum was DOA secretary, the agency had 974 employees and its two-year budget was $40.1 million.

Governors made a habit of adding to DOA's authority over the years, no doubt causing Miss Walsh to spin in her grave.

The zenith of DOA power, of course, was under Tommy Thompson, who evidently inculcated the agency with the notion they were under under the governor's personal and political control. A long list of DOA employees were on the list of Tommy's political contributors in my database, the first -- and last -- ever assembled by a news organization in Wisconsin.

Today, the DOA has fewer employees than it had in 1973: 902.08. Somebody should find that eight-hundredths of an employee and interview him or her. That is, if the eight hundredths includes his or her mouth.

But DOA's budget has soared to $915.8 million. That's more than a five-fold increase in budget, in inflation-adjusted dollars, since the Lucey years.

Under Tommy's DOA secretary, the Germanic Jim Klauser, DOA's major failure was its attempt to sneak a gas tax increase into law. It strove to centralize the state's data functions into a giant computer under Klauser's control and accumulate still more power any way it could. Its nickname was the Department of All.

One of the first powers DOA got was control over state purchasing, in 1959. Today the agency is reeling under the indictment of a career civil servant for allegedly throwing a contract to friends of the governor.

Regardless of who knew what and who did what, maybe Gladys Walsh was right. Maybe too much authority in one place is a truly dangerous thing.

'Spies, Lies and Wiretaps'

"A bit over a week ago, President Bush and his men promised to provide the legal, constitutional and moral justifications for the sort of warrantless spying on Americans that has been illegal for nearly 30 years, the New York Times wrote in an editorial Sunday.

"Instead, we got the familiar mix of political spin, clumsy historical misinformation, contemptuous dismissals of civil liberties concerns, cynical attempts to paint dissents as anti-American and pro-terrorist, and a couple of big, dangerous lies."

If you didn't see it, check out the whole editorial on the Times web site, www.nytimes.com. You may have to be a subscriber to the Times or Times Select. You should be.

Watch what they do, not what they say

President Bush, in his state of the union speech tonight, is expected to call for new initiatives to reduce energy prices and reliance on foreign oil. Meanwhile, his fellow Republicans in Congress are very close to cutting $20 million from a program allowing farmers to buy renewable energy systems or to improve their farms' energy-efficiency.

One order of pandering with a side of hypocrisy coming right up.

Gonzales caught on wiretapping

The Bush administration has been on a PR campaign to deflect questions about the fact that they have been running a secret domestic spying program without legislative or judicial oversight.

The Bushies want people to believe this about fighting terrorism but the reality is it's about our values and the foundations upon which our country was built-- a democracy with three co-equal branches of government.

To date the media and pollsters have been asking the wrong question. Do most people support the use of wiretaps to go after terrorists? Sure, but they don't believe Bush should be engaging in secret, warrantless domestic spying on Americans and that is what he has been doing.

As upcoming congressional hearings will reveal, the big problem for King George is the fact that the Administration has been misleading congress about the secret program and going around the judicial branch with no legal leg to stand on.

Look for our very own, Russ Feingold to be asking the tough questions. In fact he has already started. As the Washington Post reports Tuesday:

Sen. Russell Feingold (D-Wis.) charged yesterday that Attorney General Alberto R. Gonzales misled the Senate during his confirmation hearing a year ago when he appeared to try to avoid answering a question about whether the president could authorize warrantless wiretapping of U.S. citizens.

"It now appears that the Attorney General was not being straight with the Judiciary Committee and he has some explaining to do," Feingold said in a statement yesterday.

When you are so arrogant as to believe that you can simply blow off two branches of government some people might have some questions and it's good to see Feingold taking the lead in challenging an administration that continues on it's drunk with power bender.

Concealed carry override: NRA is powerless

On Tuesday, the Assembly votes on whether or not to override Gov. Doyle's veto (for what seems like the zillionth time) of Sen. Dave Zien's concealed carry bill. It will be a close vote, by all accounts.

One thing to consider: last session, Rep. Gary Sherman (D-Port Wing), a co-author (!) of concealed carry, was the deciding vote against overriding the governor's veto. Sherman represents a northern, rural district that exemplifies NRA country. The gun lobby was enraged, and threw everything they had at him, even luring Sherman's predecessor, Barb Linton, out of retirement to run against him as a Republican.

Linton got slaughtered, and Sherman coasted to re-election. There is a lesson in this story for Assembly Dems who are sweating their votes on this issue.

Of Grauls and Judges

With their boy Mark Graul definitively caught with his hand in the Abramoff cookie jar, the Get Doyle crowd has decided the best defense is a good offense. To that end, they're ramping up the chatter about Doyle campaign manager Rich Judge (see McBucher and McSykes), and the fact that he (like just about every other political operative in this state) spent some time working in the now-defunct caucuses some six years ago.

The justification is that if Graul's acceptance of free luxury box tickets from Jack Abramoff in 2000 (in violation of House ethics rules) is going to be an issue, so should Judge's work history from the same period.

The comparison is bogus. And pathetic.

The reason - the one and only reason - that anyone cares TODAY about what Graul did six years ago is because he was still having trouble keeping his stories straight LAST WEEK. The event itself is ancient history, but it continues to be newsworthy because Graul still can't bring himself to tell the truth about it.

Real voters couldn't give a lick what a couple of political operatives did in 2000. But Graul has given the Abramoff issue currency through his own incompetence at keeping his story straight, and is now justifiably paying the price. That has nothing to do with what people did in 2000; it has everything to do with what people are doing in 2006.

Exposed: Cheney's Secret Prison in SEWRPC's HQ !

Ok. Vice President Dick Cheney isn't running a secret prison out of the Southeastern Wisconsin Regional Planning Commission's (SEWRPC) headquarters in Pewaukee. I made that up.

But considering the veil of anonymity SEWRPC operates under, Dick Cheney might be living in its basement for all we know.

Take, for example, State Senator Mary Lazich's legislation that would require boards with taxing authority to be elected, rather the appointed. She seems to be targeting technical boards for the change but in public comments talked about including the usual suspects like the Wisconsin Center District and the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District.

What about SEWRPC? SEWRPC pays for its operations through a regional tax levy apportioned to each of the seven counties it serves on the basis of equalized valuation. Plus it exerts a great deal of influence over policy decisions that can involve billions of tax dollars and private investment. Sounds to me like they fit the bill (pun intended) to a tee.

SEWRPC also escaped mention in the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel's news coverage and editorial offering general support for Lazich''s idea. Transportion, land use, water and housing continue to be controversial issues in the region. But search the local newspaper's archives and you'll be astonished by how little has been written about them over the past few years. How does SEWRPC manage to fly so far under the radar screen?

Is this a case of amnesia? Or politics?

Country feels less safe with Bush

Russ Feingold has been saying for months that the Iraq War has in fact made us less safe against terrorism. Not only is he right but the American people agree.

A new Zogby poll shows that a majority of the American people feel less safe with Bush as President.

"In September 2005, 51% said they felt safer with Bush as President, down from numbers above 60% in earlier polls. Now, just 43% said they feel safer with Bush as President, while 53% said they feel less safe, the survey shows. "

This comes on top of the fact that only 39% of Americans approve of the job Bush is doing.

Walker's management woes: Agostini's impolitic comment

The most amazing comment in the whole Milwaukee County Parks $2.3 million deficit fiasco came from county Budget Director Stephen Agostini last week when he said of county government: "We have a lot of bad managers out there who don't take it seriously."

Uh, Steve? Those are County Executive Scott Walker's managers. You just told the entire world that your boss, a candidate for governor, has bad managers.

Do you really think that will win him any votes, or are you secretly pulling for Mark Green?

More on fees

It was nice to see more legislators join the "Do as I say, not as I do" crowd in Sunday's Milwaukee Journal Sentinel. If too many of them crowd into the same room, we can get them either for violating the Open Meetings Law or for violating the fire code.

I had a long, enjoyable talk with Michele Derus for the story, and understandably not everything I told her got into print.

One point that didn't make it is that local governments are only belatedly learning what the Legislature long ago figured out: you can hold the line on taxes while raising fees to cover increasing costs. Of course, the Legislature also can hold the line on taxes by creating structural deficits, something local governments can't do, but that's another story.

I reached into my file cabinet while I was talking to Derus and picked two Bob Lang memos out of my Fees-State Budget file. Lang is the long-time director of the Legislative Fiscal Bureau. If he had a beard, it would be as long as Methuselah's.

Anyway, a Lang memo dated Aug. 10, 1995 revealed that the 1995 state budget increased fees by at least $120.6 million over the two-year budget. There were no dollar estimates for some of the fee increases.

But the state was just getting the hang of how fees can ward off tax increases. In 2003, the redoubtable Lang calculated that the state budget bill would increase fees by $414.1 million.

And Sen. Glenn Grothman (R-West Bend) criticized Mayor Tom Barrett because fees in Milwaukee were increased $15 million? Methinks there's a hint of politics in the air.

Shouldn't state legislators make sure their own house is spic and span -- and odor free -- before telling local government how to arrange the furniture and which flower arrangement to put in which vase?

Doyle Returns, Take Charge

Governor Jim Doyle's assertive moves today on the state travel contract mess - - canceling the contract and bringing in former DOA secretary Mark Bugher to review state contracting procedures - - are good remedial steps.

Besides being substantive, and protecting public processes and dollars, Doyle's actions stand in positive political contrast to the counter-productive foolish partisan attack launched against US Attorney Steve Biskupic by the Wisconsin Democratic Party leadership.

All that did create more bad media.

It's still too early to see how the indictment plays out, both legally and politically. Doyle is smart to take action where he can as the state's CEO without unnecessarily stirring the pot.

Giving Away Tax Base

Why is is that some legislators so dearly love to give to special interests tax revenue destined for other levels of government?

The Legislature's propensity for doing just that is displayed starkly in s. 70.11 of Wisconsin statutes, which denominates five pages of prtoperty-tax exemptions that the Legislature has bestowed on special interests, many of them worthy, some not so worthy. No wonder property taxes are so high for the rest of us.

The latest effort to cement the Legislature's love affair with tax-exempt groups -- some of them deserving, some not so deserving -- is LRB 4284/1, being circulated by Sen. Dan Kapanke and Rep. Leah Vukmir.

LRB 4284/1 helps out so-called benevolent associations that provide housing to well-to-do senior citizens without addressing the fundamental tax equity issue of giving some old people a property tax break but making other old people pay full freight.

The Kapanke/Vukmir proposal is special-interest legislation aimed at undercutting another bill that hopes to provide a reasonable and generous way of making property tax exemptions available to people of truly moderate incomes and below.

AB 573 would ensure that low-income housing and assisted living won't be taxed. But retired fat cats would have to contribute to their communities just like ordinary people.

Exempting all senior housing from property taxes unfairly penalizes senior citizens who choose to stay in their homes. ANot to mention the effect that exemptions in current law have on the rest of us, incrteasing our property taxes.

The Legislature already has an amended AB 573, a solution to the problem of property taxation on senior housing that adds fairness to existing law and protects the little guy who now falls through the cracks. Why go overboard for special interests?

Green's Secret Vote

Still no word on who Mark Green is supporting to replace his friend Tom Delay as Majority Leader. Green refuses to tell anyone who he is supporting with the secret vote coming on Thursday.

Xoff has posted on this earlier. Green's vote will tell alot about what he looks for in "leadership."

Ryan and F. James are backing John Shadegg.

Like Delay and Green, Shadegg has Connections to the Abramoff Scandal

"Rep. Shadegg shed more than $6,900 in campaign contributions from sources connected with lobbyist Jack Abramoff. Three contributions involved the congressman's use of sports suites provided to him for fund-raisers at hockey and basketball games at the MCI Center in Washington and one fund-raising dinner paid for by Abramoff partner Kevin Ring. The total value was calculated as $5,444. Shadegg is among the more than 30 congressional Republicans who signed letters on behalf of Abramoff clients just days after Abramoff or his clients gave them money or hosted fundraisers for them."

For more on the three candidates, check this out Mark.

Will secrets be revealed on Thursday?

The Squirm Machine

It's now official. Charlie Sykes and Jessica McBride provide neither good spin or good analysis. Case in point the Marky Mark case. Instead of spinning Green and Graul out of the Abramoff story they simply join the squirm machine.

Green's top aide, that would be congressional Chief of Staff and campaign manager Mark Graul, has admitted to taking and requesting freebies from indicted lobbyist Jack Abramoff. We know this based on e-mails that Graul himself says are "legitimate."

Charlie asks, "Is there any there there?"

And McBride says, "There is no legitimate allegation of illegality."

Huh?

The "there there," are two violations of House ethics rules and both are illegal.

Sykes goes on to suggest that despite the fact that what Graul did is a violation of ethics rules and illegal (which is OK in his world), there is no "quo for the pro."

How does he know? Abramoff's luxury suites were paid for in part by Indian tribes and foreign sweatshop owners who wanted to "stop legislation aimed at cracking down on sweatshops and sex shops in the American territory."

Abramoff and Calvert had a lot of clients whose interests depended on how members of Congress voted. There can be no doubt Mark Green voted for their interests so when that is shown will McSykes warm to the idea that this is "a story?" More on that later.

The best McBride can come up in her attempted spin for Marky Mark is that the MJS spent too much time, reporters, words on the story, which she says isn't a story anyhow. Wisconsin taxpayers should be frightened by the fact that their hard-earned money is going to a journalism professor who says it is not the media's role to report on taxpayer funded staffers lies to the media and public.

Let's keep in mind in all this, Mark Graul is not someone who his boss would or could characterize as having a "'six degrees of separation' connection" to either him or Abramoff freebies. While Marky Mark's "hoax" may be working with McSykes it certainly isn't going to work with the media and voters.

Local governments and fees

Today's MJS had a solid piece on the increasing role user fees are playing in local government finance. The tin-foil hat club (Grothman, et al) would have you believe this is an abomination:

Grothman called fees "a huge loophole" to the state-mandated spending caps, which keep property tax levy increases to 2%, or the value of new construction.

Well, one man's loophole is another man's lifeline. In this case, fees are a necessity for local governments to continue providing the services that citizens demand, while also living within the state-imposed levy limits.

It's a fact of life that the cost of providing these services is going up, and there's often not much local government can do about it. For instance: citizens expect their garbage to get picked up, their streets to be plowed, and police to patrol their neighborhoods. All these activities require the use of something called "gasoline". This is the stuff that makes the garbage trucks, snowplows and police cars go. As we all know, the price of gas has jumped some 50% over the course of the last year or so. That money has to come from somewhere, and if it can't come from the levy, it either has to come from somewhere else, or the service has to be dropped. It's that simple.

Well, there is one other option. I'll call it the Scott Walker Plan. Under that scenario, you grossly underfund your pension liabilities and make a whole series of similar decisions that put the long-term viability of your municipality at risk, with a hope and a prayer that things won't go to hell until sometime after, say, November, 2006.

Nobody likes paying taxes or fees, but they are a necessary evil in a civil society. If you don't like them, move to Alabama. If you like decent public services and a good quality of life, stay in Wisconsin, and understand that everything has its cost; to pretend otherwise is dishonest.

No Pack, Paul?

It is a time honored tradition in Wisconsin politics for campaigns to try and shine the bright light of our Green Bay Packers tradition on their candidates. Rarely does a website get set up for a political campaign without some reference to Packer glory.

Mark Green has his family in Packer paraphernalia in front of lamb. Scott Walker has his family superimposed in front of Lambeau (but not Miller Park?), JB Van Hollen has a picture of his family at a game, and even John Gard, who lives in Sun Prarie but is running for Congress to represent Green Bay, has a picture of himself at Lambeau.

Of course, as we all know, and I hate to remind you, the Packers aren't winning lately but what do you think Attorney General candidate Paul Bucher is thinking?

On the Bucher website not even a hint of the Green and Gold. Nothing Packer.

You don't suppose it has anything with the fact that Bucher doesn't want to remind people that he's the one who fumbled the prosecution of former Packer Mark Chmura?

The fact that he failed to prosecute Chmura with anything for enticing a 17-year-old girl into the bathroom and sexually assaulting her at a post-prom party may make it hard for him to make the claim of Wisconsin's "top cop" but is it preventing him from giving our beloved Packers a little love on his website?

After all, Bucher has said the Chmura case is one he's "proud of."

What gives. No Pack, Paul?

Indian Tribes and foreign sweatshops pay Grauls way

Just when you thought it couldn't get any worse for Mark greens top aide, Mark Graul, it does.

As if taking AND requesting "gifts" from lobbyists in the form of Abramoff freebies wasn't enough.

Wait until you here about was who was funding the "gifts" to Graul.

Today's Milwaukee Journal sentinel (MJS) article only scratched the surface of this coming bombshell for Marky Mark.

As former Republican National Committee attorney Jan Witold Baran said, "It was exceptional even for prosperous lobbying groups to have skyboxes, observing: "Firms typically do not rent such suites because the price of tickets now regularly exceeds the limits on gifts to legislators."

So what did Abramoff do to entertain congressional Chief's of Staff like Mark Graul? He had clients like Indian tribes and foreign sweat shop interests pay for the luxury suites and then Abramoff and his associates gave out the freebies.

That's why the MJS story reports, "The firm last week disavowed that control of the skybox, issuing a statement indicating: "Mr. Abramoff leased and managed the MCI Center box in his personal capacity."

As the Washington Post reported last month in a story entitled, Tribal Money Linked to GOP Fundraising, Skybox Events Were Not Always Reported to FEC, "They used tribal money, records and interviews show, to pay for events that appeared to be designed more to help House Republicans' campaigns and Abramoff's overall lobbying effort than the Indians' legislative causes."

Another one of Abramoff's clients was the Saipan Garment Manufacturers Association and the Northern Mariana Islands, who hired Abramoff to "stop legislation aimed at cracking down on sweatshops and sex shops in the American territory."

The funding for the sweat shop lobbying effort came from Luen Thai Holdings and its controlling shareholders, the Tan family.

As reported last week by The Standard, a Chinese business newspaper, "Abramoff billed Tan US$223,679 in 2000 toward the annual rental of skyboxes in three Washington-area stadiums and arenas."

So who does Graul have to thank for giving him the tickets? Abramoff.

But who does he have to thank for paying for the luxury suite that he enjoyed? Indian Tribes and sweat shop owners.

This seems to me to be in touch with those Wisconsin values Green and Graul are always talking about.

"The foundations of the company's profitable niche are loopholes in US law that allow free migration to the island, set its minimum wage below mainland US levels and allow clothing sewn there to carry the "Made in USA" label and be exempt from quotas and tariffs.

"Before the Tan family had friends in Washington, they made enemies. In 1991, the US Labor Department sued six Tan companies for paying 1,350 mainly Chinese workers less than Saipan's minimum wage and forcing them to work up to 90 hours a week without required overtime pay."

I hope you sleep well tonight Marky Mark.

Graul Breaks the Political Rules

It's a bit ironic that Xoff is off-line while the Mark Graul story that Bill had pushed begins to finally unravel in the sunshine. Nonetheless, let's tip our collective hat to Bill and take away these additional political and media lessons:

Graul didn't do his boss, Cong. Mark Green, any favors by a) embarrassing the boss and gubernatorial candidate, and b) keeping the story alive with weeks of bobbing and weaving.

Most of all: the story will get fresh and lasting legs because it's finally in the mainstream media - - bigtime - - namely, in the Sunday Milwaukee Journal Sentinel. Blogs and websites have a roll to play, but as with the Ament recall, a story doesn't take off in Wisconsin until and unless it's prominently in the big daily paper. (Full disclosure: I worked for The Milwaukee Journal, and The Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, from 1983 to 1996.)

Sykes' "soft bigotry of low expectations"

Do voucher supporters want to know if these children are getting a good education?

No they don't. Otherwise they would support some sort of standards and accountability for achievement in Milwaukee's voucher schools.

"We have a moral obligation to make sure every child gets a good education. That's how I -- it's a moral obligation to make sure that we herald success and challenge failure. It's not right to have a system that quits on kids. I mean, some schools may not think they're quitting on kids, but when you shuffle kids through the schools without determining whether or not they can read and write and add and subtract, I view that as quitting on kids. I called it the soft bigotry of low expectations. In other words, you believe certain children can't learn, so, therefore, just move them through. It's kind of a process world, isn't it? It's more important that somebody be shuffled through than it is to determine whether or not they're capable of meeting certain standards in certain grades."

That's voucher supporter, George Bush. Should these comments apply to Milwaukee's voucher program? Most people would say yes and they're right, but the GOP legislature doesn't believe we should care if these kids are being left behind.

See any hypocrisy here? If voucher supporters really cared about these kids they would be spending their time trying to find a good school for them, not lobbying for a way to give a school like L.E.A.D.E.R more taxpayer money in the form of lifting the cap on the school choice program.

The next time Charlie Sykes talks about "standing in the schoolhouse door" he needs to take a look in the mirror, because it is he who is standing there letting the kids who need a quality education most enter the door of a failed school like L.E.A.D.E.R.

Green's top aide admits to freebies from Abramoff

After squirming around like a fish in the boat for months, Mark Green's top aide congressional and campaign aide, Mark Graul, gets nailed for taking freebies from indicted D.C. lobbyist Jack Abramoff.

"Graul has given differing accounts, over the last three months, to distance himself from allegations that he took freebies."

But he has failed to distance himself from the allegations and instead run smack into them like a hammer to a nail.

Milwaukee Journal Sentinel reporter, Katharine Skiba, goes where no one in the media has gone for months and actually does the job of a reporter by challenging Mark Graul's slippery lies to the media about the fact that he took what amounts to a violation of House ethics rules--an illegal gift from a lobbyist.

The Graul violation in question centers around his taking free tickets from Abramoff's firm to sit in his skybox for a Washington Wizards basketball game. Green has even acknowledged that Graul attended the game.

As Skiba notes, the House ethics rules are very clear on this. Evidently not clear enough to Graul or Green.

"Under House rules, a gift to lawmakers or their aides must be worth less than $50. The rules treat skybox seats at sporting events as equal in value to the event's top-priced individual seat - and in 2000, the top ticket to the Washington Wizards fetched $85."

As has been previously reported, for the game Graul and Green admit he attended as a gift from Abramoff, a request was made for 4 tickets to go to Graul. I know Republicans in D.C. have a hard time with math but $340 is more than $50. In order for Graul to have been within what was a legal "gift" from a lobbyist for the game he would have had to be sitting here by himself.

He wasn't sitting there in the nose bleed seats by himself, he sat in the Abramoff suite, a fact confirmed by another Green staffer in the MJS story.

But it doesn't end there. In e-mails that Graul previously chalked up to an "internet hoax," the product of a "liberal blogger with an ax to grind" and the suggestion that "stuff could be fabricated," it's three strikes and your out for Graul's lies to the media.

He now admits the e-mails are "legitimate." But that means more problems for Green's top aide.

These "legitimate" e-mails also detail how Graul requested tickets for Abramoff's luxury suite.

As Skiba reports, "Under civil laws, federal employees may not solicit anything of value from people doing business with their employer."

Of course the wingnuts say this is not a story--Green's top aide, Graul, breaking House ethics rules and taking freebies from the most infamous indicted lobbyist, Jack Abramoff, AND based on e-mails from Abramoff's lobby shop that Graul himself calls "legitimate," Graul has also requested freebies in violation of civil laws.

Ouch.

Perhaps most damaging is the fact that Green's top campaign aide now has absolutely no credibility with the media, zero, none, nada. Graul has given the media no reason to believe anything he says to them from here until the September GOP primary, or sooner if Green does the right thing and gets rid of Graul. Green surely can't be pleased with Graul's mis-handling of the Delay contributions, so what does Graul have to show for his work on the campaign thus far.

Don't worry Mark (Graul), there might be a career yet for you in D.C. lobbying. You certainly have the experience and connections.

It's the economy...King George

This coming week, King George will give to us little people his State of the Monarchy. One of the things we are sure to hear from his Excellency is that he believes all is well with our economy. Too bad no one believes him.

As poll after poll shows, despite what rhetoric "W" throws out there the reality is people are not happy with our economy. Instead of spending time spinning us, Bush would be wise to spend more time listening to the American people.

State of the Union? Not so good, most say.

A USA TODAY/CNN/Gallup Poll taken last weekend and interviews across the country this week found most Americans pessimistic about the economy.

"Six in 10 said the current economy was only fair or poor, and 54% said economic conditions were getting worse."

One of Bush's many challenges this week is convince people he has the ability to lead the country in the right direction and has plan do so. His problem right now is the American people don't think he does.

By 62%-35%, they were dissatisfied with the way things are going in the USA. That's the most pessimistic view at the start of a year since Bush took office. By 64%-34%, they said Bush didn't have a clear plan for solving the country's problems.

Could it be any of this has anything to do with that sentiment? Tax cuts for the wealthy, turning surpluses into deficits, doing nothing about rising health care costs, cutting programs for those who need help the most, and giving government subsidies to big oil companies while they enjoy record profits while we pay more at the pump.

Expect little change from Dubya this week and more of the same.

Graul caught in his own web

Finally, the Journal Sentinel has performed an act of journalism attempting to get to the bottom of Mark Graul's acceptance of freebie tickets from indicted GOP lobbyist Jack Abramoff. At issue is whether or not Graul, campaign manager for Mark Green gubernatorial campaign and longtime Green aide, improperly accepted free tickets in Abramoff's luxury suite to a Washington Wizards basketball game.

As the story recounts in excruciating detail, Graul's story changes every time he is asked about it:

• "Graul said last week that he probably attended" the game
• "Interviewed Monday, Graul was asked about the game ... 'The impression I had was the seat was less than $50 (and) the face value of the ticket put us in compliance with the gift rule"
• "By Tuesday, he was no longer sure he went to the game"

Graul's story also changes when it comes to the issue of the Abramoff office emails that fingered him as requesting numerous freebie tickets: "...details emerge in a series of emails - which Graul once dismissed as a 'hoax' but now concedes are 'legitimate'".

There has been much chatter this week about the alleged ineptitude of Team Doyle's "spin" on issues of ethics. But that truly pales in comparison to Graul's ineptitude, in which he has dodged, weaved, changed his story, hemmed, hawed and hedged for months, keeping the story alive with a trail of conflicting statements and ridiculous assertions.

Predictably, the Graul apologists are already on the scene, led by Jessica McBucher, whose characteristically tendentious post focuses on the use of the word "apparently", as in Graul "apparently took an improper gift from a lobbyist", but that no evidence is presented that taking the freebie tickets actually violated House rules.

Earth to Jessica: the record has established how much the ticket cost. The record has established the allowable value of freebies. The Graul/Ambramoff freebie exceeded the allowable value. Case closed. The only reason the word "apparently" finds its way into the story is because Graul himself continues to play fast and loose with whether or not he actually went to the game.

This all could have been easily avoided if Graul had just 'fessed up when this issue first arose. It was a long time ago, and real voters probably wouldn't have cared that much. The reason it's become a current issue has more to do with Graul's ongoing lack of candor than with what he did on that fateful night back in 2000.

McBucher's Dog Don't Hunt

Jess McBucher has repeatedly tried to make an issue out of how much Russ Feingold raised and spent on his last election in a lame attempt to question Feingold's record of reform.

What Bucher's bride doesn't tell you is that what Feingold raised and spent in the last election cycle came in over a six year period, at an average of $60 per contribution. That's less than McBucher spent bidding on Mark Belling bobblehead.

I just bid on the Mark Belling bobblehead!
It was up to $102 on ebay so I bid $110. It'd be worth 100 times that
to show up Spivak and Bice. posted by Jessica McBride

Also missing from her misinformation is the fact that over a two year period, Feingold's opponents spent over $10 million attacking him. That's the most money spent against any candidate in state history and what was the result--an 11 point win over Tim Michels where Feingold won 54 of Wisconsin's 72 counties,including 27 counties won by Bush.

Sorry Jess, your dog don't hunt. Get over it.

When McBucher's hubby rolls out how much he has raised for his campaign for AG in such glowing spin so as to demonstrate his fundraising prowless, the real question will be did he meet the Feingold standard of $60 per contribution? We'll see.

In her critique of Feingold's success, is she suggesting that Bucher will announce a commitment not to spend any more than those running against him in his race for AG? I doubt it.

McBucher argues that in order for Feingold to have credibility on campaign finance reform he needs to either raise and spend no money, or place a cap on how much he raises and spends. Which one is it? And if it's a cap, what's the amount you would cap spending on a statewide campaign?

I think a lot of people will be interested to find out just what sort of caps on fundraising and spending you are proposing for your hubbies campaign. In fact, I bet you get a story out of the MSM when he proposes it.

And then he might even be called a "Maverick."

Scandal: Doyle takes campaign cash from grateful property tax payer

By Patrick Marley and Steve Walters
(The first of an endless series)

Things went from bad to worse for Gov. Doyle today, when it was revealed that his campaign received a contribution from a homeowner whose property taxes were reduced thanks to provisions in Doyle's budget.

According to campaign finance records, Charlie Pirlot of Beloit donated $500 to Doyle's campaign on December 15, 2005. The donation came just days after Pirlot receieved his property tax bill, showing his taxes were going down by $71.

"This is the kind of 'pay for play' activity that is turning Wisconsin into a cesspool of corruption," bloviated Jay Heck of Common Cause. "Jim Doyle blatantly cut property taxes, and got a generous campaign contribution in return. The influence-peddler who wrote the check even included a note telling Doyle to 'keep up the great work!' It doesn't get much worse than that."

Doyle opponents were quick to pounce on the latest revelations. "The James E. Doyle administration is as foul as a bottle of milk left outside for two days in a July heatwave," thundered Rick Graber of the Republican Party of Wisconsin. "Not even Chuck Chvala would be so bold as to take campaign cash in exchange for cutting someone's property taxes. If James E. Doyle has an ounce of decency, he will return this dirty money, along with every other contribution he received from individuals who saw reductions in their property taxes."

Doyle campaign manager Rich Judge dismissed the allegations. "For chrissakes, we cut the guy's taxes, he was grateful, he sent in a check. Are we supposed to return all the money from families whose kids benefited from the SAGE program too?"

Judge took a long swig of Diet Pepsi before concluding, "Heck and Graber should shut their yaps and get a life."

Prediction

Jensen will plead out. He knows there's enough evidence to likely convict him on at least one felony, especially in Dane County. Like Burke and the rest, he will continue to insist he's going to trial until the final moment, when the deal will get cut.

Had Jensen not gotten caught up in the caucus scandal, he might be running for re-election as governor right now. Leading up to 2002, there was great speculation about him running for governor. He could've beaten McCallum in a primary, and been very competitive against Doyle. That's all over now.

The McSilence of the McBucher

More than a month has gone by since the end of the Dan Vrakas/Jennifer Finley spat. Still nothing substantive on the subject from Jessica McBucher, who should have been in a position to know, well, something. Way back on Dec. 14, McBucher wrote:

There might come a time when I will be able to elaborate on this matter, but it's not now. In some ways, it's more interesting than people think and in other ways... it's more banal.

Given the very contentious, very public route the Vrakas/Finley "divorce" took subsequent to that post, it's hard to imagine the truth being "more banal" than people think. Au contraire, Madame McBucher! This would seem an ideal time for you to "elaborate on this matter".

The truth behind Finley's messy depature isn't an academic question. Finley made serious allegations about Vrakas' approach to fiscal management. Was Vrakas' lack of budget cutting ardor truly the reason for her departure, did Vrakas fire her for incompetence, or does the truth lay somewhere in between?

McBucher likes to pretend she's a journalist, from time to time. This would seem an opportune time for her to act like one, instead of covering up the messy truth about what her political pals are up to in Waukesha County government.

McChicken? McGagged? McCatgotyourtongue?

Shouldn't be necessary to say this

But, obviously, it is:

DOJ: Statement on Georgia Thompson Indictment
1/27/2006

For More Information Contact: Kelly Kennedy
608/266-7876

As stated in the January 24, 2006 news release of the U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District of Wisconsin, the indictment charging Georgia Thompson alleges violations of law by her alone, and does not allege wrongdoing by any other person. Those charges were the result of an investigation conducted by experienced, career prosecutors and investigators, both state and federal, and the evidence was reviewed by members of this office, both U.S. Attorneys’ Offices, and the Office of the Dane County District Attorney. It is not appropriate for those involved in the investigation and prosecution to discuss publicly the evidence supporting the charges, or to respond to comments critical or supportive of the indictment. This case will continue to be handled in a professional manner, and the evidence will be presented in court.

The indictment is a charging document only, and Ms. Thompson is at this time presumed innocent.

How to get more gumment bidness

U.S. Rep. Green to Co-host Seminar on Procuring Government Business

WHAT: Green to co-host “Opening Doors to Government Business” seminar for Wisconsin businesses interested in learning how to secure government contracts for their companies

WHEN: Monday, January 30

WHERE: KI Convention Center
333 Main Street
Green Bay

Fundraiser to follow. (OK, I made that up. Sorry. It was just too easy.)

Jensen hopes for jury of illiterates

For all his brave talk, it's pretty clear that Scott Jensen doesn't want to go to trial.. In Dane County, he's afraid he'll get a jury that's too well-informed.

But you'd have to find a pretty remote area to find people who haven't heard about the caucus scandal. Maybe he's hoping for a jury of illiterates who don't own TV sets.

Chai Vang's murder trial was in Sawyer County, but they brought the jurors in from Dane County. They still convicted him.

Jensen insists he wants a trial, but would be welll-advised to cop a plea. If there is any justice, the deal will include him leaving public office. Maybe he thinks he can delay things until his term ends in January.

I only hope the Democrats have a candidate this year.

Accountability? Well, in some cases

There's a time for accountability, this story suggests:

State Sen. Alberta Darling (R-River Hills) said she wanted Doyle administration officials to testify soon before the Legislature's Joint Audit Committee about the Milwaukee Job Development contracts because of concerns about accountability.

Darling, who has been an outspoken critic of Milwaukee W-2 agencies' performance, said she wanted assurances that state officials were effectively monitoring the new agency.

It seems Republicans believe that accountability is fine for poor families when it comes to social programs, but not for their schools.

Just replace the references to the agencies above with schools and you will quickly see statements that never seem to be able to come out of Republican mouths.

The GOP used to be the party of accountability. What happened?

Where the buck stops

An afterthought on Scott Walker's buck-passing:

“The buck stops with me and that’s why I’m here today,” he said.

Milwaukee County Executive Scott Walker today publicly gave county Parks Director Sue Black a six-month deadline to erase deficits or “I’ll find somebody else to do that.”

If the buck really stopped with him, Walker would say: "If I can't fix it in six months, you should get a county executive who can."

-- From Working for Change. (Click cartoon to enlarge)

Inquiring minds want to know ...

Who is the mysterious blogger who signs himself John Galt (the Ayn Rand character), but who appears to be the brains behind the Charlie Sykes school choice ad equating Gov. Jim Doyle with some of the most notorious racists and segregationists of the 20th Century?

Speculation welcome. No reward. Here's a link to his postings.

The Good Old Days of Tommylot

I do not subscribe to the "everybody does it" theory of legal defense. I think DA Brian Blanchard got it right the other day when he said, "That's a confession, not a defense."

But the timing of Jim Klauser's endorsement of Mark Green for governor Thursday provides an excellent opportunity to reflect on the Good Old Days of Wisconsin's Camelot, when Tommy the Thompson ruled and James the Klauser was the wizard, and the people all pay tribute.

Herr Klauser was the one they called the Deputy Governor, Thompson's brain, his Karl Rove, if you will. Come to think of it, there are a lot of similarities in the Thompson-Klauser relationship to the Bush-Rove team. A likeable doofus out front, mangling the language, while the boys in the back room run the gummint.

Klauser was Tommy's secretary of the Department of Administration, but under Klauser they called it the Department of All. He had almost absolute power that cut across all state agencies, not just DOA. And he also masterminded and called the shots in Thompson's campaigns.

His official biography at We Energies, where he is now ensconced, says:

Mr. Klauser served as Secretary of the Wisconsin Department of Administration (1986-1996). He was designated Secretary Emeritus by Governor Thompson on Jan. 23, 2001. He was Special Counsel to the Governor from 1994 to 1996. Mr. Klauser has served on numerous boards, commissions and committees; among them -- the Wisconsin State Investment Board, the State Building Commission, the Wisconsin Educational Communications Board, the Wisconsin Housing and Development Authority Board, the Wisconsin Sesquicentennial Commission and the Local Property Tax Relief Commission. He was a consultant from 1992 to 1996 for the Republican National Committee and Republican Governors Association. He served as General Chairman, Thompson for Governor Committee (1986-2000). He also served as Co-Chairman, George W. Bush for President–Wisconsin 2000 and as Chairman of the Bush-Cheney 2004 Wisconsin campaign. He is the Wisconsin Finance Chairman of the Republican National Committee.

I highlighted one line just to help you out.

That's right, Klauser served simultaneously as DOA secretary and Thompson's campaign chairman. With one hand he awarded state contracts, and with the other collected contributions for the Thompson campaign. (Perhaps not literally. But he certainly oversaw the campaign, including its monumental fundraising efforts.)

Marc Marotta left his DOA job recently and became Doyle's campaign chairman. Do you think anyone would have objected if he just held both jobs at once?

Thompson used to say he had no idea who gave money to his campaigns. But Klauser may have had a clue, since his wife, Shirley, was on the campaign payroll, kept its books and prepared its finance reports. The checks and donor information came to Klauser's house.

Not that there's anything wrong with that???

If you wonder what it was like to do business with the State of Wisconsin in the Thompson-Klauser era, here's a look at how it all worked.

Again, nothing Tommy did excuses any wrongdoing by anyone else. But, as he cashes Klauser's check, Mark Green might want to dial down the sanctimony just a notch.

Letting the people speak on the war

Citizens of at least 20 communities in Wisconsin will be able to vote on April 4 on whether the United States should bring the troops home from Iraq, The Chicago Tribune reports.

So what on earth is the matter with officials in Watertown, who have refused to put it on the ballot, despite petitions with 900 signatures, and amended language to satisfy concerns that were raised? Now it's in court. What is there to be afraid of in letting people have a voice?

Helping Green do the right thing

Is Rep. Steve Freese trying to do Mark Green a favor, and help him find a way to get rid of the $30,000 in Tom DeLay money that's still sitting in his campaign account?

Or is he trying to highlight the DeLay money and help Scott Walker?

Whatever his motive, Freese is introducing a bill to clear the way for Green to get rid of that money. Green says he wants to dispose of the tainted dough, but not badly enough to give it to a non-partisan voter education and registration program, which he could legally do right now.

Freese's memo correctly points out that federal law already allows campaigns to give money to charity. Rep. Paul Ryan, for example, could dispose of the $25,000 in DeLay money sitting in his account. He says he'll get rid of it if DeLay's convicted, and does not seem under the same pressure that Green is -- probably because Ryan doesn't have a competitive race.

Ryan first said the money was already spent, but most recently took the "dump upon conviction" position. He did give back some really embarrassing money he had gotten directly from convicted lobbyist Jack Abramoff, but has gotten a pass from the media on the DeLay money, ,even though Green says he will get rid of his $30,000 -- someday.

Freese's memo:

MEMORANDUM

To: All Legislators

From: Rep. Steve Freese

Date: January 26, 2006

Re: Co-sponsorship of LRB-4371/1, relating to authorization for registrants under the campaign finance law to make donations to charitable organizations or the common school fund from campaign treasuries. I am introducing legislation that is similar to federal campaign finance law allowing campaign treasures to make donations from their respective campaign account to either a charitable organization or the common school fund for any reason at any time.

Currently, a registrant is generally prohibited from making a disbursement from moneys solicited for political purposes for a purpose that is other than political. From time to time our campaigns are called upon to make charitable donations that would benefit various entities. This bill will allow such contributions. The analysis by the LRB can be found below. If you would like to co-sponsor LRB-4371/1, please contact the office of Rep. Freese at 6-7502 by February 1, 2006

Analysis by the Legislative Reference Bureau

Currently, with certain exceptions, a registrant under the campaign finance law is general prohibited from making a disbursement expenditure) from moneys solicited fro political purposes for a purpose that is other than political. However, a registrant that receives a contribution from an unregistered nonresident, an unlawful corporate contribution, an anonymous contribution exceeding $10, or a cash contribution exceeding $0 may donate the contribution to a charitable organization r to the state common school, fund. In addition, residual moneys in a campaign treasury when a registrant ceases financial activity may be treated likewise.

This bill provides that a registrant may make a donation from a campaign treasury to a charitable organization or to the common school fund at any time for any reason.

Bush ratings lowest ever

The LA Times reports:

WASHINGTON — As President Bush prepares for next week's State of the Union address, he faces widespread discontent over his job performance and the nation's direction that could threaten his party in the 2006 election, a Los Angeles Times/Bloomberg poll has found.

In the survey, 43% of Americans said they approved of Bush's performance as president — his weakest showing ever in a Times poll.

He received even lower marks for his handling of the economy, healthcare and Iraq — especially from women, who the poll found had turned against him on several fronts. And by a 2-1 ratio, those surveyed said the nation needed to change direction from the overall course Bush had set.

It's no better in a CBS/NYT poll:

(CBS) President Bush's approval rating is stuck at a dismal 42 percent as he heads into next week's State of the Union address, according to the latest CBS News/New York Times poll.

Fifty-one percent of Americans give him a negative job approval rating. It's the first time in his presidency he'll give a State of the Union speech with a majority of the residents of the country saying they disapprove of the job he's doing.

Hat tip: Political Wire.

Goo-goos get their 15 minutes of fame

All Will Rogers and I know is what we read in the newspapers, and what I know from reading them the last few days is that there are some peculiar things going on.

The State Ethics Board is asked to investigate whether a Dept. of Transportation official violated the law when he sponsored a campaign fund-raiser for the governor. The board does an exhaustive investigation and finds that the DOT employee did nothing illegal. But the chairman of the board offers the gratuitous observation that the board thinks it should be illegal. That's what makes the news. That's an interesting new standard.

Meanwhile, Mike McCabe of the Wisconsin Democracy Campaign has gone far beyond being an advocate for campaign finance reform. He's become part of the investigation, a cheerleader for more charges, and now had some ideas about reorganizing the government, too, apparently to make every position civil service. McCabe in the Wis. State Journal:

Mike McCabe, the head of the Wisconsin Democracy Campaign, suggested there was a different sort of inertia at work, one of political favoritism. McCabe said the presence of politically connected officials like [Pat] Farley without good qualifications, especially in controversial cases such as the travel contract, undermine public confidence in government.

"They're political people and therein lies the problem," said McCabe, adding that he thinks prosecutors will try to use the heavy penalty Thompson faces - up to 20 years of imprisonment if convicted - to convince her to give evidence against her bosses.

McCabe apparently is the one who told the Badger Herald about the grand jury:

[McCabe] said University of Wisconsin officials told him a federal grand jury is probing the state travel contract given to Adelman Travel Systems of Milwaukee.

"I heard about it from UW officials," McCabe said. "But we've been contacted over the course of a pretty long period of time by FBI agents, state justice department officials and the U.S. Attorney's Office about this."

The authorities have been looking for information on Doyle's campaign contributions from Adelman officials over the past six months, McCabe said, and are also investigating other campaign practices that have raised red flags.

"Obviously in this case, they have reached the point where they feel a federal grand jury is warranted," McCabe said, adding other state-contract awards may also be brought into question...

McCabe said a procurement committee member who was mentioned in an article in the Wisconsin State Journal told McCabe he was involved in the grand jury inquiry.

McCabe bragged to the Journal Sentinel that he has offered records to the investigators -- and reaches his own conclusion:

Mike McCabe, executive director of the Wisconsin Democracy Campaign, said his organization had given the state investigators records of $43,000 in utility-related donations to Doyle's campaign. McCabe said the state investigators told him they were going to turn the materials over to the office of Milwaukee-based U.S. Attorney Steven M. Biskupic, who is leading the state-federal probe.

McCabe said his group also volunteered records documenting increased donations by SBC executives to the governor's campaign in 2004. The timing of SBC donations to Doyle were "interesting," McCabe said, because the governor later signed a $108 million, five-year telecommunications contract with an alliance led by SBC.

McCabe said state investigators came to him asking for records of campaign donations to aid Doyle's re-election bid. The non-profit Democracy Campaign has the most complete database of campaign gifts of $100 or more to Capitol officials.

"It's not our job to decide if laws have been broken," McCabe said. "It's the job of citizens to decide." He added that he personally believes the campaign cash played too great a role in Doyle administration decisions.

McCabe tells JS columnist Mike Nichols:

The real scandal in Wisconsin is what is perfectly legal," Mike McCabe, the executive director of Wisconsin Democracy Campaign, told me. "We have a legalized system of extortion and bribery."

This isn't all, by any means, or even the worst. It's what was relatively easy to grab in a Google search.

McCabe goes a little farther every day to take on the roles of investigator, prosecutor, judge, jury, and executioner.

And the news media just lap it up.

Pretty heady stuff for a guy who used to work as an Assembly staffer (before the cleanup) and got 16% of the primary vote when he ran for the Assembly himself. (Like Ed Garvey, he decided that if he couldn't win, there must be something wrong with the system. In both cases, a little introspection could have gone a long way.)

NOTE: We should not ignore Jay Heck of Common Cause, who runs a strong second, but McCabe wins the whoring off to the media contest hands-down.

Heck, by the way, has a few skeletons of his own. He knows firsthand how sleazy Capitol politics can be. The Wis. State Journal, in 2004:

Jay Heck, former communications director for the Senate Democratic Caucus (SDC), recalled with irony the campaigning he said he and other caucus staff members did during his tenure from 1989 to 1991... "Much of that (campaigning) was done right on state property," Heck said. "You were, essentially, in many cases, the campaign apparatus for the candidates."

Even after leaving the caucus and joining Common Cause, Heck never blew the whistle.

No real reformer in GOP leadership race

Three Republicans jockey for position in the race to succeed Tom DeLay as House majority leader.

Here's a group that thinks none of them are worth a damn.. With videos, too.

Why no real opponent for Herb Kohl?

We like him, we really like him.

Feingold's numbers are a little tighter, because Repubs are negative on him.

No news here: Walker passes the buck

Scott Walker pretends, for the first time in his career, to take responsibility for something, but actually passes the buck again, as he always does:

From the Journal Sentinel Daywatch:

Walker issues ultimatum to parks director

Milwaukee County Executive Scott Walker today publicly gave county Parks Director Sue Black a six-month deadline to erase deficits or “I’ll find somebody else to do that.”

Black responded by asking for the community’s help in finding ways to meet the parks’ needs in the tight county budget. She recounted how she repeatedly rejected Walker’s job offer in 2003 because of her reluctance to take over what she viewed as a failing system struggling for adequate resources.

Gaylord Nelson, a former U.S. Senator and Wisconsin governor, finally convinced her to try to turn it around, Black told the County Board’s Finance and Audit Committee, which quizzed her about a surprise projected deficit of $2.3 million for 2005 in parks.

“I’ve been given three to six months,” noted Black, former state parks director. “I’ve been trying to fix it since I walked in the door.”

Walker told the committee that he fully expected that with an infusion of new fiscal oversight, Black would get the job done by this summer.

Walker answered criticisms that he had not taken responsibility for the bad news, which threatens to leave his third straight budget in the red at year-end.

“The buck stops with me and that’s why I’m here today,” he said.

He alluded to his campaign for governor and denied it had caused him to take his eye off of county government.

Supervisor Gerry Broderick, echoing Walker, defended Black’s passion for parks and ability to motivate, and said the public understood those qualities as well. He blamed Walker’s tax-freeze budgeting and a problematic merger of parks and public works for the deficits. The merger has since been undone, with parks and public works returning to separate departments.

“If six months from now this is not solved, the most foolish thing in the world would be to get rid of Sue Black,” Broderick said.

Also at the committee meeting, Assistant District Attorney David Feiss, white-collar crime unit leader, said the criminal investigation into the Milwaukee Public Museum’s near collapse was his sole focus now that he has cleared other cases. Decisions on whether any charges are warranted should come in about one month, Feiss said.

-By Dave Umhoefer

Can't wait for concealed weapons in Capitol

The Richmond Times-Dispatch:

A remorseful John S. Reid, a Republican from Henrico County, apologized on the House of Delegates floor today for accidentally firing his gun in his legislative office this morning.

In a freak accident, Reid said his gun went off when he was ejecting the magazine -- which contains bullets --from the .380-caliber Kel-Tec handgun. A bullet was fired into a bullet-proof vest that happened to be hanging inside his office door.

The bullet proof vest worked: it stopped the bullet.

UPDATE: Gary Fisher reminds me Wisconsin already has had guns in the Capitol:

Gun-toting Officer Causes Capitol Stir

Wisconsin State Journal, March 15, 2002

While checking the state Senate gallery after someone had loudly demanded to testify about a proposed concealed gun law, the sergeant-at-arms found a man toting a gun.

The armed man turned out to be a police chief in plain clothes who'd taken off his jacket, exposing the gun. But the experience alarmed Senate Sergeant-at-Arms Jon
Hochkammer.

The incident has prompted Senate officials to review policies on firearms in the building.

Just before the incident last week, Senate Democrats had blocked a vote on the bill to allow ordinary citizens to get permission to carry concealed weapons.

Hochkammer said state statutes already permit law enforcement or military personnel to carry a weapon in the Capitol.

Capitol Police talked to the armed man, who turned out to be Fairchild Police Chief David Wagner, said Bob Seitz, an aide to Sen. Dave Zien, R-Eau Claire, the main supporter of the concealed weapons bill.

When Wagner entered the Capitol, he showed his badge and told officers guarding the door that he had a gun, Hochkammer said.

Hochkammer said he wished that he'd been warned.

"It would have been nice to know he was carrying," Hochkammer said. "We see police in here carrying weapons a lot and we encourage them to notify us, but not everyone knows what the rules are."

Said Senate Chief Clerk Donald Schneider: "The fact he was in the building with a sidearm gave people pause. It's the first incident like that we are aware of in the gallery."

... Wagner said he came to Madison to testify on the concealed weapons bill. "I do not have a problem with the law-abiding citizen possessing a firearm," Wagner said. "The criminal who has a gun is going to be a danger to me."

Wagner has been Fairchild chief for two years and a law enforcement officer for 10 years.

--Mike Lester, Rome GA News-Tribune, via Cagle.

Oprah Winfrey Says She is 'Deeply Sorry'

John Lott, Mary Rosh both like guns

The National Rifle Assn., always quick on the trigger, fired back today at a report issued yesterday by State Rep. Jon Richards, D-Milwaukee, which opposed carrying concealed weapons.

The NRA diatribe is long and not deserving of a log, detailed reply -- if you think they are a credible source I probably can't dissuade you -- but there are a couple of things in their document that cry out to be mentioned.

One is citing John Lott as an expert. Lott has been discredited for, among other things, posing as a female student, Mary Rosh, to defend his statistics.

The other is the NRA's observation that a statewide poll which showed Wisconsinites against concealed weapons by a 63-31 margin would have actuallly showed a majority in favor if it hadn't included Milwaukee and Madison. Whaddya know? Lop off the state's two biggest cities and you get a different result. The same would be true in statewide elections, of course, if the NRA and the GOP could just figure out how to get rid of those darned city voters.

Waukesha program flush with success

The Daily Reporter brings news of an important breakthrough for Waukesha.

Waukesha is chucking the three primitive toilets in City Hall and replacing them with the superior engineering of Kohler Co.'s most sophisticated bowl - the Cimarron. The Cimarron, (that's it at right)named after a river in New Mexico and Colorado, uses half as much water as the traditional model but has superior flushing power, said Kohler Sanitary Products Marketing Manager Kathryn Streeby.

Kohler put the Cimarron through extensive testing before introducing it to the world in January 2004. Its Class 5 plumbing technology - named after the rating rafters give to violent rapids - handled 100 feet of toilet paper in a single sitting. During
another laboratory test, it demonstrated the ability to flush 31.5 ounces of bean paste.

I recently shared with readers the first rule of sanitary engineering.

Bean paste flows downhill, too

The new toilets are actually part of a much bigger effort as Waukesha, desperate for water, is beginning to look at conservation. Story.

Sykes joins Vukmir as Swaggart 'winner'

Charlie Sykes and Leah Vukmir have teamed up on the school choice issue recently, pushing to lift all limits on enrollment.

Now they share another distinction: Eye On Wisconsin has named Sykes the winner of its second Swaggart award for hypocrisy. Vukmir won the first one. And who will be lucky winner #3?

-- M.e. Cohen, via Cagle.

Dems on defense

Seth Zlotocha outlines the three-pronged Republican campaign strategy to defeat Gov. Jim Doyle, and says it all seems to be running pretty smoothly. He concludes:

Right now Republicans are controlling the debate and subsequently the road to the Governor's Office. It's about time for the Democrats to start playing some offense.

Good analysis.

Green, Walker in no position to lecture on ethics

Playground Politics, a right-leaning anonymous blog written by a Capitol insider, has an interesting and unexpected take on the Adelman travel case:

... [T]he last people who should be lecturing anyone about ethics are Mark Green and Scott Walker.

Georgia Thompson is a civil servant, not an appointee of the Doyle administration. Those who try to paint Thompson as a Doyle ally are missing the point that she was hired while Scott McCallum was governor. She is not, as Mark Green would have you believe, "an official of Governor Doyle's administration." Doyle had nothing to do with her hiring and Thompson, having passed her review process, has job protection that precludes her from being disciplined prior to the outcome of this case. She can be transferred into another job, and that's about it. And Mark Green, as a former legislator, damn well knows that. This is about as disingenuous as Green calling himself a fiscal conservative after voting for that Medicare prescription drug giveaway.

Scott Walker's release, on the other hand, shows only that the man is incapable of understanding what the indictment actually says. Walker would like to infer that Thompson was pressured into using political considerations in the course of her work, something not indicated anywhere in the actual indictment. Of course, Scott's a college dropout. Should we really expect him to successfully process the contents of a legal document? Probably not...

What's really sanctimonious and full of BS, however, is the Republican criticism of Doyle over the Thompson matter. If we're going to play the guilt by association game, Mark Green's campaign manager was the recipient of a basketful of Jack Abramoff freebies. Green also has yet to return $30K from a fund controlled by also-indicted Rep. Tom DeLay. Scott Walker's old pal and fundraiser Nick Hurtgen is on his way to jail for extortion. Doyle, meanwhile, has a bit of a snafu over at DOA with a state employee he claims to have never met. If that in fact is the case, Doyle is by far the least of the three sinners. Besides, didn't that "last, best offer" by Adelman Travel save the state $30K?

If anything, the Thompson matter shows that everyone running for governor may end up ethically compromised.

It's not TABOR, it's WUHT-PAH

We warned you that TABOR, a year and a half in the making, would be reappearing soon in a new guise, after a face lift, fingerprint removal, and some other cosmetic surgery.

Oh, new name, too.

Wednesday, State Sen. Glenn Grothman, R-West Bend, said it will be called -- TA-DA! -- the Wisconsin Taxpayer Protection Amendment."

Pretty inspired stuff. WUHT-PAH doesn't resonate quite as well as TABOR, but I'm sure we'll get used to it.

State Sen. Judy Robson, D-Beloit, wasn't impressed. “If it walks like TABOR and talks like TABOR, it’s TABOR," Robson said.

“TABOR is a proven failure,” Robson said. “Colorado sent up TABOR as a trial balloon and it came crashing down like the Hindenburg. Democrats have offered responsible ways to bring down property taxes. TABOR is an abdication of responsibility.”

When 'nothing improper' becomes 'improper'

Headline:
Doyle fund-raiser called

legal but improper

3rd paragraph of story:

Wednesday's report said Deputy Transportation Secretary Ruben Anthony Jr. did not act improperly by inviting dozens of consultants who compete for $100 million in state engineering contracts to a Sept. 8 barbecue fund-raiser he organized. The Ethics Board concluded that Anthony never indicated to the invitees that he would use his position to steer contracts to particular companies.

Emphasis mine, of course.

Sykes commercial too much even for right-wing group that plays on bigotry

It turns out that the vile commercial produced by Charlie Sykes, Mikel Holt, and Jim Gilles of WTMJ radio's production staff was too much even for the Coalition for America's Families.

The Coalition for America's Families is a group that will stop at almost nothing to try to damage Gov. Jim Doyle, as evidenced by television ad its ran last year, playing on anti-gay and anti-immigrant feelings to attack Doyle's budget. Many felt the anti-immigrant commercial was tinged with racism, while the other spot bashed gays.

Sykes, who has been running a free commercial comparing Doyle to segregationist Govs. Orville Faubus and George Wallace, proudly announced that the right-wing group was going to pay to run his commercial on three Milwaukee radio stations with primarily black audiences.

In fact, the Journal Sentinel reports, the group has recut and cleaned up the Sykes-Holt commercial to eliminate the references to Faubus and Wallace:

Holt said Wednesday that the Coalition for America's Families is now running an ad that uses the voices of parents instead of students and does not mention Faubus and Wallace. But it still includes the idea of Doyle standing in the schoolhouse door.

The commercial came under fire Wednesday from the NAACP and a large group of African-American leaders and activists. Holt, editor of the Milwaukee Community Journal, a black newspaper, tried to apply some spin and say that comparing Doyle to Faubus and Wallace wasn't calling him a racist:

Holt said he thought the ads were misunderstood.

We "never called Doyle a racist," he said. "All they said was that if he doesn't lift the cap, they will be thrown out of the program and it will have the chilling effect of his standing in the schoolhouse door. There was no maliciousness involved."

The problem wasn't that they were misunderstood. It's that they were understood perfectly.

Even the Coalition for America's Families, which sets the bar very low, decided this spot didn't measure up. That's saying something, when a group that has relied on bigotry in its previous ads thinks this one needs editing.

Columnist Eugene Kane on the controversial ads:

The news conference at the NAACP office on N. King Drive was an intriguing mix of race and politics. Unlike the usual scenario in which black activists blast white politicians for insensitivity on racial issues, this was a case of blacks objecting to the use of stark racial imagery from this nation's troubled past to slander a white Democratic governor with a good reputation among African-American voters...

The news conference was intended to demonstrate that many black voters aren't stupid enough to fall for an ad that exaggerates the school choice debate in such an unrealistic - and insulting - manner.

The Southern governors who stood in the door against black students were willing to do anything - no matter how extreme - to drive home their point of view.

Apparently, the school choice debate brings out that same kind of ugliness in some people.

A related question: Was the spot really the idea of the Coalition for America's Families to begin with? This Oct. 25 item from Sykes and a post from John Galt on the Coalition's website suggest that it was.

No reformer in race for GOP leader

Three Republicans jockey for position in the race to succeed Tom DeLay as House majority leader.

Here's a group that thinks none of them are worth a damn.. With videos, too.

NAACP remembers Wallace, Faubus; condemns ad linking Doyle to them

Jerry Ann Hamilton of the Milwaukee NAACP deplored school choice ads comparing Gov. Jim Doyle to Orville Faubus and George Wallace Wednesday, and reminded people what Wallace and Faubus represent:

In 1957, Gov. Faubus declared that “Blood will run in the streets shall Negro students attempted to enter Central High School.” On the first day of school, Faubus ordered 250 Arkansas National Guardsman to allow only white students to enter Central High School. Later under Federal protection, nine brave school children endured horrific treatment and entered Central High School in Little Rock, Arkansas.

In 1963, Gov. Wallace uttered these disheartening words to a generation of citizens who dreamt of a better America for themselves and their children “segregation now, segregation tomorrow and segregation forever.” It was against this backdrop that on June 11, 1963, he stood in the doorway of Alabama University to block the attempts of Vivian Malone and James Hood to register at the University of Alabama.

In contrast, in 2005 Governor Doyle stated before the NAACP National Convention last summer that we have made much progress but victory cannot be declared until we “are free from segregated neighborhoods and discrimination and until opportunity is truly equal for everyone.” These are not the words of a segregationist.

Hamilton took part in a news conference with other African American leaders to express support for Gov. Jim Doyle's efforts to reach a reasonable compromise on school choice in Milwaukee.

Among those attending was Doyle's son, Gus. Others: Michael Morgan, Antonio Riley, Cory Nettles,Martha Love,Cecelia Gore,Ralph Hollmon,Greg Wesley,Danae Davis, Rev. Roland Womack,Rev. Charles McClellan,Donsia Strong-Hill,Wendell Harris Sr., Genyne Edwards, Felmers Chaney,Tamiko Dorgan, Martha Toran, and Rosie Caradine-Lewis.

Meanwhile, word apparently has reached City Hall that there's a debate going on about school choice caps. Mayor Tom Barrett weighed in with his own plan.

What's the frequency, Patrick?

An interesting footnote in the State Ethics Board report clearing a DOT official of any wrongdoing for hosting a fundraiser:

The Milwaukee Journal Sentinel has repeatedly reported the existence of a DOT document that describes the contract process as requiring Mr. Anthony to concur in the awards. DOT has been unable to produce any such document and it does not appear to be a document adopted by DOT. Patrick Marley, of the Journal Sentinel, has refused to cooperate with the Board’s investigation – he has refused to provide the document or identify its source. Mr. Marley has stated that his source knows the Ethics Board has asked to see the document, but the source has not contacted us.

What does that mean? Phony document?

Quote, unquote

A good rule of thumb is “never attribute to malice what can be explained by incompetence”. It’s not always the right answer, but it’s almost always a good starting point. -- Badger Blues on "Travelgate."

Elsewhere, Pat Kreitlow uses the neutral term, "The Adelman Travel Case," for his analysis.

A new journalistic milestone

Great moments in journalism, brought to you by David Callender of the Capital Times:

As the pseudonymous blogger Dennis York put it, "The $10,000 contribution from Craig Adelman has now guaranteed a half a million dollars' worth of ads run against Doyle. Hope it was worth it.
"This would be like a married guy sleeping with his secretary for one night, then coming home to find his wife had packed his bags. It may have been good one night, but wave goodbye to your marriage," he wrote.

This is a milestone: The first time an anoymous blogger was a source in a front page story, suggesting a governor is implicated in illegal activity.

Where do we go from here?

Preview of tomorrow's front page story

I assume we'll see this story on the front page tomorrow morning.

Why the front page? Well, the Journal Sentinel has run five -- count 'em, five -- page one stories about the issue, not to mention one on the front page of the Metro section and an editorial. (See the list below.)

Now that the Ethics Board has found no wrongdoing, the paper will undoubtedly want to correct the record.

State Ethics Board clears DOT official

Madison - The state Ethics Board today issued a report clearing a political appointee of Gov. Jim Doyle of any wrongdoing for inviting state road contractors to a Doyle fund-raiser, but the chairman of the board said it should be illegal for appointees to organize such events.

The report was issued the day after Georgia Thompson, a civil servant in Doyle’s Department of Administration, was indicted for allegedly defrauding the state by awarding a contract to Adelman Travel, whose CEO donated the maximum allowed $10,000 to Doyle around the time the contract was being considered. Craig Adelman previously had never given more than $1,000 to a governor or candidate for governor.

Today’s report said Deputy Transportation Secretary Ruben Anthony Jr. did no wrong by inviting dozens of consultants who vie for $100 million in state engineering contracts to a Sept. 8 fund-raiser he organized. The Ethics Board concluded that he never promised to use his position to steer contracts to particular companies. The report also found no one in the department used state resources to organize the event.

“While it may seem objectionable to some that a state official would organize and sponsor a fund-raiser and invite to that fund-raiser individuals who do business with the state agency with which the official is associated, Wisconsin statutes do not prohibit or restrict that practice,” Ethics Board Chairman James Morgan said in a statement accompanying the report.

“The Ethics Board believes that statutes should prohibit this activity.”

The report also said some of those consultants were not just invitees, but sponsors of the event. They include high-ranking officials with DAAR Engineering, CH2M Hill, Kapur and Associates and Short Elliott and Hendrickson Inc.

The Ethics Board voted on the matter Tuesday, but did not release its findings until today.

-By Patrick Marley

---

Previous stories:

Milwaukee Journal Sentinel
DOT official's fund-raiser questioned
Posted: Oct. 28, 2005
Pg. 1

DOT official's role murky
Posted: Nov. 2, 2005
Pg. 1

Doyle fund-raiser under review
Posted: Nov. 10, 2005
Page 1

Doyle presents ethics changes
Posted: Jan. 5, 2006
Page 1

Cash paves way for roads
Posted: Jan. 14, 2006
Page 1

Doyle rebuffs review questions
Posted: Jan. 4, 2006
Section B Page 1

Editorial: Legal? How about proper?
Posted: Nov. 4, 2005

GOP seek national convention site

State Chair Rick Graber is on the committee.

Last year he picked Sheboygan for the state convention. And now there's a new spaceport coming there.

Do ya think... 2008 could be our year?

Why accountability?

Why all this talk about accountability for choice schools? One example.

Quote, unquote

"If we are to fire every employee in America who has viewed pornography for 67 seconds, we won’t be left with many workers."

--Bruce Murphy, Milwaukee Magazine editor, on Cedarburg High School firing.

Dumping TABOR, but for what?

Well, it's official. TABOR, the so-called Taxpayer Bill of Rights, is dead. After 18 months of trying to herd cats in the Republican State Senate caucus, the TABOR folks have decided they will never get the 17 votes they need.

Last week, we were promised a "new TABOR," probably with a new name -- to get rid of any taint from Colorado, the first state to pass TABOR, which has experienced all sorts of problems and negative results.

But today TABOR is dead, a stake through its heart.

Don't click your heels just yet, though. There's something that sounds equally bad -- and equally vague -- in the works. The JS story:

...Grothman and Rep. Jeff Wood (R-Chippewa Falls) no longer speak of inflexible, TABOR-like spending limits.

"It's not a 'spending' limit," said Wood, adding that he had yet to explain all details of his final proposal to the Republicans who control the Assembly.

Instead, Republicans are focused on trying to impose controls on revenue, which they would define as taxes and most fees, on state and local governments. They say revenue controls would be a simpler way to restrain spending.

"It is much easier to define 'revenue' than it is to define 'spending,' " Grothman said . . .

Fine-print details of the constitutional change were still being worked out Tuesday by Grothman, Wood and legislative staff members. Neither lawmaker could provide a final draft of the proposal, which Grothman said had already been rewritten nine times.

Details be damned. Wisconsin Manufacturers and Commerce already supports it:

The voters of Wisconsin deserve to be heard on high taxes,” said James A. Buchen, vice president of government relations for Wisconsin Manufacturers & Commerce. “A constitutional amendment ultimately goes to the voters to let the people decide and they deserve the right to be heard.

“And, they deserve the right to know which elected officials support limits and which elected officials are against limits. A vote in both houses is critical to giving the people the truth on this issue.” WMC research has found strong voter support for tax limits.

Which makes you wonder if perhaps WMC lobbyists aren't writing the bill, too, as well as the press release.

Indictment: More questions than answers

UPDATE: Tomorrow's front page story.

Anyone who has been waiting for something insightful from me on the indictment of Georgia Thompson is going to have to wait awhile longer. I don't know enough about it to offer anything profound. There are a lot more questions than answers today.

I was surprised, to say the least, that the grand jury issued indictments against her in connection with the awarding of a state travel contract. I did not expect anything to come of the investigation.

To state the obvious, it appears the investigators are hoping the charges will pressure her to implicate someone higher up in the chain of command. Whether that will happen -- or whether there is someone to implicate -- I don't know.

Neither do the Republicans, who are already connecting the dots right to the governor himself.

There is, of course, no evidence that the governor had any involvement or knowledge of any improprieties in awarding the contract. It would not surprise me to find out that he didn't even know a travel contract was being awarded until after the fact.

But it would shock me to find out that Jim Doyle had anything to do with illegal activity or condoned it, as Scott Walker is quick to suggest.

Politically, that may not matter. If someone, anyone in the Doyle administration is convicted of breaking the law, his opponents will hang it around his neck. That's politics.

But in the meantime, there is a legal system and little things like due process and the presumption of innocence, even for Georgia Thompson. I had never heard of her before the stories about this contract ran. We have all learned in the last 24 hours that she is a civil service employee, not a political appointee, who began work in the state DOA under Secretary George Lightbourn in the McCallum administration. That makes it all more puzzling, and also suggests that it might be prudent to let this play out before jumping to any conclusions.

Cory Liebmann asks, Are only Republicans innocent until proven guilty?

Remembering Osama

A new blog, Wisconion, says that Bush almost forgot about Osama and 9-11, but fortunately had a right-wing Wisconsin blog to remind him.

Why no med mal caps? GOP doesn't want them

Dad29, who agrees with me about 1 per cent of the time, judging from his comments and blog, gets this one right:

The only reason Wisconsin doesn't have a reasonable compromise on a cap for medical malpractice awards, he says, is that the Republicans who control the legislature don't want to solve the problem. They want a campaign issue.

As he says, being a conservative and being a Republican are not the same thing.

File under "Suspicions confirmed'

Lest there be any doubt whether the barrage of school choice commercials are "about the kids" or something else, consider this WisPolitics report:

Republican Party of Wisconsin Executive Director Rick Wiley said he traveled to Washington, D.C. last week with RPW chair Rick Graber and National Committeewoman Mary Buestrin to talk '06 campaigns with national committees.

During a meeting with Republican National Committee members, according to Wiley, an RGA official played the gathering a spot on the school choice issue and said, "The governor's race in Wisconsin has started."

Something Dems, GOP can agree on

State Rep. Mark Pettis, R-Hooterville, has to go, says I Am the Force, because the Republicans are sick of him.

Dems to the rescue with a quality candidate, Polk County Sheriff Ann Hraychuck, who should be able to put Pettis and the GOP Assembly leadership out of their misery come November. Campaign website.

Is there a lawyer in the house?

It didn't take Republican Party Director Rick Wiley long to go over the top with reaction to Tuesday's federal grand jury indictment of a state procurement official, Georgia Thompson. In the first hour, he was posturing and making impossible demands of the Doyle administration.

From Wiley's statement:

We call on Governor Doyle to release the names of employees of his Administration who have been interviewed by the grand jury. The public has a right to know."

Actually, here's what a website on federal grand juries, from the University of Dayton Law School, explains:

The identities of the grand jurors are secret, as are the identities of the witnesses who testify before them and any evidence they consider.

Rick Graber, Wiley's boss and GOP chairman, is a lawyer and, presumably knows that. If he doesn't, maybe he should catch up on his continuing legal education credits.

Scott Walker, meanwhile, refers to Thompson as one of Doyle's top aides. Funny no one, including me, had ever heard of her before this travel story broke. Here's how much I know about her position, from searching the web:

Division: Enterprise Operations
Bureau: Bureau of Procurement
Section: Enterprise Programs

'A confession, not a defense'

WisPolitics Courtwatch blog:

Dane Co. Dist. Atty. Brian Blanchard says the "everybody else is doing it" defense should not be allowed in the trial involving state Rep. Scott Jensen and former Assembly aide Sherry Shultz.

The document filed with Dane Co. Judge Steven Ebert yesterday lists a number of arguments Blanchard would like to see excluded from the trial...

"A claim that 'other guys were doing it' is a confession, not a defense, and it would be grossly misleading and confusing to a jury for defense counsel to be allowed to treat this as anything but a confession attrial," writes Blanchard to Dane Co. Circuit Judge Steven Ebert.

Courtwatch has a link to the whole Blanchard filing.

-- Tab, Calgary Sun, via Cagle.

Doubler standards?

Jay Bullock, aka Folkbum, is on a roll this week. In his latest, he discusses double standards and doubler standards in the way the RWB (right-wing blogosphere) discusses the governor's position on school choice.

Quote, unquote

"Dick Cheney was given a clear bill of health by doctors at the Bethesda Naval hospital. Bet he hasn't felt this relieved since getting his 5th deferment."

-- Will Durst, The Progressive.

Bad numbers have never bothered her

The AP reports that the Florida GOP is rallying around Katherine Harris, their US Senate candidate, who is best known for her role in giving Florida to Bush in 2000. She trails badly in fundraising, but:

Harris shrugged off the numbers.

"We know that when we turn out the Republicans, we'll be victorious," she said.

What she meant was, "We know if I recount the votes, we'll be victorious."

-- Earthhope action network graphic.

Kane: Sykes spot 'patently unfair'

Eugene Kane on the Sykes radio spot:

The furor over choice has sparked a patently unfair radio commercial equating Doyle's stance on school choice with Southern governors such as Orval Faubus and George Wallace, who stood in the schoolhouse door to prevent black children from receiving an education.

I asked one of the ad's co-creators, Mikel Holt, associate publisher of the Milwaukee Community Journal, why the language in the ad was so racially inflammatory, particularly in the way it linked Doyle - the adoptive parent of two African-American adult sons - with two racist Southern governors.

Holt denied the ad is meant to imply Doyle is racist; he said the ad simply represented a new civil rights struggle for black choice students.

My take is the ad's language is just as loaded - and condescending - for blacks as Hillary Clinton telling a Martin Luther King Jr. Day audience that Republicans run the House like "a plantation."

The ad also wrongly suggests that school choice is the paramount issue for most blacks in the 2006 gubernatorial election. It's not.

Opening for talk show host

Mark Reardon is out at WTMJ radio. They say budget cuts, but who knows the real story?

Anyway, as a goodwill gesture to Journal Broadcast Group, since I've been pretty rough on them lately, I have a money-saving idea. Give Reardon's show to Jessica McBride, who will probably do it for free, just for the publicity.

UPDATE: Cory Liebmann volunteers.

Leaning Blue has some suggestions.

Intrigue in labor's AG endorsement

Organized labor, like the Democratic Party, is divided over the primary for attorney general between Peg Lautenschlager and Kathleen Falk. No surprise.

Even the public employees union, AFSCME, is split, with one council, representing state workers, backing Lautenschlager, and the other two, representing Milwaukee County and county and municipal workers across the state, backing Falk.

Normally, the state AFL-CIO endorsement would be a slam-dunk for a Democratic incumbent, but this is not an ordinary year. Lautenschlager did get the endorsement last week, but there was more than a little intrigue before she got it by a single vote.

An endorsement requires a two-thirds vote, but apparently that's two-thirds of the Executive Board members voting, not those present. So a couple of them abstained, which helped Lautenschlager get two-thirds without them actually having to vote for her.

But the real shocker was when the representative of AFSCME Council 40, the county and municipal employees, voted for Lautenschlager. Council 40 had endorsed Falk the day before the AFL meeting, but their rep, Joan Kaeding, voted the other way. Kaeding apparently fell on her sword for Lautenschlager; the assumption is that Council 40 will replace her on the exec board with someone who will vote to represent their opinions.

How much does all of this matter? Not much, in the grand scheme of things. It's just another indicator that the Falk-Lautenschlager race will be hard-fought every inch of the way to the finish line in September.

Note to the Bucher campaign: In 20 years and about 40 campaigns I've worked on in Wisconsin, I can probably count on my fingers the number of media stories there have been about my candidates being endorsed by any person or group. The media just aren't interested, unless it's man-bites-dog. Frankly, most voters don't care, either. The members of the endorsing groups care, of course, but they will find out directly from their organization. So quit whining and do something productive.

Hey, Mr. Gunderson: I've got time for one more gun and a sixpack to go*

Maybe I am the only one in Wisconsin who didn't know this, but my friends the Gun Guys have come up with some background on who's who in Wisconsin's concealed weapons movement:

EXCLUSIVE: Sponsor of Wisconsin’s CCW Bill Owns Gun Store that Sells Beer

Well, here we go. All along we’ve been asking ourselves, exactly who’s interested in passing a concealed weapons bill in Wisconsin, and why? The people up there don’t want it, the police up there don’t want it, the Governor’s planning to veto it, and pretty much everybody thinks, rightly so, that it’s simply dangerous and unnecessary. So why would sponsors Sen. Dave Zien and Rep. Scott Gunderson want to pass it?

And now we have our answer. According to this campaign finance website, Gunderson owns a place called Gundy’s Liquor and Sports. Yep, Scott Gunderson owns a Liquor and Sports store where he sells, among other things, firearms. We’ve reprinted the list here, just in case the page changes (the bold is ours).

Contributor(s) - City - Business - Amount
Reesman, Edward & Linda - Waterford, WI - Payne & Dolan - Oconomowoc Public Schools - $3,250
Gunderson, Scott - Waterford, WI - Legislator/Gundy’s Liquor & Sports - $2,862
Kozelou, Bruce & Cindy - Burlington, WI - 3-B Concessions - $1,900

Which explains quite a bit, especially why Gunderson isn’t working for what the people of Wisconsin want. He’s working for what he wants! A concealed weapons bill leads to gun sales (especially handgun sales, which, when we called on the phone, the Gundy’s salesperson was happy to order), which of course leads to money lining Gunderson’s pockets. It’s like a legislator who runs a Ford dealership proposing a bill that grants free parking to every Ford driver in Milwaukee!

Not to mention that in addition to firearms, “Gundy’s Liquor and Sports” also sells beer with a smile. Even a gun guy will tell you that firearms and alcohol are a deadly mix, and Scott Gunderson has been more than happy to put them together under one roof. “Gundy’s Liquor and Sports”: It’s your one-stop shop for death and destruction! No wonder Scott Gunderson is working to fight against the safety of Wisconsinites by fighting to pass a bill no one wants– he stands to make some cash.

* Apologies to Hank Thompson

Russ fuss?

Columnist Rhonda Chriss Lokeman of the Kansas City Star offers what she callls "new word order," her own additions to the dictionary. Including:

russ fuss n., stir created when a moderate American lawmaker demands public accountability from a secretive executive branch (derived from Russell Feingold)

Russell Feingold n., Democratic senator from Wisconsin since 1992; in 2006 assumed seat vacated by Jon Corzine on the powerful Senate Intelligence Committee (see russ fuss)

Hat tip: Keith Schmitz

Sykes mixes misdirection with bluster

Charlie Sykes missed his calling. He should have been an illusionist, a sleight of hand artist specializing in misdirecting the audience's attention. Or maybe that's what he is.

His latest post twists the language inside out again:

"Why are Doyle and Xoff so upset?" he asks, then answers: "because this ad is so powerful."

Actually, it's because the ad in question is so vile, so slimy, and so unfair. But back to Sykes:

Doyle flak Xoff's legal complaints turned out to be bogus, but curious minds want to know: have I…crossed…the…line…into….activism….by so openly advocating for school choice?

Um, yes. Hello? If I crossed the line, I crossed it years ago. I’ve been advocating for choice for most of the last decade, including actively raising money for scholarships on the air. This is part of what it means to stand up for what’s right. While the local MSM managed to ignore those campaigns, they have been reported nationally for years.

The question, of course, has never been whether Sykes has crossed the line into activism. The question is whether the Journal Broadcast Group, which owns the radio station on which Sykes performs, has crossed the line into corporate-sponsored issue advocacy.

The corporate-produced commercials he is running, with no disclaimer, are issue advocacy, pure and simple. That advocacy is regulated, and corporations are not allowed to engage in it.

Despite Sykes' claim, it is not the same as when he spouts off about an issue. It is a commercial. Any listener can tell the difference.

It's not the same as a newspaper editorial, either. It would be the same as if a newspaper ran full-page ads, day after day, taking a position on some piece of legislation, but without saying who paid for the ads or even identifying them as advertising.

Let's say the Journal Sentinel -- owned by another arm of the same company that owns WTMJ -- ran a full page ad every day calling for defeat of the concealed weapons bill. The paper has editorialized against it. Would running unpaid, anonymous ads every day be the same thing? Of course not. Would it be legal? I don't think so.

Sykes says his company backs him up. Of course they do. They always do after the fact. WISN backed up Mark Belling for his "wetback" remarks, too, but that didn't make it right. I'll bet you a dollar to a doughnut that Sykes didn't check with the lawyers before he pulled his stunt, but now they're on the hook and have to defend him. What are they going to do, say they broke the law and tell him to stop? Not likely. That's not what they get paid for.

Here's Sykes, in full bluster, with a phalanx of corporate lawyers, hurling his challenge at the blogger (me) who dares to challenge him:

In case there is any doubt, my managers and the companies lawyers are standing solidly behind Mikel Holt and I on this. Xoff, of course, is perfectly free to file any campaign-related complaint he wishes (he is unable to cite any law we might have violated); and we, of course, are free to seek legal fees and costs incurred in defending against frivolous charges.

Does that sound like intimidation? It is certainly intended to be just that. Actually, the State Elections Board, where such a complaint could be filed, doesn't award lawyers fees and costs. If it won the case, Journal Broadcast Group would have to file a separate lawsuit to try to collect. The purpose of doing that wouldn't really be to be reimbursed -- the company has billions -- but to try to intimidate anyone who might think about challenging them in the future.

I don't plan to file, although I still think there could be grounds for a complaint. It is not how I want to spend my time and energy. It's the kind of thing a good government group might do, if they weren't so busy trying to make every elected official look like a crook. The last thing those groups are likely to do is to challenge the media.

I do seem to have gotten Sykes' attention. It's always fun to watch him overreact and talk like a tough guy.

Sykes dishes it out like a pro, but he can't take a punch.

Setting him off like a skyrocket with some regularity is really pretty amusing. I'd invite others to join the fun. He froths at the mouth, but can't really hurt you, although you can be sure he would it he could.

Haiku to you, boo-boo!

Liberals you suck!

Stop helping the middle class.

Just fix my highway.

This may be a little esoteric for some, but there's an ongoing, amusing response from Robola, at a blog called Someone Took in These Pants, every time the Journal Sentinel's resident right-wing kvetcher, Patrick McIlheran, writes an op ed column.

Robolo summarizes each column in a series of haiku. Here's the current batch. It helps if you read Pat Mac's column first, but that may be asking too much.

WSJ fails the disclosure test

The post-State of the State Wisconsin State Journal story blasting Gov. Doyle's usage of job creation statistics contained this notable "expert" quote:

Economist David Ward of NorthStar Economics in Madison was clear on what he would use in a study.

"What you want to be using is seasonally adjusted numbers."

Now, there are a couple of interesting things about this. First of all, as has been previously noted in this blog, is WSJ's quoting of Northstar Economics in this piece - the same firm that totally botched an economic "study" of the Madison paid sick leave proposal the prior week.

Just as interesting though, is the failure of the reporters to note that the quoted economist, David Ward, was a financial contributor to Doyle's opponent in 2002, Scott McCallum. He gave not once, not twice, but thrice to that doomed campaign (proof enough, mayhap, of the soundness of his economic judgement - but I digress).

Stories quoting incompetent "experts" are bad enough. Stories quoting incompetent "experts" attacking an elected official whose opponent they financially supported (without disclosing that fact) are irresponsible. For the record, the guilty parties are WSJ reporters Phil Brinkman and Jason Stein.

Oh, and by the way, let us not forget amidst this tempest in a teapot the most important fact: since he took office, Gov. Doyle has created at least 69,500 new jobs for Wisconsinites.

Katrina victim to F: Get over it!

A letter from a Hurricane Katrina survivor about Bryan Kennedy, the Democrat running against Rep. F. Jim Sensenbrenner, is getting national attention today on two of the best-read political blogs, My DD and Daily Kos. The writer sent the letter to friends in the Gulf area and sent Kennedy a copy.

Kennedy's campaign is uphill in a heavily Republican district, but Sensenbrenner's arrogance and heartlessness in the past year have gained him national notoriety. That can only help Kennedy. The letter:

Dear Friends,

Those of you who know me well, or had the misfortune to hang out with me in the Katrina aftermath, know that one of the things that really upset me (other than that almost everyone I know had lost either their home, their car, their job, their business, their school, their church or any number of combinations of the above) was Congress’ refusal to grant a reprieve to those folks from the implementation of the Bankruptcy Reform Act. A mean-spirited piece of legislation in good times, it was just cruel and unreasonable to impose it on the citizens of Louisiana and Mississippi during the Katrina aftermath.

Like many of you who are lawyers, I was called upon to help folks during those last days before the statute went into effect. One gentleman, who sat in my makeshift BR office and cried while trying to wrestle with the decision to file bankruptcy after his home was destroyed, particularly moved me. He feared that there would be no way for him to pay off the huge and largely uninsured mortgage along with his other obligations ($250K and a house marinated in sewer water for 2 weeks does not go far in paying off an $800K mortgage). He, of course, would have no relief under the law after October 17th. He asked me why, with all that he faced at that given moment, did he have to decide now whether to take such a serious step. I had no real answer—actually, all I could do was cry too.

After that encounter, rather than my usual response—go home, have a glass of wine, and bemoan the fact that the world was not too good a place—I thought I would try to do what little I could to change it. My attention was quickly drawn to the good Congressman from Wisconsin who, when asked to consider the delay of this particularly vile legislation that he had authored, commented that this was just the whining of those who were opposed to it in the beginning, and that we should “just get over it”. Well, try as I might, I just couldn’t do that; so I started looking into Mr. Sensenbrenner’s record a little more and discovered that he was one of the 11 members of Congress who voted to deny ANY relief to the folks of the Gulf Coast after Katrina struck. Apparently, he shared the view of only a handful of his fellow Congressmen that that is what the Red Cross is for! So I decided that helping get him out of office was one thing I could do.

That’s when I discovered Bryan Kennedy. A professor from Wisconsin, Mr. Kennedy had decided to take on Mr. Sensenbrenner and run for Congress in his district. Better yet, he shared my view of the good Congressman. His web site included his campaign ad that derided Mr. Sensenbrenner for turning his back on us. That basically sold me, and off went my check. Of course, that really isn’t enough so I thought I would pass on to you Mr. Kennedy’s name and the information below. If others who felt the way I did sent a check maybe that would be enough. So I’m asking you to send something to Mr. Kennedy cause I realllllllllllly would like to say, come this November 7th, to the good Congressman. “So you lost the election. Sorry Mr. Sensenbrenner, ‘Just get over it!’” Thanks.

Your friend,

Jan Hayden

Kennedy's website.

Let me make this perfectly clear ...

I will not be a candidate for the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage Commission if this bill passes. I have had my time in the barrel.

During my time as a commissioner, I did learn that the first principle of sanitary engineering is the same one I learned in the Marine Corps.

Shit flows downhill.

The right to bear arms and arm children

Here's great idea. Let 8-year-olds hunt. Yes, with guns.

Only one thing that bothers me: Would we be discrimination against 6- and 7-year olds? They have constitutonal rights, too, don't they?

F. Jim still feeding at free travel trough

No surprise here.

Rep. F. Jim Sensenbrenner, right,the multimillionaire who represents suburban Wisconsin, leads the state delegation again in taking free travel, with five trips worth $39,000 in 2005.

You may recall the story last year in which he led all members of Congress in privately-paid travel. He even had more free trips that Tom DeLay.

He hasn't slowed down, or let any of the lobbying scandals affect him. Speaker Dennis Hastert wants to ban privately-paid travel, but F. sees no need to do that. It doesn't influence him at all, he says, and saves the taxpayers money. Of course, F could easily afford to pay his own way, but you don't get rich spending money when you don't have to, so F keeps his credit card in his wallet and keeps his wallet in his pocket.

The AP reports:

Sensenbrenner, chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, traveled to Europe, Japan and Las Vegas, and twice to San Francisco last year, congressional records show.

Two trade associations that have business before his committee - the National Cable & Telecommunications Association and the National Association of Broadcasters - paid to fly Sensenbrenner and his wife to speak to their groups. He met with the cable group in San Francisco and the broadcasters in Las Vegas...

In February, Sensenbrenner and his wife traveled to Paris; Stuttgart, Germany; and Liechtenstein to participate in congressional roundtables on economic, monetary, trade and foreign policy issues. The International Management and Development Institute, which promotes dialogue between business and government leaders, picked up the $16,200 tab.

Last fall, the Japan-U.S. Friendship Commission spent $11,400 to cover the couple's travel expenses to Tokyo, where Sensenbrenner met with members of the Japanese parliament.

Sensenbrenner also traveled to San Francisco to give a speech to his alma mater, Stanford University.

Last year's pace was not unusual for Sensenbrenner. In a report in April, Political Money Line, which tracks money in politics, found that Sensenbrenner took $168,000 worth of privately funded trips since 2000 - more than any other lawmaker.

Ryan travel worth $23,000; he opposes ban, too

Rep. Paul Ryan rang up $23,000 worth of travel, and said he opposes a ban on privately funded travel, but would support a ban on trips paid for by corporations. The AP reports:

Ryan's trips were paid for by the Heritage Foundation, the Club for Growth, the Claremont Institute for Statesmanship and Political Philosophy and the America Israel Educational Foundation.

"I'm concerned about a total ban because some of these are fantastic educational trips that make us better members of Congress," he said. "We need to ban the lobbying junkets - the golf course in Scotland - and I think we should have the ethics committee pre-approve trips.

Ryan's most expensive trip was to Israel, funded by the America Israel Educational Foundation at a cost of nearly $15,000.

"I learned more about the Middle East peace process in a few days than I could have going to 100 congressional hearings on the topic," Ryan said, adding that he met with both Palestinian and Israeli leaders. "Given that I have to vote on these foreign policy issues repeatedly each year, I think it made me a better decision-maker."

Four members of the delegation took no privately funded trips last year: Republican Rep. Mark Green, Democratic Rep. David Obey, and the state's two Democratic senators, Herb Kohl and Russ Feingold.

Feingold, a longtime advocate of curtailing the influence of special interests on Congress, said last week he supports a complete ban on privately funded travel, "with the possible limited exceptions for certain charitable groups that don't lobby."

The whole list for 2005.

GOP to use terror as campaign issue.

The Abominable No Men

Have you noticed how the Republican response to every idea in Gov. Jim Doyle's State of the State speech has been to play the roles of the Abominable No Men?

It all costs money, they say. OK, not much, but we don't have any. When new revenue estimates say there is more money, they don't change their tune. They're willing to spend money to set up a bureaucracy to license concealed weapons, but not to help people keep their families from freezing this winter.

Cory Liebman has been paying attention, and asks, if Christmas is over, why is Scrooge still here?

Carrie Lynch writes that the only things Rep. Mark Green thinks we can afford are some pork -- oops, I mean earmark -- projects he got in the federal budget, despite huge deficits. But when it comes to the state of Wisconsin, he has no ideas or interest in doing anything.

Right-wing race baiting on school choice

Jay Bullock calls it like he sees it, and he sees shameless race-baiting on the right over school choice. And he's absolutely right.

Sykes choosing words more carefully? His 'spot' becomes paid commercial

[This was written Sunday, but you'll find today's latest update at the bottom.--Xoff.]

Has Charlie been hearing from the lawyers?

Is it just my imagination, or is Republican radio shill Charlie Sykes beginning to watch his words just a little more closely as he describes the corporate-financed radio commercial he's been running that basically calls Gov. Jim Doyle a racist?

Do you think Charlie's been talking to the corporate lawyers about where the line is between unregulated free speech and regulated issue advocacy advertising?

You be the judge:

When he first played the commercial, produced by WTMJ staff using WTMJ production facilities and aired on WTMJ radio, Sykes called it a spot. You don't have to be a radio professional to know that a spot is a commercial. They are used interchangeably.

His first post on the subject:

WEDNESDAY, Jan. 18, 2006, 8:40 a.m.
GOVERNOR DOYLE, GET OUT OF THE SCHOOLHOUSE DOOR

This is the script of the spot we played this morning. [He also offered a link to the audio, which is called " 189 School Choice Ad" on the station's website.

Wednesday afternoon's WisPolitics report:

WTMJ-AM conservative talk show host Charlie Sykes is running a spot on his show featuring young voices blasting Doyle for "blocking school choice opportunities for hundreds of African American students here in Milwaukee." The spot draws comparisons between Doyle and former Alabama Gov. George Wallace, who once stood in front of a schoolhouse door at the University of Alabama in an attempt to stop desegregation of that institution.

When asked who was paying for the spot, which is running on Sykes' show, Sykes responded via e-mail:

"This is what makes it interesting. No one is paying. Mikel Holt (the editor of the Milwaukee Community Journal) and I put it together on our own. For free. We are making it available to anyone who wants to use it. Right now, it is simply an element of my show."

Sykes stammered a bit on the air Friday morning before defiantly playing the spot over and over. He introduced it as a "spot," then said it was "an element" of his show, and finally, at the prodding of his producer, called it a "message."

Afterwards, this was Friday post on Sykes Writes:

We will continue to air the message from the kids as part of my show.... authorized and paid by no one. For now, it's not an ad, because no one bought it, no one paid for it, and it does not run in any of our ad breaks. But once again: Mikel and I have agreed to make the spot available to anyone who DOES want to turn it into an ad on any station of their choice. Smoke on that, Xoff.

From WisOpinion.com Friday ...

-- WTMJ-AM conservative talk show host Charlie Sykes today responded to criticism on a controversial school choice spot running on his show. The spot, which features young African American voices blasting Doyle for "blocking" school choice opportunities, was criticized by one Dem blogger [Guess who?] yesterday as free corporate issue advertising.

In an e-mail to WisPolitics, Sykes clarified, writing, "at this point it is not an ad, because no has bought it. No one has paid for it. It is not run in any of our ad blocks. It is an element of my show."

Sykes indicates that all of the voices featured in the ad are students in the choice program. ``None of them were paid. The ads were recorded in the WTMJ studios," writes Sykes.

So Sykes insists "it is not an ad," and in the next breath says "the ads were recorded in the WTMJ studios."

Saturday Journal Sentinel:

Voucher advocates have launched a series of moves aimed at pressuring Doyle to agree to lift the cap. Commercials in which students and others urge Doyle to "lift the cap" have been running on radio and television in Milwaukee and Madison ...

In one commercial, students say Doyle is "standing in the schoolhouse door" the way segregationist Southern governors did in the 1950s and '60s.

Clearly, what Sykes has done is to produce an ad, a spot, a commercial. It is running for free on the state's biggest radio station, owned by Journal Broadcast Corp., a large corporation. The commercial is clearly issue advocacy. Corporations are not allowed to spend money on issue advocacy. To run the commercial as many times as it already has would cost school choice supporters or opponents thousands of dollars.

Is this beginning to sound even a little problematic?

Sykes' defenders say there is no difference between him spouting off his right-wing talking points for three and a half hours every morning and running a free commercial. But there is an obvious difference, and anyone who's listening can tell what it is. A commercial is a commercial is a commercial -- even if you claim it's just "an element" of your show. Even the newspaper calls it a commercial.

Sykes tries to use Mikel Holt, the black newspaper editor, and the black students of Messmer High, whose voices are on the commercial. He plays the race card, says I'm trying to silence black kids, calls it the kids' message when what they were doing was following a script he gave them. He's using those kids, and he's putting words in their mouths to unfairly paint Jim Doyle as a racist. That's what makes this whole thing so disgusting.

So when is a spot not a spot? Why, when Charlie says it's not.

---

UPDATE: Now the Coalition for America's Families, the same wingnut group that brought us the racist anti-immigration ad attacking Jim Doyle,says that it will buy the ad and pay to put it three Milwaukee radio stations with black audiences.

"Well, now it **is** an ad," he crows on Sykes Writes. Indeed it is. It always was an ad. And now it is an issue ad being run as a paid commercial on other stations while the Journal Broadcast Group continues to run it for free on WTMJ-AM.

Sykes and his right-wing friends have just proven my point. If it continues to run on WTMJ, it should be as paid issue advertising there, too.

UPDATE 2: Sykes mixes misdirection with bluster.

Santorum backs ban on gay westerns

The Borowitz Report:

Three days after the critically acclaimed film “Brokeback Mountain” won Golden Globe awards in four major categories, Sen. Rick Santorum (R-Penn) called for a constitutional amendment banning gay westerns.

“We cannot sit idly by and watch ‘Brokeback Mountain’ sashay into the mainstream of American culture,” Mr. Santorum said on the Senate floor today. “If allowed to flourish, gay westerns will destroy the sanctity of traditional westerns.”

He added that if the film continued to gain acceptance in the heartland, several western states might soon legalize marriage between gay cowboys.

OK, admit it. For just a split second, you thought it was real, right? It's only a small step from the arguments for the Wisconsin constitutional amendment on same sex unions. Loony? You bet. Funny? Not really.

Human toll: Iraq's long-term casualties

On Friday, Vietnam veteran Ron Kovic, who has been in a wheelchair and almost totally paralyed since 1968, wrote about his concern for those wounded in Iraq.

Sunday's NY Times tells the story of one courageous Marine fighting his way back to be able to function after suffering serious brain injuries from a roadside bomb.

He represents thousands of others who will haunt this nation and its veterans hospitals for the next 50 years. It is just part of the human toll of the misguided Bush war on Iraq. More than 16,000 Americans have been wounded, and 2,225 have died. The Iraqi civilian toll is many times higher, and they are not getting the life-saving care described in today's story. President Bush has acknowledged 30,000 civilian deaths. The number of wounded could be 150,000 or 200,000. Do you wonder why the Iraqi people want US troops to leave?

--Bob Engelhart, Hartford Courant, via Cagle.

The real Mark Green

He has a blog, and it's refreshing to find a Mark Green who gets it.

Not. Backing. Hillary.

Molle Ivins has had quite enough:

AUSTIN, Texas — I'd like to make it clear to the people who run the Democratic Party that I will not support Hillary Clinton for president.

Enough. Enough triangulation, calculation and equivocation. Enough clever straddling, enough not offending anyone. This is not a Dick Morris election. Sen. Clinton is apparently incapable of taking a clear stand on the war in Iraq, and that alone is enough to disqualify her.

Read it all.

The Sykes bucket brigade carries Charlie's water

Grumps, of the Happy Circumstance blog, has some insights into the right-wing firestorm I ignited by challenging the right of Republican radio host Charlie Sykes and his corporate masters to run issue advocacy spots paid for by Journal Broadcasting:

Wow! All it takes is one evening for the right side of the Cheddarsphere to lose it altogether.

Xoff posted an article with the claim that WTMJ and host Charlie Sykes have created and are running a "spot" criticizing Governor Doyle's position on school choice caps which violates laws against advocacy ads. The resulting snot-storm threatens to coat all of Wisconsin as the perpetually offended finds a common target.

Jess Bucher accused Xoff of violating the law himself by advocating for Doyle on WisOpinion. The Sykes Writes crowd swarm-posted Xoff's site with many missing the point outright. Peter DiGaudio ruined a right-side wrapup of the controversy by repeating Sykes' wacky claims that the Governor is, somehow, a racist.

Read the rest: Carrying Charlie Sykes' Water In Their Right Hand

---

Today's fair and balanced lineup on Sykes' TV show: Panel includes Jeff Wagner, Jessica McBride, Mikel Holt, and Mark Reardon. (Two more WTMJ Republican radio talkers, one sycophant, and his accomplice in the "Schoolyard Door" spots.) Bet it was quite a "debate."

UPDATE: Seth Zlotocha, who writes on In Effect, actually forced himself to watch the program and has a recap:

The conversation amounted to each one repeating the deceit they published in their blogs over the past couple weeks, while Holt added that Doyle is "feeling the political pressure" of this issue--namely from attack ads--and thus just choosing to come to the negotiating table now. While fiction can be fun, the reality is that Doyle made his proposal to expand the voucher program on November 4, 2005. That's right, Doyle's willingness to negotiate started over two months ago, long before any deceitful attack ads ran.

I'm not surprised that Sykes and the panelists on the program this morning presented the cases that they did. I mean, they've been deceitful on this issue for the past two weeks, why stop when they get on television? What is really troubling, however, is that the Journal Broadcast Group, which produces the "Milwaukee Insight" program, found it completely acceptable to give five people on the same side of this issue sole access to air time. Is this really doing a service to the public discussion on this issue?

Read it all here.

UPDATE: It really is an ad, being paid to run on other stations. Details.

--Sandy Huffaker, via Cagle.

Let's hope Wisconsin GOP buy Rove plan

Karl Rove made a "rare public appearance" Friday to lay out a scheme for the GOP to hold on to power in the 2006 elections. The NYT reports:

Mr. Rove called for civility in politics in his speech to the Republican National Committee, and then for 26 minutes offered a lacerating attack on Democrats that other Republicans said was a road map for how the party would deal with a tough electoral environment as it battled to retain control of both houses of Congress.

You might remember Rove, although he seems to be working from one of those secure locations lately and seldom coming out of his burrow. He is the top advisor to President Bush who is still under investigation for leaking classified information to the media. The investigation has already shown that Rove, on a number of occasions, revealed the identity of a classified CIA agent, Valerie Plame (Wilson) to discredit her husband, former ambassador Joseph C. Wilson IV, a harsh critic of the administration's Iraq war policy. Of course this is in direct contradiction to the fact that Rove sent White House spokesman Scott McClellan out to lie to the American people in 2003 and deny any White House involvement in the leak.

You also might find Rove's scheme familiar. It's virtually the same plan that the GOP tried to beat Sen. Russ Feingold with in Wisconsin in 2004. They lost big time in the last election.

Mr. Rove criticized Democrats for what he described as their "cut and run" policy on Iraq, for blocking a renewal of the antiterrorism law known as the USA Patriot Act and for challenging the legality of the administration's use of wiretaps without warrants.

Democrats across the country would be wise to look to Feingold's 2004 campaign as they plan this year's campaigns. Rove must have forget that his scheme for 2006 was a failed strategy in 2004 when Feingold ran against Bush and crushed Tim Michels by 11 points, winning 54 counties of 72 counties, including 27 counties won by Bush.

Feingold, who voted against going to war in Iraq because he thought it was a irresponsible distraction from the fight against terrorism, has rejected the false choice Rove and Bush have been peddling on the War in Iraq. Feingold has said we should neither "cut and run" or "stay the course" but have a timetable for bringing troops home from Iraq by the end of this year. Do you think most voters are more in line with Feingold or Rove on Iraq?

Let's hope Rep. Mark Green, founder of the Victory in Iraq caucus, takes Rove's advice. If Green wants to stand next to a failed "stay the course" strategy in Iraq, a Patriot Act that doesn't protect our freedoms, and a President who thinks he has the power to break the law and wiretap the phone conversations of innocent American citizens, Democrats should say, "Bring it on."

Rep. Green, can we expect to see Rove campaigning for you here in the state? You might want to look at this poll first. (Scroll to bottom of column.)Bring him on, too.

It looks like next to your friend/donor/mentor Tom DeLay, Rove has about as much credibility with the American people your friend Bob Ney does on ethics. Will he be coming back to Wisconsin anytime soon to lecture us about clean government?

Quote, unquote

"The bill does not create a single job, help a single Wisconsin citizen afford health care or improve schools for a single Wisconsin child. The Legislature should spend more time trying to get jobs into our communities instead of more guns."

--Gov. Jim Doyle, vetoing concealed weapons bill.

He could make that first sentence a mantra for many of the Republican-passed bills he's vetoed, whether it's voter ID, birth control, That's what they have in common; they do nothing to solve the state's real problems.

Job performance? Let me put it this way...

I'm sure these are not "from actual federal government employee performance evaluations." as they were advertised to be in the e-mail that sent them my way. In fact, I'm pretty sure they're not. But who cares?

For those of you in management who are looking for some creative ways to communicate the performance achievements of your less gifted employees, here are some inspiring quotes :

1. "Since my last report, this employee has reached rock-bottom and has started to dig."

2. "I would not allow this employee to breed."

3. "This employee is really not so much of a has-been, but more of a definite won't be."

4. "Works well when under constant supervision and cornered like a rat in a trap."

5. "When she opens her mouth, it seems that it is only to change feet."

6. "This young lady has delusions of adequacy."

7. "He sets low personal standards and then consistently fails to achieve them."

8. "This employee is depriving a village somewhere of an idiot."

9. "This employee should go far, and the sooner he starts, the better."

10. "Got a full 6-pack, but lacks the plastic thing to hold it all together."

11. "A gross ignoramus -- 144 times worse than an ordinary ignoramus."

12. "He doesn't have ulcers, but he's a carrier."

13. "He's been working with glue too much."

14. "He would argue with a signpost."

15. "He brings a lot of joy whenever he leaves the room."

16. "When his IQ reaches 50, he should sell."

17. "If you see two people talking and one looks bored, he's the other one."

18. "A photographic memory but with the lens cover glued on."

19. "A prime candidate for natural de-selection."

20. "Donated his brain to science before he was done using it."

21. "Gates are down, the lights are flashing, but the train isn't coming."

22. "He's got two brains cells, one is lost and the other is out looking for it."

23. "If he were any more stupid, he'd have to be watered twice a week."

24. "If you give him a penny for his thoughts, you'd get change."

25. "If you stand close enough to him, you can hear the ocean."

26. "It's hard to believe he beat out 1,000,000 other sperm."

27. "One neuron short of a synapse."

28. "Some drink from the fountain of knowledge; he only gargled."

29. "Takes him 2 hours to watch '60 Minutes'."

30. "The wheel is turning, but the hamster is dead."

F. Jim, live and in person

Everything you wanted to know from Rep. F. Jim Sensenbrenner, if you're not afraid to ask at four town meetings this weekend.

Suggested questions for F:

Aren't you glad those people in New Orleans got what they deserved?

Who could possibly object to having their phones tapped to fight terrorism?

How high does the wall across the Mexican border have to be to keep out illegals? Do we need guard towers and machine guns?

et cetera

Saturday, January 21
9:00am Oconomowoc City Hall
1:00pm Richfield Town Hall

Sunday, January 22
1:00pm Whitefish Bay Village Hall
7:00pm Brookfield Public Safety Building

Platoon of Iraq vets running for Congress

Veterans of the Iraq war are running for Congress in considerable numbers -- approaching platoon strength -- and they are running as Democrats, Scott Stearns of Brewtown Politico notes.

Some vets have asked me whether there is a central location where they can find out about the candidates, offer support, and contribute.

Indeed there is. There's probably more than one, because that's how things go these days, especially on the Internet (do we have to capitalize Internet? Why?) and among Democrats.

The most comprehensive site I'm aware of is Band of Brothers.

Others that people have passed on to me:

Securing America, Wesley Clark's PAC.

Fighting Dems, from Majority Report radio.

Draft Zinni, a site recruiting vets to run.

America-Patriots, a vets' communal blog

Other nominations? Let me know and I will share them.

Insight check

What do Charlie Sykes, Jessica McBride, and the Washington Post have in common?

(Don't shoot me; this post isn't about blogging; it's about free speech.)

-- Mike Lane, via Cagle.

A new Zogby poll, meaningless as ever

The latest Zogby poll on the governor's race is out, and just as unreliable as the previous ones.

Mark Green and Scott Walker say all the same stuff they said last time, and while they bark, the caravan moves on.

And Tommy's still not running for the Senate.

Agreed: An apology is in order

Boy, there's a storm in the RWB (Right Wing Blogosphere) over my post about the free, corporate-produced and paid commercial running on WTMJ-AM radio. Charlie Sykes calls it a blogswarm. Jessica McBride alone did her own blogswarm, being inspired to write 1,500 words.

The right-wingers are all over it and me, using terms like "free speech" and "fair comment" to defend what clearly is neither. They don't seem to be able to distinguish between this post on a WisOpinion blog, a newspaper editorial, and a commercial, which fits all of the definitions of issue advocacy, airing over and over on the state's largest radio station.

Worse yet, James Widgerson suggests I owe Sykes an apology.

Au contraire.

If there is any apology due anyone, it is an apology from Sykes to Jim Doyle, for equating him with two racist governors who tried to keep black students out of public schools.

Doyle has offered a reasonable compromise on this issue. The Republicans insist on an all-or-nothing approach.

It is the Republicans and their allies who are blocking the doorway and creating a crisis that does not have to exist.

It's not about the kids. It's about scoring cheap political points at any price, at the expense of Jim Doyle,who has been committed his entire life to the fight for racial equality. It's not lip service with Doyle; it's the way he's lived his life. As most people learned for the first time in the last governor's race, the Doyles have two African-American sons.

I guess that's probably one of the things that set me off when I heard what Sykes calls his "spot." Jim Doyle is the antithesis of a racist. But he is being portrayed as one, and it's not very subtle.

Hell, yes, there should be an apology. Sykes should apologize on the air to Jim Doyle.

While he's at it, maybe he should apologize to principled school choice supporters, like Howard Fuller, who really do care about the kids, and who would I am certain would never stoop to tactics like this. Fuller and others know Doyle is a decent man who happens to disagree with them on this issue, not a racist who's trying to hurt black children.

Sykes knows that, too, of course. But he doesn't care.

UPDATE: Sykes plays the race card.

Quote, unquote

"Freedom of the press is limited to those who own one."

--A. J. Liebling (1904 - 1963)

A liar and a snake?

Throughout his speech and afterwards in an interview with the Tribune, Walker, a former member of Marquette's College Republicans and president of Marquette Students for Life, said Doyle was a liar and a "snake" and had "failed the leadership test."

"He's pretty slippery when it comes to the issues," Walker said about why he considered Doyle a snake. -- The Marquette Tribune.

That's going to be the level of discourse 10 months before the election? Scott McCallum called Doyle a crook in 2002, but it backfired badly.

Walker, of course, leaves himself wide open to the well-known Pee Wee Herman defense: "I know you are, but what am I?"

David Clarke: Profiles in Cowardice

Republican radio host Jeff Wagner on Milwaukee County Sheriff David Clarke:

First, who’s kidding who? Face it, David Clarke really is a Republican.

Over the course of the last four years, Clarke has taken a number of courageous positions that reflect mainstream Republican thinking. Whether it has been his continuing calls for the community to take responsibility for the violence that plagues our streets to his often harsh (but dead on accurate) criticisms of the breakdown of social structures in society, Clarke has established himself as a leading conservative voice in the community. I say this fondly but David Clarke running for office as a Democrat is like Teddy Kennedy serving as a spokesperson for the Christian Coalition.

Finally, a voice on the right saying what many of us on the left have been saying for the past year or two.

Clarke, believing he can't win an election as a Republican in Milwaukee County, continues the charade, running as a Dem while showing up at GOP events and quacking like a Repub.

Wagner writes that Clarke is making a mistake, that he will lose in a Dem primary but could win in November on the GOP ticket. I disagree with that analysis -- but I agree that the sheriff should have the courage to take off his sheepskin and show himself for the voracious Republican wolf he really is.

How about it, Sheriff? Time to display some of that courage you like to talk about -- taking a stand for what you believe in. It's the conservative way. Or is that just a philosophical discussion? David Clarke: Profiles in Courage, or Profiles in Cowardice?

What's it gonna be, guts or glory? In this case, I don't think you can have both.

Charities believe Green, ask for DeLay $$$

Poor Mark Green. He said he'd give his tainted Tom DeLay money to charity, and now charities are asking him for some of the $29,000.

They didn't hear the part about how he wasn't going to do it now, because it requires a change in state law, which could take a long time. Or else he'll have to wait until he disbands his campaign and closes the account, which could be in 30 years or so, since he is a career politician who's bound to run for something else even after he loses the governor's race.

Green could have avoided all of the confusion by simply giving the money to a non-partisan voter education and registration effort, like the League of Women Voters. That's perfectly legal right now.

Instead, he chose to hang on to the money, but says he won't spend it for his campaign. Why not get rid of it? (He used to say he had already spent it, but that statement is inoperative, as Richard Nixon would say.)

But back to those requests from the charities.

One reason state law requires campaign money to be used for political purposes is to prevent candidates from trying to buy favor -- and to prevent organizations from shaking them down, to put it bluntly.

"You're running for governor, you have a million dollars, and you won't even contribute $1000 to (fill in the blank with your favorite charity here)?"

It's far easier to explain that you can't contribute because it's illegal.

That's one reason it might not be a slam-dunk to ask the legislature to change the law.

Any campaign manager will tell you it is already hard enough to cope with the many requests that come for "advertising" in newsletters, organizational publications, and programs for events, which may buy a little goodwill but probably don't win one extra vote.

Green could do himself and every other candidate a favor by just giving that $29,000 away now.

Politically, it would also let him say that he had gotten rid of it. Right now, it is no doubt still sitting in his campaign bank account, despite his announcement that he would somehow get rid of it.

Ron Kovic on Iraq's forgotten wounded . . .

Ron Kovic served two tours of duty as a U.S. Marine in the Vietnam War and was awarded the Bronze Star and the Purple Heart. In combat on Jan. 20, 1968, he suffered a spinal cord injury that left him paralyzed from the chest down. He became one of the best-known peace activists among the veterans of the war. He wrote a book about his story, "Born on the Fourth of July," which was the basis for a film by Oliver Stone, which starred Tom Cruise as Kovic.

Today is an important anniversary for Kovic, as he relates:

Thirty-eight years ago, on Jan. 20, 1968, I was shot and paralyzed from my mid-chest down during my second tour of duty in Vietnam. It is a date that I can never forget, a day that was to change my life forever. Each year as the anniversary of my wounding in the war approached I would become extremely restless, experiencing terrible bouts of insomnia, depression, anxiety attacks and horrifying nightmares. I dreaded that day and what it represented, always fearing that the terrible trauma of my wounding might repeat itself all over again. It was a difficult day for me for decades and it remained that way until the anxieties and nightmares finally began to subside.

As I now contemplate another January 20th I cannot help but think of the young men and women who have been wounded in the war in Iraq. They have been coming home now for almost three years, flooding Walter Reed, Bethesda, Brooke Army Medical Center and veterans hospitals all across the country. Paraplegics, amputees, burn victims, the blinded and maimed, shocked and stunned, brain-damaged and psychologically stressed, over 16,000 of them, a whole new generation of severely maimed is returning from Iraq, young men and women who were not even born when I came home wounded to the Bronx veterans hospital in 1968.

Read the rest at TruthDig.

The real choice on school choice

In case anyone is wondering what the real debate is about on school choice, and what the proposals of Gov. Doyle and the Republican legislators are, Seth Zlotocha of the In Effect blog has performed a public service and posted them.

It cuts through all the rhetoric. What you'll find is that Doyle is not trying to end the choice program, but has actually made a reasonable offer.

Here's the rundown from In Effect:

Doyle Proposal

Increase school voucher cap from 15% to 18%

Eliminate all prior-year eligibility rules, thereby allowing children to participate in the voucher program regardless of where they attended school the previous year
Increase the income eligibility cap for families who want to participate in the voucher program from 175% to 220% of the federal poverty level.

Allow MPS to count each voucher student at a rate of 45%, phased in over five years, when calculating state aid; all of the funds that come from this must be used by MPS for instruction.

Starting in the 2007-2008 school year, increase SAGE funding from $2000 per participating student to $2500 per participating student

Increase the enrollment cap on the Racine Charter School from 400 to 480

Implement mandatory WKCE standardized testing in grades 3-8 and 10 of all schools participating in the voucher program

Starting in the 2007-2008 school year, make it mandatory for all voucher program schools to be accredited by one of a number of specified independent accrediting authorities

Republican Proposal (Vukmir & Darling)

Remove all enrollment caps on the school voucher program

Undertake a privately-funded study of the school voucher program in Milwaukee led by researchers from Georgetown University

Make standardized testing voluntary for voucher schools, but make it mandatory they release the test scores if they do implement the testing

There they are—the two positions as they stand now. It’s time to keep the public discussion on the merits of these points moving forward.

Consider the source

The Wisconsin State Journal questions whether Gov. Jim Doyle used the right set of job numbers in his State of the State speech -- seasonally adjusted vs. unadjusted seems to be the debate.

I confess I have not spent a lot of time thinking about that debate. None, in fact.

But I was struck by this quote from the only "expert" the newspaper included in the story:

Economist David Ward of NorthStar Economics in Madison was clear on what he would use in a study.

"What you want to be using is seasonally adjusted numbers."

NorthStar Economics? Where have I heard that name before?

That's right, they are the ones who produced the totally discredited report on sick leave last week for the Madison Chamber of Commerce. David Ward is the head of the company.

Journal Broadcast breaking the law by running corporate issue advertising

UPDATE: An apology is in order.

---

Republican radio host Charlie Sykes is quite proud of himself for producing and airing an ad comparing Gov. Jim Doyle to two racist former Southern governors George Wallace and Orville Faubus, on the issue of school choice.

He's talking freely about how he and a WTMJ radio production person, Jim Gilles, produced the spot. Sykes is airing it on his program. He's posted the script and audio on his weblog.

It has no disclaimer, because, he tells WisPolitics, no one is paying for it.

Actually, that's not true. Journal Communications, and its Journal Broadcast Group, which owns WTMJ radio, is paying for it.

It is a corporation running free issue advertising on a bill that is in the legislature.

If that sounds illegal, it's because it is. State law does not allow corporations to run issue or political advertising, although in some instances it allows them to contribute to groups that do, like Wisconsin Manufacturers and Commerce.

Sykes says the commercial is simply "an element of my show."

But it's not, and it's not the same as parody commercials Sykes or Mark Belling have run making fun of Tom Ament or other elected officials.

This one is a real, honest-to-goodness issue ad that is trying to affect legislation and -- not incidentally -- do some damage to Gov. Jim Doyle, whom Sykes despises and wants out of office. The campaign for governor is already underway, which is a relevant fact as well.

Do you think Journal Broadcast lawyers reviewed and signed off on this spot? I would be amazed if they did, since the station is running an issue ad for free on taxpayer-owned airwaves. The Journal Broadcast Group does not own the airwaves; it is licensed by the government to use them.

WTMJ-AM is the biggest station in Wisconsin. This week, a spot on Sykes' show would cost an issue advertiser $520 if it ran before 10 a.m. and $320 between 10 and noon. There is a dollar value as well as a poliltical value to what Sykes and his corporate bosses are doing.

I'm not a lawyer and not in the business of filing lawsuits or complaints. But someone who is should take a close look at this and consider filing complaints with both the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) and the State Elections Board, for starters.

If Sykes can do this now, what's to prevent him, Jeff Wagner, Mark Belling and whoever to produce and run their own negative issue commercials right through the coming campaign and up to election day? Does that sound legal? If not, then what Sykes and Journal Broadcast are doing right now isn't legal either.

POSTSCRIPT: Sykes wonders why I don't mention Mikel Holt, editor of the Community Journal, who helped produce the spot. Is it because he's black? No, actually it's because he -- unlike Sykes and Gilles -- doesn't work for the Journal Broadcast Group, so his participation is not a corporate contribution. It does raise the interesting question, however, of whether Holt is an agent or representative of one of the other organizations that is advertising or lobbying on the issue. That could be a little problem, too.

POSTSCRIPT 2: Sykes' defense is that it's free speech. It's free to him because he's on the air, but it is paid for by the corporation he works for. If it were really free speech, the station would offer equal time for people on the other side of the issue to air their opinions and run their own "unsponsored" commercial.

THE REAL CHOICE. If anyone wants to get past the rhetoric and compare the proposals on choice caps from Gov. Doyle and the legislative Republicans, click here.

Republicans try to camouflage TABOR

WisPolitics confirmed in its Wednesday report what the Alliance of Cities has been saying, as we reported -- TABOR, the so-called Taxpayer Bill of Rights, is about to get a new name.

State Sen. Glenn Grothman, R-West Bend, who unseated Mary Panzer because, among other things, she couldn't deliver on TABOR, is still trying to put together a proposal that can get 17 GOP votes in the Senate. He says now he'll have something by the end of the month.

WisPolitics says:

But don’t be too quick to call it the Taxpayers Bill of Rights – or TABOR. A name change could be coming that pays homage to Wisconsin taxpayers.

Sen. Glenn Grothman, R-West Bend, is taking the lead on the issue in the Senate, with some help from Senate Majority Leader Dale Schultz of Richland Center. Grothman tells WisPolitics the draft is in the works. “I think you’ll see a draft in two weeks. I’ll be disappointed if you don’t,” Grothman said, adding Wisconsin’s version of the government spending limit will be different from current TABOR policies. “It’ll be different from the Colorado thing. Colorado made some errors, and we’re not going to do those errors.”

Last night in an interview, Schultz said Senate Republicans “believe very strongly that a constitutional amendment ought to have the right to be voted on.” He said he was letting Grothman take the lead on the draft’s introduction date. “You can expect us to have a constitutional amendment without arguing the slogan,” Schultz said.

And last week WMC's Jim Pugh said it's up to legislators what the plan should be called but added "this idea is so popular that the name of the proposal is somewhat irrelevant.”

The truth is, it has been all about the slogan. But now that TABOR's reputation has been tarnished in Colorado, where it originated, the GOP wants to get far away from anything that can be tied to Colorado's TABOR. Opponents aren't likely to let that happen.

A name to "pay homage" to Wisconsin taxpayers? What would that be, The Wonderful Wisconsin Taxpayers Amendment? Give us a break.

As for Pugh's insistence that the idea is so popular the name doesn't matter -- if that's true, why don't we just call it TABOR?

Real conservatives don't back wiretaps

Lest we think that the Bush-Cheney spy mission to conduct warrantless eavesdropping on American citizens is something their base would like, consider this:

An organization calling itself Patriots to Restore Checks and Balances (PRCB) wants Congress to hold "open, substantive oversight hearings examining the President's authorization of the National Security Agency (NSA) to violate domestic surveillance requirements outlined in the Federal Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA)."

The group includes some of the right's biggest luminaries -- Grover Norquist, president of Americans for Tax Reform (ATR); David Keene, chairman of the American Conservative Union; Paul Weyrich, chairman and CEO of the Free Congress Foundation and Alan Gottlieb, founder of the Second Amendment Foundation.

"Public hearings on this issue are essential to addressing the serious concerns raised by alarming revelations of NSA electronic eavesdropping." -- Grover Norquist.

"The need to reform surveillance laws and practices adopted since 9/11 is more apparent now than ever. No one would deny the government the power it needs to protect us all, but when that power poses a threat to the basic rights that make our nation unique, its exercise must be carefully monitored by Congress and the courts. This is not a partisan issue; it is an issue of safeguarding the fundamental freedoms of all Americans so that future administrations do not interpret our laws in ways that pose constitutional concerns." -- David Keene.

"If the law is not reformed, ordinary Americans' personal information could be swept into all-encompassing federal databases encroaching upon every aspect of their private lives. This is of particular concern to gun owners, whose rights guaranteed under the Second Amendment are currently being infringed upon under the Patriot Act's controversial record search provisions." -- Alan Gottlieb.

Read the release.

Funny how these real, principled conservatives stand up for protecting personal privacy while the partisan hacks like Sykes, Wagner, Belling, and McBride all excuse Bush for trampling on people's freedoms.

Their response: "It's OK, he's the President."

Who decides, party bosses or the people?

State Rep. Terri McCormick, R-Appleton, was surprised and a bit put out to learn that the Republican Congressional Committee has decided to support her opponent, Speaker John Gard, R-Sun Prairie/Peshtigo for Congress. McCormick and Gard are both running in the GOP primary for the open seat being vacated by gov wannabe Mark Green.

McCormick criticized party bosses for lining up for her opponent so early. "The voters should speak first instead of political insiders," she said, according to the AP story.

Voters sometimes react badly to the party bosses trying to tell them who to support. Ask Bob Kasten, who was endorsed for governor, but lost to Lee "Let the People Decide" Dreyfus in the GOP primary. That's when the state party quit endorsing in primaries.

Free advice to the McCormick campaign: "Let the People Decide" has a nice ring to it. Try it on for size, and run against the bosses and the machine, which Gard truly represents.

Sheriff has his own rules

The most dangerous place to be in the Milwaukee County courthouse is not in the county jail's holding pen, but between Sheriff David Clarke and a TV camera.

Spivak and Bice nailed him for hogging the limelight on a recent perp walk when he had nothing to do with making the collar. Now they've followed up after learning Clarke was so busy getting on TV he broke a department rule and took his gun into a no-gun area. It's an amusing read, because Clarke stonewalls with the best of them.

"Never look back." he says. His deputies should remind him of that next time he wants to discipline one of them for something that happened yesterday.

Sykes finds his calling

Charlie Sykes, Republican radio host, has finally found his niche -- making negative commercials. Since Todd Robert Murphy left town, there might be an opening for a GOP smearmeister.

Sykes has an advantage that other issue advocates don't have, though -- he produces and runs them free on the state's biggest station.

Charlie Sykes, meet Seth Zlotocha.

How amendment would do real damage

This is the kind of argument for fairness and equality that may resonate with Wisconsin voters.

Patrick Flaherty explains what the proposed constitutional amendment to ban same sex marriages and civil unions could mean to those who already have domestic partnerships recognized by their employers:

...[T]he proposed ban on civil unions and marriage progressing through the Wisconsin legislature could threaten Milwaukee’s domestic partner registry if the amendment passed and a court found that the registry created a legal status too “substantially similar to that of marriage.” She couldn’t understand why her government would try to take away her family’s ability to see a doctor. I find that when Milwaukee-area staff and volunteers get a chance to talk to voters about how far the amendment goes and how it hurts Wisconsin families in their communities, most voters agree with Teresa that we must vote no on discrimination.

-- John Trever, Albuquerque Journal, via Cagle.

The State of Milwaukee County?

Scott Walker is the world's fastest buck passer. The buck never stops at his desk. With Walker, it's more like a game of Hot Potato -- how fast can he get rid of it?

Cory Liebmann of Eye on Wisconsin offers some observations on the State of Milwaukee County:

Milwaukee County Executive Scott Walker tried to bury bad news at the beginning of a holiday weekend last Friday. What was the bad news? The report that the Milwaukee County Parks Department has a $2.3 million deficit. Does that not sound familiar to anyone else? It should because the same thing happened in 2003.

Let me briefly summarize what happened at that time. The Parks budget was $2 million in deficit, then Director of Parks Susan Baldwin devised a deficit reduction plan that she says was affirmed and reaffirmed by Scott Walker. This plan included early closings of pools in the summertime. When constituents (mostly in Walker’s suburban strongholds) started complaining, Walker had to take quick action that would pass the buck to someone else. That “someone else” he passed the buck to was Susan Baldwin and four of her colleagues whose resignation/retirement he demanded.

Such drastic action was taken at that time and now an even greater deficit. Who will Walker blame now? The only common denominator between the deficit in 2003 and the current one is Walker and his policies. It does not take a genius to figure out that this County Executive job was only a stepping stone for Walker to run for Governor. It seems clear that he is only trying to bide his time as County Exec and then let some other poor soul clean up his mess.

Read the rest, including court documents about how Walker passed the buck in 2003.

MLK Day on Sunday? Let's expand on that

State Sen. Glenn Grothman, R-West Bend, thinks Wisconsin should move the Martin Luther King holiday to a Sunday. "If you really wanted to have a ceremony honoring Martin Luther King, wouldn't it be better to do it on the third Sunday of the month, when everybody could honor him rather than just state workers? I think this becomes more of a holiday to benefit government employees than to benefit the memory of Dr. King," he says in a Wis. State Journal story.

If you read between the lines, it sounds like Grothman is just hacked off that state workers have a holiday when some other people don't. Typical. (One reader suggests maybe Grothman's gripe is that he couldn't collect his $88 per diem on the holiday.)

Did West Bend have a ceremony? (Just curious.) Would it have one, no matter which day it was? (Even curioser.) Moraine Park Technical College's West Bend campus is having an observance, but it's next Monday. Is that it?

In Milwaukee, there were plenty of activities on both Sunday and Monday. If you wanted to honor Dr. King at something official, you could easily do that.

Dr. King's birthday is already a federal holiday, of course. That wouldn't change.

Some school districts held classes on Monday, on the theory that students wouldn't remember Dr. King on their own if they were out of school, but would have to hear and perhaps learn something about him if they were in school. Middleton-Cross Plains was one district that held classes, sparking some controversy.

But back to Grothman's brain fart. I'm a veteran and always thought I should have Veteran's Day off. Maybe if we celebrated in on a Sunday, veterans wouldn't have to work. Maybe if we had Labor Day on a Sunday, more workers would have the day off. The possibilities are endless. IfValentine'ss Day were on Sunday, more couples could go to brunch. If St. Patrick's Day were on Saturday, the bars could stay open later, and people could just miss church the next day, instead of missing work.

And how about Election Day? It's a hassle to vote on a Tuesday. If it were on a Saturday or a Sunday, think of how much easier it would be for working people to get to the polls. Think we could get some Republican sponsors for that? Oops, forgot. They don't want to make it easier to vote; they want to make it harder.

Concealed carry law will boost tourism

So concealed carry has passed again. Won't you feel safer when when you don't know who might be carrying a gun?

Maybe Gov. Jim Doyle wouldn't be so quick to veto it again if he realized what a boon the new law would be to tourism.

This from a brochure by the Wisconsin Concealed Carry Association:

The number of permit holders in each state is typically small (on average about 1.7 per cent of the population), but even a small number of permit holders serve as a deterrent to violent crime. This deterrent is a collateral benefit realized by all citizens, whether they carry a gun or not. When concealed carry is legal, the criminal has no idea whether the potential victim is armed or not. To protect their own life, they must assume everyone is carrying a weapon and trained to use it.

This change in criminal behavior was very evident in Florida in 1988, after passing a concealed carry law; criminals knew that Florida citizens might be armed. Rather than risk their own lives, they turned their criminal attentions to tourists in easily recognized rental cars. The criminals knew the tourists would not be armed and able to defend themselves.

You'll be happy to know that Florida got rid of the special license plates that identified rental cars. And now there's a new Shoot First law, which would be next on the NRA agenda for Wisconsin if concealed carry becomes law here.

---

Paul Soglin roasts the Democrats for their role in concealed carry.

UPDATE: I've found now that the Wisconsin law would allow licensed gun-toters from Florida, Texas or other states to bring their weapons when they visit the Badger state. I guess they'll have to stash the guns in their checked baggage, not carry them on the plane. So anyone planning on victimizing them would have to do it on the way to the baggage claim area.

Abramoff is a Republican scandal

While Republican flaks and apologists continue, with some success, to try to persuade the media that the Abramoff scandal is really bipartisan, Robolo does a nice job of assembling the facts and setting the record straight.

This is a Republican scandal, top to bottom.

Quote, unquote

"We care about this almost too much. We are deeming people guilty merely when the insinuation of an association is implied."

-- Mordecai Lee, a former state senator, warning against overzealousness in linking political contributions to scandal. Lee was Mr. Clean in the legislature, famous for not allowing lobbyists in his office.

Taking sides in House leadership race

UPDATE: WisPolitics reports that Rep. F. Jim Sensbrenner is supporting Arizona Republican John Shadegg for majority leader. Sensenbrenner said,"Shadegg is the person who can listen and lead us in a new direction."

That leaves Mark Green hanging out there as the only uncommitted Badger Republican.

---

Two Wisconsin Repubs have taken a stand in the three-way race to replace the indicted Rep. Tom DeLay as House majority leader. All three candidates are ethically challenged.

Rep. Tom Petri, is backing Rep. Roy Blunt of Missouri.

Rep. Paul Ryan supports Arizona Rep. John Shadegg, and has signed a letter urging others to support him.

If Reps. Mark Green and F. Jim Sensenbrenner have decided who to support, they haven't made it public yet. No surprise that Green hasn't taken a stand; he still has never taken a stand on President Bush's plan to privatize Social Security, despite months of questions and pressure from Dems, senior citizen groups, and others. Who would have thought a public official could get away with that?

Dubious achievement award

Gov wannabe Mark Green's current online newletter touts this accomplishment:

When Mark Green served in the State Assembly, he authored a number of lawsuit reform laws – including the cap on non-economic damages that was overturned by the Wisconsin Supreme Court earlier this year.

Nice job, Mark. That's what we call going the extra mile.

Hat tip: Pablo on Politics.

Tommy, Klauser on witness list, too

UPDATE: Paul Soglin gives Top 10 reasons for the big list.

Besides ex-Assembly Speakers Tom Loftus and David Prosser, former Gov. Tommy Thompson and his "Deputy Gov." Jim Klauser are on the defense witness list for the trial of Scott Jensen on felony charges of mkisconduct in public office.

The full list:

Steve Baas, who worked for Speaker John Gard before becoming governmental affairs director for the Metropolitan Milwaukee Association of Commerce.

Bill Bablich, former state Supreme Court justice, former State Senate majority leader,now a lawyer with Michael Best & Friedrich of Madison.

Tanya Bjork, former employee of the now-defunct Assembly Democratic Caucus who later worked for then-State Sen. Brian Burke, D-Milwaukee.

Bill Broydrick, lobbyist and former state rep.

Ray Carey, Assembly Republican Caucus director from 1995 to 1999.

Tim Cullen, former State Senate majority leader.

Brian Dake, an aide to Scott Jensen in the Assembly.

J. Mac Davis, former State Senator, now Waukesha County Circuit Court judge.

Raghu Devaguptapu former employee of the now-defunct Assembly Democratic Caucus who later worked for then-Sen. Brian Burke, D-Milwaukee.

Peter Dykman, Legislative Reference Bureau counsel.

Pat Fuller, chief clerk of the Assembly

Bob Garvin, PSC commissioner

Brett Healy, Scott Jensen's former chief of staff

Mark Jefferson, former Assembly Republican Caucus deputy director

Rich Judge, former Assembly caucus diirector, now Doyle's campaign manager

Jim Klauser, former Department of Administration secretary and ex-State Senate GOP caucus director.

Shirley Krug, former Assembly Democratic minority leader

Walter Kunicki, former Democratic Assembly speaker

Tom Loftus, former Democratic Assembly speaker

Don Millis, former state Elections Board member

Bruce Pfaff, Milwaukee County Executive Scott Walker's campaign manager

R.J. Pirlot, lobbyist

David Prosser, former Republican Assembly speaker, now State Supreme Court justice.

Donny Schneider, former State Senate chief clerk.

John A. Scocos, former Assembly chief clerk, now secretary of Dept. of Veterans Affairs.

Joe Strohl, former State Senator,now a lobbyist

Ray Taffora, former legal counsel to then-Gov. Tommy Thompson, now an attorney at Michael, Best and Friedrich.

Tommy Thompson, former governor. Jensen served as his chief of staff.

Joelle Tierney, lobbyist.

State Rep. Gregg Underheim, R-Oshkosh

Mike Zaleski, former state Dept. of Justice prosecutor, now a private attorney.

-- Thanks to Gary Fisher.

A hard knock for Calatrava

Santiago Calatrava, architect and designer of the Milwaukee Art Museum addition,takes a hard knock from Sarah Williams Goldhagen of the Harvard School of Design, writing in The New Republic. [It may require free registration to read it all.] Excerpt:

There is a word that characterizes the phenomenon that I am describing. That word is "kitsch."And as Calatrava builds more architectural projects, it becomes increasingly apparent that much of this work is not even well-considered kitsch. Consider Calatrava's long-standing interest in kinesthetic architecture. His extremely large structures often sport movable parts: the roof of the WTC hub will open to the sky every September 11, and the flapping "wings" of the Milwaukee Art Museum offer a slowmotion image of a bird taking off from the ground. It's cool. But for an architect who claims that his design principles are grounded in the natural world, it is more than slightly ironic that Calatrava exhibits little interest in environmentally responsible ("green") architecture. When in motion, these buildings must consume more energy than others thrice their size.

Jensen witness list includes Prosser, Loftus

A state Supreme Court justice and a UW Regent -- both former Assembly speakers -- appear on the witness list filed in court today by the defense lawyer for another ex-Speaker -- Scott Jensen, R-Brookfield -- charged with three felony counts of misconduct in public office. The governor's campaign manager also made the witness list.

The defense also filed a request for the "learned treatise" of Tom Loftus' 1994 book, an inside look at lawmaking called The Art of Legislative Politics, admissible as evidence in court.

The witness list defense attorney Stephen Meyer submitted today reads like the Who's Who of Wisconsin politics.

It includes former Republican Assembly speaker and now-Supreme Court Justice David Prosser, and UW Regent Tom Loftus, a former Democratic Assembly Speaker, as well as Rich Judge, former director of the Assembly Democratic caucus and now-Gov. Jim Doyle's campaign manager.

Indefinite at this time is whether Dane County Circuit Judge Daniel Ebert will allow the defense to call them to the witness stand. He can restrict the scope of the defense.

But the judge won't act on the witness list until requested by one party or the other or during trial.

However, it's likely the state will scream bloody murder when they figure out some of these witnesses.

During the interim, the defense won't appeal Ebert's recent ruling denying a change of venue motion attorneys filed for Jensen and former GOP staffer Sherry Schultz, who faces one felony charge of misconduct in public office.

-- By Gary Fisher

Being 'nice guy' doesn't excuse bad behavior

Apologists for legislators like Steve Foti, who say he was a nice guy and shouldn't be penalized for abusing his office -- folks like Ragnar Mentaire, for example, would do well to read this piece by Scott Milfred of the Wisconsin State Journal, who nails it.

Mentaire:

For the team, Foti said fine when higher ups asked him to put the Assembly Republican fundraiser on his payroll. He didn't supervise her, he didn't direct her, he merely stood aside and let things happen in other corners of the capitol. Foti was never involved in caucus campaign stuff. It simply was not his interest, and he never particularly cared for the institution. After becoming Majority Leader, he simply stepped up and allowed for one of his positions to be used by others. WHAT ABOUT SHIRLEY KRUG OR BRIAN FRALEY OR MARY PANZER OR RICH JUDGE? For gods' sake, they actually ran campaign machines out of the capitol AND THEY'VE NEVER BEEN CHARGED WITH ANYTHING!!!!

Steve Foti is one of the best guys to have ever served in the Legislature. His early unseriousness was replaced by intelligence, results and an exceptional demeanor with members of both parties. It is worse than unfortunate that this scandal forced him out of office, as he would have been a great Speaker. A giant next to the midgets that are currently hoping to succeed Gard. SHAME ON YOU, BRIAN BLANCHARD, FOR SCREWING THIS UP!! You busted one of the good guys, and let dozens of more egregious violators slide. IT IS BEYOND SICKENING!

Milfred:

To avoid trial on a felony charge, Foti pleaded guilty to a misdemeanor ethics violation Friday. He admits he hired a campaign fundraiser, Sherry Schultz, on the state's payroll for more than three years at an annual salary that grew to $65,052. The total tab is estimated at $300,000.

For the expense, Wisconsin taxpayers got a full-time "money person" who hit up private political donors and recruited leader- picked Assembly candidates, according to Foti's criminal complaint.

A longtime state employee in Foti's office complained repeatedly about Schultz after she was hired in 1998. Schultz shouldn't be working at the Capitol, the staffer told Foti, unless she's doing legitimate public work.

Foti eventually agreed to move Schultz to an office at the Assembly Republican Caucus office a block from the Capitol. But it was still a state office, and taxpayers were still paying Schultz's salary.

"Schultz would brag about how much money she raised," the complaint states. "Foti and the rest of his staff knew what Schultz was doing with her time."

Multiple state employees said Schultz never did any legitimate work for taxpayers.

Foti already had four employees. Schultz became his fifth. So much for the Republican mantra of small government.

Schultz would track campaign money, file necessary reports and create "call sheets" of donors, the complaint states. Schultz was "constantly talking with lobbyists regarding campaign contributions." Lobbyists would drop checks off at Foti's Capitol office.

Schultz worked "typical banker's hours" but often disappeared during afternoons, the complaint states. When it wasn't campaign season, Schultz would go on vacation a lot.

Schultz also raised campaign money for Foti himself.

Heard enough? This wasn't a petty ante case. This was grand theft from the taxpayers. And Foti had direct, personal responsibility.

Taking one for the team? Not much of a defense. It's easy to see why Foti's lawyer didn't want to use the Mentaire defense in court.

Reinforcements to the rescue

Just when you start feeling outnumbered, fresh troops arrive. Just like in the movies. The latest blog on the left, In Effect, is Milwaukee-based and written by Seth Zlotocha. (Is that a real name? I don't know). {He has now e-mailed to assure me it is.}

First posts include hot topics -- school choice, whether Democrats are pro-choice in general, the tire-slashing trial, and more.

System not working? Blame officials, not radio

Republican legislative leadership lacking

Having trashed one "community columnist" already today, let's move on to another, one Joseph Geck, who comes off better.

He asks: "Is local democracy threatened by the politics of the ridiculous?"

His premise, after a trip through Michigan listening to talk radio, is that the medium focuses on political sideshows rather than the important issues this country faces, and that democracy is poorer as a result. He writes:

Now, southeastern Michigan is bracing itself for the layoffs of tens of thousands of autoworkers in 2006. The U.S. segment of the auto industry is in serious trouble, with some predicting the demise of Ford and General Motors. Some suggested a plan whereby Toyota would buy out GM.

As I drove across Michigan, I expected to hear a discussion on talk radio with questions like: Why aren't we able to compete with the Japanese and Germans? Is there something about our tax structure and our way of funding health care that makes our companies less competitive to overseas competition? What will happen as people lose their pensions and health care? What are the long-term implications for U.S. defense with the slow erosion of its manufacturing base?

Unfortunately, I didn't realize I was on the AM dial. What were the two biggest concerns of all the local and national shock jocks?

The first issue was the "treasonous" conduct of Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) for successfully getting a measure passed that would prohibit torture of prisoners under American control. I could not fathom how these commentators (I listened to five) could link McCain, a POW in Vietnam and one of the foremost statesmen in the Senate, with the word "treason."

The second issue that they fumed about was the war on Christmas. They were complaining about the lack of Christ in Christmas in nearly the same breath that they advocated torture as an interrogation technique. After listening to them, I wondered how we would ever get Christ back into Christianity. The ministers who were on their shows didn't blink at the absurdity of discussing torture and Christmas on the same program.

At the end of the day, one of the commentators appealed to citizens who felt the war on Christmas and the banning of torture were tragedies to work to remove liberals from public office in 2006.

It's easy to make talk radio -- I prefer to call it what it is, Republican radio -- the villain.

But in Wisconsin the problem is bigger than that. It's our legislative leadership -- the people we elect to tackle the state's problems -- who are staging the sideshows.

The Republicans who control both houses of the Legislature have allowed the extreme elements of their party -- the "base" -- to set the agenda, with Assembly Speaker John Gard as their willing accomplice.

The result is that the legislature spends its time on what the popular shorthand calls "Gods, guns and gays," while allowing real problems to languish. It's all about political gamesmanship and "gotcha." The public interest? Forget it; this is politics.

Bills that would actually improve people's daily lives languish in committee and can't even get a hearing, while lawmakers debate which pattern should be designated as the state tartan. I wish I were making this up, but I'm not.

Republican radio contributes to the problem, to be sure, by mobilizing the zealots to pressure their legislators and drive the public agenda to the right. It has considerable influence with suburban Republican lawmakers, who can pressure their caucuses.

But Republican radio's statewide influence is greatly overstated. How hard, and how long, did Sykes, Belling, Wagner et al. try to help George W. Bush carry Wisconsin? They pounded away incessantly for months. John Kerry won the state. How hard did they try to bring down Jim Doyle in the last governor's race? And how'd that turn out?

But the radio hosts weren't elected by anyone to look out for the people's interests. They were hired to help their employers make money. It's a business.

Legislators, on the other hand, were elected by the people to represent their interests and guard the public trust. They are failing that responsibility.

Alexis de Tocqueville, who's cited by columnist Geck, would not be happy with the current state of affairs, it's true. But he would blame the citizenry and the legislators they've elected, not talk radio.

When the backlash comes from citizens who are tired of the gamesmanship on display in the Capitol -- and that day will eventually come -- the new Republican minority will have only themselves to blame.

Is there an editor in the house?

I was skeptical about the Journal Sentinel's idea to have a bunch of "community columnists" writing for the newspaper's op ed page. It's hard to say exactly what it was. Maybe it seems like tokenism of a sort. Allowing a few "regular people" to write columns, and others to serve on an editorial advisory board, are intended to give the false impression that this is somehow the people's newspaper. It clearly is not; it's just one piece of a big corporation that dominates the Milwaukee media market.

Many of the community columnists have been a pleasant surprise. They write about things the newspaper's editorial board normally would ignore, and come at the issues from a different perspective.

But today's column by Kurt Spielmann, about Milwaukee needing something -- he has no idea what -- to attract "guests" is simply embarrassing. A sample:

If we had some guests, people'd have to treat you a little nicer. Maybe you're a guest. And yeah, there'd still be some who knew you and treated you mean, but you could be proud of them. For the sake of the guests.

"Hey," you'd say with a wink and a shrug, "that's just Milwaukee being Milwaukee."

If we had some guests, we'd have someone to get sick of besides each other.

What we really need are some standards for guest columnists. And maybe an editor.

If it's good for the goose...

why not the gander? If lowering penalties for late payment of property taxes is such a good idea, why exclude Milwaukee from the bill?

AND THE ANSWER IS ... "The City of Milwaukee has a separate section of the statutes dealing with tax collections, that has already solved the problem," acccording to an e-mail from the bill's sponsor, State Rep. Bob Ziegelbauer, D-Manitowoc.

One poll after another is bad news for Rs

A number of national polls out this week tell the same story: Americans know about the Abramoff scandal, think it will hurt Republicans and believe that Democrats will be more honest running Congress than Republicans.

Public Strongly Believes That Democrats Are More Ethical & Honest. By a 12-point margin, Americans questioned last week feel that Democrats will do a better job of dealing with corruption in government. In a separate poll, voters felt Democrats would govern more ethically and honestly than Republicans by a 7-point margin. [USAToday/CNN/Gallup, 1/10/06; Pew Research Center, 1/11/06]

By A Nearly 2:1 Margin, Voters Think Republicans Are More Corrupt. According to the new CBS News poll, Republicans in Congress are nearly twice as likely as their Democratic counterparts to be seen as the party that is more financially corrupt. [CBS News, 1/9/06]

Only 1% of Public Believe Abramoff Will Hurt Democrats. According to the CBS News poll, only 1% of voters think that Democrats will be the party most significantly involved the testimony Jack Abramoff agreed to as part of his plea agreement. [CBS News, 1/9/06]

More Than Half of Americans Are Paying Attention to Abramoff Case. According to the USAToday/CNN/Gallup poll, 53% of American voters believe that the Abramoff case is a major scandal. [USAToday/CNN/Gallup, 1/10/06]

By a 13-Point Margin, Americans Want Democrats to Lead Congress. A new AP-Ipsos poll shows that Americans would prefer Democrats in control of Congress by 49% - 36%. As Time magazine noted after the release of the AP poll, the fact is that about two-thirds of Abramoff-related money went to Republicans, and that may have already begun to shift the political equation.-- [AP, 1/7/06; Time, 1/16/06]

More Than Half of Americans Disapprove of GOP Congressional Leaders. A new Pew Research poll shows that 52% of Americans disapprove of the job the Republican leaders in Congress are doing. [Pew Research Center for the People & the Press, 1/11/06]

Americans Have Little Faith in GOP Legislative Policies. According to a new USAToday/CNN/Gallup poll, 50% of Americans believe that the policies being proposed by Republican congressional leaders will move the country in the wrong direction. [USAToday/CNN/Gallup, 1/10/06]

The bad news, of course, is that because of partisan redistricting there are only a couple of dozen really competitive House seats in the whole country. But these polls certainly should give Ds some hope. Now if we only had a message.

Hat tip: DSCC.

This is clearly NOT about the kids

The RWB (right-wing blogosphere) seems to think this from Owen at Boots and Sabers is insightful:

... It’s about the kids. School choice is helping a lot of kids. Sure, it has some problems, but overall, it is helping thousands of kids who were not succeeding in MPS for whatever reason. It is also helping MPS, as shown by its improving statistics.

Instead of just lifting the cap to help educate more kids, Governor Doyle is trying to extract a price from the Republicans first by attaching all sorts of unrelated conditions to his signature. I mean, really… what does more money for SAGE have to do with lifting the cap on School Choice? Doyle won’t lift the cap without his conditions because then he would have “lost.” He needs to “win” to keep the support of WEAC. In reality, the only people losing here are the kids.

If Doyle and Folkbum would stop thinking of this issue as a “us vs. them” issue and start thinking of the kids, maybe we can actually educate some children.

We could, of course, just reverse that and say: If the Republicans were really interested in helping ALL Milwaukee kids, and not just trying to score some political points against Gov. Doyle, they would have worked out a compromise long ago.

This isn't about the kids. It's about mean-spirited electoral politics that is holding Milwaukee's kids hostage. The Republicans think they need to "win" 100% of what they want, while the kids suffer.

Another observation or two from someone (me) who supports school choice, but not what's happening right now:

If the idea behind choice is that parents should be empowered to make informed choices of where to send their kids -- public or private -- shouldn't they know how the schools compare to each other?

Isn't one good way to compare the scores on the same tests? Where have we heard that argument? That's right; it's the theory behind No Child Left Behind. If a Democrat took the position that Alberta Darling does, that testing should be optional, the GOP would be all over it.

What good does a longitudinal study do for parents? They find out in 10 years that they made the wrong choice for their kids? I bet most parents will figure it out long before any Georgetown researchers do.

Parents deserve information so they can make choices. Wisconsin taxpayers deserve some measure of accountability, since they will soon be spending $100-million a year on the choice program. Why aren't Owen and the fiscal conservatives saying that?

-- Mike Konopacki

The Wisconsin Historical Society offers Highlights of its civil rights collection.

And on my right ...

This is turning out to be a great holiday.

First, Jay (Folkbum) Bullock does comprehensive coverage of the school choice issue, so that your faithful scribe can get away with only a few scribbles and a link to his writings.

Now comes Dennis York, from the right side of what Bullock calls the Cheddarsphere, with an insightful commentary on the push for "campaign finance reform." Again, while I don't agree with every last word York writes, I agree with 98%, which is enough to let me simply offer this link to his blog. A sample:

For finance reformers, however, full transparency in fundraising isn't enough. They see the whole process of fundraising as evil, and therefore want to all but end that practice, as well. Not only do they not want you to be able to contribute to a candidate of your choice if you support their ideals, they want to control how much you can hear from that candidate during an election and mandate how much of your tax money that candidate will get to run their campaign. Think back to the last campaign you lived through -- are campaign ads really something you think need taxpayer support? Do we really need to subsidize mudslinging between candidates when we have other funding priorities? Campaigning is hard work, and one of the signs of a good candidate is one that is willing to do the unpleasant work of fundraising. By essentially socializing the campaign process, you are providing a government subsidy to many lazy candidates who are unwilling to do the hard work.

Sorting out the school choice mess

Let's start with the disclosure that I support school choice as one of many ways to try to improve education in Milwaukee. I don't think choice is the be-all, end-all. But I do think the competition can help make our public schools better, and that is still where the lion's share of our kids will be educated -- in the public schools.

Milwaukee has a unique problem, with fewer than half of the incoming high school freshmen graduating four years later. I subscribe to the idea that we need to try every available option to giving our kids a better chance to succeed. Why not try everything and see what works?

That does not excuse or justify the current campaign to remove limits from the number of students who can participate in choice. Republicans in the legislature, working with their school choice allies, are willing to make Milwaukee school children pawns in their game to hurt Gov. Jim Doyle politically.

I could do on and on about this, but Jay Bullock (an MPS teacher) already has, so I will quote him briefly and refer you to his blog, which has covered the issue in depth:

Years ago, Jim Doyle started offering to work with legislative Republicans on a solution to the cap problem, one that would prevent the kind of mess that we see coming this fall. Yet time after time, the Republicans have asked for one thing only: A complete removal of the cap. They have shown no willingness to compromise, no willingness to consider the 96,000 other children in Milwaukee and how to improve the education for them. Because, let's face it, even if the cap disappeared tomorrow, there would not be a voucher spot for 96,000 more students. We have to do something for them. But, no.

Who knew? Sick leave = societal meltdown

The discredited "study" released last week by the red-faced Madison Chamber of Commerce continues to draw comment, mostly from people who can't believe that anything so far wrong could be distributed as a credible report, even at the Avenue Bar.

The Chamber quickly removed the offending document from its website, but you can access a copy here, courtesy of the Dane101 blog.

Susan Lampert Smith, in her Wisconsin State Journal column:

While the report's authors have 'fessed up to bad math that exaggerates the city property tax costs of the ordinance by a factor of 10, the report's apologists, including conservative radio host Vicki McKenna, defend the underlying concept. They say the proposed ordinance will drive businesses from Madison like rats from a sinking ship.

But they don't stop there. If you read the "externalities" list on Page 7, you'll see that our entire quality of life will be destroyed by giving sick workers ... a few days off.

The study is based on the debatable idea that 37 to 185 businesses will leave Madison. After that, it warns, civilization will unravel.

It predicts workers at runaway businesses will start neglecting the kids (substituting commuting time for family time), smashing up their cars (insurance costs will rise to cover the greater incidence of traffic-related injuries and property damage) and speeding (vehicle speeds may also increase as commuters try to minimize their sick time taken for personal or dependent care, raising safety concerns for other motorists).

It won't be safe to go outside anymore.

What makes this even more amusing is that it is followed by a section in which the authors blast "mandatory sick leave rhetoric" which holds that "in Madison, 46,000 workers (and their families) are a sneeze away from homelessness."

I guess it takes rhetoric to know rhetoric.

What's sad is that this report is a lost opportunity for a fair look at the pros and cons of the proposed ordinance. Like a lot of people, I've been on the fence, waiting for some concrete facts before making up my mind...

Once they recover, I hope they'll write a real report, with actual facts, good math and less hysteria.

For guidance, I'd point them to the last page of their own report: "Public policy initiatives based on careful analysis rather than heated rhetoric is the best approach to take."

If I were grading the report's authors, I'd give them an A for that idea, a D for sentence structure, and an F for their ability to follow their own advice.

Another nagging question: If this is at all representative of the work done by NorthStar Economics, does it give you any pause about the content of some of these earlier reports and economic impact studies?

A new disguise for TABOR?

Republicans have had the edge, at least recently, in packaging, labeling and selling their policies. Everything they do is some kind of Taxpayer Protection Act or Job Protection Act or Blue Skies Act.

The Taxpayer Bill of Rights -- I almost typed Bull of Rights, which would not have been inaccurate -- is another example of using framing and packaging to try to sell a bad idea. It's become known as TABOR for short.

But some of the luster has worn off the name, apprarently, because of problems with TABOR in Colorado, where it originated.

A name change and new brand appears to be in the works, the Wisconsin Alliance of Cities reports:

Imagine our surprise to discover lobbyists for Wisconsin Manufacturers & Commerce hard at work with a state legislator to find a new name for TABOR.

The next version of TABOR — whatever it's called by then — seems to walk like TABOR and it seems to quack like TABOR. It is being drafted by Sen. Glenn Grothman (R-West Bend) and Rep. Jeff Wood (D-Chippewa Falls).

As Shakespeare said, TABOR by any other name would smell as bad.

Want to know more about Colorado's experience? Watch this video.

A tough choice for Green: Which ethically challenged leader to support

Since Rep. Mark Green is trying to convince Wisconsin voters that he should lead the state, some enterprising reporter might find out who Green is supporting to the lead his party as Majority Leader, now that Green crony/friend/mentor Tom DeLay has decided to step down.

Three candidates are running: Roy Blunt of Missouri, John Boehner of Ohio, and recent entry, John Shadegg of Arizona. Must be a tough choice for Green as to who will fill the big shoes of DeLay, who contributed $30,000 to Green, but it's a simple question for the media to ask Green. It might give us a good idea of what Mark Green looks for in leadership.

Let's take a look at Green's candidates. Blunt say he has the votes so let's start with him.

Blunt

Roy Blunt has taken $8,500 from disgraced Republican super-lobbyist Jack Abramoff, who pled guilty to fraud, tax evasion, and conspiracy charges in connection with a federal bribery investigation. Blunt has also taken $16,019 from Tom DeLay's ARMPAC. No surprise that Blunt voted with Tom DeLay 97% of the time between Jan. 1 2004 and March 31 2005. He also voted to weaken the ethics rules in a move that many say served only to protect Tom DeLay.

The Washington Post reported:

Blunt and the man he wants to succeed as House majority leader, Tom DeLay, shared similar connections to convicted lobbyist Jack Abramoff and to corporate lobbyists. Blunt, R-Mo., wrote at least three letters helpful to Abramoff clients while collecting money from them. He swapped donations between his and DeLay's political groups, ultimately enriching the Missouri political campaign of his son Matt...Texas prosecutors recently subpoenaed records of a series of financial transactions in 2000 between DeLay and Blunt that were highlighted in a recent AP story. DeLay raised more money than he needed to throw parties at the 2000 Republican National Convention and sent some of the excess to Blunt through a series of donations that benefited the causes of both men.

Still undecided, Mark? For more, Public Citizen has put together a new report. Rep. Roy Blunt: Ties to Special Interests Leave Him Unfit to Lead, details how much money Blunt has collected from lobbyists and corporate political action committees (PACs), the favors he has done for contributors, the trips he or candidates he has paid expenses for have taken on corporate jets, and how members of his staff have gone to work for major corporations that later donated thousands of dollars to Blunt’s political committees. The report also delves into the unsettling nature of Blunts’ ties to the fundraising apparatus of indicted former House Majority Leader Tom DeLay (R-Texas) and admitted felon and former super-lobbyist Jack Abramoff.

Boehner

In 1996 Boehner admitted he distributed a tobacco political action committee's campaign checks on the House floor, but said at the time he would never do it again.

The Cincinnati Post reports that Boehner received $32,500 from Jack Abramoff and his tribal clients. The money went to Boehner's PAC.

The WV Charleston Gazette reports that Boehner, as chairman of the House Education and Workforce committee, has not held a single hearing on mine safety since President Bush took office in 2001, even though his committee has jurisdiction over such issues. Despite bi-partisan calls for an investigation and to hold hearings into the Sago Mine disaster that killed 12 miners, Boehner hasn't showed the leadership. Could be because Boehner's biggest special interest contributor is the ever popular insurance industry.

Forbes magazine reports that Boehner has "recently been scrutinized for accepting donations, parties and trips from Sallie Mae, the nation's largest provider of student loans, as it lobbied the House Education and the Workforce Committee, which Boehner heads. He routinely has accepted trips over the past five years that were paid for by special interests and often took along his wife, Debbie. For instance, he took three trips in a single year to Florida at the expense of corporate interests. Just this month, Boehner refused to return donations he got from American Indian tribes represented by Jack Abramoff, the lobbyist at the center of an influence-peddling investigation. Many other lawmakers gave back the money or donated it to charity."

Shadegg

The alternate, late entry, "reform" candidate, a "principled conservative." How does the GOP spell reform? Shadegg has taken more than $6,900 in campaign contributions from sources connected with lobbyist Jack Abramoff. One of the contributions went undisclosed for five years in violation of federal campaign-finance rules.

Three contributions involved Shadegg's use of sports suites provided to him for fund-raisers at hockey and basketball games at the MCI Center Washington, D.C.

In June of 2003, a few months before the Bush-Green Medicare boondoggle, Shadegg had this to say about the bill:

Sadly, Congress is putting politics ahead of policy. In its rush to pass something--anything--it is on the verge of imposing a staggering financial burden on our children and grandchildren, pushing Medicare closer to financial collapse and losing a once in a lifetime opportunity for reform.

But according to a June 2005 passage from Congress Daily:

During the marathon vote for the Medicare prescription drug bill in November 2003, House GOP leaders found a surprising ally in Rep. John Shadegg, R-Ariz. Shadegg opposed the bill, but helped the party reach its razor-thin margin of victory in the early morning hours.

Now that's principled leadership!

As Green well knows politics is about choices. Wisconsin voters would do well to ask: Who is your choice, Mark Green, and why?

Was all that talk about higher standards this past week for real or was it just grandstanding?

The other Republicans in Wisconsin's House delegation -- Paul Ryan, Tom Petri, and F. Jim Sensenbrenner --face the same bad choices, of course. We should ask them the same question. But as a candidate for governor -- and one who spend last week posing for holy pictures -- Mark Green rightfully will have the spotlight.

Western Tech?

Western Wisconsin Technical College would like to change its name to Western Technical College, which rolls off the tongue much more easily, the LaCrosse Tribune reports.

No problem. Then can we finally start calling UWM the University of Milwaukee? The basketball team already wears jerseys that just say Milwaukee. Let's make it official.

The Great Wall of Sensenbrenner

Our boy, Rep. F. Jim Sensenbrenner, is the proud sponsor of an anti-immigration bill that, among other things, would make it a crime to be in the US illegally or to offer aid to an illegal immigrant. Sounds like a full-employment bill for prison-builders.

He also wants to build a 700-mile wall along the US-Mexican border, on the theory that if we don't fight them on the Rio Grande we'll be fighting them on Mitchell Street.

Hmmm ... building prisons ... a 700-mile wall. Do you think this is F's idea of a job-creating public works bill? Will the building trades unions support it?

Joel McNally has a few pithy comments. And no, I don't have a lisp.

Just one question

About the book-length Sunday Journal Sentinel story with the screaming headlines: Was anyone surprised?

Gard: 'Doyle's pro-jobs agenda shows results'

Think the Republicans would agree with this?

Aggressive pro-jobs agenda shows results

Since Jim Doyle began his role as governor in 2003, "job growth" consistently has topped his agenda. New data released in recent weeks relating to the economy shows that many of the plans signed into law by Doyle have contributed to great growth in Wisconsin:

Thanks to Doyle's leadership with a pro-growth, pro-jobs, and lower tax agenda:

Unemployment in Wisconsin last month was 4.3%, below the national average of 4.8%

Construction jobs in Wisconsin grew 74,000 in one year.

Wisconsin ranked 9th nationally in job growth last year thanks to a pro-jobs agenda . A recent Wisconsin Banker's Association survey noted that optimism has grown in the last 6 months in Wisconsin, with 78% rating the state economy as 'excellent or good.'

Thanks to landmark legislation under Doyle's leadership, such as the Job Creation Act, Wisconsin is cutting the red tape and adding jobs.

They should. Assembly Speaker John Gard's campaign wrote it. All I did was substitute Doyle for Gard. Fair's fair. The legislature didn't do a single thing without Doyle's agreement and signature.

Branding the state

"Most of Our Elected Officials Have Not Been Indicted."

That was one of the suggestions for a new state slogan for New Jersey. It didn't win.

Wisconsin could consider: "Scott Jensen hasn't been convicted yet."

Feingold, Kohl should oppose Alito

Wisconsin is in the unusual position of having both of its Senators on the Judiciary Committee, which will vote on the nomination of Samuel Alito to the Supreme Court. Both should be voting no.

Craig Gilbert of the Journal Sentinel reports:

Senate Democrats Herb Kohl and Russ Feingold both said Thursday that they came away from Judge Samuel Alito's four days of testimony with concerns and unanswered questions about his nomination to the U.S. Supreme Court.

The two said they had not made a final decision about their vote, but Alito appeared on track to be confirmed by the Senate in the next few weeks.

Activists on both sides of the debate are expecting the 18-member Judiciary Committee to split along party lines, with all 10 Republicans supporting confirmation and all eight Democrats opposing.

Feingold and Kohl voted for Bush's last nominee, John Roberts, so they are not pure partisans on judicial appointments.

But there are many good reasons for them to oppose Alito, even though it appears he is on his way to confirmation. There's his bizarre theory that the government can't regulate machine guns, for one. Here are a few more from the ACLU:

* Judge Alito has shown an alarming deference to the power of the executive branch. Throughout his career, Judge Alito has promoted an expansive view of executive authority and a limited view of the judicial role in curbing abuses of that authority. Two years ago, Justice O'Connor, whom he would replace, eloquently expressed what is at stake in these critical times when she wrote: "A state of war is not a blank check for the president when it comes to the rights of the nation's citizens." This is extremely important given the various issues the Supreme Court will likely consider: the Patriot Act, the warrantless surveillance of Americans by the NSA and others.

* Judge Alito has repeatedly advocated against our fundamental civil rights and civil liberties. Judge Alito's judicial philosophy in the areas of race, religion, and reproductive rights raise serious questions as his commitment to preserving our fundamental Constitutional freedoms. He expressed particular pride in the role he had played in the Solicitor General's Office in helping to craft Supreme Court briefs arguing that racial and ethnic quotas should not be allowed and that the Constitution does not protect a right to an abortion, noting that these were positions "in which I personally believe very strongly." By and large, Alito's legal opinions make it more difficult for plaintiffs alleging discrimination to prevail, easier for the government to lend its support to religion and harder to challenge questionable tactics by the police and prosecution.

* Judge Alito has taken a narrow view on Congressional power. In at least two cases, Judge Alito's judicial philosophy shows that he does not view the legislative branch as co-equal. First, Alito held that Congress had exceeded its power under the Fourteenth Amendment by requiring the states to provide time off for sick employees under the Family and Medical Leave Act. Several years later, the Supreme Court rejected a similar claim in upholding a parallel provision of the FMLA. Second, Alito argued in dissent that Congress had exceeded its power under the Commerce Clause by making it a federal crime to possess a machine gun. This narrow view of the Commerce Clause could have implications in future civil rights and civil liberties cases.

A call or e-mail to Feingold and Kohl wouldn't hurt.

Foti: If I only had known it was illegal ...

Bonnie Ladwig said everyone was doing it long before she came to the Assembly, so she just kept right on doing it.

Today, Steve Foti said: "For several years, I have allowed certain of my staff to participate in partisan political activity without ensuring that taxpayer funds would not be utilized for their compensation. Had I then recognized the illegality of that practice, I could and should have prevented same."He didn't know that was illegal to have a staffer in his office, paid by the taxpayers, whose full-time job was to raise money for Republicans?

This sets the stage for the Scott Jensen defense: Getting more Republicans elected was part of my official duties.

Incredible.

And, just for the record, the Brian Burke and Chuck Chvala rationalizations weren't any better.

Another Walker success story

Well, Scott Walker has figured out a way to avoid having a Parks Department budget crisis in the summer, which he handled in 2003 by closing public swimming pools on some of the hottest days and taking other creative steps like laying off maintenance people and neglecting upkeep.

In 2005, there was no summer crisis because they used a creative new accounting system, apparently. So the deficit is just coming to light now.

Bear in mind that Walker is the guy who's running for governor based on his executive, management and budget experience.

Dave Umhoefer reports in the Journal Sentinel:

An estimated 2005 deficit of $2.3 million in the county parks was revealed today and has county officials scrambling to cut parks services and spending to avoid a repeat this year.

County officials said the surprising bad news was discovered only in recent weeks. It threatens to put the county budget overall in the red for the third straight year when the books are closed this summer.

Parks Director Sue Black said she took full responsibility for a fiscal shortfall that her department insisted as late as last week was a more-manageable $400,000 deficit.

Parks division officials worked from a separate, unofficial set of books than county budget officials to avoid reliance on “archaic” county financial systems, County Budget Director Stephen Agostini said.

Black told the County Board’s Finance Committee in December the deficit might be $250,000 but probably much less.

A pile of work orders that came in at year’s end contributed to the delay in noticing the problem, Black said.

“I was overzealous in trying to get parks projects done,” Black said. “I should’ve watched and assured that we only do the work we can afford.” Her goal, she said, has been to make a dent in some $19 million in backlogged parks maintenance projects.

Black said she would make additional cutbacks in seasonal parks maintenance staffing. That staffing has taken significant hits the past two years.

For now, only emergency maintenance work is being approved in parks, Black said.

She is considering, at some point, closing some skating rinks and warming houses at county lagoons, and discontinuing the grooming of cross-country ski trails.

“We have to review all programs,” Black said. “There’s not enough money to go around.”

She said layoffs of parks staff would be a last resort.

The County Board’s Finance and Audit Committee is expected to receive a “corrective action plan” from Black and Agostini at its Jan. 26 meeting. Agostini is recommending that his department take over fiscal oversight of the parks system.

The parks budget was combined in 2004 with county facilities management and the landscape and architecture division as part of a merger proposed by County Executive Scott Walker and approved in modified form by the County Board. The facilities division is the landlord for most county departments. After a county audit criticized the new parks-public works merger, supervisors undid it for 2006, making parks a separate department again...

Agostini said his department warned the parks division several times during the year about apparent deficit problems, and temporarily shut down spending in July on accounts for some services and supplies.

It's great that Sue Black has already taken full responsibility, because if there is one thing you can count on it is this:

Scott Walker or Steve Agostini will never take the blame for anything that happens. In their world, it is always somebody else's fault. [I discovered this too late in the day to do me much good, but today is Blame Someone Else Day.

Jim Rowen would say this is Reason #4559 that Walker should get out of the governor's race.

Green hangs on to some tainted money

OK, this may seem like nitpicking to some people, and maybe there's a good, logical explanation. I just haven't been able to figure out what it might be.

Here's the question: It seems that Rep. Mark Green has received $6,013 in contributions from Nick Hurtgen, who's under indictment in Illinois for a kickback and influence peddling scheme. He's returning $4.013, but keeping the other $2,000. Why would that be?

The Journal Sentinel reported:

Because of his new standard,[Campaign Manager Mark] Graul said Green had also returned campaign money he had received from others who have run into corruption charges, including $4,000 from Stuart Levine of Chicago, received in December 2003; and $4,013 given in March and September of that year from Nicholas Hurtgen of Glencoe, Ill., a former aide to former Republican Gov. Tommy G. Thompson.

Levine, a prominent Republican contributor, was indicted in Illinois in August on charges of extorting hundreds of thousands of dollars in kickbacks from investment firms seeking business from a multibillion-dollar pension plan for Illinois schoolteachers. In May, he was charged with fraud in a separate case involving alleged use of his role as an official with a state hospital oversight board to block hospital projects.

Levine also gave Walker's campaign the maximum $3,000 donation, and Levine's spouse donated $2,000.

Hurtgen was indicted in May along with Levine in the hospital-projects case. He helped Walker raise more than $25,000 from a group of major GOP players and Chicago-area investment executives in early 2003.

Here are the Federal Election Commission records.

HURTGEN, NICK
CHICAGO IL 60602
06/27/2001
1000.00
BEAR STEARNS/MANAGING DIRECTOR
21990291185

NICK HURTGEN,
GLENCOE IL 60022
12/31/2001
1000.00
BEAR STEARNS/MANAGING DIRECTOR
22990211517

NICK HURTGEN,
GLENCOE IL 60022
03/31/2003
1000.00
BEAR STEARNS/MANAGING DIRECTOR
23990725683

HURTGEN, NICK
GLENCOE IL 60022
09/29/2003
1012.00
BEAR STEARNS/MANAGING DIRECTOR
23992091210

HURTGEN, NICK
GLENCOE IL 60022
09/29/2003
1000.00
BEAR STEARNS/MANAGING DIRECTOR
23992091210

HURTGEN, NICK
GLENCOE IL 60022
09/29/2003
1000.00
BEAR STEARNS/MANAGING DIRECTOR
23992091210

I thought the explanation could be that Green will say he didn't transfer all of the Hurtgen money into his governor's campaign, but that explanation doesn't work any more since his decision to set aside money from another indicted Republican, Tom DeLay.

Milwaukee: The new 'it' city

Maisonneuve magazine has been described -- not by me -- as the new New Yorker for younger people, I'm told (by the magazine itself). It is somewhat self-consciously cool.

So why on earth would I be reading it? Well, I'm not, but a younger, cooler person tipped me off to an article saying that the next new hot spot for indie music is going to be -- Milwaukee. It has some very positive things to say about the city.

Since there's been some back and forth this week about whether the city is dying and decaying or actually the garden and culture spot of the Midwest, this seemed relevant.

By the way, the guy who started the debate appears to have surrendered.

Breakthrough on Wal-Mart health coverage

Today's NY Times reports:

ANNAPOLIS, Md., Jan. 12 - The Maryland legislature passed a law Thursday that would require Wal-Mart Stores to increase spending on employee health insurance, a measure that is expected to be a model for other states.

The legislature's move, which overrode a veto by Gov. Robert L. Ehrlich, was a response to growing criticism that Wal-Mart, the nation's largest private employer, has skimped on benefits and shifted health costs to state governments.

The vote came after a furious lobbying battle by Wal-Mart and by labor and liberal groups, and is likely to encourage lawmakers in dozens of other states who are considering similar legislation

The AFL-CIO has, in fact, targeted 32 more states for a similar effort. Contrary to Paul Soglin's post, Wisconsin is on the list.

Assembly Bill 860 , sponsored by State Rep. Terese Berceau, D-Madison, and State Sen. Dave Hansen,D-Green Bay, is scheduled for a hearing in the Assembly Labor Committee on Jan. 18.

And your position on declawing ...

What was Samuel Alito doing subscribing to Cat Fancy magazine in 1985, anyway?

Dennis York thinks it's funny, but it speaks volumes about Alito's core beliefs -- and about York's, too.

It's no laughing matter.

York, the anonymous blogger whose identity is reportedly being semi-exposed in today's Capital Times, has the details on the Cat Fancy scandal. I'm hoping the newspaper story won't declaw or silence York.

UPDATE: Lee Sensenbrenner at the Cap Times leaves York's identity a secret.

Sick leave study is totally bogus; Chamber drowns sorrows at Avenue Bar

It was obvious at first glance that a Chamber of Commerce "study" on the effect of a proposed Madison sick leave ordinance was bogus. When I said that yesterday, though, I had no idea how bad it really was.

This morning's Wisconsin State Journal, which trumpeted the study in a page one scoop on Thursday, has this to report today:

There are major flaws in a Greater Madison Chamber of Commerce study that predicts dire consequences if a proposed law to guarantee paid sick leave for most employees in the city is adopted.

The biggest flaw is in a centerpiece conclusion of the study - that the sick leave law could result in a huge loss of property taxes.

The study, even if all other assumptions are accepted, exaggerates the loss by a factor of 10...

The study, prepared by NorthStar Economics and released Thursday morning by the chamber at a press conference at the Avenue Bar, claims that many companies [the number was 185 -- Xoff] will leave the city if the sick leave proposal is adopted, causing a loss of up to $21 million in city property tax revenue.

But a Wisconsin State Journal analysis found a major miscalculation of city property tax revenues - a decimal point is in the wrong place - that inflates projected property tax losses tenfold.

Further, the study indicates the city would be hit by the tax loss. But the numbers used to make calculations are for collections by the city, Dane County, the Madison School District, and Madison Area Technical College, so any loss would be shared.

"We have to redo the property tax numbers," NorthStar Economics vice president Dennis Winters conceded.

How dramatic is the difference? The study suggests a $4.2 million to $20.1 million hit on the city's budget. But even if all the study's other contested assumptions are used, the State Journal's review suggests that the revised impact on the city's budget would range between about $150,000 and $750,000.

The chamber has removed the study from its Web site and will repost it after mistakes are fixed, chamber executive director Jennifer Alexander said Thursday evening.

"The error is regrettable," she said. "That doesn't change the rest of the impact (it shows) on employees and employers."

The sick leave proposal, initiated by the grass-roots Healthy Families, Healthy City Campaign and introduced by King to the City Council in mid-September, would provide an hour of sick pay for every 30 hours worked - about nine days annually for a full-time employee.

It would cover employees who work at least 12 hours a week, exempt businesses with fewer than five employees, and count any sort of leave - vacation, sick or personal time - toward the requirement. Employees could also swap shifts if they're out sick...

[The study] devotes four pages to the negative impacts of other recent mandates, including the city's minimum wage, already eclipsed by state law, and the city's sweeping smoking ban.

But a prominent chart showing a dramatic drop in "leisure and hospitality employment in Madison, Wisconsin," is misleading.

The data cited for the city doesn't exist and is actually for the Madison metropolitan area, which includes Dane, Columbia and Iowa counties, said Eric Grosso, state labor economist for the Department of Workforce Development.

Winters agreed, but said most hospitality jobs are in Madison and that the drop reflects troubles.

A bigger problem with the study ...is that it is based on a chamber survey that shows 37 of 92 respondents - 40 percent- would "consider" leaving Madison if the sick leave law passed.

The survey was done months ago when there was much misunderstanding about how the law would work and it didn't sample outside the chamber membership, [Ald. Austin]King said.

Such a survey "might be a good way to tell how scared people are but it's not a good way to tell what people will do," added Laura Dresser, an economist and director of the Center for Wisconsin Strategy.

"We knew going in the survey was going to be of limited scientific potential," Winters said, adding that the study's projections are conservative, offering scenarios in which between 2 and 10 percent of businesses that said they would consider leaving would actually relocate.

"The time and resources were lacking to do a full-blown economic study," he said of relying on the survey.

The study also seems to have unreliable data on the number of businesses that would be affected by the proposed law, Dresser said.

Chip Hunter, an associate professor of management and human resources at UW- Madison's School of Business, also questioned many parts of the study.

The property tax analysis, for example, is not only based on bad math but seems to presume that property would have no value if a business left, Dresser and Hunter said.

And an estimated $15 million in compliance costs for businesses is unrealistic, Hunter said.

The bottom line is the study provides no true insight into impacts of the law and the public "should not really pay any attention to it," Hunter said.

NorthStar will fix math errors and will stand behind the study, Winters said.

Although imperfect, the study's conclusions reflect what businesses, especially small businesses, are saying, Alexander maintained.

"This only reinforces what we've heard," she said.

It didn't say whether Alexander was still at the Avenue Bar when she said that.

It's a classic example of what happens when an organization with a point of view and an ax to grind commissions a study to support what it already believes. NorthStar Economics , whoever that is, was so eager to please its client that it went way off the deep end.

(Owen Robinson of Boots and Sabers swallowed the whole study since it fit his view of the world, commenting on how the business people, not Austin King, were the ones to believe. Meanwhile, Ald. Brenda Konkel was asking all the right questions on her blog. Lakeshore Laments says that maybe the numbers were wrong, but the conclusions were right.)

When you misstate impacts by a factor of 10 (that darned decimal point will get you every time) and say the impact on the city budget will be no more than $750,000 and perhaps as little as $150,000 -- rather than $4-million to $21-million -- you have committed what is known as a monumental screwup. There's a stronger word than screwup (starts with f, rhymes with truck-up), but this is a family blog.

Instead of trying to defend this study, even in its general findings, the Chamber should do its best to wipe the egg off its face, demand a refund from NorthStar, and head back to the Avenue Bar.

THIS JUST IN: Well, it was in last Sunday, but I just found it: Pure Madnesson reports that the Chamber'ss Alexander is giving up her paid sick leave, to set an example, and urging Chamber members to follow suit. Details.

Scott Walker as Howard Dean?

Boy, those Mark Green folks are touchy. Mark Green and his backers are upset Scott Walker's little shot, saying Green should give back his tainted Tom DeLay money. Green's weekly e-mail newsletter complains:

Scott Walker Uses Howard Dean's Talking Points

In what we hope was only a temporary bout of bad judgment by Mark's primary opponent, last week Milwaukee County Executive Scott Walker spewed some of the same manure Howard Dean likes to spread. Here's what Scott Walker had to say in a Capital Times article:

Gubernatorial candidate and Milwaukee County Executive Scott Walker says his Republican rival Rep. Mark Green should give back the campaign money he has received from indicted former House Majority Leader Tom DeLay.

"I think (he) should give the whole thing back," Walker said in an interview with the editorial board of The Capital Times on Monday. "Why would you keep any of it?"

If you read the whole article, you'll see Walker claim Mark is not "pure" because of contributions from many years ago. Of course, Scott Walker is then saying Paul Ryan, Jim Sensenbrenner and President Bush are all also not "pure" for having received contributions from Tom DeLay. Not a stance that is going to win many friends among the GOPers we know.

As you now know, Mark decided to return funds he received from anyone indicted on a political corruption charge – a step it looks like Walker intends to follow – because of the scandals involving Jim Doyle and Jack Abramoff. Not because he thinks anyone who received funds from Tom DeLay is not "pure."

We know there will be times when the Green and Walker camps have some disagreements. That's what elections are about. Let's just hope the Walker Team stops using the DNC's talking points to launch their attacks.

I can't help but think that if Mark Green had just done the right thing months ago, when the DeLay scandal first broke and Democrats called on him to give back the money, Scott Walker would not have had his free shot.

Walker had already taken a whack from conservative blogger and Green supporter Deb Hawley for violating the 11th Commandment and speaking ill of another elephant. And Ragnar Mentaire of I Am The Force piled on, too.

I guess this means Green won't be asking Walker to return his questionable contributions?

UPDATE: The pushback on Walker is shutting him up. The Manitowoc paper reports that he is hesitant to criticize Green.

No more Mister Nice Guy

"Unlike other candidates, I'm not going to hide my evil side."

-- Former pro-wrestler and Minnesota gubernatorial candidate Jonathon "The Impaler" Sharkey, quoted by the Minneapolis Star-Tribune.

Of note: Sharkey's 13-point platform includes "his pledge to execute -- by impalement in front of the State Capitol -- terrorists, rapists, drug dealers, child abusers, repeat drunken drivers and anybody who preys on the elderly."

Before you laugh too hard, remember Governor Jesse (The Body) Ventura? Of Minnesota?

Hat tip: Political Wire.

Bush finds another path to Arctic drilling

These guys never quit:

By Janet Wilson, LA Times:

The Department of Interior on Wednesday approved oil and gas drilling on Alaska land considered such sensitive wildlife habitat that it was first protected by former Interior Secretary James G. Watt under President Reagan, and by four Interior secretaries since.

The decision — decried by Native American, hunting and environmental groups — comes just weeks after the U.S. Senate rejected drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, about 200 miles to the east.

And whose idea was it? Darth Vader and Company:

Bureau of Land Management staff said the decision was made after three years of study and in response to requests by Vice President Dick Cheney's energy task force.

As Grist, the online environmental magazine puts it,:

OK, We'll Just Drill Over Here Instead

The Bush administration's lust for the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge having gone unrequited, it's going to stick its derricks in some sloppy seconds: The Department of Interior is opening up hundreds of thousands of acres of other Alaskan wildlife habitat to drilling. The land around Teshekpuk Lake, about 200 miles west of the refuge, is part of the National Petroleum Reserve-Alaska; it may contain up to 2 billion barrels of "economically recoverable" oil and 3.5 trillion cubic feet of natural gas. The area is so rich in migratory waterfowl and caribou that even the Reagan administration protected it, as did the Bush the Elder and Clinton administrations. Staff at the Bureau of Land Management say the decision to clear the way for drilling was made at the behest of Vice President Dick Cheney's super-secretive energy task force, which never met an ecosystem it wouldn't treat like a two-bit hooker.

straight to the source: Anchorage Daily News, Wesley Loy, 12 Jan 2006
straight to the source: Los Angeles Times, Janet Wilson, 12 Jan 2006

-- Bruce Plante, Chattanooga Times Free Press via Cagle.

This report is enough to make you sick

Just reading the Wisconsin State Journal story is enough to make your stomach hurt:

Up to 185 companies would leave Madison - taking with them nearly $21 million in property tax revenues - if the city enacts a proposal requiring employers to give workers paid sick days, according to a study to be released today by business advocates.

Under that worst-case scenario, the report projects that the exodus would force nearly 6,000 workers to move or face much longer commutes. For some companies, a paid sick leave law would destroy already-thin profit margins and force them out of business entirely, the report continues.

The study, obtained by the Wisconsin State Journal on Wednesday, found that even under more modest projections, the law would blow a $4.2 million hole in the city's operating budget.

The Greater Madison Chamber of Commerce commissioned the report as part of its continued fight against the proposal, and has planned a morning news conference to discuss the findings today.

What a load of crap. I'll bet it really took some enterprise for reporter Ben Fischer to get the Chamber to "leak" the story, which it displayed prominently on page one.

This is the same kind of "study" that warned Wisconsin would lose all sorts of jobs if it raised the minimum wage. We raised the minimum wage. Heard about a lot of entry-level jobs being eliminated? Of course not.

Business is horrified at the idea that most workers be allowed up to nine sick days a year.

I don't know much about this particular proposal. I support the concept that workers should be paid for legitimate sick days.

Better yet would be to see that all workers have health insurance, which could reduce the number of days they're sick. But the Chamber doesn't want to do that, either.

I have serious doubts that this city ordinance is the solution to the sick leave issue.

But I know a bogus "study" when I see one, and this one is a classic.

UPDATE: Study is totally bogus; Chamber drowns sorrows at Avenue Bar.

Quote, unquote

"If we tackle these problems the wrong way, then while today there is one bin Laden, after a few years there will be ten bin Ladens. And it is possible that after a few more years, there will be 100 bin Ladens."

--The Dalai Lama, in a remarkable Progressive Magazine interview.

Bush milestone: 2 years of disapproval on Iraq

From Think Progress:

As President Bush continues his desperate campaign to sell his flawed Iraq strategy to the American public, a new CBS News poll finds that most Americans aren’t buying what President Bush is selling.

The trends over time tell an important story of President Bush’s failed efforts to shift the basic structure of American public opinion on Iraq:

– President Bush has lacked support and approval from a majority of Americans on Iraq for TWO YEARS. The last time a clear majority of Americans said that they approved President Bush’s handling of Iraq was December 2003, just after the capture of Saddam Hussein.

– Fully 58 percent disapprove of President Bush’s handling of the situation with Iraq – unchanged since he began his public relations offensive in late November.

– A majority of Americans (54 percent) support a timetable for withdrawal.

Wisconsin Repubs have Abramoff money, too

Jessica McBride:

Turns out that, for all of the Democratic frothing at the mouth about Jack Abramoff and Congressman and Republican gubernatorial candidate Mark Green, Wisconsin Gov. Jim Doyle now stands as the only candidate in the Wisconsin governor's race who got money from a Jack Abramoff associate. There is a God.

She might want to qualify that, and say -- "so far."

I would refer her to this post and this one. Sensenbrenner and Ryan have Abramoff-related money for sure, and I predict there is more to come. Stand by, Mark Green.

The Graul Files raise many questions; Who to believe? Mark Graul or Mark Graul?

Sorry, Charlie, but I am not giving up the Mark Graul chase until the truth comes out. It could be a long time, at the rate we're going, although we get one tiny grain at a time.

Charlie (Sykes, not Tuna) seems to think a statement from Jennifer Calvert closes the case, so I should quit hounding this poor, innocent guy and take up stamp collecting. Here is the careful statement from Calvert, a lobbyist in Abramoff's firm at the time in question:

When I worked at Preston Gates Ellis & Rouvelas Meeds in 2000, it was standard procedure at the firm to make requests to Jack Abramoff”s assistant in order to host guests before actually extending an invitation to anyone. Jack Abramoff had no influence at all over whom I would invite; his sign off was merely an assurance that there were tickets available to a particular event. Even after I was given permission to invite someone, my plans often would change and I would not even extend the invitation. Also, many times the person I invited was unable to attend. I certainly do not have any involvement with the illegal acts of Jack Abramoff, and have not been questioned in the wrongdoing surrounding him or his associates. In fact, from what I’ve read, the offenses at the heart of the Abramoff investigation occurred when he was at the Greenberg Traurig firm – well after I ever worked with him at Preston Gates.

A few things she didn't say:

-- That Graul didn't ask for NBA all-star game tickets, as the e-mail says he did.

-- That Graul never asked for or accepted any tickets, for himself or anyone else.

-- That Graul didn't go to the Bucks game with free tickets to Abramoff's skybox. (He has a hard time remembering, but most days he says he went.)

-- Why, on the World Wrestling event, there is a date of the tickets being sent to Green's office.

-- Why she was so anxious to do favors for Mark Green's office.

-- That the e-mails were not authentic.

---

Let's move on now to the post from Josh Marshall at Talking Points Memo, which Charlie also seems to think exonerates Graul:

As you probably know, we've spent a bit of ink over the last few months knocking around Mark Graul. He's the campaign manager for Rep. Mark Green (R) who's now running for Governor of Wisconsin. And Graul's name popped up in a series of Team Abramoff emails getting tickets for various events in DC in 2000 and 2001 at Jack Abramoff's skyboxes.

In most cases the emails were to or from Jennifer Calvert, another lobbyist at Abramoff's then-firm, Preston Gates who worked with Abramoff on Native American issues. (She's now at another shop called Washington Strategies.)

There've been a series of back and forths in posts here and in article in the Wisconsin press about this. But today I finally got a chance to chat with Mark.

So which of the events did he go to and how did it all shake out?

"I went to the one Bucks game with Jennifer Calvert," said Graul. "I didn't go to the other events. I wasn't even in DC. Jennifer said it was a perfunctory matter. She may not have even asked me. And I certainly wasn't available to go."

That's pretty much what Graul told the Journal-Sentinel last week.

Now, we said this in our initial posts. But let me take this opportunity to restate some key points. What we know about Mark Graul, Jennifer Calvert and all this ticket business is all bounded within the four walls of the half dozen emails we published here back in October.

In one of the emails Calvert tells Jack Abramoff's executive assistant, Susan Ralston, that she "got a request from Mark Graul" for tickets to the NBA all star game. Another email has a docket of who was given tickets for a professional wrestling event. Graul's name shows up for two. The other four emails are each one permutation or another of Calvert writing to Abramoff or Ralston and asking (this is a paraphrase, of course), 'Hey, can I get this or that number of tickets for Mark Graul?'

Now, here's the key point. Do I know whether Calvert picked up the tickets from Abramoff's office? No. Do I know whether she actually gave them to Graul? No. If Graul got them, do I know he went to the event? No idea.

If Graul says he only went to one of the events, there's nothing in the emails to prove otherwise. And I take him at his word.

I'm not trying to be overly cute about this. I'm just trying to be precise. The emails are there to read. You're in as good a position to interpret them as I am.

-- Josh Marshall

OK, so there is no proof Graul got or used the tickets. So did Graul get the tickets for someone else in the office? Did some other Green staffer use them? Did Green himself?

Does that sound far-fetched? Consider that Graul himself, in an unguarded moment, told Spivak and Bice:

But Graul said this week that he's never met Abramoff and never went to see Limp Bizkit - "I thought it was a medical condition"- though he did see the Milwaukee Bucks play the Wizards in D.C. three times.

Graul said he didn't know if tickets to any of those games came compliments of Abramoff's firm. As to why his name is on the e-mails, he speculated that he was the contact person to receive freebies and he knew an Abramoff associate.
Besides, in the nation's Capitol, this is all business as usual.

"From time to time, people would call and offer tickets," Graul said. "There were a handful of times we said yes."

Egads - some state lawmakers would break out in a cold sweat just hearing that talk.

"I believe it's illegal in Madison" to take freebies, Graul said. "It's legal in Washington."

---

Then there is the question of the e-mails.

Let's start with the Wisconsin State Journal story Wednesday morning that contradicts much of what Graul had told other reporters. To be helpful, I will highlight some things to pay attention to.

Denying reports of freebies. A top aide to Republican gubernatorial candidate and U.S. Rep. Mark Green, meanwhile, is denying reports his office received freebies from another Abramoff firm.

In October, Washington Monthly writer Joshua Micah Marshall posted e-mails on his political blog, talkingpointsmemo.com, purporting to be internal e-mails from a former fellow lobbyist of Abramoff's.

In them, Jennifer Calvert asks for tickets to various Washington-area events for several congressional staffers, including Mark Graul, then Green's chief of staff and now his campaign manager.

Graul last week categorically denied ever asking for the tickets. He said "it's possible" he went to one Milwaukee Bucks game with Calvert and that she paid.Unlike Wisconsin state law, House rules permit lobbyists to provide members and staffers with items of value so long as the value does not exceed $50 per item, or $100 in one year.

"This is an Internet hoax, as far as I'm concerned," Graul said of the e-mails, whose authenticity the State Journal has so far been unable to confirm.

"I don't know if somebody was using my name to try to get tickets for friends. I have no clue. All I know for certain is, as it relates to me and to Congressman Green's office, we did not receive the tickets or even solicited such tickets from Mr. Abramoff. I've never met Mr. Abramoff. Mark (Green) has never met Mr. Abramoff. We don't know this guy from a hole in the ground."

So Graul, who said he used to be the contact person for tickets in Green's office, which sometimes said yes to freebies, now denies the office ever said yes to any tickets.

Who should we believe, Mark Graul or Mark Graul?

The emails were "an Internet hoax" in Wednesday morning's paper. But by the afternoon WisPolitics report, this was the story:

However, a series of e-mails of unknown origin show Graul asking and receiving other tickets from Calvert. Graul told reporters he “never asked her (Calvert) for a ticket,” and only went to a single Bucks game with a ticket from Calvert.
Graul insisted he does not doubt the authenticity of the e-mails reproduced on TalkingPointsMemo.com. “There are two things to remember… none of us know the source of those e-mails. None of us here. None of us anywhere know the source of those e-mails. .. I don’t quibble with the authenticity of that,” Graul said. “When I originally saw them, I thought ... boy, this is just, you know, some liberal blogger taking shots at the front-runner for the governor’s race.”

Josh Marshall, who posted the e-mails, said in a post:

These emails were produced by the relevant parties pursuant to a lawful subpoena. They are most definitely authentic.

No one knows the origin of the e-mails?

Marshall said today in a e-mail that when he talked to Graul on Tuesday, Graul "freely conceded they were real."

Who to believe, Mark Graul or Mark Graul?

Meet Machine Gun Sammy

The Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence has called out Supreme Court nominee Samuel Alito for misleading the Senate Judiciary Committee about the “content and history” of federal gun laws.

Alito, known by the Gun Guys as “Machine Gun Sammy,” wrote a decision that claimed that Congress didn’t actually have the power to regulate machine guns. Of course, any judge who knows his stuff will tell you flat out that’s not true.

In his opinion, Judge Alito wrote that the federal machine gun ban amounted to an unconstitutional exercise of Congressional power under the Commerce Clause.

- Judge Alito wrongly suggested to the Committee that the machine gun ban is indistinguishable from the statute struck down in U.S. v. Lopez, 514 U.S. 549 (1995). The Gun-Free School Zones Act at issue in Lopez banned possession of guns in a particular place; i.e. at or near a school. The machine gun ban, by contrast, prohibits possession of fully automatic weapons in any location.

- Moreover, Judge Alito went far beyond the limited holding in Lopez, and indeed his view in Rybar has been repudiated by the Supreme Court. In June 2005, the Supreme Court issued its latest ruling on Congressional power under the Commerce Clause in Gonzales v. Raich, 125 S.Ct. 2195 (2005), rejecting the theory advanced in Judge Alito’s Rybar dissent. Six Justices, including Justice Scalia, sustained the application of federal drug laws to intrastate medical marijuana use. Based on this ruling, the Supreme Court vacated a 2-1 ruling in the Ninth Circuit case of U.S. v. Stewart, 348 F.3d 1132 (9th Cir. 2003), that had declared the machine gun ban to be unconstitutional. In his exchange with Judge Alito, Senator Kyl cited the Stewart decision, without noting that it had been vacated by the Supreme Court. Judge Alito’s conclusion that the machine gun ban violates the Commerce Clause has now been rejected by every circuit to consider the issue: the Second, Third, Fifth, Sixth, Seventh, Eighth, Ninth, Tenth and Eleventh Circuits.

Whew. That’s a lot of legal jargon, but the point is that Alito argued, for whatever reason, that Congress did not have the right to restrict weapon possession and sales. And, according to all those judges in all those courts, that’s not true. And yet neither he nor the Committee made that clear during the nomination proceedings.

The fact remains: “Machine Gun Sammy” endorsed an interpretation of the law that wasn’t just wrong, it was dangerous to the American people. Machine guns are pointless and deadly things, and we need a judge who understands that bans on them are both legal and necessary. That judge, “Machine Gun Sammy” ain’t. -- The Gun Guys.

What's in a name?

Do you remember how pissy Jess/Jessica Bucher/McBride got awhile back when I pointed out that she couldn't even decide what her name was? To contact her at the McBride Madia Matters blog, for example, you send an email to Jess Bucher.

She accused me of sexism for making fun of her. Her professional name is Jessica McBride, she sniffed.

How, then, to explain her post on Tuesday, in which she repeatedly calls Jim Rowen --who happens to be married to George McGovern's daughter -- Rowen McGovern?

And this from the woman who's favorite phrase is "double standard."

--Mike Keefe, Denver Post, via Cagle.

I know boring, and Milwaukee ain't it

I guess the ice fishing at Lake Koshkonong, where he lives, is really exciting.

No wonder world traveler Brian Christianson thinks Milwaukee is boring.

(If a bunch of us "No nukes" nuts in the 1970s hadn't kept the nuclear power plant out of his backyard, he'd be catching some more interesting fish. But that's another story.)

As someone who lived in Madison for almost 25 years, and with almost 10 years in Milwaukee now, I know which one is boring. It ain't Milwaukee.

If you want to make Lake Koshkonong, or even Madison, look exciting, check out Waukesha. It will do wonders for your self-esteem.

More later. I seem to nodding off. Must be the boredom of looking at the same old inland sea every day.

Graber gets a homework assignment

Cory Liebmann, one of my favorite left-wing Badger bloggers, joins the WisOpinion lineup today. With Cory and Carrie Lynch, who signed on last week, we're ready to do battle for truth, justice and the American way.

Cory does his homework and researches what he writes. He starts today on his Eye on Wisconsin blog by suggesting that Republican Party Chair Rick Graber should do a little homework, too.

Maybe he could just assign the research to one of those staffers who don't have enough to do.

Mark Green's long and winding road

Mark Green ended up in the right place today on the question of disposing of $31,000-plus in tainted money from the indicted ex-Republican Majority Leader, Tom DeLay. He is going to get rid of it. How is complicated, but no matter; he won't use DeLay's $31,000 to campaign.

But getting to the decision to rid himself of the money was a long, torturous trip.

Wisconsin Democrats began asking Green to dispose of the money last September.

Green and his campaign manager, Mark Graul, responded with a series of changing stories about the money.

Sept. 29 Journal Sentinel: "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."

Oct 2, Green Bay Press Gazette: Green says he only transfered $2,000 of DeLay's money into his governor's campaign account, so the most he could give back is $2,000.

Oct. 2, Appleton Post Crescent: “The fact of the matter is, I don’t have a federal account anymore,” said Green, who is seeking the Republican nomination for governor in the September 2006 primary. “And as we understand it, it would actually be illegal to do what they are calling for.” [The truth was that he did have a federal account at the time, which wasn't terminated until Dec. 19, FEC records show.


Oct 11, Wisconsin State Journal: "While he said Green may return the $2,000, [Graul]rejected Democrats' calls to donate the balance of the $30,000 to a voter registration effort. "We need the money to beat Jim Doyle," Graul said.

We've said all along, in a dozen or more posts on the subject, that other members of Congress were coming up with creative ways to rid themselves of the DeLay money, and that Green could do the same if he really wanted to.

It turns out that was true. It just took more than three months of inctreasing pressure, capped by the Jack Abramoff conviction, to get Green to do what he should have -- and could have -- done in the first place. Carrie Lynch points out on her What's Left blog that Green blames the state for making him keep the money, a bogus claim.

Now, what about that $25,000 Rep. Paul Ryan took from DeLay? It's in a federal account, and it would be much easier to return it or give it to charity, as a number of other Republican members of the House have done. Ryan is mentioned as an up-and-comer who could be a leader in the House some day. Why would he want to keep that money? Perhaps now, with Green's decision to finally do the right thing, someone will ask Paul Ryan what's stopping him.

Mark Graul's not off the hook yet either. We'll get to that later.

With new standard, there is 'Abramoff' money everywhere

Gov. Jim Doyle's campaign has returned a $1000 contribution from a lobbyist who used to be in the same firm as lobbyist Jack Abramoff, the Wisconsin State Journal reports.

Sen. Russ Feingold did the same, returning contributions from former members of Abramoff's law firm and the law firm's political action committee.

None of those contributors have been accused of any wrongdoing. They simply happened to work, at one time, in the same company as Amramoff, whose name is poison in political circles since his conviction on corruption charges.

The law firm in question, Greenberg Traurig, has 1,500 lawyers in 25 offices. Like many law firms, it makes sure that its partners and lawyers contribute on both sides of the political aisle.

Let's use an example closer to home. If a lobbyist who worked for Foley and Lardner, another huge firm, was caught up in an indictment, the contributions of every lawyer who works for Foley across the country would be tainted.

Greenberg Traurig was not some small shop where Abramoff called all the shots and every contribution was associated or connected to his work and to what he did. In fact, the firm's lawyers were big givers to Dems (including moveon, ACT, and Kerry). Abramoff's presense along with the former Hill staffers who he took with them to the firm -- including a couple from Tom DeLay's staff -- was meant to have a bipartisan lobbying component at the firm. The problem is it was that Abramoff's half of their lobbying was corrupt. When reports first surfaced, the firm fired him in early 2004.

So we have established the standard. Any money from Abramoff's associates must be returned.

Fine. Let's return to my post from last Sunday:

In a desperate attempt to make the Jack Abramoff lobbying scandal bipartisan, the National Republican Senatorial Committee posted a list of Democratic Senators who have ever received any contribution that could be linked to Abramoff, even after six degrees of separation. It included contributions from Abramoff associates and clients, in some cases when he wasn't even working for them...

Two Republican Congressmen from Wisconsin, Paul Ryan and F. James Sensenbrenner, have each taken four times and eight times as much, respectively, as Feingold got from the same Abramoff law firm PAC. Federal Election Commission records show Ryan got $2,000 and Sensenbrenner $4,000 from the same law firm political action committee that gave Feingold $500.

There's been no media coverage, not a peep from either of them about returning the money, or any call from the RIB (right wing blogosphere) to do so. (And I am not talking about the $949 Ryan gave to charity -- which by the way was from Abramoff himself. Not one penny of contributions from Abramoff or his wife went to a single Democrat. None. Nada. Zip. Zilch. Zero. Here's the list.
Now that that the GOP has defined what a "link" is to the Jack Abramoff, Bob Ney and Tom DeLay scandals, this should be fun for Democrats as they uncover those links.

So there will be plenty more contributions to be unearthed. Here are two more to F. Jim Sensenbrenner from lawyers at the firm, from FEC reports:

FOSTER C. ALLEN,
WASHINGTON, DC 20007
GREENBERG TRAURIG LLP/MEMBER

SENSENBRENNER, F JAMES JR
VIA SENSENBRENNER COMMITTEE
12/19/2001 250.00 22990341031

WALSH, J. DANIEL
ALEXANDRIA, VA 22311
GREENBERG TRAURIG LLP/DIRECTOR OF

SENSENBRENNER, F JAMES JR
VIA SENSENBRENNER COMMITTEE
05/17/2005 1000.00 25970664827

So, let's all give it back.

Sensenbrenner and Ryan have not returned any of the money, except for the direct donation to Ryan from Abramoff himself.

Then there's the $30,000 Mark Green got from Tom DeLay's committee, and $25,000 Ryan got from DeLay. Green says it's all spent except $2,000, which he'll give back only if DeLay is convicted. Ryan says -- who knows? Both Green and Ryan have changed their positions on the DeLay money multiple times. The only thing that's been consistent is that they have kept the tainted money. Bad judgment.

UPDATE: Green gets religion, won't spend DeLay money.

Colon keeps strange company

Citizens for Republican, I mean Responsible, Government is having a wing-ding on Saturday in Milwaukee to celebrate the fourth anniversary of the start of the recall of Milwaukee County Exec Tom Ament.

The CRG event at Serb Hall seems like little an ill-disguised campaign rally for their hero, County Exec Scott Walker, who won the election after Ament resigned. Walker, of course, is running for gov in the Republican primary.

The lineup of speakers includes bloggers (!) Owen Robinson and Jessica McBride (Guess Sykes and Wagner couldn't come); their boy Walker, speaking on "local and state issues": County Supervisor Mark Borkowski: State Rep. Jeff Stone on TABOR; Milwaukee Ald. Tony Zielinski, on the city budget; and lobbyist Craig Peterson, speaking on a proposed new Manpower TIF.

And State Rep. Pedro Colon, a Milwaukee Democrat who chairs the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District, speaking on MMSD and its budget.

Aside from the distinct possibility he will be roasted alive when he tries to explain and defend MMSD, Pedro will find himself in some strange company.

CRG, which is working toward becoming a statewide force that does more than just run recalls, has already announced that it is working this year to defeat Gov. Jim Doyle. Did they invite Colon to make this seem like a bipartisan event? Does Colon think they invited him because they like him?

Why would Colon want to associate himself with CRG? You'll have to ask him. Maybe he'll get a few points from the wingnuts for his courage, but he'll lose as many with his own party for his stupidity.

Milwaukee cops give, Milwaukee cops get

Here's a scoop. The Journal Sentinel reports that the Milwaukee Police Assn. still has clout in the legislature and gets laws passed giving them special benefits other cops don't get. Why? They endorse Republicans and give them money.

In return, those tight-fisted Republican guardians of the public's money have no problem requiring Milwaukee taxpayers to pay the salaries of cops after they're fired, or dictating that the taxpayers pay the salaries of the full-time union officers.

So, the MPA gives and the MPA gets. In other circumstances, they call that pay to play. Where do you draw the line?

Note to JS: State Rep. Peggy Krusick isn't a Republican. She votes like one, especially on police issues, because she's from a police family.

Giving people a voice and vote on Iraq

Whitefish Bay voters will have a chance in April to express themselves in a referendum on the war in Iraq.

The village board put the question on the ballot after a petition drive, even though some of the board members disagree with the organizers, who want the U.S. to withdraw its troops, the JS reports:

However, the board's approval does not signify their support for the measure, said Trustee Anthony Busalacchi, chairman of the committee that considered a petition circulated by an anti-war group.

"We had two options," Busalacchi told a reporter. "We could adopt the language of the petition as our resolution or we could place it on the ballot and let the voters speak."

Busalacchi, a Korean War veteran, said there was considerable opposition on the board and the general sentiment was that the resolution was unpatriotic and not supportive of American troops.

"No one is more supportive of our troops than I am," said Busalacchi. "The issue is should we or should we not allow this resolution to be placed on the ballot."

That's the way it's supposed to work, but officials in Watertown and Monona have looked for technicalities to try to keep the question off the ballot. But they may still realize there is nothing wrong -- and a lot right -- with letting the public express itself on important national issues.

The question, is various forms, will be on the ballot in many Wisconsin communities on April 4. In Milwaukee, it is awaiting final approval, but may end up on the November ballot. Here's a roundup.

Incoming fire from the right

I was wondering who the mysterious new conservative blogger on WisOpinion, and now we know. It's Deb Jordahl, who starts right out on her new Above the Belt blog by ripping Scott Walker's face off. She might be a conservative I can get along with. Bet that doesn't last long.

-- From Working for Change.

Bucher opens a can of GOP worms

Republican AG candidate Paul Bucher is crowing over the fact that one of the Dem candidates for the post, Kathleen Falk, has reimbursed Dane County for health insurance costs for a county staffer who took a leave from the county exec's office to work on Falk's campaign.

Bucher compared it to the caucus scandal, and said "the arrangement raises serious questions about her judgment." (Just for the record, the caucus scandal involved things like then-Speaker Scott Jensen, R-Not Convicted Yet, hiring Sherry Schultz to work full-time on the state payroll, with full benefits, while her only job was to raise money for Republican candidates.)

Even though the county's administration department had approved the arrangement in advance, Falk's campaign paid the county a whopping $575. 87 to pay for five weeks of health insurance.

Bucher told the Capital Times that "he was pleased" by Falk's prompt action. "That's good news for the taxpayers," he said.

But that was yesterday. Today, his campaign blog is all over the issue again, with a lot of questions about it, clearly trying to keep the story alive. (One question he keeps asking is why the state DOA was involved in this. The answer is that it wasn't; it was the county DOA.)

Bucher's wife, writing under her professional name of Jessica McBride, chips in with a comment on her blog asking whether the story would get a lot more attention if it involved Jim Villa, chief of staff for Milwaukee County Exec Scott Walker.

This could be huge can of worms for Bucher. It is typical practice for GOP legislative staff to take leaves from their Capitol jobs during the summer and fall of election years to work on or manage a campaign for their boss or others. Staffers who have done that in the last two campaign cycles have never lost their insurance or had to pay for it.

Staffers in the Capitol -- and in Walker's county exec office -- have been known to take unpaid days off to do political work, if they didn't have vacation time or didn't want to use it. Have they paid for their health insurance for those days? I think you know the answer.

And I'd be a little careful about bringing up Jim Villa as an example. He was Walker's chief of staff, left to become his campaign consultant, then came back to be his chief of staff. Villa is clearly in charge of the campaign now, although he is on the Milwaukee County payroll. Once Villa left the Markesan Group, the consulting firm that was working for Walker, Walker ended his contract. Why pay consultants if the taxpayers will pay Villa?

It's about time someone made another public record request of Walker's office. (I just said that so they could spend the afternoon deleting e-mails and files.)

Bucher may have scored a small point yesterday, but it may be a shallow victory.

Inside information?

Jessica McBride, in a Waukesha Freeman column:

"Because no matter how hard the Democrats try to camouflage it, last time I looked it was their candidate and their candidate alone who is being investigated by Steve Biskupic for pay for play."

Journal Sentinel, May 10 story:

A local offshoot investigation began last summer after questions were raised about a $100 million Milwaukee County bond deal underwritten by Bear Stearns and the Journal Sentinel reported Hurtgen's political connections to Walker, now a Republican candidate for governor.

The paper reported that Hurtgen helped set up a 2003 Chicago fund-raiser for Walker during a period when Bear Stearns was seeking county bond business. Records of the bond deal were missing, but later turned up.

Levine and his wife, Sheri, gave Walker a total of $5,000 around the same time, according to county records.

Walker on Monday defended the county's actions.

"Every independent review of the work done by Bear Stearns shows that the process was legitimate and that the plan saved taxpayers money," Walker said. "The county used numerous safeguards to ensure a fair process with positive results."

However, aspects of the bidding process were criticized by an auditing firm hired last year by the County Board. Auditors concluded that the county generally has an acceptable bidding and award process in place, but for bond transactions, several improvements could "elevate the public's confidence."

Milwaukee County District Attorney E. Michael McCann found no evidence of political pressure during the selection of Bear Stearns, he said Monday.

A federal investigation into aspects of the county deal continues. U.S. Attorney Steven M. Biskupic declined to comment Monday.

Did Buskupic clear Walker at some point and not tell anyone? Or is McBride just wrong?

Sheriff's plan to end the violence: Wear uniforms to school and pray more

Milwaukee Sheriff David Clarke got a Democratic opponent this week, in the person of Vince Bobot, former cop and former municipal judge. Presumably, that means a primary since Clarke refuses to admit that he's a Republican, even though he talks like one, acts like one, and hangs out with them. But at election time he will masquerade as a Dem, because that's the only way he could get elected in Milwaukee County.

Conservatives like to say that's not true, that Republican Scott Walker winning a non-partisan race for county exec proves a Republican can carry the county in a partisan race.

The sheriff's race would be a great chance to test that theory. Clarke's the incumbent and has huge advantages. Why doesn't he run as a Republican and help the ticket?

Speaking of the sheriff, he wrote an article the other day offering his solution to inner city violence. He called it a plan, but it sounded a lot more like a campaign platform.

"City of Milwaukee government lacks a take-charge person with courage and vision." he began. Hmmm, who would that be? Clarke ran for mayor in 2004, and the people said no thanks. He didn't make it through the primary. But it sounds like he's still running.

"Milwaukee is facing an overwhelming crisis that requires immediate action — a plan," says Clarke...The strategic plan must work toward eliminating the risk factors associated with crime, violence and urban decay. I don’t have all the answers but I do have some ideas that are worth pursuing.

Well, he got that part right. He certainly doesn't have the answers. Here are the basic elements of his so-called plan:

Fix fractured families. (This has led to inadequate parenting/absent fathers/dysfunctional children/teen pregnancy. This must be done by the individual as some things only the individual can do for themselves. Government can assist by enacting family-supporting policies such as lowering taxes.) [If individuals were capable of fixing the problem, we wouldn't need a plan. I'm sure that cutting taxes will reduce crime, though. -- Xoff.]

Reform public education in Milwaukee (MPS is a broken system. We’re spending $1 billion per year on a system that’s failing children. Structure and discipline must be the hallmark. School uniforms would be a good start. The plan must include more education choices for parents so that every child has an opportunity to reach their God-given potential. Incorporate “character development” courses as a requirement for graduation. This teaches students about virtues such as civility, trust, responsibility, honesty and citizenship.) [MPS is not the problem, although it needs improvement. For every gang banger and thug, there are 10 kids who attend the very same schools and are successful. The difference is that they go to school and want to learn.--Xoff.]

Reverse middle class flight by rebuilding neighborhoods from inside the city out (Give residents more say over the distribution and use of resources. Currently bureaucrats and politicians make too many of the decisions based on political considerations. Close the Community Development Block Grants office at city hall, which has done nothing more than create cottage industries and which enables people to get rich off the poor. Very little money actually reaches the poor with this formula anyway and it is really used for political patronage. Funnel money instead through community based organizations such as Sherman Park Community Association. Let involved neighborhood groups make funding decisions.) [Giving federal money right to the neighborhoods sounds great in theory. Would Clarke support that in New Orleans?]

Identify a significant role for the church in community life to deal with social ills. (There is no example of society maintaining moral order without religion. Our moral framework has to be rebuilt. This spiritual awakening can lead to social renewal.) [Right. Government should get the church more involved?]

So, once you strip away the posturing and rhetoric, what's left? Another right-winger who thinks the problem is that poor people don't have enough money . They don't go to church enough , their kids don't dress nicely, and their taxes are too high, so of course they turn to crime.

In David Clarke's mind, this is a plan? Give me a break.

---

UPDATE: Dan Cody of Left On The Lake didn't think much of it, either.

Republican Party overstaffed

Attention, Republican Party of Wisconsin Chair Rick Graber: Time to see if there's any fat in the budget at party headquarters. It certainly looks like there are some people there who don't have enough to do.

Paper still ignores facts about Walker's award of contract to donors

When the newspaper does it, it's called investigative reporting. When candidates do it to each other, it's called mudslinging. And if bloggers do it, it's just ignored.

My favorite nugget from the Journal Sentinel's amazing story today on negativity over ethical issues in the governor's race -- to which the newspaper has been a major contributor -- was this gem:

[Scott] Walker said his campaign reviewed its contributions recently and decided to return $325; a subsequent review of more than 4,000 donations received in the last part of the year is now under way.

It makes him sound like a Boy Scout. But Walker only returned that money after Eye On Wisconsin revealed that he had awarded a $250,000 no-bid contract to a firm whose executives contributed to his campaign. Others picked up on the story, including the state Associated Press wire. That's when Walker decided to return $325, only about 10% of the money from the company's executives.

The Journal Sentinel never printed a word. Today's story still offers no clue about why Walker gave back the money, or the questions raised about the contracts. At least the paper is consistent.

Quote, unquote

"Once one Milwaukeean is arrested for cannibalism, suddenly the whole city gets the reputation as a good place to avoid if you don't want to get eaten."

-- Joel McNally, on how the national media brands cities.

Game, set, match: Paris def. Coulter

Paul Soglin's been having an ongoing good time keeping score in an IQ contest of sorts between Paris Hilton and Ann Coulter. Soglin's latest:

Coulter, Wiretapping and the Spread of Lies and Stupidity

We know about the Coulter rants. Here is what one of her toadies had to say building off Ann's follies:

ANN COULTER IS RIGHT ... AGAIN

Obviously many of these FISA judges are nothing but partisan political hacks pretending to be unbiased arbiters of justice, and it's about time folks started expressing a little outrage over their ideologically-driven rulings, as well as the decisions of every other activist who sits on a federal bench.

And the facts are:

William Rehnquist, the late chief justice of the Supreme Court, appointed all the sitting FISA judges.

Rehnquist is appointing partisan political hacks? Partisan as in Democratic Partisan? They are smoking some pretty powerful stuff in Ann's closet.

This week's score:

Paris (All I Need to Do is Keep My mouth Shut) Hilton 3
Ann Coulter 0

Don't tell Herb Kohl. . .

who would be mortified to discover that something called Liberal Oasis had something good to say about his comments at the Judiciary hearing today.

Some things are meant to be disposable

This post dedicated to Dennis York, whose graphics are truly graphic:

Grist,the online environmental magazine, tackles a lot of tough topics.

Today's question is whether condoms can be recycled. Answer: Well, it's no, of course. But flushing them isn't best practice, either, Grist says. MMSD taxpayers can attest to that. Corralling them has cost nearly $2-million.

-- Mike Thompson, Detroit Free Press, via Cagle.

"I have never met Abramoff in my life. I wouldn't know him if he walked in the room."-- Mark Green.

Rowen gets Walker's dander up

Jim Rowen, in a Cap Times column, jabs at Scott Walker and says he should do himself a favor and get out of the governor's race.

Walker counterpunches with a personal attack on Rowen, painting him as a left wing Madison/Berkeley lunatic, and links him with the Marilyn Figueroa case and -- even worse -- with me. (Can't wait for my deposition to go online.) He forgets to mention that Rowen came within 1,000 votes or so of being Madison mayor in 1979.

Walker doesn't say he's in to stay, though. And his Madison/Berkeley shot makes you wonder if he wishes he had stuck around at Marquette long enough to get a degree himself. (Full disclosure: I don't have one, either.)

While those two duke it out, Brian Fraley holds their coats.

AFTERTHOUGHT: Scott Walker's memory of the old Madison/Berkeley days must be a little hazy. When he was born in 1967, Rowen was a leader in the Madison antiwar movement and I was a Marine in Vietnam.

How Bush lost Wisconsin -- again

Fourteen months after President George W. Bush was re-elected without carrying Wisconsin, five men who worked for the Kerry-Edwards campaign, including the sons of two prominent Milwaukee politicians, go on trial today on felony counts of vandalism in the tire-slashing of more than 20 vehicles rented by Republican campaigners.

What are we to make of that first paragraph in today's Journal Sentinel?

The vandalism was despicable. If there are convictions, there should be tough sentences that send a clear message this kind of lawlessness and disregard for the rules of fair play won't be tolerated.

But are we supposed to conclude that George W. Bush lost Wisconsin because of this misguided act?

Hardly cause and effect. The newspaper should know better. Wisconsin hasn't voted Republican for president since 1984, and even Daddy Bush lost the state to Michael Dukakis, who won almost nowhere. It's gotten closer here, but Bush clearly lost, with or without the help of tire-slashers.

Let's condemn what happened without suggesting it was part of some left-wing conspiracy to steal the election. Can we agree on that?

Despite bluster and quotable denials, Ellis signed off on ethics package, quote

UPDATE: Ellis confesses. But he's still unhappy (natch).

---

Republicans have had a few days of fun at the expense of Gov. Jim Doyle's office, gleefully quoting State Sen. Mike Ellis, R-Neenah, who trashed Doyle's new ethics package and claimed he had never agreed to support it.

WisPolitics reported:

Yesterday, Doyle rolled out an ethics reform package, including a provision to prohibit fundraising during the budget process.

But the shining moment was spoiled soon after when a key GOP supporter, Sen. Mike Ellis, knocked the package in colorful language.

Ellis continued his rant today on WTMJ-AM, telling conservative Charlie Sykes this morning that Doyle was ``the most ethically-challenged governor we've had in the 30 years I've been in the Legislature'' and that Doyle's ethics package was "B.S. from one end of his body to the other."

He said Doyle usurped ideas that he and other legislators had, put them in the package and tried to pass it off as bipartisan. Ellis said when he saw his name attached to the news release announcing the package, "It just about knocked my hairpiece off."

The RWB (Right Wing Blogosphere) was beside itself.

Charlie Sykes:

MIKE ELLIS RIPS DOYLE

Was Governor Doyle more dishonest or dumb here?

Yesterday, the panicky guv announced his "comprehensive" ethics package and that he was "joined" by State Senator Mike Ellis and others.

The release even includes what purports to be a direct quote from Ellis:

"These are important reforms that will help to ensure public confidence in government, and I'm pleased that the Governor is supporting them," Senator Ellis said. "It's essential that any meaningful ethics reform be bipartisan and the Governor's support will go a long way toward that effort. I am hopeful that, with his backing, we can win strong support in the Legislature."

But Ellis was not on board... the quote was not cleared by him... and he has now gone Ellis-style nuclear.

On my show this morning, Ellis called Doyle a liar and the "most ethically challenged" governor in history.
If you missed it (and it's a classic), click on the top audio link to the right to listen.

Then ask yourself: what were the Doyle folks thinking?

One person e-mailed a comment to the Xoff Files asking whose head would roll in Doyle's office because of this.

Well, guess what? Ellis had signed off on the quote and the proposal, as these e-mails make clear. Read from the bottom.

I assume the RWB -- along with MSM, the Main Stream Media the RWB detests -- will duly note this and correct its mistakes. And that Ellis will cement his hairpiece on.

Mark Pocan has this, too, along with his earlier explanation of what was wrong with Ellis last week: It's got to be the pain pills.
______________________________________________
From: Boerger, Michael (Legislature) [mailto:Michael.Boerger@legis.state.wi.us]
Sent: Wednesday, January 04, 2006 1:41 PM
To: Henderson, Patrick - Office of Governor Jim Doyle
Subject: RE: Ethics Reform Package

Looks good, Pat.
_____________________________________________
From: Henderson, Patrick - Office of Governor Jim Doyle
Sent: Wednesday, January 04, 2006 1:02 PM
To: Boerger, Michael (Legislature)
Subject: RE: Ethics Reform Package

Mike,
Here is what we worked up. It's pretty similar so let me know what you think...
"These are important reforms that will help to ensure public confidence in government, and I'm pleased that the Governor is supporting them," said Ellis. "It's essential that any meaningful ethics reform be bipartisan and the Governor's support will go a long way toward that effort. I am hopeful that with his backing, we can win strong support in the Legislature."

Patrick Henderson
Office of Governor Jim Doyle
Legislative Director
(608) 266-1338

____________________________________________
From: Boerger, Michael (Legislature) [mailto:Michael.Boerger@legis.state.wi.us]
Sent: Wednesday, January 04, 2006 8:29 AM
To: Henderson, Patrick - Office of Governor Jim Doyle
Subject: RE: Ethics Reform Package

Looks good, Pat. Sorry I missed you yesterday, but I was really out of it.
"I'm pleased to see Governor Doyle's support for these initiatives," said Ellis. "It's essential that any meaningful ethics reform be bipartisan and the Governor's support will go a long way toward that effort."
_____________________________________________
From: Henderson, Patrick - Office of Governor Jim Doyle
Sent: Tuesday, January 03, 2006 3:00 PM
To: Griffiths, Terri; Boerger, Michael (Legislature)
Subject: Ethics Reform Package

Hi Terri and Mike,

To ensure that we are all working off the same information here is what each of you told me you were comfortable supporting. Hopefully I have captured the opinion of your bosses and the Governor is comfortable with the attached package. When you have a couple quotes for us to include in the Governor's release please feel free to forward them to me. Mike I'm not sure if you and I talked about this idea of the quote but if you would be so kind as to provide us with a quote we will make sure that it is in the Governor's release along with Rep. Freese's quote to make sure that you all get credit for being a part of this as well. Thanks.
<<>>

Bush sides with torturers against veterans

State Veterans Affairs Secretary John Scocos wrote a column recently, marking the 15th anniversary of the start of the 1991 Persian Gulf War.

He told in some detail of the about the abusive treatment and torture of captured Americans, including a Wisconsin veteran, Joseph Small.

Those details and more are available in a lawsuit filed by a group of Gulf War veterans and their families, seeking punitive damages from the Iraq government for their mistreatment.

Scocos didn't mention the lawsuit, in which a federal district court awarded the veterans nearly $1-billion in damages from the government of Iraq.

The Bush administration opposed the award in an appeal, on the grounds that there is a new government in Iraq which needs the money to rebuild from the devastation caused by the current war, or, as an LA Times writer described the Bush argument:

Today's Iraqis are good guys, and they need the money.

The case — Acree v. Iraq and the United States,— abounds with ironies. It pits the U.S. government squarely against its war heroes and the Geneva Conventions.

The appeals court overturned the award, and the Supreme Court refused to take up the case.

So Bush's record is consistent -- for torture on both sides.

Quote, unquote

"The following commentaries were written by the former mayor of Madison, Wisconsin, left-wing icon, crypto-communist, 1960s student-riot leader Paul Soglin."

-- Pastor Ralph Ovadal, anti-Catholic, anti-gay minister whom Soglin has written about because of his connection with State Sen. Tom Reynolds, R-Loonyville. Soglin has more.

The view from the cheap seats

Indulge me while I follow up the latest Mark Graul report. The Green Bay Press Gazette:

Mark Graul, who is now campaign manager for Green's gubernatorial bid, acknowledges attending a Milwaukee Bucks-Washington Wizards basketball game as a guest of lobbyist Jennifer Calvert [who worked for Jack Abramoff's lobby firm] in 2000.

Congressional staffers are allowed to accept complimentary tickets to sporting events and shows as long as the face value of the ticket is less than $50.

OK, here's what the best $48 seat would look like for Monday night's Wizards game. It's what Al McGuire called the nosebleed seats. This photo is taken from the front row of the $48 section. The top row would give you vertigo.

That would be a funny way for a high-roller like Abramoff -- who was taking Congressmen on all-expense paid golf trips to Scotland -- to treat a guest, even a Congressman's chief of staff like Graul was at the time.

Of course, there are a couple of things Graul and the Press Gazette didn't mention. First of all, he was listed for two tickets, so even in the cheap seats they were worth more than $50, the limit under House ethics rules. (UPDATE: My mistake. It was 4 tickets.)

More importantly, the tickets in question were for Abramoff's skybox. Those seats certainly go for $100 a pop or more -- not to mention the food and drink that are usually available free in the suites.

Why can't Graul just make it easy on himself and come clean? Does he think it's too late, after all of his carefully-worded denials? The more he bobs and weaves, the more like it seems he has something to hide.

And why doesn't his boss, Rep. Mark Green, tell him to 'fess up? At last report, Green was still claiming he had never even asked Graul about the freebies -- because he doesn't want to know the answer?

Monday morning mopup: Gay issue freaks out Darling staffer

Cleaning out the inbox on Monday morning:

Horrific response. Anne DeSellier, a constituent of State Sen. Alberta Darling, R-River Hills, wrote Darling a pefectly reasonable letter about discrimination against gays, and can't understand the horrific response she got from Darling's office.

The ultimate voter suppression. If you stood in line for hours to vote, did nothing wrong, and ended up in court, charged with voter fraud, would it make you think twice about voting next time? It's an amazing story.

Ya think? Jay Heck of Common Cause in Wisconsin " praised the elements of Gov. Jim Doyle's (ethics) proposal," said it didn't go far enough, and "doubted its chances of success without heavy support from Republicans, who control both houses of the legislature," the Journal Sentinel reported. Well, duh! With a 60-39 majority in the Assembly and a 19-14 edge in the Senate, nothing passes without some Republican support. But the JS thought that was so insightful it made the third graf of the front-page story.

Letting the people decide. What on earth is wrong with letting the people have a voice on the Iraq war? If the war is supposed to be bringing democracy to Iraq, maybe a little democracy could trickle down to Monona and Watertown, where local officials are resisting attempts to have a referendum.

An independent voter? He's been blogging in Port Washington since March 2004, and leans to the right, but seems somewhat open-minded. As Tom Lehrer sang, he doesn't like anybody very much. He's The Independent Voter.

Not on the list. Maybe I've been purged from the Doyle list, but I have not seen an e-mail from the gov's campaign asking people to as public television to carry his State of the State speech. One blogger says the e-mail made the rounds of every other mailing list I'm on.

Here's haiku to you. Patrick McIlheran's regular anti-government op ed rant in the Journal Sentinel has inspired some haiku.

Editorial: Mark Green and the scandals

This editorial steals some of my best stuff. Wish it were the Green Bay Press Gazette writing it.

The questions that Wisconsinites have to be asking themselves is this: Why, if George Bush, Dennis Hastert and so many other top Republicans are going out of their way to put distance between themselves and the various scandals that have gripped Washington, is U.S. Rep. Mark Green, R-Green Bay, not severing his ties to the subjects of so many investigations and inquiries?

Green refuses to give up roughly $30,000 in campaign contributions he got from groups associated with DeLay, he refuses to dismiss his campaign manager a former congressional aide who has been accused of accepting gifts from Abramoff and he refuses to distance himself from U.S. Rep. Bob Ney, the Ohio Republican who made a special trip to Wisconsin last fall to help Green and who now is one of the prime subjects of the Abramoff investigation.

Green, who is seeking the Republican nomination for governor, needs to follow the lead of Bush, Hastert and other Republicans who have recognized that the scandals that are plaguing Washington are a big deal. If he fails to do so, no one in their right mind will want to trust him with the keys to this state's executive offices.

Feingold says the I word

No wonder the Republicans are out to hatchet him. He's not afraid to speak up.

-- Via Working for Change. (Click on cartoon to enlarge.)

The old double standard: Ryan, F. Jimgot thousands from Abramoff-linked PAC

In a desperate attempt to make the Jack Abramoff lobbying scandal bipartisan, the National Republican Senatorial Committee posted a list of Democratic Senators who have ever received any contribution that could be linked to Abramoff, even after six degrees of separation. It included contributions from Abramoff associates and clients, in some cases when he wasn't even working for them.

The NRSC tried to link Wisconsin Sen. Russ Feingold, Mr. Clean, to Abramoff by saying Feingold received a contribution from the PAC of Abramoff's former law firm. Feingold returned the money along with some contributions from lawyers who used to work at the firm.

Charlie and Jessica McSykes got all hot and bothered about it, and especially that the hated MSM, or Main Stream (read Liberal) Media, didn't cover it -- or, more accurately, didn't cover it enough to suit them.

McSykes always likes to talk about the double standard in the news media.

Here's a chance for them to do something about it.

Two Republican Congressmen from Wisconsin, Paul Ryan and F. James Sensenbrenner, have each taken four times and eight times as much, respectively, as Feingold got from the same Abramoff law firm PAC. Federal Election Commission records show Ryan got $2,000 and Sensenbrenner $4,000 from the same law firm political action committee that gave Feingold $500.

There's been no media coverage, not a peep from either of them about returning the money, or any call from the RIB (right wing blogosphere) to do so. (And I am not talking about the $949 Ryan gave to charity -- which by the way was from Abramoff himself.)

Not one penny of contributions from Abramoff or his wife went to a single Democrat. None. Nada. Zip. Zilch. Zero. Here's the list.

Now that that the GOP has defined what a "link" is to the Jack Abramoff, Bob Ney and Tom DeLay scandals, this should be fun for Democrats as they uncover those links.

Stay tuned, Mark Green.

---

Dean slays the Wolf. Howard Dean sets Wolf Blitzer straight on whether this is a bipartisan scandal. Check it out.

---

And Wolf plays Capitol Hill Jeopardy.

The goo-goos: How soon they forget

It seems like it was just this week that the good government twins, Mike McCabe and Jay Heck, were hobnobbing with the gov, basking in the reflected glow of some legislation he was signing to prevent election fraud.

Oh, it was this week? It was a law to require all voting machines in Wisconsin to provide a paper ballot along with the electronic results? The goo-goos liked it, but forgot to issue any news releases? Did they get souvenir pens, too? The next day they were both teeing off the gov, even when he offered an ethics forum package? Where is the love?

(For the record, from left, that's Jack Heck of Common Cause , State Rep. Mark Pocan, D-Madison, a sponsor of the bill, Mike McCabe of the Wisconsin Democracy Campaign, in casual attire, and another sponsor, State Sen. Jeff Plale, D-South Milwaukee. I don't know or care who the guys in the back are.)

President lies, newspapers ask him to resign

Did that headline give you pause?

Unfortunately, the president in question isn't W, although he has told some whoppers.

It was Bill Clinton in 1998. He lied about sex, and 58 daily newspapers -- that liberal media we hear so much about -- editorialized that he should resign.

Two of those papers were in Wisconsin.

For the whole story and list from Editor and Publisher, click here.

Hat tip: Truthout via Op Ed News.

DeLay gives up the fight to keep job

Indicted Rep. Tom DeLay, the Texas Republican who stepped down temporarily as House majority leader to handle his growing legal problems, has decided not to try to get the leadership post back, the WashPost reports.

Besides his existing problems -- little things like money laundering charges -- DeLay was very closely tied to Republican lobbyist Jack Abramoff, who has copped a plea and agreed to turn state's witness. There is bound to be more bad news for DeLay.

Now we will never know whether any of Wisconsin's four House Republicans -- Mark Green, F. Jim Sensenbrenner, Tom Petri and Paul Ryan -- would have ever had the courage and the integrity to vote to remove him.

We certainly didn't hear talk about any of them being ready to sign a petition to force an election to replace DeLay. Here's a list of 14 who were, but no one from Wisconsin is on it.

But, then again, the Wisconsin news media never asked any of them.

'We all went into the bubble and came out'

President Bush Thursday with present and former secretaries of state and defense: Harold Brown, Lawrence S. Eagleburger, James A. Baker III, Colin L. Powell, James R. Schlesinger, Donald H. Rumsfeld, Vice President Dick Cheney, Mr. Bush, Condoleezza Rice, George P. Shultz, Melvin R. Laird, Robert S. McNamara, Madeleine K. Albright, Alexander M. Haig Jr., Frank C. Carlucci, William J. Perry and William S. Cohen.

To see the photo Maureen Dowd refers to, described above, click here.

Reach out and touch no one

By MAUREEN DOWD

Doing the math, you've got to figure that the 12 wise men and one wise woman had about 30 seconds apiece to say their piece to the president about Iraq, where vicious assaults this week have killed almost 200 and raised U.S. troop fatalities to at least 2,189.

It must have been like a performance by the Reduced Shakespeare Company, which boils down the great plays and books to their essence. Proust is "I like cookies." Othello raps that he left Desdemona "all alona, didn't telephona." "The Iliad" and "The Odyssey" condense into "The Idiodity." "Henry V" is "A king's gotta do what a king's gotta do," and "Antony and Cleopatra" is "Never get involved in Middle Eastern affairs."

Beyond taking a class picture ringed around Mr. Bush's bizarrely empty desk - a mesmerizing blend of "Sunset Boulevard," "The Last Supper" and a "Sopranos" ad - the former secretaries of state and defense had to make the most of their brief colloquy with W.

The spectral Robert McNamara might have enlightened on Vietnam: "Didn't understand the culture. Misjudged the opposition. Didn't know when to get out." If he was a fast talker, he could have added: "It's the dominoes. If Iraq falls, then Syria falls, then Lebanon falls, and before you know it, all of Southeast Asia - I mean, the Middle East - will fall."

Melvin Laird only needed to add: "Ditto."

Al Haig's summation would have been a cinch: "I resign. I'm in charge here. I resign - again."

Instead of his good-soldier silence, Colin Powell could have redeemed himself with four words: "I should have resigned."

Madeleine Albright might have succinctly imparted some wisdom from Somalia and Rwanda: "Didn't understand the culture. Misjudged the threat. Didn't know when to get in."

James Baker, Svengali and Sphinx, must have been thinking: "I told your dad not to let you in here. I could tell you how to get of Iraq in 10 minutes, but you're too under the sway of that nutball Cheney to listen."

George Shultz only needed to say: "I have a tiger tattooed on my fanny," and Lawrence Eagleburger could have abridged his thoughts to "I need a smoke. Bad."

It may seem disturbing at first, that with several hundreds of years' worth of foreign policy at his elbows, and a bloody, thorny mess in Iraq, Mr. Bush would devote mere moments to letting some fresh air into his House of Pain.

Sure, he has A.D.D. But he just spent six straight days mountain-biking and brush clearing in Crawford. He couldn't devote 60 minutes to getting our kids home rather than just a few for a "Message: I Care" photo-op faking sincerity?

"We all went into the bubble and came out," one of the wise men noted.

Read the rest here.

Gimme an F... What's it spell? FOOD STAMPS!

Reading this story about the insults to Madison East, our kids' alma mater, I shudder to think about what the Middleton fans might have chanted if they were playing a Milwaukee school:

Middleton High School officials apologized in writing Friday to Madison East High School for disparaging remarks made by students at a boys basketball game.

Middleton fans chanted "food stamps, food stamps" and "Os-car May-er" during verbal jousting with East fans, according to East students at the Dec. 20 game in Middleton.

East High is Madison's most diverse school economically, and Oscar Mayer's headquarters are in its attendance area.

East junior Jenny Peek, 17, said she was at the game and heard the "food stamps" chant.

"I guess they think everyone who goes to East is poor," she said.

About 40 percent of East High students are eligible for federally subsidized school lunches, compared with less than 10 percent at Middleton High School.

A victory for the victims

Gov. Jim Doyle used his veto Friday to give lead paint poisoning victims the chance to go to court for damages from lead paint manufacturers.

That sounds like a no-brainer, but the usual suspects -- Wisconsin Manufacturers and Commerce, and of course lead paint manufacturers -- were unhappy.

The Journal Sentinel reports:

“I cannot sign a law that closes the doors of justice to children who have been poisoned,” Doyle said.

“Here in Wisconsin the problem of lead paint poisoning is substantial and it is ongoing,” the governor told a crowd of 80 people at the 16th Street Community Health Center. “Every day lead continues to seep from paint on windowsills of this city’s oldest homes, and seeps into the blood, bones and brains of thousands of kids. It happens soon after they learn to stand or walk, and long before they learn to read. The majority of these kids come from the city’s poorest families.”

Lead paint poisoning, he said, is a particular concern for Wisconsin, given that Milwaukee’s children are almost six times more prone to the illness than their peers nationwide.

Earlier post: Lead paint issue isn't about lawyers; It's about victims poisoned for life.

Growling about Graul story

Robola, who writes for a blog with the great title, Someone Took in These Pants, agrees that the Mark Graul-Jack Abramoff story has been greatly underreported, even by the Spice Boys, when this is a story that should be right up their alley. Link

Ellis as punching bag

State Sen. Mike Ellis, RINO-Neenah, takes a couple of well-deserved shots on the Cheddarsphere today.

Ellis announced , to no one's suprise, that he was not running for governor, prompting a post and photo (right) at "I Am The Force" titled, Crazy guy blinks.

Ellis, the Republican that Common Cause loves, also had some nasty things to say about an ethics reform package from Gov. Jim Doyle, playing the partisan game and looking for reasons not to support it, even though he agrees with the content. Cory Liebmann at Eye on Wisconsin works him over on that.

Mark Pocan has an explanation for Ellis' reaction to the reform package: It's got to be the pain pills.

Freeman fires Shook, won't say why

Dennis Shook, editorial writer and columnist at the Waukesha Freeman, has been fired. He blames politics. The paper, of course, says that's not it. The Spice Boys have more.

Advice to Graul: 'Fess up and shut upabout free tickets from Abramoff

Josh Marshall, the person who first posted the e-mails linking Mark Graul to freebies from lobbyist Jack Abramoff, does not take kindly to Graul's latest defense -- that the e-mails are phony. Marshall, in a post today:

Non-denial denial ain't just a river in Egypt!

... If you're interested in delving into the minutiae of this, note that Graul is changing his story about the hoops game with Calvert from what he said last year. Also, this talk about whether he showed for this game or that is just more bamboozlement. As we said last October "do we have proof that Graul showed up at the skybox that night? No. What we have are Team Abramoff emails saying he was one of the lucky Hill staffers who they gave tickets to. I'll let you draw your own conclusions."

Now, Graul's new angle seems to be that he hasn't seen the letters, isn't sure they're real, doesn't this, that and the other.

Mark, a bit of free advice courtesy of TPM: just admit you got some freebie tickets and move on. These emails were produced by the relevant parties pursuant to a lawful subpoena. They are most definitely authentic.

Graul knows they're real. And that's why he's been ducking my phone calls about them for three months.

If Graul doesn't have anything to hide here, why won't he take my call?

Graul is far from the only congressional staffer to snag a few skybox tickets from the Abramoff gravy train. He's just doing more than any of the others to cover it up.

-- Josh Marshall

Wal-Mart website makes racial connections

DVD Shoppers Get Offensive Referrals

By Ylan Q. Mui of the Washington Post:

Wal-Mart apologized yesterday after its retail Web site directed potential buyers of "Charlie and the Chocolate Factory" and "Planet of the Apes" DVDs to also consider purchasing DVDs with African American themes.

The world's largest retailer said in a statement that it was "heartsick" over the racially offensive grouping and that the site was linking "seemingly random combinations of titles."

"It's just simply not working correctly," said Mona Williams, vice president of corporate communications for Wal-Mart Stores Inc.

The company said it was alerted to the problem early yesterday afternoon after word began spreading among bloggers. When visitors to Walmart.com requested "Planet of the Apes: The Complete TV Series" on DVD, four other movies were recommended under the heading "Similar Items." Those films included "Martin Luther King: I Have A Dream/Assassination of MLK" and "Unforgivable Blackness: The Rise and Fall of Jack Johnson."

Williams said similar titles were called up when the DVD of the movie "Charlie and the Chocolate Factory" was requested. There were three such combinations involving those two movies and African Americans films, she said.

Bentonville, Ark.-based Wal-Mart said in a written statement that it removed the combinations at 6:30 p.m. Eastern time. By last evening, "Planet of the Apes" was linked to DVDs of the fifth season of the CBS comedy "Everybody Loves Raymond" and the 10th season of the NBC hit "Friends." The company said it planned to shut down its entire cross-selling system overnight.

Like most other major retail sites, including Amazon.com, Wal-Mart's site directs users searching for movies to other titles that might interest them; Wal-Mart calls the process "mapping." Wal-Mart said last night that the system was malfunctioning but did not explain why or how.

Williams said the company has "absolutely no evidence" that the problem was intentional. A company statement said that the site had also linked African American films to the movies "Home Alone" and "The Powerpuff Girls." Marty Hires, a spokesman, said the company is investigating.

Williams said news of the problem was first posted on a blog. The company then learned about the offensive combinations when a reporter called to ask about it.

The blog Firedoglake, run by Jane Hamsher in Oregon, posted news of the combination yesterday afternoon under the heading "So Wrong."

The incident illustrated how quickly a firestorm can build on the Internet. Two minutes after the post appeared on Hamsher's blog, it was up on the Crooks and Liars site. Within hours, more than 100 comments were posted to that site, questioning such things as Wal-Mart's agenda and the technicalities of mapping.

Wal-Mart has been in a public relations battle over the past year. In May, the company apologized for a newspaper advertisement in Arizona that equated a proposed state zoning ordinance with Nazi book-burning. Then came the Robert Greenwald documentary "The High Cost of Low Price," which criticized Wal-Mart's treatment of employees.

The company fought back by hiring former political operatives to polish its image and has joined in founding a group called "Working Families for Wal-Mart" that helps promote positive stories. Yesterday, Wal-Mart repeatedly apologized for the offensive material on its Web site.

"We are deeply sorry that this happened," it said in a written statement.

Mark Graul's latest claim: I was framed

Mark Graul, campaign manager and former chief of staff to Rep. Mark Green, has changed his story repeatedly when he has been asked about a series of e-mails showing he was on the list for free tickets to events in felonious lobbyist Jack Abramoff's skybox.

In today's story in the Green Bay Press Gazette, he tries a new one: The e-mails are fake.

Let's look at that story. My comments are in italics.

Taken out to a ballgame

Meanwhile, the former chief of staff to U.S. Rep. Mark Green, R-Hobart, said Abramoff's plea bargain has no bearing on his past association with a former colleague of Abramoff.

Mark Graul, who is now campaign manager for Green's gubernatorial bid, acknowledges attending a Milwaukee Bucks-Washington Wizards basketball game as a guest of lobbyist Jennifer Calvert in 2000.

Congressional staffers are allowed to accept complimentary tickets to sporting events and shows as long as the face value of the ticket is less than $50. [True, except that Graul is on the list for two skybox tickets. Try getting even one skybox ticket to the Bradley Center for less than $50.]

The Wisconsin Democratic Party, citing purported e-mails between Calvert and Abramoff posted by an Internet blogger, claims Graul also obtained free tickets to other events in Washington with Abramoff's OK.

Wisconsin Democratic Party Chairman Joe Wineke sent Green a letter with copies of the e-mails, asking the congressman to find out what Graul was expected to do in return.

However, Graul denied having attended the other events, saying he was in Wisconsin on the days they occurred.

"I can assure you that I didn't go to them," said Graul. [Did he get the tickets for someone else? Another staffer? The Congressman?]

Graul said there's no evidence the alleged e-mails are authentic and that he never met Abramoff. [The question is not whether he ever met Abramoff. It is why members of Abramoff's staff wanted to do favors for Graul. There is "no evidence the alleged e-mails are authentic"? There is no evidence they're not. And you would have to ask Graul why he thinks someone would single him out for this treatment. Why would anyone forge documents to make Graul look bad? Did anyone ask Josh Marshall at Talking Points Memo, which posted the documents in question, whether they are authentic? Marshall is not some partisan young blogger; he's a respected writer who's regularly published in some of the nation's largest newspapers.]

Calvert's relationship with Abramoff as a co-worker ended several years ago, when she left Preston Gates & Ellis to help establish the government affairs business at Washington Strategies, a smaller lobbying firm across the Potomac River from Washington in Rosslyn, Va.

Graul said Thursday that he considered his attendance at the game at the MCI Center in downtown Washington with Calvert primarily a social event. He did not recall what business topics were discussed. [Of course it was a "social event." Lobbyists don't invite you to a basketball game and demand your vote at halftime. They schmooze you, do you favors, and establish a relationship and access that will be useful in the future. That's how the game is played.]

The two became acquainted when one of Calvert's clients was an association that represented the personal watercraft industry, said Graul.

Calvert's firm said Thursday she was out of town for the week.

Calvert's biography posted on the Washington Strategies Web site says, "Her lobbying expertise focuses on the issue areas of appropriations, natural resources, transportation, education and Native American issues." The firm's site also states, "She is active in raising money for Republican members of Congress and serves as a political consultant to various members of the House and Senate.'

UPDATE: Josh Marshall of Talking Points Memo, who posted the e-mails to begin with, reacts strongly to Graul's claim.

Sheriff, county in contempt of court

Gretchen Schuldt of Story Hill's Hood Happenings reports:

Judge rips Sheriff Clarke's jail operations, but denies damages

Milwaukee County this week was found in contempt of court by a judge who said conditions that existed in the jail booking room "are unacceptable, if not appalling."

Descriptions of conditions by detainees and former detainees included "overly crowded conditions, inmates who were forced to sit or sleep on the floor next to urinals, inmates who had to sit up for hours and hours, lack of hygiene, unsanitary conditions, inmates who were not given pillows or blankets to sleep on, cells that were infested with bugs, cold temperatures, bodily fluids on the floor and bad odors," Circuit Judge Clare Fiorenza said in her decision...

Sheriff David Clarke's department violated the consent decree by detaining more than 16,000 inmates more than 30 hours each in the crowded jail booking room over a 2 1/2 year period.

"The sheer number of violations, 16,662, is staggering," Fiorenza wrote, adding: "Although Milwaukee County contends that it was unaware of the extent of the problem, it is beyond this Court's comprehension how over 16,000 violations of the consent decree could go undetected."

"This court is satisfied, and so finds, that the actions of Milwaukee County officials were intentional," she said.

There were violations before March 2002, when Clarke was appointed sheriff, but numbers soared after he was sworn in and remained high until the ACLU and Legal Aid brought the contempt motion, records show.

While there were 18 violations in December 2001 and 20 in January 2002, for example, there were 518 in December 2002 and 830 in January 2003.

Sheriff's deputies complained to a County Board committee in December 2002 and January 2003 that overcrowding in the booking room was creating unsafe work conditions, Fiorenza said. Those complaints "should have raised suspicions and prompted further investigation of the situation in the booking area of the jail; however, the record does not demonstrate that any action was taken by the county."

Links to the full decision and earlier stories can be found on the Story Hill site.

Green running against Milwaukee?

Has Mark Green decided to run for governor as the anti-Milwaukee candidate?

This LaCrosse Tribune story makes it sound that way:

The Republican candidate will need strong support in Milwaukee — a Democratic stronghold — to beat Doyle, Walker said. He pointed out he had nearly 58 percent of the vote in 2004.

Walker also said he has more executive experience than Green. A county executive, much like a governor, must appoint a cabinet and administer a budget, he added.

Mark Graul, campaign manager for Congressman Green, disagreed with those assessments, noting candidates from Milwaukee tend to fare poorly in state races. While he didn’t pin the blame on Walker, Graul said that city’s crime rate, education issues and financial problems are generally “not seen as a benefit” to those elsewhere in the state.

That has the makings of a great campaign theme: "Do you want Scott Walker to make all of Wisconsin like Milwaukee County? Coming soon to a county near you -- crime, poverty, bad schools, and -- perish the thought -- minorities."

Walker can try to explain that he's not the mayor, and those really aren't problems in Wauwatosa, where he lives. But that's a little complicated for the yahoos who would buy Green's anti-city message.

Graul also told the Tribune that no one has gone from county executive straight to governor. He neglected to mention that only one sitting member of Congress has been elected governor since Wisconsin became a state in 1848, and that was Cadwallader Washburn in 1872.

It's put up or shut up time on campaign finance reform

Gov. Jim Doyle called his critics' bluff today, proposing a far-reaching, comprehensive reform of campaign finances and ethics.

Doyle, who has been under fire both for his own fund-raising operation and for not pushing hard for reform, proposed a package with bipartisan support.

Highlights of the package include:

Banning all fundraising during the budget process by state office incumbents and challengers alike, from the date of introduction of the budget until it is signed into law;

Placing a one-year ban on lobbying their respective branches of government by legislators, legislative staffers, former Governors, and all gubernatorial political appointees once they leave office;

Banning the use of campaign contributions or state tax dollars to pay for legal defense fees by someone who's been criminally charged with violating state ethics or campaign finance laws;

Offering 100 percent of public funding for Supreme Court candidates who agree to limit their campaign spending; and

Renewing the call for SB 1, which would merge the Wisconsin Elections and Ethics Boards. This bill passed the Senate November 1, 2005 with various amendments and if passed by the full legislature, would provide greater enforcement power over our elections and ethics laws.

Will those who have been posing for holy pictures adopt serious campaign reforms, or will they nitpick this one to death because it does not meet their definition of perfect?

Watch carefully, and take good notes. See where the do-gooders come down on this.

The sniping has already begun. The Journal Sentinel reports:

But critics were quickly circling. Doyle's release quoted Sen. Mike Ellis (R-Neenah) praising the package, but an aide from Ellis' office said Ellis was critical of the final package because it didn’t do enough to reform the way campaigns are financed.

UPDATE: WisPolitics reports that Jack Heck of Common Cause says

"The problem with the package now ... is that it apparently does not have the support of Senator Ellis and Representative Freese who both say they did not agree to the inclusion of the provision banning the use of state tax dollars or campaign contributions for the legal defense of legislators or staff criminally charged with violating state ethics or campaign finance laws. It's a good proposal which we support but its inclusion with the other reforms may make this package untenable and make it no longer bipartisan--which means it won't move an inch."

So Republicans are going to hold up or kill this bill because they want to be able to use taxpayer money or their campaign accounts to pay for lawyers when they break the ethics or campaign finance laws? Great! Let's have that debate. Can't wait for the fall campaign ads.

'Green knee-deep in political cesspool'

Turning up the heat on Green to act on scandal

The song and dance team of Rep. Mark Green and Mark Graul, Green's campaign manager, is going to have to come up with some fancier footwork if the duo hope to avoid the issue of their ties to convicted Republican lobbyist Jack Abramoff and indicted Rep. Tom DeLay.

Writing in the Capital Times, John Nichols says:

DeLay and Abramoff scandals both provide evidence that a culture of corruption has taken hold in the Washington of Tom DeLay and Bob Ney. And Mark Green is at least knee-deep in it.

If the congressman wants to be taken seriously as a contender for governor of a state where voters still set high standards for public responsibility, he needs to detach himself from Ney, dispose of the DeLay money and distance himself from Graul. Even then, Green's actions and associations will continue to raise questions about whether he is able to put the public interest ahead of the partisan ties that have pulled him into the political cesspool.

The Democratic Party isn't letting Green and Graul keep up their dance, either. Party Chair Joe Wineke has sent Green copies of the e-mails showing Graul as the recipient of free tickets from Abramoff. Green says he's never asked Graul about it.

From the party's release:

To date, Green has turned a blind eye to Graul’s involvement with Abramoff, saying he has never asked Graul whether he knew Abramoff or any of his associates, adding “there is no reason that he would.” [Capital Times, 12/13/2005]

Yet documents clearly show Graul, as Green’s congressional chief of staff, repeatedly requested and received skybox ticket freebies from Abramoff for NBA games, concerts, and even a WWF event. [TalkingPointsMemo.Com, 10/10/2005]

Graul has changed his story every time he has been asked about the Abramoff tickets, first denying it and then excusing the behavior by saying it is illegal in Wisconsin to take freebies, but “it’s legal in Washington.” He even admitted to the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel that he was the contact person to receive freebies. [Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, 10/21/2005]

Wineke also responded to attempts by Green’s campaign manager to discredit the authenticity of the emails, saying the documents were obtained by a legitimate journalist who acquired the records from a legitimate source during the course of his reporting. Joshua Micah Marshall, the publisher of TalkingPointsMemo.Com where the documents are posted at http://talkingpointsmemo.com/docs/graul6.html, is a respected journalist who writes for The Hill newspaper and has been published in newspapers from The New York Times to The Boston Globe to The Los Angeles Times.

“No matter how much Mark Graul tries to cover it up or discredit the documents, the fact is email records show Graul listed as a recipient of free tickets from Abramoff’s firm at Abramoff’s approval,” Wineke said in his letter to Green. “I hope that you are able to find the time to discuss this matter with Mark Graul, and that you can provide answers to these questions to the people of Wisconsin.”

Mixed receptions for newcomers

Herb Kohl's newest Republican opponent for U. S. Senate doesn't get a very warm welcome from Lakeshore Laments.

Spivak and Bice, who have formally adopted the Spice Boys tag we've all been using for awhile, do get a warm welcome from Leaning Blue. It's got a good beat; I'd give it a 72.

No comment

Jessica McBride explains below why she doesn't allow reader comments on her blog. Wonder if Sykes has the same excuse?

And here I thought it was just because they were both thin-skinned.

Comments on the blog?

A couple times a week, I get emails from readers asking why I don't allow comments on my blog. Sometimes, I am tempted. This is why I don't. I have absolutely no problem with constructive criticism and insightful opposition. But, if I put comments on my blog, I would be called vicious names by angry reporters and liberals and people with an axe to grind against Paul - you name it. Why should I give over my space to that? I've read the comments on other blogs and they get really vicious and are often downright slimes against a lot of people - sometimes even veering on libelous.

For libel reasons, I prefer to control the content on my blog. I attended a blog seminar where a lawyer was speaking and she said bloggers are actually in more dangerous legal territory if they delete some blog comments - even if they worry the comments are libeling someone - because then they are perceived as the "editor" of them rather than the passive recipient. So they are sort of stuck. I might consider eventually allowing non anonymous comments. That might be a compromise down the road.

UPDATE: Thanks to Owen at Boots and Sabers for pointing out that I had not allowed comments on this post. Jay Bullock gave me credit for irony, but it was really stupidy. Just an oversight. Comments are on now; hoping to hear from Sykes and McBride.

Questions unasked and unanswered about Green, Ryan links to Abramoff

As fallout from the exploding Jack Abramoff lobbying scandal drifts over Wisconsin, some Republicans are seeking shelter while others are hoping a little A (for Abramoff)-bomb radiation won't hurt anything.

Today's Journal Sentinel coverage lets Wisconsin Congressmen and their staffers off pretty easily so far. It left some questions unanswered, and others unasked.

Rep. Paul Ryan moved quickly to get rid of a $949 contribution he got from Abramoff in 2000. It's interesting to note that he didn't say he'd already spent it, which is his excuse for not returning $25,000 in political action committee money from the embattled and indicted Rep. Tom DeLay.

You also have to wonder about the $949 contribution, which Ryan gave to charity. Donations of odd amounts usually indicate that they are in-kind contributions rather than direct gifts. Did Abramoff pay for a Ryan fundraiser?

Ryan said he didn't know Abramoff, the paper reported. It's hard to find anyone who knows the guy these days. How did he every get anything accomplished in the House?

The story also says: "The majority of Abramoff's donations went to Republicans."

Actually, every dollar Abramoff and his wife gave went to Republicans. The only ties to any Democrats are contributions from one of his clients, an Indian tribe. The Abramoffs never gave a Democrat a nickel.

Then there's this little dance:

Web log reports are denied

Also Wednesday, Mark Graul, former chief of staff to Green, one of two Republican candidates for governor, denied reports on a Web log (talkingpointsmemo.com) that Graul repeatedly asked an Abramoff aide for tickets for himself to Washington events such as pro wrestling matches, sporting events and even a rock concert.

Graul, who is now managing Green's campaign for governor, said the report was written by a "liberal blogger with an ax to grind." Graul said he hasn't seen the original documents on which the blog was based.

According to the blog, Graul's requests for tickets were relayed to Abramoff or his aides through Jennifer Calvert, who worked for a Washington lobbying firm.

"The only thing that I recall attending with Jennifer Calvert was a Bucks game," said Graul, who denied making repeated requests for favors and had no explanation for why his name repeatedly shows up on documents on the blog as requesting tickets for six Washington events in 2000 and 2001.

"I've never met Jack Abramoff in my life," Graul said.

The documents in question are readily available. I've posted links several times, if Graul wants to see them. Graul hasn't seen "the original documents," he says. Does he claim these documents are phony?

The Wisconsin news media continues to let him get away with that bobbing and weaving. Graul says he doesn't know Abramoff. Does he say he doesn't know Susan Ralston, the Abramoff staffer who took care of his free ticket needs?

The media's let Green get away with murder, too, dodging questions about Graul by saying he has never asked Graul whether he knew or had a relationship with Abramoff staffers.

Don't you think it's about time for Green to ask his campaign manager that question -- and for Graul to have a look at those documents?

The reporting on this has been pathetic.

Then there's the DeLay money, where Green has given about 27 different answers to the question of whether he will return $30,000 he's gotten from DeLay. His primary opponent, Scott Walker, says he should:

Graul responded to Walker's statement this week that Green should have already returned some $30,000 he got from a fund controlled by indicted U.S. Rep. Tom DeLay (R-Texas), who has ties to Abramoff.

Walker "is incredibly off base," Graul said. "Mark Green has already said if Tom DeLay is convicted of anything, he's going to divest himself of any money" from DeLay.

That would be news, if true. Green's last statement on the matter was that he had spent all but $2,000 of the $30,000 before forming a campaign committee to run for governor, and that he would give back the $2,000 if DeLay is convicted. Graul makes it sound as though Green will dispose of the whole $30,000. He should do himself a favor and get rid of it now.

Meanwhile, Grumps at the Happy Circumstance says that the giving spirit of Republicans warms the heart.

Walker ethics head -- from bad to worse?

When County Exec Scott Walker nominated Don Uebelacker, a retired sales manager who helped build Citizens for Responsible Government in 2002, to head the Milwaukee County Ethics Board, I thought anyone would be an improvement over John Carter, the outgoing chair. Carter could never see anything wrong with whatever Walker did.

But Jim McGuigan has given me some second thoughts. McGuigan (who lost his County Board seat in a CRG-baxcked recall) calls Uebelacker "a known CGR liar," and says:

He's a cancer that started rotting Brown Deer politics and whose influence quickly metasticized to other parts of Milwaukee County. To further his political agenda, he has penned deceitfull editorials in CNI's Northshore Herald and that paper has been forced to run corrections because they didn't check his claims first.

And that's just for starters.

Lawsuit alert

Heads up to Ragnar Mentaire of I Am The Force: Beware of process servers and Ed Garvey, Esquire. State Sen. Lassa does not like public criticism.

How many more wasted lives?

Is the way to honor Americans who have died in Iraq to send more Americans to die? This family doesn't think so.

Saving the House

In his NY Times op ed column today, David Brooks says it's time to clean up the House, and suggests that a couple of Wisconsin Congressmen could help show the way:

By DAVID BROOKS

I don't know what's more pathetic, Jack Abramoff's sleaze or Republican paralysis in the face of it. Abramoff walks out of a D.C. courthouse in his pseudo-Hasidic homburg, and all that leading Republicans can do is promise to return his money and remind everyone that some Democrats are involved in the scandal, too.

That's a great G.O.P. talking point: some Democrats are so sleazy, they get involved with the likes of us.

If Republicans want to emerge from this affair with their self-respect or electoral prospects intact, they need to get in front of it with a comprehensive reform offensive.

First, they need to hold new leadership elections. As Newt Gingrich and Vin Weber told me yesterday, Tom DeLay needs to take care of his own legal problems and give up the dream of returning as majority leader.

But Republicans need to do more than bump DeLay. They need to put the entire leadership team up for a re-vote. That's because the real problem wasn't DeLay, it was DeLayism, the whole culture that merged K Street with the Hill, and held that raising money is the most important way to contribute to the team.

New leadership elections would, at least, make the current leaders re-earn their slots with new platforms. At best, they would allow the party to reinvigorate itself under new management. A party led by young talents like Paul Ryan, Eric Cantor, Mike Pence and Mark Kirk would be taken seriously as a party of reform.

Second, the Republicans need to get a grip on earmarks.

Earmarks are the provisions that single members can stick into gigantic bills to steer spending toward favored projects. They're an invitation to corruption. If individual members of Congress can control $100 million federal contracts or billion-dollar pork barrel projects, then of course companies are going to find ways to funnel graft to those members.

To prove they're serious about special-interest spending, Republicans could declare a one-year earmark moratorium until they get a handle on this problem. Or they could promote legislation mandating that earmarks eat up only 1 percent of any spending bill's total cost.

Third, Republicans need to steal David Obey and Barney Frank's lobbying-reform ideas. For some insane reason, having to do with their own special interests, Democrats have been slow to trumpet the ideas coming from their own party. Republicans have a chance to hijack them before the country notices.

Specifically, there should be a ban on lobbyist-paid travel. (Members should be allowed to take spouses on publicly financed travel because it is important that members get out and see the world.) Former members should not be allowed to lobby on the House floor. All lobbyist contacts with government officials should be posted on the Internet.

Gingrich intriguingly suggests abolishing all fund-raising in the Washington metro area. Make the lobbyists go to the districts if they want to attend $1,000 cocktail parties.

Fourth, enforce House rules. There's bound to be corruption when spending provisions can be slipped into legislation in the dead of night, outside the normal oversight procedures. There's bound to be corruption when members are forced to vote on sprawling bills nobody has a chance to inspect. Instead, all legislation should be posted online for 72 hours before the vote, so the staff and bloggers can nitpick and expose.

Fifth, rebuild the ethics committees. Norman Ornstein of the American Enterprise Institute proposes a bifurcated process. The investigations should be conducted by a commission of former members and former staffers. That way, current members are not investigating one another. Then the committees can vote on the commission recommendations.

Sixth, readopt the pay-as-you-go budget rules. As long as a $2.6-trillion-a-year government is expanding into more areas of national life, businesses will have an incentive to invest in lobbyists. The 1990 pay-as-you-go rules, which forced Congress to offset new expenditures with spending restraint not only imposed fiscal discipline but also forced pork projects to compete for limited resources.

Finally, today before noon, fire Bob Ney as chairman of the House Administration Committee. For God's sake, Republicans, show a little moral revulsion.

Back in the dim recesses of my mind, I remember a party that thought of itself as a reform, or even a revolutionary movement. That party used to be known as the Republican Party. I wonder if it still exists.

Before he becomes part of the Reform Team leadership, Ryan might want to return the $25,000 he's gotten from Tom DeLay, whether DeLay is convicted or not.

-- Tom Toles, Washington Post

Well, it's a start

The AP reports:

Ryan donates Abramoff contribution to charities

WASHINGTON (AP) -- U.S. Rep. Paul Ryan said Wednesday he donated to charity a $949 campaign contribution he received from lobbyist Jack Abramoff.

Abramoff pleaded guilty in federal court in Washington on Tuesday to mail fraud, conspiracy and tax evasion charges. As part of a plea agreement, he agreed to tell investigators about alleged bribes to lawmakers and their aides in a wide-ranging inquiry involving the lobbyist.

Ryan, R-Wis., said in a statement he donated the contribution to USO Operation Phone Home, which provides calling cards for soldiers to call home from abroad, and to the Bert Blain Memorial American Heart Association Heart Walk, held in Rock County, Wis.

In the campaign statement, Ryan said he does not know Abramoff personally.

"I am disgusted by the reports I have read regarding Jack Abramoff's actions," Ryan said. "He should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law."

Now, if Ryan could just quit making phony excuses and give back the $25,000 from tom DeLay's political action committee, we'd be getting somewhere.

Mark Green's buddy Ney in deep trouble

Aside from Jack Abramoff and Tom DeLay, who's the guy in the most trouble today over the Abramoff scandal?

It's an Ohio Congressman -- a Republican, of course -- named Bob Ney.

If that name sounds familiar, it's because he was in Milwaukee not too long ago, at the invitation of his good buddy Mark Green, to hold a phony hearing on voter fraud and tell people in Wisconsin to clean up their act.

Ney is also famous as the guy who brought Freedom Fries to the House cafeteria.

Green, I expect, will say he never heard of Ney and wouldn't know him if he knocked on Green's front door.

The LA Times says The Heat Is Now on Ohio Rep. Ney. And here's a chart showing just what kind of problems Ney might have.

Is this guilt by association? Well, Green could easily get some distance from everyone involved. He could simply give back DeLay's $30,000 and say that Ney should step down as chair of the House Administration Committee -- they call him the mayor of Capitol Hill -- until the case is resolved. Watch and see.

Quote, unquote

"Happy new year! Have a gun! That's the Wisconsin Legislature's gift to citizens of this state. Members hope this will be the year they can ram through a bill that would allow residents to carry hidden pistols, stun guns and other weapons."

-- Wausau Daily Herald editorial, Lawmakers give the gift of more guns.

Wake up the watchdogs

It isn't just the news media that have been silent about the links between Jack Abramoff, Tom DeLay, and Wisconsin Congressmen Mark Green and Paul Ryan.

The goo-goos -- the "good government" groups that put out the inflammatory news releases and provide the juicy quotes, full of insinuations that every dollar raised by a campaign is at least a venial sin -- have not uttered a peep. The media refer to the organizations as watchdogs, but they are asleep in their doghouses on this one.

Will we hear from the Wisconsin Democracy Campaign's Mike McCabe? Isn't he concerned, at least, if not outraged, by the flow of money from DeLay to Green and Ryan? Doesn't he think they should give it back? Or is he too busy peddling questionable claims about Jim Doyle to get around to this long-standing question?

And Common Cause? Where are you, Jay Heck?

The silence is deafening.

Blackout or amnesia? Journal Sentinel ignores Abramoff-DeLay-Green links

The downfall of Republican lobbyist Jack Abramoff has sent shock waves through Washington, where members of Congress and their staffers wonder whether Abramoff will finger them.

While the national news media covers the story in depth, the Wisconsin media so far ignore the known and potential links between Abramoff and Wisconsin members of Congress. Cory Liebmann at Eye on Wisconsin says the Journal Sentinel has amnesia, failing to even mention that Rep. Mark Green's former chief of staff and current campaign manager is one of the staffers who has accepted free tickets and favors from Abramoff.

Then there is the matter of the $55,000 Green and Rep. Paul Ryan have accepted from Rep. Tom DeLay, who is under indictment already and is likely to be in more trouble by the time Abramoff finishes singing. Abramoff gave or directed huge amounts of money to DeLay and his political action committee, which was the source of the $30,000 in contributions to Green and $25,000 to Ryan. Both have resisted calls to give back the money. Now Scott Walker, Green's primary opponent, has joined in the call for him to return DeLay's money. Should any of that be worth a mention by the state's largest newspaper?

---

Why do I call him a Republican lobbyist? Despite some national media suggestions that Abramoff spread his largesse on both sides of the aisle, the evidence shows otherwise.

New blog on the left side of the block

Good news for lefty bloggers. Reinforcements have arrived, in the person of Carrie Lynch, who writes a new blog, What's Left.

Judging from her first few posts, she's someone who is going to hold candidates accountable and compare their rhetoric with their records. We could use more of that.

UPDATE: Make that plural -- new blogs. State Rep. Mark Pocan, D-Madison, has launched a blog, too, promising in a press release to reveal, "the good, the bad and the ugly" about state government.

It's not 'gay marriage amendment' either

I warned yesterday that the right wing is moving to package the constitutional amendment on gay marriage as the Defense of Marriage Amendment, when it is nothing of the kind. If your heterosexual marriage is threatened by gay people having any legal rights, your marriage is in trouble anyway.

Ingrid Ankerson says that even calling it the "gay marriage amendment" is inaccurate, and she's right. Writing on the No on the Amendment blog, she says:

It is not the "Defense of Marriage" amendment.

It is also not the “marriage amendment” or even a “gay marriage” amendment. Calling it any of these does not sufficiently describe just what this amendment is or what it would do. It would permanently ban marriage for lesbian and gay couples, yes. But it would also ban civil unions or other protections that are substantially similar to marriage.

Instead we should—we must—refer to the amendment as the “ban on civil unions and marriage.”

It doesn’t make for a pretty acronym (quite the contrary), but it does get the point across. This amendment would ban something. And it won’t just ban marriage.

It would also ban civil unions.

---

Journal Sentinel columnist Jim Stingl, fresh from seeing "Brokeback Mountain" over the holidays, says:

Don't buy that nonsense about any of this being a defense of traditional marriage. I'm so sure that gays pose no threat to my marriage that I gave my wife tickets to "Naked Boys Singing" as a wedding anniversary gift.

---

Eye on Wisconsin has another idea on how to protect marriage: Ban fundamentalist weddings.

Senseless, brutal beating prompts community soul-searching

What to make of the brutal beating of Samuel McClain by a gang of young sociopaths on Milwaukee's north side?

More importantly, what to do about it?

I've been reading and listening as others have weighed in. This may sound like what we used to call a copout in bygone days, but I don't have an answer yet. This wasn't a subject I wanted to address in the heat of the moment, when it's easy to say something you'll come to regret for a long time. A week later, I still don't pretend to have even a slice of a solution.

What happened to McClain should never happen to anyone in a civilized society. We all can agree on that -- even if it turns out that McClain was in the neighborhood to buy crack, not just innocently driving through.

But there the opinions diverge. What can we do about it? How can we prevent it from happening again? What is wrong with society/Milwaukee/young people/the inner city/black people/poor people/ or noun of your choice?

Here is a sampling of opinion on the subject:

Owen Robinson calls the attackers animals. (Eric Von of WMCS talk radio says animals is too good a word. He calls them savages.) Writes Robinson:

Liberals are already talking about “root causes.” The root causes are always the same: poverty; hopelessness; not enough government programs; racism; etc...

In truth, the Left is correct to look at root causes. The perpetrators of this beating should be rounded up and severely punished, but that will do little to change the putrid culture that grows such rotten people.

Where the Left goes wrong is in identifying the solutions...

The first step is security of people... Milwaukee must put a strong police presence into the worst neighborhoods and show by responding quickly and forcefully to criminal activity that the good people can trust them. When people feel safe, they will venture into the neighborhood instead of searching for a way out of it.

The second step is security of property... When the property is secure, people will begin to invest in the inner city. They will build businesses, create jobs, and invest in their neighborhoods. This will help build a foundation for hope.

The third step is education. Milwaukee must improve the public schools through rigorous reform and strict accountability. It’s about the kids – not the teachers. It would be a leap in the right direction to immediately lift the cap on school vouchers so that kids can escape the worst schools. Educated people are more likely to get good jobs and abstain from criminal activity. [Xoff Note: Milwaukee public schools need improvement, but they are not a root cause of the problem. Thousands of students who actually attend school and study are successsful, and they are enrolled in the same school system as the savages. Quoting Eric Von again, MPS is not the problem. I agree.]

The fourth step is liberty. The culture in the inner city that tells kids that they are trapped and oppressed must be eradicated. Teaching young black kids that they are acting “white” and betraying their heritage if they are educated, articulate, and law abiding is destroying more young lives than Jim Crow ever did. This oppressive culture stifles kids’ potential and quashes their dreams. We must create a culture where kids feel free to succeed and reach their infinite promise. [Xoff asks: Easy to say. How do we do that?]

Scott Stearns correctly observes that having more laws in place would not have prevented McClain beating:

Such ideas are being driven by the politics of the moment, and may well be worthwhile. However, would they have prevented this terrible incident from taking place? I don't think so. Mobs like this one aren't driven by rational thought when they commit such heinous acts. The juveniles and young adults that did this obviously lack discipline and have little to no ability to resolve conflict outside of resorting to violence.

Passing stiffer penalties is all fine and good for dealing with the crime after it has occurred. What people need to spend more time on is how we prevent more people from becoming so very cold and cruel like these kids have. That is much tougher, and not as simple as passing a bill and signing it into law.

Brian Fraley talks tough for now, promises more analysis later:

For this particular case, it's important to also focus on the criminal justice system running its course. It appears the police are rounding up the thugs that beat this man. Now we wait to see if the DA and the judges will be firm or wimpy. I will be blogging a lot about Milwaukee's real problems and real attributes over the next few months. And I will delve into the 'root causes' argument as well. But as McClain lays in a Wauwatosa hospital recovering from his beating, I'm spending a few days rooting for the cops and the prosecutors.

Jessica McBride says:

It's about time that we start talking about the realities of homicide ... and violent crime in Milwaukee. Violent crime is concentrated in a small geographic area and it involves a core group of young men who make up the urban underclass in our community. Young African-American males are disproportionately victims and suspects. But too often we write and talk about the homicide problem through racially and gender neutral terms... We are losing a generation of young black males in Milwaukee (in 2002, for example, the homicide rate for black males was 40 times that for white males and the homicide rate for black males was off the charts compared to any other group). People are afraid to focus on this because they don't want to be called racist...

I am not a person who thinks systemic issues and historical problems don't play a role in crime. Of course they do. I believe the southern sharecropping culture mirrored social patterns that exist today in the modern ghetto. I believe the decline of the manufacturing base in Milwaukee played a role. I believe the crack epidemic did as well.

I also believe that, although we can, and should, try to identify the reasons that can lead to a criminal environment (and identify how some segments of society lost the rigid rules needed for order on Golding's island), we can not excuse the individual from the choices they've made. Let me be very clear about that. There comes a point where incarceration is the only option. You can't rehabiliate a Laron Ball. It's too late.

[Xoff notes: Laron Ball, a young man with a long rap sheet, was shot and killed when he went for a deputy's gun in a courtroom after being convicted of homicide. Some of his relatives apparently were involved in the McClain beating. The real question is at what point to give up on a young man, and what to do to prevent the next generation of Laron Balls. Are the 14-year-olds involved in the McClain beating beyond redemption? Perhaps.]

I am sad to report that James Widgerson, who commutes into Milwaukee for his job, is giving up on the city and predicts its doom:

Eventually, some businesses will die off. More people will flee to the suburbs. Milwaukee's mayor, whether it's Barrett or a successor, will get to preside over a city out of control. If they try to restore order using the police, they'll just be called racists (or Uncle Toms, depending on the politician's skin color). Michael McGee will eventually win and the Milwaukee Public Schools will be an even worse Hell filled with punks wearing "no snitching" t-shirts the kids won't be able to read.

It will be a liberal paradise, because the official policy of the city will be to fear the policeman with a gun more than the criminal with gun. (It's already official policy to fear the law abiding citizen with a gun more than the criminal.) Soon the police will be little more than parking enforcers and tavern ordnance enforcers, shaking down the law abiding for more cash for a dying city's coffers.

Eventually my job will move out to the suburbs, as well as all the jobs my company generates. Milwaukee will be left as a burned-out shell of a city, murdered in cold blood. But the blue bracelets they handed out to stop the violence will be a nice find in the junk heaps.

When my children are older I'll tell them what it was like to grow up in Milwaukee, even as my parents tell me about their first apartment on Atkinson. My children will think I was lucky to escape alive. Perhaps I was.

Renee Crawford admits to being "a bleeding heart liberal," but writes about what she saw in the summer of 2004 when the black community had more hope than despair:

I will continue to fight for the glimpse I saw that summer. A glimpse of what could be if anyone cared enough to make it be. For the friends and colleagues I have so much respect for in my community. The hard working masses who just need someone to give them a chance.

Nothing gets me more angry than when I see someone like Belling dismiss the entire community as a lost cause not worthy of his consideration. Or when someone calls my people lazy or unwilling to change their lives. Belling's racism and hatred disgust me.

I spent an entire summer going door to door throughout the entire black community of Milwaukee. Never once was I afraid. Never once did I feel threatened. They had hope that summer and hope trumps all. Mine eyes have seen the glory...

Oh, and the city's daily paper? a predictable editorial.

Hate to say I told you so ...

Actually, I love to say it, and since this is probably both the first and last time I will ever have any Waukesha County news first, there will be no false modesty. (Is there ever?)

County Exec Dan Vrakas announced today that Allison Bussler, Dan Finley's old chief of staff, is Vrakas' new chief of staff. She replaces Jenifer Finley.

You read it here on Dec. 15.

Because the story overlapped New Year's, I'm just wondering: Will this be eligible for the 2005 or 2006 Pulitzer?

Walker says Green should return tainted money from Tom DeLay

The gloves may be coming off in GOP governor's race

In a major shift in the Republican governor's primary campaign, Milwaukee County Exec Scott Walker says that his opponent, Rep. Mark Green, should give back about $30,000 he has received from Rep. Tom DeLay's political action committee.

"I think (he) should give the whole thing back," Walker said in an interview with the editorial board of The Capital Times on Monday. "Why would you keep any of it?"

For months, Wisconsin Democrats have been calling on Green and Rep. Paul Ryan, who took about $25,000 in DeLay contributions, to give back the money.

They have responded with a changing list of defenses, excuses and explanations about why they can't or won't give it back, ranging from "we spent it all" to "that would be illegal" to "the dog ate it."

None of those excuses are valid. A number of other GOP Congressmen have found creative ways to either return the money to DeLay's political action committee or find another way to dispose of it, such as contributing it to charity.

Republican Lobbyist Jack Abramoff's guilty plea to three felonies today will increase the pressure, because DeLay took huge amounts of cash from Abramoff, and DeLay, in turn, distributed money to Republican colleagues -- like Green and Ryan -- and GOP candidates. Green's campaign manager is among those who have taken freebies from Abramoff, but Green has pretended he doesn't know that, or doesn't want to know.

Green and Walker have been polite to one another so far, adhering to the Republican 11th Commandment, "Thou shalt not speak ill of another Republican."

Those days would appear to be over.

Perhaps even the Wisconsin Democracy Campaign will decide it should ask Green and Ryan to return the money, something it has not done so far.

Say it isn't so; Barbie goes bisexual

First it was SpongeBob SquarePants and the Teletubbies. Then it was American Girl.

Now Barbie, of all people, has joined the sexual revolution and is advocating bisexuality.

What's next? Snoopy comes out for bestiality?

Quote, unquote

"I'm actually running for office, not against him. It just happens he's in office right now."

-- Jessica Reyes-Martinez, who filed for the Texas legislative seat now held by her estranged husband.

Right wing tries to frame anti-gay proposal as 'Defense of Marriage'

The proposed constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage in Wisconsin will soon have a new name, unless opponents of the amendment speak up soon -- and loudly.

Until now, the proposal, headed for a statewide referendum in November, has been referred to as the gay marriage amendment in news stories.

But in a new WisPolitics interview, Julaine Appling, executive director of the Family Research Institute of Wisconsin, calls it the "Defense of Marriage" amendment. And WisPolitics plays right along. Another supporter of the amendment picked up the same language today.

It's a technique the right wing has perfected and one the left hasn't learned.

When the Bush administration wants to ease restrictions on air pollution, they call it the "Clear Skies" initiative.

When industry and their Republican allies want to take away the right of seriously damaged lead poisoning victims to sue the companies who made the poison, they call their bill the Job Protection Act.

The Defense of Marriage language isn't something Appling just dreamed up.

The Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) was passed by Congress and signed into law in 1996. It, like the proposed constitutional amendment in Wisconsin, was an unnecessary, over-the-top, slap in the face to the nation's gay population.

The law doesn't bar states from legalizing gay marriages, but says that one state isn't obligated to recognize a gay marriage performed in another state. At the time, a legal case in Hawaii had the right wing alarmed and afraid that gay marriage might be legalized there.

Shame for passage is bipartisan. It passed overwhelmingly -- even Tom Barrett, then a Congressman, voted for it -- and President Clinton signed it into law.

Gay rights advocates, who are organizing a strong campaign against the amendment, should make certain they are not outfoxed by this stolen language.

"Framing" is the term that's now in vogue for defining issues. If opponents of the amendment allow the right to define it as a "Defense of Marriage Amendment," it will make the already uphill battle against passage even more difficult.

Opponents need to call the amendment what it really is -- an unnecessary, discriminatory amendment intended to capitalize on anti-gay sentiment and fuel it for political purposes in a mean-spirited way.

That's a little long for sloganeering. It needs a short name.

The Discrimination Against Gays Amendment (DAGA)?

Or maybe the Preserve the Republican Majority Amendment (PRMA?)

Actually, there is no need for another name besides the gay marriage amendment, if the news media are smart enough not to be duped by whatever name the right wing attaches to this piece of hateful political opportunism. The generic description should suffice.

But opponents shouldn't count on that. The news media are easily led by the nose. If the right wing says this is the "Save the Children" amendment, they'll probably call it that.

Opponents should speak up forcefully to let the media and the public know that the "defense of marriage" is not what this amendment is about.

For example, here's one exchange in the WisPol interview with Greg Bump:

Bump: Do you think this amendment - at all - would infringe on the civil rights of gays?

Appling: Well, first of all, they have the same civil rights as I have, same civil rights as you have, the same civil rights that every other citizen of the state has. The right for them to marry has never been there, because they're choosing not to meet the criteria of the law because our law says, not in clear enough terms but by current interpretation, you need to be of the opposite sex and the right age and all of that. So, they haven't, just like I as a single person, don't have the hospital visitation rights, the inheritance law rights, all those benefits. I don't have those any more than they do as a same-sex couple. So, it's hard for me to understand how we are denying rights that they never had. It seems to me that to deny someone (rights) you have to have had them at some point. But there are legal means very readily available for people to get the benefits that they think they want with inheritance and hospital visitation and real estate transactions and all of that.

A little something for everyone to start the year

Cleaning out the inbox to start the new year fresh:

What's wrong with this picture? The Waukesha engineering firm that won a $109,100 regional water study consulting contract from the Southeastern Wisconsin Regional Planning Commission also boasts the Waukesha Water Utility as a client, Story Hill's Gretchen Schuldt reports on Hood Happenings. Waukesha, of course, has a water shortage and is looking at Lake Michigan as a way to quench its growing thirst. Can you say conflict of interest?

Walker's deja vu campaign. Scott Walker announces his agenda for his first 100 days as governor (dream on), but Playground Politics says it's the 2001 Republican legislative agenda. It should sound familiar to Walker, because he was in the Assembly in 2001.

Voter fraud? It's no secret that Scott Newcomer, GOP nominee for Dan Vrakas' old Assembly seat in Waukesha County, voted from an address where he doesn't live. He says that was legal, but the Waukesha County Democratic Party now has filed a formal complaint with DA Paul Bucher. Because Bucher and Newcomer share a political consultant, the Dems are asking Bucher to recuse himself from the case.

Feingold for President? "He tests the waters, but will he jump in?" Katherine Skiba asked in a Sunday Journal Sentinel story on Russ Feingold. "Yes, Feingold jumps," says Brian Christianson of Free Will.

Green wins governor's poll. No, not GOP hopeful Rep. Mark Green, but Green Party candidate Tony Palmeri, who wins a complicated and convoluted online survey on Babblemur, a blog which exists in a different dimension.

Is Wal-Mart Good For America? That's the question posed in a "Frontline" documentary, to be rebroadcast on public television tonight. Check listings, but it is 8 p.m. on most stations.

Replace the Bradley Center? Why? That's what Joel McNally wants to know in his op ed column in the Capital Times. Says McNally: It seems awfully wasteful to litter the downtown landscape with disposable, multimillion-dollar sports palaces just to junk them every 20 years. It's hard for me to argue with that, although Ulice Payne certainly will.

Scooter,pack your toothbrush. Former State Rep. Bonnie Ladwig cops a plea in the caucus scandal, and agrees to cooperate in cases against two former Republican colleagues, Scott Jensen and Steve Foti, and Sherry Schultz, their former staffer whose full-time taxpayer-paid job was to raise money for Republicans. Jensen is the only one charged in the scandal who is still in office, but a felony conviction would end that.

R-rated commentary. Or PG-13, anyway. Renee Crawford offers an impeachment poster with this disclaimer: "I know this is a bit crude, but it's the hottest poster, t-shirt, bumper sticker on the web right now and I just couldn't stop myself from sharing." Enjoy.

Look for the silver lining. Laurel Walker, Waukesha columnist for the Journal Sentinel, says Dan Vrakas and Jenifer Finley each deserve a little credit for doing something right in their messy split in the county exec's office -- Vrakas for getting rid of her and Finley for giving back some of her salary. Walker's column.

As the year turns ... Bush keeps on lying

Meet the New Year, same as the Old Year.

This from Matt Rothschild, editor of The Progessive:

Bush Starts Off Year Lying about NSA

Nice to see Bush starting off the new year the way he ended the old one, lying about the NSA spying program.

“I was elected to protect the American people from harm,” he told wounded soldiers at the Brooke Army Medical Center, according to The New York Times Actually, he was also elected to uphold the Constitution and to see that the laws are faithfully executed, but that’s fine print to Bush.

Bush continued: “And on September 11, 2001, our nation was attacked.”

So obviously he didn’t do a good job of protecting the American people from harm.

Back to Bush: “And after that day, I vowed to use all the resources at my disposal, within the law, to protect the American people.”

It’s that little clause, “within the law,” that’s at issue here.

And we all should have claustrophobia when Bush invokes that clause, because he thinks that just because he says something is within the law that makes it so.

Here he echoes Nixon, who said, “When the President does it that means that it is not illegal."

Spying without a warrant in the United States is clearly illegal, no matter how many times Bush claims it is “within the law.”

Bush couldn’t even explain the NSA program properly without hedging the truth about it, saying more than once, according to the New York Times, that the eavesdropping was “limited to calls from outside the United States to calls within the United States.”

Afterward, his aides had to come to his rescue and say that he misspoke, that the NSA in fact is also eavesdropping on calls coming from the United States.

The guy is clueless.

Clueless about his own spying program.

And clueless about our Constitution.

At his press conference in December, Bush called the NSA leak a “shameful act.”

What, pray tell, does he call violating the Constitution and acting as though he is above the law?

I suppose he calls that leadership.

But it is a much more shameful act than leaking to the press the fact that the President is violating the law.

Now Attorney General Alberto Gonzales is investigating the leaker, and what a joke that is.

Gonzales has a double conflict of interest.

First, he’s an old crony of Bush’s.

Second, and more importantly, when he was White House Counsel, he was one of the architects of the NSA spying program. So much so that he and Chief of Staff Andrew Card had “to make an emergency hospital visit to John Ashcroft, then the Attorney General, to try to persuade him to give his authorization” to continued NSA spying after Ashcroft’s deputy, James B. Comey, refused to go along, the Times reports.

Rather than investigating the leaker, Gonzales should be investigating himself—and Bush.

---

Paul Soglin has some pungent observations on the topic, here and here.