Paul Soglin: Waxing America

Wisconsin Supreme Court Candidate Annette Ziegler: Conflict of Interest in Wal-Mart Case?

Cory Liebman has an interesting post regarding Wisconsin Supreme Court candidate Washington County Judge Annette Ziegler's handling of a case involving a Wal-Mart fighting to locate in Hartford:

...I have to wonder how Hartford CRG (Citizens for Responsible Govenment) would react if they knew that the judge to whom they are appealing is a big time investor in Wal-Mart.  I also have to wonder why Annette Ziegler would have accepted such a case despite the possible conflict of interests. 

According to her most recent statement of economic interests filing, Annette Ziegler owns as much as $50,000 of stock in Wal-Mart Stores Inc.  The same source shows that she also owns as much as $50,000 in Wal-Mart of Mexico.  Should she really be hearing a case in which she may have such a big personal financial interest?  Did she ever bother to disclose this information to anyone prior to accepting this case?  If not, what is her reasoning and why is this appropriate? One can't help but wonder if it does not present a conflict of interests.

...Hartford CRG and Wal-Mart should not be the only ones to watch Ziegler's eventual ruling, so should every Wisconsinite.  It actually may provide a few answers as to how she might treat her potential conflicts in the future.    With the kinds of investments in big corporations that she has, this Wal-Mart case will likely not be the last.

- Barry Orton

Watching Governor Doyle's "State of the State" Address

Thoughts and observations about Governor Jim Doyle's State of the State Address.

• Fiscal Responsibility: The Governor is correct regarding an improved fiscal operation for Wisconsin, but at some point we need to raise taxes, perhaps the sales tax for education.
• Health care and health insurance reform is admirable. The BadgerCare fixes and enhancements are a solid first step.
• Democrats jump up and applaud too much.
• The Tobacco Tax is a solid idea; enacting a ban on tobacco in all public buildings and workplaces is a tough but achievable goal. Sign me up.
• Republicans are too stone faced and somber. They lost some elections last fall, but the world is not coming to an end.
• "Smaller classes, higher standards, good nutrition, a strong start in life..." The Governor took the first step acknowledging that Wisconsin has a crisis in education and health. The real tests will be passage and then effective implementation.
• The commitments to job development and the UW system may be the real payoffs in combating poverty and building the state's economy. Pulling it off is another matter.
• Republicans are loosening up. Democrats are still jumping up too much.
• Ray Hubbard. The highlight of the evening was the moment when the Hubbards whispered to one another, kissed and then gave the most genuine heart-warming smiles imaginable. I thank them for that as much as Ray's service to his country in time of war.
• Creation of the Department of Children and Families. Finally a voice for Wisconsin's future within government. Up until now it was hit or miss.  This, along with the next item, are the two most important items in the speech.
• Milwaukee Package. "Unless our entire state joins together to help meet those challenges, our entire state will suffer... From supporting kids, to cracking down on violent crime, to creating jobs and investing in infrastructure, I’ll ask you to join me in making an investment in Milwaukee for the sake of all Wisconsin." Nothing more needs to be said.  Now is the time for effective action.
• A few Republican's faces still look like they should be chiseled in a granite mountain.
• Campaign Finance Reform. Everyone stood and applauded.  Good luck.

The substance and context of the speech hit upon critical areas for this state: education, health, and ultimately, the economic future of Wisconsin. Doyle took an important first step in establishing appropriate priorities.  The real test will come in adoption and then implementation. My skepticism lies in the ability to do this without a tax increase, which is a very appropriate investment.

Endorsements: All Over the Map Philosophically

Your endorsements seem to be all over the map philosophically. Considering the issues you identify as important, I just can't see any consistency within this group. I'd be curious to hear more about why you have chosen each of these individuals.

Just curious, --Lisa

Good question from Lisa. During my first tenure as mayor I noticed that a lot of federal programs were poorly administered. The Nixon-Ford administrations did not like the programs, and if they could not kill them in Congress, they made sure they failed dismally from lack of proper supervision. Jimmy Carter was a noble and honorable president. None of that mattered much because he did not know how to run the federal government, and that gave us Ronald Reagan.

In the 1990's, the largest American cities fell into Republican hands. New York, for example, had been led by the exceptionally caring David Dinkins. I admired Dinkins on a personal level; his political values were beyond reproach. However, he did not have a handle on administration, despite having some the best advisers available. What followed was eight years of Rudy Giuliani. The same thing happened in Los Angeles, a Democrat, Ed Bradley failed to manage and the city fell to the conservatives doing progressive programs no good.

For much of my life, I supported the most progressive candidate in all elections. But, some years ago I realized that the most progressive candidate was not always the best candidate. A progressive who paid little attention to management and administration could be a disaster, particularly in the area of enterprise and entitlement programs.

I learned the importance of why we have three levels of government, local, state and federal, and saw that selecting the appropriate level of government to advance certain programs was as important  as the program itself.

That is one of the reasons I do not always support the most progressive candidate.

How The Press Handles Crazy Candidates

Dennis York has a rather thoughtful post questioning how the press covers the genuinely crazy candidates for public office with kid gloves, using current Madison mayoral ballot-occupier Will Sandstrom as his example.

...I have found an issue that has caused me to sympathize with local media. That is; how do you cover candidates that are completely crazy?

I'm not talking "crazy" in the sense of "I disagree with every word they say," kind of crazy. Take the mayoral race here in Madison as a prime example. Will Sandstrom is once again running for mayor, and he is completely nuts. Seriously - somewhere there is an empty bed at a mental health facility crying out for him. During mayoral candidate debates, he is prone to long diatribes about his mother contracting gangrene, his father cooking moonshine, kids calling him "China Boy" growing up, his time dodging bullets in a Russian prison, and how he coined the term "Fish and Wildlife."

...Here's the audio from a 2003 debate where Sandstrom goes on a legendary diatribe that is somehow supposed to explain why he should be mayor of Madison, Wisconsin. The question was about garbage collection or something, and he went on for two minutes about being embarrassed to walk around with his mother because she had gangrene. When he finished, the look on Paul Soglin's face was classic, as he actually had to try to answer the question without laughing.

Audio over at York's blog.

- Barry Orton

Schools, Poverty, Money and Wisconsin I

Given the significant growth in the student population living in poverty and significant budget cuts imposed by the state of Wisconsin, it is nothing short of a miracle that the Madison Public Schools demonstrate success.

The Capital Times article on Friday, January 14, 2007 brings home a critical point about educating our children. Besides, a quality teaching faculty, and money, which translates into low student to teacher rations, parental involvement is critical.  One place where a principal can make a difference is in motivating teachers and parents to work closely together. Mendota's principal is Sandy Gunderson.

Successful Students Successful School: High Poverty Mendota Elementary Beats The Odds

...Today Mendota's book room is a richly stocked and perfectly organized resource where teachers can easily access appropriate materials to supplement lessons and curriculum for students of widely varying skills and abilities.

Gunderson has promoted an integrated curriculum and strong sense of teamwork among the teachers at Mendota, a system that is geared toward making sure every child's needs are well known to staff members, and not just teachers.

The halls and classrooms are bright with student art and immaculately clean; the students greet custodians Ed Carberry and Dan Zimmerman enthusiastically by name. In turn, they are also greeted by name.

Teachers, meanwhile, systematically share information about how each student is doing and ideas for improvement....

...At recent parent-teacher conferences, more than 50 percent of the classes had 100 percent participation, and all classes had better than 80 percent participation...

The introductory paragraphs to the Wisconsin State Journal story on Sunday say it all.

Financial crunch takes its toll; lauded program loses ground

Citing a lack of money, increasing numbers of Wisconsin schools are pulling out of a state program credited with boosting the scores of vulnerable poor and minority students.

The number of schools in the Student Achievement Guarantee in Education (SAGE) program has fallen 17 percent in six years, and many of the 480 remaining SAGE schools are struggling to retain the program because state payments have failed to keep pace with rising costs, a Wisconsin State Journal review shows.

The SAGE pullouts across the state come even as poverty rates are rising among the elementary students whom experts say can benefit most from the program's small classes. The cuts are also among the first indications that class size is being sacrificed to balance budgets, the State Journal found in an analysis of the effects of the state's school funding system....

It is time to take this issue to Governor Doyle and the State Legislature. School boards, educators, city officials, and of course, the citizens must make it clear that more money is needed for all of our state's public schools. This is not a time for silence or weakness, or apologies to friends in higher public office. For those looking for a solution, we can start with a 1/4 percent local school district sales tax.  And while we are at it, there can be 1/4 percent for the cities as well.

Dan Sebald on Madison City Issues

Dan Sebald, a frequent commentator added the following to one of my posts. I believe it should be read as a post. (Dan, I edited the typo.)  My comments are below. Paul

Well, toss out the trolley issue.  The media has covered this issue far more than the attention it has gotten at common council.  It seems few alders have made up their minds on that one.  District 6, Marsha Rummel, has made her position clear on opposing trolleys, but I hope that isn't a significant reason for endorsing a candidate.  If trolleys looked like an almost certainty and Paul were opposed, then maybe that would bump priority up a bit.  But I don't see trolleys a near certainty at this stage; more like a strawman issue.

Combating poverty and working with schools are a significant CC oversight in the past couple years.  The Sunday WSJ lead story is more evidence how Madison's educational system has been clobbered.  (I wasn't real pleased with the elementary school referendum process either... note Paul's comment about educational opportunities and the fact the new school is far west side.)  The city council and mayor should be raising Cain with state legislature and Doyle on that one.  Unfortunately, few if any of the candidates Paul endorsed seem to be outspoken on that issue.  It's simply that for some strange reason there are no politicos with that priority.

Public transportation?  If the outpouring of community support for Metro at CC meetings hasn't convinced politicians, don't know what will.  At least one and maybe more existing alders that Paul didn't endorse have been quite friendly to Metro and the non-automobile community.

Don't know what to say on the issue of poverty.  Minimum wage increase?  We've seen how vehemently opposed business is to that idea.  Alder Bruer is probably the best alder when it comes to standing up for the lower economic class.  I don't think the city council is silent or afraid to address this.  (The African American community did show up for public testimony at city council on the Metro issue.  In fact, I think their testimony was so influential along with that of a former alder that it may have re-instated a route, if I'm remembering correctly.)  Paul seems to have presented the problem as well as anyone, at least on the micro scale.  On the macro scale, some alders are very pro city and for mixed use, which I contend is also healthy for lower income communities.

I'd argue that there is simply too much going on with all the non-smart growth in Madison.  Sprawl draws a lot of capital out of the city and someone will end up losing.  (The majority of people driving into the city in the morning and out at the end of the day are taking pay checks along with them.)  Unfortunately, as much as I dislike it, least represented social classes lose out.  It's difficult to discuss job training when big issues like water quality and transmission lines and other issues brought on by growth require attention.

This is probably some of the best pool of candidates as there have been.  Note that many of them have been very politically active.  One problem is that District 10 includes Monroe/Dudgeon, a very politically active group which has the most viable candidates, yet they are so isolated from other parts of the district.  What I mean by viable is that the person is familiar with political process, knows when to show up for public testimony, so on.  So, in response to On Wisconsin's comment, the question isn't minorities being able to represent themselves, the problem is getting them involved in the political process.

Maybe the city should have a liaison program to get people from each neighborhood within a district more involved in the process.  Or, now that I think of it, another approach would be to ask the mayor to appoint more people from certain districts onto various commissions.  That would be a way of getting interaction with under-represented neighborhoods, i.e., the commission member can talk with neighborhood friends about issues, so on.

Paul's comments:

• While the Common Council (CC) did not spend a lot of time on trolleys, it consumed an inordinate amount of staff time and resources. The investment, to date, is considerable. Too bad the resources were not devoted to combating poverty.
• Dan is so accurate regarding the CC raising hell with the state (and the county, I might add).
• My own belief is that the reduction of poverty will come when an agenda is devised that goes beyond housing. We have done such a good job in dispersing poverty in Madison, we no longer have a school with less than 30% poverty. This year, the kindergarten class is over 50% indigent.  The solution is in job training and development, quality child care, and public transportation.
• Political process:  We can adopt the Madison model (as in James), and assure everyone their due process. But we need the substance as well as the form.
• Committee appointments: Good point. Not  many of those children in kindergarten living below the poverty line have parents serving on city committees.

Some More Aldermanic Endorsements: Madison

There are three threshold issues as the election season opens. These are issues that do not necessarily measure a candidate from left to right, but establish a basis for my support. The candidates I did not endorse fall in a range from unacceptable to excellent.

I imagine this discussion will go on through the April election and beyond.

Trolley: On December 22, 2006, Waxing America said: Trolley Follies: Let The Voters Decide

The Question: "Will you vote to put a referendum on the ballot for the bond issue needed to fund the eight miles of Madison light rail?" In other words, let the public decide on the largest financial commitment in the history of the city.

Three weeks later, Stuart Levitan put the question to the mayor and got a squishy response. During January most of the aldermanic candidates and two of the principal mayoral challengers made it clear they supported a referendum.  Finally, on Thursday of this week, the incumbent mayor, Dave Cieslewicz, indicated support for a referendum.

Let's move on to important issues.

Poverty: The problems of families living below the poverty level is paramount.

• Mayors and Public Schools: Another Collision  ...For over thirty years I said, "There is nothing a mayor can do that has the impact on a city that is as great as the public school system."
• New York Times Plays New Years Joke on Madison ...A lot of attention to the problems of a sociable downtown, and not much attention to the issues of crime, poverty, and race.
• Madison's Allied Drive Needs Far More Than Improved Housing and Social Services ...Yes, and badly needed is a plan that works off of the resources of the community and the skills of the residents. If the skill set needs enhancement, then the requisite job training is the highest priority. Once again the city of Madison, particularly the progressive left (with the exception of Golden and a few others), focuses solely on housing, and ignores programs designed to ensure economic stability

In judging a candidate's commitment to battling poverty, I look not at the rhetoric but at the effectiveness of their position:

• There must be be acknowledgment that poverty is a major problem in Madison and that Blacks, Hispanics, and Asians are not receiving equal benefit of Madison's educational and employment opportunities.
• There must be a commitment to involving the private sector in job development and training.
• A claim to be the candidate 'furthest' to the left does not cut it.
• A commitment to support low income housing is not sufficient.

Administration: While the mayor is the chief executive officer, every elected official is obligated to support clean government and efficient administration. That does not invite a meat-ax or employee-bashing approach to management. It represents a commitment to fair and equal hiring and personnel practices, quality management and open government. Time management is also an issue-the allocation of staff resources to support trolleys as opposed to combatting poverty, working with the schools, confronting discrimination, making sure there is public transportation for folks without cars.

Old and new endorsements:

District 1: Aaron Backer

District 5: Troy Thiel

Distrct 6: Marsha Rummel

District 8: Eli Judge

District 9: Paul Skidmore

District 10: Br1an Solomon

District 11: Chris Schmidt

District 12: Mike Basford

District 13: Julia Kerr

District 15: Vicky Selkowe (sorry for the previous spelling error)

District 18: Michael Shumacher

District 20: Gary Poulson

More to follow.

Mel Laird Rewrites History for Bush

Melvin Laird, the architect of Nixon's failed  "Vietnamization" of the war in Southeast Asia, wrote last week in the Washington Post:

The brewing fight in Congress..is an ominous reminder of 1975, when Congress cut off funding for the Vietnam War three years after our combat troops had left. With the assistance we promised South Vietnam in the 1972 Paris Accords -- U.S. equipment, replacement parts and ammunition -- it had won every major battle since we left. But Congress lost the will to keep our promise and killed the appropriation. The result was a bloodbath.

This from the man, who as Secretary of Defense lied to Congress from 1969 until 1973, arranged for the bombing of Cambodia that set up the Khmer Rouge and Pol Pot, who then proceeded to murder millions in the Killing Fields. That was a bloodbath.

Here is what happened under the Nixon-Laird Vietnamization of the war:

• January 23, 1973 - President Nixon announces that an agreement has been reached which will "end the war and bring peace with honor."


• March 29, 1973 - The last remaining American troops withdraw from Vietnam as President Nixon declares "the day we have all worked and prayed for has finally come."

• America's longest war, and its first defeat, thus concludes. During 15 years of military involvement over 2 million Americans served in Vietnam with 500,000 seeing actual combat. 47,244 were killed in action, including 8000 airmen. There were 10,446 non-combat deaths. 153,329 were seriously wounded, including 10,000 amputees. Over 2,400 American POWs/MIAs were unaccounted for as of 1973.

The following year the two foes, North and South Vietnam, engaged in no significant battles. While Laird is swift to note that Congress cut off funding for American involvement in the war in 1974, he still fails to recognize that Vietnamization was simply a cover for our retreat.

As Scott Laderman notes in Iraq, Vietnam, and the Bloodbath Theory:

The Bush administration currently offers two serious public justifications for continuing the war in Iraq. Both have antecedents, though imprecise, in the Vietnam war. The first is the fight against anti-American terrorism. The second, which is my focus in this essay, is what is described as an effort to prevent full-fledged civil war and the chaos and Iraqi bloodshed this would produce. For this the Vietnam war offers possible lessons...

...The bloodbath theory proved beneficial to the Nixon administration because, at a time when a growing number of Americans viewed the Vietnam war as immoral, it restored a moral cast to the American intervention...

Today's Demonstrations Honor the Troops

The valor and the heroism of our soldiers does not emanate from the purpose of war. It emanates from their own personal valor and conduct on the battlefield. Throughout history, presidents, emperors, and kings told the soldiers and their families that their lives were tied to the nobility of a war.

Presidents Johnson, Nixon, and Bush stood in a straight line with warmongers over the centuries who claimed that if the citizenry did not support the purpose of the war, they did not honor the soldiers. To claim that opposition to a war is tantamount to disloyalty is to misuse and exploit those very soldiers.

This clever manipulation preys on both the families of the soldiers as well as the opponents of the war because it says to the families, 'The opponents of the war say your loved one's life was wasted,' and if there is something worse than death of a loved one, it is that the loved one died in vain.

Honorable soldiers are committed to protecting their nation and their comrades on the battlefield. The noble performance of the combatant, defense of comrades, compassion for civilians, and devotion to freedom and justice is how we measure their lives.

Those demonstrating today against the continued occupation of Iraq honor our military and our country far more than those who would continue a deception and seek impossible outcomes that can be labeled a "victory."

Some Aldermanic Endorsements: City of Madison

District 5: Troy Thiel

District 8: Eli Judge

District 9: Paul Skidmore

District 11: Chris Schmidt

District 15: Vicki Selkowe

District 18: Michael Shumacher