Paul Soglin: Waxing America

Citizens United Case Creates A Monster

Zina Saunders, my favorite political illustrator, has done an animation of the Supreme Court's decision in the Citizens United case creating life from corporate political spending power. It's over here at the Mother Jones site. Worth a click.

Saunders' newest cover for Mother Jones with Sarah Palin as the modern version of the "Attack of the 50-foot Woman" is here at Zina's new blog and also worth a click, and her book, "Overlooked New York,"  a collection of portraits and interviews with New Yorkers about their joyous obsessions, is the bomb. I especially enjoyed the street performers, rooftop pigeon guys, and the Puerto Rico Schwinn Club.

Her campaign 2008 book, "The Party's Over," is also terrific.  Here's her website, with the many Palins, Obamas, and others that her amazing art has produced.

- Barry Orton

Russ Feingold Needs Help To Fight Fortunate Son-In-Law's Family Fortune

The method: a "Cheddarbomb." That's a Net-based "moneybomb," Wisconsin-style.

Here's a video with quasi-famous people for your amusement:

Russ Feingold:

Ron Johnson and the extremists want to win this election bad. They want to gut Social Security, roll back health care, and hand over our economy to the Wall Street profiteers who got us into this mess in the first place.

I'm extremely proud of my record and I hope you are too. I've spent the last 18 years protecting and creating jobs in Wisconsin, creating legislation to help our veterans, and helping small businesses grow. And do you know something else I'm proud of? Every election, I've relied on grassroots support - not corporate special interest support - to win in Wisconsin. This race is no different.

This election is in your hands. Don't let Ron Johnson and corporate special interests in Washington take it away.

You know what to do.

- Barry Orton

T. Wall on Ron Johnson: "Is This the Kind of Senator We Want?"

T. Wall still can't get enough off his chest about his failed race for the Republican nomination to challenge Russ Feingold. While almost nothing he posted here will endear him to the GOP, he saves his best shot for "Tea Party" and Republican Party of Wisconsin favorite son-in-law Ron Johnson, who Wall implies is not an "honest candidate."

...I realize that Johnson says he'd spend every penny of his fortune to win, but what that really means is the voters have a candidate who wants it too bad. That's someone who wants desperately to be Senator rather than doing it for the right reasons. Is this the kind of Senator we want?

Ouch.

- Barry Orton

Ron Johnson's Real Accomplishment: Marrying the Shrink-Wrap Princess

So it turns out that Senate wannabe Ron Johnson isn't really a self-made man who built a business; but you can't say he wasn't entrepreneurial - he married one of the daughters of a man who did.

When Johnson married Jane Curler, his University of Minnesota sweetheart, he became the son-in-law of Howard Curler, a member of the Wisconsin Meat Industry Hall of Fame for innovations in plastic packaging. Curler and a partner, Robert Woods, started a company, Curwood, that soon "revolutionized cheese packaging" with their shrink-wrap and made Curler and his family very very rich.

In addition to cheese and meat, Curwood and its Group Companies produce packaging films for coffee, candy, sweet and salted snacks, liquid products, personal care and medical products and the list continues to grow. Manufacturing plants and sales offices are now located across the United States and Canada and in Europe and South America.

In 1977, Howard Curler set up his son Patrick in a business, named PACUR (for PAtrick CURler), with Curwood as his only customer for many years. Ron Johnson joined the company in 1979 and worked for Patrick. Jud Lounsbury details how Johnson succeeded:

The reality is that Ron Johnson lucked-out by marrying Howard Curler's daughter, but that doesn't make him an entrepreneur and a business-dynamo, that makes him lucky.

And in Wisconsin you need more than luck to replace Russ Feingold.

- Barry Orton

Another Biased Poll - This Time from Scott Walker - He Cannot be Trusted

The political handlers for wasteful Milwaukee County Executive Scott Walker announced the details of a poll they bought this past week. According to the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, the poll, not surprisingly, shows that the badly flawed Walker defeats all Democratic candidates, Poll shows Walker, Barrett are leading gubernatorial candidates in their parties  :

The poll was done this week for Walker's campaign by the Tarrance Group, a national polling firm for Republican candidates. The firm interviewed 800 likely primary election voters Tuesday and Wednesday. The results had a margin of error of plus or minus 3.5 percentage points. (emphasis added)

For a poll to be meaningful, it must not only survey likely voters, but it must also have the proper demographics reflective of the voters who turn out on election day.

A poll of Waukesha County would produce different results from a poll of Milwaukee or Dane County. A poll that was of 98% white voters and excluded college students or Hispanics or Blacks, is of little value except to promote the candidacy of the beneficiary of such deceptive practices.

When it does come to time to cast real ballots the voters should not forget this deception from Scott Walker.

Given the reported outcomes of the various races, it is likely that the poll is heavily biased towards suburban Milwaukee County and surrounding collar counties.

 

Report: Doyle Not To Run? Trotting Out the Same Old Talking Points

The reports are only a few hours old, from politico.com - Gov. Jim Doyle won't seek re-election , and the Wisconsin State Journal says, Update: Report says Doyle won't seek a third term; Monday announcement expected . The pundits are already crafting the talking points:

Gov. Jim Doyle, the first Democrat in a generation to be re-elected to the state’s highest office, will not seek a third term... Republican Party of Wisconsin Chairman Reince Priebus...“Whether or not Governor Doyle runs again, Republicans will be well-positioned to take back the governor's office next year and get to work making Wisconsin great again,”...

Whether Governor Doyle runs for re-election or any of the numerous candidates offered up as possible Democratic or Republican contenders, they will all face the same challenge - convincing Wisconsin voters that they represent the best interests of the state.

We can expect to hear that Wisconsin:

• needs the smallest government possible with lower business taxes and less regulation

• needs the leadership of a fiscal conservative with compassion

• needs someone who is tough on crime and tougher on big spenders

• needs investment in education and creating jobs to strengthen our economy

• needs to look out for the working people of the state

• needs a governor who can right the state's economy

• needs a leader who can take the Packers to the Super Bowl.

I doubt that any of that is going to resonate beyond a small base that each candidate brings to the campaign.

Wisconsin, like the other forty-nine states, was the victim of a recession brought on by the war in Iraq, fueled by the greed generated when the financial services industry was deregulated by the Gingrich Republicans and Blue Dog Democrats, and by bi-partisan trade polices that destroyed America's economic base.

The problems were complicated by Wisconsin leaders failing to create a plentiful 'rainy-day fund' back in the prosperous 1990's

The next Governor, Jim Doyle, or any of the other contenders, should not occupy that office unless they have a plan based in reality that is presented frankly and honestly, and is a good faith commitment to invest in our future.

 

The Point of Caperton v Massy

Last week I made the point that the importance of the Caperton v Massy decision may be its indirect consequences.  To make the case meaningful, there must be disclosure as to who contributes to issue committees in judicial races. I wrote  The Real Problem Caperton v. Massey poses to WMC and the Right Wing Fronts. "...For the U.S. Supreme Court decision to have any meaning, there must be disclosure as to the source of the funds. WMC, All Children Matter, Americans for Prosperity, all will have to reveal the funders..."

Legal scholar, legal commentator, and law school professor (I am none of them) Rick Esenberg makes two critical suggestions in his recent post, What Caperton ought not to mean.

Esenberg argues that the facts are so unusual that this kind of occurrence is not likely to happen again. After all Massy poured millions into the West Virginia race dwarfing other contributions. No doubt the standards will vary.  A contribution of $25,000 will gain little notoriety in a $3 million race but it might be significant in a $100,000 campaign.

Esenberg also notes that "...In fact, one might just as well argue that there is no due process problem as long as the donors are anonymous. The judge has no idea where the money came from and, therefore, does not know who she is "indebted" to..." 

That, of course, is an enormous leap of faith. There are always efforts to build a firewall between the judicial candidate and the issue committee so they do not run afoul of the law. I am not about to accept the fact that the judicial candidate does not get information about who is raising money for the issue committee. The rest of us do not know, but I am not about to accept a denial from Ziegler or Gableman that they had no knowledge or suspicion as to where the millions of WMC Issue Committee funds were raised.

Raise and spend the money - but disclose.

Who Pays For WMC Watch

Someone with the initial 'B' wrote a comment to the post, The Real Problem Caperton v. Massey poses to WMC and the Right Wing Fronts:

I'd like to know an itemized list of where the money for WMC Watch is coming from. If you demand accountability from others, you have to have the integrity and honesty to list your donors as well. Pot calling the kettle black?

These guys just do not get it. But let us try one more time.

WMC and the other fronts like All Children Matter raise millions of dollars to be put into elections. The money goes to buy media -TV, radio and mailers. The money is spent to elect candidates by purchasing advertising in an election.

All the money Soglin Consulting LLC. and WMC Watch receives that is used to elect a candidate is revealed. The amount is zero. Nada. Zilch. Zip.

Soglin Consulting LLC does have income for doing research and monitoring WMC and the other right wing groups. That income is not spent on electioneering. None of that money is spent on electioneering.

A majority of Americans believe that the sources of money used to finance campaigns should be disclosed. No one is telling WMC it cannot participate in the electoral process within the law.

The only issue for WMC and the others, like Americans for Prosperity, is disclosure.

Reflections on the Election

Shirley Abrahamson's re-election to the Wisconsin Supreme Court was rewarding:

• She proved that you do not have to run from your core beliefs to win a state wide election to the court. Neither Louis Butler or Linda Clifford ran from their core beliefs but they both lost.
• Among the WMC, All Children Matter crowd, those who called for a full all-out negative television campaign against Abrahamson and successful Superintendent of Pubic Instruction candidate, Tony Evers, were vindicated. Clearly the anonymous bundled millions of dollars that were used by the issue committees in the fall 2008 and the previous two Supreme Court races in 2007 and 2008 was effective. The absence of these funds in this election was obvious. Expect WMC and its surrogates to come to the next gunfight well armed.
• Look for Randy Koschnick to return for another Supreme Court race. WMC and the Americans for Prosperity left him out on a limb, having encouraged him to run, promising money, and then sitting out the election. They will repay him if Dave Prosser does not seek reelection in 2011 with a full press, state wide effort.
• Shirley Abrahamson  proved that a non-partisan progressive candidate can put together a solid functioning campaign. Credit goes to  Heather Colburn, Rick Phelps, and the rest of the crew that managed and strategized the victory.

I was quite pleased that Bridget Maniaci won the Madison second aldermanic district race over incumbent Brenda Konkel. I was surprised, upon hearing the results, that I felt sad for Brenda in her defeat.

Other thoughts:

• Kathleen Falk, re-elected as Dane County Executive, proved she is mortal. While no longer the Teflon candidate, now measured by normal standards, her victory over Nancy Mistle was convincing and impressive.
• Biggest winner in Madison who was not running: Mayor Dave Cieslewicz. He got victories in the two most critical city council races where he made endorsements.
• Losers who deserve better and we hope to hear more from them: Hamilton Arendsen who lost in Madison's fifth aldermanic district to Shiva Bidar-Sielaff, and Stephen Ehlke, who was defeated by Julie Genovese for Circuit Court Judge, Branch 13. Congratulations to both of the victors.
• Sly, the morning maverick at WTDY AM, 1670, reminded us that in a discussion with Charlie Sykes he suggested that maybe right-wing Milwaukee radio, not Madison, is the 70 square miles surrounded by reality. He may have something there.

Randy Koschnick Campaign Goes After Annette Ziegler

Just when the commentators credited Randy Koschnick as superior when compared to his two right wing predecessor candidates, Annette Ziegler in 2007, and Michael Gableman in 2008, the Jefferson County Circuit Judge smacked the entire state with a dose of reality.

It turns out that while Koschnick may be brighter, more articulate, and more honest about his conservatism than Ziegler and Gableman, he is just as capable of selective standards, not an admirable quality in a jurist.

As I watched his latest television advertisement, I paused to reflect about the nature of its offense. The content is not significantly different than the TV spots purchased on behalf of the Ziegler and Gableman campaigns:

• Abrahamson is a liberal
• She is an activist judge
• She takes campaign contributions from attorneys who appear before the Supreme Court
• She 'votes' to release sexual predators.

What is so curious about the Koschnick campaign effort is his torpedoing his conservative friends on the Supreme Court.

Annette Ziegler is the poster child for taking contributions from individuals with business before the Supreme Court. She took $42,296 from lawyers and lobbyists. 

When you exclude her own money, the combination of funds she received from the financial service sector (banking, insurance, securities industry) and litigators represented over 20% of her campaign finances.

None of that include the hundreds of thousands, if not millions, that was funded through Wisconsin Manufactures and Commerce (WMC) on her behalf.

One has to wonder if Koschnick would like to join the millions of his fellow Wisconsinites in calling upon Ziegler to step down because of her tainted campaign contributions.