As I See It

As I See It (329)

Wisconsin's longest running daily commentary, a daily tradition since 1971.

Friday - March 31, 2017 9:00 am

Where are opponents to Scott Walker?

Written by

Is there no one beside Scott Walker who wants to be Wisconsin's next governor? The list of democrats who have given up on the thought of challenging Governor Walker keeps getting longer. Former State Senator Tim Cullen is the latest to announce that after considering a challenge to Scott Walker, he is giving up on the idea. Previously, La Crosse State Senator Jennifer Shilling and La Crosse Congressman Ron Kind abandoned their possible runs. Alma Senator Kathleen Vinehout is said to be considering a run, but hasn't announced. So far, the only announced candidate for the democrats is a 25 year old man named Bob Harlow, a Wisconsin native who ran unsuccessfully for a seat in Congress from California last year. In announcing his decision not to run, Cullen cited the task of fundraising, saying it is likely Walker will raise upward of $40 million if he seeks a third term as expected. It shouldn't take that much money to win election in Wisconsin. Why can't an average Joe, with good ideas, run a successful campaign for Governor? Because money is what fuels the political machinery, and it takes big bucks to be a successful candidate, especially when taking on an entrenched politician. That shouldn't be the case, but as Cullen's announcement shows us, it is a political reality.

Comment

On its surface, the effort seems to be to give chesse some much-needed love in Wisconsin. A group of elementary students are asking Wisconsin legislators to declare cheese Wisconsin's official dairy product. It is not so much that they love cheese, but want to get a first-hand look at how laws are made in Wisconsin. But if these inquiring students really want to get a look at how politics works at the state level in Wisconsin, they would have to peel many layers of this onion. The students should know that whatever party is in charge in Madison controls what legislation can even be debated. They should see how the lobbyists grease the palms of the politicians so they can get their pet project passed. They should witness how political boundaries are gerrymandered so that only the chosen few can get elected. They should witness the deals that are made behind closed doors, and the repeated efforts to keep the public in the dark about it. The students should see how arcane procedural rules can keep people from testifying about the proposal. Unlike most bills, the effort to declare cheese the official dairy product has bipartisan support. It requires just a rubber stamp from the legislature. But if these students think making a law is simply as easy as asking your legislator do introduce it, and give it a fair debate on its merits, they are not getting much of an education about our political process.

Comment

Technically, seats on the Wisconsin Supreme Court are non-partisan. Those running for office don't declare themselves either republican or democrat. Of course, in reality, we know that our high court justices are partisan. Some get most of their campaign cash from conservative groups, while others get their funding from liberal groups. But when it comes to whether they behave politically, that is something that the Wisconsin Judicial Commission is in charge of finding out. The Commission has just been handed a complaint targeting conservative Supreme Court Justice Michael Gableman for his involvement in a political fundraiser. Gableman was listed as a speaker at a Lincoln Day Dinner in Rice Lake, where conservatives gathered to raise money for like-minded candidates. That is a no-no. The Wisconsin Judicial Code prohibits a judge from participating in political party promotions and from using the prestige of judicial office for fundraising. Gableman ultimately didn't attend the event, but his name and face was on the flyer inviting people to open their wallets to advance their political cause. Justices and others complain about a lack of judicial integrity in Wisconsin. Perhaps if they stopped demonstrating a lack of integrity, such complaints would stop as well.

Comment

Thursday - March 23, 2017 9:35 am

Still stalling on redrawing legislative boundaries

Written by

The judge's order was clear. Wisconsin lawmakers were told to redraw the current legislative boundaries by November 1 of this year. The judge ruled the current gerrymandered boundaries were created, purposely, to benefit republican candidates. The maps were called the most partisan the judge had ever seen. So what has been the reaction to the judge's ruling? Unfortunately, the only reaction we have seen so from from republicans who control the legislature is to try to launch another legal battle, hoping to overturn the judge's ruling. Apparently they are pinning their hopes on being successful, because so far there is no evidence that our lawmakers have spent a single minute trying to work with each other to draw new maps which are fair to both parties. There has been no input from the public. In fact, lawmakers are spending hundreds of thousands more of our tax dollars on lawyers, without so much as a public vote to authorize the expenditure. But there have been no meetings even scheduled to begin drawing new maps. We have not heard when they will finally get to work, and how they plan to do this job. They have not told us how much they are spending on these lawyers, or even who they have hired to do the work. We shouldn't be kept in the dark on this. Our lawmakers should get to work on these new maps, and the public should be part of that process.

Comment

Wednesday - March 22, 2017 10:10 am

Will Wisconsin finally get tough on drunk drivers?

Written by

Members of the Wisconsin legislature are likely to once again debate strengthening Wisconsin's drunk driving laws. If history is any guide, our lawmakers will do little to address the problem. Wisconsin has a long history of brushing off the dangers of drunk driving, and remains the only state in the nation that fails to consider first offense drunk driving a crime. Lawmakers have over the years spent much time debating strengthening these laws, but little has come of it. They did finally make the fourth offense drunk driving a felony a couple years ago, but more needs to be done. Rep. Jim Ott of Mequon has introduced a series of bills designed to toughen Wisconsin's drunk driving laws. One would set a minimum of five years in prison for anyone driving drunk who kills someone. Currently there is no minimum sentence for drunk driving homicides. A second bill would raise the minimum incarceration for fifth and sixth offenses from six months to 18 months. Another piece of legislation would prohibit anyone caught driving drunk from driving any vehicle without an ignition interlock device. That should be a priority. The latest numbers from Mothers Against Drunk Driving show some 37,000 people tried to get behind the wheel while drunk in one year's time, but were prevented from doing so by ignition interlock devices. That is more than any other state. La Crosse police call the numbers staggering, and they are right. Wisconsin needs to do more to toughen our drunk driving laws. This package of legislation is a good start.

Comment

The numbers don't lie. Wisconsin lawmakers continue to fund voucher schools to the detriment of public schools. Even as Governor Walker pledges more money for public schools in his latest budget, it still doesn't keep pace with what lawmakers are handing out in free tuition to private schools. A report by Wisconsin's Legislative Fiscal Bureau shows that payments to voucher school operators would be at least $1000 higher per student than the average for public school students. And the money that pays for these vouchers is coming directly from the general aid fund that should go to public schools. The report finds that while state tax dollars for voucher school operators has increased 12 times faster than total school aids for public schools. In fact, voucher payments are more than doubling over 8 years of Republican control. At the same time, general aids for public schools in Wisconsin fell. Under the Governor's budget, payments to voucher schools would total up to $8403 per student, while aid to public school students would total just $6700. These numbers tell the story. Public education in Wisconsin has suffered, while we continue to hand tax dollars to those attending voucher schools. Public school students should not be second in line for state aid.

Comment

It seems that no matter how many laws we may pass to try to hold our politicians accountable, our lawmakers inevitably find a way around them. For example, there are a number of laws which require those we elect to public office do the people's business in public. Meetings where decisions are made about our tax dollars are to be held in a forum where we can watch and even participate. But in Wisconsin, it is becoming increasingly common for our state representatives to try to remain in the shadows. This week in Madison, Republicans serving on the Budget Committee will meet in private to discuss the Governor's budget proposal. But because only Republican lawmakers are invited to this closed-door discussion, there will not be a quorum of the committee, and therefore, technically, it does not violate the state's open meetings laws. But it sure isn't right. What do they want to say in private that they don't want to say in public? Why the need for secrecy? Unfortunately, this tactic is becoming more common. Members of the Assembly Corrections Committee circumvented the law by taking turns in groups touring the state's troubled youth prison so as to keep their meeting private. There is a reason we have laws designed to keep the public informed. These troubling tactics may not violate the letter of the law, but certainly violate the spirit of the law.

Comment

So, just what did we learn with the release of some of President Trump's tax returns this week? Apparently, that people have real issues with the use of the term “breaking news.” MSNBC host Rachel Maddow offered what she called breaking news Tuesday night, when she told viewers she was in possession of Trump's tax return. She tweeted about an hour before the show that she would be revealing the results. When she finally did, we learned that Donald Trump paid about $38 million in taxes on income of nearly $150 million. On the surface, there is no smoking gun, no evidence that our President is a tax-dodger. But the reaction seemed to be more about how the new information was released than about the substance of the returns themselves. Some said it took Maddow longer to actually release the information than it would take most people to do their taxes. Others claimed this should not be considered breaking news because there was very little news there. I'm not hung up on the use of breaking news to tease the information. To me, breaking news is something happening now that we didn't know before. This would fit that bill. It was the first time we had seen Trump's returns, even if it was just two pages of a return filed a dozen years ago. But the real story is why are we relying on little leaked bits of information in order to try to get the facts. If Trump would simply release his returns, as presidents before him have done, then we wouldn't have to brag about uncovering any scrap of information, and we wouldn't have a debate about what really constitutes breaking news.

Comment

Wednesday - March 15, 2017 10:25 am

Dozens voted illegally, but did nothing wrong

Written by

Those who claim that our system of voting is ripe with fraud may be pointing to a new report which finds some people voted illegally in Wisconsin as proof of their claims. But once again, they would be wrong. A report the state Elections Commission will submit to the legislature finds there were some 60 cases of people voting in last fall's primary and general elections who were not yet of legal voting age. Were these people trying to rig our elections, as some have claimed? No. These were 17 year olds who wanted to be part of our democracy, to have their voice heard. What they did hear, on social media and elsewhere, is that people could vote in the primary election if they would be turning 18 by the November election. That may be true in some states, but not in Wisconsin. These teens didn't know that, and showed up to vote, having been told they could. That was the case for one La Crosse county teen, who voted despite not yet being of legal age. But he freely told the poll workers he was 17, so he told no lies. The La Crosse District Attorney wisely is not prosecuting the case, telling Wizzum this voter truly believed he was eligible, and did not attempt to circumvent the process. The real mistake made here was by a poll worker, who should not have let him vote. But while some may see the headline that 60 17 year olds voted in Wisconsin as proof our elections are rigged, the truth is our election system works, and when it doesn't, we catch those not eligible to cast a ballot.

Comment

Like many communities, La Crosse has a problem with binge drinking. But a proposal to be debated by the La Crosse city council designed to prevent the problem is not a good solution. The council will debate putting an end to those all you can drink specials offered by some bars. Customers pay five bucks, get a wristband, and can drink as much as their stomach's allow. The proposal would put an end to these all you can drink specials. But that would likely do little to curb binge drinking. First, only a small handful, maybe 3 or 4, La Crosse bars even offer these specials. There are also enough places to get cheap drinks, even without all you can drink specials, that you could get good and loaded for just a few bucks. This proposal does nothing to prevent young people from partying at home before even heading downtown. But if this legislation were to be approved, it would also likely have to include a ban on all you can drink specials at bars, but also at community events, like the Between the Bluffs Beer and Cheese Fest, or the Craft Beer Night at Oktoberfest. These events both are very popular, and bring lots of people to town. Both have a significant economic impact on our community. Do we really want to put an end to these popular events, just so we can feel like we are doing something to prevent binge drinking?

Comment