Voter Turnout High in WI for Recall Elections

Just a brief update . . . turnout has been reported in Wisconsin as being anywhere from 60 to 80 percent, depending on where you are.  In Racine, where I am, I’ve heard estimates of 65% and up.  In Waukesha County, one of the “reddest” Republican areas in the state, turnout is said to be close to 80%, which on the R side is necessary to give Gov. Walker a chance to retain his seat.  And in Northern Milwaukee (city and county), clerks ran out of ballots early, which is said to be a good sign for the Democratic challenger, Tom Barrett, as that’s one area he must win by a big margin.

All I know at this point — as it will be another four hours until the polls close here in Wisconsin — is that voters have taken their responsibility seriously.

I’ll keep you posted on what transpires, especially here in the hotly-contested District 21 Wisconsin state Senate recall race.

Why Scott Walker is Still Bad For WI

It’s two days before the June 5, 2012, recall election against sitting Governor Scott Walker, sitting Lieutenant Governor Rebecca Kleefisch, and against four Republican state Senators (three sitting, one who has already resigned), including my own Republican state Senator, Van Wanggaard.  Basically, everything that can be said about the recalls — why I favor them, why I believe they are necessary and are a form of democracy in action — has been said.

But one thing I realized when reading over my previous blog, “Scott Walker: Bad for Wisconsin” is this — for whatever reason, I didn’t define why I felt Walker was bad for Wisconsin.  Instead, I reflected upon all of the divisive things Walker did early in 2011 which caused a great deal of harm to public discourse and civility in Wisconsin, and hoped my views would be clear.

But in case it wasn’t, let’s try again.  

Since Scott Walker was elected in November of 2010, he has divided this state in harmful, self-aggrandizing ways.  He has not used his “bully pulpit” to good effect, as he could’ve explained why he wanted the so-called reforms as propagated by Act 10 (which repealed collective bargaining for public employee unions, something Wisconsin had since the late 1950s) rather than just do it by fiat.  After Walker used his power to make such a drastic change, he proceeded to get upset because the 14 Democratic Wisconsin Senators left the state in an effort to delay Act 10 by any means necessary as the Wisconsin Assembly had already shown indications of passing Act 10.  The “Wisconsin 14” did this to promote civic — and civil — discourse, because if they hadn’t left the state, Act 10 would’ve been approved within days of Walker “dropping the bomb” on the state’s voters; by leaving the state, every single voter in the state was able to become informed.

At this point, Scott Walker and his Lt. Gov., Rebecca Kleefisch, went on various right-wing talk shows, including many at the Fox News Channel, to discuss these “modest reforms” — things that were no such thing — and to say that the “Wisconsin 14” were a bunch of low-lifes who refused to “compromise” with Walker, the Republican Senate Majority Leader, Scott Fitzgerald, or the Republican Speaker of the Assembly, Jeff Fitzgerald (brother of Scott).  This was classic Orwellian doublespeak on the part of Walker and Kleefisch; while Kleefisch, to a degree, could be excused for this because her position as Lt. Gov. has very little power, there was no excuse for what Walker said, nor for how he said it.

As we all know now, the Wisconsin Republican Senators eventually passed SB 10 by the vote of 18-1 in order to make Act 10 the law in Wisconsin.  (The lone dissenting vote was Dale Schultz of Richland Center.)  Some of the Republican Senators, including my own Van Wanggaard, had strong ties to unions — Wanggaard being a former policeman and past union representative — yet apparently had no qualms about stripping other union members of their rights, probably because police and firefighters had been exempted from Act 10’s “union-stripping” provisions.

After the Senate Rs did this, the Wisconsin 14 came home to a deeply divided state, where Scott Walker, Rebecca Kleefisch, the Fitzgerald brothers, etc., still said one thing and did something else.  But the people on the ground (like me) who at that time weren’t affiliated with either party were outraged.  Nine Senators — six Republicans and three Democrats — faced recall elections.  Of those, four Rs and all three Ds were retained, while two Rs were tossed from office and officially recalled.

That, of course, was far from the end of the story, as in November of 2011 four more Senate recalls and the recall of Walker and Kleefisch started.  Recall petitioners were told that we’d “never get” enough signatures, but we proved the naysayers wrong; ultimately, Walker, Kleefisch, Wanggaard, Scott Fitzgerald, and two other state Senators were recalled.

If you’ve read my blogs thus far, you know all this.  You probably also know that Scott Walker has gone to more out-of-state functions than any other one-year Governor in the history of Wisconsin.  He’s raised 60 to 70% of his campaign donations from out-of-state donors, some from extremely wealthy men and women.  You probably even know that in some quarters, Walker is viewed as a hero, of all things, because he “refused to back down” when the unions “told (him) where to go.”

The only part of those beliefs that’s true is that Walker refused to back down about anything.  But what people who insist on “standing with Walker” fail to realize is that Walker set this whole thing into motion himself — it’s not just the way he did things, which was execrable, but what he did that caused this whole mess.

All of this leads me to only one conclusion: Scott Walker is still very bad for Wisconsin.  Because Walker has shown that he cannot and will not compromise with anyone, he’s shown he’s incapable of being Governor — a job where compromise is a must.  And if Walker is retained on Tuesday, we in Wisconsin will be looking at more pain, more problems, and more frustration, as Walker will view this election as yet another mandate to do whatever he likes, even if he wins by .0001% of the vote.

That’s why I urge my fellow Wisconsinites to vote for Tom Barrett on Tuesday, June 5.  Vote for Mahlon Mitchell as your next Lieutenant Governor, and for those of you in Racine County’s District 21, vote for John Lehman as your next Senator.  All three men are moderates who will work to restore civility to Madison, which is why we need all three of them to be elected on June 5.

*****************

Edited to add:  John Nichols explains very clearly why Scott Walker should be recalled and replaced here.  Here’s a few words from his compelling and cogent blog:

Elected officials weren’t supposed to campaign on one set of themes and govern on another. They weren’t supposed to “divide and conquer” the state. They weren’t supposed to collect $500,000 checks from billionaires, and gather most of their campaign money in other states. They weren’t supposed to have criminal defense funds.

Amen, brother!

WI Recall News: Bill Clinton Will Visit Wisconsin Tomorrow

Earlier today, the Washington Post reported that former President Bill Clinton will visit Wisconsin on behalf of Democratic gubernatorial candidate Tom Barrett in the Wisconsin Gubernatorial Recall race.   Here’s a few words from Bill Clinton’s statement as quoted by the Post:

“Folks in Wisconsin have been on the front lines of fighting for working, middle-class families across America for more than 16 months,” the former president said in a statement. “I’m coming to Wisconsin to help Tom and the extraordinary grassroots volunteers on the ground.”

Now, why is this happening at this late date?  It’s because voter turnout must be high from Democrats and Independents if Wisconsin truly does wish to recall Governor Scott Walker (R).  The Republicans know it; the Democrats know it.  And what everyone knows, but very few polls have pointed out, is this: Independents, in general, do not like Scott Walker very much.  And what living Democratic President fired up Independents along with Ds?  You guessed it — Bill Clinton.

Note that Bill Clinton, in the past, was not in favor of recalls; he went to California to prevent the recall of then-Governor Gray Davis in 2003, as did several other prominent Ds with national standing (such as John Edwards, then a Presidential candidate).  So for him to come here on behalf of Barrett most likely means that Clinton believes the recall of Walker is the right thing to do (in addition to the realpolitik of it all, which is that Clinton, a former D Governor from Arkansas, certainly wants more D Governors).

This visit by the former President should help boost turnout, but more importantly, it will boost optimism that the recall of Walker can and will succeed because Clinton has an excellent record when it comes to helping embattled Ds.  As The Hill reports tonight:

Clinton’s entrance into the race could disrupt what had seemed like a likely victory for Walker, however. The former president has posted an impressive record in 2012 endorsements to date, helping Rep. Mark Critz (D-Pa.) and Pennsylvania attorney general candidate Kathleen Kane both win their Democratic primaries after trailing early on. Clinton also helped Maryland businessman John Delaney to a unlikely primary win in April.

So, will Clinton be able to help Barrett also?  My best guess is that yes, Clinton’s visit will make a positive difference on behalf of Barrett, Lieutenant Governor candidate Mahlon Mitchell, and the four D candidates for state Senator, including my own candidate in District 21, former Sen. John Lehman.

But with all the will in the world — and Clinton does have a tremendous will — this race still comes down to turnout, which is what I expect Clinton to say tomorrow during his visit as he’s no fool.  Clinton’s visit will be a boost to Barrett, Mitchell, Lehman and all of the other D candidates for state Senate, but Wisconsin’s voters must go out and vote.

As I’ve said before, my intentions are clear and have been so from the beginning.  Scott Walker deserves to be recalled.  So does his Lt. Governor, Rebecca Kleefisch.  So does my sitting state Senator, Van Wanggaard (R-Racine).  Which is why I will be voting to recall all of them on June 5, 2012 — and while I would do so without a visit from Clinton, it’s nice to know that Clinton hasn’t forgotten Wisconsin or how hard we’ve been fighting here for the past year and a half ever since Walker “dropped the bomb” and started his “divide and conquer” tactics.

Scott Walker and Rs outspend Barrett and Ds 2-to-1 in WI Recall

Well, it’s official.  Wisconsin Republican Governor Scott Walker and various Republican Super-PACs have outspent Democratic challenger Tom Barrett and various Democratic organizations by a 2-to-1 margin according to WisPolitics.com over the past week (ending date May 16, 2012).  But considering WisPolitics.com is a pay site, and the article I am using to reference it is through the Huffington Post, I’d rather link to the latter.

The figures for the week of May 9 to May 16, 2012, officially, are these:

1. Scott Walker and various Republican groups/SuperPACs — $216,980
2. Tom Barrett and various Democratic groups/SuperPACs —   $87,980

As you can see, Walker and his allies are outspending Barrett, et. al., by over a 2-to-1 margin.  Which if you lived in Wisconsin, you’d know quite easily because for every ad either praising Tom Barrett or bashing Scott Walker, there’s at least six ads praising Scott Walker or (more commonly) bashing Tom Barrett.

While I haven’t seen any figures for the local state Senate race in District 21 between current Republican Senator Van Wanggaard of Racine versus former Senator John Lehman, also of Racine, the ad buys are strikingly similar.  For every six to ten pro-Wanggaard or anti-Lehman ads out there, there might be one pro-Lehman ad or one anti-Wanggaard ad (so far it’s been one or the other, not both, which shows a lack of balance with regards to ads).   The only difference between the ads thus far is that most of the anti-Lehman/pro-Wanggaard ads have aired on the radio, while the anti-Barrett/pro-Walker ads have aired on TV.

I hate negative advertising, and I hate even more that so many ads have flooded the airwaves.  Yet I condemn the Rs — all of them, including the misnamed “Wisconsin Club for Growth” (actually a Koch Brothers front group), Wisconsin Manufacturing and Commerce, Americans for Prosperity, etc. — for running ads that distort both Tom Barrett and John Lehman’s records.  These ads are terribly biased, and unless you’re aware of what these men actually did, you might think they’re the political equivalent of axe murderers.  (Which they aren’t.)

For example, one anti-Lehman ad talks about how Lehman voted for “the biggest expansion in healthcare, worse than Obamacare, in Wisconsin history.”  Do you know what the vote Lehman actually took was for?  It’s for Badgercare, a state-run health plan that helps give low-income people health insurance for low or no cost.  Badgercare actually saves the state money because it allows people to go in immediately when they get sick rather than going in only after things have drastically worsened to be admitted to the hospital via the emergency room.

So why is it that the Rs don’t just say Badgercare instead?  Because they know that the vast majority of state voters, including most Republicans, approve of Badgercare because they know it actually saves the state money in the long run.

The anti-Wanggaard and anti-Walker ads are much more factually-based.  They talk about what Wanggaard has actually done since he became a Senator — in other words, they talk about his checkable record, and don’t distort it out of recognition.  And they talk about what Walker has actually done with regards to education cuts and the results of said cuts — most of the ads have been about education — or about Walker’s large amount of out-of-state travel due to fundraising, which also are truthful, checkable facts.

So it’s clear that the Ds and their allies are for the most part taking the high road.  The Rs aren’t; instead, the Rs are taking the muddiest, dirtiest road they possibly can in order to confuse and befuddle as many voters as they possibly can.

Overall, if I were a voter who hadn’t paid any attention in the past year (not that Wisconsin has many of these), I’d be wary of the Republican ads due to how awful they are, while I’d be more kind to the Democratic ads because at least there, a voter can go online to check the veracity of the facts.  But as most voters have paid attention, I can only hope that they, too, realize the difference in the ads and don’t get fooled.  (Again.)

Scott Walker Tape Surfaces: “Divide and Conquer” Strategy Clear from Day One

Folks, it is official.  Scott Walker is a liar.

You see, when Walker was campaigning in 2010 for Governor of Wisconsin, he never told the public that he would eliminate collective bargaining for public employee unions.  Nor that he intended to use a “divide and conquer” strategy.  But due to a video that surfaced a day ago, that is indeed exactly what Walker intended all along.  In this recording, Walker used the words “divide and conquer” clearly to one of his biggest fund-raisers, Beloit (WI) billionaire Diane Hendricks; she, of course, approved of this. 

This recording was made in January of 2011, a few weeks before Walker “dropped the bomb” and announced that his “budget-repair” bill would have a provision in it to strip public employee union members of their collective bargaining rights.

And lest anyone complain that this somehow is a “gotcha” moment — well, Walker did this to himself, talking with a real, Republican backer.  Since he uttered those words, Ms. Hendricks has given over $500,000 to Walker’s campaign, so it’s obvious what Walker intended.

Please see this link from the Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel for further details:

http://www.jsonline.com/news/statepolitics/barrett-walker-at-odds-over-divide-and-conquer-union-remark-oi5coda-151148935.html

While Walker now says he “doesn’t remember” what he said back in January of ’11, and now just wants to “move forward,” this is a typical politician “non-denial denial.”  None of us should believe it.

Democratic opponent Tom Barrett, the current Mayor of Milwaukee, astutely analyzes why Walker said such a thing.  In this quote from the above-cited Journal-Sentinel article:

Barrett said that he first heard about the video Thursday night while driving home from Wausau and was “flabbergasted at his language.””If you want to know when Scott Walker is really telling the truth, it’s when he’s talking to billionaires and when he thinks he’s talking to billionaires,” Barrett said. “He says one thing to the public, but to people who give him $500,000 or to people he thinks are giving him $1 million to the Republican Governors Association, his message is completely different.”

All of this is important because Walker insists that he does not want to make Wisconsin a “right-to-work” state.  “Right-to-work” states make it harder for existing unions to operate, and almost impossible for new unions to arise, due to its onerous provisions against such practices.  Or as the recently surfaced video says (quoting from the above article):

In the conversation on the video, Hendricks was seen asking Walker about right-to-work legislation. “Any chance we’ll ever get to be a completely red state and work on these unions – ”

“Oh, yeah,” Walker broke in.

“- and become a right-to-work?” Hendricks continued. “What can we do to help you?”

“Well, we’re going to start in a couple weeks with our budget adjustment bill,” Walker said. “The first step is we’re going to deal with collective bargaining for all public employee unions, because you use divide and conquer. So for us, the base we get for that is the fact that we’ve got – budgetarily we can’t afford not to. If we have collective bargaining agreements in place, there’s no way not only the state but local governments can balance things out . . . That opens the door once we do that. That’s your bigger problem right there.”

So that just goes to show you, folks.  Walker’s intentions — that is, to break unions — were clear from the moment he took office.  Any denial to the contrary is just nonsense; worse than that, it shows Walker’s mendacity in full measure.

So don’t fall for the Walker “non-denial denials.”  Because they just don’t make sense.

Wednesday Early AM Recall Musings

Folks, I’m still working hard on an edit that’s nearly completed, so I don’t have a lot of time available to blog.  That said, I watched the election returns this evening and noted the following:

The total amount of votes in the Democratic primary recall race for Governor cast for the four real Democrats was 665,436; the total amount of votes cast for the one real Republican in the race, sitting Governor Scott Walker, was 626,538. 

One thing is clear; anyone who cast a vote tonight in the Democratic primary is likely to vote for anyone other than Scott Walker.  Tonight’s winner, current Milwaukee Mayor Tom Barrett, knows he has a good-sized coalition in place that’s ready and eager to vote against Walker on June 5, 2012.

Other than that, Mahlon Mitchell easily won his race in the Democratic primary recall race for Lieutenant Governor, so he will be taking on current Lt. Gov. Rebecca Kleefisch on June 5.  And former state Senator John Lehman, D-Racine, easily beat “fake Democrat” Tamra Varebrook, advancing to the June 5 election against current state Senator Van Wanggaard.  (All four Democratic challengers easily won their May 8, 2012, races for state Senate.)

These elections show that many people want to change course in Wisconsin.  We don’t like extremes here on either the D or R side; instead, we like moderates.  Yet we’ve seen little moderation from the current crop of R politicians that was voted in during the 2010 election season, which is why so many people went out and signed recall petitions.  (Simply put: they didn’t listen to us, so it’s time to boot them out and get someone in there who will.) 

No matter how the Rs try to spin it, remember this well: the way Scott Walker and his R cronies behaved in 2011 is why so many voters went out and voted in the various primaries.  And that bad behavior is what’s going to get at least a few of these Rs recalled on June 5.

Scott Walker in Tight Race in WI Governor Recall

Folks, today a new poll was released by the Marquette University Law School (yes, they do polling, too) that says that if the election were held today, Scott Walker would lose (by a point) to Democratic candidate Tom Barrett.  Walker would win according to this poll against Democratic candidate Kathleen Falk, 49% to 42%, and would beat Democratic candidates Douglas Lafollette (the current Secretary of State) and state Senator Kathleen Vinehout of Alma by a margin of 49% to 40%.

As for how all four Democratic candidates do against each other?  This poll says that Barrett leads with 43%, followed by Falk with 21%, Lafollette with 8% and Vinehout, the least-known candidate, with 6%.

Here’s a link to the article about the poll at the Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel:

http://www.jsonline.com/news/statepolitics/walker-barrett-in-deadheat-in-recall-showdown-poll-says-8l58n4s-149857945.html

Now, here’s my take about this poll:  I distrust it.  Why?  Because the Marquette University Law School poll has a known bias that helps Republican candidates look better in polling than they actually tend to do.

For that matter, Falk, a former Dane County Executive, distrusts it also.  Here’s what she said in the Journal-Sentinel article sourced above:

. . . Falk questioned the poll’s findings when she talked to reporters during a campaign tour of Union Cab, a taxi cooperative in Madison.

“The establishment naysayers have predicted this whole year incorrectly,” she said. “They said this recall would never get off the ground.”

I’m with Falk on this one, because I don’t think this poll accurately reflects Wisconsin voters.  Falk is likely being undercounted, as the TV ads have tried to make her out to be a “Madison liberal” when she’s clearly a moderate in the Hillary Clinton mode, and assuredly Vinehout is, as she has a huge stronghold in Northern Wisconsin (the area she serves) that apparently hasn’t been polled whatsoever.  And if two of the four candidates being polled aren’t being adequately reflected, what does that say about the entirety of the poll?

As for the political TV ads we’ve seen thus far in Wisconsin, they’ve been heavily negative against Falk and Barrett.  This is mostly because Walker can spend all sorts of money (he’s raised $13 million thus far, with 2/3 of that money coming from out-of-state interests) and neither Falk nor Barrett can match it as the two, between them, have raised $1.75 million.  (Vinehout and Lafollete, who both are “alternative” candidates with strong grass-roots appeal, certainly can’t.)

But for that matter, I don’t understand the barrage of political advertising thus far.  As it stands, this is an election that’s likely not going to be decided by big-money interests.  Everyone in Wisconsin knows what Walker did, and has firm opinions on it, which is why there are very few “undecideds” in the sense of knowing whether or not they approve of Walker.

Where the indecision comes in — and where the big-money ads may come into play — is this: does Scott Walker deserve to be booted out of office after less than two years in the Governor’s chair?  Some of those who don’t like Walker may be indecisive about getting rid of him, precisely because this is a historic move that’s never before happened anywhere in the United States, much less Wisconsin.

My guess is that the 900,ooo-plus that went out to sign petitions recalling Walker have the most to say in Walker’s recall election, to wit: if they go out and vote, en masse, to get rid of Walker, he will be out on his ear.  Which is why now, we’re starting to see news reports on Milwaukee-area TV stations of a more reflective Walker.  On these TV “spots” (mostly on news reports), Walker insists that even if he is recalled, he’s done everything right.  This belief that Walker somehow is right and everyone else is plain, flat wrong is why Walker should be recalled. 

Wisconsin voters must get rid of Scott Walker, no matter who the Democratic candidate is.  Because if we don’t, we will have no opportunity whatsoever to have a responsible Governor who actually listens to Wisconsinites, as Walker himself has already shown us that he’s not listening to anyone and isn’t about to start doing so, either.

So on May 8, 2012, go out and vote for the candidate of your choice in the Democratic primary.   Then, regardless of who wins (it’s likely to be either Falk or Barrett, which I would’ve believed no matter what the Marquette University Law School poll said), go out on June 5, 2012 and support that person.  Because if we do not get Walker out, things will only get worse — not better.  Guaranteed.

Gubernatorial Candidate Kathleen Vinehout Visits Racine

Yesterday, I heard Wisconsin Democratic candidate for Governor Kathleen Vinehout speak at the Labor Center in Racine, WI.  Vinehout is one of four candidates running to oppose incumbent Gov. Scott Walker (R) in a well-publicized recall election; Vinehout is probably the least-known Democratic candidate, as she represents Alma in the state Senate (a small border town in western Wisconsin).

While Vinehout may be little-known, she’s a woman of accomplishment; she’s been a state Senator since 2006, was a dairy farmer for ten years, and taught at a university for ten years.  This means she has ability in both the public and private sector, something we badly need in Wisconsin; she also is articulate, friendly, and knowledgable.

Vinehout is the first candidate aside from Tom Barrett (mayor of Milwaukee, who ran against Walker in 2010 and lost) to visit Racine as far as I’m aware; former Dane County Executive Kathleen Falk sent her husband to represent her, but she, herself, has not visited Racine, nor has current Secretary of State Douglas Lafollette.  Vinehout being willing to come to Racine when it’s at the southern end of the state — very far from her home in Alma — showed a lot about her character and willingness to get to know every aspect of the state she wishes to represent as Governor.

I was impressed by what I heard from Vinehout; she believes she can roll back the worst of what Walker and the radical Republicans in our state house have wrought, and the way she speaks makes it clear that a razor-sharp intellect is behind her friendly, capable exterior.

To my mind, Vinehout has everything the next Governor of Wisconsin needs.  She understands what’s going on in Racine — we need economic development, we need more money for our public schools, and we need, most of all, hope and optimism.  And it seems to me that Vinehout, despite being the least-well funded of all four candidates, is willing to “go to the mat” for Wisconsin’s people, which also is a very big plus; we know this because she’s a member of the “Wisconsin Fourteen” who stood up to Walker and the radical Rs last year and because she’s visiting as many areas of the state as she can despite being a “grass-roots candidate” (meaning she has passion behind her, but not a lot of money).

I’d encourage anyone who believes in progressive principles to seriously look at Kathleen Vinehout’s candidacy.  Check out her home page at http://kathleenvinehout.org/, or look her up at Facebook — you’ll be glad you did.

Walker, Kleefisch, Wanggaard Recall Dates Set; WI Rs to Put More “Fake Dems” into D Primaries

As of tonight, the recall of Governor Scott Walker and Lieutenant Governor Rebecca Kleefisch has been set; the primary will be held on May 8, 2012, and the general election will be held on June 5, 2012.  These are not-so-coincidentally the same dates on which the four Republican state Senators (including Racine’s own Van Wanggaard, my current Senator) will have to defend their seats; this should alleviate some of the financial problems court clerks around the state had been concerned about as all the recalls are going to be run at the same time.  While I’m not fond of this — as I’ve said before, I think the state Senator recalls should already be over and done with as the 2011 Senatorial recall elections were taken care of in a far more expeditious manner — it does make logistical and financial sense.

But the GOP has decided to field obviously fake Democratic candidates — “fake Dems” — in the Senate recall races in order to give the Rs more time to raise money (due to a quirk in Wisconsin law, an incumbent facing recall may raise unlimited amounts of money so long as the recall election is forthcoming).  I had predicted they’d do this very thing, but I don’t like their reasoning for it.

From tonight’s Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel article:

Within hours, the state Republican Party said it would run fake Democrats in all the races, ensuring there will be primaries.

“The protest candidates will run as Democrats to guarantee that there is one clear date for the primary election and one clear date for the general election,” said Stephan Thomas, the party’s executive director.

He said the move was made because otherwise some or all of the general elections for state senators would happen the same day as the primary for governor – when Democrats flood to the polls to pick their candidate for governor.

Note that Thomas says quite forthrightly that of course the WI Rs are going to send more “fake Dems” into the fray, just as they did in 2011.  He’s using the rationale that this way, all of the “real” recall races will be held at the same time, as all of the real Democrats running to replace the four incumbent R Senators will now have to face a primary. 

But is this really a good rationale for such a practice?  Considering the WI Rs have a very bad reputation for not listening (except for “mavericks” like Dale Schultz of Richland Center), an even worse one for refusing to explain anything, and the worst one imaginable for failing to understand that their high-handed actions would set off massive unrest in Wisconsin, perhaps doing this again — sending in the “fake Dems,” all so their four R Senate candidates can rake in some more money before facing their day of reckoning on June 8, 2012 — wasn’t the world’s best move.

Because while you’re allowed to do such a thing under Wisconsin law, it’s not exactly ethical.  Voters in the 2011 recall elections were quite perturbed about the Rs doing this, and I’d imagine they will be this time, too; because I remember just how angry people were over this “fake Dem” tactic, it’s not a place I’d want to go if I were a strategist for the WI Rs.  (You can go to the well once too often, y’know.  So why tempt fate?)

Anyway, the other tidbit in this article is that Lt. Gov. Kleefisch is the first ever Lieutenant Governor to be recalled in the entire United States.  (I bet she feels special now!)  Which just goes to show how angry much of the state is; most of the state barely knows who she is, yet she was recalled right along with Walker and the four Senators.

This is why, were I a member of the Wisconsin GOP, I’d want to tread lightly with regards to the whole issue around the “fake Dems.”  Because at some point, enough’s going to be enough.  Once that point is reached, it’ll be hard even for the practical politicians like Dale Schultz (who actually listen to their constituents) to hold onto their seats.

WI Recall Election Dates Set

Folks, it’s official: the 2012 Wisconsin recall elections have been set on the calendar for May 8, 2012 and June 5, 2012, the dates the Wisconsin Government Accountability Board (GAB) wanted.  The Senate elections are likely to all take place on May 8 unless the Wisconsin Republicans again run “fake Democrats” to primary the Democratic candidates in the four Senate races up for grabs, as they did in 2011.  All four Senators being recalled are Republicans; two of the four being recalled are Senate Majority Leader Scott Fitzgerald, and my own state Senator, Racine’s Van Wanggaard.  

The recall petitions that were turned in to recall Governor Scott Walker and Lieutenant Governor Rebecca Kleefisch haven’t yet been certified by the GAB, so it is unclear at this time whether or not Walker and Kleefisch will be among those who will have to run in elections on one or the other of these dates.  There will definitely be a Democratic primary — a real one this time — for the gubernatorial contest, as there are three Democrats who have declared they’re running for Governor: former Dane County Executive Kathleen Falk, Democratic state Senator Kathleen Vinehout, and Secretary of State Douglas LaFollette.  That would mean, tentatively, that it’s likely Walker will have to defend his seat on June 5.  (It’s possible that Kleefisch may have to defend her seat sooner than Walker, which will be really interesting.)

Now, let’s take a moment to consider the difference between 2011 and 2012 with regards to the recalls.

In the 2011 drive to recall the Republican Eight, recall petitions had to be delivered no later than April; elections were set for June, July and August.  Two Republican Senators, Mary Lazich and Glenn Grothman, were not recalled; signatures were not able to be filed against them.

In the six other recall elections pertaining to the original Republican Eight, most were artificially delayed by the Republican maneuver of entering “fake Democrats” into the primaries against the real Democrats running against them.  This tactic allowed the Rs to raise more money, as under Wisconsin law, any incumbent may raise unlimited money to defend his (or her) seat.  This sizable monetary advantage helped four of the six who were recalled, as they retained their seats.  Only Dan Kapanke (R-La Crosse) and Randy Hopper (R-Fond du Lac) ended up losing their seats (to Democratic challengers Jennifer Shilling and Jessica King, respectively).

In 2012, the Republican incumbents have had nearly a year to raise money, and since November 15, 2011, have been able to raise unlimited amounts of money to defend their seats.  This has given them a significant advantage over their 2011 brethren.  This huge monetary advantage is one reason why I wish the GAB had prioritized the Senate elections. **

There’s no excuse for the elections to have been set so far after the petitions were hand-carried in on January 15, 2011.  The GAB surely could’ve set the Senate recall elections earlier, as they worked far more speedily last year to schedule nine Senate recall elections (the three Dems who were recalled and had to stand for new elections were retained); this time, they only had four to deal with.  So why the delay?

At any rate, the recalls have been scheduled, at least for the state Senate; we’re now on the clock.  Keep watching this space, as I’ll give you whatever updates I can as soon as I receive them.

————————

** I am well aware that over 900,000 signatures, the revised and corrected total, were turned in to recall Walker, and over 800,000 to recall Lt. Gov. Kleefisch.  The four Senators, between them, amassed around 65,000 signatures to force their recall elections.  That’s why I used the term “prioritized.”  (Hold your fire.)