Posts Tagged ‘Van Wanggaard’
It’s Official: Wanggaard Requests Recount in District 21 Senate Race
As I expected, Van Wanggaard, the recalled Senator from Racine’s District 21, has requested a recount. Wanggaard was declared the official loser of the District 21 race by 834 votes this past Tuesday, and at that time he said he was “weighing his options.” Because of the recount request, former Senator John Lehman (D-Racine) must now wait for the recount to officially, and finally, send him back to Madison as District 21’s next Senator.
The recount will begin at 9 a.m. Wednesday, June 20, 2012, at the Racine County Courthouse.
Here’s a link to some video the Racine Journal-Times took of Lehman’s commentary after Wanggaard requested the recount:
Basically, Lehman says he has “a lot of confidence that the vote total will hold up.” He also said he has great faith in the Wisconsin election system, and that he looks forward to going back to Madison to “begin the healing process.”
Here’s a link to the actual story:
On the flip side, Wanggaard says that once upon a time, Judge Dennis Barry (now deceased) was down by about 700 votes in an election. Barry requested a recount, and it was found that Barry actually won by 900 votes.
Note that I was unable to find any reference to this election online, and that I’ve lived in Racine for many years and do not remember any such occurrence. (I’m not saying it hasn’t happened. But I am saying that I cannot find it and don’t recall it personally.)
Whereas I do recall that in 2002, Democratic incumbent Senator Kim Plache (D-Racine) lost by 773 votes to Republican Cathy Stepp. Plache did not request a recount; instead, she conceded.
Recounts are expensive, which is one reason many Republicans last year lambasted the Kloppenburg-Prosser state Supreme Court recount, even though percentage-wise, it was closer than the 1.12% margin between Lehman and Wanggaard. (Granted, recounting one Senate district is much less onerous and far less expensive than recounting a whole state, but the principle is the same.)
In this case, Wanggaard had to pay a $685 filing fee to request the recount. He did that today.
What’s more troubling than this recount request is that Wanggaard’s camp has trumpeted in the media that there were problems at various wards in Democratic areas (particularly at the Cesar Chavez Community Center, which is news to me as that’s my polling place) that rose to the level of “election fraud.” The Racine Sheriff’s office is investigating to see if any election fraud has occurred; I’d not worry so much about this except for the fact that Wanggaard is a former police officer and sits on the Police and Fire Commission in the City of Racine. This doesn’t mean the Sheriff’s Department will do anything wrong; in fact, I’d be astonished if they did. But it does mean that it appears the reason Wanggaard’s concerns about election fraud were taken more seriously than other, reported concerns, is because the Sheriff’s Department knows Wanggaard well and is more likely to believe him.
Yet I’ve heard that at other polling places, especially in Republican wards, Democrats were harassed. Nothing’s being done to investigate this by any police or Sheriff in the entirety of District 21, even though at one ward there was one person who was allowed to stay who apparently harassed every single person she saw if she felt they were going to vote for a Democrat. Why is it that this person, who apparently stayed at the polling place for five hours and strongly appears to have done something against the law in Wisconsin (it’s called “electioneering” and it’s not allowed within 100 feet of a polling place), hasn’t been investigated even though it truly appears by her actions, she interfered with the vote on June 5, 2012?
Is it because this person is alleged to be a Republican bigwig from Lake County, Illinois? (If so, that’s plain, flat wrong.)
Getting back to this particular election, Wanggaard lost fair and square. Here’s why:
- Wanggaard is well-known in this area as a former policeman and police union representative.
- Wanggaard alienated and angered people by voting against collective bargaining, especially due to being a past union representative who’s benefitted from collective bargaining.
- Wanggaard was unresponsive to the voters in this area when asked to explain what he’d done, much less why he’d done it.
These three things were more than enough to get him recalled.
As for the story about former Judge Barry, Judge Barry was a good man, a well-respected man. If it’s true that there was a problem, once upon a time, with votes being inaccurately counted and an election swinging the other way (as the Racine Journal-Times hasn’t yet referenced the election Wanggaard is discussing, and because I haven’t been able to find out anything regarding such an election online — meaning it may have pre-dated the rise of the Internet), I’d want a recount in Wanggaard’s place, too.
But I’ve said all along that I am in favor of a recount (mostly because I was in favor of Kloppenburg’s recount last year and unlike some Rs, I’m not a hypocrite). So bring on the recount . . . but don’t expect it to change things overmuch.
In other words, John Lehman is still Senator-elect for District 21, and once the recount is completed, Lehman will officially be sent to Madison to take up his duties as state Senator. Period.
————
Edited to add:
The blog Badger Democracy has an interesting article you should read. In short, every public official who has a hand in this recount is either a Walker appointee or is a dyed-in-the-wool Republican (or both). This is both concerning and distressing, but the conclusions being drawn are even more so:
The bottom line here is simple – each of the players in this case – DA Chiapete, Sheriff Schmaling, former DA and now Judge Nieskes all have a vested political and financial interest in the outcome of this case. This is an obvious attempt to use unfounded claims of “vote irregularities” to block the electoral process – a highly hypocritical move for the GOP machine, smearing Milwaukee DA John Chisolm and the John Doe Investigation (Chisolm has prosecuted Democrats and Republicans alike during his truly non-partisan terms). All three of these GOP shills should recuse themselves and appoint an independent investigator if they truly believe a crime was committed.
But they won’t – look for a case in a GOP-friendly court (such as Waukesha County), based on these so-called “irregularities” to enjoin the GAB from certifying the election, as the case makes its way through the courts – and the Senate remains at 16-16 until November. Both Racine County DA and Sheriff’s Department refused comment to Badger Democracy on an “ongoing investigation.”
All I can do is hope that this will not happen, though I have seen such delaying tactics used before by the Republican Party — in Minnesota, where Republican United States Senator Norm Coleman lost narrowly in 2008 to Democrat Al Franken — in fact, Coleman lost by only 312 votes — but delayed Franken being able to take his new seat as US Senator by eight months due to various legal challenges.
Granted, that election had some things in it that this one doesn’t — namely, it was a three-party race, and the difference, percentage-wise, between Franken and Coleman was about .01% (that is, one one-hundredth of a percent).
This election isn’t nearly that close, percentage-wise, and obviously there were only two parties involved in this race — the Democrats, represented by Lehman, and the Republicans, represented by Wanggaard.
If the Rs decide that they’re better off to employ a similar “delay as long as possible” strategy, they will certainly erode public faith in the election system of Wisconsin. And considering that many, including myself, are wondering if all the vote totals in every county were exactly as stated in the Walker/Kleefisch recalls due to possible problems with electronic voting machines, that might not be a really good wasp’s nest to kick up right now.
Scott Walker Wins; Kleefisch (Maybe) Wins; Lehman-Wanggaard Race Too Close to Call
With 85% of the vote in, it looks like Republican Governor Scott Walker has held off Democratic challenger Tom Barrett; the current vote percentages are Walker, 55%, Barrett 45%. I say that it looks like Walker has won because there are a lot of votes yet to be counted; the last voter in Milwaukee County, for example, cast his or her vote at 9:30 p.m. So the current voting percentage probably will narrow significantly — but there most likely are not the votes remaining for Walker to be defeated, which is why Barrett has conceded.
In addition, Lt. Gov. Rebecca Kleefisch (R) leads challenger Mahlon Mitchell (D) 54% to 46%. This is an apparent victory, but as it’s a percentage point closer to begin with, it’s possible that Mitchell may pull within 1% of the vote once every vote has been counted in Milwaukee, Racine, and LaCrosse counties. If that happens, a recount may come into play. So keep an eye on this race.
Three of the state Senate races have been decided in favor of the Rs, including the Scott Fitzgerald-Lori Compas race (where Fitzgerald won handily over Compas, 60% to 39%); these races are over.
The only recall race outstanding is the John Lehman-Van Wanggaard race, which remains too close to call at this hour due to the extremely high turnout in the City of Racine wards (right now, most of the vote that’s in is from Racine County, especially the Town of Mount Pleasant, which trends Republican; the City of Racine trends heavily Democrat). Right now, less than 1/3 of the wards in the City of Racine have been counted, possibly due to incredibly heavy turnout.
If Lehman prevails once the City of Racine has been counted, the Democrats will re-take the Wisconsin state Senate. This is an extremely important race, especially considering the statewide outcome; I’ll do my best to keep you posted as more results become available.
According to the Racine Journal-Times, as of 10:50 p.m. CDT, here are the results:
Van Wanggaard (R): 14566
John Lehman (D): 11881
33% of wards reporting
If you wish to look at the overall Wisconsin map, the Huffington Post map is probably the best. Take a look at it here.
Now, as to how I feel about Walker and Kleefisch apparently being retained? One word sums it up: disgusted.
More tomorrow, once I’ve caught my breath.
WI Rs sue to put Recalls in “New” Districts: Ds countersue
Folks, this takes the cake.
I live in Wisconsin — more specifically, I live in District 21, which is comprised of the City of Racine and most of Racine County. We are recalling our state Senator, Van Wanggaard, who was voted into office in 2010, took office in January of 2011, and has served as my state Senator for eleven months.
However, the state’s Republican Party has decided that the recall of Wanggaard should be held in the “new” District 21 — which is comprised of the vast majority of Racine County and Kenosha County, while the cities of Racine and Kenosha are lumped together into the “new” District 22. There is a federal lawsuit that is pending in this case, because the “new” map amounts to gerrymandering on the part of the Republicans — most particularly with regards to Van Wanggaard’s district.**
Or, to be more blunt, Wanggaard is helped more by this new map than is any other candidate facing a recall election — the other three Senators facing recall at this time are Senate Majority Leader Scott Fitzgerald (R-Juneau), Pam Galloway (R-Wausau), and Terry Moulton (R-Chippewa Falls) — and that’s the main reason why the Rs want the “new” map rather than the old one in place.
See this link for further details:
A relevant quote from the Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel article referenced above:
A group of Republicans has asked the state Supreme Court to require any recall elections for state legislators to be conducted in new districts, a move that would favor their party.
Republicans who control the Legislature drew new legislative and congressional maps this year to account for changes in population, and they explicitly wrote in the law that the maps were not to take effect for elections until November 2012.
Now, Democrats are trying to recall four Republican state senators, and Republicans want any recall elections to be held in the new districts, which would make it easier for them to hold onto their 17-16 Senate majority.
Going on, this article points out that the new R plaintiffs are being represented by Michael Best & Friedrich — or as the Journal-Sentinel puts it:
. . . the same firm that helped GOP lawmakers draw the maps and write the law that said they were not to go into effect until November 2012. In all, taxpayers paid $400,000 to Michael Best and the Troupis Law Office for their work on the maps.
So, did you catch all that? The Rs are trying to “have their cake and eat it too” by filing this lawsuit, and are doing so under the auspices of the people who made up the terrible maps (that are now in litigation) in the first place.
I view it this way, folks: my own District 21 voted Wanggaard into office in 2010. We are the only people who should have the right to recall and/or retain him — not the people in the “new,” largely ruralized District 21 that may or may not ever come to be (as there are some really big problems with that map). And we are the ones who should make this choice — no one else.
For the Wisconsin Republican Party to do something like this isn’t just disingenuous. It’s downright disgraceful.
Because think about it, just for one moment; if the Rs were that confident in themselves, or their message, why would they be resorting to political trickery like this?
Short answer? They wouldn’t.
This is yet another reason why we must recall and replace Van Wanggaard. Because if he were an honest and ethical person, he’d not want this lawsuit; instead, he just wants to hold on to his job. And that’s just not a good enough reason to be a Senator to my mind — not at all.
Instead, this lawsuit is yet another reason as to why I keep saying, “Throw the Wisconsin Rs out!” (Or if you use Twitter, the shorthand form #ThrowWIRsOut works quite nicely, too.)
——-
** Thus far, there are at least two lawsuits in progress. One was started by the Latino advocates Voces de la Frontera, and is a federal lawsuit. And the Ds have vowed to countersue in both state and federal court over these “new” maps . . . all I know is, most of the time in WI, the only way maps get drawn is by impartial observers to do it because the process is just too contentious, else. That’s why I am for a similar process to the one used by the state of Iowa, where the political theatre is absent and the work gets done without all this sturm und drang.
Barb Caffrey's Blog 