Senator Reynolds

Anyone following the tales of Senator Tom Reynolds and his gang of fools, go here for a must read.

And then ask yourself, is it too hard to imagine that scene actually happening?

So at what point is it time to consider whether or not Senator Tom Reynolds is not qualified to even vote much less hold office under this:

Statute:

6.03 Disqualification of electors.
6.03(1)
(1) The following persons shall not be allowed to vote in any election and any attempt to vote shall be rejected:

6.03(1)(a)
(a) Any person who is incapable of understanding the objective of the elective process or who is under guardianship, unless the court has determined that the person is competent to exercise the right to vote...


Let's look at the evidence:

Tom Reynolds thinks he's Joseph and his wife is the Virgin Mary.

Tom Reynolds has stated on the Senate floor and in committees that voting is a privilege and not a right (demonstrating that he is doesn't understand the election/voting process).

Tom Reynolds is a paranoid who has repeatedly expressed concern with being filmed.

Tom Reynolds has demonstrated incompetence when hiring employees by asking them about their sexual habits and a host of totally inappropriate interview topics.

The list goes on and a mental health professional certified by the state could probably make the case quite clear in court.

If a court finds that he is not a qualified elector - then it would follow that he is not eligible to hold office.

Just a thought.

-By Ann Telnaes via Slate.com

New Gard ad reality check

Rep. John Gard has a new ad out suggesting Gard is some big fan of organized labor and fights for jobs in Wisconsin. That idea is so laughable I barely know where to begin.

If Gard was really interested in securing good jobs for our state, he would have brought AB 639 to the floor in 2003 instead of voting to keep it from even being debated. The bill would have provided grants to companies to train workers if the company would keep the jobs in our state.

And if Gard was even remotely interested in fighting for the working families of this state, he wouldn't have voted to table an amendment to increase the minimum wage in 2001. He has numerous votes against raising the minimum wage, but since he was getting a $2424 raise that year and another $1336 raise for the next year, it really would have been fair to vote for the increase in 2001. That same year, Gard got an increase in his per diem, which meant he could get even more money for driving to work from Sun Prairie while claiming his residence was in his district so he could get more than what those living in Dane County get for a per diem.

He also could have voted to make sure the jobs that are created by the state are family supporting jobs by voting against tabling an amendment to require companies getting state financial assistance not to cut health care or pension benefits within five years of receiving assistance.

Gard has a long history attacking organized labor. He put banks ahead of workers when he voted against requiring companies that go bankrupt to pay off workers for wages owed before paying off banks and credit companies. He has also voted to weaken collective bargaining rights by allowing municipalities to contract out for more services.

These votes are just the tip of the iceberg for Gard on these issues. If these are the "supporters" working families can count on having in state government, who needs enemies?

Hoping for a little Wisconsin common sense

Jay Hein, a Wisconsin native, has been picked to lead the Faith-Based Initiative office for the White House. If this office is going to exist, let's hope that injecting someone from Wisconsin into it will result in better accountability for the program.

A recent GAO report found that some of the organizations in the program are mixing religion with their services, there is almost no oversight of the program and the White House still hasn't even developed any clear standards for the organizations in the program to follow.

Probably because they don't care. This program was always about getting tax dollars into churches and the Bush Administration most likely isn't bothered if the groups in this program are preaching to the people coming to them for services. In fact, they probably hope they will.

Perhaps the Bush Administration is using this program to start Rep. Katherine Harris' "we must elect Christians" edict. Afterall, the woman that helped throw the election to President Bush says people who are not Christians simply don't know any better. If our federal tax dollars aren't helping convert more people into Christians, how will we replace all of the elected officials currently holding office that are not Christians?

Green Bay Area Newspapers

While Rep. Mark Green has to run ads in his base trying to convince people he is not too extreme, one of his home area papers is doing what it can to help him.

The Appleton-Post Crescent has a section in the Sunday paper about elections going on around the state. They had a small story about the race for governor. It started by saying that the polling showing Governor Doyle with a large lead over Green doesn't mean that Doyle is going to win.

Fair enough. Polling this far out doesn't predict a winner.

The story pointed out some good news for Green and then shifted to the Democratic side. And that's where they help came in.

Even when the paper is reporting good news for the Dems, they try to make it not so bad for Green.

On a positive note for the Democratic camp, the most recent poll, conducted by Rasmussen Reports, gives Doyle his greatest show of support since December when the same pollster found he edged Green 45 to 39 percent.

Notice how they couldn't bring themselves to post the new numbers from Rasmussen that have the numbers at 49 percent for Doyle and Green at 41 percent. The new numbers are a little too close to 50 percent so they put in the old numbers.

Green Bay TV

I visited family in the Green Bay area over the weekend and what a difference being in swing area TV market! I have not seen any political commercials here at home Madison, but just about every commercial during the news in Green Bay was a political ad.

The first one that came on was Rep. Mark Green's "I need to convince everyone I haven't been voting too extreme" commercial and my first thought was that it is odd that he even has to run that ad in his home market.

Until I heard my ten-year-old niece say "Mark Green is too extreme" after the commercial was over. Her parents don't work in politics like I do so if a ten-year-old child is saying that phrase, I'd say it's sticking.

It's going to be pretty rough sailing for Rep. Mark Green if he has to spend money convincing the area that knows him best that he is not too extreme.

Senator Ron Brown finally learns about his job

Senator Ron Brown (R-Eau Claire) was stunned to find out that his constituents think he should do more to help solve the health care crisis. Welcome to your job Mr. Brown.

While it's true that the major push for health care reform has to come from the federal government, that fact does not absolve state elected officials from trying to help plug some of the gaps in our health care system. Brown knows this too or he would not have a section on his campaign website devoted to what he has done on the health care issue.

That knowledge did not prevent him this week from saying it's not fair that people in the Eau Claire area held a press conference calling the state legislature to the mat on this issue. Brown's belief that he gets to take credit for what he has done but is not responsible for what the legislature has not done might explain some of the votes he took on health care over the last couple of years.

How else to explain why he voted to increase the residency requirement from thirty days to six months for the Health Insurance Risk Sharing Plan(AB 100, 6/30/05)? If someone comes to our state for a new job, but the job doesn't have health insurance, why should they wait six months to be able to buy into health care coverage that could keep them from going bankrupt if they get sick? Senator Brown was not asked to wait six months to get his state health care coverage.

He also voted to increase co-pays and deductibles for the BadgerCare program that provides health insurance for the children of parents with jobs that don't provide health care insurance. (SA1 to SSA 1 to SB 44, 6/18/03 and AB 100, 6/30/05) With all the tax cuts the Republicans tried to enact, it seems unfair to do it buy increasing the health insurance costs for children.

Brown does think the state controls health care enough to allow health professionals to deny treatment if their religion believes it is wrong. (AB 67, 2/4/04) That's not only unfair, it's immoral.

But Senator Brown is not responsible for any those actions in his mind.

Who does the WI Republican Party wish was running for governor?

Isn't it odd that the webpage for the Republican Party of Wisconsin has a large picture of President Bush with former Governor Tommy Thompson? You would think they would be trying to sell the guy that is actually running for governor.

There isn't even a link to Mark Green's campaign website on the main page.

Running with the past

There have been a lot of polls released recently about the race for governor in Wisconsin. The results vary quite a bit with everything from a statistical tie to a ten-point lead for Governor Doyle. Who knows which of the polls is the most accurate? Whether or not he is tied or ten points behind shouldn't be what Republican Mark Green is concerned about. He should be concerned about the number of voters that still have no opinion of him.

The election is about eleven weeks away and in the latest poll done by WISC-TV, 34 percent did not have an opinion of Green. In the polling world, that means they have no idea who Mark Green is.

And sooner or later, despite Green's best efforts, they will learn that Green is a U.S. Congressman. That title carries with it anemic approval ratings of anywhere from 29 to 36 percent this month. In fact the disapproval number for Congress has dipped below 50 percent in only one of the dozens of polls taken this year and has even been as high as 73 percent.

Typically candidates drive up their numbers by talking about all of the good things they have done in their last couple of jobs. This is especially true if they have held another public office prior to the one they are seeking.

A quick look at Green's 2002 campaign website shows that he did use this method in the past. His accomplishments section included phrases like "during his second term in Congress" and "Mark Green emerged as one of the key leaders in the U.S. House of Representatives" as a way to convince voters to send him back.

None of the ads we have seen from his campaign so far talk about anything he has done in Congress. They talk about things everyone loves like brats, Brett Farve and whether or not to have perch or cod for dinner, but not about Green's time in Congress.

So how will he win over the 34 percent that don't know him without talking about his experience? His lawn will need to be mowed a few more times between now and the election, but more commercials with him on a lawn mower aren't going to move too many people.

He may try to keep modifying his record in Congress to win over voters. He has already started voting differently and this week we saw him trying to distance himself from his leadership role in the Victory in Iraq Caucus.

Green can gain some ground by running ads against Governor Doyle, but it is very risky for Green to run ads too early that are perceived to be negative by the public. If the only thing a voter sees is a candidate "going negative", they think poorly of the candidate running the ad.

The recent attempts by the Green Team to spit shine Green's record in Congress suggests they have realized that they have to acknowledge he is a congressman and just make the best of it by rewriting the history of Green's record. Green has a long record to account for in Congress so that project should keep them busy until election day.

Hilldale Mall development plan

File this under be careful what you wish for...

Earlier this year the owner of the Sentry store at Hilldale Mall voiced objections to a Whole Foods coming into the Hilldale Mall development because the Whole Foods store would have a lot of surface parking spaces. Much like, well Sentry.

The owner, Tim Metcalfe, was really trying to use the liberals on the city council to reject the plan by playing to their development desires to get rid of large surface parking lots. His real goal it to try to keep a new Whole Foods store from taking business away from his store. And they did reject the plan for a 50,000 square foot Whole Foods store with 240 surface parking spaces.

Now the Hilldale developer has come back with a new plan that includes a parking ramp instead of a large surface lot. Sounds good so far. But here is the rub for Metcalfe. The new proposal contains a 65,000 square foot Whole Foods store.

Stem cell debate will continue

The new technique that may produce stem cells by removing one cell from a blastomere and placing the remaining cells into a uterus to grow into a fetus is interesting, but not the end of the debate on stem cell research. And unfortunately for Rep. Mark Green, the religious right isn't going to allow him to support this alternative.

The Catholics have already trashed the method as being against their principles and too risky to the embryo. A panel appointed by President Bush also found the procedure "ethically troubling" a while back.

The purists on this issue will never accept any research method that involves an embryo.

The cell is extracted from an two-day-old embryo and the religious right believes that an two-day-old embryo is an two-day-old human being with all the rights and protections of an two-year-old human being. In the mind of a purist, removing a cell for research at this stage would be the equivalent of doing an experiment on someone without asking.

And of course, the purists also believes that the cell that is removed from the blastomere to create the stem cell line has the potential to become a human being as well.

If this new procedure works, great. But it doesn't mean that the current methods to obtain stem cells should be abandoned. If the research community has six different types of research going into curing lung cancer, they wouldn't abandon the other five just because one looks promising. What if one of the other five actually has the cure within it?

Green rolls out another "plan" with no details

In what has become standard operating procedure, Rep. Mark Green put out another "plan" today with absolutely no details. He created the illusion of caring about crime in Milwaukee by putting a lot of police in the picture with him, but didn't even give any hints about how he would help fight crime in our state's largest city.

And it seems like the press is finally starting to catch on to the fact that the emperor has no clothes. From the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel DayWatch:

A statement released by Green's campaign, however, did not provide any details on how Green would tackle crime in the city, nor did it provide a measuring stick for success, such as a particular reduction in the murder rate or crime rate.

You can find the rest of the post here.

Unless Rep. Mark Green starts to give voters more details about what he would do as governor, Tony Mandarich will no longer be the most overhyped thing to come out of Green Bay.

OverPACed

Just how much of the state law about PAC funds does Rep. Mark Green think applies to him? He doesn't think the generous $485,000 overall limit applies to him. Does he also think that the individual PAC limits don't apply to him either?

Individual PACs are limited to giving $43,128 to candidates for governor. Under Green's rules, he may be able to take in more per PAC than other candidates for governor.

For example, the funds Green transferred from his federal account to his state account include $15,000 from a realtors PAC. Should that realtors PAC be allowed to give $43,128 more in PAC funds on top of that to his state account? Green also transferred $5500 from pharmaceutical giant Eli Lilly's PAC fund to his state account. Should they be allowed to give $48,628 total to Green or should he have to subtract the $5500 he collected from them at the federal level?

Green has some big PAC donations from individual PACs that he transferred over to his state account. He has twelve PACs that gave $10,000 or more included in the funds he transferred to his state account. Do all of those groups get to give him $10,000 or more over the individual PAC limit too?

Things get pretty complicated when you are writing your own rules for campaign finances as you go.

The polls you don't see

Josh Marshall at Talkingpointsmemo.com caught something few have noticed about polling in the congressional races. The congressional races must be going well for Democrats...

The point I didn't mention is this: the normal response when one candidate puts out a poll favorable to him or herself is for the other side to go into the field and (if they can) and get a better number to release. And back in July they did just that. According to Roll Call (sub. req), the NRCC dropped $450,000 to conduct polls in 28 competitive districts. The article was dated July 31st. And the polls were conducted "over a two-week period this month." In other words, the polling was almost certainly done at least a month ago.

So far as I can tell, I've seen few if any of those polls. And it's not hard to figure out why.

Cricket, cricket ...

Providing for the few

Since Rep. Mark Green and his colleagues tried to link the increase in the minimum wage and a reduction of the estate tax, one might think that the two proposals would at least help a similar amount of people. However, a recent report by the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities reveals the desires of a few were put above the needs of many.

Legislation passed by the House before it departed for recess links a dramatic reduction in the estate tax with an increase in the minimum wage. In seeking to tie the fate of these two proposals together, House leaders have implied that they address concerns of similar import and urgency.

In reality, of course, the minimum wage increase would benefit 5.6 million workers, while the estate tax reduction would benefit 8,200 very large estates. Moreover, over the past decade, Congress has zealously protected the small number of wealthy estates subject to the estate tax, enacting legislation (in 1997 and 2001) that has reduced estate tax burdens in eight of the past nine years.

You can find the report here.

-By Ben Sargent via Slate.com

The lost city of Arcadia

Since the mayor of Arcadia is so gung ho about English only for everything, when can we expect his proposal to get rid of that Greek name they have for the city?

A pledge for Green to sign

Jon Alter has a column in Newsweek that Rep. Mark Green should read. And then he should sign the pledge that Alter proposes in his column.

The pledge:

“Because of my strong opposition to embryonic-stem-cell research, I hereby pledge that should I, at any point in the future, develop diabetes, cancer, spinal-cord injuries or Parkinson’s, among other diseases, I will refuse any and all treatments derived from such research, at home or abroad, even if it costs me my life. Signed, ______”

Alter bases his pledge on the no-tax pledges Republicans are so fond of signing so they should have no problem signing this one.

You can find his column here.

Green's election year miracle

An AP story in the Wisconsin State Journal today takes a look at Rep. Mark Green's voting history on ethics reform. The story correctly points out that Green has changed his tune on ethics since he decided he was running for governor. And then the hilarity begins.

When the reporter asked Green about his votes in 2003 and 2005 for the Republican House rules bills that actually weakened the ethics rules, Green said he opposed the bill but voted for it because without a rules bill the House couldn't function. Oh the calamities he said would happen without those bills passing. Committees couldn't meet. Hearings couldn't be held. Votes couldn't be taken.

That's kind of the point though isn't it? The House shouldn't have been functioning under weakened ethics rules. It would have been better to shut it down. A congressman that really cared about ethics more than his party surely would have voted to shut the House down.

Then the reporter asks Green about his vote to change the rules that let Rep. Tom DeLay keep his leadership position even though he had been indicted for a crime related to his office. And wouldn't you know it, Green was against that rule change too.

But he couldn't seem to find the "no" button when he went to vote that day. He says he voted to keep DeLay in office because they added some language requiring members to vote on removal. Nice try. Voting to change the rules to allow DeLay to stay in office WAS the vote on removal and Green blew it.

In 2004 Green voted against a motion to set up an investigation into DeLay activities. He claims he voted against this because the committee already had the authority to do an investigation. Except the House Ethics Committee run by Green's colleagues didn't investigate anything. Ever. Not DeLay. Not now-jailed Rep. Duke Cunningham. Not anything.

Green also voted against the McCain-Feingold campaign finance reform. Twice. He's got an excuse for that one too. He claims he supported something stronger but a spokeswoman for a DC congressional reform group said the bill he supported was not a credible bill. In other words, it was never going to be taken up and voted on and Green knew it so he felt he could put his name on that bill and vote against the reform on the floor.

And then: (cue the music) ALLELUIA!!

He sees the light! He sees the light! He starts to break rank with his party and vote on real reform.

An election year miracle!

But it's one no one should believe. His past voting record alone should tell people he is not serious about reform. And if Green was even half serious about reforming politics, he wouldn't be trying to take in over twice the amount of PAC money allowed by state law.

Interesting endorsement

One would think that a former sheriff running for the 21st SD would be a lock to get the endorsement from the Wisconsin Troopers Association. Not so when the candidate is William McReynolds.

I'm guessing part of the reason the Wisconsin Troopers Association picked Rep. John Lehman is that McReynolds has flipped-flopped on the issue of concealed carry. When he was a sheriff, he was against them. Now that he is a county executive and doesn't have to deal with consequences of concealed carry as part of his job, he is for allowing them.

I've heard rumors about his behavior as sheriff that may have also played into the endorsement, but I won't put them down here until I can confirm them.

Bucher's latest ad makes him unfit for AG office

Paul Bucher has always seemed unaware that the Department of Justice is about far more than busting hardened criminals on the street. His latest ad for his campaign to be the Attorney General confirms that not only does lack a plan for how to operate the rest of the department he seeks run, he is actually unfit to do the job.

Bucher's latest ad used the name of a murdered state Department of Justice agent until the family asked him to stop using it. The fact that Bucher, a man who has worked in the justice field for a number of years, would use the name of this man in a political ad without even considering how it might impact the man's family makes him unfit to serve as the Attorney General of our state.

Keep in mind that the Attorney General's office must deal with crime victims all the time and even has an Office of Crime Victim Services. How can someone who has displayed such a complete lack of empathy for a crime victim's family be considered for an office that must help crime victims on a regular basis?

Bucher's drive to be the Attorney General kept him from even asking the family whether or not they would want to hear about the agent's murder as a political commercial while they are driving home from work. That displays such a severe lack of judgment that the voters should not think an apology for this event will prevent a future incident like it.

John Gard's creepy new ad

So how high would someone's negatives have to be for a political consultant putting together a commercial to suggest that the candidate be blurred in the background and not utter one word?

John Gard's new commercial about women's health has him sitting behind his wife while she speaks and he is somewhat blurred the whole time. The entire ad is like this and the strange look on Gard's face with the weird positioning of him behind his wife almost makes you think that Gard has some sort of sharp object in his wife's back forcing her to say nice things about him.

Seeing this ad confirms what I've thought all along about this race - the Republicans should have run John's wife Cate Zeuske for the seat. That race would be a lock by now for the Republicans if they had run her instead.

And by the way Team Gard, corporations like Nike don't like having their logo displayed in things like campaign commercials. Especially for a politician that has negatives as high as Gard. They've spent lots of money making the little swoosh a positive item.

Of course, we all know that this wouldn't be the first time Gard has not gotten permission to use something in a commercial.

Welcome to a new blog

There is a new blog out there that could be tons of fun to read. The blog is devoted to keeping tabs on Senator Glenn Grothman(R-West Bend). You know, the guy that thinks some people can't afford college because they take too many vacations.

The blog should have plenty of material to use. You can find it here.

The health care crisis is a federal problem

I have to hand it to Rep. Mark Green. He has a lot of chutzpah to make this statement in the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel about Governor Doyle's proposal to create a tax deduction for health care premiums:

"I don't think it shows a lot of leadership to suddenly, right before the election, do something he had failed to do for 3 1/2 years," Green said. "What's he been doing?"

As a member of the Do Nothing Congress, it takes a lot of nerve to ask what other politicians have been doing for the last couple of years.

The quick answer as to what he has been doing is cleaning up the budget deficit that Green helped create when he was a state assemblyman. It's pretty hard to tackle major new initiatives when you have to dig out of hole first.

But the better question is what has Congress been doing to tackle the health care crisis in this country. Governors across the country have been doing their best to plug as many gaps in the system as they can, but true health care reform has to come from Congress and they haven't even tried to do it.

Green and his Republican colleagues like to talk about health care cost transparency as a means to help get the health care crisis under control. This amounts to not a whole lot more than people being able to see the cost of the procedures they can't afford to have and can't get their insurance company to cover.

And it's going to take a whole lot more to fix this problem. Our health care system is completely broken and Green and the Republicans running Congress have stood by and let it happen. In fact, they took over Congress by stopping an attempt at major reform. The plan the Clinton's put together had a lot of problems, but the Republicans didn't try to put together a better plan. They just scared everyone into thinking we didn't need health care reform.

The country now knows better.

About 46 million people in this country lack health insurance coverage. Which is like everyone in the states of Wisconsin, Illinois, Ohio, Michigan and Indiana not having health insurance. If our nation decided that those five states should not have health insurance simply because of where they lived, people would be outraged. So why is acceptable to deny people coverage simply because of the job they have because they are spread out all over the country?

The number of people without insurance has been climbing steadily for the last couple of years and it is not a result of people that refuse to work. About 21 million of those people work full-time and still have no coverage. A good deal of the rest work close to full-time hours but are not allowed to have the rest of the hours to make them full-time and qualify them for benefits. Many businesses do this to save money and more and more companies are not providing health care at all due to the costs.

The fact is, the health care crisis is so large that only the federal government can solve it now. It does not require a government run health care. But it will require federal government funds and the system should no longer be job based. It will be expensive at first, but in the long run it will save us money to have everyone covered by insurance instead of doing quick health care fixes in emergency rooms across the country.

The answer to our health care problems probably lies closer to having more people be able to buy into the health care system the federal government provides to its employees and having the federal government subsidize those that can't afford it instead of having the government running the hospitals and clinics.

But will Congress let other people into the good health care coverage they get? Or will they continue to try to pawn the problem off onto the states?

The wacky left grows!

We're up to sixty percent baby!

This CNN poll has the number of people opposing the Iraq war/occupation at sixty percent and a majority of them favoring the withdrawl of at least some of our troops.

This is the wacky left that you hear so much about from Republicans. They try to argue that only people on the fringe want out of this occupation of Iraq, but that group seems to be growing each day.

Gard should have left Guard alone

The picture for this story about the Appleton-based National Guard returning home made me cry. Look at the expression on the boy's face and tell me you can't get a sense of the fear this boy has been trying to deal with while his father was gone for a year.

Then I saw this news release from the Republican candidate for Congress, John Gard, and it made me sick. He might as well have written "Yes they are heroes but look at me!"

If you want to show up and thank the men and woman coming back from Iraq, that is great. But don't make it a campaign moment. You can't tell me Gard thought the return needed press coverage either. I'm quite certain the news industry was well aware that the Guard unit was coming home.

No, that release was all about John Gard. And that's what made me sick to my stomach. If John Gard couldn't let the National Guard unit have their moment, he should have stayed home.

Motivated by fear

So now we see the reason behind Rep. Mark Green's release claiming someone was planning to blow up the Mackinac bridge. Republicans are losing the "security moms".

From the Washington Post:

Married women with children, the "security moms" whose concerns about terrorism made them an essential part of Republican victories in 2002 and 2004, are taking flight from GOP politicians this year in ways that appear likely to provide a major boost for Democrats in the midterm elections, according to polls and interviews.

This critical group of swing voters -- who are an especially significant factor in many of the most competitive suburban districts on which control of Congress will hinge -- is more inclined to vote Democratic than at any point since Sept. 11, 2001, according to data compiled for The Washington Post by the Pew Research Center.

The "security moms" are leaning Democratic by a wide margin.

The study, which examined the views of married women with children from April through this week, found that they support Democrats for Congress by a 12-point margin, 50 percent to 38 percent. That is nearly a mirror-image reversal from a similar period in 2002, when this group backed Republicans 53 percent to 36 percent. In 2004, exit polls showed, Bush won a second term in part because 56 percent of married women with children supported him.

You can find the rest here.

Democrat shopping

What's the latest sign that Dems are going to take back some control of Congress this fall? Lobbying firms are hiring Dems.

From TPMmuckraker:

"Washington lobbying firms, trade associations and corporate offices are moving to hire more well-connected Democrats in response to rising prospects that the opposition party will wrest control of at least one chamber of Congress from Republicans in the November elections.

"In what lobbyists are calling a harbinger of possible upheaval on Capitol Hill, many who make a living influencing government have gone from mostly shunning Democrats to aggressively recruiting them as lobbyists over the past six months or so." (Washington Post)

Green's resume

Normally when you apply for a new job, you talk a lot about how well you have done in your past jobs. But Rep. Mark Green isn't talking much about his current job in his ads. These polls could be the reason why. Congress' job approval is running anywhere from a high of 36% to a low of 24% this month.

No wonder he is leaving that job off of his resume these days.

Checked out

You can sure tell Rep. Mark Green is not running for Congress this year. He isn't bringing much back for his area in the latest Health and Human Services appropriations bill in Congress.

If you go the Sunlight Foundation's website and shift the earmark map to Wisconsin, you will see there is noticeable lack of earmarks up in the 8th Congressional District.

The website is actually designed to help bring to light the congresspeople asking for earmarks. And I supposed the Green Team would argue that they are being fiscally conservative. But that doesn't wash since he has bragged about the earmarks he has inserted into bills in the past.

WMC attacking Lehman for work McReynolds should have done

This week Wisconsin Manufacturers and Commerce (WMC) released an ad attacking the Democrat running for the 21st Senate District, Rep. John Lehman, that tries to tie Lehman to Honda's decision to build a new plant in Indiana. They're attack is a little misguided as his Republican opponent, County Executive Bill McReynolds, was probably in a better position to help get the plant to come to Southeastern Wisconsin than Lehman.

No doubt WMC is running this ad because they used a similar ad to go after former State Senator Rod Moen. But this ad could acutally bring to mind the failures of Racine County government.

When word came out that Walworth County was not going to get the plant, the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel had an article with this in it:

"I wasn't surprised," said Walworth County Economic Development Alliance Executive Vice President Fred Burkhardt, who spearheaded the local effort to lure Honda.

"We knew going in we were a long shot," Burkhardt said. "We knew we were late in the game, and we appreciate the opportunity to have played."

So Walworth County was the government entity that was pursuing the plant and they got in the game late. Burkhardt even admitted that the county hastily put the proposal together.

Racine County is right next to Walworth County so perhaps McReynolds could have directed his economic development staff to help Racine County get the proposal done so Racine County could have benefited from the new jobs too.

Or hey, maybe Racine County could have put in a bid themselves.

In the end, Wisconsin was not likely to get the plant since Honda was looking for a site closer to their operations in Ohio.

But at least Walworth County tried. Racine County wasn't even in the game.

Green making promises he shouldn't keep

The conservative business group Wisconsin Manufacturers and Commerce (WMC) has posted a letter that they received from Rep. Mark Green on their website. Two things jump out at me about this letter.

One, he gives more detail to WMC than he does to everyone concerned about education. For education he put out a "plan" that basically says he is going cut funding to local schools and let someone else worry about the details of actually making the cuts. He only wants to be governor, why should he have to outline the items he would cut from the budget to pay for his "plan" when he can simply pass the buck to someone else?

Number two is even more of a problem. WMC is an active political participant. Few groups in this state do more than WMC to try to get the candidates they want elected than they do. That's not the problem. WMC has every right to do this. But knowing this, Green has put something in his letter to WMC that is smells to high heaven.

As governor, I will sign pro-growth legislation into law to demonstrate to the world that Wisconsin is once again open for business!

First, we must replace Governor Jim Doyle and I need your help, support and your vote.

Isn't Green promising action on items of interest for WMC if they donate to his campaign? I didn't even move those two lines together myself. That is how he wrote. You give me donations, and I'll give you someting you want.

What else could he mean by the word "support" in a letter to a group known to help get money to candidates and run ads about politicians?

We have a word for this. It's called logrolling. And Green has been in politics long enough to know it.

Not even close, take two

And here I thought the excuse from the Appleton bar owner about why there have been more underage drinking citations was the worst I would hear this week. Turns out, Donovan Riley has him beat by a mile.

Green advocates for open air classrooms

Rep. Mark Green's press release on his "plan" for education is a joke right? It has to be. Otherwise you come away thinking Green doesn't know that classrooms are in buildings. Green says he wants to spend money on the classrooms but also says:

“Taxpayer dollars should be targeted at children and classrooms - not bureaucrats and buildings."

Yeah, the money spent on the roof above the classrooms is wasteful spending pure and simple. Why should we pay for new roofs for the buildings when we could have open air classrooms? The kids could just meet with the teacher in a field. We'd save a ton of money on heating and building maintenance costs that way. Sure the kids may get cold in the winter, but science class will be all around them. Hey, maybe that means we can stop wasting money on science textbooks too!

Extreme denial

"Jim Doyle and his henchmen at the Greater Wisconsin Committee have run a lot of negative ads and spent a lot of time trying to call Mark Green extreme, but nobody believes him."

-Rep. Mark Green's campaign manager Mark Graul

Then why is the Green Team spending thousands of dollars on television ads saying he is not extreme? If no one believes it, his ad trying to say he is not extreme would be the dumbest ad of all time. Why would a candidate even mention the word extreme if s/he didn't think other people believed they are extreme?

Face it, the Green Team has polling that shows the people of Wisconsin thinks he is too extreme for our state. Probably because he is.

Must be an election soon

-By Rob Rogers of the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette

And since the election is few short months away, Congress has to pretend they are doing something about gas pricing so they are holding a hearing on the pipline leak.

But not the secret meetings that both the White House and oil executives lied about.

Or whether or not giving over $14 billion in tax breaks to big energy companies has produced anything for the American taxpayer.

Or the fact that mergers in the refinery industry are pushing up prices for consumers.

Do you think they'll make the oil execs testify under oath in this time?

Student moving day

Folks heading downtown Madison today should be prepared for a little chaos. Today is the annual student move out and that always means tons of students with all of their stuff on the street for the night.

And for those that go down searching for a few items to take home from the curb, a word of caution. Don't open any bags looking for items. My babysitter told me that when she went back to clean her apartment this weekend (she was subletting it out), she found a pumpkin from Halloween in a storage closet. And it wasn't ceramic.

SOS La Follette still refusing to follow the law

What do you think it will take to get Secretary of State Doug La Follette to put an "authorized and paid for" line on his campaign material?

Hey, who said that?

"My Republican candidate for governor is absolutely opposed to any kind of stem-cell research and I can't accept that."

-Former Republican Governor Lee Sherman Dreyfus in the Isthmus

When someone from the Doyle campaign points this out, the Green team has a fit and calls them a liar. Can't wait to see the press release from the Green team taking Governor Dreyfus to task and exaggerating the number of diseases helped by research on adult stem-cells.

Spending in election for governor

Yesterday, Scott Milfred of the Wisconsin State Journal had an editorial in the paper about campaign spending. Most of the article was about how more candidates from Minnesota abide by spending limits and most from Wisconsin don't. However, there was one little paragraph in that editorial that was pretty irritating because it was so wrong.

Wisconsin Democratic Gov. Jim Doyle is predicted to spend $10 million or more this fall. U.S. Rep. Mark Green, R-Green Bay, is predicted to spend about $8 million.

This statement is the result of spin from the Green campaign. How many times have we seen newspapers fall for the "poor me, I'm going to be outspent by the big bad Democrat" line from Republican challengers?

Rep. Mark Green is not going to be outspent by $2 million in this race. When has a serious Republican challenger for office ever been outspent so badly?

I will grant the Republicans that they are good at this game of convincing the reporters that they will be outspent and that they are going to get almost all of their money from within the district or within the state. But they always end up with more money and a lot of it comes from outside the district or outside of Wisconsin.

How do they get away with this? They backload it to the last campaign finance report that doesn't get reported until after the election.

The best example of this was in 2000 when Senator Shelia Hardorf challenged then Senator Alice Clausing. Harsdorf bemoaned all of Clausing's campaign funds and complained she was going to be outspent. She also repeatedly hammered Clausing for her out-of-district money.

Harsdorf ended up spending over $100,000 more than Clausing on the race and her last campaign finance report, the one published after the election was over, reads like a who's who list of the Milwaukee area. This is not to say that Harsdorf is not a strong in-district fundraiser. She is. She just isn't the purist she claimed she was in the early months of the election. But she got a ton of great press beating up Clausing for her fundraising and ended up doing exactly what she was accusing Clausing of doing.

And it will be the same for Rep. Mark Green. He will close the fundraising gap quickly in the last month or so of the campaign and spend just as much as Governor Doyle.

But first he'll keep the feeding the press lines about how Doyle is going to outspend him by millions and help the press beat up Doyle for his out-of-state donations. Indeed he put out a press release late last month along those lines.

In the end, Green will spend as much, perhaps more, than Governor Doyle on the election and will have a lot of out-of-state donations come in during the last few weeks of the campaign.

And the press will have bought the whole ridiculous story like they always do.

Cheney's playground politics

-By Mike Luckovich of the Atlanta Constitution via Slate.com

I'm sure we can expect this talking point out of Lieberman any day now.

RNC and Photoshop

So this is real mature. The RNC may have modified a picture of Howard Dean on their website. If they did do this, they have now changed the photo back to normal. You can find the story here.

Farm Bureau not really for farmers

Brian Fraley over at Dailytakes is suggesting that the Wisconsin Farm Bureau endorsement of Rep. Mark Green is a big deal because Governor Jim Doyle was courting the endorsement. Doyle may have been courting it by doing things Wisconsin farmers care about, but issues farmers care about take a back burner to conservative politics at the Farm Bureau. No one should be surprised by the endorsement and I'm sure the governor was not.

The Farm Bureau politics run very, very Republican and that stems from the fact that most of the members of the Farm Bureau are not farmers. An article a few years back noted:

"The Farm Bureau is perceived as the voice of farmers, when it is actually the voice of agribusiness," says Bob Ferris of Defenders of Wildlife. "It’s an organization that is seriously broken in terms of setting its priorities." Ferris explains that only 1.9 million of the Bureau’s 5 million members are farmers - the rest are policyholders of one of many Farm Bureau insurance companies or customers of other for-profit ventures.

Defenders of Wildlife found this by putting together a report called Amber Waves of Grain. The subtitle will give you a clue as to what they found: How The Farm Bureau Is Reaping Profits At The Expense of America's Family Farmers, Taxpayers And The Environment.

UPDATE: I almost forgot that 60 minutes did a piecs on this issue a little while back too. You can find a summary of it here.

Not even a good try

If the following statement came out with a straight face, this guy could have a future in politics. From the Appleton Post-Crescent:

The head of a group seeking to exempt bars from the city's smoking ban blames the ban for an increase in violations for serving underage people.


Bill Maloney, president of the Appleton Coalition for Business Owners Rights, said the ban has driven experienced bartenders out of the city, leaving bar owners with inexperienced servers.

Do you think when Bill was a child that he actually tried to blame his dog when his homework wasn't done?

I know when I was a waitress, it took me months and months to learn how to ask to see an ID before serving someone alcohol.

Fifty candidates with little value for a woman's life

I was a little shocked to see that there are fifty people running for office this year in Wisconsin that don't think the life of a woman is valuable enough to protect. This list of candidates running for everything from Lieutenant Governor to District Attorney don't believe abortions should be allowed even when the life of the mother is danger.

Pro-Life Wisconsin, the group that is endorsing these candidates, even seems to disregard the possibility that there could be a situation where the mother could die in childbirth by wording the situation as:

the child whose mother's life is perceived to be in danger

Perceived, not in danger. Groups like Pro-Life Wisconsin like to give people the perception that women just don't die in childbirth anymore and people want that exception put into law so women can use it willy nilly to get an abortion. Nothing could be further from the truth.

Women do still die in childbirth and no one at Pro-Life Wisconsin has ever explained how being "pro-life" means being ok with letting women die in child birth.

The position is no where near to being pro-family either, but that is how many politicians try to sell it. I grew up in the congressional district now occupied by Rep. Paul Ryan (R-Janesville). When he was first running for office, I went home to visit my father and there was a piece of mail from the Ryan campaign promoting his "pro-life" and supposedly pro-family views.

The mailer highlighted a story from U.S. Senator Rick Santorum and his wife about one of the pregnancies she had went through. The Santorums were told that the baby would most likely not live once born and Santorum's wife's life was at risk if she carried the pregnancy to term. She had the baby and unfortunately for them, it did die a few hours after being born.

It was a tragic story for the Santorums and I felt bad for them that they had to go through it, but I didn't think their decision was the pro-family thing to do because the Santorums had some older children. Is it pro-family to potentially have those kids grow up without a mother?

How can any politician potentially force a women to go through with a pregnancy that might kill her and call themselves pro-life or pro-family? The fifty folks on that list should be prepared to answered that question this fall from the families they want to represent.

Green picks party over state

From this article, you would never know that Republicans control the majority of governorships in this country. Republicans currently control the White House, both chambers of the Congress and have control of 28 states, but the last National Governor's Association(NGA) meeting sounded like a rally getting ready to go burn down the U.S. Capitol.

What is a guy like Rep. Mark Green supposed to do as a Republican Congressman running for governor?

You would think that by now he would start to try to distance himself from the branch of government everyone loves to hate these days.

So why would Rep. Mark Green, a man who wants to be governor, vote to surrender power over the National Guard to the President of the United States?

I suppose we'll hear from the Green Team that it was a big bill, lots of things that were needed are in the bill, blah blah blah.

Ok, fine. I'll accept that. It is a really large bill and no one wants to be accused of "voting against the troops" by voting against that bill.

But where is his outrage on this provision now? Republicans governors are upset about this and have finally picked up on the fact that their colleagues in Congress have abandoned them.

Huckabee, who is considering a presidential bid in 2008, said Congress and the administration -- run by his fellow Republicans -- have moved far from what he called the "traditional states' rights position" of conservatives.

Huckabee is a Republican governor from Arkansas and even though his party is the one taking action against his state, he is standing up for his state rather than his party.

And from Green? Nothing.

Unfortunately, this is but one example in a long list of items where Green and his colleagues in Congress have stuck it to the states. In fact, all the issues listed in the Stateline.org article that governors were upset about at the NGA meeting are items that Rep. Mark Green went along with his party on despite having visions of running the state himself someday.

Governors also vented frustrations at Capitol Hill over illegal immigration, high gasoline prices and new driver’s license regulations, and in conversations said the relationship between states and the federal government has deteriorated since they were last elected.

Green didn't buck his party on any of these issues.

The National Conference of State Legislatures estimates that the changes required by the REAL ID act on how states issue drivers licenses will cost the states $500 to $700 million. Since he wants to run a state after his stint in Congress, one might think Green would have prodded his colleagues to cough up the money for the program rather than forced the states to pay for it.

"The national mood is pretty sour out there towards Congress ... and I think it's getting worse, because people are just getting frustrated. They recognize the tremendous needs, and they don't see anybody stepping forward or a party stepping forward to getting it done,"

And just who made this comment at the NGA meeting? Wisconsin's own Tommy Thompson. And judging by that very unhelpful comment for Green, Thompson accepted the speaking gig at the conference just to be able to show Green that while he begrudgingly got out of the way for Green, Thompson still gets to go to the NGA meetings and Green might never get there.

Of course, Green cannot pretend he wasn't part of Congress. But Democrats should be happy that Green hasn't started thinking more like someone who is looking out for the state of Wisconsin first. As long as he continues to go along with what his party bosses in Congress want him to do, Thompson will still be the latest Republican governor from Wisconsin at the NGA meetings.

Lieberman descends into the muck right away

It would seem that Karl Rove is writing the talking points for Joe Lieberman right out of the gate. Sigh.

Lieberman Says Lamont's Policies Would Be "Tremendous Victory" For Terrorists.

I'm surprised he hasn't point out that he lost his primary and right away we see a terror plot unfold.

Don't let the door hit you on the way out Senator Lieberman...

Just like Mitt

How appropriate that Rep. Mark Green has Massachusetts Republican Governor Mitt Romney coming to town today to raise money for him. Romney was recently unanimously overridden by his legislature when he vetoed a minimum wage increase for the state.

Rep. Green wants to be just like Mitt.

Now showing: Neverland

Neverland is often seen as a metaphor for eternal childhood (and childishness), immortality, and escapism.

-From Wikipedia.com

Now showing: Neverland - A movie about the Attorney General Race in Wisconsin

Starring:
The Capital Times Newspaper as The Lost Boys
Peg Lautenschlager as Peter Pan
Paul Bucher/JB Van Hollen as Captain Hook
The voice of reality as Tinker Bell

This scene opens with Peter talking to the Lost Boys about the upcoming election.

Peter: I really think the voters will forget all of my problems in the past and vote for me this fall. Don't you agree?

Lost Boys: What problems? You've done nothing that will inhibit your ability to be elected this fall.

Peter: You know what, you're right and I'm going to start telling everyone that over and over again and soon it will be true.

Lost Boys: And we will help! We'll say it over and over again, in WRITING, which makes it even more true! Plus we'll criticize anyone that dares to mention the things you haven't done!

Tinker Bell: Peter, Captain Hook is going to bring up the problems so you will have to deal with them.

Lost Boys: Our first article will be the Tinker Bell doesn't exist!

Try as they might, the Capital Times cannot take all of us to Neverland to escape the problems Attorney General Peg Lautenschlager will have this fall. This editorial proves they are still trying though.

Never mind that they are using the same type of smear tactics against Kathleen Falk that they are decrying here by trying to say she is sleazy because a firm has done one thing wrong in the past. The editorial is yet more evidence that they refuse to look at the facts when it comes to their friend the Peg Lautenschlager.

Hiring an opposition research firm doesn't make any politician sleazy. It's called a modern campaign. Sticking your head in the sand pretending things like this aren't done will get you nothing more than a lot of losses.

I don't think Kathleen Falk is going to run any sleazy ads, but she will present the case for why she should be elected instead of Peg Lautenschalger. And if the Attorney General cannot sustain a thorough primary challenge, she doesn't stand a chance this fall.

All the fairy dust in the world can't change that.

Drink up boys and girls

This week the Wisconsin State Assembly Natural Resources Committee blocked a proposed rule that would regulate a cancer causing chemical that is starting to pop up in too many wells in Wisconsin. The chemical, alachlor-ESA, is a byproduct of the herbicide alachlor manufactured by Monsanto. They blocked it despite the fact that the cancer causing byproduct has been found in 43 percent of the wells tested in the southern two-thirds of Wisconsin.

When asked by the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel about the vote, Rep. Scott Gunderson (R-Waterford), chair of the committee, said the committee had a good comfort level that we are all safe.

Just what is the comfort level when we are talking about cancer anyway?

Is Gunderson saying we have to find the three-headed frogs before we take action?

Combine that with the story told in this blog post about the Senate and Assembly Agriculture Committees voting to protect a few large agribusiness operations instead of groundwater and you've got some serious problems ahead for water quality in our state. Especially if these representatives remain in charge and continue to ignore things like an entire family getting sick from water contaminated with manure.

The representatives that voted this way in the Assembly Agriculture Committee were just outraged that the Wisconsin Wildlife Federation (WWF) was putting children in their press release to illustrate the problem. Some of the committee members put out a press release criticizing the WWF for emotionalizing the issue.

Because politicians NEVER, EVER use children to draw attention to themselves.

Seriously, when was the last time you received a piece of campaign literature without a child on it from a politician?

And of course it's not sickening that these representatives are pushing all the family farmers that don't even do what this rule would address out in front so they can say they are protecting farmers, not agribusiness.

So drink up boys and girls. The water is fine according to the folks who run these committees. Or better yet, let's say we set up a little test a la Erin Brockovich and line up glasses of water for the committee members to drink but not tell them which ones have manure in them, which ones have the cancer causing byproduct in them and which ones are clean. There would be only one glass with clean water and they'd have to drink them all.

Think they'd drink them?

War and the Democrats

-By Jeff Danziger via Slate.com

Does Joe Lieberman losing his primary yesterday mean that a Democrat that voted for the war cannot win the Democratic nomination for president in 2008? I think it does because this comment:

``I don't expect war fever to dissipate in the Democratic Party," said Roger Stone, a Republican political consultant. ``This is an ominous sign . . . for Democrats who have supported the war."

from this article is probably right. While I wouldn't call it war fever, it seems unlikely Democrats will walk away from this issue any time soon since the situation in Iraq looks like it is getting worse.

I had long ago decided that I could not vote for a candidate in 2008 that voted for the war, but Lieberman's loss yesterday suggests there are many more like me out there. I can forgive politicians voting to save their jobs on many issues. I get that it is hard to make everyone happy when you are an elected official. But sending our soldiers to die in a war because you were afraid you might you lose your job or not get a future job like President of the United States, is unforgivable in my book no matter how hard you pick at Secretary Rumsfeld now in a committee hearing.

Twenty-three senators and one hundred thirty-three representatives had the courage to vote "no". Those totals included people from both parties and if a candidate for President of the United States wasn't one of them, there are a lot of people that will not vote for them in 2008.

UPDATE: Josh Micah Marshall of Talkingpointsmemo.com asks since Lieberman only lost by four points, might he have won if he hadn't told everyone weeks ago that he would run as an Independent if he lost? Maybe signalling that he was ready to leave the Democrats made more Democrats leave him. Josh also has some wise words for politicians that forget where they came from in this article.

American Idol - The Death Penalty Addition

I'm all about people participating in the political process in any way that they can, but please tell me that this is not the main strategy to defeat the death penalty referendum this fall.

There is more right?

Interesting poll

This article in the Washington Post outlines some very interesting poll results on how the public currently views Congress.

1994 comes to mind, but the Democrats shouldn't assume these numbers today will translate into a victory in November. Democratic Stratgegist Mark Mellman is right on when he says:

"There's a big anti-Republican wave building," says Mark Mellman, a Democratic pollster working for several House candidates. "But that wave will crash up against a very stable political structure, and nobody will know till Wednesday morning [the day after the election] which is more important - the size of the wave or the stability of the structure."

in this article from the Christian Science Monitor.

Hip-hop and downtown

"I listen to hip-hop and I am not a violent person. Please leave music out of this. It could be four or five hundred Girl Scouts listening to nursery rhymes and smashing bottles that they brought from home to shiv somebody...it doesn't matter what they're listening to, you just sound racist when you say that."

-Ethan Lund of the Flatiron Tavern on King street responding to other King Street area residents complaining that violence on King Street is caused by Club Majestic playing hip-hop music.

Lund is right. The vast majority of the people that go to Club Majestic to listen to hip-hop aren't causing problems. The wrong people end up at numerous bars in town but no one seems to link the music being played in the bar to violence.

In fact, the weekend before last weekend there was a stabbing outside of the Kollege Klub on Lake Street (near State Street).

No word yet on whether or not local residents are going to chase the jukebox from the Kollege Klub out of town.

DeLay has to run!

The U.S. Supreme Court has decided to get out of the business of interfering with elections. Rep. Tom DeLay (R-TX) has to stay on the ballot.

Wisconsin Democracy Campaign's dirty little secret

The Wisconsin Democracy Campaign (WDC) has a dirty little secret. They don't want campaign finance reform.

Oh they say they do but how else can you explain their behavior of rewarding politicians that lie to them and work directly against campaign finance reform?

For example, take Rep. Steve Freese. He answered the candidate questionnaire provided by WDC and he said "yes" to the first question that asks:

YES OR NO: Do you support and would you vote for bipartisan legislation (similar to 2005-2006 Senate Bill 1) to strengthen enforcement of Wisconsin's ethics code and campaign finance laws by replacing the current State Elections and State Ethics Boards with a nonpartisan and politically independent Government Accountability Board with an enforcement division with the authority and resources to investigate and prosecute violations of state elections, ethics, campaign finance and lobbying laws and regulations?

Freese answered "yes" even though he shouldn't have even been allowed to answer the question at all after his behavior regarding that bill this session. Freese is not only part of the Assembly Leadership that at first decided behind closed doors to prohibit the bill from coming to the floor, he voted "no" when he had a chance to vote outside of his leadership circle.

If WDC is serious about campaign finance reform, why would they allow people like Freese to make a mockery of them time and time again? If a citizen in Freese's district were to go to the WDC website to see if Freese supports SB 1, they would come away thinking Freese does even though he had more to do with sinking the bill than most of the other assemblypeople.

This is not the first time Freese has sunk reform either. This is from a 2003 WDC press release:

Few lawmakers have gone to greater lengths to wrap themselves in the cloak of reform than Steve Freese. But while his words are reminiscent of John McCain, his record on reform resembles Tom DeLay's.

As chairman of the Assembly Campaigns and Elections Committee, Representative Freese is a key gatekeeper on campaign finance reform legislation. He has kept the gate locked. While quickly shepherding photo ID legislation making it harder to vote to the floor of the Assembly early this session, he has taken no steps to develop comprehensive campaign finance reform legislation in his committee for eight months.

It goes on to say:

Comprehensive reform legislation was introduced and referred to his committee in March 2001. For over 11 months, he did not permit his committee to vote on any comprehensive reform proposals. Once it was clear the Senate was taking action on reform legislation, Freese pledged to work in his committee to develop a bipartisan reform package. With considerable fanfare, a bipartisan working group was assembled under Freese's direction. The working group was a charade.

So why does the WDC allow Freese to look like he supports their cause every year at election time by answering "yes" to all of their questions, while working to stop campaign finance reform?

Rep. Mark Green refuses to even address the big problems

Rep. Mark Green continues to offer 'plans' that are not even serious. His latest idea would be to give back-to-school shoppers a tax free shopping day for school items. However, he shouldn't be taken seriously since he offers no items out of the state budget that he would cut to pay for this loss of tax revenue.

Of course that is how he has helped Congress pile up a debt and deficit faster than anyone thought possible so I guess we shouldn't be surprised.

In his press release announcing this idea Green says:

"A tax holiday will put money back into the pockets of students and parents trying to make ends meet while their paychecks don't seem to be keeping up with increasing costs."

Here's an idea. How about you take steps to fix that later part of that sentence Rep. Green? How about you vote to help working families increase their paychecks?

For example, Green could have voted to increase the minimum wage one of the eight times that he voted against it before he decided that in order for those making minimum wage to get an increase, Paris Hilton and the children of Bill Gates needed to have millions more in their pocket first. (And he didn't offer a way to pay for this $268 billion tax break for the wealthiest of the wealthy - see a pattern here?)

Or how about offering the working families of Wisconsin health care as good as the plan that the taxpayers pay for your family to have each year instead of offering up only health care savings accounts (HSA) as a 'plan'? HSAs not only will do almost nothing to reduce health care costs, they are financially out of reach for most of the people that are struggling with health care costs. But they do provide a tax break for those that need help with health care costs the least.

Or maybe while Green was in Congress he could have offered a plan to deal with the increasing pay gap between women and men?

Maybe instead of voting for an ill-conceived war that has turned into a bloody occupation that also drains our economy of billions of dollars, Rep. Green could have proposed or supported a plan to invest that money in our country so wages would not continue to decline.

With large deficits looming and a slowdown in debt-driven consumer spending apparently in the making, U.S. economic growth needs a new foundation. Higher wages must form that foundation. Unfortunately, average wages have a lot of catching up to do. After accounting for inflation, weekly wages dropped for the past three years in a row, according to data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS). These decreases were enough to erase much of the modest wage gains made in prior years. By December 2005, inflation adjusted weekly wages were lower than at the end of the last recession in November 2001 and only 0.2 percent higher than at the end of the last business cycle in March 2001. Stronger wage growth would fuel renewed expansion in consumption and would do so on a more sustainable basis.

All of the funding spent on the war and paying for the interest on the deficit could help address this problem if it was spent on our universities, infrastructure and business start-ups.

Rep. Mark Green could have chosen to lay out a plan to address the real problem in his sentence above. Instead, he chose to propose a cheap political stunt that isn't even well thought out financially, even though he spends his much of his time complaining about state budget problems.

A serious candidate should offer the voters more before election day.

81st AD

I live in Rep. Dave Travis' (D-Waunakee) Assembly District and I've started to see a few Henry Sanders yard signs pop up here. I think Travis will get through the primary, but I'm curious. Does anyone out there think he is in danger of losing the race?

Three Madison Alders oppose local business preference - but 14 support it

At the Madison City Council meeting this week, three of the alders tried to stop the city from even studying a possible preference for local vendors for city purchases. From the Isthmus' webpage:

The final item boasts 13 of the 20 alders as sponsors; it is the study that would research the possibility of a local preference purchasing policy for the city. Jed Sanborn, however, opposes this kind of policy, saying that the city should look for the "best" deal possible regardless of geography.

Alder Compton subsequently proposes an amendment that would strike language from a policy that would allow the city to spend "a little more" when contracting with a local company. "We get a much better bang for our buck" says Austin King in opposition amendment, adding that nothing is yet determined, hence the need for a study. Zach Brandon agrees, saying "some things are based on value," not just cost. The amendment is defeated with only 3 ayes (Sanborn, Thomas, and Compton) and 14 nos.

Sanborn, Thomas and Compton don't quite seem to understand that local businesses getting more city contracts could actually translate into a win financially for the city. If spending a little a more would help keep our local tax base solid by helping local business become stronger, isn't that at least worth a look by the city council?

Will this be first Green ad?

There is a Washington Post article today about Republican candidates making a desperate attempt to run away from President Bush in their elections at home. Some of them have voted lock, stock and barrel with him and are now running ads that essentially say "President Bush? Never heard of him!"

On Capitol Hill, Rep. Mark Kennedy (Minn.) and Sen. James M. Talent (Mo.) are known as loyal Republican soldiers, reliable votes for President Bush on tax cuts and the Iraq war. In elections past, they have aired advertisements featuring the president and have stumped with him at public rallies.

This year, both are running for Senate seats, but their television ads have made no mention of Bush -- and have been conspicuous in distancing the candidates from their partisan affiliation. "Most people don't care if you're red or blue, Republican or Democrat," Talent's ad states. A recent ad from Kennedy says, "He doesn't do what the party says to."

That's not to say they won't take campaign dollars raised by a visit from the president.

These Republicans have hardly broken with Bush. Talent and Kennedy, after all, have invited him into their states this year to help raise hundreds of thousands of dollars for their campaigns.

Sound familiar? Will Rep. Mark Green use money he raised from his fundraiser with Presient Bush to run an ad trying to distance himself from the president? We'll see soon.

In the end, it will be hard for Rep. Green to put too much distance between himself and the Bush White House. He was a solid vote for the Bush Team even if it meant voting against the interests of his own district. Bottom line, you could plug Green's name into the following comment and it would fit.

"All these guys are trying to seem like reasonable, moderate guys who are not the scary conservatives who their opponents will make them out to be," Smith added. "But they all have very conservative records and support for the president that will make it difficult for them to duck this."

Odds increasing for Dems?

"Time is running out for Republicans. Unless something dramatic happens before Election Day, Democrats will take control of the House. And the chances that they’ll seize the Senate are rising toward 50-50.

"The electoral hurricane bearing down on the GOP looks likely to be a Category 4 or 5, strong enough to destroy at least one of the party’s majorities. The political climate feels much as it did before previous elections that produced sizable upheavals, such as in 1994, when Democrats lost 52 House seats, eight Senate seats, and control of both chambers."

-Charlie Cook from a National Journal article via the Political Wire.

Mercury rising

It is very good news that the Mercury Policy Project is conducting a conference in Madison next week. Maybe the folks in the dome will listen to a few things this coalition has to say on the dangers of mercury in the waters of our state before it is too late.

There are a few legislators in particular that should send a staff member over to the conference to listen to the presentations. In particular, the members of the resources committees of both chambers that voted against Clearinghouse Rule CR01-081 in the 2003-2004 session of the legislature. This rule would have reduced mercury emissions from power plants by 80 percent by the 2015. You can find the vote here.

Unbelievably, even though Rep. Mark Pettis represents an area that derives a lot of income from anglers, he told a newspaper after the vote that folks should just eat less fish.

Our neighboring states are taking the action necessary to protect their resources:

“Wisconsin has fallen behind in regulating mercury emissions from power plants,” said Keith Reopelle, Program Director for Clean Wisconsin. “We need to reduce mercury emissions by at least 90 percent as our neighbors in Illinois and Minnesota have.” The Wisconsin DNR will make a decision on mercury regulations this fall.

But will the Republican legislature even let them make the right decision?

They should because millions of tourist dollars for our state are riding on the action or inaction of the state legislature. In 2000, 341 lakes in our state had a health advisory for mercury. It hasn't improved as nearly every lake now has an advisory. Some of the worst lakes for mercury pollution were compiled by Clean Wisconsin in a 2004 report.

If the potential loss of tourist dollars isn't enough, the DNR publishes a document on the impacts of mercury that should give enough warning to legislators. Or maybe they should care that a poll in 2003 found that 88 percent of Wisconsin residents want mercury regulated.

If they don't, there is a poll in November that could yield them some pretty final results.

Update: I swear I had not seen the Isthmus for this week yet when I wrote my post that uses the same name they do for an online article previewing a report on mercury in fish. Just a funny coincidence. I haven't read the article yet but I'm willing to bet it is good so pick up a copy if you get the chance.

DeLay must stay on the ballot

According to CNN a federal appeals court agreed with the U.S. District Judge that said earlier this year that Rep. Tom DeLay (R-TX) must stay on the ballot because that is what the voters chose in a primary election.

DeLay's team has vowed to appeal the decision to the U.S. Supreme Court. Are they going to distort another election process?

You can find the story here.

In name only

The presumed Republican candidate for the 54th Assembly District, Julie Pung Leschke, brags about being a member of the League of Women Voters on her website. One would think that means she supports the efforts of that group.

So why didn't she answer the candidate questionnaire sent out by that group on campaign finance reform?

I suspect the answer is that Leschke doesn't support campaign finance reform and only joined the group to have something to put on her campaign literature. In fact, she voted against putting a campaign finance reform referendum on the ballot when she was on the Winnebago County Board in 2000 so I doubt the voters in her area will be all that surprised.

Thanks to Jef Hal for catching this one.

Playing games

"I will never play political games with people's careers," Green said.

-Rep. Mark Green on cutting state employees in the Capital Times.

Lest anyone think Mr. Green is a hero of the public employee, don't forget he has made another statement that renders this statement completely false. Green's stated support for TABOR and all the other versions of the state limits on local spending will force the layoffs of public employees all over the state.

In other words, Green wants to try to make County Executives and other local elected officials do the hard part of cutting jobs while he boasts about how he cut spending.

SOS LaFollette swiftly being corrected

It was hard to read Secretary of State Doug LaFollette's letter to Democrats regarding potential debates with his challenger, Scot Ross, without wondering if it is a joke. LaFollette thinks he is being "swift-boated" in this campaign. Is he really comparing being asked to a debate with an orchestrated, high-dollar campaign that tried to turn an actual war combat veteran into someone that is afraid of war?

Sadly, yes.

The Capital Times doesn't think being asked to debate is such a crazy idea.

Ross has mounted a spirited challenge, which has garnered a decent measure of support from grass-roots Democrats and liberal activists. He now wants to debate the incumbent before the September primary. While we'll admit that a debate between contenders for the job of secretary of state might not be the highest profile event on the year's political calendar, La Follette should accept the invitation to debate Ross.

But LaFollette seems to think if the two candidates for the office are in the same county it's practically a debate so why should he be bothered to take part in one where they are in the same room?

He also believes that preaching to the choir at the Democratic Convention once every couple of years equals speaking out against Republican abuses of power and the misplaced priorities they have tried to cram down the throats of Wisconsinites for the past couple of years.

Incumbents are not entitled to their office simply because they've been there a long time. But debates are part of a campaign that voters are entitled to before they go into the voting booth.

Green's short term memory

"Jim Doyle is making it tougher and tougher for Wisconsin families to send their kids to a UW school - I think that's dead wrong and I'm gong to do something about it."

-Candidate for Wisconsin Governor Rep. Mark Green in a press release today

Yeah, Green's doing his best to make sure it's harder to go to EVERY college in America. It's like he thinks all of his votes in Congress don't count or something.

Honesty is the best policy

If Rep. Mark Green is going to start outlining his budget plan for our state, he could start by getting his colleagues in the House of Representatives to be honest about just how much it will cost to implement the bribe it took to get him and other Republicans to vote to increase in the minimum wage instead of hiding it with a phase-in. If they think Paris Hilton and others deserve this money so much, why not give them the tax cut right now?

From the Center for Budget and Policy Priorities (CBBP):

The new House proposal is being presented by House leaders as being $15 billion less costly than the estate-tax plan that the House passed in June. Supporters point to new Joint Tax Committee estimates that show the new proposal would result in revenue losses of $268 billion between 2007 and 2016, as compared to $283 billion for the earlier bill. But even this small difference is deceiving, as it stems from a timing gimmick employed in the new legislation.

Hold the phone! Does that say a budget gimmick? It seems like just yesterday that Rep. Mark Green was accusing Governor Doyle for what he thinks are budget gimmicks. Oh wait, he was today.

You can find the rest of the report from CBBP on this proposal here.

Fool us once...

"Mark's budget plan is a statement of principles," Graul said. "We don't have the budget office available to us to do line item by line item of what that will be."

-Mark Graul, Rep. Mark Green's campaign manager

So I'm guessing Mr. Graul will be changing the title to this news release from the Green Team very soon.

I mean, you can understand why most of us thought this was his budget plan since the title of the release starts with:

Green Announces Budget Reform Plan...

and the Green Team website links to a story from the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel calling it a plan but not the story that has the quote from Mr. Graul saying it is not a plan.

I don't recall anyone asking for a line by line outline of what the budget will be if Rep. Mark Green is elected governor. But the voters deserve more than 40 words on how Green will spend their tax dollars if elected since the last time he was elected on a principle, Green promised to be a fiscal conservative in Congress and we have deficits and debts as far as the eye can see.

Not asking for much

-By David Horsey of the Seattle-Post Intelligencer via Slate.com

Fair Wisconsin has a new ad out and you can view it here.

And if you can give me a good reason why this couple of 49 years should not have been allowed to be married before one of them died, I'd like to hear it.

That's everyone then

It's official. No one can give money to the candidates in the race for governor or any other politician for that matter. Every donation is suspect and a potential scandal.

A story in the Wisconsin State Journal today is the one that makes it official. The story is highlighting a ridiculous accusation by the Republicans about a business that gave money to Governor Doyle but didn't get any business from the state. If you have been following the news, adding this story to the mix means business that don't get contracts from the state cannot give money and businesses that do get contracts from the state cannot give money before OR after getting a contract.

That's everyone I guess. Anyone that works for a business is not allowed to give money to politicians because you just never know if your employer might get a contract from the state or might not get a contract from the state.

At what point do you think the businesses in Wisconsin will get really angry that the press is making them look as bad to the public as the politicians they support?

A recent story in the Capital Times illustrates just how poisonous the press has made campaign contributions to politicians these days. The article is about doctors donating to Madison Mayor Dave Cieslewicz's campaign and the reporter was trying to get the doctors to say they were donating to him solely because of the smoking ban that Cieslewicz's promoted for the city.

None of the doctors wanted to go on record saying this, but the reporter, desperately trying to make this a story, was quick to point out that many of the health professionals have never given money to the mayor's campaign before.

Why is this a bad thing or even an issue?

Why can't citizens donate money to a politician after they see the politician doing something they like without an attempt by the press to make it sort of slimy? Isn't that what we want to happen? Citizens to get involved in the process, see an issue that they believe in come to fruition and then get involved helping that politician get re-elected?

Campaigns have gotten into this game too because it is the easiest way for a campaign to get press. Campaigns can put out ten press releases outlining plans and policy directions and maybe get a story or two buried on page three. But put out one press release connecting the dots on campaign contributions and votes about your opponent and you'll most likely get a front page story out of it with a screaming headline.

Those headlines do two things are damaging to our elections - they force campaigns to try to supply the next headline just like it about their opponent and drive down voter turnout. The press truly does have the power the change both of those.

This is not an argument for the press to ingnore campaign donations (that would place me in a glass house). Sometimes there is a story there. However, I do think I focus far, far more often on voting records than I do campaign donations because I think politicians shouldn't get away with saying they support something in campaign literature and then vote the opposite way.

The press could really do the public a service by focusing on votes taken by both parties more often and save the stories about campaign donations for the real scandals.

Minimum support

A few posts back I wrote that the Republicans must have polling showing that the general public thinks increasing the minimum wage is more important than Republicans and their backers believed. And it's true.

There is a CBS/NY Times poll out that shows 85 percent of the nation supports increasing the minimum wage and only 13 percent are against it. (Go to page 28 of the poll to find the question)

The fact that 94 percent of Democrats support increasing the minimum wage is not a problem for the Republicans. Nor is the fact that even 75 percent of Republicans support it. The big problem for the Republicans in this poll is that 84 percent of Independents support raising it too.

Those darn Independents making us do things we don't want to do!

Of course then there is the little matter of Congress accepting a raise for themselves, which the poll did not take into account. Nor did it measure whether or not Congress will get credit for voting for the raise only because they fought to get the wealthiest of the wealthy a tax break as a condition of increasing the minimum wage.

But I'm sure someone is working on those polls too. Somehow, I don't think 84 percent of the Independents are going to support those moves.