In The Supreme Court Race Today

Written by Daniel on March 22, 2007 – 5:44 pm -

Welcome, if you're new here, you may want to subscribe to our RSS feed or subscribe to our email newsletter. Thanks for visiting!

FIRST of all, just as a random note, someone somewhere needs to poll this race. WISC-3000 in Madison, the Badger Poll at UW, even St. Norbert for WPR, some media outlet needs to poll this race sometime in the next week and let those results out. Because frankly for all the hype, which I happily bought into, there should be way more money being spent on TV and radio for Ziegler by WMC/Club/US Chamber et al. That there’s not suggests to me that their internals all show this race is over - why spend $2 million on a race a $10,000 poll says is already clinched? I have to figure that’s the only explanation for the lack of major outside paid media right now. But I can only confirm my hypothesis if we got some polling data made public.

SECOND, the West Bend Daily News story about Clifford’s consultants - obviously it is disappointing that Clifford’s contracted investigators lied by saying they were with a media outlet. Whether this willl get the same momentum in the mainstream media as the ethics allegations against Ziegler remains to be seen… the degrees removed from the candidate makes it doubtful.

THIRD, One Wisconsin Now Action is mad that $1600 in contributions from West Bend Savings Bank employees have gone to Ziegler’s campaign for Supreme Court. Really, this is totally a partisan hatchet-job - candidates receive money from contributors whose interests they vote on all the time; judges receive donations from those attorneys who do or would practice in front of them rather regularly. Most candidates could be guilty of these kinds of accusations.

FOURTH, both the Appleton Post Crescent and the Madison Badger Herald have decided to endorse Clifford. Both stake much of their endorsement on the ethics issue. I expect almost every other paper to follow this same road.

FIFTH, Judge Ziegler has chosen to transfer all of her stock over to a blind trust. Hopefully this step will mute some of the criticism over her past decisions. Even Mike McCabe from the WI Democracy Campaign praised the decision.

SIXTH, The Democratic Judicial Campaign Committee has decided that Wisconsin’s judicial elections should no longer retain their last vestiges, however much a facade, of non-partisanship. FORMER Atty Gen Lautenschlager joined several Dem state leggies for a rally today to make this charge: “Lautenschlager described a history of secretive corporate expenditures, ‘the bottom line is that corporate interests of some sort, likely including pharmaceutical companies, are attempting to buy this election, just as they have done in similar elections throughout the U.S.’”

Big Pharma is the new Big Oil - the ultimate bad guy. Why do they think Pharma companies? Because Ziegler owns about $250k in Pharmaceutical companies stock. Which is just terrible logic - would a huge pharma co like AstroZenica donate to WMC to run ads for someone who owns a few shares in a giant company? Clearly not. Do the Pharma companies have any pressing business before the WI Supreme Court where they want a friendly justice? Not that I’m aware of. The whole argument that it’s Big Bad Big Pharma behind the WMC ads is silly.

Then AG Lautenschlager goes on to say: “In doing so, they [these big companies] have subverted Wisconsin’s election laws with front organizations that may accept corporate contributions not allowed under state election law and by refusing to disclose the sources of those funds.”

How silly. The Democratic Attorneys General Association ran over $100,000 on her, including $75k in independent expenditure paid media for Lautenschlager before her primary. Who supports the DAGA? Big Pharma and Big Oil (Merck, GlaxoSmithKline, Eli Lily, AstroZeneca, Pfizer, Chevron Texaco). Lautenschlager asks, “Should Wisconsinites have elections such as this one be subject to purchase by national corporate interests?” Perhaps she could have answered that when DAGA went out and spent money on her behalf - money including a contribution from the US Chamber of Commerce! How sweet the irony.

At the same press conference, St. Rep. Gary Sherman said, rightly, “Private agendas have no place in our legal system. We must have judges and justices who decide one case at a time, based only upon the facts and law presented in court on that case.”

Between Ziegler and Clifford, I think the reality is clear that Ziegler believes in judicial restraint, while Clifford will be a judicial activist. The final point illustrates why I believe that will be the case with Clifford:

SEVENTH, More and more folks are latching onto Linda Clifford’s comments threatening the future of school choice in Wisconsin. Patrick McIlheran at the Milw. Journal Sentinel and Charlie Sykes at WTMJ have both railed on Clifford’s answer. Now consultant/advocate George Mitchell and School Choice Wisconsin’s Susan Mitchell are in as well. In a letter to Clifford seeking clarification, Susan Mitchell writes:

Your comments suggest a willingness to reconsider the constitutionality of a program twice sustained by the Wisconsin Supreme Court. Many principles set forth in the 1998 state decision can be found in the U.S. Supreme Court’s 2002 decision. Against this clear and recent legal precedence, you refer ambiguously to “very profound issues” are that compel you to think this program needs yet another legal review.
There is a limited amount of time remaining before the April 3 election for you to clarify what you mean by these comments. You will understand that your remarks have unsettled parents across the City of Milwaukee who have made educational choices for their children based on the Milwaukee Parental Choice Program. Barely a year has gone by during which this program has not been attacked, often by major supporters of your campaign. These parents and all citizens of Wisconsin deserve a fuller explanation of your apparent belief that two relatively recent rulings of the Wisconsin Supreme Court are suspect.

Keep up the drum beat.

Last 5 posts by Daniel

Posted in Ministry of Strategery |

2 Comments to “In The Supreme Court Race Today”

  1. edmoney Says:

    You just nailed it on point 6 - well done. No wonder Democrats are opposed to full transparency on things like campaign finance - it takes away their ability to demagogue on issues like this. Nice work on the DAGA linkage. How dare people spend money on speech in this country.

  2. Concerned about Clifford Says:

    Honestly, I do not really think highly of either candidate, but Judge Ziegler is clearly better than Clifford. I think it is a sad state of affairs for our political system in Wisconsin when all the good, qualified candidates are afraid to run because of the type of mud slinging that Clifford has done of late.

    Judicial experience is CRITICAL. The Court regularly reviews the actions, decisions, and procedures of the Circuit Court judges. If you have only been an environmental and immigration attorney who has only ever even appeared in a court room less than 5 times in a 30 year career, you are clearly not qualified to review court procedures!

    Ziegler, having been a judge, has shown her commitment to the judicial process. She also paid her dues as a prosecutor!

    All Clifford can do to try to compensate for her complete lack of relevant experience is sling mud falsely. That is all she has the experience to do! And that, she has done well. Too well.

    Clifford has turned me off with her mud slinging. Clifford also has ZERO relevant experience.

    I am voting for Ziegler. I don’t really like either, but at least Ziegler is qualified!

Leave a Comment