Wisconsin Democrats lost everything. The governor's office, both houses of the Legislature, the attorney general's office and, despite the fact that the judiciary is theoretically nonpartisan, the Supreme Court were all in the hands of the right wing of the Republican Party. And this result occurred in a state that historically has been more blue than red. There was absolutely no check on the power of these right-wing Republicans. And these are not Republicans in the mold of the late Gov. Lee Sherman Dreyfus, or even Gov. Tommy Thompson—these are "Tea Party" Republicans. Unlike in the U.S. Senate, where the minority can have a major influence because of the filibuster rule, Wisconsin Republicans were unchecked. But then they overplayed their hand.
A governor who won in a national wave election with just 52% of the vote decided to gut the progressive traditions and social contract that had made Wisconsin a very desirable place to live, work and start a business over the past several decades. We had good schools where teachers were respected, and a great university and technical college system that was accessible and affordable to everyone in Wisconsin who studied hard and played by the rules. We had clean, honest government and public employees who were capable, competent and fairly paid. Any business owner who has tried to work in an environment where government officials were "on the take" understands and appreciates the value of competent, honest government.
After the Tea Party Republican takeover of states like Wisconsin, Ohio and Florida, the national right-wing ideologues supplied governors like Walker, Ohio's John Kasich and Florida's Rick Scott with their playbook that clearly declares class warfare against the middle class. The fact that the richest 400 people in our country, including the likes of the Koch brothers, have more wealth than the bottom 50% of the entire country—some 150 million people—is not good enough for them. They want more. And Govs. Walker, Kasich and Scott can't jump quickly enough to satisfy the demands of their rich contributors.
Now that Walker and the Fitzgerald brothers, who control both chambers of the state Legislature, are implementing the game plan put together by right-wing groups like Americans for Prosperity and the American Legislative Exchange Council, middle-class Wisconsinites are seeing their lives and their futures turned upside-down. In a few short months, Gov. Walker and company have made it more difficult for injured parties to get justice in the courtroom, have cut deals to allow ravenous corporations to destroy Wisconsin's wetlands, and have seriously damaged the social contract between Wisconsin's teachers and other public employees and their governmental employers—at the same time that they have given huge tax breaks to corporations in the name of "job creation."
The good thing that has happened is that Walker and his corporate advisers, who thought that the average Wisconsin resident wouldn't really understand what was happening, learned that Wisconsinites are neither dumb nor docile. Those good Wisconsin schools have done a pretty good job of educating the Wisconsin people, so when Walker and company overplayed their hand and exposed their real agenda, Wisconsinites quickly understood what had happened and exercised their constitutional rights to assemble and to petition their government. They understood that this is not just an attack on public employees and their unions, but the first step in an effort to slap down the entire middle class.
Wisconsinites have decided to fight back against this blatant class warfare. Here are some of the actions that people are advocating for and choosing to take:
A Vote for Prosser Is a Vote for Walker
First of all, we need a Supreme Court that will be
fair and honest. There will be an election for a Supreme Court justice in less
than three weeks—April 5—and this election really matters. The seven-person
state Supreme Court, which is supposed to be nonpartisan and unbiased, is
currently in the hands of four conservative Republicans. One of the four
Republicans, David Prosser, who personally is a very nice fellow, is up for
re-election against a very capable opponent, Assistant Attorney General JoAnne
Kloppenburg (for interviews with these two candidates, see page 10).
The reason this election is so important is that
many of the items that Walker proposed and the Legislature forced through—using
a dubious "emergency procedure" that, among other things, severely limited
public input—are probably unconstitutional since they violate such things as
the separation of powers enshrined in our state Constitution. This questionable
legislation will likely end up in the Wisconsin Supreme Court, and recent
history has shown that the current four Republican justices will vote in lock
step to support the Republicans.
In the re-election effort for the Republican
Prosser, his campaign material has made it very clear that he will support the
Republican governor and the Republican Legislature. Prosser is now trying to
claim that he was not aware of what was in his campaign material. It is hard to
believe that claim, considering that Prosser has been a speaker at Tea Party
rallies. Yes, a supposedly unbiased state Supreme Court justice actually has
been a speaker at Tea Party rallies. So much for an honest chance in court,
since Prosser himself has essentially made it clear that "A Vote for Prosser Is
a Vote for Walker." An honest Supreme Court can curb the abuses of the Walker
administration. Beware, though: This campaign will get very nasty, with out-of-state
money running negative ads that attack challenger Kloppenburg.
Second, there are recall movements against all 16 of
the senators who have been in office for more than a year. Victories in some of
these recall elections could result in the ability to block the abuses of the
Walker administration and force some bipartisan cooperation. There are three
sitting Republican senators that are vulnerable in a recall election. One of
these three is Sen. Alberta Darling, who represents the North Shore of
Milwaukee County and parts of Ozaukee, Washington and Waukesha counties. Sen.
Darling, originally elected as a moderate Republican in a special election in
1990, has moved sharply to the right over the past 20 years in return for good
legislative appointments. She is currently the co-chair of the powerful Joint
Finance Committee (JFC). As committee co-chair, along with co-chair Rep. Robin
Vos, she was responsible for pushing the current Walker legislation through the
legislative committee. Darling, as co-chair of the JFC, could have altered
Walker's extreme legislation. Instead, she strongly endorsed it. She won her
last election with just 51% of the vote and is totally vulnerable to a recall
election, despite the fact that her senate district leans slightly Republican.
For those who want to stay informed on the status of Darling's recall election
and other competitive recall elections around the state, you can receive e-mail
updates by signing up at recallupdate@shepex.com.
Keep the Pressure On: Continue to Exercise
Your Constitutional Rights
As citizens of Wisconsin and the United States,
people have a constitutional right to make themselves heard to their elected
officials in a peaceful, nonviolent manner. Elected officials hear from all
sides—with each side firmly believing they are right—and then have to make
decisions, which are bound to offend one side or the other. That's politics in
a democracy. However, when elected officials refuse to hear the views of the
governed—by using, for example, "emergency procedures" in the Legislature when
there is no "emergency," simply to avoid having to go through the normal
committee procedures that allow for adequate public input—then the governed
must raise their voices.
There is a constitutional right to assemble, and
demonstrations do make a difference. Contrary to what Gov. Walker and company
may say, when Walker looks out the window and sees 70,000 people peacefully
marching around the Capitol carrying signs and denouncing his policies—to the
point that he wants to be escorted through a series of tunnels under the
Capitol to get to his car—he is clearly hearing the message.
Former President Richard Nixon, who would argue that
the demonstrators who dogged him until he was forced from office were just a
vocal minority, admitted years later that it did keep him up at night. And
seeing as the demonstrators' views have become the majority position in public
opinion polls, it does affect the governor.
When Walker's fellow right-wing governors, like Gov.
Chris Christie in New Jersey, see the demonstrations around the Wisconsin
Capitol and begin to distance themselves from Walker by saying that they are
not trying to do what he's doing in Wisconsin, it does affect Gov. Walker. It
is hard to be considered an up-and-coming Republican vice presidential hopeful
when your constituents are hounding you wherever you go.
Peaceful and persistent demonstrations do have an
impact, and they are constitutionally protected—assuming we have unbiased
Supreme Court justices to interpret the Constitution. Finally, it is not
"getting personal" when you demonstrate in front of your elected officials'
home or office, or wherever they may be, since these elected officials have
chosen to put themselves in the public arena to make decisions that seriously
affect your life. We do live in the world's greatest democracy, and we have
some basic rights.
Louis Fortis is a former Wisconsin state legislator.
*/?>
This is a great article and well written. Even a right wing extremist Nixon Republican like me likes this. I was really surprised the Shepard would allow this to be printed. Then I saw who wrote it and it wasn't one of the staff wacko's but a former Wisconsin state legislator. Again nice job. I think liberals would do a better job communicating if more peo
If the lefty's want their way, then get your ass out their and vote. You didn't and lost so deal with it. Give the recalls a good shot. I doubt you will win any but go for it.
If Prosser loses it will send a message. I don't think he will lose because I had never even heard of his opponent until reading this article, and I read a lot.
Mr. Fortis's message is clear - go vote. I usually find a way to win either way, regardless of who is in office. But for me I usually get ahead more when the Republicans are in power.
I meant to finish --- liberals would do a better job of communicating if more people wrote calm sensible articles like this instead of the ones that go overboard using terms like devastating the middle class, draconian. mean, vicious, etc, the way Old Lady McNally does. Imagine if I were to write a conservative article? Then the sissy libs that mostly read this rag would really think we were nuts. I think it would be best for the Shepherd to ditch the extremist like Kaiser and McNally for more intelligent writers like Fortis. And it would be best not just politically but from a business standpoint in getting more readiers to take the newpaper seriously. Really how can anyone take the Shepherd serious when hardly anyone makes comments like what I'm doing right now? Then some worthless story in the Journal Sentinal buried on page 70 might get 200 comments.
Mr. Fortis is correct, that the Tea Party Republicans are not like the traditional Republicans.
My take on the Tea Party is this... In 2010 there was a sizable amount of "angry voters" that stayed silent for decades, stayed silent because it was not politically correct to say what was bugging them. Then it took a black man with a muslim sounding name to win in 2008. Had the 2008 election been staggered to see who won prez, then vote the congress members the following week, I guarantee you that the 2010 "sweep" would have happened in 2008.
I believe that it was the election of Obama in 2008 that drove the sweep of 2010, not ObamaCare itself. ObamaCare simply gave them a talking point to start from (talk money, not politally correct to speak of race). Me being a person who someone else called the "Waukesha Race Sentinel" in these pages, I stand firm on this.
The Tea Party was a wave of people who want the restoration of the good old days when it was okay to discriminate, to segregate, to show favoritism toward your own kind, and that includes being a racist or bigot. I've heard way too much off the record talk from all kinds of people, that's how I've come to that conclusion. In the suburbs surrounding Milwaukee county, the feeling is so strong that they believe they are in a strong majority. Had that been true, Obama would have lost in 2008.
I was really upset when young neices and nephews who had voted in the 2008 election had failed to vote at all in 2010. They believed that voting for president was all that mattered.
I think what happened Waukesha dude was that when the people who voted for Obama did not get their "Obama checks" in the mail they got pissed off and didn't vote. They where hoping Obama would borrow a few trillion and then mail out checks to the poor people to redistribute the wealth. They were also upset he did not get free health insurance for all in place. When Obama dropped the ball, people stayed home. Then he, with Clinton's blessing, gave us all our Bush tax breaks, which didn't go over well with the low class.
As a small business owner, I enjoy the freedom of being able to hire and fire at will. All my support staff are minoritires or women, just not the disadvantaged types, but the preferred types. I'm even part owner of a disadvantaged business (minority woman owned), but my contract says I get 90% of the profits as a management fee. The libs made the rules, so I'm following them. This way when bids get sent in, if a minority business beats my bid, it better be one that I control. Funny, I don't even have to keep this secret and nobody cares.
David Livingston you got some issues man. Just because you can doesnt mean you should......
"preferred types" wow. That doesn't make you cool or intelligent, or daring to say that type of stuff. The reality is that human beings are more similar than your "type" ususally gives them credit for. Poor people are most often very hard working people with systemic roadblocks. And being poor doesn't condition one to assuming they deserve entitlements, or as you say Obama checks. That type of thinking about the poor is arse backwards, and doesnt pan out in the real world.
David, you are quite possibly the worst human being I have ever interacted with.
It's almost like you're not even a real person, but rather some kind of Steven Colbert/Mr. Burns/Gordon Gecko/Lex Luther charicature of a Right Wing-Capitalist-Fascist-Corporatist-Conservative-American.
You forgot to include Nixon, Bush, Limbaugh, and Beck. But I will still take it as a compliment. I would suggest to Jamil to look up who really gets the money from minority or disadvantaged business contracts. Take a look at the Indian casinos and then go to the Indian reservation. So who got those billions? Take a look at minority businesses the city of Milwaukee contracts with. Follow the money and usually flows to some white haired white guy in Florida. The city knows that but as long as they follow the rules and the job gets done, so be it.
And you don't think that people would like to see that scenario of yours changed?
Okay - what's better than a society that is devoid of overpaid, make-work slackers, devoid of welfare cases, but still has a "white-haired white guy in Florida" pulling the strings and keeping half the profits?
I'll tell you, it's a system that does not have that guy in Florida keeping half the goods, instead has common people feeling secure enough to know that they can feed themselves, plus their wife and kids, secure enough to not have to play a system that cuts them off as soon as they start to make it. And secure enough to make it with honest work, not have to hustle in territory outside of ethical decency.
We have a gap here. Poverty line low enough to totally cut you off from benefits when you attempt to rise out of it, and you got to make 2-3 times as much to be able to afford the same services that you had when in poverty, all because you tried to do the right thing and make it on your own.
I agree Waukesha dude. We have system that punishes people the harder they work. First you rise out of poverty but all you welfare like food stamps, Earned Income Credt, child care assistance and credits, and BadgerCare/Medicaid gets cut off. Then on top of that your taxes get raised. Then when you get to be middle and upper class, they hammer you more on the taxes.
I'm going to Australia next month. I was told the minimum wage there is $40k a year. $15 an hour plus national health care. Really here in the USA its about $40k too. Whatever you make the government will kick in with welfare and health care to boost you up to about $40k. After that they cut you off pretty quick. I know single moms who choose not to work more than 32 hours because if they work 48-60 hours, they are working for nothing because the government willl take away their welfare type benefits. No more free Badgercare food stamps, WIC, EIC, child care etc. There is no incentive to put in long hours. But a lot people work off the clock or off the books to keep their reportable income low. Or they transfer their wealth into a trust. There are a lot of loopholes to beat the welfare system to make it work for you. Sure you got to cash your checks at Walmart to make sure there is no bank record, sock your cash in a lock box, lease a car not own, etc. I know a millionaire on Lake Drive, similar to the guy running for county exec. He was on Medicaid Title 19 when I went to see him in the hospital. He owned nothing, zero, nada. It was all in a trust controlled by his parents. He had no assets in his name and minimal cash. Techincally he qualified. Is this a great country or what? I recall the nurses at the hospital were very resentful about this. I wonder if this is common among trust fund babies?
DJL, most of the working poor are not taking advantage of situations like that. But, to cut off those who do manipulate the system, people like you are more than willing to make the honest working poor suffer even more.
I've heard that in Israel, EVERY man and woman is required to serve one year in their military when the reach age 18. We avoided that here as backlash from wars on someone else's soil (and culture) like Viet Nam, instead, we set up the option of Peace Corps, again had to be not on our own soil. If we instead require all our 18 year olds to serve a year of public service ON OUR OWN SOIL, for example as a large force of welfare case workers to make sure the system is not abused by a crafty subset of the working poor.
It would provide the necessary humility to the future capitalists and conservatives to see what it is like to walk in the environment of the non-privileged, to better know what society really needs for balance and order.
One thing I do see with any "redistribution" back down to the "lazy" class, even when it is wasted like title 19 for that trust fund baby. At least the title 19 money is paying the workers at that care facility, which gives them dollars to spend in our local, Main Street small business economy.
Handing the money straight to big business as corporate welfare or big tax cuts only takes a freeway bypass around Main Street, does an end around small business, doesn't even pass through the lower ranks hands on the way to Wall Street.
So is it honest or dishonest for a single mom to work 32 hours and collect welfare type benefits (Wisconsn Shares, Badgercare, Food Stamps, etc) compared to working two jobs 50-60 hours a week. A lot of people would say if she is working one job, its enough. I'd say cut out the welfare and opt into a second job. If after working 60-70 hours a week you are still not bringing in enough, perhaps a few handouts are justified. We've made too easy that too any people are going home to their lounge chairs and waiting for the food stamp card to arrive instead of heading off to the second shift.