Wisconsin's Governor Walker and the possibility of a recall

NathanialG wrote:

If he was attempting to rile the base it would have been released with a bigger fanfare. I am starting to think he really does believe the rhetoric.

I'd been thinking of it in terms of what would make a good advertising blurb, but you're probably right - if this was strictly a political ploy I'd expect some kind of fanfare, rather than trying to bury it in a late-night singing heading into Easter weekend.

I get how Republican women can believe in the health stuff but how can rhey support the not equal pay stuff?

If you believe in Leave it to Beaver as reality television, then cutting women's wages is the best way to drive them back where they belong.

karmajay wrote:

I get how Republican women can believe in the health stuff but how can rhey support the not equal pay stuff?

Your answer here.

Actually, he's being PRO woman, since employers who would otherwise hire less expensive female employees are prevented from doing so because they are forced by the evil government to pay them the same wage as equally qualified men. [/sarcasm off]

Seriously though. That's precisely how those folks think.

I'll cross-post this in the Gay Marriage thread, but deserves documenting here, as well:

Walker seeks to stop defense of state's domestic partner registry

Gov. Scott Walker believes a new law that gives gay couples hospital visitation rights violates the state constitution and has asked a judge to allow the state to stop defending it.

Democrats who controlled the Legislature in 2009 changed the law so that same-sex couples could sign up for domestic partnership registries with county clerks to secure some - but not all - of the rights afforded married couples.

Wisconsin Family Action sued last year in Dane County circuit court, arguing that the registries violated a 2006 amendment to the state constitution that bans gay marriage and any arrangement that is substantially similar.

Republican Attorney General J.B. Van Hollen refused to defend the lawsuit, saying he agreed the new law violated the state constitution. Then-Gov. Jim Doyle, a Democrat, hired Madison attorney Lester Pines to defend the state.

Walker, a Republican, replaced Doyle in January and fired Pines in March. On Friday, Walker filed a motion to stop defending the case.

"Governor Walker, in deference to the legal opinion of the attorney general that the domestic partner registry...is unconstitutional, does not believe the public interest requires a continued defense of this law," says the brief, filed by Walker's chief counsel, Brian Hagedorn.

Hagedorn told Dane County Circuit Judge Daniel Moeser that if he could not withdraw from the case, he would like to amend earlier filings to reflect Walker's belief that the registries conflict with the state constitution.

Even if Walker is allowed to withdraw from the case, the law would still be defended in court because gay rights group Fair Wisconsin intervened in the case last year.

Fair Wisconsin attorney Christopher Clark said the governor's move raises legal questions.

"It's not clear to me that a defendant in a lawsuit... can simply walk away from a lawsuit or withdraw," he said.

Pines said Walker's aides never gave him an explanation when they told him to stop working on the case. He said he was troubled by the latest court filing.

"The governor of this state has an obligation to defend laws he doesn't like. And for that matter, so does the attorney general," Pines said. "This shows an utter disrespect for the rule of law."

At what point do the Feds step in? Things in Wisconsin are strange, and the Republican Party seems WAY out of line all over the place. I would think that even some Republicans are starting to question the things going on there.

I cannot tell you how much that upsets me. The governor of my home state hates gay people so much he doesn't want them to provide comfort and care in stressful, possibly life-altering situations. Amazing.

NathanialG wrote:

At what point do the Feds step in? Things in Wisconsin are strange, and the Republican Party seems WAY out of line all over the place. I would think that even some Republicans are starting to question the things going on there.

If they aren't challenging Michigan on the emergency manager policy, Wisconsin isn't even on the radar.

If Obama's AG office had simply defending the Military Commissions Act et al., I wonder what the response of Scott Walker's backers would have been?

You should probably treat that as a rhetorical question; this is a family website.

Malor wrote:

Gov. Walker quietly signs several controversial bills into law

Including:

  • A repeal of the state's law requiring comparable pay across genders for comparable work;
  • A repeal of the state's sex education law, which required that minors be taught scientifically accurate information about sex.
  • A law banning abortion coverage for women in the state's upcoming Obamacare program, except for cases of medical necessity, rape, or incest. (ie, if you're a slut, you don't get coverage.)
  • A bill requiring women seeking abortions to undergo a physical exam and to consult with a doctor alone, away from friends and family, "to make sure she's not being pressured into a decision".

The last one I was against at first, but I've come to see it in another light. Imagine parents pressuring their daughter to abort a child because they didn't like that her boyfriend was of color. Though I don't think that is why that particular bill passed.

Right, but who's to say that the doctor isn't exerting pressure too?

Malor wrote:

Right, but who's to say that the doctor isn't exerting pressure too?

The doctor will be too busy showing the woman a 3D mock up of what the fetus will look like when it graduates college.

OG_slinger wrote:
Malor wrote:

Right, but who's to say that the doctor isn't exerting pressure too?

The doctor will be too busy showing the woman a 3D mock up of what the fetus will look like when it graduates college.

with the animated disappointed face directed at the teenager who intends to abort it.

rosenhane wrote:
Malor wrote:
  • A bill requiring women seeking abortions to undergo a physical exam and to consult with a doctor alone, away from friends and family, "to make sure she's not being pressured into a decision".

The last one I was against at first, but I've come to see it in another light. Imagine parents pressuring their daughter to abort a child because they didn't like that her boyfriend was of color. Though I don't think that is why that particular bill passed.

I don't think the law needs to be changed to address that situation. Isn't a doctor's primary responsibility to the patient? If family pressure was suspected to be a factor in a healthcare decision, I'd expect the doctor to speak privately to the patient - my doctors have done this on more than one occasion, for situations far less egregious than the one described.

[Edit to add: agree with rosenhane that is unlikely to be the reason the bill got passed, regardless. Also, probably a derail in this thread.]

Paul Bucher, a defense lawyer and 2006 Republican candidate for Attorney General, requested current Wisconsin Attorney General Van Hollen to take over the John Doe investigation.

Bucher said in his letter that he had previously sent a letter to Judge Neal Nettesheim, who is presiding over the John Doe. In that letter, Bucher said he had raised concerns that 43 people in the district attorney's office had signed petitions to recall Walker.

However, prosecutors overseeing the long-running Doe investigation weren't among those who signed, said Chief Deputy District Attorney Kent Lovern.

Media Trackers, a conservative research group, has alleged that 43 staffers in the district attorney's office had signed the Walker recall. They said 20 attorneys in the office and 23 secretaries and support staff had signed the petitions.

Media Trackers also alleged that Janet Oelstrom, a secretary in the Public Integrity Unit, signed the recall petition. Assistant District Attorney Bruce Landgraf confirmed Oelstrom is the secretary of the unit, which is handling the Doe investigation.

Reached by telephone Wednesday morning, Bucher said individuals within the district attorney's office and public integrity unit signed the recall petitions "in some fashion, either them or close associates of theirs."

"I know they were involved in the recall petition," Bucher said. Asked what evidence he had, Bucher said his information came from several sources.

"It raises the specter of bias and fairness and that was the reason for the letter. There have been continual and unprecedented leaks out of that John Doe, which I expressed a concern in another letter. Now I just think it has reached a pinnacle where the AG needs to step in and do something and protect the integrity of the investigation process and restore any public confidence, whatever is the result of the John Doe," he said.

Bucher declined to confirm or deny he was representing one of more people who have been involved in the ongoing Doe probe. But Bucher, a defense attorney since losing his bid for the Republican nomination for attorney general in 2006, has represented a client in the John Doe investigation, the Journal Sentinel has learned.

Asked why he had written the letter, Bucher replied, “I’m a citizen interested in fairness and the outcome of this process."

To his credit, Van Hollen's office rapidly (within an hour) and strongly declined to take the case.

[Edit to add] Re-reading the article, I noticed something that I'd somehow missed in the earlier John Doe coverage. Van Hollen's office co-operated in the initial stages of the John Doe investigation, but withdrew their assistance when it began to touch on former Walker aides, claiming conflict of interest because of Van Hollen's legal representation of Walker as governor. That's interesting, since of course the Attorney General is not responsible for representing the Governor in any personal matters.

In any event, the Wisconsin DoJ's refusal to assist is why the FBI ended up getting involved in the John Doe investigation - so if it was a ploy to try to starve the DA of resources and force a premature closure, that definitely backfired.

I do hope you are writing a book as you go, Dimmer.

Walker aide Kelly Rindfleisch, facing four felony charges arising from the John Doe investigation, today filed a motion to move her trial from Milwaukee to Columbia County.

Rindfleisch argued Thursday that the case should be sent to Columbia County because she resides, votes and pays taxes in Columbus. While working for Walker, she stayed at a friend's house in Milwaukee County two or three nights a week but continued to return to a home she owns in Columbus, Rindfleisch said in an affidavit attached to the petition.

The defendant is seeking to invoke a law passed in the wake of the legislative caucus scandal that allows public officials to be tried in the county where they live for certain offenses related to elections, ethics and lobbying relations laws. Normally, a trial is held in the county where the alleged crime occurred.

I'd be very curious about where Kelly voted during her employment with Scott Walker, as well as what was listed as a residence on any tax returns from that timeframe.

Robear wrote:

I do hope you are writing a book as you go, Dimmer.

Heh - appreciate the vote of confidence, but don't doubt there are folks out there with better sources who already have that covered.

Paleocon wrote:
OG_slinger wrote:
Malor wrote:

Right, but who's to say that the doctor isn't exerting pressure too?

The doctor will be too busy showing the woman a 3D mock up of what the fetus will look like when it graduates college.

with the animated disappointed face directed at the teenager who intends to abort it.

If he's holding a liberal arts degree, that 3D mock up might backfire.

dejanzie wrote:
Paleocon wrote:
OG_slinger wrote:
Malor wrote:

Right, but who's to say that the doctor isn't exerting pressure too?

The doctor will be too busy showing the woman a 3D mock up of what the fetus will look like when it graduates college.

with the animated disappointed face directed at the teenager who intends to abort it.

If he's holding a liberal arts degree, that 3D mock up might backfire.

Don't you know all aborted babies would have been Nobel Peace Prize winners?

I hear Einstein was almost aborted, until his mother took an arrow to the knee.

Paleocon wrote:
dejanzie wrote:
Paleocon wrote:
OG_slinger wrote:
Malor wrote:

Right, but who's to say that the doctor isn't exerting pressure too?

The doctor will be too busy showing the woman a 3D mock up of what the fetus will look like when it graduates college.

with the animated disappointed face directed at the teenager who intends to abort it.

If he's holding a liberal arts degree, that 3D mock up might backfire.

Don't you know all aborted babies would have been Nobel Peace Prize winners?

But only because they were aborted. It's a eugenical catch-22.

wordsmythe wrote:
Paleocon wrote:
dejanzie wrote:
Paleocon wrote:
OG_slinger wrote:
Malor wrote:

Right, but who's to say that the doctor isn't exerting pressure too?

The doctor will be too busy showing the woman a 3D mock up of what the fetus will look like when it graduates college.

with the animated disappointed face directed at the teenager who intends to abort it.

If he's holding a liberal arts degree, that 3D mock up might backfire.

Don't you know all aborted babies would have been Nobel Peace Prize winners?

But only because they were aborted. It's a eugenical catch-22.

A sort of Schroedinger's Fetus, if you will.

A very generous evaluation by Politifact of Governor Walker's claim that his sons were "targeted" on Facebook by out-of-state protesters.

Spoiler:

Two messages, mentioning Walker's sons, by a single Wisconsinite.

I think referencing family like that (unless they're making themselves a political issue, à la Ann Romney) is not okay. Miles has had issues with stupid impulsive decisions in the past, like when he poured a perfectly good beer over Representative Vos' head last fall.

Walker's really obsessed with people out of state.

More developments in the ongoing John Doe case today. Arthur Jensen, who was arrested last December, is now apparently cooperating with investigators.

Late last year, commercial real estate broker Andrew P. Jensen Jr. refused to cooperate with the John Doe investigation into Gov. Scott Walker's current and former aides.

That landed Jensen in the county jail for a night.

Now Jensen is cooperating with authorities in the secret investigation, and this is what he just received:

A letter of exoneration.

Jensen, 50, and the firm for which he works, Boerke Co., have been informed by District Attorney John Chisholm's office that they are not targets in the probe, according to a highly unusual statement.

Later in the article is what appears to be confirmation that Robear's theory was correct:

Late last year, prosecutors called Jensen before the John Doe and tried to compel testimony by having the judge grant him immunity. Jensen went to the state Court of Appeals to try to keep his grant of immunity secret.

The appeals court ruled in early December that grants must be public.

Have a cupcake in celebration, my treat.

The March 2012 job report for Wisconsin doesn't look good for Walker.

Christian Science Monitor wrote:

]Wisconsin lost 23,900 jobs between March 2011 and March 2012, according to data released Tuesday by the US Bureau of Labor Statistics. The state’s lead in job losses is significantly greater than the rest of the 50 states: No other state lost more than 3,500 jobs.

The majority of the losses in Wisconsin, 17,800, were in the public sector. However, the state lost more private-sector jobs, 6,100, than any other state. The only other states to report private-sector job losses in the same time period (instead of private-sector gains) were Mississippi and Rhode Island.

There are some interesting twists to the data that can be interpreted to support Walker. Such as unemployment being lower that a year ago in all but 3 counties of the state. This is a damaging report to have come out just as the recall is finally about to happen.

Often, when unemployment is lower, that means they just decided to stop counting some unemployed people.