New Year’s Resolution

A New Year’s Resolution 

Science Based Environmental Policy

Governor-elect Tony Evers’ cabinet is beginning to take shape with important agency appointments that will set the direction for their respective departments. His choices reflect Democratic values and positions Evers promoted during his campaign and echo many he held as Superintendent of Public Instruction. Among Evers’ top choices is Preston Cole as the new Secretary of the Department of Natural Resources.

Cole comes to the position with impeccable professional and educational credentials. He has a degree in forestry, experience working in natural resource management and as the forester then deputy director of the Public Works Department for the City of Milwaukee. He was originally appointed to the DNR Board by then Governor James Doyle and later re-appointed by Governor Walker. He grew up in rural Michigan, the son of farmers and a proud member of the Future Farmers of America. He understands the concerns of the DNR rank and file staff who chaffed under the pro-business and anti-environment policies of former DNR Secretary Cathy Stepp. GOP Senators should be encouraged that Stepp, now the regional head of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, feels comfortable being able to work with Cole. 

By all measures of competence and experience, Cole should have no problem being confirmed by the GOP members of the Wisconsin Senate. Unfortunately, some of the early GOP Senate criticisms have already cast a partisan shadow over Cole’s upcoming confirmation hearing and vote. Some GOP Senators fear that policy position appointments that do not require Senate approval will end up in the hands of representatives of “radical” environmental groups with designs on protecting air and water at the expense of property owners and business interests. We are already hearing echoes of the refrains that gained prominence during the “Mining Wars” in Northern Wisconsin that promoted use of the resources for profit instead of people.

The DNR’s mission is to manage Wisconsin’s abundant natural resources, striking a balance between the several competing interests with conflicting goals. Tourism is the life blood of the North Woods and will only thrive if there are forests, lakes and streams to support wildlife and fisheries. People are attracted to clean air and water and repulsed when those are polluted, the birds are gone and the fish die. 

Property rights are important and so are the rights conveyed to Native Tribes by treaties entered into by their leaders and the government of the United States in the late 1800s. The DNR is charged with navigating the continuing conflicting interests of the new settlers and Wisconsin’s first inhabitants with the goal of protecting both. The DNR partnership with Native tribal resource management efforts has worked well, but needs constant attention to avoid resurgence of the “Walleye Wars” that erupted when native spearing spread to more Northern lakes during spawning season.

Resurgent mining exploration, proposed power transmission lines and fossil fuel pipeline developments need evaluation and permitting to avoid contamination of precious air and water resources. Commercial developments statewide must continue to obtain regulatory approval to commence to ensure similar protections for those of us downstate. Businesses and municipalities cannot be allowed to spew pollutants into our shared environment unchecked. 

Protection of the water resources on our eastern and northern borders, requires cooperation and consultation with the Native Bands on their shores as well as the other members of the Great Lakes Compact. The fisheries and fresh water found in Lakes Michigan and Superior are unparalleled and need vigilant oversight against those who would endanger them for short-term gain. 

Municipalities charged with managing drinking water and sewerage systems must be held to strict uniform standards to protect ground water aquifers, rivers, streams and lakes. Garbage collection and disposal needs regulation to limit landfills. Recycling and reuse programs need to be encouraged to reduce what we throw away.

The DNR under GOP leadership has leaned too heavily in favor of business and property owner interests and cuts to staff positions have reduced its ability to enforce regulations necessary to protect the environment. Preston Cole has vowed to lean on his staff science teams when crafting policy and deciding on enforcement priorities. One can only hope his turn back to science-based decision making will not derail his confirmation by the Wisconsin Senate when the new administration takes office in January.

Waring Fincke is a retired attorney and serves as a guardian for the elderly and disabled for a Sheboygan County non-profit agency.

The People’s Budget

The Birth of a Peoples’ Government

It is About Time

In stark contrast to previous state budgets that were crafted behind closed doors to favor the interests of wealthy business owners and corporations, Governor-elect Tony Evers has begun to prepare a “Peoples Budget” for the upcoming two-year cycle by holding listening sessions around Wisconsin to hear from people from all walks of life on how the state should spend their money.

Evers has made it clear that the sessions are not going to be used to tell the citizenry what his administration will include in the next budget, but to solicit what the people believe are the important priorities for state spending. 

The first session was held in Green Bay earlier this week. It was followed by a session in Wausau with another planned for Superior early next week. Subsequent sessions will be held in Milwaukee and Madison with others still being planned. All the ideas mentioned will be considered as the Evers administration puts together a spending plan to submit to the legislature.

For those who cannot make any of the sessions, the Governor-elect has provided an on-line form anyone can fill out to submit ideas for budget consideration. You can find it at 

https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLScHfkoflPcl76h5m8KKaIJ7oxYjdYpne2Dpt2YUikwfp21S2g/viewform

Senate Majority Leader Scott Fitzgerald has already labeled the Evers’ budget proposals “the most liberal budget you have ever seen” before the first item is put on the list. This is not unexpected from the GOP legislature, given its recent moves to sharply curtail the authority of the new governor and attorney general before they take their oaths of office. 

If we are to have a functional government that addresses Wisconsin citizens’ needs and problems over the next four years, the GOP is going to have to stop the barrage of attacks and demonization of the new administration. We want the GOP controlled legislature to find common ground with the new administration in order to keep Wisconsin moving forward 

We do not want a gridlocked government that does nothing. Wisconsin highways and local roads need money and a plan to make the necessary improvements we all want. Wisconsin public schools and universities need adequate funding to prepare our children for what lies ahead. We need strong environmental protections to ensure clean air and water, especially in light of the Trump administration roll backs of Federal environmental protections. We need accountability for the state tax dollars spent with Foxconn to build its plant and for the incentive package Governor Walker just proposed for Kimberly-Clark. We need criminal justice reform that minimizes mass incarceration and provides mental health and addiction treatment services to truly make our communities safer. We need a renewable energy policy that helps move us away from fossil fuels that contribute to global warming and climate change.

To help move Wisconsin in this new direction, Governor-elect Evers is also bringing back the “Wisconsin Idea” of blue-ribbon advisory panels made up of experts in their fields whose purpose will be to examine the problems in their areas of expertise and propose bi-partisan ideas to solve them. 

Panels have been named to study prisons and the justice system, science, energy and agriculture, health policy and economic development just for starters. The people named to these panels are charged with identifying policy changes that need to be made and funding priorities that will help in the budget writing process. All are open for public input and none are beholden to special interest groups who stand to profit from the suggestions the panels produce. 

All of these efforts to bring a diverse population of ideas into governmental planning and policy development are a far cry from the closed-door actions of the current Wisconsin government that appeared to act solely for the benefit of the wealthy donors who funded GOP campaigns. The bills recently passed in the early morning hours of the lame-duck legislative session are hopefully the last example of their kind now that the new administration is set to take over. 

All these changes should bring a new openness to our government. We will need to be vigilant and hold them to their promises through continued advocacy and participation. They cannot do it without our input and support. Keep the emails, calls and letters coming so we truly have a “Peoples’ Government” in 2019. This is what Democracy looks like.

Compromise or Confrontation?

Compromise or Confrontation?

It’s Up to the GOP

In the November election, Wisconsin Democrats took all of the state-wide seats and over 54 percent of the votes cast for Assembly seats. One might think the Republican legislative leadership would recognize this as a mandate to find common ground with the new Governor-elect and his administration. No such luck.

Assembly Speaker Robin Vos and State Majority Leader Scott Fitzgerald have rebuffed Governor-elect Evers’ offer to work on a people’s agenda to improve our roads, enact comprehensive healthcare reform and fully fund public education. Instead, they have called for a special session of the legislature to start next week. With outgoing Governor Walker’s blessing, they will try to enact a series of laws to limit Evers’ power and ability to govern while consolidating more power in GOP hands.

While the list of bills to be considered will not be released until after my deadline for this article, it is widely thought to include:

1. Taking the power to approve administrative regulations away from Governor Evers, even though they willingly gave such power to Walker.
2. Limiting Evers’ ability to appoint members to the Wisconsin Economic Development Corporation’s Board of Directors in order to continue GOP control of its agenda.
3. Moving the Spring 2020 election for the Wisconsin Supreme Court seat currently held by a conservative Justice to a date different than the Spring Presidential Primary where Democratic turnout is predicted to be higher thus hurting Justice Kelly’s chances to hold the seat. Never mind that the municipal clerks responsible for running these elections are mostly opposed to the move because of the time needed for potential for recounts, added costs and voter confusion.
4. Passing package of economic incentives to keep Kimberly-Clark in the Fox Valley. The paper maker has threatened to leave Wisconsin without more state help. 
5. Putting some GOP favorite rules, such as the requirement for a photo ID for voting and work requirements for Medicaid eligibility into state statutes.
6. Enacting state law requiring health insurance companies to provide coverage for pre-existing conditions.
7. Limiting Evers’ ability to change the Attorney General’s Solicitor Generals office in order to try and preserve some of the lawsuits brought by outgoing Attorney General and soon to be Waukesha County Circuit Court Judge Brad Schmiel.

Never fear though because the Assembly and Senate leaders have yet to agree on how these or other measures might be considered. Speaker Vos apparently wants one omnibus bill that includes all of the issues. Majority Leader Fitzgerald favors individual bills that would be taken up separately, probably because he does not have the votes in his chamber to pass the Kimberly-Clark package after being burned by the Foxconn deal. Evidently, neither wants to address redistricting and the creation of fair maps or any of the other pressing problems Wisconsin voters want them to solve

Both leaders want to get the job done by mid-week so they can all go home for the holidays.

This effort, whatever its final form, does not bode well for cooperation on issues that voters cared about in November. Governor-elect Evers plans to work on the people’s agenda that includes fixing our roads, bridges and other parts of Wisconsin’s infrastructure too long neglected by the GOP. He wants a public education budget that fully funds our public schools and returns power to locally elected school boards to control their own district finances. He wants to expand Medicaid by accepting federal support that Walker rejected so more people have healthcare coverage.

Evers has called the proposed power grab unnecessary and potentially violative of the constitution’s separation of powers doctrine. He will have the support of his new AG, Josh Kaul, who will have no problem defending Evers’ positions.

Hopefully, some of the few moderate remaining Republican legislators can stand up and put a stop to the special session. They are the only ones who have the ability to slow the train or put it on a siding. They do so at the peril of losing financial support from GOP committees controlled by the leadership if they do not toe the line. They are the last hope for cooperation and a search for common ground in the coming legislative session.

Elections Do Matter

Elections Do Matter

Our recent state-wide elections brought interesting and hopeful results. Democrats swept the state-wide races and Republicans maintained comfortable, but not veto proof, majorities in both the Assembly and Senate. Hopefully, one of the results will be an end to, if not a tempering of, the one-party rule arrogance that has permeated Wisconsin government since the GOP ascendance in 2010.  

Clearly, Wisconsin voters just elected to move forward with divided government. When power is split between the two parties, no one agenda holds sway. There are only a couple of options. 

The preferable option is for the GOP leaders in the legislature to work with Democratic legislators and the Governor’s administration to find common ground. Polling makes clear that voters want our roads, bridges and other infrastructure items fixed, they want affordable healthcare that covers everybody and they want public education funded adequately. These are problems that transcend party lines and need bi-partisan fixes with which everyone can live. Governor-elect Evers reached out to GOP legislative leaders offering to work with them on these and other pressing agenda items. There has not been a favorable response.

A second, less favorable, option is for the two sides to continue the battle for power and control with the legislature passing bills that Governor-elect Evers cannot sign or fix with the line item veto. The goal here has less to do with actually trying to address real problems with real solutions than it is to make the other side look bad and rack up points to use in the next election cycle. Unfortunately, the GOP’s Assembly Majority Leader Robin Voss and Senate Majority Leader Scott Fitzgerald are toying with this option by publicly floating proposals for a lame duck legislative session to pass bills stripping the newly elected governor of certain powers they freely gave when a friendly Scott Walker occupied that office. They follow this path at their peril. Voters will see it as nothing more than a naked power grab and a slap in the face for the new administration. The ultimate outcome with this choice will be a do-nothing government until the next election and that will suit many in the GOP just fine. 

An equally intriguing issue is how the legislative races turned out. Even though Democrats scored a 10-point victory re-electing Tammy Baldwin to the U.S. Senate, and took the rest of the state-wide races with relative ease, they lost legislative races to the GOP in staggering numbers. 

Michael Warren, a UW-Madison student journalist, looked at the numbers and came up with this analysis. 

If we look at the votes cast in all the Wisconsin Assembly Races, Democrats out polled Republicans by about 200,000 votes. 1.3 million Democrats voted in Assembly races but only 1.1 million Republicans did. These translate roughly to Democrats casting 54% of the votes to 46% for Republicans. When we look at the numbers of Assembly seats won, in a fair election, we would expect similar percentages to hold. Instead, Republicans won roughly 63% of the Assembly seats to 36% for Democrats. There is only one way to explain those numbers. Unfair partisan gerrymandering of the Assembly districts in favor of Republicans. 

Gerrymandering involves the drawing of state and federal legislative district lines to give an advantage to one party over the other. It is done in two ways, “packing” and “cracking.” The current legislative districts were drawn by the GOP when it controlled the legislature and governor’s office. They “packed” certain districts with Democrats, making sure they stayed blue, and “cracked” other democratic strongholds into several districts, giving Republicans majorities in multiple districts. 

In this past election, there were 35 democratic seats won. 80% of those races had no Republican candidate to challenge the Democrat. In the Republicans’ 64 seat victories, only 4% were uncontested. Republicans did not bother to run in districts “packed” with Democrats while Democrats ran in many more districts because they contained “cracked” Democratic voting blocs. Of the 68 contested races, 41% had a margin of victory of less than 5,000 votes. Thin victory margins rely upon where the district lines run in “cracked” districts. 

Let us add fairly redrawing the lines of Wisconsin’s state and federal legislative districts after the 2020 census to the list of issues the new Wisconsin split power government must consider. Leaving it to partisans leads to unfair gerrymandered districts that favor those in power. 

Six states, some red, some blue, have instituted independent commission systems to draw fair lines that make districts with roughly equal numbers of voters from each party much more competitive. It is part of the Wisconsin tradition to utilize panels of experts to look at and propose solutions to problems free from partisan political influence. We should consider returning to that approach when tackling redistricting while we have time to get it done fairly and correctly. This is another issue voters care about and demand a fair fix.

What Would They Think

Wisconsin Civil War Heroes

Remember Why They Fought

I read with great interest a recent piece in this paper by Linda McAlpine about an exhibit of photos of Wisconsin citizens who served in the Union Army during the Civil War that will be coming soon to Washington County’s Historical Society Museum. 

Evidently, over 90,000 Wisconsin soldiers fought to preserve our nation from being torn asunder by those who promoted the evils of slavery and believed that the rights of individual states to control what happened within their respective borders took precedence over federal laws to the contrary. The slave holders and states’ rights proponents lost that epic struggle on the battlefield and had to accept federal superiority as a precondition for re-entry into the Union. That victory cemented our current federal/state governmental hierarchy.

Many in the Southern states and recently in other states, including Wisconsin, continue asserting beliefs that states should not have to follow federal mandates with which they disagree. Anglo-Saxon racial superiority over those with other skin tones has once again reared up to justify rejection of the more inclusive society we have become since the Civil War.  Wisconsin politics has been consumed by divisive rhetoric along those very lines. 

I wonder what those brave Wisconsin men in blue uniforms who fought to preserve our nation state would think if they saw Confederate flags flying from pick-up trucks and painted on the sides of rural barns on their home grounds. Surely, they did not fight and die to see this come to pass. 

Another driver of the states’ rights and supremacy of individual freedom train is an extreme form of Christian fundamentalism that has taken over our political discourse. “Religious Freedom” has become an accepted justification for rejecting federal laws requiring equal treatment of women, the gay and transgendered, brown and yellow skinned immigrants, contraceptive insurance coverage and universal healthcare itself. “Religious Freedom” has morphed under such fundamentalist teachings. It used to mean that you were free to worship as you see fit. It now means my religious beliefs trump the laws with which I disagree.  

The Wisconsin men who went to war to reunify our country certainly never envisioned Wisconsin and the country being torn apart once again. 

What we are witnessing in this election season is a re-incarnation of the Union Army of the Civil War as Wisconsin men and, yes, women join together to reassert the fundamental beliefs that were reaffirmed by the Union victory those many decades ago. 

We are one state in one country, united by the common shared values and beliefs enshrined in the Constitution. We are all equal and have the right to enjoy the prosperity our shared work produces. We are blessed with untold resources that require wise conservation and preservation so that future generations can share in our national bounty. We take care of one another because together we can and will accomplish much more than any one of us can do individually. We share responsibility to protect the Republic and to make it stronger through unified, purposeful actions designed to promote the common good. We do not leave any one behind. The fallen and weak are just as important as the strongest among us and can contribute to the common good if only allowed the opportunity. We welcome all those, as we have since our founding, who come here to make a better life for themselves and their families.

To achieve these lofty ideals, we must learn once more to work together to find solutions to our common problems. We need to rely upon science to provide a foundation for what we do and how we do it. Religious beliefs must be honored for those who have them with freedom to believe what they believe, but not with the ability to impose those beliefs on others. 

We are on a threshold of once more rejecting attempts to divide this great country into increasing numbers of warring factions or allowing the chaos to envelop our wonderful State and make the struggles of those brave Wisconsin soldiers who left home to protect our nation a wasted effort.

All Politics Are Local

All Politics Are Local

Change Starts Here

Election season is upon us once again.

Wisconsin Democrats are putting up more quality candidates than we have seen for many years. Women, veterans, business leaders and union workers are running strong campaigns across the state, including traditionally GOP voting districts like ours.

Dennis Degenhardt, the recently retired CEO of West Bend’s Glacier Hills Credit Union, has been knocking on doors and meeting voters across the 58^th Assembly District all Summer. Building on his special election run for the same seat last winter when he won the City of West Bend over Rep. Rick Gundrum, Dennis is making his case directly to the voters on the issues that matter. 

Degenhardt’s campaign is focused on support for affordable universal healthcare, stronger support for public education, creation of family sustaining jobs, fiscal responsibility for state spending, protection of Wisconsin’s natural resources and ensuring fair elections. His website is found at https://www.degenhardtforassembly.com

Chris Ralf, a Navy veteran and businesswoman, is running strong against Rep. Rob Brooks in the 60^th Assembly district. She was recently the beneficiary of a gift from Gov. Scott Walker when Walker called on Brooks should resign from the Assembly after making offensive racial and sexual comments about several GOP women assembly members while intoxicated. Brooks stepped down as Assistant Assembly Majority Leader, but refused to resign. 

Rahlf’s campaign is focused on sustainable economic growth, increased protection for the environment, stronger support for public education, fair elections and affordable universal healthcare. Her website is found at http://chrisrahlfforassembly.com

Emily Siegrist, an Army veteran and nurse, is running in the 24^th Assembly District against Rep. Dan Knodl. She promotes universal healthcare, increased support for public education, renewing Wisconsin’s infrastructure, support for veterans and protection of the environment. Emily’s website is found at https://www.emilysiegristforwi.com

All of these candidates for Washington County assembly seats share something else in common. All of their Republican opponents have refused every opportunity to debate or share public events with them. The non-partisan Ozaukee County Chapter of the League of Women Voters proposed debates in each of the districts where the incumbents and challengers could describe their visions and take questions form their constituents. All the GOP incumbents refused this time-honored format, but suggested one forum for all of the candidates. When that demand was agreed to, they demanded more conditions such as choice of moderators and influence over the questions to be asked. The League wisely backed away.  Rep. Gundrum refused to debate Degenhardt during the special election campaign and has, so far, failed to respond to an invitation from groups at UWM-WC to a candidate forum on their campus next week. Brooks has already declined to attend. All the invited Democrats agreed to attend.

These GOP representatives seem to be acting in concert with other GOP Assembly members who have also refused to meet face to face with Democratic challengers in front of their constituents. One has to wonder what they are afraid might happen should they meet with voters in something other than a friendly forum with scripted questions followed by buzz word answers. 

Perhaps they might be asked to explain how they might respond to Gov. Walker’s about face on issues like education, healthcare and transportation. Once hallowed GOP ground, Walker has sullied the party line by recently adopting very democratic sounding ideas like full 2/3 state support for cost of public education, required coverage for pre-existing conditions and increased funding for Wisconsin’s crumbling roadways. Walker’s new promises ring hollow when we recognize that he does not have the support from his colleagues in the Legislature for any of these measures. He knows he can promise the moon in order to gain another term when he also knows that his cronies will never allow him to deliver. 

The pre-existing condition coverage promise is all the more hypocritical after Walker unleased Attorney General Brad Schimel to join other Republican governors in suing the federal government to overturn the Affordable Care Act which provides the very coverage he now claims to support.

Walker even tried to outdo State Superintendent of Schools Tony Evers by claiming the mantle of “Education Governor.” While it is true that Walker proposes to significantly increase “education” funding in the next budget, he forgets to mention that most of the increase would  go into the failed voucher/school choice pot, not the “public education” pot he and the Legislature have slashed to the marrow of the bone. GOP restrictions on local control and funding through referenda remain untouched.

Voters indeed have a choice next month. We can restore Wisconsin to its great traditions of strong. Locally controlled public education, a pristine protected environment, fair taxes spread equitably and elections free from gerrymandered chicanery or re-elect those afraid to meet their challengers to debate the issues of the day in front of their constituents and a governor who is willing to say and do anything to get re-elected. 

Confirming Kavanaugh

Confirming Kavanaugh Sends the Wrong Message

The confirmation hearings for Judge Brett Kavanaugh quickly morphed from a dispassionate examination of his credentials and judicial record into another sordid chapter in the divisive partisan politics that have consumed our body politic ever since Newt Gingrich decided to adopt a scorched earth approach to achieve a one-sided political landscape. The partisan divide aside, the hearings also brought sexual assault and violence towards women face to face with angry white male privilege and entitlement. We are none the better for either.

Whether you believe Dr. Ford’s allegations or Kavanaugh’s denials, the televised hearings made one thing very clear. Judge Kavanaugh did not display anything that comes close to approaching the temperament we expect from judges. Having practiced law in State and Federal trial courts, State and Federal Courts of Appeal and the Wisconsin Supreme Court, I have run across all manner of judicial behavior. There have been partisans and umpires, those with open biases and closed minds, prosecutors who never left their world view, scholars and political hacks at all levels of the judiciary. Fortunately, many of those ill-suited for the bench don’t last long in the robes. They either chaffed at the constraints or failed to earn the trust of their colleagues. 

The standards for judicial conduct are set out in the ABA Standards of Judicial Conduct and State level equivalents based upon them. Federal Judges, including Judge Kavanaugh who sits on the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia, are bound by the Code of Conduct for U.S. Judges. That Code has five Canons which state the broad rules. They are:

Canon 1: A Judge Should Uphold the Integrity and Independence of the Judiciary
Canon 2: A Judge Should Avoid Impropriety and the Appearance of Impropriety in All Activities
Canon 3: A Judge Should Perform the Duties of the Office Fairly, Impartially and Diligently
Canon 4: A Judge May Engage in Extrajudicial Activities That are Consistent With the Obligations of Judicial Office
Canon 5: A Judge Should Refrain From Political Activity

Each Canon has detailed explanations of their meanings and the broad sweep of their coverage. 

Judge Kavanaugh’s angry outburst during his opening statement before the Senate Judiciary Committee after Dr. Ford’s testimony and many of his responses to questions put to him by the Senators clearly demonstrated a lack of judicial temperament and violated Canons 2, 3 and 5. Any one of these violations should disqualify him from confirmation to the United States Supreme Court. The most egregious came when he accused Democrats, including the Clintons, of engaging in a calculated conspiracy involving Dr. Ford and his other accusers to deny him his seat on the Court. Kavanaugh’s lack of judicial demeanor caused over 1,700 law professors and the largest group of protestant Christian churches to call for his nomination to be withdrawn or rejected. I cannot imagine ever appearing in his court and expecting a fair hearing while representing a cause even loosely tied to an issue espoused by Democrats or involving sexual violence against women. His mind will be made up before the case is even called.

Kavanaugh’s disqualifying demeanor should have caused those responsible for his nomination to withdraw it or for the GOP Senators to reject it. Neither course was taken. 

President Trump, after weeks of restraint, finally caved back into his baser instincts. He recently tweeted and spoke demeaning Dr. Ford and her unholy alliance with Democrats. He heaped praise on Kavanaugh and bemoaned the damage done to his reputation and family. Most telling was Trump’s rallying cry that young men must now fear being guilty of similar false accusations, especially for youthful indiscretions. Trump and Kavanaugh both expressed their clear entitlement to do what they will as part of their privileged stations in life. No mention was made by either of a need to listen to and address violence and sexual assault against women by men, even young men. 

We are left with a restricted FBI investigation into some of the allegations raised by Dr. Ford and Deborah Ramirez. So far, this appears to be but a sham to cover loose ends, not the thorough examination of the facts and any corroborating evidence Senators Flake and Coons wrested from Senate leadership before they would vote Kavanaugh’s nomination out of committee. Few now anticipate anything new being added to the confirmation process, especially since Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell has indicated the FBI report would not be released to the public before the full Senate votes. 

The saddest part of all these machinations is the message being sent to young girls. They still will not hear, “we believe you” if they are assaulted. They will continue to be told that rape is not the fault of the rapist, but their own because they did not keep themselves safe. Kavanaugh’s confirmation will embolden another generation of privileged white men and silence another generation of those abused and violated by them.

Rush to Judgment

What’s the Rush?

Do it Right this Time

What’s the rush to hold a vote on Judge Brett Kavanaugh’s nomination to the United States Supreme Court?

The Senate Judiciary Committee scheduled a hearing on Dr. Christine Blasey Ford’s

 accusations of sexual assault against the nominee for this coming Monday. Dr. Ford’s requested a short delay and rules to ensure a fair hearing and her safety. Grassley already rejected her request for an FBI investigation into her allegations but has offered to have the hearing next Wednesday with questioning to be conducted by an independent lawyer. Dr. Ford is still considering this offer. Committee Chairman Sen. Charles Grassley seems hell bent on getting the distraction caused by Dr. Ford over with so his committee can vote to confirm Kavanaugh’s nomination and pass it on to the full Senate. 

This is no longer 1991 when Prof. Anita Hill leveled sexual misconduct accusations against another Supreme Court nominee, Clarence Thomas. Hill’s appearance before the same committee in that year played out on TV and showed the nation what little regard the male Senators had for issues of sexual violence against women. Some of the same Senators who dismissed Prof. Hill then still sit on the Judiciary Committee today and we will soon learn if they have made any progress on women’s issues in the decades that have passed. 

Dr. Ford’s life has already been turned upside down after she revealed her claims publicly in an interview with the Washington Post. She has received death threats, had her email hacked and had to leave her home for the safety of her family. She has every reason to request an independent investigation into her allegations so that there is more than a “she said, he said” record before the Committee hearing. While Kavanaugh’s original FBI background check has been completed, all President Trump has to do is ask that it be re-opened to include Dr. Ford’s claims. So far, Trump has failed to make that request.

Prof. Hill correctly pointed out in an opinion piece in the New York Times on Tuesday that the Senate lacks any kind of protocol for handling claims like those she and Dr. Ford have made. She suggests the outline for one that makes a lot of sense and would take much of the partisanship out of the process.

Prof. Hill suggests that Senators make both claims of sexual violence and the integrity of the judiciary priorities and craft rules that acknowledge the importance of both. Next, she proposes that a neutral body, well versed in sexual violence cases, be tasked with investigating the claims and issuing a report for the Committee to use when it develops questions for a fact-finding hearing. The Committee should also rely upon advice from experts in the field of sexual violence as the hearing unfolds to avoid many of the myths often raised to counter women’s claims, like the “failure to report, therefore she’s lying” claim Trump made Friday. Hill joins the voices calling for a delay in the fact-finding hearing so that a proper investigation of Ford’s claims can be conducted. Finally, Prof. Hill suggests calling Dr. Ford by her name and not referring to her as an accuser or other loaded terms. 

Unfortunately, Prof. Hill’s suggestions are likely to fall on the tone-deaf ears of highly partisan Senators who need Judge Kavanaugh confirmed before the Supreme Court’s new term begins on the first Monday in October, not to mention the mid-term elections that take place a little over a month later. The shaky GOP Congress does not want a slew of 4-4 votes from the Court when a clear 5-4 majority is close at hand. 

There are substantial downsides for the GOP rush to confirmation looming as well. Confirming Kavanaugh’s nomination without holding a meaningful investigation and a fair fact-finding hearing on Dr. Ford’s claims will further alienate suburban women who are already jumping from the GOP ship in droves over Trump’s treatment of women. If the male-dominated Senate pushes Dr. Ford aside, many of those up for re-election in the up-coming mid-terms will not fare well in the backlash.

The #MeToo movement and the passage of time since Prof. Hill was raked over the coals must have had some impact on those in the Senate with any compassion for women who have suffered from sexual violence. Hopefully, Senators Collins and Murkowski will join with Sen. Jeff Flake and slow the train by voting “no” if Kavanaugh’s nomination comes up for a speedy confirmation vote in the full Senate. The ten democratic Senators facing re-election in states that Trump won will have to stand strong as well. A dismissive treatment of Dr. Ford’s claims will make that an easier vote for them all. 

We have reached a pivotal moment in our history. We will soon see how those we elected to represent us choose to treat women’s claims of sexual violence by the prominent and important. They need to start taking women seriously. 

Trump Must Go

The President Must Resign

The hijacking of our democracy continues. Alarm bells ring loudly, but none in the corridors of power with the power to stop it seem to be paying attention. What will it take for those who can bring the madness to a peaceful conclusion to take decisive action?

This week one of the nation’s most respected and trusted journalists published a book on the failings of the Trump presidency only to be ridiculed and dismissed by Trump and his minions. This week one of the most trusted and respected newspapers in America published an anonymous op-ed piece that revealed serious resistance to Trump’s presidency inside the White House at the highest levels only to be called “gutless” by Trump. This week Trump’s nominee to fill a vacancy on the United States Supreme Court refused to answer basic questions from United States Senators charged with vetting his qualifications in advance of a confirmation vote. At the same time, the White House withheld tens of thousands of documents related to the nominee’s background and views from those who need them in order to do their work effectively. 

First, there was Bob Woodward’s book, “Fear: In the Trump White House.” Woodward was part of the team that broke the Watergate burglary and cover-up story at the Washington Post that helped end the Nixon presidency. His reputation since has been beyond reproach. His writings then and up to the present were and are always backed up by recorded interviews with multiple sources who have first-hand knowledge of the matters discussed. He follows up all of the leads and resolves the conflicts between different perspectives of the same event. His work is always documented and vetted. If Woodward makes a claim or puts a statement in quotes, he can back it up with ease when challenged. 

Woodward’s book has been excerpted from advance copies to other media outlets and many of his more telling descriptions of the Trump presidency should raise serious concerns and questions, especially for the members of the GOP in Congress who support the Trump presidency. Woodward’s reporting shows a White House run by fear and a president out of control. These GOP members, many of whom are up for re-election in the coming mid-term elections, stand with Trump at their peril.

On Wednesday, the New York Times took the highly unusual step of publishing an anonymous op-ed piece by a senior Trump White House staff person. The Times’ editors know the writer’s identity and must have believed what their source provided or they would not have published it, at least without attribution. The writer disclosed the existence of a “soft resistance” in the White House staff and, apparently, in the President’s own cabinet, that actively works against the worst of Trump’s ideas and plans. Trump is variously described as morally and politically adrift, issuing contradictory demands and proclamations while favoring America’s enemies over long standing allies and unable to look beyond his own selfish goals to see what the people of America need. The discussions of what this “resistance” should do to protect the country included consideration of the provisions of the 25^th Amendment to the United States Constitution that make it possible for the Vice-President and a majority of the cabinet to declare the President unable to perform the duties of his office and have the him removed from power. Never before in our nation’s history has there been such an active resistance within the White House against a sitting president.

Finally, we have the three-ring circus of the confirmation hearing for D.C. Court of Appeals Judge Brett Kavanaugh to fill the seat on the Supreme Court vacated under questionable circumstances by Justice Anthony Kennedy. Here we see the partisan gridlock in full bloom. The republicans have the votes to confirm Judge Kavanaugh by the slimmest of margins. To keep their members in line, the leadership ramrodded the scheduling of the confirmation hearings before much of the Judge’s record could be examined. The White House invoked a claim of Executive Privilege and refused to release over 100,000 pages of documents related to Kavanaugh’s work in the Bush White House. The night before the hearing, the White House delivered 40,000 pages of Kavanaugh related documents to Congress, leaving no time for review or analysis before the hearing began. No previous Supreme Court nominee has had his or her record stonewalled like that. 

Even if one is compelled to forget all of the other atrocities committed by this President during his short tenure in the Oval Office, the events of this week alone should be enough to compel Americans of conscience to rise up and demand the President’s resignation.

Guns Won’t Win Elections

Guns won’t win elections

Voters want more

There was a surprising twist in the recent Republican primary election for the Washington County Sheriff. Jason Guslick staked out a “I’m tougher on crime” position and won the endorsement of Tim Schmidt, owner of Delta Defense. Both lost to the more moderate and experienced Marty Schulteis who wisely steered clear of both issues. 

Guslick apparently believed local voters would buy into the fear of criminals invading from the inner city of Milwaukee pushed hard by Delta Defense/NRA elements who believe that the Second Amendment gives everyone the right to tote whatever kind of fire power they want to defend themselves from the hordes of “others” bent on doing them harm. Voters clearly rejected that message.

Had Guslick been paying attention, he would have remembered the most recent Wisconsin Supreme Court election where Rebecca Dallet refused NRA money and handily defeated the NRA backed judge who opposed her. Most Wisconsin voters no longer see an NRA endorsement as a sole reason to cast their vote. Thankfully, the Delta Defense endorsement did not fare any better.

Guslick might have been better served to look at the national polls that show a strong majority across party lines wants sensible and stricter gun control measures, especially in the wake of the mass shooting incidents that show up all too frequently in the headlines. 

The post-Parkland shooting millennial voter registration drive aimed at new voters opposed to guns for everyone everywhere has raised the stakes and mounts a significant challenge to NRA positions. These new voters want candidates who will refuse pro-gun money and commit to sensible gun control legislation once elected. They have already swung the discourse away from the Second Amendment purists.

Political candidates, especially in law enforcement, need to walk a fine line. It is perfectly acceptable to stress public safety and the need for public support for law enforcement. Fear based campaigns cross the line, especially when they are tinged with racism and stereotypes. Most voters now want to see effective and fair law enforcement that does not play favorites or support white supremacy.

Anti-Immigration arguments often cross the line as well. Washington County is home to many immigrant families who work hard every day on local dairy farms and behind the kitchen doors in our restaurants. 

Let’s have a nuanced discussion on immigration reform that recognizes the substantial contributions immigrants make to the local economy. We need to encourage a path to citizenship to recognize the sacrifices those newly in our country have made to start their new lives here. 

Claiming support for a southern border wall will not garner as much support as it once did for President Trump in light of the economic reality of our need for immigrant labor. 

Law and Order is a great name for a 1990s television show. Voters have moved beyond the buzz words and slogans and are looking for realistic, sensible solutions to the problems in our society. 

We cannot win any war on addiction, especially opioid addiction, with just a lock ‘em up and throw away the key mentality. Law enforcement can disrupt the supply chains all day long. Without effective medical and mental health treatment programs to help the addicted and their affected families, law enforcement interdiction efforts will always fail. 

Law enforcement that partners with community-based resources offering treatment, homeless solutions, medical care and other social services will be more effective in reducing criminal activity than driving around in armored SWAT vehicles with automatic rifles at the ready.

Washington county voters appear ready for these changes in our law enforcement strategy. Hopefully, the new Sheriff understands and will act accordingly.

Waring Fincke is a retired attorney and serves as a guardian for the elderly and disabled with a Sheboygan County non-profit agency.

Guns won’t win elections

Voters want more

There was a surprising twist in the recent Republican primary election for the Washington County Sheriff. Jason Guslick staked out a “I’m tougher on crime” position and won the endorsement of Tim Schmidt, owner of Delta Defense. Both lost to the more moderate and experienced Marty Schulteis who wisely steered clear of both issues. 

Guslick apparently believed local voters would buy into the fear of criminals invading from the inner city of Milwaukee pushed hard by Delta Defense/NRA elements who believe that the Second Amendment gives everyone the right to tote whatever kind of fire power they want to defend themselves from the hordes of “others” bent on doing them harm. Voters clearly rejected that message.

Had Guslick been paying attention, he would have remembered the most recent Wisconsin Supreme Court election where Rebecca Dallet refused NRA money and handily defeated the NRA backed judge who opposed her. Most Wisconsin voters no longer see an NRA endorsement as a sole reason to cast their vote. Thankfully, the Delta Defense endorsement did not fare any better.

Guslick might have been better served to look at the national polls that show a strong majority across party lines wants sensible and stricter gun control measures, especially in the wake of the mass shooting incidents that show up all too frequently in the headlines. 

The post-Parkland shooting millennial voter registration drive aimed at new voters opposed to guns for everyone everywhere has raised the stakes and mounts a significant challenge to NRA positions. These new voters want candidates who will refuse pro-gun money and commit to sensible gun control legislation once elected. They have already swung the discourse away from the Second Amendment purists.

Political candidates, especially in law enforcement, need to walk a fine line. It is perfectly acceptable to stress public safety and the need for public support for law enforcement. Fear based campaigns cross the line, especially when they are tinged with racism and stereotypes. Most voters now want to see effective and fair law enforcement that does not play favorites or support white supremacy.

Anti-Immigration arguments often cross the line as well. Washington County is home to many immigrant families who work hard every day on local dairy farms and behind the kitchen doors in our restaurants. 

Let’s have a nuanced discussion on immigration reform that recognizes the substantial contributions immigrants make to the local economy. We need to encourage a path to citizenship to recognize the sacrifices those newly in our country have made to start their new lives here. 

Claiming support for a southern border wall will not garner as much support as it once did for President Trump in light of the economic reality of our need for immigrant labor. 

Law and Order is a great name for a 1990s television show. Voters have moved beyond the buzz words and slogans and are looking for realistic, sensible solutions to the problems in our society. 

We cannot win any war on addiction, especially opioid addiction, with just a lock ‘em up and throw away the key mentality. Law enforcement can disrupt the supply chains all day long. Without effective medical and mental health treatment programs to help the addicted and their affected families, law enforcement interdiction efforts will always fail. 

Law enforcement that partners with community-based resources offering treatment, homeless solutions, medical care and other social services will be more effective in reducing criminal activity than driving around in armored SWAT vehicles with automatic rifles at the ready.

Washington county voters appear ready for these changes in our law enforcement strategy. Hopefully, the new Sheriff understands and will act accordingly.