Gov Tony Evers Can Issue New Emergency COVID-19 Order Now: Here's How

B.1.1.7 Mutation Should Be "Treated as a Separate Epidemic," Say Experts as Wisc Court Says All COVID-19 Viruses Are the Same

Updated - Madison, Wisconsin — Gov Tony Evers needs to declare a new state of emergency; use the academic resources our state has cultivated to draft justification for the new threat in the specific form of the B.1.1.7 variant [aka U.K. variant, British variant or Kent variant].

This should be done soon in such a formulation that to disagree with the executive action is to disagree with evolution and the scientific community, and the Wisconsin University System in which the population retains pride and support.

On March 31, four rightist Supreme Court of Wisconsin justices issued a sweeping decision, blocking Gov Evers' executive orders declaring an emergency and mandating masks in many circumstances (Jeré Fabick v. Tony Evers 2020AP001718-OA Case History); (Opinions, Decision text); (Executive Order #105, February 4, 2021).

The case is Supreme Court of Wisconsin, Jeré Fabick v.Tony Evers (Case No.:2020AP001718). 

 

The four-to-three decision was issued with a biting dissent authored by Justice Ann Walsh Bradley.

Evers can still declare a new state of emergency, but such a new executive order must be predicated on what the justices regard as new enabling conditions, the four Republican justices held, inventing a new reading of the power of the Wisconsin governor.

 

Jeré Fabick v.Tony Evers is what happens when rightest judges crawl under ideology; deny implications of evolution and declare uninformed views on virology and epidemiology to be judicial policy, in corrupt service to the Republican Party of Wisconsin.

Still, the COVID-19 variants' genetics have changed so radically and rapidly, and behave so differently (and destructively) that these mutated biological agents incontrovertibly constitute a new underlying cause and enabling condition for a new executive order declaring a state of emergency.

Jeré Fabick v.Tony Evers

People will die because of the Jeré Fabick v.Tony Evers holding that is, essentially, just another Republican power grab. Outside of Republicans, few believe the majority's opinion is anything beyond what the dissenting opinion describes as:

"[J]udicial immodesty, [that] goes beyond the relief requested and declares Executive Order #105 [Relating to Declaring a State of Emergency and Public Health Emergency​​​​​​] unlawful with scant analysis and without candid justification," (p. 2. Dissent, Walsh Bradley)

The seven justices agree on the authority of the governor to declare a public health emergency and issue emergency orders. 

 

Further, the Court agrees that COVID-19 as a new Coronavirus meets the statutory criteria as a public health emergency.

Beyond a profound disagreement on standing, a primary disagreement concerns the governor's power to declare subsequent multiple states of emergency for what the Republican-supported majority assert is the same "basis," the same "enabling condition," and underlying cause.

The dissent notes two relevant state statutes — Wis. Stat. §323.02(16) and 323.10 — relate to occurrences or imminent threat of public health emergencies, an argument the Republican refuse to engage, beyond a dismissive paragraph.

Gov Evers had declared four separate states of emergencies after the State Health department reported the threat of the Coronavirus and new data indicating spikes in cases and the imminent threat of increased community spread.

The state's case was briefed and argued by the Wisconsin Dept of Justice, brief filed by Hannah S. Jurss, assistant attorney general, and Joshua L. Kaul, Wisconsin attorney general. There was an oral argument by Hannah S. Jurss.

"[Plaintiff] Fabick, a single Wisconsin resident, filed suit as a taxpayer [after the third declaration of a State of Emergency and Public Health Emergency]. He brought his suit as an original action before this court, arguing that the Governor lacks the statutory authority to declare successive states of emergency 'arising from the same public health emergency,'" notes Justice Walsh Bradley (p. 4, dissent).

Gov Evers Can Declare New COVID State of Emergency

The most recent declaration of emergency is Executive Order #105 (Feb), struck down by the Court for relying on the same enabling conditions as past COVID-related declared emergencies.

Though Executive Order #105 mentions the B.1.1.7 variant — [aka U.K. variant, British variant or Kent variant], a COVID-19 virus with many gene mutations — as part of the reasoning for the Feb 2021 declared state of emergency, micro-biologists and epidemiologists note the B.1.1.7-U.K.variant is now dominant in the United States, and in Wisconsin, as noted by the Wisconsin Dept of Health Services, after first appearing here in Jan 2021.

The CDC director on April 12 called for Michigan to "to enact shutdown measures in response to its worst-in-the-nation surge of coronavirus infections," reports the NYT.

Writes Sanjay Mishra: "The coronavirus variant known as B.1.1.7, which studies show is both more deadly and more transmissible than the original version of SARS-CoV-2, is now the most common strain circulating in United States, and its growing prevalence has alarmed prominent epidemiologists (National Geographic).

Mishra continues:

Earlier in the pandemic, not many children were becoming infected with the coronavirus, and they did not appear to be major sources of virus transmission to other age groups. 'That changed with B.1.1.7' says epidemiologist Michael Osterholm, director of the Center for Infectious Disease Research and Policy. 'We're now seeing substantial numbers of outbreaks in schools and in school-related activities.'

Further, Mishra writes, outbreaks among children in Wisconsin and Minnesota now have experts convinced that this mutated form of the virus presents a new threat in its capacity to infect children, and its capacity to successfully bind to human cells.

A rapidly growing outbreak of COVID-19 in Carver County, Minnesota, has been linked to school-sponsored and club sports activities. In a study done by the Minnesota Department of Health, researchers produced a detailed map of COVID-19 transmission showing that the B.1.1.7 variant caused about a quarter of these cases.

A similar outbreak was reported in Wisconsin, where all the children at a Dane County childcare center who tested positive were 6 years or younger.Now, a growing number of experts want the B.1.1.7 variant treated as a new virus because of its genetically enhanced tendency to attach to human proteins.

Researchers believe the variant spreads so rapidly because B.1.1.7 accumulated a large number of genetic changes—17 in total—including eight in the virus’s hallmark spike protein. The spike protein attaches to the ACE2 receptor protein, which is found on the outer wall of 72 types of human cells. After the virus latches onto the ACE2 receptor, it can enter the host cell, make more copies of itself, and trigger infection.

By binding more tightly to the ACE2 receptors, 'these mutations provide selective advantage to B.1.1.7, so that's why now it is spreading everywhere' says Olivier Schwartz, head of the Virus and Immunity Unit of the Pasteur Institute in Paris, France. 'It's a kind of a Darwinian selection process.' ...

Some researchers believe that B.1.1.7 behaves so differently from the original strain that it can even be 'treated as a separate epidemic,' says Ravindra Gupta, a professor of clinical microbiology at the University of Cambridge.

B.1.1.7 also been causing problems in other ways. It carries a couple of genetic mutations in the spike protein called deletions, because they eliminate part of the genetic code, that help this variant escape antibodies during the body’s immune response after an infection.

So, why do Wisconsin Republican judicial policymakers and legislators want the COVID-19 virus treated the same as the radically different mutated strains?

Wisconsin Republicans need to recognize the fact of evolution and help the citizens of the state do everything in their power to slow this progression of the virus, its mutated strains and ensure the governor is not blocked by a corrupt Supreme Court and a corrupt state legislature.

Tony Evers and the Dept of Justice should be using Wisconsin's prominent research and academic resources, cultivated for over a century.  

Wisconsin has the great public research institution, the University of Wisconsin-Madison, home of pioneering public health and Zoonotic disease research. 

UW-Madison has 100s of research scientists and academics, evolutionary biologists, the Dept of Geoscience, the Genetics dept, the J.F. Crow Institute for the Study of Evolution; you get the picture.

The Wisconsin Dept of Justice needs to be prepared to argue the consensus of the scientific community at the Wisconsin Supreme Court. Yes, this new strain should be treated as a new basis for a public health emergency and here's why.

What Gov Evers and Attorney General Kaul need to do is make the legal fight against COVID-19 variants a community fight, a citizen fight enlisting young Genetics and Geoscience students and academics, for example, and make outrageous decisions against our citizenry by corrupt justices come with unacceptable political costs.

In other words, if Republicans want to be on the side of the viruses, and kill our families, they pay the costs.

Starving children is fine with Republicans, as we know by Fabick which would have killed $50 million in funding to help provide food security, without desperate U.S. and Wisconsin negotiations to save the funds.

Basing more opposition to a new state of emergency on the proposition that evolution-in-action does not make genetically mutated strains a new virus, and a threat constituting a new emergency is crazy, and is jurisprudence that can be easily overturned.

Evolution is a fact. The scientific community knows more COVID-19 variants are coming. So does the Biden administration.

Biden's American Rescue Plan signed into law in March provides critical funding "to dramatically increase our country’s sequencing, surveillance, and outbreak analytics capacity at the levels demanded by the crisis," in a nod to virus mutations and evolution, both processes as real and predictable as the misery and devastation already inflicted (White House).

Following a call from Gov Evers and Attorney General Kaul, Wisconsin needs a brilliant project manager with vast interdisciplinary knowledge who can establish that genetically altered viruses are the emergency threat this Pandemic has wrought.

Guess what? In Wisconsin there are 1,000s of such people.

Wisconsin Supreme Court Election—Tim Burns Towers over Two Opponents

Comment such as that above leave Tim Burns, candidate
for the Wisconsin Supreme Court, labeled a heretic.
The National Review today calls Burns a "Sandernista."

Finally, a, Wisconsin Supreme Court candidate calls bull-shite on this farce

Madison, Wisconsin—There is a case decided in 2001 by the nation's highest appellate court that instructs the Wisconsin Supreme Court primary on Feb. 20.

Atwater V. Lago Vista is a Fourth Amendment case in which a mother and her two young children, three- and five-years old, were pulled over by an over-zealous Texas cop, verbally abused, and arrested in front of multiple, gathering witnesses who all confirmed the same story: Young children were traumatized and cried, as their mother was arrested by a vicious police officer for a traffic violation.

"The question is whether the Fourth Amendment forbids a warrant-less arrest for a minor criminal offense, such as a misdemeanor seat-belt violation punishable only by a fine. We hold that it does not," the United States Supreme Court held 5-4

A powerful dissent by Justices O’Connor, Stevens, Ginsburg, and Breyer notes the demise of the Fourth Amendment right to privacy and security in this "severe intrusion on an individual’s liberty," (as custodial arrests are), in a decision preceding 9/11 by five months, after which for other reasons: Good bye, Fourth Amendment and hello, American police state.

Atwater is animated by a general disdain the state and federal courts have towards the liberties of Americans against police incursions. For all the fluff about 'land of the free,' after Atwater, the Fourth Amendment barely exists today.

With respect to the Wisconsin Supreme Court election tomorrow, three candidates are on the ballot, two of whom will continue as candidates in the April 3 Spring general election.

Only one candidate, Tim Burns, cares about the liberties and humanity of Gail Atwater of Texas, brutalized by a cop.

Tim Burns

Tim Burns, has made concern for citizens against powerful interests the basis of his campaign.

The only appellate attorney in the race, Burns acclaims the primacy of voters' rights, the right to safe, clean water, civil liberties and citizens' right to an impartial judiciary among other liberties that 20 years ago were not controversial in Wisconsin.

Rebecca Dallet

Rebecca Dallet is a judge pretending the Wisconsin Supreme Court is a trial court.

Dallet's tendency to mislead the electorate plays well politically with some of the state Party and legal establishment.

But Dallet's record belies her claim to instructive experience for Wisconsin's top appellate court, as a bulwark for citizen liberties against unlawful lower courts, and the corporation and police interests for whom jurists like Dallet work.

Dallet is the presiding judge in Wisconsin v. Ryan Erik Diggins, (2003), (overturned on appeal)), in which Dallet found blacks leaning against a wall were engaging in suspicious conduct because racist Milwaukee police said so.

Under Dallet's black-hence-suspicious theory of liberty and people, one can understand how America has evolved into a police state.

Dallet is the problem, so it's no surprise Dallet donated $2,500 to he Koch brothers' chief justice of the Wisconsin Supreme Court.

This is how Dallet thinks about the world, a land with little rights dominated by Koch brothers-approved stooges.

Michael P. Screnock

Michael P. Screnock is manifestly unqualified, directly funded by corporate Wisconsin. In the Republicans' view of Wisconsin, privacy and liberty claims are of no moment.

This is a moment for Wisconsin.

But if 15 percent of the electorate votes on Feb. 20, I will be quite surprised.

Tim Burns, Wisconsin Supreme Court Candidate, Rankles Establishment-Sleaze Complex

Rebecca Dallet gave $2,500 to Koch-brothers-funded
Wisconsin Supreme Court Chief Justice Pat Roggensack.
(Wisconsin Campaign Fiance Report, p.7)

Tim Burns' toughest opponent is the civil-liberties hating, Koch brothers-loving Rebecca Dallet

Madison, Wisconsin—There's a Spring primary election for the Wisconsin Supreme Court on Feb. 20.

The candidates are Tim Burns, Rebecca Dallet and Michael Screnock.

Tim Burns is running a hard-hitting, progressive campaign stressing that Wisconsin law and liberties mean ordinary citizens are big players in Wisconsin on the scales of justice.

The rightwinger Screnock, a Scott Walker clone, disagrees.

The corporatist, Dallet, is why Republicans are ascendant in Wisconsin.

Dallet is a stooge for the Koch-brothers-funded and rightwing Wisconsin Supreme Court Chief Justice Pat Roggensack.

Dallet went so far as to contribute $2,500 to Roggensack in 2013 for Roggensack's successful reelection campaign.

The Bernie Sanders movement-created Our Wisconsin Revolution has endorsed Tim Burns:

From Our Wisconsin Revolution:

Tim Burns is running for this important position to make sure that the judicial system and especially the highest court in the state is acting to ensure a level playing field for everyone and not corporate interests. This focus aligns with the values Our Wisconsin Revolution is fighting for in Wisconsin. Our members know Tim will bring an experienced, authentic voice of reason to the Supreme Court, a voice that sides with the people of this state. We are eager to mobilize 6,000 members across the state in support of Tim through the Primary and General Election in April.  -- Sarah Lloyd, OWR Co-Chair.

Dallet and Screnock can raise all the money they want. Can garner all the establishment endorsements, and contribute as much money as them want to Koch brothers-funded judges like Roggensack.

The people and law are on Tim Burns' side.

From the Capital Times:

I am the grandson of Mississippi sharecroppers. My father was forced out of school by poverty in fifth grade; my mother in the 10th. But I grew up in a time when a minimum wage job could support a family. We had great public schools and libraries, and I could work hard and become one of the top lawyers in the country.

My national practice is devoted to suing insurance companies and I’ve had the privilege of representing clients from 36 states and 10 foreign countries. I am the only candidate in this race with appellate court experience. I was one of a handful of young lawyers appointed each year to serve as a law clerk on the United States Court of Appeals. I’ve both served as a prosecutor and defended indigent clients in criminal court, but my experience starts there, it doesn’t end there.

I’m running for the Wisconsin Supreme Court for four reasons.

First, I’m running because in the span of my adulthood, equal opportunity for the children of people who struggle has disappeared in our country. It has been replaced by a system where most new income and wealth goes to the top 1 percent and everyone else works longer and harder for less and less. The inequity is astounding, and our rubber-stamp Wisconsin Supreme Court is part of the problem. The courts are the final authority in this country, and ours has been looking out for special interests, instead of standing up for regular people.

Second, I’m running because this is the court that upheld a photo ID law that cost Hillary Clinton Wisconsin’s electoral votes. As Alexis de Tocqueville wrote in the 1830s, every major political decision in this country sooner or later finds its way into the courts. If we don’t take back the courts, we will never truly take back our state.

Third, I’m running because President Trump has nominated and has had confirmed extreme right-wing judges on the federal courts. We can no longer count on the federal courts to protect our basic rights, such as the right to vote, workers' rights, civil rights, LGBTQ rights, and reproductive rights. Increasingly, we will need to turn to state courts, like the Wisconsin Supreme Court, for such protections.

Finally, I’m running because I’m a progressive and I think that is what our court needs at this moment in time. Before being appointed to the bench by Gov. Scott Walker in 2015, Judge Michael Screnock worked as an attorney to create the current gerrymandered legislative maps, he helped defend Act 10 in court, and was twice arrested for protesting outside an abortion clinic. He proudly touts his conservative judicial philosophy and admiration of the late Justice Antonin Scalia at every campaign stop.

My other opponent, Judge Rebecca Dallet, is running on her experience, but it is her experience that keeps me up at night. I find her ruling in Wisconsin v. Ryan Erik Diggins extremely offensive. An individual should not be subject to search because they are a person of color standing in a public location for five minutes. Judge Dallet has previously supported conservative judges in Wisconsin, including Chief Justice Pat Roggensack her 2013 race against Ed Fallone.

We do not need more friends of Governor Walker or Chief Justice Roggensack on the Wisconsin Supreme Court.

We can change this court before the next presidential election, and the people who are supporting my campaign, Our Revolution, American Federation of Teachers Local 212, former Dane County Executive Kathleen Falk, former Congressman Steve Kagen, Judge JoAnne Kloppenburg, former Lt. Gov. Lawton, Congressman Mark Pocan, and others, are ready for a fight to take back this court.

Please join us.

Tim Burns

Light em' up, Tim.

Wisconsin Supreme Court Race—Spectacle of Deceit

Wisconsin Supreme Court candidate Tim Burns has
often expressed his view that clean and safe water
is protected in the Wisconsin Constitution, statutes
and derived administrative law.

Top Appellate Court Race Misleading and Shameful

Madison, Wisconsin—There are two credible candidates in the Wisconsin Supreme Court primary on Feb. 20—Tim Burns and Rebecca Dallet.

A third candidate, Michael Screnock, is a no-count right winger whom Wisconsinites should reject.

The race for the open Wisconsin Supreme Court seat is for the top appellate court in the state judiciary. In deciding a case, an appellate judge informs the state what the relevant law is and how the law is applied to a case that may be fraught with error from lower court(s).

Rarely does the Supreme Court hear non-appellate cases (original jurisdiction), not decided by lower courts.

Yet, this fact is ignored in the political culture as the media and most campaigns fool the electorate into believing the Supreme Court is a trial court. Or a rubber stamp for a special class of litigants and communities of interest like a county sheriff, district attorney, some dopey rightwing law enforcement association such as the Wisconsin Sheriffs and Deputy Sheriffs Association, or Wisconsin Manufactures and Commerce and the Koch brothers-funded Club for Growth.

Five of the seven justices—Patience D. Roggensack, Annette Kingsland Ziegler, Michael J. Gableman, Rebecca Grassl Bradley, and Daniel Kelly—are corrupt party hacks with their elections bought-and-paid-for by special interest groups. Any pretension otherwise is false.

The anointed right winger to replace the outgoing Justice Gableman, Michael Screnock, would, if elected, be another corrupt hack for far right wing Republicans.

Absentee voting has begun for the Feb. 20 primary election, and nine days out, not a single reference in Wisconsin media notes the principal function of the Supreme Court—the state's top appellate court. The Wisconsin people are being conned from multiple parties.

Rebecca Dallet's Lie

Rebecca Dallet is guilty of this deceit about the Supreme Court as seen in Dallet's campaign web page and advertising.

Dallet sings her praises as a prosecutor and circuit court judge, while presenting campaign surrogates criticizing Tim Burns for not being a trial jurist.

Dallet goes so far as to pronounce Burns "unqualified" because he is not a trial attorney. On this basis many of the faculty at Marquette University Law School and the University of Wisconsin-Madison Law School are unqualified. Take for instance, Joel Rogers, all-around friendly face whom most Wisconsin pols have encountered once or twice. Rogers has never argued a case at trial, so by Dallet's reasoning is unqualified to sit on this contrived high trial court.

We are not electing a trial judge here; the Wisconsin Supreme Court is an appellate court.

Lying about the nature of the office one seeks should be a political disqualification.

Why is Rebecca Dallet pretending the Supreme Court is a trial court, or is she just lying? Because Dallet like the five Republican Party hacks lacks the character to simply tell the truth.

Good Appellate Judging

What makes a good appellate judge such as a justice on the Wisconsin Supreme Court, an impoverished institution of lies and corruption today?

Consider the wisdom of Richard Posner (U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit, (1981-2017)), on judicial opinion writing in federal appellate court: "Be sure to read every case, statute, regulation article, treatise, etc., cited, [case documents]," (p. 257, Reflections on Judging (Harvard University Press. 2013)).

A good Wisconsin Supreme Court justice should be an intellectual, a scholar, a researcher, a jurist who loves reading with a full understanding and appreciation of the litigants, human beings. A justice should as well be impartial, and not rule in accordance with the Republican Party special interests in Wisconsin, for example.

Ideally, candidates seeking the office of a Supreme Court justice should stow the law-and-order, we’re-tough rhetoric, and specifically Rebecca Dallet's he's-no-litigator hokum.

And it truly does not matter how many sheriffs and law enforcement officials you have in your camp.

Honesty demands candidates edify the electorate on judicial processes, the function of the top appellate court in ascertaining what the law is, and the candidates' ability and dedication to this enterprise.

Electing judges whose job it is to avoid advocacy once in office ought to result in the candidates' insulating themselves from specific communities of interest (and their money) during their campaigns.

 An Endorsement

Tim Burns is a breath of fresh air because of his insistence on informing the electorate where he stands on issues of the moment.

Burns has campaigned on his insistence that Wisconsin citizens are the beneficiaries, the stakeholders, of judiciary policymaking. Burns pledges to fight against special interests, and while omitting the appellate function of the court, also pledges to fight for the citizens for whom laws are enacted.

Candidates not mindful of this status of citizens tend to ignore these same citizens once they get into office.

Writes Burns on his website:

• Do you want a Supreme Court that protects your right to vote?
• Do you want a Supreme Court that protects your right to hike and fish in a Wisconsin free from pollution?
• Do you want a Supreme Court that protects your right to ask for a pay raise – regardless if you ask by yourself or collectively with your fellow workers?
• Do you want a Supreme Court that protects your right to build your own small business, or your own small farm and compete on a level playing field with the massive corporations of the world?

There is no pretension from Tim Burns that he is living in a cocoon. For instance, Burns does understand the powerful, affirmative right to vote in Wisconsin.

Burns does believe these rights and liberties are protected by the Wisconsin Constitution and statutes.

This commitment and honesty make Tim Burns the clear choice for the Wisconsin Supreme Court, not to serve special interests, not to work as a trial jurist, but to serve Wisconsin citizens by impartially researching and applying the law.

Madison Mayor Paul Soglin Says He's in Wisconsin Gov Race—The Bernie Sanders Delegate Bets on Broad Reach

Madison, Wisc Mayor Paul Soglin

A Paul Soglin-Scott Walker race would be epic clash not seen since Feingold-Neumann, 1998

Updated - Madison, Wisconsin—Madison Mayor Paul Soglin says he'll enter the race for Wisconsin governor, making a formal announcement the second week of January, AP writer Scott Bauer reports, (Twitter).

Soglin's comments to Wisconsin media this week follow public statements made in June 2017 in which Soglin cited the success of Bernie Sanders' candidacy in Wisconsin's 2016 presidential primary as evidence independent candidates can win statewide office against the Democratic Party establishment.

Soglin was a Bernie Sanders delegate in 2016.

Sanders' performance with young, independent voters combined with appeal in the northern two-thirds of the state is cited by political observers as a formula for defeating the incumbent Scott Walker.

The right to vote is key in elections, a truism that escapes notice in much of Wisconsin's political culture.

Under Soglin's administration, Madison has recognized the right to vote, as Walker has worked to obstruct the right to vote.

This sets Soglin apart from the field where support for the right to vote is not a defining feature in stated policy objectives or campaign commitments thus far.

Candidates for the Democratic Party nomination are lining up fast as Walker is seen as a vulnerable incumbent.

Soglin will become the ninth major candidate declaring against Gov. Scott Walker, (R), who formally announced on Nov. 5.

"The other highest profile Democratic candidates for governor are: state Superintendent Tony Evers; state Sen. Kathleen Vinehout, of Alma; state Rep. Dana Wachs, of Eau Claire; former state Rep. Kelda Roys, of Madison; statewide firefighter union leader Mahlon Mitchell; former state party chairman Matt Flynn; Milwaukee businessman Andy Gronik; and political activist Mike McCabe," reports the Wisconsin State Journal.

In the 2014 Democratic Party primary campaign, the state Democratic Party successfully discouraged candidates from running for office, a strategy that failed.

Today's AP report by Scott Bauer was augmented by the State Journal with silly facts.

Soglin is counting on social media to reach Wisconsin voters who care about public policy more than the fact Soglin has a mustache.

Writes Soglin this week:

I need your help. In a few weeks I plan to formally announce my candidacy for governor of Wisconsin. Social... https://t.co/2PagvkqBhs

— Paul Soglin (@Paulsoglin) December 26, 2017

Reports Abigail Becker in The Capital Times: "Soglin said Wednesday he will make an official announcement in the second week of January."

As noted in Mal Contends, a Paul Soglin-Scott Walker race would be an epic clash of cultures pitting an intellectual pragmatist with genuine vision in municipal policy, and roots in the Civil Rights Movement against a religious fundamentalist who is vindictive against swaths of the state opposing authoritarian rule, and has worked to transfer public resources of the Badger state to billionaires and special interests.

Soglin brings a large base of support to the 2018 race, critical to winning in a large field in the Primary.

In June, Republicans ridiculed Soglin's work for citizen action in the Civil Rights Movement, the environmental movement and anti-war movement as "left-wing."

Voter turn-out in the 2014 general election was some 57 percent.

Wisconsin Is Saying 'No' to the Fox Con

Wisconsin delivers a hostile response to Chinese scheme to foist
colony onto the Badger state.
Scholar, Allen Ruff, created the Facebook news group site,
Say No to the Fox Con over weekend, quickly gathering
100-plus members as state mobilizes opposition to Foxconn.

Imposing a colony in Wisconsin land of sand and water

Madison, Wisconsin — In July Donald Trump, Rep. Paul Ryan (R-Janesville, Wisconsin) and Gov. Scott Walker (R-Wisconsin) extolled the virtues of tax payers coughing up $ 3 billion to Fox Conn, (aka Hon Hai Precision Industry Co Ltd), in an unprecedented bid to induce the controversial electronics company to site a plant in Wisconsin—a "win" sounding too good to be true, (Washington Post).

Hon Hai Precision-Foxconn is too good to be true; it's a lie.

Wisconsin people smell a rat; an anti-human, polluting rat that infamously induced Chinese workers to commit suicide rather than be forced to work another day in Chinese work camp-'dormitory' complexes, (CBS News), (Jenny Chan, New Technology, Work and Employment), (CNN Technology). [Foxconn communications director Liu Kun, argued in defense of worker suicides that "with more than a million employees in China alone, the rate of 'self-killing' wasn't far from China's relatively high average," after the company installed anti-suicide nets to catch workers jumping to their deaths in prison dormitories, (CBS News).]

Led by social media such as Facebook, Wisconsin's political culture supports a ready resistance to Foxconn.

On August 4, scholar-activist Allen Ruff created the Facebook group site, Say No to the Fox Con, quickly gathering 150-plus members, expected to balloon to 1,000s by the end of next week as  a "clearing house for critical news and views, primarily articles to inform and educate opposition to the construction of a Foxconn factory in Wisconsin. Pieces regarding the impact on the environment, accounts of the firm's operations elsewhere, and analyses of other effects and 'externalities' not offered up by backers."

Gov. Scott Walker has called a for a special legislative session to push the tax-water-sand give-away through in August before citizens begin focusing on the scam, (Fortune), intended in part to reelect Gov. Jobs Failure who counts on Wisconsinites too discouraged to effectively oppose his regime.

Notes John Nichols in The Capital Times:

Walker, who has claimed over the years that the state is too impoverished to adequately fund public education, public services and roads, has suddenly determined that Wisconsin has an extra $3 billion to hand off to a controversial multinational corporation that is famous for making big promises to nations and states and then failing to deliver.

How is this possible?

Easy. Walker is running for re-election and, as a career politician, he is perfectly happy to sacrifice fiscal responsibility on the altar of his own ambition.

Blowing up the Fox Con is the win working families are counting on before the state is mobilized against Walker in the 2018 gubernatorial campaign.

Madison Wisc Mayor, Paul Soglin, Eyes Challenge to Scott Walker for Gov

Paul Soglin, Madison, Wisconsin Mayor

Updated - Madison, Wisconsin — The political world in Wisconsin was treated to news this weekend hitting early Summer like a bomb.

Madison, Wisconsin Mayor Paul Soglin said this weekend he is considering running for governor in 2018, citing specifically the success of Sen. Bernie Sanders, (I-Vermont), in winning Wisconsin in the 2016 presidential primary, (Sommerhauser, Wisconsin State Journal).

Soglin made his comments to the Wisconsin State Journal at the state Democratic Convention held in Madison.

Soglin would bring his spanning-decades administration of America's most livable city, an unemployment rate of some two percent, and a city remaining the Athens of the Midwest through Wisconsin's lost decade of 2011-precent.

A Soglin-Walker race would be an epic clash of cultures pitting an intellectual pragmatist with genuine vision in municipal policy and roots in the Civil Rights Movement against a religious fundamentalist who is vindictive against entire swaths of the state who oppose his authoritarian rule, and has made giving public resources of the Badger state to billionaires a center of adminstration.

Reports WISC-TV:

Soglin said that Madison's economic growth could be a focal point in his potential run for governor.  He said Walker takes credit for Wisconsin's job growth, despite much it occurring in Dane County.

'Almost two-thirds of all the jobs that have been created since Gov. Walker and I both took office in 2011 have been here in the Madison metropolitan area,' Soglin said.

The longtime mayor also pointed to accomplishments on homelessness, affordable housing and transportation.

'In the northern and western parts of the state, they've got the same challenges that we've dealt with here,' Soglin said. 

Economic growth, good schools, civil rights and Bernie Sanders. Sounds like the foundation for a place to call home.

Observers contacted this morning handicapping a Soglin-Walker race say the numbers are there for Soglin,

Scott Walker Blocks Federal Money for Healthcare in 'Crazy' Move

Scott Walker: "I care too much about the people of this state
not to empower them to control their own destiny."
(Stein. Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel, Feb. 13, 2013) 

Update: Walker's Rubik Health Care Solution Cruel Update

'Major step backwards for working parents in Wisconsin seeking healthcare' as Ayn Rand devotee, Scott Walker, echoes Mitt Romney's "47 percent" crack

What do we expect from Scott Walker who blocked Wisconsin from receiving $810 million for funding for a labor-intensive [lots of jobs] project to improve and expand its rail road system?

We expect, in the words of Citizen Actions of Wisconsin's Robert Kraig: the same governor to block "billions of ObamaCare dollars that would have extended BadgerCare to over 170,000 additional Wisconsinites, created over 10,000 jobs, and saved the state millions."

Ideological opponents to Medicaid like Walker are counting on the corporate media to muddy the waters and pretend Walker really just loves health care, as Walker pretends to offer another health care plan in an announcement this week that he says allows people to 'choose.'

Walker made his announcement to the rightwing Wisconsin Manufacturers and Commerce group this week.

Even industry analysts critical of ObamaCare are shaking their heads at Walker.

Writes Scott Bauer in an AP piece picked up around the state, but buried inside local papers:

Gov. Scott Walker's plan to move more people off state Medicaid plans and onto private insurance through a federal marketplace won't result in cutting the number of uninsured Wisconsin residents in half as promised, an independent analyst said Thursday.

Walker's numbers are inflated because poor people near the poverty line won't be able to afford private health insurance that requires individuals to pay for annual deductibles and other cost-sharing expenses, Bob Laszewski, a Washington-based insurance industry consultant, told the Associated Press after reviewing the Republican governor's plan.

"To me this is crazy policy," said Laszewski, president of Health Policy and Strategy Associates and a frequent critic of President Barack Obama's health care overhaul.

"These exchange plans were never designed for Medicaid-eligible people. They're designed for middle-class people who can afford deductibles and co-pays," he said.

Walker is adopting the rightwing think tank High Deductible-Health Savings Accounts positions hatched in the late 1990s, and designed to phase out Medicaid and Medicare by ideologues opposed to the popular opinion that health care is a right.

Joe Tarr at Isthmus quotes advocates who work at getting healthcare for families, and are skeptical and often hostile to the motives of health insurance companies:

Jon Peacock, research director with the Wisconsin Council on Children and Families, said that many of those plans will have very high deductibles and copays that will make it difficult for poor people to afford.

"Congress didn't intend for the exchanges to be servicing families just above the poverty level," Peacock said. "Even with the subsidies, the exchanges aren't affordable for many low-income families. And not all families will be eligible for the exchanges."

For instance, if people can get insurance through their employers -- even if they can't afford it -- they won't be eligible for the exchange. ...

Bobby Peterson, executive director of ABC for Health, said it looks like Walker is making a political calculation to set himself apart from other Republicans who might have hopes of higher office. "He's trying to distinguish himself from the Republican crowd," Peterson said.

Peterson joined numerous health care advocates and Democrats in condemning Walker's proposal.

"We think it's a major step backwards for coverage of low-income working parents in Wisconsin," Peacock said

Citizen Action's Kraig explains why Scott Walker's rejection of $12 billion in federal Medicaid money is crazy below:

Randy Hopper, the Hypocrite from Fondy, with Video and Hopper Wearing an AFSCME shirt

Two recent pieces point to Sen. Randy Hopper, recall target, and the problems he faces surviving the recall.

• Sen. Randy Hopper's 2008 TV AD Featured Extensive Footage of Young Family
• Hypocrisy, thy name is Randy Hopper

"I don't know about you, but Republican State Senator Randy Hopper sure doesn't look too upset about putting on an AFSCME shirt to show his support for some of his constituents on lobby day last year," writes Blogging Blue

Citizen's Criminal Complaint Against Gov. Scott Walker

Update II: Defending Wisconsin - New Website to start Recall Petition launched. Pass it on.

Update: Madison Police Chief Noble Wray Thursday asked Gov. Scott Walker to explain his "troubling" and "unsettling" statements captured in a secretly recorded phone conversation that he "thought about" planting troublemakers among the thousands of peaceful demonstrators at the Capitol. (Dee Hall, Wisconsin State Journal)

In summary, Gov. Scott Walker can't do this to us.

This letter was dropped off Thursday; this is still America.
---
United States Attorney's Office
Western District of Wisconsin
660 West Washington Avenue, Suite 303
Madison, WI 53703

February 24, 2011

I am writing to ask for a criminal investigation into the actions of the office of Governor Scott Walker.

I refer to the recently publicized tape of a phone call in which Gov. Walker responds to a caller’s (pretending to be David Koch) suggestion (vis) [“But, uh, what we were thinking about the crowds was, uh, was planting some troublemakers.”] to place agents provocateur among the citizens protesting the Wisconsin budget bill, to which Walker replies, “You know, the, well, the only problem with that — because we thought about that. The problem — the, my only gut reaction to that is right now the lawmakers I’ve talked to have just completely had it with them, the public is not really fond of this” [A.G. SULZBERGER; New York Times, February 23, 2011. “Walker Receives Prank Call From Koch Impersonator”].

My concern is that—as presumably the “thought” Walker referenced was not conveyed telepathically—the Walker administration discussed planting “troublemaking” agents provocateur at the rallies that I have attended, along with members of my family. Such discussions merit an investigation.

I would like what Gov. Walker said and to whom he spoke on this matter of planting agents provocateur at political rallies held in Madison investigated under suspicion that Walker conspired to disrupt protected political activity.

In point of fact, apropos to the tape referenced above, members of David Koch’s organization, Americans for Prosperity, were bussed in on Saturday, Feb. 19, according to numerous media reports; and labor organizations and supporters were widely warned to stay away from Koch’s group and not “engage” them. Several law enforcement agencies were reportedly aware of the possibility of violence.

It is not relevant to my concern that the David Koch impersonator turned out to be a journalist. What concerns me, again, is Gov. Walker’s taped statement that Walker said he presumably discussed planting “troublemaking”agents provocateur at political rallies, rallies which continue today.

The price of my exercising my First Amendment rights ought not to be dread that my governor is conspiring to plant “some troublemakers” when I petition my elected representatives on pending legislation and peacefully assemble to protest that legislation.

Would you please forward this letter to the appropriate investigative unit?

Yours truly,


Michael Leon

cc U.S. Rep Tammy Baldwin
cc Special Litigation Section, U.S. Dept of Justice
      Civil Rights Division

Wisconsin political junkies need fix

WisPolitics has an online poll up asking if Gov. Jim Doyle is running for reelection.

The GOP primary field looks set as Mark Neumann declared his intention to run. “While he'll file with the state, he plans to hold off on any formal announcements on his campaign until later this fall,” says WisPolitics.

Maybe that’s because the gubernatorial candidates can’t even begin to collect nomination signatures until June 1, 2010, or file nomination papers until July 13, 2010.

Seems like a long time.

The political site, Five-thirty-eight.com, ranks Jim Doyle at 45th among the 50 governors in political power.

Imprecise, but as the two major GOP candidates for governor are going to spend the next several months taking pot shots at Doyle, look for a very early gubernatorial campaign.

Doyle can’t just stand there and do nothing.

He has to fire back and declare his intentions early, and the fun begins fast.

"I held off as long as I could," Neumann said. (WisPolitics)

Heard that. And Governor Doyle: Hurry up too, man. It’s been over eight months since the last election!

Wisconsin's Obama Delegate Win Equals Clinton's Penn Win

Wisconsin Obama Delegate Win - 10

Pennsylvania Clinton Delegate Win - 10

The question is not if but when Obama wins the nomination.

Faced with Obama's inevitability, and apparently intent on stretching the primary out as long as possible, what will Hillary do?

Wisconsin High Court Candidates Disgrace the Office

‘Don’t worry about the result; just tell me what the law is.’

Such a directive ought to be the mission, objective and goal of every justice of the state’s top appellate court, the Wisconsin Supreme Court.

If one were to ask candidates for the Wisconsin Supreme Court their commitment to the above principle, one can expect a declaration of absolute fidelity.

But you would not deduce the presence of this judicial ethos from the campaigns of the two leading candidates for the seat in the current election, Justice Louis Butler and Judge Michael Gableman.

Like the others' before them, their campaigns do not offer explanation of the judicial process, the nature of appellate procedures, the role of briefs and arguments in the creation of judicial policy, and the imperative to be impartial; but rather well-crafted political demagoguery.

Go to both candidates’ websites (and their TV spots) and one can read about the endorsements from police associations, law enforcement officials, and District Attorneys.

What does parading the endorsements mean?

That these candidates have a disposition in favor of a particular class of litigants?

Judges are supposed to be impartial.

Their slogans ought to be: Elect us, we’re corrupt!

And both men know better.

The same principle applies to endorsements from unions, business organizations, or any other interests.

That’s great that the Supreme Court has unanimously called for public financing for candidates to its office. Money corrupts more than endorsements.

If Butler and Gableman wish to be a Supreme Court justice for the next term, they should act like it and stow the likes of the law-and-order, we’re tough rhetoric, and instead edify the electorate in judicial processes and the function of the top appellate court in impartially ascertaining what the law is.

###