Aug 26, 201412:46 PMBlaska's Bring It!
with David Blaska
Should free-market capitalists enjoy the appearance of free speech?
(page 1 of 2)
If you really want to understand the yin and yang of campaign finance law, hire a $300/hour attorney specializing in the field. If you can settle for the gist, one need only understand that the voluminous laws and regulations amount simply to this: avoiding the “appearance of corruption.”
In what other field of endeavor is “the appearance” of something — rather than the act itself — cause for regulation? The Gang of Bad Guys was arrested Monday for appearing to rob a bank?
The chief investigator in the judicially discredited, secret John Doe II proceedings uses the “appearance” locution, as revealed in Friday’s document dump (recounted here).
“Because Wisconsin Club for Growth’s fundraising and expenditures were being coordinated with Scott Walker’s agents at the time of Gogebic’s donation, there is certainly an appearance of corruption in light of the resulting legislation from which it benefited.”
Stipulated: The Gogebic Taconite mine people donated $700,000 to Club for Growth. Stipulated: Scott Walker encouraged donors to make such donations. Stipulated: Club for Growth advocated for mining regulations reform that would promise and up or down decision instead of an infinity of court challenges. Argued: that no one was forced to make such a donation, absent evidence to the contrary. Which is notably absent. Argued: Candidate Tom Tiffany presented his pro-mining platform to the people of the north woods — next door to the proposed mine — and they elected him their state senator.
Does one suppose that Scott Walker is in actuality a tree-hugging, vegan socialist union organizer but now only appears to be a free-market libertarian after those damnable Koch Brothers made him sign a pact with the devil?
Put another way, if Blaska runs for elective office on a platform of complete citizenship complete with voting rights and food stamps for dogs, would it be surprising that dog lovers support his candidacy? Do farmers support farming? Bass fishers clear streams?
‘Bought and paid for’?
How dare conservative candidates take money from people who support them? One Scot Ross, major domo of that “dark-money” outfit One Wisconsin Now, “is attacking Republican candidates for taking money from people who support them,” according to our friends at MediaTrackers. Let them tell the story:
Ross tries to claim Republican politicians are bought and paid for by pro-school choice donors. … Claiming politicians like Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker, Lt. Gov. Rebecca Kleefisch and a host of GOP legislators have taken what OWN tries to present as dirty money, OWN does not offer a single name of what they view as the “pro-voucher cabal.”
But while OWN made no attempt to back up the claim, Media Trackers has uncovered facts that Ross and OWN will not likely be writing into a press release anytime soon. …
In the first six months of 2014 Burke also received over $165,000 — or more than twice what OWN claims Walker got from pro-voucher donors — from anti-voucher, public teacher, unions. Those union donations, in part, include:
Central Wisconsin UniServ Council — $40,000; Madison Teachers Inc — $15,000; Northwest United Educators — $10,000; National Education Association (Washington, DC) — $43,000; Wisconsin Education Association Council — $43,128.
In other words: If you believe that school choice helps students, the pro-choice candidates in the Republican tent are happy to see you. If you believe in the teachers union monopoly, give to Democrats. Let the people decide.
Scott Walker urged likeminded individuals to donate to Club for Growth, which — as its name suggests — promotes economic expansion. Scott Walker ran on a pledge of creating jobs (if we need reminding). That he might support a project that would create several hundred well-paying iron-mining jobs in Iron County should not be too surprising.