Robin Vos clears the way for Mike Gableman recall

Robin Vos, a Republican in the Wisconsin Assembly, wants to amend the State constitution so that politicians* may only be recalled from office for specific offenses. Evidently he's upset because Democrats just picked off two of his Republican counterparts in the State Senate. We haven't seen Vos's proposed constitutional language yet, but according to the Eau Claire Leader-Telegram, one of Robin Vos's bases for recall would be "if they are found guilty of an ethics violation." What could that mean?

The judicial branch of government already has its own process for disciplining its members for ethics violations. Supreme Court Justice Annette Ziegler, for example, was "found guilty of an ethics violation" and publicly reprimanded in 2008. So according to Robin Vos's reported contemplations, Justice Ziegler would be subject to recall in addition to the public reprimand, which is arguably a species of double jeopardy.

On the other hand, Supreme Court Justice Mike Gableman was "found guilty of an ethics violation" by a three-judge panel in 2009, but ultimately was not reprimanded. So Vos is paving the way for his recall?

The Wisconsin constitution provides for the right of the people to recall their elected officials after those officials have served a year in office. Furthermore the Wisconsin constitution specifically provides that "no law shall be enacted to hamper, restrict or impair the right of recall."

Yet that is exactly what Robin Vos wants to do, "hamper, restrict [and] impair" a constitutional right of the people. Which come to think of it is perfectly in consonance with the FitzVanWalker regime's general agenda.

Anyway it's unlikely anything will come of Rep. Vos's petulance.

Why would the people vote to restrict their own rights? That's irrational.** Vos may be irrational, but presumably the people aren't.

* In Wisconsin, the justices of the Supreme Court are very decidedly politicians. In fact recent history has demonstrated that some of the justices are even more politician than are the traditional politicians.

** In the Lockean, "rational actors" sense. The people may be otherwise irrational in different contexts (see, e.g. the election of Robin Vos).

Journal-Sentinel joins Robin Vos in Gableman recall

So the Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel, which frequently asserts its corporate constitutional rights to press freedom, has come out in favor of abridging the constitutional rights of the citizens of Wisconsin.

The Journal-Sentinel didn't appreciate this summer's recall elections, the right to which is guaranteed by the State constitution, arguing against along two fronts: 1) Elected officials shouldn't be recalled simply over policy disagreements and 2) The recall elections were too costly.

Journal Communications, Inc.'s business side can't possibly endorse the latter jusification. A huge portion of that $44M spent on advertising ended up as JRN revenue and the Journal-Sentinel's online edition's page views were through the roof, satisfying and attracting advertisers. In fact JRN has an affirmative duty to its shareholders to lobby for more and more and more recall elections and their attendant political gossip.

Nevertheless this morning the Journal-Sentinel supports Republican Assemblyman Robin Vos's proposal to amend the constitution, requiring specific grounds upon which to initiate the recall process — "higher standards," it says, as in, the commission of crimes by elected officials or findings by the Government Accountability Board of ethical violations.

Fine, then, let's accept that for the sake of argument. However, the Government Accountability Board is not responsive to ethical complaints against members of the judiciary which, as we have been observing for the last several years, suits the definition of "elected officials" better even than the elected officials in the political branches of government.

Thus there is no more reason to absorb the Government Accountability Board into the proposed rejiggered recall process than there is to absorb the Wisconsin Judicial Commission, the GAB's corollary for the judicial branch. And as we learned, the statutory framework for the processing of complaints against members of the judiciary proved ineffective in 2010, when the WJC's complaint against a justice of the Supreme Court, Mike Gableman, reached the impasse of an evenly divided tribunal.

The statutes direct the Commission to follow the rules of civil procedure to the best extent possible but at the same time the statutes thwart that goal. It doesn't happen in civil procedure that courts divide on motions for summary judgment (dismissal) because motions for such judgment are brought in trial courts, where a single judge presides.

Recall that, procedurally, the three-judge panel in the Gableman action convened on Gableman's motion for summary judgment. While the panel recommended dismissal, its recommendations are toothless, as they are subject to review by the Supreme Court, which retains the discretion to ignore them completely. And then that court, necessarily Gableman-less and reduced to six members, failed to reach a majority disposition.

Wherefore does the Gableman complaint remain pending to this day.

Which, according to both Robin Vos's and the Journal-Sentinel's own reasoning, presents a classic case for the recall of an elected official in strict conformance with their proposed constitutional amendings.

In other words since the system currently in place failed to get the job done, the remaining recourse is for the people to exercise their right to recall and one expects Vos and the Journal-Sentinel to lead the charge.

Earlier: Robin Vos clears the way for Mike Gableman recall

Wisconsin Republicans win but keep lying anyway

Of the single loss they did sustain:

“Unfortunately a portion of it was fraud,” Robin Vos said.

And unfortunately for Robin Vos, fraud requires intent, which must be proven, and Robin Vos hasn't proven it, so he's simply lying about it.

"I still think that in many ways the election was illegitimate," he said. "To have a recall where someone is going to be serving for the next two years but use the old district lines seems like kind of a rigged setup.

Which is funny, because that is how Robin Vos's party wrote and passed the law, so that the new districts wouldn't take effect until November.

No wonder that dude poured a beer on this clown's head.

It's almost the appropriate reply to his nonsense.

Introduction to logic with your host Robin Vos

[State Rep. Robin Vos] said he heard second hand that someone tried to use a Bed Bath and Beyond mailer as proof of address.

"Is that fraud? I don’t know. It isn’t right and it seems fraudulent. You tell me how that’s not a fraudulent vote."

That's a clown question bro.

Assemblyman Robin Vos: Conflict of interest much?

Lawmaker's public bill could reduce lawmaker's own private legal bill

Amusingly, Robin Vos is the guy who wants to amend the constitution, restricting the right to recall politicians to ethical misdeeds in office.

Robin Vos signature illegible

REJECT.

On teh web: Robin Vos clears the way for Gableman recall

Fallone on popular sovereignty and federalism

Excellent essay here.

And a reminder that governments don't have rights; people have rights. Governments have powers but only those given to them by the people, which they may expand or retract from time to time. One of those rights — in Wisconsin, at least — is the right to recall elected officials. Nine such elections took place this summer. Democrats won five of them while Republicans won four.* In their wake, one Republican, Robin Vos, is spearheading an attempt to restrict the right of recall. As I mentioned earlier, this is purely a move by Republican politicians to abridge the rights of the people, and nobody should let them get away with it.

Another right Wisconsinites possess is the right to vote. The Wisconsin constitution says that the legislature may enact laws "[d]efining residency." Recently the Republicans in power enacted a law requiring photo identification. What's your picture got to do with residency?

We'll find out soon enough.

* A less mentioned aspect of this summer's political jamboree is that Republicans filed formal notice of recall against seven other Democratic incumbents, and failed to collect the required number of signatures in every instance. Yet the Republicans keep telling us they are "winning."

Recall Gableman

Argues the Shepherd Express.

Can't say as it's the worst idea anybody ever had.

Meanwhile, Gableman's millionaire patrons call out for reform.

See infra Robin Vos clears the way for Mike Gableman recall

WMC sure wouldn't want to lose that investment.

Peppercorn Mike Gableman

Is back in the news, courtesy of Rep. Robin Vos.

Where are the WJC's complaints against Peppercorn Mike?

Anybody remember this cock-and-bull story?