Two Heroes

Environmental Activist Steven Schmuki Loses Assembly Bid

2006-11-20T00:00:00.023-06:00

Official Results

Here (scroll down) are the official results from the Waukesha County Clerk's Office. Steve won City of Waukesha wards 5, 6, 19, 20, 21, 22, 24, 29, and 30. In other words, he captured the downtown ward (20) and wards surrounding downtown. Wards 5 and 6 lie due north of downtown; ward 19 lies west of it; wards 21, 22, and 24 lie to the east; and wards 29 and 30 fall to the south of downtown. The following is a breakdown of his victory margin in each ward:

Ward Net Votes
5 10
6 13
19 4
20 107
21 82
22 37
24 32
29 11
30 43

Schmuki almost won the 3rd ward, losing it by only seven votes; and the 27th (my ward) banked toward Kramer by eighty votes. On inspection, the above wards probably represent a good proxy for the progressive territory here in Waukesha. Unfortunately, some other wards do not see it that way. Areas in which Kramer did best on November 7th include wards that are rapidly developing and among the wealthiest in town:

Ward Net Votes
36 443
33 348
2&5 (town) 217
32 175

Adding these numbers together yields a total of 1183 votes, or approximately 53% of Kramer's aggregate victory margin of 2237 votes. Had this subset of voters changed their minds on election day, Waukesha would have elected a Democrat to the State Assembly for the first time since 1982. Instead, Kramer beat Schmuki by 55.82-44.1%. With these official results, this is the "official" terminus of this thread. It will appear from now on under the heading announcing Larry Nelson's victory in the sidebar. Needless to say, it will not be colored blue.

I am not going to attempt here a comprehensive analysis of the failure of Steve's campaign, given that the election is rapidly receding into the past. I would note, however, some indisputable facts. Steve and his campaign manager, Ellen, ran a clean campaign without any major gaffes from the candidate. They raised a sufficiently high amount of cash to operate the kind of campaign they wanted. And, finally, the candidate campaigned on soundly progressive ideas. The 97th Assembly district encompasses just too much of Waukesha County for such a campaign to defeat a G.O.P. candidate, given the imbalance in the straight-ticket electorate.

As for myself, I did not know what to expect long ago when Ann Nischke announced her retirement from this seat, thus eliminating incumbency bias. I have worked on campaigns before, but never independently in a forum where I could basically do whatever I wanted on behalf of a campaign. I have tried with varying degrees of success to be as objective as possible in reporting actual news. However, my preferences were never really in doubt. This sort of independent research, analysis, and opinion was truly new to me. Though sometimes it may have seemed otherwise, I did the work for myself, and was never inclined to sway anyone else's mind. As for the candidate, I sincerely hope he remains active in environmental matters and local politics. We need more politicians like him.

Disappointing News

Steve Schmuki lost his bid to replace Ann Nischke in the State Assembly yesterday to Bill Kramer. The margin of victory for Bill was rather large at about eleven points. This news is saddening, given that I thought, with a Democratic "tidal wave" this year, solid fundraising, a positive message, and a quality candidate, that the 97th district was "in play" this year. Not so. Anyway, the local business leadership got the candidate they wanted. Everybody else is stuck with a member of the idiot wing of the G.O.P. for the next two years. I have concluded from this that some people just enjoy being used. That is the essential message Waukesha sent to the State Assembly with Bill Kramer.

Last Campaign Finance Report: Kramer Trying to Buy an Election

James Wigderson reports on the last campaign finance report before the general election next week. The raw data can be found at the State Elections Board in Excel format here. The most interesting piece of data is, of course, the fact that Bill Kramer has loaned his campaign $14,000 more than his opponent, Steve Schmuki. If the previous campaign finance report is any indication, I suspect he has granted his campaign much more cash as well. Clearly, given a poor reception among donors, Kramer is attempting to buy the election for State Assembly out of his own pocket.

A comparison with last spring's mayoral election here in Waukesha can only go so far, but it is an eery one indeed. Ann Nischke, despite having poured thousands of her own dollars into the campaign, comfortably lost against the current Mayor, Larry Nelson. Another piece stood out as well: Schmuki still has almost $12,000 on hand a week before election day. Again, I suspect that a last-minute lit. blitz coupled with good turnout for tomorrow afternoon's GOTV effort will sop up this cash. All in all, the Schmuki campaign raised a fair amount since August 28 - $16,837.10.

James wonders why Schmuki has refrained from loaning a similar amount to his own campaign. My impression is that Steve is concentrating more on doors and a grassroots organization than direct mail, phone banks, etc. He may feel that the kind of campaign he wants to run requires relatively low overhead. And, more importantly, in a tidal wave year for Democrats in general, he has at least an even chance of pulling it off. The key, though, is whether turnout will be strong tomorrow. If it is, then a Democrat will excel at something Republicans thought they owned: get-out-the-vote efforts.

Victory Party Time and Location

The following piece of direct mail arrived in my mail box today:

Finally, less than a week from election night, I now know the location and time of a victory party. My question is, though, is this event only for Steve or for all the candidates around Waukesha County? It was discussed earlier this month at the Party meeting that, for purposes of economies of scale, only one party should be thrown. Is this true? Democrats really need to upgrade their planning for these events. This is one reason, among others, why Republicans capture too many seats at the local level. They are better logistically at handling the small stuff.

Campaign Finance Update: Schmuki's Current Numbers

Ellen Morris-Gutierrez, Steve's campaign manager, was kind enough to kick some numbers my way indicating the level of enthusiasm among the Democratic base. As of October 21, 2006, the campaign has raised a total of at least $15,700 from 115 individuals within the district. Of these, at least forty contributed $100 or more and must report their activities to election officials. At least sixty contributed less than $100, in amounts that range from $10-$99. These are solid figures for any candidate running a campaign that eschews radio and T.V. buys.

In other news, Steve just recently covered the 27th ward and I was fortunate enough to actually be home when he arrived at my door. Our conversation centered mostly around how little excitement there is within the G.O.P. base for Bill Kramer. He was optimistic having just met some voters who are older (and, by extention, probably more conservative) who had voted for him by absentee ballot. He will soon choose another ward to target. Having done literature drops for Bryan Kennedy here, I know that canvassing can be a bit arduous at times. Hopefully, his efforts will be rewarded two weeks from today.

Second Debate Forum: Schmuki Vs. Kramer

The two candidates for State Assembly district 97 met tonight in the second forum at which the voters could size up their positions on the issues as well as their demeanor. The two men expressed their differences with more-or-less liberal vs. conservative philosophies of government in the 21st century. Mr. Kramer wants the State to emphasize Health Savings Accounts while Mr. Schmuki wants universal health insurance. Mr. Kramer warned the audience that universal health insurance would cost $400 billion annually and kill jobs. Most estimates place the cost of insuring the roughly 46 million Americans without health insurance at $80-$100 billion per year. He may have been referencing Canadian-style health insurance, which is one form of universal health care. He also noted that we already have universal health insurance, which went unsupported. On the other hand, Mr. Schmuki approached the issue as a form of social insurance that a developed economy like America's, he feels, should have.

On education, each candidate gave stock answers from their philosophies of government. Mr. Schmuki opposes TABOR because it would threaten the integrity of public education, among other public services. Mr. Kramer supports it because, he feels, stronger constraints are needed to force state and local officials to locate efficiencies. 25-30% of the structural budget deficit could be cut with TABOR-like boundaries, according to Mr. Kramer. The candidate failed to elaborate further on this point. He also repeated that TABOR is going to prevent pork in the budget and will result in diminished "brain drain." Mr. Kramer left the audience to ponder these propositions further.

Social issues were also discussed at tonight's forum, in particular the upcoming referendum on marriage and the advisory referendum on the death penalty. Mr. Schmuki presented the liberal perspective on the constitutional amendment that would codify marriage as between one man and one woman. He feels that it would be at variance with the state's history to place a measure into the constitution that restricts civil rights. Mr. Kramer, rather, believes that a safeguard needs to be implemented to prevent the recognition of out-of-state marriages among homosexuals. On the death penalty, the candidates again expressed the standard Left-vs.-Right perspective. Mr. Schmuki flatly opposes the death penalty for three reasons: 1) It is not, he feels, a deterrent; 2) It is costly to undertake; and 3) The risk of executing an innocent person is too great. Mr. Kramer believes that this risk is insignificant and that the precise wording of the referendum implies that the death penalty could deter, if the crime is premeditated.

Progressive Majority Endorses Schmuki for Assembly

I hope everything went alright this morning at the first debate forum between Steve and Bill. I was unable to attend given that I am, um, not a morning person. Anyway, much more importantly, Progressive Majority has fully endorsed Steve Schmuki for State Assembly. Awhile ago, down, down, down on this thread, I commented that his news page had claimed that P.M. had "invested" in the candidate. This confused me somewhat. However, it is now clear that this organization seriously believes Steve can win next month. I say seriously, because Progressive Majority only endorses candidates they feel are close to sure things. Two-thirds of the candidates they endorsed went on to win the election. Furthermore, they gave his campaign $247.37 prior to August 28th.

All of which is excellent news. Even better, I will be able to attend the next discussion on October 18th, 7:00 P.M., at Ascension Lutheran Church, 1415 Dopp St., Waukesha. According to his updated news page, a forum sponsored by U.W.-Waukesha is also in the works. Some more notes from the campaign indicate that Steve is now canvassing due north of downtown, in wards 5 and 6. I sure hope he makes it down here to the 27th ward. After all, even though he ran unopposed in the primary, he received (p. 193) 107 votes from residents of the 27th. That was his best result last month.

He also has agreed to restrict donations to individuals in return for the maximum grant from the Wisconsin Election Campaign Fund. His opponent declined any public finance. And, really, why should he, since Kramer has farmed over a grand in donations from P.A.C.s so far, including a $500 check from the G.O.P. machine in Madison? I guess when you receive the same amount from Ford Titus, C.E.O. of ProHealth, Inc. - one of the area's largest employers, you know where your interests lie. I make two things out of this. We no longer should have guys like Mr. Titus financing the campaign of anybody, at any amount. More importantly, the check from Madison indicates to me that the Party is scared that the 97th could really flip this year.

On a personal level, I am glad the candidate relaxed downtown this past Saturday evening for the art crawl. Turnout surprised everyone and there were lots of bare shelves and walls from the strong sales. I do not know if the street scene resembled "the old days before the malls" because I grew up with the mall culture. But I am glad that downtown seems to have emerged as an "art colony" of sorts. I hope the growth will continue. I have not been to an indoor mall in a long time and intend to keep it that way.

First Candidate Forum Set for This Thursday

I am normally loathe to republish information found in the mainstream media. However, given the extreme short notice involved in the announcement, I need to here. Steve Schmuki and Bill Kramer will debate each other very soon in the first of two forums.

Where: Citizens Bank of Mukwonago
2109 Corporate Dr.
Waukesha
When: Thursday, October 12, 2006
7:30 A.M.

The event is sponsored by the Waukesha Chamber of Commerce. A second forum organized by a group of area churches will take place on October 18th, though the exact timing remains undisclosed.

An Endorsement

With the midterm election only a month from today, I thought I would offer my first "endorsement" of a candidate for public office. It should perhaps come as no surprise that I will be voting for Steve Schmuki for 97th District of the State Assembly next month. I base this support strictly upon the position statements of the organization at which Mr. Schmuki is President, the Waukesha County Environmental Action League. While this may seem overly restrictive (no considerations of his views on health care, education, etc.), the environment is an issue on which Steve has the most expertise and interest. Therefore, it follows that he will continue to express a disproportionate commitment here if (when?) elected to the Assembly. Furthermore, in targeting the base, Steve is rallying voters who have a strong interest in the environment as well.

Steve Schmuki will do something on the issue of global warming. Indeed, if W.E.A.L.'s statement on clean air and transportation is to be believed, he will do quite a lot. Although the state of Wisconsin is only a minor contributor to this problem, Americans need a coordinated response to it at the federal, state, and local levels of government for a solution to work. His approach would be three-pronged: 1) Remove or convert motors that produce the most emissions; 2) Provide incentives for the use of alternative fuels; and 3) Strengthen the region's mass transit system. All of these policies will cost a substantial amount of money, to be funded by business, the taxpayers, and the consumer. However, the risk to every living thing on Earth of doing nothing is far, far more costly. This voter wants some insurance against that occurence, which is why I will proudly cast my ballot for Steve Schmuki on November 7, 2006.

What Steve's Group Is All About

With Steve's courtship of the base, I thought that I, as a member of it, would research exactly what it is that the Waukesha County Environmental Action League wants done to improve the environment here in Waukesha. So, I clicked on "Position Statements" and located eight specific issues that W.E.A.L.'s Board of Directors would like addressed: Great Lakes Water, Clean Water, Clean Air, Environmental Chemicals and Genetic Engineering, Open Space, Wetlands, Waste Issues, and, Transportation.

Great Lakes

This was not a difficult task for me - only 22 pages of material to digest with no equations or graphs. Clearly, W.E.A.L.'s top priority is the preservation of open space in the county, and, by extension, improved land use planning and the prevention of urban sprawl. However, a close second, it seems, is the modification of the Great Lakes Basin Resources Compact, in particular Annex 2001, strongly opposing diversions of water from the Great Lakes to communities that lie outside of its basin (like Waukesha). W.E.A.L. proposes doing so by tightening up some terminology within the text that allow loopholes through which communities that "straddle" or abut the basin's borders seek exemptions from the diversion ban. W.E.A.L., furthermore, supports the current definition of the basin as a creature of surface water flow and topography. What surprised me somewhat is that only one-percent of Great Lakes water is renewed each year. W.E.A.L. wants a restriction on total diversions to reflect this constraint and proposes that "in-basin" users adopt conservation standards as rigorous as "out-basin" users.

Open Space

W.E.A.L. advocates for even stronger conservation measures for land here in rapidly-growing Waukesha County. In order to prevent sprawl and conserve what open space remains in the county, W.E.A.L. wants far more stringent land use planning, the lack of which it calls a "crisis." The following list of measures stood out the most:

Farmland assessments should only reflect the value of the crop, and not the value to a potential developer - effectively, a subsidy to keep land open.

An ordinance should be adopted by the County mandating that only if a farmed parcel of land adjoins developed land can its zoning status be changed - effectively, a wealth tax on farmland near, but not contiguous to, developed parcels.

A requirement that developers issue Economic Impact Studies for new development should be regulated - effectively, a tax on new development, and, by extension, on tenants and residents.

Environmental Corridors should be preserved in their natural state - effectively, a 100% tax on new development on those parcels and the opportunity cost of sale on whatever public entity preserves the land.

All appropriate ordinances should be approved to support a County land use plan, including stormwater management, non-point source pollution abatement, and land division and development.

If the above cost qualities of these policies are interpreted as criticism of them, they should not be. It would be hopelessly naive to assume that a comprehensive countywide program to preserve open space would go cost-free, on developers, residents, taxpayers, etc. Finally, W.E.A.L.'s objective is the preservation of lots of wetlands in the county - buffered D.N.R. mapped sites, small unmapped ones when possible, and those missed by the D.N.R.

Clean Water

Wetlands are an integral part of the area's water system. Another important component is, of course, Waukesha County's lakes and streams. W.E.A.L. supports the preservation of more flood plains, shorelines, wetlands, natural areas, and environmental corridors in order to control non-point source pollution and improve water quality in the area. In addition, stronger restrictions should be installed on the application of pesticides and fertilizers on croplands, parks, golf courses, and yards. Such a measure would reduce runoff into surface and ground water. Finally, W.E.A.L. commends the continued abatement of point source pollution by all levels of government and the private-sector. These sources include untreated wastewater from industry and municipalities.

Clean Air and Transportation

As someone who does vote partially based upon a candidate's environmental record and vision, this is my most important concern. According to the W.E.A.L., automobiles contribute 43% of ground level ozone in southeastern Wisconsin whereas other sources (small engines, lawn mowers, boat motors, etc.) contribute 42%. Moreover, according to the D.O.T., only ten percent of automobiles generate half of all pollution from motor vehicles. That is simply unacceptable, particularly since it is also associated with greenhouse gas emissions that threaten the lives of everyone on Earth, not just those in Waukesha County. What should we be doing here in Waukesha County to ameliorate, if only slightly, the very real risks imposed by global warming?

Removal of the worst motor vehicle contributors through increased waiver cost limits or a State purchase plan for vehicles failing Emissions' Inspection

Require new small engines and boat motors to have emission controls using the same standards implemented in California

Promote programs to conserve energy and utilize renewable types of energy through strict building codes, utility rebate programs and tax incentives

Advocate for incentives to private citizens to acquire/convert to vehicles powered by electricity and other alternative fuels

Work toward restructuring Wisconsin Department of Transportation's (D.O.T.) funding priorities to emphasize mass transit

Advocate for formation of a Southeastern Wisconsin Regional Transit Authority to plan regional transit needs through mass transit

Each one of which is a no-brainer piece of a comprehensive local contribution to the solution to global warming.

Steve does not have all the answers. Nobody does. And on some of W.E.A.L.'s policy points, I found myself in disagreement, either because I am ignorant (more likely) or right (less likely). Conservatives would also assert that, if taken literally, the program of the W.E.A.L. would involve enormous costs upon business, taxpayers, consumers, etc. That is true. However, at least some of those costs are borne, just not by a party undertaking the activity. And, some costs are those that can only be supported through the tax base. Furthermore, conservatives may read "land use planning" as something hatched in Stalinist Russia, rather than Waukesha County. I think the W.E.A.L. would suggest that the other extreme position is just as bad. Imagine the entire county looking like Bluemound Road - no planning, jurisdictional chaos, traffic congestion, etc. Steve would suggest that we are not locked into two discrete options here. There is a continuum - too much planning is as bad as too little. We are going to conserve at least some of the county. All that is required is a sense of balance about how much.

Bills That Steve Can Back

Steve, the last time I saw him at least, was courting the base downtown and around. With such supporters, he feels, no doubt, freer to discuss his passionate environmentalism. I have yet to report on his organization's specific perspective on the issues here. However, tonight, I trolled the State Assembly's database on bills and resolutions pertaining to the environment. If Steve encounters a wily voter interested in specific proposals, these should help him make the issues more concrete since they are floating around the legislature right now. The following bills appeared under the keywords "environmental protection,""natural resources," or "energy conservation" with appended descriptions provided by the Legislative Reference Bureau:

Assembly Bill 585 (P.D.F.)
This bill creates a sales and use tax exemption for equipment that is energy efficient, as qualified under the Energy Star program, including air conditioners, dehumidifiers, furnaces, boilers, refrigerators, freezers, and clothes washers, but not including consumer electronics. This bill will be referred to the Joint Survey Committee on Tax Exemptions for a detailed analysis, which will be printed as an appendix to this bill. For further information see the state and local fiscal estimate (P.D.F.), which will be printed as an appendix to this bill.

Status: Failed to pass pursuant to Senate Joint Resolution 1 on May 11, 2006

Assembly Bill 744 (P.D.F.)
This bill creates an income and franchise tax credit for the amount of the sales and use taxes paid in the taxable year on the purchase of energy efficient equipment, including air conditioners, dehumidifiers, furnaces, boilers, refrigerators, freezers, and clothes washers, but not including televisions, audio equipment, and other consumer electronics. The amount of the credit may not exceed an amount equal to $1,000 for each piece of equipment purchased in the taxable year. For further information see the state fiscal estimate (P.D.F.), which will be printed as an appendix to this bill.

Status: Failed to pass pursuant to Senate Joint Resolution 1 on May 11, 2006

Assembly Bill 767 (P.D.F.)
This bill creates an income and franchise tax credit for alternative energy sources. A taxpayer may claim a credit in an amount equal to the amount of sales and use taxes the taxpayer paid in the taxable year on certain equipment and services related to generating electricity and heating water by using solar energy, wind energy, or gas from agricultural waste. In addition, a taxpayer may claim a credit in an amount equal to 10 cents per kilowatt hour for energy generated from wind, the sun, or gas from agricultural waste that is used exclusively by the taxpayer or returned to a utility as surplus energy. For further information see the state fiscal estimate (P.D.F.), which will be printed as an appendix to this bill.

Status: Failed to pass pursuant to Senate Joint Resolution 1 on May 11, 2006

Senate Bill 81 (P.D.F.)
This bill creates sales and use tax exemptions for the sale of a renewable resource and for the sale of any item of tangible personal property that uses a renewable resource. Under current law, "renewable resource" includes a resource that derives electricity from a fuel cell that uses a renewable fuel, tidal or wave action, solar thermal electric or photovoltaic energy, wind power, geothermal technology, wood or plant material, biological waste, crops grown for use as a resource, or landfill gases.

Under current law, the Development Finance Board (board) may award technology development grants and loans, from the Wisconsin development fund, to businesses to provide capital for developing and marketing a business or to fund technical research that is intended to result in the development of a new, or the improvement of an existing, industrial product or process. This bill requires the board to biennially award technology development grants or loans, not exceeding a total of $400,000 in each biennium, to businesses for research, development, or commercialization activities related to renewable resource projects. This bill will be referred to the Joint Survey Committee on Tax Exemptions for a detailed analysis, which will be printed as an appendix to this bill. For further information see the state and local fiscal estimate (P.D.F.), which will be printed as an appendix to this bill.

Status: Failed to pass pursuant to Senate Joint Resolution 1 on May 11, 2006

Senate Joint Resolution 1 is essentially the current biennial session schedule. Failure to pass pursuant to it means that all the above bills died in committee. Bummer. However, that does not mean that they cannot be reissued in the next legislature if (when?) Steve Schmuki is our Assemblyman. Another consideration, of course, is the stark realism any environmentalist must face. In short, the current session's work on this issue amounts to little or nothing.

The result from the next legislature is unlikely to be much different. Assuming Scott Jensen is replaced by another Republican (sorry, Sterling) next year, Democrats would need an eleven-seat pickup to regain control of the Assembly. That is about as likely as the Earth colliding with an asteroid in my lifetime. However, the story is much brighter on the Senate side, with only three pickups needed to wrest back control of that chamber. Hopefully, guys like Jim Sullivan are as committed to reform as Steve Schmuki.

Some Technical Notes

Update
So, the strikethrough problem should be solved. Inexplicably, Moz does not recognize the < s > tag, whereas I.E. does. I foolishly thought this tag meant "space" not "strike." This tag was written into all my tables in order to separate the columns and improve appearance. Instead, I.E. interpreted it as "strike everything following until < /s > appears." As I never closed this tag out, everything below the most recent table was crossed out. I have no idea why the sidebar text should have been affected since I never wrote this tag into my template. Weird.

This thread has grown way too unweildy. After months of reporting on this race, my browser's page is maxed out and this post consumes more than half of it. So, I have replaced generic "update" tags with real headlines below. I also blank targeted each link so there is no longer any need to hit the back option on the browser. Also, I have received word from several of my readers of strikethroughs on some, or all, of this blog's text. Honestly, I have no idea of the origin of this. No matter how hard I try, I cannot replicate this effect on my system. I have googled it and have attempted to seek a technical solution with blogger as well. All to no avail. If anyone out there can offer help, I would appreciate it.

Finally, as we approach election day, I may report information that a particular campaign (not just Steve's) would rather not be released to the public. Several readers of this blog would rather be pushed in front of a speeding locomotive than vote Democratic. Therefore, any campaign representative is welcome in the comments or via e-mail to request some boundaries on what I express here. All information pertaining to strategy is probably strictly between Steve and his campaign chair, Ellen. But, I do not want to go around stepping on toes, especially friendly ones.

Schmuki Canvassing Downtown and Around

Tonight, I attended the monthly Waukesha County party meeting. I skipped last month's. Why? The featured guests were the Democratic primary candidates for Secretary of State. I cannot imagine a more boring and irrelevant time. This evening's featured guest was Talia Schank representing FAIR Wisconsin. I became a little more educated on the ban on civil unions voters get to disapprove of in less than seven weeks time. More important, I got rather psyched that Wisconsinites will be the first to knock down a measure that would write discrimination against homosexuals directly into our State's constitution.

Anyway, this thread here is about Steve's campaign. He dropped in about forty-five minutes into the meeting, just in time for "Candidate's Corner." Andrew Stiffler, Democratic candidate for 33rd Senate district, spoke first. Apparently, his campaign is so broke that he cannot afford any yard signs, but he is getting some media attention from WTMJ. If it is hard to be a Democratic candidate in the City of Waukesha, it has to be impossible for Mr. Stiffler at the County level. I actually felt a touch of pity well up in me.

Not so for Steve. He arrived having just completed a circuit of doors in the 20th Ward - a district that includes parts of downtown and environs immediately south. Ah, warms the heart observing a smart politician. And, Steve, I live in the 27th. You know, the one that includes Waukesha South? We like you here too. Even better, he informed us that his campaign has distributed a total of 14,500 pieces of lit. in his first buy. The composition of this buy was somewhat unclear - 14,500 pieces of "something." A second buy has been contracted and will be distributed soon. If only candidates could knock on as many doors, eh?

Lufter for Assembly: What Went Wrong?

The following is a postmortem on the wreckage of the Lufter for Assembly campaign. Chris was billed as the "insurgent" versus Bill as the "establishment" candidate. I do not think such an "analysis" is very useful. I am not sold on the idea that an advantage in endorsements, connections, whatever translates into cash or motivated voters. Furthermore, each side cancelled one another out in the pro-life endorsement war. For some odd reason, each campaign initially targeted the base on abortion. The conservative base, having been put through the ringer lately, has, it seems, been worn down to this issue alone.

There is a pattern here. Chris ran as the tax revolt candidate, with credentials to back up her position. So did Scott Walker. So did Ann Nischke. All lost. Why? Because moderate, libertarian Republicans who used to be motivated by such experience and rhetoric are staying home on election day, or have bolted from the party altogether. Those that remain in the G.O.P. tent are much more likely, therefore, to respond to a socially conservative message than before. Though Lufter is very much pro-life, her appeal centered squarely on her "pro-taxpayer" message.

Adjoining this failure of message was a tardiness in campaigning, and hustling cash to deliver it. Chris did not declare her candidacy until June 27, thus giving Kramer weeks, perhaps months, time to raise cash. He had a $2,464.90 cash advantage only days into the race. At the time, I thought Lufter's superior name recognition within the G.O.P. base would allow her to rapidly close this gap. This proved illusionary on two levels. With such a long lag, Bill had plenty of time to introduce himself to the party faithful, and raise cash. He probably began the race with superior, not inferior as I proposed, name recognition. He was then able to maintain his fundraising advantage over Chris.

Now, what does this mean for Steve's campaign, and for Democrats here in general? As I recommended long ago, before Chris jumped in, ignore the base and concentrate on moderates and independents (like those who used to vote for candidates like Lufter). With TABOR gone (effectively) as an issue to rally the base, there is no need to waste oxygen and paper on them, who are already very motivated this year. Unfortunately, Steve needs to know that this also applies to the environment. Those who are passionate about the environment will show up and vote for Steve regardless of the shape his run takes.

Kramer ran a smart campaign, but I believe he knew he was going to win, and win big primary day. How? On the Saturday before the election, I received a piece of direct mail from his campaign. Expecting to read yet more pro-life sermoning, I sighed, and read Bill's perspective on... education. Yep, an issue aimed straight at the very people who skip the primary, but vote in November. Now that is confidence, and Steve needs to meet it halfway.

Kramer Defeats Lufter in Landslide Victory

With 51% of precincts reporting as of 10:24 P.M. C.S.T., Kramer leads Lufter, 55% to 44%. Unless all hell breaks loose, therefore, Bill Kramer will represent the G.O.P. for 97th State Assembly district in November. An analysis of the failure of the Lufter campaign due for tomorrow.

Message Delivery in the Internet Age

The following YouTube broadcast is useful only to the extent we get a better glimpse of the candidates's body language and eye contact. Incidentally, this is linked over at Lufter's campaign website - kudos to her on two levels. First, it is unbiased news coverage. More importantly, this is how to deliver the message in the year 2006. Yard signs are a component too, but so is this.

Do Endorsements Matter? A Political Analysis

James ponders in the comments below how Lufter can be in trouble given her superior cash balance. Call it the "I want to die broke" rule. Campaign donations are no good unless spent on real lit., yard signs, etc. Two months ago a flush bank account would be an advantage, but it is now crunch time. Unless spent in a mad dash to the finish line, I do not see how these funds are going to be productive for her campaign. James also notes that Bill has incurred debts totaling $5,000 over the reporting period. He is correct, however, the numbers below were meant to show each campaign's flow of funds, not whether any assets or liabilities were taken on. If his obligations are included here, then his ending cash balance would be -$4,063.65. Bill's campaign, of course, is alone in indebtedness.

James also notes that Bill's numbers are upward biased given his campaign treasurer's connections among monied local Republicans and his suite of endorsements. Given that I am not a partisan insider, the former is unknowable to me. Whether or not endorsements translate into hard cash is uncertain. After all, in the period Jan. 1, 2005 - Jun. 30, 2006, fully 60.6% ($3,000) of Bill's "big money" contributions were from either himself or his girlfriend. Only $1,950 (39.4%) was given by eight others for a paltry average of $243.75. It would seem that his early endorsements had little effect on the bottom line. Until the latest data are analyzed closer, we cannot know whether any "catch-up" in contributions has occurred. I suspect that, indeed, it has. Nobody donates $6,322.40 (60.6% of $10,433) to their (or their boyfriend's) campaign.

Underlying all of this, though, is the question of whether endorsements or connections (however weighted) are correlated with campaign contributions. Bill's campaign might have received as much cash had nobody liked him. We just do not know. No doubt Chris is running ragged in her quest to replace Ann Nischke. But, doubtless too, so is Bill. The difference is that Bill got in earlier, raised cash earlier, maintained a (slight) advantage in raising additional funds, and spent it faster. Whether this trend can be reversed in the next seventy-two hours is, of course, plausible. It would be the only way to burn up her considerable cash hoard.

I have the luxury here of analyzing this primary campaign from a neutral perspective. There is no way on earth I could ever support either candidate, financially or otherwise. I would say, though, that Kramer has, in this outsider's view, run a slightly stronger campaign so far. From Chris's side, all I note is later, later, later: Late in announcing, late in fundraising, and late in spending the money, relative to her opponent. On a personal level, the closest I have gotten to Chris was to read a piece of junk mail. Bill actually knocked on my door. Voters remember that.

Second Campaign Finance Report: What Is Lufter Waiting For?

The following summarizes the campaign finance activity of the candidates (Excel) during the period July 1 - August 28, 2006 (the reporting period).

Candidate Beginning Cash Income Expenses Ending Cash
Bill Kramer $2,544.90 $10,433.00 $12,041.55 $936.35
Chris Lufter $80.00 $9,041.64 $4,552.56 $4,569.08
Steve Schmuki $4,637.85 $4,802.37 $653.23 $8,786.99

These numbers are troublesome for Chris's campaign. She is shaking the money tree almost as hard as her primary opponent yet continues to be dogged by her relatively late entry into the campaign - the $2,464.90 edge in Bill's beginning cash balance can buy a lot of visibility. Worse, though, two weeks and change out from September 12th and over $4,500 still in the bank? Can we expect from this a last minute blitz from the Lufter side? If so, and I mean this sincerely, I truly hope they avoid direct mail.

Schmuki Launches Website

Way to go Steve - finally, a web site comparable to your opponents'! Some bugs still infect it, though. I tried to volunteer and the e-form was lost due to technical difficulties. Hmm... On the campaign news page, I discovered that Progressive Majority has "invested" in Steve's campaign. What this means is unclear. After all, Steve does not appear in their list of candidates. Perhaps unsurprisingly, though, Jim Sullivan, fifth State Senate district candidate, does. This is good, good news, given that P.M. has a strong track record of endorsing winners (like Larry Nelson).

Lufter Plays Weak Ethics Card against Kramer

The banner headline in today's Freeman reports on a press release from the Lufter campaign critical of Bill Kramer's vote earlier this year approving of a pay raise for his girlfriend, Pamela Reeves, Waukesha County Treasurer. Since ethics is so much in play this election year, something like this was not unexpected from either side. It will receive some press. But two weeks from now it will not even be a memory.

More important, the article demonstrates less-than-complete reporting. Rather than call the Wisconsin Ethics Board legal counsel, Kollin, (who will blow you off or refer you to local officials) why not dig into Bill's campaign finances as well. After all, is the fact that the same Ms. Reeves has donated a sizable amount to Bill's campaign - $500 - not important as well? I know. This sort of information cannot be gleaned from a press release.

Kramer and Lufter Cancel Each Other Out in Endorsement War

I am not sure what to make of Bill and Chris's attempts to court the base in this primary campaign. One thing is clear, however. Both campaigns are waging that abortion will resonate the most, hence, the endorsement war. On Saturday, I received more junk in the mail, this time from the Lufter for Assembly side. It reads almost identically to Bill's, received only twenty-four hours earlier. Pluck one extreme pro-life group's name, insert another's, repeat. There were some differences, though. Rather than source glossy mail from a marketing firm, Chris decided to do direct mail on the cheap - analogous to walking into a McDonald's and asking what the cheapest item on the menu is. I read the form letter and was perplexed.

After all, I thought Lufter was the anti-tax zealot in this campaign. Not only did she fail utterly to mention other issues besides abortion, but she failed to differentiate herself from Bill at all. After all, do Republicans really care if one candidate is endorsed by Pro-Life Wisconsin rather than Wisconsin Right to Life? Can we expect that only members of these "advocates for the unborn" groups will show up at the polls next month? Why Chris and Bill did not hedge and mention other issues is unknowable. Why the emphasis on direct mail is another mystery.

The scene is not one of total darkness, however. Inserted into the envelope was a small card that, if one desired, could be mailed in requesting a yard sign. These devices no doubt help out on name recognition but are highly variable in their effectiveness. I am inclined to think, more often than not, that they are a waste of campaign resources. Most surface streets here in town receive relatively little traffic - auto, bike, and foot. As Bucher for Attorney General is demonstrating, going big and going major thoroughfare (Sunset Drive) may be the only viable option here.

First Kramer Mailing Touts Pro-life Group's Endorsement

Well, today, I received my first bit of political junk mail from the Kramer campaign. What an odd campaign Bill is running. On the one hand, he runs the classiest web site of the three, while on the other, he is resorting to print on the message. Print is considered the cheapest, yet least effective, method of delivering the message - a fact of life Ann Nischke learned the hard way when she placed it at the center of her campaign for Mayor of Waukesha. Anyway, back to Bill. He touts his endorsement by Wisconsin Right to Life and delivers some platitudes on his pro-life perspective.

This is both cheap and smart politics. Only the base will show up next month, so deliver the message now that will rally them to the polls. It is cheap, though, because it is so brazenly so. Bill had the opportunity to explain in this mailing how he feels on other issues besides abortion (and, yes, even among the G.O.P. base, there are others) and chose not to. Worse, about a quarter of its surface is covered by two photos of an infant. Bill, I am not sold on Gerber baby formula here. When will these people understand that voters are not impressed by garbage in their mail boxes? On the other hand, as my uncle says, if you throw enough shit up against the wall, some of it is going to stick.

To be fair, Bill has been canvassing. There is a glimmer of understanding of how local politics is won in the real world there. The following was shoved into my door handle on Saturday, the fifth:

Note the handwriting. He was here. I mean, HE WAS HERE. One other thing before I go, and this just occurred to me tonight. This guy seriously resembles former New York Governor Tom Dewey.

Bill Kramer Tom Dewey

Schmuki Draws Upon Network of Activists for Campaign Finance

The following is a breakdown of Steve's "Big Money" ($100 or more) contributions during the period January 1, 2005 - June 30, 2006:

Source Amount
Steve Schmuki $1,020
Gennrich Family $1,000
L.B. Hardy $500
Sazama Family $500
Amerson Family $250
Lisa Cottrell $250
Jean Batha $200
Marlin Johnson $200

I ignore here items of only one-hundred dollars (though noteworthy, Kathleen Falk, Dane County Executive and a State Attorney General candidate gave his campaign that amount). The above numbers sum to $3,920 or 81.3% of "Big Money" cash. Ellen Gennrich serves with Steve at the Waukesha County Land Conservancy as its President. She is also a member of the Waukesha County Environmental Action League, at which Steve is President. Alison Sazama of Chippewa Falls is President of the Chippewa County Land Conservancy. Fay Amerson is employed by Walworth County in their Land Use and Resource Management Department. Her position is in the Resource Management part, under Conservation. And, finally, Marlin Johnson is a retired Biology prof. at U.W.-Waukesha and an active member of the Waukesha County Land Conservancy, among other groups.

Very little information exists for the remaining three contributors. L.B. Hardy contributed (p. 14, P.D.F.) a while ago to the Ice Age Park and Trail Foundation. Jean Basta is a realtor, and may be a professional acquaintence of Steve's.

Kramer Launches Website

Here is Kramer's. Perhaps surprisingly, his is the most sophisticated of them all, even though it appears 31st on Google for "bill kramer waukesha." Maybe Bill should talk more about himself on his site.

Lufter Launches New Website

Chris has a new site - distinct from the Taxpayers League's - here. Steve's site is, regrettably, not as sophisticated as Chris's. Maybe, a new direction - technically, that is - is in order. I mean, blogger is a free host as well. Anyone with any proficiency in H.T.M.L. should be able to design a whole new page in an afternoon's work. The real issue is that they do not believe it matters, because they feel that no one visits. It does. We do. Fix it.

First Campaign Finance Report: Numbers Understated for Lufter, Solid for Schmuki

Steve is winning the money race so far, as reported yesterday in the Freeman. The following numbers woefully understate Lufter's ability to raise cash because she declared her candidacy only three days before the end of the period covered by the campaign finance reports.

Candidate Beginning Cash Income Expenses Cash on Hand - June 30
Steve Schmuki $0.00 $5,405.00 $767.15 $4,637.85
Bill Kramer $1,739.19 $2,520.45 $1,714.74 $2,544.90
Chris Lufter $0.00 $166.58 $86.58 $80.00

Clearly, this has to be good news for Steve, especially since his campaign is less than two months old. I can only assume that most of Steve's expenses have been incurred through printing many, many, many leaflets resembling the one above. His campaign tosses them out like confetti at events. Over at the elections board, all of the numbers can be accessed in Excel format.

Is Scott Walker Still Running for Governor? "Phony Freeze" Mess

Apparently, the Waukesha Taxpayers League believes that Scott Walker is a candidate for Governor. I clicked on their "Phony Freeze" link and was ejected to a site paid for by "Friends of Scott Walker." The site also features the banner "Help Scott Walker defeat Jim Doyle: Contribute Here." No really, he is still accepting money for his non-campaign. Guys, according to the State Elections Board, Scott Walker is not going to replace Doyle next year.

Still, maybe Walker's principles are what is motivating their inclusion of "Phony Freeze." This one is going to be harder to knock down than their TABOR link, on which TABOR is offered for sale on eBay. I first hit "Story of the Week," hoping for some news on the anti-tax crusade. Apparently, four days from now, I can welcome in the year 2006. After all, "Phony Freeze"'s version of news was posted on December 27, 2005. I am glad to see that not only Waukesha Blogger has serious update issues.

It gets worse. Dejected that more recent events, like, um, those that happened this year, are not covered, I made my way to "'Freeze' News." Here we encounter a flurry of press releases from the defunct Walker for Governor campaign, and the G.O.P. machine in Madison. Walker's campaign staff, and their Republican allies, sure know how to write. Problem is, they stopped writing months ago - the most recent one was issued (P.D.F.) on November 18, 2005. I am still awaiting the start of 2006. Under "Walker 'Freeze' Updates," we find four articles (actually three, since two titles link to the same J.S. Online piece). The most recent was posted on October 10, 2005, and one article fails to load. This last piece is actually the most appropriate. After all, why is a server still spinning for Walker for Governor? And why is it continuing to accept donations for his defunct campaign?

Below these minor items, we are treated to a litany of "news" articles in "More Phony Freeze Stories." Under General News, three of nine articles fail to load, and the most recent is, yep, New Year's Eve 2005. Under Southeast Wisconsin, only two of twenty articles do not load, however, the most recent was printed on December 9, 2005 - some article on tax increases in North Fond du Lac of all places. Do not bother with Southwest Wisconsin. Only two in seven articles still have homes. Ditto for Mark Green country (Northeast Wisconsin) - three of eight are not there. As for Northwest Wisconsin, where is Chetek anyway? Excitedly, I clicked on both links for the Governor's and Walker's tax returns. How much does Doyle make? Is the County Executive position rewarding, financially? I will never know. Both links are thin air.

So, Chris is proud to be affiliated with a site that claims the following:

Scott Walker remains a candidate for Governor of Wisconsin.

Scott Walker wants contributors to come forward to finance it.

News is still news, even for events that were covered last year.

The most disturbing aspect of "Phony Freeze" is that it strongly implies that Scott Walker is accepting donations for a campaign that is no longer active. I am no attorney (thank God), but I am curious if this sort of practice is legal. Even if these contributions flow into "Friends of Scott Walker" as an omnibus group that would presumably fund a reelection bid or possibly a future gubernatorial run, the implication here is that this nomenclature is synonymous with "Scott Walker for Governor." Interesting.

Lt. Governor Lawton Visits Waukesha for Fundraiser and Rally

This evening I attended a fundraiser for the Democratic Party of Waukesha County at Sprizzo coffeehouse downtown. The featured guest was Lt. Governor Barbara Lawton, sent here to rally the troops. Steve, of course, was there also, and received the sharpest applause that attests to this district's potential for a Democratic pickup this November. The only candidate to address the crowd of about forty was Lawton and her focus was on fiscal responsibility and the ongoing effort of Democrats to portray themselves as not "tax-and-spend" liberals. Mayor Nelson formally introduced her and his remarks also centered on "electability" and fiscal responsibility.

I was somewhat disappointed that Jim Sullivan, Wauwatosa Alderman and candidate for the fifth Senate district currently held by freshman Senator Tom "Autobahn" Reynolds, was unable to appear. Jim and Steve stand shoulder to shoulder as candidates who offer the opportunity for significant Democratic gains in the state legislature this year. The party needs only three pickups in the State Senate for control of the chamber. If this is to be done, the fifth is a "must-win." How a working-class portion of the Milwaukee area like 'stallis ever elected an extreme, psychotic Republican like Reynolds as their representative will forever remain a mystery.

Approval for Placement on the Primary Ballot: Candidates for 97th Assembly District

It is official. According to the Wisconsin State Elections Board (p. 49), the following candidates have been approved for the primary ballot:

Steven D. Schmuki Bill Kramer Chris Lufter
W271 S3581 Oak Knoll Dr. 2005 Cliff Alex Court South #3 W26253186 Ridge Rd.
Waukesha, WI 53189 Waukesha, WI 53189 Waukesha, WI 53189
333 Signatures 307 Signatures 272 Signatures

Curiously, someone named Frank A. Dolezal of the Constitution Party declared his candidacy on July 10th, twenty-four hours before the deadline to submit nomination papers. I drive by this guy's home at least once a week and update myself on the number of prophecies fulfilled.

Wisconsin Tourist's Bill of Rights (TABOR)?

This is comical. The W.T.L.'s revised links page contains a reference to "Wisconsin Taxpayer's Bill of Rights (TABOR)." Hoping to learn more on Chris Lufters' organization's perspective on it, I clicked on the U.R.L. And what pops up? The following:

I am directed to a site entitled Welcome to witabor.org that features, among other things, Wisconsin Bed And Breakfast, Wisconsin Resort, and Madison Wisconsin Hotel. Okay, so maybe the site should be renamed "Wisconsin Tourist's Bill of Rights (TABOR)."

More seriously, there is a reference to "Tabor" that I clicked on. Naively, I expected to read a version of TABOR that Chris endorses. Instead, I found the following links:
Tabor - Weichert Realty

Tabor on eBay

Unique Aromatherapy Products Online

Buy Tabor

Tabor at Amazon.com

This campaign is going to be so much fun.

Waukesha Taxpayers League Website Needs an Update, Part II

Well, either by sheer coincidence or actual motivation, the W.T.L. has updated their links page, half-assed-ly though. Waukesha Blogger is still listed there. Lastly, why have a Mayoral Candidates page at all? Each campaign ended their work months ago.

Waukesha Taxpayers League Website Needs an Update, Part I

Now that the President of the Waukesha Taxpayers League is campaigning to replace Ann Nischke in the State Assembly, I thought it opportune to investigate her organization's website. I did not much like what I saw, and for strictly nonpartisan, apolitical reasons.

Under links, they link their site to their website's home page. Unless crossreferencing specific information, most designers would point out that this sort of link is unnecessary.

We are also served up a Belling column from last October on, among others, Former Mayor Carol Lombardi. Umm, guys, Larry Nelson is now Mayor of the City of Waukesha. In fact, all three of the articles are from last October. Please update this embarrassment.

And last, but not least, a link is placed to Waukesha Blogger, a blog that last updated on March 14th of this year. Trust me, Justin is no longer interested in blogging. You can tell that just by looking at his profile photo.

On their Take Action page they again think that Carol Lombardi is our Mayor. Some might consider this post a cheap shot, but politics is as much about style as it is substance. If Chris wants to demonstrate her competence, she might start with her organization's site.

Waukesha Taxpayers League President Lufter Enters Republican Primary for Assembly

Christine Lufter, President of the Waukesha Taxpayers League has entered the fray, having filed yesterday with the State Elections Board. Her campaign has until July 11th, 5:00 P.M. to collect two-hundred valid signatures to place her name on the primary ballot. This should pose few headwinds for her. A slightly bigger problem, however, is that she is several weeks behind Steve's campaign in the money chase and months behind her Republican opponent. I doubt Kramer will roll over like he was inclined to against Nischke. Thus, each campaign will be drawing from the same funding pool. Two questions here: Will Chris excite the base enough to swell this pool significantly and, relatedly, will the cash flow disproportionately into her war chest? I am inclined to answer yes to both questions, but await hard data next month on how good Kramer's numbers look.

Clearly, at first blush, a Schmuki vs. Lufter contest, as opposed to a Schmuki vs. Kramer race in the general has to be bad news for Steve. Lufter launched her campaign with higher name recognition, thus her bad financials matter less. Her organization's network and record can much more effectively mobilize fiscal conservatives, assuming she prevails in the primary. This will swell the base relative to a Kramer campaign, and make it harder for Steve to convince straight-ticket Republicans to opt for him instead - a difficult route in good circumstances.

However, what conservatives often overlook is that TABOR-advocacy, and a candidate who actively lobbied the state legislature for the strongest version of it, will rally this town's liberal base as well. Steve's task is now two-fold. With Kramer as his opponent, my advice was to court moderates and independents, and ignore his base. He has the opportunity now to give his base a big reason to visit the polls come November. What he lost in (potential) conservative defections he may have more than made up for in liberal support.

Schmuki Officially Announces His Intention to Seek Assembly Seat

This evening I attended Steve's official campaign announcement. His family, of course, was there, along with his campaign manager and treasurer. Rick Congdon and Bryan Kennedy also showed up, along with approximately forty others, including me. The announcement itself carried with it little news, at least policy-wise. He sharpened his message only on the environment by mentioning water conservation. Also, Steve failed to turn on the microphone and was difficult to understand. The only real substance came at the end: No more nomination signatures are needed.

In his weekly column in the Freeman, James Wigderson laments that more Republicans have not come forward to retain this seat - not exactly a ringing endorsement of Bill Kramer's campaign. Really, what has he done on the County Board other than support the reduction of it, something conservatives are obsessed with these days? If Kramer is looking, with such a proposal, for cheers beyond the base, do not bother. Assuming he can find enough copy, this maybe should be the subject of a future Wigderson column.

On name recognition generally, I think both start out even with little to none among the local electorate. No doubt some in his district may know Bill by name, but by accomplishment? At least Ann accomplished something during her tenure in office - bad accomplishments, more or less, but something. Besides, this should matter much less to Bill than Steve. Midterm elections attract far more straight-ticket voters than special elections, like for Mayor of Waukesha. No doubt, Republican "straight-shooters" outnumber Democratic ones here in the city.

Steve's campaign has two challenges. It needs to woe straight-ticket Republicans to go out of their way election day and support him. Better, though, it needs to focus on moderates and independents in Waukesha. As Larry Nelson demonstrated, an analysis exclusively on straight-ticket voters reveals a false impression. And, as I stated below, these voters want education discussed, not the environment or ethics.

Schmuki's Priorities: A Political Analysis

Steve and I share one thing in common: Both of us have never held elective office. Neither have I ever run a campaign. However, that said, I would like to offer the candidate some advice at this nebulous stage of his campaign for 97th district assemblyman. On the issues, he states that his priorities are the environment, education, and ethics, in that order. These should not attract equal weight in his campaign for a number of reasons.

Ethics, as a priority, sounds better symbolically than substantively. Steve wants to tag himself as a candidate who will uphold only the highest order of ethical behavior once elected. There is a problem here, though. If by ethical he means legal, then most of our representatives already do so. On the policy side, I do not see a pressing need for ethical reform. Politicians occasionally break the rules. That is why we have prosecutors, judges, laws, and jails. On the politics side, I believe, most constituents view ethics as a local issue. That is, if their representative is behaving badly, they will act. If someone else's is corrupt, they will be indifferent - "That is their problem."

Steve will no doubt passionately voice his concerns on the environment during the campaign. However, many of the environmental challenges facing the county are irrelevant to city residents - sprawl, for example. Furthermore, most who consider the environment a top priority will support Steve regardless of his advocacy. His dilemma is will this wedge issue rally his liberal base enough to make it worth his while to concentrate the message on it over issues that swing voters want to hear voiced? My guess is no; the liberal base will not need to be rallied between now and November. Even so, he could emphasize this issue, and his experience, in more liberal neighborhoods (e.g.: downtown and around).

We will learn over the next several months much more about Steve and his proposals for the 97th district and the State of Wisconsin. However, with his campaign only weeks old, I believe an emphasis on education will deliver more voters come November. In particular, Steve could target access to higher education and recent tuition increases in the U.W.-System. This kills two birds with one stone: It rallies the base (students) and swings their parents. Steve may be tempted here to play it safe, however, a structural reform plan for the system might be warmly greeted by the electorate. The U.W.-System is in dire need of reform if Wisconsin wants to seriously compete for brains and new industries in the 21st century. What shape such reforms would take is up to Steve. But, it needs to be pondered before it is too late.

Culver Not Seeking Assembly Seat

James Wigderson is reporting that Dean Culver is out of the race. If true, Bill Kramer would represent the G.O.P. and Steve Schmuki would do so for the Democrats.

Waukesha County Environmental Action President Schmuki Seeking Election to Assembly Seat

I foolishly assumed that Nischke was running unopposed based solely upon her rivals' total lack of name recognition. They are Dean Culver and Bill Kramer, both of Waukesha. Culver, founder and director of the Waukesha Teen Center, ran against Nischke in '02. Kramer is Waukesha County Board Supervisor for the 24th district. Now that Ann is gone, we will learn much more about them soon.

Speculation tonight as to why Ann left the race focused on her finances. It is no secret that her campaign left the mayoral race a few months back deeply indebted. Worse, apparently, she threw a fundraiser on June 8 that was poorly attended. This is mere gossip, however. What is done is done. With the incumbent gone, I was pleased to hear that Steve Schmuki, president of the Waukesha County Environmental Action League, has filed with the state elections board as a Democrat. He will announce his candidacy some time over the next several days.

Steve has three top issues where he believes state government could do better: The environment, education, and ethics. As he has never held elective office, he will have to fight hard in this safe Republican district. Since many Republicans vote straight-ticket here in the fall elections, he will have to canvass, canvass, and canvass some more and convince them to go out of their way to vote Democratic for state assembly. It will not be easy but, clearly, the ground is ripe for a surprise in Waukesha come November. Sound familiar?

Nischke Not Seeking Re-election to Assembly Seat

Apparently Ann Nischke had her heart so set upon the mayoral position that she is done with her service in the State Assembly. During her campaign for mayor, this was undetectable. She exuded about as much enthusiasm for the job as a corpse. Looking to the future, this announcement is a mixed bag for the following reasons:

To my knowledge, she was running unopposed for reelection. I am pessimistic that the G.O.P. will run someone less qualified and less "with it" than Ann (e.g.: Kathleen Cummings). At the very least, Nischke was competent and not a space cadet.

Democrats have yet, at the eleventh hour, to field any candidates. If a Democrat is ever going to represent the 97th, this is the time to run. With the G.O.P. deeply unpopular generally, and with incumbency bias gone, the electorate has a real choice now.

Will Waukesha County Democratic Party Chairman Rick Congdon try again to be elected to public office? I am attending the party's monthly meeting this eve and will update any developments.

The following is Ann's press release:

Dear Friends,

Earlier this week, Dan and I reached a very difficult decision. Nearly four years ago, our community called on us to represent Waukesha in the State Assembly. It is a humbling honor and privilege to serve our friends and neighbors in public service. There are so many things that I am proud that we accomplished together. In this short amount of time, we did everything from funding the Second Chance youth apprenticeship program and the new highway sign that will mark the exit to the Waukesha County Historic Museum to the overhaul of the state insurance plan for the most vulnerable and the restoration of limits on medical malpractice lawsuits.

Yet of all the things we accomplished together, I am most proud of the opportunity to help the many individuals who contacted our office for help with their state government. The opportunity to represent my community has been one that I will always remember and cherish. But this responsibility is a temporary one, just as our nation’s founders intended. I am eternally grateful to my wonderful husband Dan, our son and daughter-in-law and our precious grandchildren for loving me enough to let me be away from them on the many occasions demanded by the commitment to public service.

While I do not yet know His plan, I trust that God will continue to use my life in His service. What I do know is that now is a time when I must ... exchange my duties as a full-time legislator to focus on being a wife, mother, and most of all grandmother. We could not have accomplished any of this without your support and encouragement over these past four years. For that support and encouragement, I cannot thank you enough.

Your neighbor,

Ann Nischke
State Representative
97th Assembly District

Kathleen Falk Loses A.G. Race

2006-11-20T00:00:00.022-06:00

Update
The official vote totals can be accessed here. Mrs. Falk, regrettably, lost the general election by less than nine-thousand votes out of 2,124,467 cast.

Update
With a scant ten days to go until the general election, it is time for a second "endorsement" of a candidate for public office. This one goes to Dane County Executive Kathleen Falk. Unlike the support I gave during the primary campaign against incumbent A.G. Peg Lautenschlager, this endorsement is polished. It has nothing whatsoever to do with anxiety of nominating a Democratic candidate that may have been vulnerable in the general election or an "okay" record as Attorney General. It is strictly about Kathleen.

Mrs. Falk is an outstanding candidate for the position. I cannot imagine anyone in the state of Wisconsin more qualified, more experienced, and more prepared for this role: 12 years as Public Intervenor, 14 years as Assistant Attorney General, and 9 years as Dane County Executive. Some have argued that this list excludes any prosecutorial experience. Attorney Generals do not prosecute cases in court. They manage and lead the State Department of Justice, an organization whose budget is dwarfed by Dane County's. Even better, she will bring to the position a vision and record of leadership on environmental protection, crime control, and substance abuse treatment. This one is simply a no-brainer. We may be looking at our first female governor one day.

Update
With 66% of precincts reporting as of 11:06 P.M. C.S.T., Kathleen Falk leads the incumbent, Peg Lautenschlager, 52% to 47% - roughly the same gap as over the past hour. Therefore, I think we can conclude that Falk will represent the Democratic Party for State Attorney General in November. This is excellent news for a number of reasons. First, as described below, the candidate is strong on experience and the issues. Even better, though, we will not be subjected to yet more attack ads pointing out what informed people already know: The chief law enforcement officer of the State decided to get drunk two and a half years ago and drive home in a state-owned car. That issue will mercifully drop away from view now.

It gets even better. The G.O.P. tonight selected little-known former U.S. Attorney for western Wisconsin J.B. Van Hollen. Whereas over the next eight weeks he will have to struggle to acquire name recognition, Falk, having been a gubernatorial candidate in 2002, already has strong scores here. A poll (P.D.F., p. 4) commissioned by WISC-TV last month asked the following question:

If the 2006 election for Attorney General were held today, would you vote for Kathleen Falk, the Democrat, or J.B. Van Hollen, the Republican?

The (edited) response shows what I mean:

Falk Van Hollen Undecided
All 45% 21% 34%
Republicans 3% 51% 46%
Independents 49% 7% 44%

Only three percent of Democrats would support Van Hollen and a mere fifteen percent (compared to forty-six percent of Republicans) do not know who to support. Kathleen goes into the general election campaign with a 31-point advantage among the base. But what really surprises me are Van Hollen's awful numbers among swing voters. Ignoring undecided voters, a miniscule seven percent of independents support him, almost as low as among Democrats. At the starting point, these numbers paint nothing but sunshine ahead for Mrs. Falk.

The primary election for Attorney General of the State of Wisconsin is really the only interesting one leading up to September 12th. Wisconsinites have a choice between incumbent A.G. Peg Lautenschlager and Dane County Executive Kathleen Falk in the Democratic Primary. Initially, this decision was a difficult one. After all, I do not believe that Peg's term has been disastrous, or even lousy, notwithstanding a very-well publicized scrape with the law involving a state-owned car. However, Peg's record can at best be described as "okay." In Kathleen Falk, Wisconsinites, next month and in November, have the opportunity to elect a potentially outstanding Attorney General to succeed Ms. Lautenschlager.

First, we need an Attorney General with sufficient experience. The Attorney General is the chief law enforcement officer of the State, among other functions. The State Legislature passes State law; the Governor approves those laws; and the A.G., as head of the Department of Justice, enforces them, basically. Kathleen has a decades-long record of experience to prepare her for this important role.

Stanford University graduate, 1973

University of Wisconsin Law School graduate, 1976

Co-director and Legal Counsel, Wisconsin's Environmental Decade, 1977-83
At the age of 26, she won a precedent-setting case before the Wisconsin Supreme Court requiring the State, for the first time, to consider the environmental impact of utility rates.
Wisconsin Public Intervenor, 1983-95

Assistant Attorney General, Department of Justice, 1983-97

Dane County Executive, 1997-Present
In her present role, she manages an annual budget five times that of the Department of Justice ($427 million versus app. $80 million).

What good has she done with her three terms as County Executive? Lots and lots, and lots, ranked in order of importance.

The establishment of pathbreaking diversion programs to treat, rather than imprison, non-violent offenders who are struggling with drug and alcohol addiction.

Leadership resulting in the landslide approval of a referendum for a $30 million conservation fund

The expansion of the County Sheriff Department by 85 new deputy positions

Leadership in partnering with other Dane County stakeholders to restore trout streams, to preserve thousands of acres of natural resources, and to improve the area's bike trails

Championing the creation of the Living Wage Ordinance and financing its implementation

Signing into law, and supporting, a "don't ask, don't tell" ordinance protecting the rights of undocumented residents and their families when approached by County law enforcement officers

While the Attorney General is not vested with the authority to enact new law, Kathleen Falk believes that part of the job description involves being a strong advocate for new law. She is right. Here is a sample of what she will press the legislature for, again ranked in order of importance.

The establishment of an independent commission to draw the lines for congressional and legislative districts, effectively ending the grotesque gerrymandering process

Raising the limits applied to public financing of campaigns

Providing an income tax credit of up to $200 for individual donations to campaigns, provided that the campaigns agree to restrict fundraising levels to half those allowed in that election cycle

Requiring electronic filing for all campaigns and committees that raise or spend over $1,000 and making that information electronically available to the public

All of the above proposals would make State government more competitive, more accountable, and less dependent on "big money." But, Kathleen wants to do much more with the office besides being a megaphone against special interests.

Coordinate much more aggressively than the incumbent A.G. with law enforcement officials in Milwaukee to combat rising levels of violent crime there

Coordinate with other state agencies, like the D.N.R., to accelerate and improve the identification and prosecution of environmental offenses under an Interagency Environmental Strike Force

Coordinate and promote existing child advocacy centers, and assist in the establishment of new ones, to install best practices in the investigation and prosecution of criminal child abuse cases

Coordinate with State agencies and others on innovations that respond effectively to global warming

Of course, Kathleen has many other accomplishments, ideas, and pledges than those above. All in all, I consider the points mentioned here a sample of a tough-minded progressive who is an outstanding candidate for Attorney General of the State of Wisconsin. Even better, so far, she knows how to control her drinking.

J.B. Van Hollen
Kathleen Falk
Peg Lautenschlager

Governor Doyle Wins a Second Term

2006-11-20T00:00:00.021-06:00

Update
Incumbent Governor Jim Doyle was comfortably reelected to a second term, 52.7% to Green's 45.31%.

Update
Jim Doyle and Mark Green met tonight at a forum sponsored, like the first, by We the People. It took place in La Crosse and was their final discussion before election day. Apparently, it was this forum that was reserved for education and health care, with the second an open banquet of issues. Even so, questions regarding corrections, ethics and energy policy were raised as well. The format seemed to encourage such free-flowing dialogue between and among the candidates.

Both men appeared much more upbeat than last time. Mark Green actually was at his best of all three events. He is really approaching an okay performance. Maybe if 79 more such events were held, he would reach it. The following is a sample of another lousy night for Mr. Green:

He wasted his time, and the governor's in rebuttal, repeating over and over again that the number of uninsured in the state is rising, as are health care costs.

The company he mentioned to support his case for H.S.A. reform employees seventeen people. Before embarking on reform, maybe Mr. Green should look at a larger set of people and firms.

We were put through yet another lecture on how "spending cut" does not equal "reducing the growth of government." If the State is forced to layoff X number of teachers regardless of how we define it, what is the difference?

According to Mark, medical transparency will result in more "consumer-driven" health care. This notion has become a pillar in the Right's free-market ideology lately and is based on the mistaken belief that competition is possible in most areas of health care. H.S.A.s, of course, also stem from this foolish idea.

Green brought the ad. wars into the theatre by gathering political points, twice, on Doyle's connection to indian gaming contracts.

And finally, on the very complex (and intractable) problem of the educational achievement gap between blacks and whites, we got to sit through a story about some black kid that Mark will go to bat for. Awwwww, how goofy.

Doyle did well, yet again, but slipped up twice.

The governor implied that Green thought H.S.A.s were not provided here in Wisconsin. Nobody suggested otherwise.

Doyle failed to specifically answer a question on whether or not he would repeal the moritorium on nuclear power in the state.

On the whole, I am grateful that the debates are over. More importantly, I am glad that both candidates conducted themselves in a civil and respectful way, for the most part.

Update
The Governor and his opponent, Representative Mark Green, met tonight for a second of three discussions down at the lakefront. The ostenible issue space was education and health care, but the number of topics was, in fact, far larger - everything from abortion to tax policy. Curiously, both candidates looked rather tired and pale, as if this was something they had to do. Green's performance tonight was only marginally better than the first discussion's. We finally learned from him that governing a State is more complex and intricate than just cutting property taxes. However, tonight was yet more of the same from Mr. Green.

The number one cause of crime in Milwaukee? Criminals. This should be an issue where Mark can gain some traction and he stumbled badly on it instead.

His pro-life position was so "out there" that I had difficulty understanding it at all. According to Mark, abortion is a safety net, but not in the way of preventing women from undergoing them in unregulated, unsafe "clinics." Goofy and lame, much less agreeable.

Mark feels that the environment is a non-partisan issue. Yeah, and George Bush and Al Gore agree on what should be done to slow global warming.

Green chided the Governor on his veto of tax deductibility for contributions made to health savings accounts, because he wants to encourage "consumer-driven" health care. Much could be said about this, but suffice it to say, H.S.A.s are a foolish way to reform America's health care system. Encouraging them, while diverting attention away from proposals that would cover catastrophic care for the uninsured, is simply worse.

Mark still maintains the delusion that any significant tax relief of any kind will flow from tweaking a State contract here, and merging an economic development board there. These are things that perhaps should be done, but expecting the result to impact anyone's tax bill at all is foolish indeed.

The Governor has, apparently, been responsible for turning embryonic stem cell research into a political issue. Well, Mark, you and Jim seem to disagree, therefore, by implication it is an issue. And, you are both politicians, therefore, it would seem, also, to be a political issue.

And finally, he repeated, three times, at the beginning of a response to a reporter's question, the line "That's a lot in a minute and a half..." This is becoming a trademark of Mark's, and left me thinking "Why would you say something like that?" Is Mark feeling overwhelmed? Is he trying to prove to the audience that he knows the issue? What?

Another lousy performance by Green tonight and another reason why he is down five points in the polls, but, again, his performance could have been worse, much worse.

What with the recent spike in well-publicized school violence, there is currently a bill in the legislature that would permit concealed-carry for teachers. I was pleased to see that Mark did not pander to the base here, and would veto any such bill.

The centerpiece of his opening statement concerned "brain drain." Although nothing specific was aired, he did prioritize it well and managed to avoid linking it to the property tax boogeyman.

All in all, Green did a bit better, while Doyle did a bit worse than the first discussion tonight. I observed it, like the first, at a party thrown by the Democratic Party and who was the host this evening? None other than our fearless Mayor, Larry Nelson, who was appointed by the Governor to host it. When Green would utter the line "If you believe that such and such is okay, then I'm not your candidate," Larry often responded "You're right! You're not!" That had everyone there laughing. We could afford to. Doyle has maintained a five percentage point lead in the polls since early summer. The last poll to show Green ahead, though not statistically, was conducted on June 4.

Update
Tonight, right here in the Waukesha area, Governor Jim Doyle and Congressman Mark Green discussed the broad issues of the state's economy and tax policy. This was their first of two such discussions. Needless to say, the Governor performed well - not picture perfect, but well. It also goes without saying that Green did worse, much worse. In fact, Green was downright lousy tonight in his performance. Indeed, at times, he appeared simply ridiculous. The following is a small sample of what I mean:

By cutting taxes, Green would increase our freedom. Gee, by that logic, why have taxes at all?

It seems, according to Mark, that taxes are the root of all our problems here in Wisconsin.
The solution to brain drain? Lower property taxes.

The solution to "senior drain", and the venture capital they take with them? Lower property taxes.

The solution to sluggish job growth? Lower property taxes.

And, boy, those internet home businesses are just so burdened by high property taxes. Are Republicans really this gullible?
Bright, educated young people and wealthy seniors leaving the State causes "disruption" of families, according to Mark. Yeah, those long-distance phone calls and cheap airfares are just so inconvenient. Mark, please stop adjusting your hearing aide, like you do not know where you are.

On State unfunded mandates on local government, his response was so garbled that I had to stop listening to it in order to retain my sanity.

Wrapping up, Mark wants "to fall in love all over again with the State." This goes way beyond eye-rolling, or even bursting out in laughter. I sat there numb, as if feeling total disbelief a candidate for anything could say that sincerely.

A solidly lousy night for Green, but not disastrous - he did get a few things right.

He called the Governor on the dire straits faced by Milwaukee County over his first term: population loss, ongoing deindustrialization, etc. He even agreed with Doyle that more innovations need to be undertaken on matching workers with available jobs. This point took some wind from Doyle, and he was left stammering "I take responsibility."

Mark brought up some plausible ideas for improving efficiency in State government, like tightening up some I.T. contracts and consolidating economic development agencies. Straight from the old waste-fraud-abuse playbook, but at least they were listenable.

The incumbent did a much better job in stressing the fiscal mess dumped on him by the last Republican governor, Scott McCallum. Of course, his claim that he repaired the budget without raising taxes is technically correct, but almost certainly wrong in spirit. Fees throughout the State were raised and funds were shifted out of the transportation fund into the general fund, thus increasing future gas taxes. Green pointed all of this out. The problem is that he has no alternative. This, Doyle pointed out. We all would like to pay lower property taxes under a stronger "freeze." But at the cost of slashing budgets in every school district in the State of Wisconsin?

Tomorrow the Doyle/Lawton reelection campaign will present its first television spot, entitled "Promise." See it here (W.M.P. - 3.8 mg). The following is a transcript.

Jessica Doyle: He joined the peace corps with me, taught in Africa and learned the power of education.

David Kruger: He closed the biggest deficit ever - balanced the budget.

Sheila Drury: He signed one of the toughest sex predator laws in the nation to protect our kids.

Brandon Casey: He doubled financial aid for college.

Nathan Johnston: He passed tough property tax limits and our bill actually went down.

Mike Killian: He's brought in new business, helping to create 140,000 new jobs.

Erica Gottschalk: He's requiring a third year of high school math and science to give our kids an edge.

Todd Brien: He kept his promise not to raise taxes because he knows we pay enough already.

Bill Breidenstein: He saved SeniorCare for 100,000 seniors.

Maddy Montgomery: He stopped extreme lawmakers from making stem cell research illegal, and raised millions so scientists can one day find a cure for my daughter's diabetes [Cuts to Jody Montgomery].

Mike Killian: He knows there's still a lot more to do.

Erica Gottschalk: He's our governor.

Nathan Johnston: Jim Doyle.

Brandon Casey: Jim Doyle.

Todd Brien: Jim Doyle.

Erica Gottschalk: Jim Doyle. [Cuts to the Governor] Doing the right thing for Wisconsin.

The dialogue is, of course, set against cheery, optimistic audio. Overall, I am satisfied with its quality, and it should be well-received by the public. Hopefully, each campaign will respect one another's boundaries and not go negative, at least not this early in the campaign.

Jim Doyle
Mark Green

The Probability That I Alone Will Decide an Election

2006-10-03T00:00:00.000-05:00

With the midterm election fast approaching, I pondered recently why the act of voting is significant at all. To anyone reading this, have no illusions. I will be voting November 7th. But, why? In 2002, 14,921 voters showed up at the polls to decide who would represent them in the State Assembly for the 97th District. Ignoring the Libertarian Party candidate and "scattering" votes, 14,419 citizens here chose either the Democratic or Republican Party candidate. The only outcome contingent upon any one voter deciding between Roger Danielsen or Ann Nischke was 7,209 votes registered for both candidates. In that case, an individual could decide the election - the outcome would be 7,210 to 7,209. In order to locate the approximate likelihood of an event like this occurring, we need two pieces of mathematics - one relatively straightforward, the other somewhat obscure. It turns out that solving this problem involves multiplying an extremely small number by an equally extreme large number.

Logarithmic Functions

A tied vote is no different from tossing a coin 14,418 times. I ignore the last vote because I assume that that voter (the deciding vote) walks to the polls with a firm mind of his/her choice. The rest vote entirely at random. Note that this is a necessary condition for one voter to decide an election. Now, in the real world, of course, voters do not behave this way. But the result is the same as if they behaved randomly.

The probability of tossing a coin and it showing a head or tail is .5, or one-half. Why? There are only two possible events resulting from tossing a coin. It can only show either a head or a tail. Since these events are equally likely, assuming a fair coin, a coin toss over many trials will yield half of the events as heads and half as tails. All trials are independent, furthermore, of other trials. That is, the likelihood of any one event is not contingent upon the results of any other trials. The coin has no memory.

I assume now that the final vote tally (including my vote) is an odd number, in order to avoid a tie. First, suppose that only three voters show up on election day. One votes for Kramer, while the other votes for Schmuki. The probability of my vote alone electing Schmuki to the Assembly is .5. To see this, note that we now have four possible outcomes (Kramer-Kramer, Kramer-Schmuki, Schmuki-Kramer, and Schmuki-Schmuki). Thus, the probability of any one outcome is 1/4, or .25. But, two of the events (Kramer-Schmuki and Schmuki-Kramer) would permit my vote alone to determine the outcome. Therefore, the probability of the event that I decide the election is 1/4 + 1/4 = 1/2, or .5.

Now, extend this analysis, to 1,001 voters - five-hundred votes for Kramer and five-hundred votes (and mine) for Schmuki. This result is exactly the same as if a thousand voters tossed a coin to determine their choice before driving to the polls. What is the likelihood of this outcome - 1,000 coin tosses and 500 show heads while 500 show tails? Look at the number of possible outcomes. Above, we trialed only twice, so, only four outcomes were possible. With a thousand trials, the number of possible outcomes is, of course, much larger. In fact, the number of possible outcomes if one were to toss a coin a thousand times is approximately 10.72³⁰⁰!

We can now express this relationship in the following form:

y = 2^x

This simple equation expresses the base two logarithm of x on y, such that x ~ number of trials and y ~ number of possible outcomes. For our purposes, the following is the number of possible outcomes from 14,418 tosses of a fair coin:

2^14,418

The probability of any particular event, say, 7,209 Kramer votes immediately followed by 7,209 Schmuki votes, is merely its reciprocal:

2^-14,418=(1/2)^14,418

This number, of course, is vanishingly small.

Combinatorics

We cannot conclude, however, that only one combination of 14,418 voters for either candidate show up at the polls. For example, 7,209 Kramer votes could show, followed by 7,209 for Schmuki. Or, they could follow a staggered pattern: one vote for Kramer, followed by one vote for Schmuki, followed by one vote for Kramer, and so on. This pattern could occur for any block of votes provided that the number of votes within each block can be divided into 14,418 with no remainder. Lastly, Kramer and Schmuki votes could be randomized altogether, with three for Kramer here, six for Schmuki there, two for Kramer here, and so on. The only constraint is that, in the end, Kramer receives 7,209 votes. There are an enormous number of combinations that could all potentially align to a tie vote, thus allowing the last vote to decide the election. Therefore, we must now turn our attention to a somewhat obscure piece of mathematics known as combinatorics.

Combinatorics sounds harder than it really is. A combination is basically the number of ways one can draw a subset of objects from a larger set of objects when the order of that subset is irrelevant. A classic example is the number of ways a person can draw 50 marbles from a jar that contains 100 marbles (roughly 10²⁸ ways). Now, imagine that the jar is the election; each marble is a voter; and our problem is to calculate how many ways we can draw 7,209 marbles from a jar that contains 14,418 of them. The result is the total number of events in which Kramer and Schmuki tie before my vote is counted. We will then multiply it by the probability of any given event's occurence and the result will be the probability of a tied vote in which my vote decides the outcome.

As might seem obvious, 14,418 choose 7,209, in the subfield's language, is extremely large. There are approximately 2^14,410.77 ways in which 14,418 voters can arrange themselves such that 7,209 vote for each candidate. So, we now know the following:

The probability of any particular event's occurence is 2^-14,418.
The number of occurences among 14,418 voters in which exactly 7,209 of them decide to vote for each candidate is approximately 2^14,410.77.

Multiplying both together, we calculate the probability that a voter can decide the outcome of an election in which 14,418 votes split precisely down the middle.

~2^-14,418 * 2^14,410.77 = 2^-7.23 = 1/150.12

~149:1 odds

In other words, tied elections, even among thousands of voters, are not usual occurences, but neither are they freak events. Naturally the probability of having a direct, individual impact on an election outcome steadily falls as the voter pool expands.

Number of Voters Probability of Decisive Vote
10 1/4.06
100 1/12.55
1,000 1/39.67
10,000 1/125.67
100,000 1/388.02
1,000,000 1/1,251.98
10,000,000 1/3,956.48

What we can conclude from this is that the odds of directly influencing the outcome of an election, even at the national level, are considerably greater than getting struck by lightning, dying in a terrorist attack, or winning the Powerball.

Alderman Larry Nelson Wins Mayoral Election

2006-04-07T00:00:00.003-05:00

Update

This is the last item in this thread. After tomorrow, it will appear in the sidebar with everything else. New and numerous campaigns are on the horizon that will provoke a shrug (U.S. Senator Herb Kohl), an "'at a boy" (Governor Jim Doyle), or a "Sign.Me.Up." (Congressman wanna-be Bryan Kennedy). Note the pattern here. It goes from landslide to thriller to mudslide. Now that everyone is starting to relax again on both sides, the above images from the right aroused the most laughter here.

Update
Dean at Musings of a Thoughtful Conservative shares his views. He attributes much of the failure of the Nischke campaign to Larry's upbeat personality. Oddly, he offers some examples from presidential campaign history to support his case. For every example, though, a counterexample exists: Richard Nixon (in '68 and '72), Lyndon Johnson (in '64), Herbert Hoover (in '28), Calvin Coolidge (in '24), and so on. Cheery candidates may be better positioned to rally the base, but this is at most a minor effect. Besides, how do we measure and confirm this relationship?

He is clear-headed, however, on Nischke's clunky relations with the Council and the local press. The fastest way to alienate someone is to threaten their job. That is what Nischke's call to reduce the size of the Council was. Besides, such a reduction is pure symbolism anyway. Also, not returning phone calls made by a columnist, regardless of his political ideology, is called "incompetence." Missing key meetings only blackens the eye more. But, he still cannot admit that, just maybe, the message itself was flawed. If she was indeed the wrong candidate with the wrong message, then how can the Taxpayer Protection Amendment not be implicated when it was so central to her campaign?

James Wigderson also writes about the election. He states that this blogger believes that the city of Waukesha leans Democratic. It does not, of course, but neither is it "strongly Republican" as he has written. He does legitimately touch on the central impact of this race: The chilling effect a Nischke loss will have on passage of TABOR in the state legislature. This race was a serious opportunity to demonstrate to other representatives across the state who serve districts that are not hard-core Republican that TABOR has deep appeal among moderates and independents. While certainly not Democratic-leaning, as James feels this blogger implied, the City is not hard-core conservative, particularly on the local scene. Even so, Nischke had all the resources to overcome this, and failed. Incidentally, the phrase "Pulling a Nischke" made this blogger smirk.

The Milwaukee Journal Sentinel's version of events can be found here. The Freeman's analysis can be located here.

Update
The election is over, but the following is a postmartem stab at political analysis. Turnout was low, at 22%, but still the highest rate in the county. With such low levels of interest by the electorate, each campaign needed to disproportionately engage the base - on message, on outreach, on doors. Despite a 3-to-1 money advantage by Nischke, she was not able to rally the conservative base relative to Nelson. The question now is why? With such an advantage, Nischke was clearly able to do more outreach - to not only let the base know exactly what the message was but also give it a reason to stop by the polls on election day. Was it the composition of the outreach effort that failed? This is doubtful, though Nischke probably relied too heavily on print, one of the least effective delivery vehicles. Given no insider information, this is unknowable.

On doors, this neighborhood is ripe for canvassing with high property values that give residents an interest in the mayoral outcome. Yet Ann did not appear here once - no lit. drop, no flesh-press, none. Repeated mailings are no substitute for good-ole-fashioned greetings. Granted, such neighborhoods are spread out and, thus, consume more time, but there is no escape from the reality of retail politics: The electorate likes to feel valued in person, not through junk mail. The impression left is that Ann's campaign leveraged their money to avoid contact with the public. Whether Larry's campaign did better here is also unknowable, though working-class neighborhoods are more compact, making canvassing easier.

Adjoining a failure of retail politics is a failure of message. Along with Scott Walker's failed gubernatorial bid, it is becoming increasingly apparent that "I will hold the line on taxes" does not sell the conservative base. This is not to imply that conservatives do not value low taxes. It seems, however, that they need more to convince them that they should go to the polls. Ann and Scott shared one thing: The core of their appeal and message lied with a low-tax message and the credentials to back it up. In order to rally a demoralized conservative base today, more is asked of the candidate - whether on social issues or image.

It is not really all that hard to demonstrate why Nischke lost an election everyone thought would be her's. She thought she could buy it by avoiding the tough, time-consuming retail side of a campaign. More importantly, she relied upon a message that conservatives are, by all accounts, tired of. That is why Larry Nelson will become the next mayor of the city of Waukesha. Despite a money disadvantage, all he had to do was shake more hands, knock on more doors, and say to more voters "I am dead set against TABOR." That is how another base is rallied here in Waukesha.

Update
Larry Nelson will be the city of Waukesha's next mayor. That was the decision of the electorate today. Unofficial final results indicate that Nelson drew 4660 votes while Nischke drew only 4165. While hardly a landslide, Larry's total represents a decisive victory at 52.8% versus 47.2% for Ann. In the end, it was not even close. More to come tomorrow, but, for now, enjoy the party.

Update
James Wigderson echoes the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel's endorsement of Ann Nischke for Mayor of Waukesha. He is surprised by it without recognizing that most newspaper editors are more conservative in their political outlook than the staff who serve under them. After all, way back when times were good, the Journal endorsed Bob Dole for President. He goes on to list Ann's blue chip resume in government and in the private sector. Notably absent, though, is discussion of a gaping hole: No experience at all in municipal government - no experience in drafting a budget for the city, no experience in hiring/firing top personnel in a municipality, no experience in regional development issues the city will face, no experience compromising with the common council, none. Indeed, except for a couple of terms as a state representative, she has no experience in government what. so. ever. The only service she performed in that limited role was as a political hack for TABOR. Clearly, her considerable talents lie squarely in the private sector.

James is, by all accounts, a "moderate" libertarian Republican. In other words, he is a smart conservative who ought to know better. Ann at the local level, like George at the national level, want lower taxes but they have no real interest in smaller government. What they, in the real world, want is all the services that only government can provide without paying for them in a straight-forward manner. Hence, in Washington, that attitude is manifest in record-breaking budget deficits. Here, it will be apparent in far higher fees on garbage and everything else. Again, James takes us to Michael Jackson's ranch, to Neverland.

On Larry's ties to the "radical" Progressive Majority Wisconsin, maybe, James, he is allied with them strictly because it works for him politically. After all, 71% of the candidates they endorsed ended up winning. And his portrayal of Nelson as Waukesha's own Michael Dukakis is ironic in the extreme. After all, did George Bush 41 not raise taxes "through the roof?" Can we expect the same reversal once Ann takes office? Only when James gives us a defeated "yeah" will he see Ann as the political hack she really is.

Update
James Wigderson in his weekly column worries that Nelson is winning the campaign finance game as the race nears the finish line next Tuesday. He also scoffs at the notion that this race is nonpartisan. First, the small stuff: It is very unclear that the city of Waukesha is "strongly Republican." The county of, maybe, but the city itself would best be described as "independent" or weak Republican. James is obviously dreaming here. Second, he does not go far enough in detailing the political effect of the mailings, the phone banks, etc. that are being funded. To the extent Larry has more cash than Ann, he will be better positioned to rally the base and give it an excuse to vote next week. There is little sense out there that the Nischke campaign is solidifying their conservative base. The lack of cash going into the final days only makes the situation worse for them. It must also be noted that print is one of the cheapest, yet least effective, mediums for a candidate to pursue. Finally, will independents be able to overlook Ann's ties to the G.O.P. and her close affiliation with a right-wing organization like the Waukesha Taxpayers League?

Update
Think conservatives, or conservative parts of the state, are automatic supporters of TABOR? Think again. Mark Pocan summarizes a recent public hearing in Pewaukee at which only a fraction of those in attendance supported it. Via In Effect.

Update
Dean at Musings of a Thoughtful Conservative shares his views of the event. James Wigderson does so as well here. Mike at Spring City Chronicle gives the blow-by-blow rundown of it. Their consensus is that neither candidate ran away in their performance. Really, how could one do so when discussing bike trials and ice rinks? The only issue of much gravity was TABOR, and here Nelson is far more grounded than Ann. M.C. Jeff Wagner of A.M. 620 Radio chides Larry here for denying that the County Democrats have endorsed him. Indeed, Jeff, it is a small matter. Nelson was expressing the view that he would rather not be endorsed by them. Clearly, he has, to his discredit, at least around here. He also offers us a prediction. Perhaps lacking in surprise, he believes Nischke will "slaughter" Nelson. His analysis is pretty thin.

Nelson obviously draws a lot of support from government and public employee types. He speaks their language. This core of support was undoubtedly instrumental in helping him finish second in the primary with 29% of the vote. The primary election was also characterized by an extremely low voter turnout (12%). The City of Waukesha is probably not quite as conservative as Waukesha County in general. Nevertheless, it is the largest city in one of the most conservative counties in the country. As a purely practical matter it's hard for me to see how an anti-Taxpayer Bill of Rights, anti-tax freeze, mainstream Democrat beats a mainstream Republican in this environment.

After the debate last night, one of Larry Nelson's colleagues on the City Council came up to me. He said that he liked Larry Nelson as a person but didn't agree with him on almost anything. I wouldn't say that I don't agree with Nelson "on anything" - but I think I have an idea what the guy was talking about. I tend to think that in a general election showdown with Nischke, Nelson will have trouble substantially improving on his showing in the primary. While I suspect that Nelson's supporters may be more fervent, I also think they're substantially outnumbered. If I were to offer one piece of advice to the Nischke campaign though, I would encourage her to embrace her Republican Party roots more aggressively than she seemed to during the debate last night.

The reality is that politics do matter - even in a supposedly "non-partisan" race. While it didn't work for them, Democrats (believing incorrectly that a Republican couldn't win a Milwaukee County race) had no hesitation labeling Scott Walker as a Republican in both of his supposedly non-partisan Milwaukee County Executive races. Closer to home, despite hand wringing from some of the usual suspects in the media, the Dan Vrakas landslide in the Waukesha County Executive race last fall shows that being a Republican in Waukesha County is still a pretty good thing.

The City of Waukesha Mayoral election is four weeks from today. Admittedly, a month is a lifetime in politics. If I were a betting man though (actually, I am a betting man) I'd bet that when the smoke clears on the evening of April 4th, it will be Mayor-elect Nischke with over 60% of the vote.

Ah, yes, the familiar line "only those who work for the government understand, support, and vote for Democrats" that lost its originality years ago. It never did have much truth value to begin with. Indeed, in George Bush's America, most states register today more Democrats than Republicans.

As you will recall, Jeff, Nelson admitted during the debate that Council members rarely agree on much. This may be more a reflection of your attitude than Larry's colleague.

Thank you for your "analysis" of the electorate based upon no polling or interviewing of any kind. Indeed, recent political history would suggest that TABOR-advocates have been far more motivated than opponents of it.

So, finally, we have the obvious point that Waukesha County and, probably, the City itself are conservative, therefore, Larry will have at best an uphill climb against Ann next month. Duh?

The Freeman's account can be found here.

Alderman Larry Nelson and State Representative Ann Nischke squared off tonight in the only debate featuring the two qualified candidates for the April 4th mayoral election. Surprisingly, attendance was lower than the previous forum that featured anyone at all interested in the post. This bodes ill for turnout, which only registered twelve-percent primary day. Each candidate, of course, is competent for the job, so there was not a major gaffe or Pluto-like proposal. Larry, mercifully, even avoided any discussion of or enthusiasm for a Les Paul Museum. That drew giggles even among strong supporters last time.

There was less, also, "I'll be a cheerleader for Waukesha!" talk. Voters, especially committed ones, are unimpressed with such rhetoric. It indicates either 1) The candidate has nothing else, substantively, to say; 2) The candidate believes that managing and leading a very fast growing town like Waukesha is simple stuff; or 3) Both. Still, there were moments of disbelief or just "what?" The following is a sample:

Nischke wants to sell Waukesha as an easy place to get around. Compared to the City of Milwaukee's grid-spoke pattern, Waukesha's was designed by a drunken Indian long ago.

Nelson's view on I-94 expansion - a key issue in regional development? Meet with his counterparts elsewhere in the metro. area, like, Mayor Barrett in Milwaukee, Scott Walker at the Milwaukee County Courthouse, and others - nothing else beyond another meeting.

In order to promote neighborhood integration throughout town, Larry wants junior high school students to produce documentaries to air on local cable television - "Wayne's World! Wayne's World! Party time! Excellent!" Goofy, goofy, goofy.

On local control, Larry quoted Lee Sherman Dreyfus, the 265-year-old former Republican governor of Wisconsin. Anyone who follows what Lee has to say already knows who they are supporting, his opponent; and TABOR is what is called a "wedge" issue - few voters sit on the fence on it.

Ann's opinion on crime control? More homeownership! Ann's solution to affordable housing? Stable property taxes! Huh?... huh?

Still, a very impressive response by Nelson to inviting a casino into downtown Waukesha. The M.C. was clearly attempting "gotcha" interviewing here and Larry responded the best any candidate could: We will look at any proposal that comes our way and evaluate it based upon reviews by the city department heads. In contrast, Nischke tried to gather some political points by asserting that she would do the due diligence; she would go through the motions; but something like that is never going to be approved by her, no matter how popular such a scheme may become in the future.

However, notwithstanding Larry's mention of Dreyfus, the evening's event indeed did, as expected, revolve around TABOR, or the constitutional amendment known as the "Taxpayer Protection Amendment." Here Nischke, and her TABOR allies, reveal their true colors.

M.C.: "Why do you support it, Ann?"

Ann: "Because most of my constituents do."

Yep, we knew it all along. TABOR is not policy to be carefully explained to the public. The "Taxpayer Protection Act" is a political document, meant more to galvinize the base and win elections. But it is an economic document too, as explained here.

Ann and her allies cannot have it both ways. Near the end of the debate she criticized Nelson, as alderman, for approving fee increases and "bonding" (meaning to go further into debt). However, these are exactly the kinds of shell games that will multiply around the state and here if TABOR is enacted into law. She scolds reality. In the real world, constituents do not like to pay taxes, but they like public services. Thus, restraints on generating revenue to finance those services will result in the thoroughly predictable outcome of politicians "creatively" paying for them through the back door - hence, the fees and the debt. Worse, according to Ann, this is a good thing. Turns out, we do not need to fund city events, like a concert or other such "frills," through the tax base. We can go, hat in hand, to local charities to fill the gap. Nischke is only clarifying for the public what other communities and states have discovered - the hard way - about TABOR. In fantasyland, it really is about spending restraint. On Earth, it is about the partial privatization of local government and nothing else.

Ann Nischke
Larry Nelson
TABOR
Taxpayer Protection Act
Waukesha

Dead Malls

2005-06-28T00:00:00.157-05:00

Metro. North

North-Central Kansas City

Irondequoit

Northeast Rochester

Richland

East-Central Columbia

Morrisville Outlet

Central Raleigh-Durham

Gary

2005-06-28T00:00:00.150-05:00

Ambassador Apartments

Completed: 1927
Abandoned: c. 1985

City Methodist Church

Completed: 1925
Abandoned: 1975

Memorial Auditorium

Completed: 1927
Abandoned: ?

Screw and Bolt Factory

Completed: 1912
Abandoned: 1986

U.S. Post Office

Completed: 1936
Abandoned: c. 1975

Union Station

Completed: 1908 or 1910
Abandoned: 1950s

Introduction to the Semantic Web

2005-06-28T00:00:00.146-05:00

Nathaniel Erroll Lange

2005-06-28T00:00:00.113-05:00

(262)547-6188

earthbynight@gmail.com

___________________________________________________________________________

OBJECTIVE
A challenging position in web development that applies my education and experience

EXPERIENCE
Office of Former State Senator Lynn Adelman - Legislative Intern

Answered constituent correspondence
Researched legal concerns of local officials

EDUCATION
University of Wisconsin - Madison

Bachelor of Arts, Economics and Political Science
Minors in History and Mathematics

Attended, University of Wisconsin - Milwaukee, Graduate School, Department of Economics

COURSES

Calculus
Econometrics
Mathematical Economics

SOFTWARE

Excel
Google Docs and Spreadsheets
H.T.M.L./C.S.S.
Word

Science

2005-06-28T00:00:00.093-05:00

The theory of evolution is about as established as the theory of relativity, a fact that too many Americans refuse to acknowledge.

Earth is not called a cosmic speck of dust for nothing.

How can the universe be 78 billion light-years across if it has only been around for 13-14 billion years?

Travel

2005-06-28T00:00:00.091-05:00

Animation only a terrorist could hate.

Starbucks Challenge 4.0

2005-06-28T00:00:00.002-05:00

7/10/06
Fair Trade Failure. Barista lacked knowledge of fair trade blend ~ Cafe Estima blend. I had to instruct.
Brookfield Fashion Center
17000A W. BlueMound Rd.
Brookfield, WI
53005

6/5/06
Fair Trade Success!
Pewaukee - Capitol and I-164
1390 Capitol Dr.
Pewaukee, WI
53072

5/18/06
Fair Trade Failure. Barista lacked knowledge of fair trade blend ~ Cafe Estima blend. I had to instruct.
New Berlin - Moorland and National
15600 National Ave.
New Berlin, WI
53151

4/25/06
Fair Trade Success!
Brookfield Fashion Center
17000A W. BlueMound Rd.
Brookfield, WI
53005

4/10/06
Fair Trade Failure. Barista lacked knowledge of french press option. Another had to instruct. Barista attempted to charge for the full French press.
124th St. and Capitol
12345 W. Capitol Dr.
Wauwatosa, WI
53222

3/30/06
Fair Trade Success!
Brookfield Fashion Center
17000A W. BlueMound Rd.
Brookfield, WI
53005

3/23/06
Fair Trade Failure. Barista attempted to charge for the full French press.
Waukesha Hwy. 18
21481 Highway 18
Brookfield, WI
53186

3/11/06
Fair Trade Failure. Barista lacked knowledge of fair trade blend ~ Cafe Estima blend. Another had to instruct.
Brookfield Fashion Center
17000A W. BlueMound Rd.
Brookfield, WI
53005

2/28/06
Fair Trade Success!
West Allis - Hwy. 100 and National Ave.
2939 S. 108th St.
West Allis, WI
53227

2/18/06
Fair Trade Success!
Brady and Farwell
1677 N. Farwell St.
Milwaukee, WI
53202

2/13/06
Fair Trade Failure. Barista lacked knowledge of french press option. Another had to instruct.
Brookfield Fashion Center
17000A W. BlueMound Rd.
Brookfield, WI
53005

Unknown Date
Fair Trade Failure. Barista attempted to charge for the full French press.
Waukesha Hwy. 18
21481 Highway 18
Brookfield, WI
53186

Unknown Date
Fair Trade Success!
Brookfield Fashion Center
17000A W. BlueMound Rd.
Brookfield, WI
53005

Unknown Date
Fair Trade Failure. Barista served "House Blend" not "Fair Trade Blend."
Waukesha Hwy. 18
21481 Highway 18
Brookfield, WI
53186.

Unknown Date
Fair Trade Success!
Hwy. 100 - West Allis
1540 South 108th St.
West Allis, WI
53214City Hippy
Fair Trade
Green L.A. Girl
Starbucks Challenge
Transfair U.S.A.

The Economics of Immigration

2005-06-28T00:00:00.001-05:00

References

Borjas, George. "The Labor Demand Curve Is Downward Sloping: Reexamining the Impact of Immigration on the Labor Market," (P.D.F.) Quarterly Journal of Economics 118 (November 2003).

Card, David. "Immigrant Inflows, Native Outflows, and the Local Market Impacts of Higher Immigration," (P.D.F.) Journal of Labor Economics 19 (January 2001).

Card, David. "Is the New Immigration Really So Bad?" (P.D.F.) Economic Journal 115 (November 2005).

Friedberg, Rachel, and Jennifer Hunt. "The Impact of Immigrants on Host Country Wages, Employment, and Growth," (P.D.F.) Journal of Economic Perspectives 9 (Spring 1995).

Leamer, Edward. "The Heckscher-Ohlin Model in Theory and Practice," (P.D.F.) Princeton Studies in International Finance 77 (February 1995).

Lewis, Ethan. "How Did the Miami Labor Market Absorb the Mariel Immigrants?" (P.D.F.) Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia Working Paper 3 (January 2004).

Lewis, Ethan. "The Impact of Immigration on New Technology Adoption in U.S. Manufacturing," (P.D.F.) Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia Conference (March 2005).

Longhi, Simonetta, Peter Nijkamp, and Jacques Poot. "The Fallacy of 'Job Robbing,'" (P.D.F.) Tinbergen Institute Discussion Paper 50 (2006).

Candidate	Beginning Cash	Income	Expenses	Ending Cash
Bill Kramer	$2,544.90	$10,433.00	$12,041.55	$936.35
Chris Lufter	$80.00	$9,041.64	$4,552.56	$4,569.08
Steve Schmuki	$4,637.85	$4,802.37	$653.23	$8,786.99

Source	Amount
Steve Schmuki	$1,020
Gennrich Family	$1,000
L.B. Hardy	$500
Sazama Family	$500
Amerson Family	$250
Lisa Cottrell	$250
Jean Batha	$200
Marlin Johnson	$200

Steven D. Schmuki	Bill Kramer	Chris Lufter
W271 S3581 Oak Knoll Dr.	2005 Cliff Alex Court South #3	W26253186 Ridge Rd.
Waukesha, WI 53189	Waukesha, WI 53189	Waukesha, WI 53189
333 Signatures	307 Signatures	272 Signatures

	Falk	Van Hollen	Undecided
All	45%	21%	34%
Republicans	3%	51%	46%
Independents	49%	7%	44%

Number of Voters	Probability of Decisive Vote
10	1/4.06
100	1/12.55
1,000	1/39.67
10,000	1/125.67
100,000	1/388.02
1,000,000	1/1,251.98
10,000,000	1/3,956.48