|
 |
7/7/2010
A first. Legislators’ business dealings at the touch of a mouse
I’m not sure I agree with this: MacIver Institute Posts Legislators’ Financial Disclosures Online.
I absolutely agree with the import of transparency in legislative dealings. I absolutely agree with the import of constituents (and opponents, I suppose) understanding where conflicts of interest might possibly occur that don’t line up with a legislator’s principles or the lives of his or her voters.
But legislators complete these Statements of Economic Interest (e.g., long lists of investments, detailed lists of a firm’s clients) with the firm understanding that these very personal reports are available to the public, but only when that public identifies himself or herself in writing. Ok, fair enough. No anonymous pot shots.
MacIver Institute has published Statements of Economic Interests for all 132 Wisconsin legislators. They say they aim to continue with SEIs from Gov. Doyle, key members of his Administration and the Supreme Court. I assume MacIver will then extend their transparency effort to every single statewide and legislative candidate as well.
Contrasts abound in the posted detail. The source of income for Rep. Penny Bernard-Schaber (D-Appleton) and her husband Dale seem to be primarily from public sources – (not to say they’re not all hard-earned) – Social Security, the Wisconsin legislature, the Wisconsin Retirement System and a WEAC annuity.
Compare that with Rep. Joan Ballweg (R-Green Lake) who must make public a very detailed list of the clients of her family business.
I’m not sure those clients signed on for every Tom, Dick and Harry in the state of Wisconsin knowing their business dealings. Will any legislators or candidates feel violated (or safe?) enough to challenge the internet postings? Should they?
What do you think?
Jo Egelhoff, FoxPolitics.net
COMMENTS
If it's made public in the 'real world', why not make it public in cyber-space? Absolutely the information should be available online (that from a webmaster / web-developer - full disclosure).
BUT it should only be made available after the site visitor registers through a double-opt in (to verify their correct e-mail / location by IP address) AND the identity of the requesting party is then made available to anyone who wants to see "who has accessed" the info.
Open and transparent - BOTH WAYS.
Jeff Riedl (Wed Jul 07 08:22:50 2010)
Well, it would be nice to know who is funding the MacIver Institute. How about some transparency here? Is this another one-man shop, as other Wisconsin "free market" groups are?
But aside from that snide criticism, I support the disclosure and if Pols like Joan Ballweg are sensitive to that, they don't belong in public service.
Jack Lohman (Wed Jul 07 08:38:35 2010)
As tempting as it may be to demand that anyone and everyone seeking or holding public office be dissected and denuded for for the general public, I have a tough time with a policy that discourages real people from seeking and holding office - people whose incentive to seek office is to affect change rather than make a career of it. If I am a business owner - no matter the industry - I would not feel right disclosing a list of my clients.
There is something eerie in this. Something along the lines of two wrongs don't make a right, or setting aside a principle to play by "their" rules.
I'm not sure. But my initial thoughts are doubt and concern.
Andrew Ellis (Wed Jul 07 09:38:36 2010)
Andrew, I was a business owner and would not have wanted to disclose my client list for my competitors to see. But I also would not have run for an office that did such. When legislators can introduce and vote for laws and subsidies for their clients, I don't think we need those additional conflicts of interest. There are many good people available for the job, and we should be reforming our election laws to make it possible for these new voices to be heard.
Jack Lohman (Wed Jul 07 09:49:30 2010)
opensecrets.org has a wealth of info re. candidate funding. Especially interesting are the PACs; you can go into who funds THEM. Leadership PACs are nothing but slush funds. It's a website well worth visiting, as are the FEc and WI's state equivalent, the GAB, at cfis.wi.gov.
emily matthews (Wed Jul 07 10:45:39 2010)
Another is VoteSmart.org that better covers state politicians and their votes and scores by special interest groups.
Jack Lohman (Wed Jul 07 10:55:30 2010)
Jack, it isn't a question of letting my competitors see my customer list. It's a question of putting my customers' transactions (in some form) out for all to see. It's nobody's business, for example, that Mr. Jones uses John Doe's carpet cleaning business. And I don't like the idea of depriving John Doe from stepping up to the plate to represent his district - which is NOT supposed to be a full-time job onw which one supports a family.
You can never completely do away with conflicts of interest. Any controversial subject will be viewed, from one side or the other, as a conflict of interest.
On another note, here's a PHENOMENAL site: http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/default.asp
Andrew Ellis (Wed Jul 07 11:40:47 2010)
I'll go with Andrew here.
Frankly, if I were a client of a Leggie, I would be very agitated to learn that my business with him/her is public record.
dad29 (Wed Jul 07 13:36:00 2010)
You are very tolerant Andrew, but I think we've had too much of that lately. If I want to avoid exposing my clients to the scrutiny of public disclosure, I'll choose not to run for public office. To expect the taxpayers to "live with it," or to force them to try to uncover potential conflicts, is not what I think prudent. If candidates are going to weasel out of disclosure I don't want them in office.
Jack Lohman (Wed Jul 07 16:53:36 2010)
I'm with Dad29 and Andrew. Having one's clients listed all over the Internet is undue punishment for serving as an elected representative.
Jo (Wed Jul 07 23:02:10 2010)
So, now we're getting somewhere. If you want to give me (the legislator) cash bribes for playing ball, just become my "client" and then you can filter money to me and we won't have to report it. Or if we do they can't open it to the public. Otherwise we can claim it as "undue punishment!" I love it!
How about doing what 99.9% of the people do: don't take taxpayer money by running for office!!! Too simple???
Now we've come full circle; we don't want even disclosure as we've been preaching, we want nothing!
Jack Lohman (Thu Jul 08 00:03:59 2010)
Ok Jack, that's enough. As I recall, not once have you run for office, much less attempted to serve the people. Oh, but wait. You probably won't do that until "the government" or "the taxpayers" or some other entity out there in the vapor pays for you to get your message out to the voters. You need to do it Jack - whatever way you want to try to preach about it. You do it - only then may you speak so self-righteously about it. It's a 2-edged sword to be asked to put one's business and customers on the line (only if unincorporated, by the way, as I read the report - does that seem possible? will have to check that again) in order to serve one's neighbors. It's not your easy answers Jack.
Jo (Thu Jul 08 03:03:03 2010)
That is absolutely silly, Jo. I do not have to run for office to know right from wrong, or when my representatives (whom I pay through taxes) are screwing the taxpayers because of conflicts of interest. But worse, they are trashing our economy because their "clients" (yes, they actually call them that!) want this or that law or regulation weakened.
And Jo, please don't make serving in office a great sacrifice. "Serving one's neighbors???" Give me a break. It's more like advancing one's wealth and coming out a multi-millionaire with a lifetime of benefits. And fame and power and people licking your boots.
But please, you do this: take your views to the people the next time you run. Tell them what you really believe relative to "protecting your clients" and see how many votes you win.
Oh I know. The Libs have the deck stacked against you, but try that argument even on the R's and L's.
Jack Lohman (Thu Jul 08 06:07:03 2010)
The MacIver institute did not require the disclosure of the information, state law did.
Our intentions were merely to make the fake transparency of these filings real. We have not commented on the propriety of having to disclose every nuance of customer/client information.
The SEIs as were previously 'disclosed,' were farcical. "Public" to the letter, but not the spirit of the law.
Previously, individuals who wanted to review these records had to travel to Madison and fill out a form identifying themselves. Included on the form is an acknowledgment that failure to properly identify yourself or your purpose is punishable by up to a $5,000 fine and jail for up to a year.
That's chilling, not openness.
We're going to be undertaking many more transparency projects over the next few months, including an examination of local governments.
As our President, Brett Healy, said earlier in the week:
"Last year we launched The MacIver News Service to give Wisconsinites greater access to the individuals and entities whose decisions affect their daily lives. This year we will be launching several initiatives to increase the transparency of state and local government—today’s launch is only the beginning."
Stay tuned.
Fraley (Thu Jul 08 12:44:21 2010)
|
|
Blog Archives
| 2010 |
  December
|
November
|
October
|
September
|
August
|
July
|
June
|
May
|
April
|
March
|
February
|
January
• Solberg: Healing After an Abortion
• Basketball fans eyeing extension of Miller Park sales tax
• Nanny sex-ed bill goes to Doyle
• A first. Village limits pension contribution for employees
• Nanny State update: Toothbrushing mandated
• Obama pushes education inflation
• WI Investment Board votes to borrow to juice up returns
• So Republicans have brought nothing to the table?
• You have got to be kidding me
• Nygren: Governor Continues Terms of Failure in State of the State
• Sen. Fitzgerald: Governor down the wrong track at high speed
• Phosphorus is the new CO2. $Billions in Wisconsin
• More Obama giveaways
• A reprimand? Would you keep him on the job?
• Burri: Sarah Palin for Prez troubles me
• Quote of the Day – Obama after the pie-eating contest
• Populism, abused and trampled
• Fitzgerald: Senate Republicans Propose Real Job Creation Agenda
• Stripped down health insurance – it’s about time
• Ok GOP, scrap the Party of NO; time to lead
• No way Feingold is a Coakley. Is Wall a Brown?
• Burri: Conservatives off the chart for a RINO?
• Paltry quid pro quo?
• Doyle says ARRA has ‘created or retained’ 44,000 WI jobs
• Does most of the public fall for this stuff?
• When you get signatures, always get a couple extra
• Blame it on the outmoded computers
• Scott Brown victory does not scuttle health bill
• 8th Congressional Candidate Forum, Jan. 25
• Scott Walker Meet-and-greet, Monday, Jan. 18
• Aren’t consumers taxpayers too?
• MORE taxes on investment income - dreadful and wrong
• Join the blaze orange army and say ‘Enough is Enough’
• The future of government-run health care
• Tax on banks is a really bad idea
• Roth, Savard on the stump, grassroots style
• Savard speaking in Appleton, 8 PM, Wed., Jan. 13.
• Rahmlow: Savard, Bies frontrunners for State Senate
• Burri: Failing Political Correctness 101
• School contracts and Race to the Top
• Senator Feingold worrisome and big red flags
• Psephological?
• This is really important. Contact Rep. Kagen. Now. Please.
• This is exactly what we need from Governor Doyle
• This guy is my hero
• Why am I not surprised?
• Talk health reform with Feingold (Th), Petri (today)
• Give the Mayor power over MPS - if he can break contracts
• Burri: Yup, Dems really are going to bypass a conference
• The $2.7 billion Wisconsin deficit no one told you about
• Walker launches county accountability website
• Rahmlow: Why is Van Hollen dodging the Nebraska deal?
|
| 2009 |
December
|
November
|
October
• The Lawton-Bader files
• Yup, it’s the TAX LEVY, not the tax RATE
• Ellis: costly automobile insurance laws must be rolled back
• If not Barrett, who?
• The subsidy game
• Burri: Bailouts, Banks, Health Care, and the Mob
• Attend Appleton Schools budget meeting tonight
• A public option WON’T increase costs? That’s delusional!
• Appleton Schools budget meeting Monday
• Wisconsin should be screaming for accountability
• Burri: If anything, we need more obstructionism around here
• WI on the leading edge - in the wrong direction
• Rep. Montgomery: Utility Customers Join State’s Crime-Fighting Efforts
• Public Conservation and Recreation Lands Total 16.5% of State
• In the crow's nest of the Titanic, shouting 'Iceberg!'
• Is Rep. Nelson a political hack?
• Health care: The road ahead will be brutal
• Kagen's pandering again
• Birthers - good stuff for you
• How much do we bend over backward for seniors?
• The trouble with health care is paying for it
• Two-parent families: The Gold Standard
• Burri: Kids... the joys and blessings
• Very, very worried about health care
• Rep. Huebsch: Wisconsin is proof government health care isn’t the answer
• School district contracts push up tax levy
• What? Obama, the Peace Prize?
• TODAY - hearing on Campaign Finance Reform
• Appleton School District tax levy up way too much
• CBO report is out - and the bill isn't even written yet?
• So, how much do YOU budget for health care?
• Burri: Copenhagen trip was amateurish
• “Sotomayor, you have blood on your hands...”
• Cap and Trade. Always follow the money
• Rep. Kagen gets (almost) free health services
• I actually agree with Rep. Kagen
• Future Wisconsin Conference for Conservatives, October 10, Wauwatosa
|
September
|
August
|
July
|
June
|
May
|
April
|
March
|
February
|
January
|
| 2008 |
December
|
November
|
October
|
September
|
August
|
July
|
June
|
May
|
April
|
March
• Important votes Tuesday, including Appleton Common Council
• Democrats are becoming supply siders??
• Further debunking Hillary myths
• WEAC has created an unsustainable monopoly
• From Mark Gundrum: One of the greatest honors an American can experience
• 'Operation Chaos' working?
• Joe Martin the best candidate in Appleton's 8th
• State programs to cut? - Volume II
• Oh the naivete of youth
• Not just disingenuous - flat wrong
• Steve - you will be missed
• Make cuts only AFTER you're elected....
• Getting serious: What programs can we cut?
• Rep. Steve Kagen joining me on Jerry Bader Show today
• Rep. Van Roy: Dental Care Pilot Program
• Has Dave Obey turned the corner on earmarks?
• Speaker Huebsch: Governor turns down Federal Aid?
• Mark Rahmlow: "We're Broke."
• As taxpayers, how do we know if it's a Chevy or a Lexus?
• This is trash talk - about a veteran
• Frank Lasee: Take time to get the Compact right
• 'The Gableman Ad' - is it racist?
• Roth thankful, Kagen shaking money tree
• Gov. Doyle's office not enamored with Freedom of Information
• Governor Doyle will never do it
• Leadership on smoking ban? Not Hanna
• Rep. Van Roy speaks out about smear ads
• You're threatening me about potholes?
• Losing the Hastert seat is NOT a trend and NOT curtians for the GOP
• First suggestion for 'slashing' programs
• Big money-saver for municipalities
• More one time fixes. Nuts.
• Any chances???
• I'm doing the Jerry Bader Show, today, the 11th
• Representative Frank Lasee: Final Waltz of the Season
• Guest Blog: It's not the county's business to be in the nursing home business
• Yup, Hillary won Texas and Ohio
• Gableman/Butler race featured - and it isn't pretty
• Lies from Planned Parenthood and NARAL
• He who sacrifices liberty.....
• Duh.
• The Troha sentencing, Doyle and that $200K
• Guns, passion and "originality"
• How hard is it anyway, to shut down a government program?
• Voting is a PRIVILEGE. And so are property taxes....
• Guest Blog: Governor Doyle, cancel your Ireland trip
|
February
|
January
|
| 2007 |
December
|
November
|
October
|
September
|
August
|
July
|
June
|
May
|
April
|
March
|
February
|
January
• Lots of ideas. No money.
• The Cigarette Tax - "Poor Policy Instrument?"
• School budget Lite?
• Frankenstein - not in the library, but in the legislature
• A librarian, a legislator, a president
• $1.25/pack - NO, NO, NO, and NO
• Kagen and Reagan in the same breath?
• Menasha: behind the 8-ball, but not biting the dust
• Any way you slice it, Wisconsin government wants (further) in on health care
• The World is Flat...what about health care?
• The PAC - too precious to fail. Day 3
• News follow-ups: Appleton West, Kagen at the White House
• Fox Cities PAC - too precious to fail - Day 2
• Fox Cities PAC - too precious to fail
• New Transit Tax coming your way
• Rep. Petri has his finger in the dike - I guess
• AASD Retirement Costs Burdensome
• Health care, health care, health care, health care
• Water rate increase was no slam dunk
• Education for all is just a bad dream
• New Year's resolutions from a parade snob
|
| 2006 |
December
|
November
|
October
|
September
|
| 2000 |
May
|
|
