Who will be the Democratic challenger to Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker when the recall petitions are finally verified and an election is scheduled? So far, there are two candidates who have officially announced for the Democratic nomination - Former Dane County Executive Kathleen Falk and current State Senator Kathleen Vinehout. Neither has looked sharp out of the gate, unfortunately.
Falk, who has been actively campaigning for the nomination for weeks, is considered to be the favorite of the Democratic Party of Wisconsin's leadership. The chair of the DPW, Mike Tate, once worked for Falk when she was Dane County Executive. Being the party insider, however, is not necessarily a good thing in this race. Outside the Dane County bubble, people who want Scott Walker out of office are looking to start over with someone relatively new, someone not chained to party apparatus. There is a fear of electing the Democratic version of Scott Walker - someone who will be devisive and continue exploiting the deep divisions opened by Walker.
It would be advantageous to be a bit of an outsider, but yesterday Kathleen Falk accepted the endorsement of the Wisconsin Education Association Council (WEAC), Wisconsin's largest teachers union. The endorsement was not a surprise, but the fact that it came so early was a shock to many WEAC members and may end up actually hurting Falk, at least in the short run. WEAC's public endorsement of Falk came on the same day that Senator Vinehout declared her candidacy. That may have been a coincidence, but the upstaging of Vinehout's announcement by WEAC and Falk looks like good ol' nasty politics.
Things haven't started smoothly for Vinehout, either. She has a great Wisconsin story. She is from Alma, a long way from Madison and an even longer way from Waukesha County. She was a dairy farmer and then a college professor before being elected to the State Senate. She has the "outsider" advantage, but she has had to spend the first couple days of her campaign bogged down in trying to reshape the perception of her Senate voting record. Specifically, she is drawing criticism for sponsoring a "conscience clause" amendment to a bill a few years ago that allows Wisconsin pharmacists to refuse to dispense contraceptives.
More below the cheese curd.
As I mentioned, Kathleen Falk is a former Dane County Executive. Dane County includes Madison and Kathleen Falk is definitely a Madison liberal. It's a common suggestion that independent, rural Wisconsinites will not vote for a Madison liberal, but I don't agree. The way to impress independents to vote for you is to let them know you have come to your conclusions about policy independently. WEAC's endorsement of Falk before the field of candidates has even been finalized hurts WEAC President Mary Bell and it hurts Falk. It gives the appearance that Falk may have already cut a deal with WEAC. Maybe she has, maybe she hasn’t, but with the headlines in Wisconsin blaring the news about Republican legislators signing secret oaths to keep the public unaware of new redistricting plans, it’s not smart to give the impression that back room deals will continue if Walker is replaced.
A lot of WEAC's members are pissed about not being consulted, and they are letting everyone know about it in comments on WEAC’s facebook page. Teachers are in the middle of the school year. They are busy, and they haven't had the opportunity to consider the credentials of actual or potential candidates. The rank-and-file assumed they were still in the evaluation stage. They were blind-sided by their union leaders and as a result they are going to resist rallying behind Falk. They know it's going to be awfully hard to convince independent voters that Falk is not being controlled by "the union bosses" when their own union made such an early endorsement.
Falk is right to embrace labor rights, but endorsements from labor unions should come later. The destruction of collective bargaining rights is what started the mess in Wisconsin, and the eventual nominee has to come out fighting on that front and mean it, but Falk should have said "No, thanks. Let's wait," to WEAC and WEAC should have waited. Anything Falk says now about supporting the working class and restoring labor rights will seem slightly tainted, like it was paid for, even though I believe Falk would be a labor champion. Right now, there is some suspicion about how Falk earned the WEAC endorsement.
WEAC’s endorsement is also puzzling because education is one of Kathleen Vinehout’s stronger policy areas. Senator Vinehout has been unequivocal about the need to restore funding for public schools. She is also one of the 14 Wisconsin senators who left the state last February to delay Walker’s union-busting bill. That's a big deal. It's hard to doubt her commitment to labor rights. Vinehout is strong on collective bargaining and strong on education. Why the rush, WEAC?
Senator Vinehout's problem right now is on reproductive rights. Many liberals will consider her record a deal breaker, but it’s her backpedaling that will alienate independent, rural voters, even in a Democratic primary. She has a record. She should defend it honestly and let the chips fall where they may. The spinning just makes it worse. One of Scott Walker's biggest liabilities is that people feel he was not open and honest about his intentions. Consider portions of this press release from NARAL Pro-Choice Wisconsin, which not only makes the case against Vinehout's record, it implies she is being dishonest:
Senator Vinehout Backpedals on Anti-Choice Women's Health Position
...NARAL Pro-Choice Wisconsin is calling out Senator Kathleen Vinehout today for inaccurate claims she made in a February 2, 2012 statement regarding her Senate record on reproductive choice. In her statement, Vinehout claims:
• Amendments she proposed to the Birth Control Protection Act (SB 232) in 2008 would not interfere with the bill's intent to guarantee a woman's ability to fill a birth control prescription without unnecessary barriers. Instead, Vinehout claims, her change would have simply placed the responsibility on the pharmacy rather than the pharmacist.
• The Prescription Protection law passed as part of the 2010 budget mirrored the changes Vinehout's amendments would have made to the proposed 2008 bill.
Both of the above statements are patently false. The amendments proposed by Vinehout included specific exemptions allowing pharmacists to refuse to fill a valid birth control prescription if either the pharmacist or the pharmacy objected on personal grounds. Specifically, one of Vinehout's amendments inserted language stating:
“A pharmacist may decline to dispense a contraceptive for a patient if either of the following applies and the pharmacist ensures that the patient will have access to the contraceptive elsewhere:
1. The pharmacist objects to dispensing the contraceptive on moral or religious grounds.
2. The pharmacist is employed at a pharmacy that is operated or controlled by an organization that objects to contraception on moral or religious grounds.”
Under Vinehout's law, a pharmacist may have refused to fill a valid birth control prescription if either the pharmacist or the employing pharmacy objected, as long as the prescription could be filled “elsewhere.” If the woman lives in a rural town with only one pharmacy, this could mean driving 45 minutes or more to another pharmacy just to have her prescription filled.
In her statement, Vinehout also points to her 2006 position statement on abortion, claiming that her position has not changed. She states, “I believe that abortion should be legal and safe. A woman should not be a criminal for having an abortion.” Again, her record tells otherwise. In 2008, serving on the Senate Committee on Health and Human Services, Vinehout cast the deciding vote against SB 398 which would have repealed Wisconsin's unconstitutional criminal abortion ban and removed criminal penalties for women who seek an abortion....
It’s tempting to label all of this as just another example of the left wing’s tendency to eat its own, but the truth is we need a strong vetting of candidates before we choose one to go up against Scott Walker and the Koch Brothers. So far, what we’ve seen is the same old politics...back-room endorsement deals from Falk and major-league spin-doctoring from Vinehout. They would do well to stop right now, regroup, and consider what legendary labor organizer Ed Garvey has
proposed on fightingbob.com:
If Democrats treat the upcoming Walker campaign as "business as usual," Walker has a very good chance to win despite the embarrassment of his record-setting recall because he thinks his pals will buy the election for him and for them.
…
How can we counter the millions of dollars Walker is counting on? Not by trying to keep pace with his fundraising, that's for sure. Can't be done. In my view the best strategy is to make his money the issue. We must urge the candidates seeking the nomination to agree to spend nothing in the primary or the general. (The candidates should raise money for out-of-pocket expenses but not big contributions from PACs, unions, corporations.) You can bet someone will say, "Unilateral disarmament is foolish." My response: If you have no chance to raise $20 million to $30 million, don't try. Spend all the time persuading the 1.1 million who signed a recall petition to get out and vote! If they do, Walker loses.
Is Garvey’s strategy a risk? Of course it is, but it’s a risk we must take. We will not remove Scott Walker from office by playing the same old game on his home field. This will be an election like no other in history. In short, it’s money vs. people. We have the people. Let’s use our greatest resource.
When former Packers coach Mike Holmgren began to recruit free agents to play in Green Bay, the story is he would tell them that they could be stars if they won anywhere else, but if they won in Green Bay, they would become legends.
Let’s make a legend. Let’s find the next Fighting Bob La Follette. Maybe it’s Kathleen Falk or Kathleen Vinehout, but not if they continue the way they have begun. If we get the right candidate, one who understands the truly historic challenge before us, we will be able to mobilize tens of thousands of Wisconsinites to work day and night convincing their friends and neighbors that people are more important than money, and that Scott Walker and the Fitzgerald brothers have to go. We can do it. The world is watching.