Out-State Newspapers Finding Many Reasons To Support Kloppenburg For Supreme Court

Moderate newspapers far from Madison and Milwaukee are finding plenty of reasons to support State Supreme Court challenger JoAnne Kloppenburg instead of sitting Justice David Prosser:
This from the Appleton Post-Crescent, Prosser's home town paper:

"...So, yes, you have a lot to ponder before April 5.

"But here's something else that might have been missed amid Wisconsin's recent political ugliness. In 2006, Prosser said that while he was a legislative leader, staffers who worked under his direction did campaign work. He also acknowledged that in his interview with The P-C on March 18.

"Here's a member of the highest court in Wisconsin, whose judges are expected to possess unimpeachable integrity, admitting he condoned illegal activity as an elected official.

"In a brief filed by the attorney of former state Rep. Scott Jensen, a Prosser protege who was charged with three felony counts of misconduct in office (in a December 2010 plea deal, Jensen pleaded no-contest to a misdemeanor charge), Prosser said he basically did the same thing that caused Jensen to be charged.

"In the brief, after outlining how his leadership role involved getting more Republicans elected to the Assembly, Prosser said:

"'During my term as a legislator and as a speaker, there were caucus members and caucus directors who participated in activities including but not limited to the following: Campaign and political meetings in the Capitol office; assisting the speaker and the elected leadership by recruiting candidates; gathering voting lists and target lists; setting up, attending and staffing fundraisers; and assisting legislators in creating and implementing office plans.'"

"Prosser's statement was presented in Jensen's defense. He's saying, as others said, that's the way business is done in Madison. That's what Jensen's job was about, too.

"It's illegal. It was illegal when Prosser was in charge and it was illegal when Jensen was in charge.

"In his statement, Prosser saw it differently. He said, "Every activity that could be characterized as a campaign activity can be conceivably construed to be an act that furthers the legislative process."

"So, campaigns and legislative work are so intertwined that it's all part of the same process.

"As a taxpayer, what do you think? Should your tax dollars, which were used to fund the caucuses until they were disbanded in the wake of a scandal, have gone toward campaigning?

"Only someone who works — or worked — in the Capitol would think taxpayers would go for that.

"Again, it was against the law. You'd think Prosser would acknowledge that, even if he didn't agree. But he told The P-C that "it was a different era and public expectations were quite different."

"Prosser said that the law "had never been interpreted that way."

"So, what do we do? Let bygones be bygones?

"We can't. The Post-Crescent endorses JoAnne Kloppenburg."

This from the Green Bay Press Gazette

"...During her campaign, Kloppenburg has made every effort — sometimes, almost to a fault — to articulate and emphasize her independence, a quality we agree is critical for justices to rule fairly. During an interview with the Green Bay Press-Gazette editorial board, the assistant attorney general expressed a reluctance to discuss certain cases that have come before the high court — or that might — ostensibly for fear of betraying any inkling of preconceived bias. And while we understand and appreciate this emphasis on independence, Kloppenburg's reticence puts her in danger of coming across as uninformed. We do not believe this is the case.

"Further, Kloppenburg strikes us as the more levelheaded candidate, and frankly we have been troubled by some of Prosser's statements throughout the campaign. During a meeting with the Press-Gazette editorial board, Prosser said repeatedly the Impartial Justice Act, which provides public funding for state Supreme Court candidates, was designed to oust him from office. At one point, he went so far as to call it "a law designed to get Dave Prosser," and said he had "a target on my back." His insistence that this is the case is unsettling.

"During a tense March 21 debate at Marquette University, Prosser made an unnecessarily awkward statement about a posting on Kloppenburg's Facebook page, inquiring whether he was the "turd" to which a poster referred. Any legitimate point Prosser, a former Republican lawmaker, may have had about the nature of the campaign was lost in this odd exchange, which we also find troubling. Taken together, statements such as these indicate Kloppenburg is the more levelheaded of the two candidates. This, combined with her experience and insistence on independence, make Kloppenburg this newspaper's preferred candidate for the state's high court."