Sunday, September 13, 2015

Journal Sentinel: Toss Boss Vos

The Journal Sentinel editorial board gives GOP Assembly Speaker Robin Vos what just might be an unprecedented drubbing in its Sunday Crossroads section for continuing to try and blow holes in the state's open records law.

The editorial board even calls for Vos' removal by his colleagues as Assembly Speaker and urges voters in his Racine County base to find an alternative representative.

So this was not your basic knuckle-rapping by the paper's lead commentators on this the opening day of the NFL season, where the Packers take on the Bears in Chicago.

The editorial writers did everything to Vos but say he should be expelled across the border to Illinois and made to wear a full-body Bears uniform tattoo.

Don't forget that Vos is out to remake the non-partisan Government Accountability Board into a partisan agency that would be less interested in elections, fund-raising and lobbying in the public interest.

As he also directed the sweeping, secretive, partisan power-embedding redistricting of both GOP-led chambers that keep's the state in a one-party chokehold, as Vos is a master of behind-the-scenes manipulation, as the unusually-strong newspaper editorial points out.

Would that the paper had made a similar break with Walker some years ago, as Walker, with Vos' assistance absorbed more and more power, whether through partisan budget reclassification of agency attorneys, government-wide rule-making approvals and limitations on local voting, environmental, residency and collective bargaining rights and procedures statewide

But, as to the editorial blow at Vos on its own - - come Monday, no doubt, we'll find Vos redefined as the latest right-wing martyr to a bullying mainstream media and sure to get a morning-to-evening talk radio defense.

In the long run. we'll assess whether the editorial board the clout to dethrone the powerful Assembly Speaker, so stay tuned.

3 comments:

Anonymous said...

Robin Voss should be recalled by the constituents in his district. Citizens For Responsible Government would gladly provide any grassroots organizers with the information and tools they need to get the job done. After all they supported this guy as someone of shared values, i.e. - "clean and ethical government".
http://electionlawblog.org/wp-content/uploads/randa-crg.pdf

Sue said...

'we'll assess whether the editorial board the clout to dethrone the powerful Assembly Speaker'
They do not. And the only reason they are outraged by this is because it directly affects them. No outrage at the GAB business, nope, although they mention it in the editorial as a source of information, so they obviously know what it is and its importance. It's just not important to them.
I give them no credit for speaking out like this. They even found a way to flatter Scott Walker with some nonsense about how Vos should learn by Walker's 'admitting it was a huge mistake' (as opposed to admitting it was a huge mistake only because he got caught).
After so many years, those who wouldn't give the 'liberal rag' MJS the time of day don't even know they wrote this editorial, and those of us who've given up on the paper know this is just so much more nonsense from an editorial board that's pretty much been a backer of Walker and all he stands for from the start.

Betsy said...

Not sure where to post this, but....In a transcript from CNN's 'State of the Union':

Tapper: "But aren't the Koch brothers special interests too? Can you give me an example of one time that you took on a conservative special interest?"

Walker: "I'd tell you flat out when I took on the $100 million or so (spent against him), I raised $80 million in three elections in four and a half years, and 70 percent of it came from people who gave me $75 or less. We raised it from more than 300,000 donors in all 50 states. That's grass roots. That's not allegiance to one group or another. That's actually listening to the people, the hard-working people all across this country who said they want a leader who's going to stand up and take on the special interests.

Is any of this true?