FREE WHITEWATER

Monthly Archives: September 2009

Brunner in the Daily Union‘s “No Input at Budget Hearing.”

Earlier, in a post entitled, “Come On, Whitewater! Stop Disappointing Your Politicians and Bureaucrats (Part 2),” I considered some of Whitewater City Manager Brunner’s remarks on low turnout at budget listening session. The session was covered at the Daily Union, in a story entitled, “No Input at Budget Hearing.”

In this post, a few follow-up remarks.

About that headline…. The story’s headline, ‘no input at budget hearing,’ tells Brunner’s tale, that no one showed up, that implicitly, the community let him down. You didn’t offer your input, Whitewater! It’s unsurprising from the paper, and representative of its coverage.

One might have considered a different angle: “Poorly Publicized Session Draws One Person.” No, it’s not the bureaucrats and politicians who organized the event; it’s your fault. Brunner’s trying to engage “the citizens,” and they’ve spurned him.

On Efficiency. The story reports that “Brunner said the city should prioritize services, review its organization structure, share resources with neighboring jurisdictions; reallocate staff resources, reduce bureaucracy and redundancies, and evaluate outside contracts.”

Good for him. Why, though, only now? Shouldn’t Brunner have tried to prioritize, review, share, reallocate, and reduce bureaucracy, and evaluate from the moment he took office?

One might ask, why only now? One might also ask, of course, what do these proposals mean?

Too funny, too, is the notion that Brunner admits he has a bureaucracy in a town of 14,296. It’s true, he does. Some of these gentlemen live as though they’re administrators of a vast city, far from the field, unwilling to dirty their hands.

It’s a small town; they would do well to stop pretending otherwise.

Daily Bread: September 25, 2009

Good morning, Whitewater

In Wisconsin history on this date, the Wisconsin Historical Society remembers the birthday of abolitionist Sherman Booth:

1812 – Abolitionist Sherman M. Booth Born

On this date abolitionist and editor of the Milwaukee Free Democrat, Sherman M. Booth, was born in New York. At the age of fifteen, he became a country school teacher and then a student at Yale. After representing the Liberty Party in Connecticut, he moved to Milwaukee in 1848.

When Joshua Glover, a captured fugitive slave, was to stand trial in March 1854, Booth successfully rallied hundreds of people to help Glover escape. There was a rush on the jail, Glover was paraded around town, and then disappeared into the Underground Railroad, with the help of Booth’s supporters.

Booth was arrested for aiding and abetting a fugitive, a crime under the Fugitive Slave Law passed in the Compromise of 1850. The Wisconsin Supreme Court released him, and Justice A.D. Smith declared the Fugitive Slave Law void. The U.S. Federal Courts caught up with Booth, however, and he was sentenced to serve one month in jail and pay a $1000 fine by Justice Roger Taney, the author of the Dred-Scott Decision.

Booth and his supporters refused to comply. Booth jumped bail and fled to Waupun. He was found and taken back to jail, only to be pardoned by President Buchanan two days before Abraham Lincoln’s inauguration. Booth was famous for his work with the Underground Railroad and his support of state’s rights over federal law.

When the Civil War broke out, he publically supported the Union, delivering over 1,000 speeches to secure enlistments to the Union Army. [Source: Badger Saints and Sinners by Fred L. Holmes, p.185-202]

Today is also the anniversary of President Eisenhower’s decision to send federal soldiers to Little Rock, Arkansas to enforce compliance with an earlier-issued cease and desist proclamation that had been disobeyed, in the much larger issue of the integration of Central High, in Little Rock, Arkansas.

Here’s today’s almanac:

Almanac
Friday, September 25, 2009 Sunrise Sunset
Official Time 06:45 AM 06:47 PM
Civil Twilight 06:17 AM 07:15 PM
Tomorrow 06:46 AM 06:45 PM
Tomorrow will be: 3 minutes shorter
Amount of sunlight: 12h 2 m
Amount of daylight: 12h 58 m
Moon phase: Waxing Crescent

Manger Suggests Palin as 2012 ‘Libertarian’ Presidential Candidate

Long-standing libertarian Phil Manger has suggested Sarah Palin as a libertarian presidential candidate. She might run as an independent, a libertarian-oriented Republican, or (although this wasn’t Manger’s suggestion) a member of the LP.

Under any scenario, she’d receive more votes than 2008 LP candidate Bob Barr if she did run as a presidential candidate.

See, Independent Political Report: Manger Suggests Palin as 2012 ‘Libertarian’ Presidential Candidate.

Reason.tv: Live from the September 12 Taxpayer March on Washington

Here’s a description accompanying the video:

Are the Tea Party protesters a small group of radical freakazoids or a large crew of taxpaying regular joes who are fed up with government spending, Democrats and Republicans, and business as usual?

Reason.tv fanned out through the crowd and the backstage of the September 12 Taxpayer March on Washington, the controversial anti-government protest that drew somewhere between 75,000 and 1 million people, according to press reports.

We talked with folks from all over the country and snagged interviews with speakers and media including Sen. Jim DeMint (R-S.C.), Rep. Mike Pence (R-Ind.), CNN’s Jeff Greenfield, actor Steven Baldwin, Freedom Works’ Matt Kibbe, and many more.

What we found was a group of people united in their calls for less government spending and their disgust at the Republican and Democratic pols who made it all happen.

Interviews by Nick Gillespie, Matt Welch, and Michael C. Moynihan. Shot and edited by Dan Hayes and Meredith Bragg. Approximately 6 minutes. more >>

Come On, Whitewater! Stop Disappointing Your Politicians and Bureaucrats (Part 2)

Over at the Daily Union, there’s coverage of the first of two scheduled municipal budget listening sessions. In a story entitled, “No Input at Budget Hearing,” Whitewater City Manager Kevin Brunner comments on the lack of attendance, and his own trailblazing listening session concept.

It’s not that Brunner receives hard questioning from the newspaper; that’s not to be expected, really. It’s that, even when quoted at length, and apparently unchallenged, his remarks just don’t add up. (There’s my obligatory numerical reference.)

Brunner on attendance: “We thought that by coming out to the community, to a place like Fairhaven, that maybe we could attract some folks. But people are very busy and, unfortunately, until they get a tax bill or see a headline in a newspaper for what might be going on, that is when they will react.

“We’re trying to engage them ahead of time, to get their ideas so we can generate ideas on how we can balance this budget,” he added. “I am disappointed, but I think next week will be better.”

You ingrate slackers! You were supposed to be at Brunner’s poorly-publicized event. You didn’t show, and you’ve let him down. There’s nothing in his quoted remarks in which he takes responsibility for a simple mistake, along the lines of “We didn’t publicize this well, and should have done better, but will try next time.” Nothing like that at all.

Note, that when he says that people won’t react until they get a tax bill, he fails to see that reacting only then may be a rational response to a string of ambiguous, lengthy, or confusing municipal meetings.

Brunner on his unique approach: “This is new,” Brunner said of the process. “I am not aware of another community that is trying to do this, to get in front of the budget by engaging the citizens.” By this, I presume he means holding listening sessions before a budget is presented.

Is Brunner serious? He’s not aware of other communities that have a similar process?

Of course they do. The City of Madison has a process like this, with public input before the introduction of a budget. The City of Franklin has a process like this.

Now I’m a common blogger, not some well-heeled, never-wrong, super-sophisticated city manager, but even I know that this process was not invented in Whitewater, Wisconsin.

Why imply that it might have been? Why pretend to be so unique and special? Why not simply say that we’re trying to do what others are doing, and that it didn’t work out? The refusal to admit any mistake, or to imply we’re so unique, is laughable, and ruinous to the city.

Wouldn’t anyone, hearing this statement, wonder about it?

Come On, Whitewater! Stop Disappointing Your Politicians and Bureaucrats (Part 1)

Monday night, Whitewater held the first of two listening sessions on the 2010 municipal budget. It had an attendance of one person. That’s not surprising; the event received little advance notice. Part puzzling, and part funny, is how a local website, the (Whitewater Banner) covered the low turnout:

“(Sep 22) The first of two Public Special Listening Sessions on 2010 City Budget was held this evening. The one member of the public was thanked for attending. There was a note of disappointment in the lack of turnout. However, it did allow a “dry run” of the presentation and discussion effort. The effort to get more public participation and input on the City’s 2010 Budget will continue on budgetary issues on Tues. Sep. 29th—6-8 p.m. at the Cravath Lakefront Center (Hosted by the Whitewater Area League of Women Voters)….it is hoped the next listening session will be better attended…”

Who should be disappointed in whom? Suppose someone held a production of Cats: The Musical, and no one attended. Whose responsibility would that be? Would potential attendees have let the production down? Of course not. The event might be poorly attended for lack of publicity, for the poor choice of time, or for the good taste of those staying home.

I suppose a producer might complain that would-be attendees were vulgar, etc., but investors in the production would probably focus their review on the theater company, not the potential audience.

(I really like cats, and even I found one sitting of Cats more than enough for a lifetime.)

There’s also a bit of a scold in all this: “There was a note of disappointment in the lack of turnout” and “it is hoped the next listening session will be better attended…”

A city’s not a nursery; politicians are not nannies.

It’s so easy for those who choose a political office or career in bureaucracy to complain: oh my, no one seems to care anymore…

By the way, I am quite sure that the next session, scheduled for September 29th, will be better attended. The Whitewater-Area League of Women Voters is co-sponsoring the event, and I’d guess they’ll get the word out just fine.

Daily Bread: September 24, 2009

Good morning, Whitewater

In Wisconsin history on this date, the Wisconsin Historical Society recalls a famous award:

1857 – First Sheboygan County Cheese Award

On this date N.C. Harmon of Lyman was awarded the first premium prize for cheese made in Sheboygan County. The award was given at the Sheboygan Agricultural Society fair held in Sheboygan Falls. The next year saw John J. Smith procure the first cheese vat in Sheboygan County. He manufactured cheese on a cooperative plan, collecting curd from his neighbors. Both are early events in the long and important history of cheesemaking in Sheboygan. [Source: Sheboygan County, Wisconsin Genealogy and History]

Closer to home, there’s information about an award, too. Congratulations to the Risdall Marketing Group, part of the Risdall Advertising Agency, of New Brighton, Minnesota, for their design of the Whitewater Unified School District’s website. The Minnesota firm submitted its design of the website for a contest, and won one of the Web Marketing Association’s WebAwards. I wondered if the website was locally designed (it didn’t seem so). Now, about that “Whippet” …

In honor of the occasion, a video uploaded to YouTube in 2006 of real whippets playing:

Here’s today’s almanac:

Almanac
Thursday, September 24, 2009 Sunrise Sunset
Official Time 06:44 AM 06:49 PM
Civil Twilight 06:15 AM 07:17 PM
Tomorrow 06:45 AM 06:47 PM
Tomorrow will be: 3 minutes shorter
Amount of sunlight: 12h 5 m
Amount of daylight: 13h 2 m
Moon phase: Waxing Crescent

more >>

Techniques of Municipal Distraction (Numbers 19 – 22)

Over a year ago, I posted a list of Techniques of Municipal Distraction, the methods local government can use to shift-blame, avoid true accountability, and do pretty much what it pleases. I’ll add four more, and list the original techniques thereafter.

19. A Compliant Press Must Always Bolster Key Leaders. Every local bureaucrat and incumbent politician needs a compliant press. Newspapers may be in trouble, and circulation down, but that’s no reason to avoid making sure the local press flacks your line. If you still have independent reporters, radio stations, or bloggers in your town, it means that you haven’t tried hard enough.

Make sure they understand that you’re a big fish in your small pond, and that stories should always show respect to you. It’s fine if reporters question garden-variety politicians, or ordinary citizens, but they cannot question you. Ordinary citizens are always fair game; it allows the reporter to be critical and inquiring, yet not inquiring of you. That’s what matters — you’re what matters.

Besides, someone who shows up at a meeting to talk is probably someone who doesn’t count; all the important people are already permanent fixtures in the room (like you)!

20. A Compliant Press Must Always End a Story on a Positive Note. End happy! When there’s a story about a meeting that went long or wrong, make sure the reporter frames the story so that it ends positively. A quote from you, with your enlightened perspective, will make it all better.

21. For Reporters to Avoid Appearing Compliant, They Should Question Peripheral Matters. Look, lots of people spot a fawning story, and roll their eyes, moving on to coupons or comics for real value. That does you no good — they should be reading about you, a municipal bureaucrat or incumbent, in the most positive way possible. Make sure the reporter describes a scene — but not you! — with a sense of irony or apparent exasperation. It’s fine for the press to talk about how part of a meeting was tedious, incoherent, etc. Just make sure that you’re not on the receiving end of that irony.

This makes the story seem more authentic, truer to the tradition of an independent press. Always remember: if it looks genuine, it is genuine. It’s not your view, it’s the view.

22. Remember: Few People Fact-Check! If you’re going to be quoted in the press, make sure you say something bold and grand, about how your work is the only work, or best work, of its kind. Why say you’re doing what others do, when you can say that you invented the very idea of something? Claim everything you can as yours — conference calls, paper clips, light bulbs, automobiles, grand pianos – say you invented them all.

If someone points out that these things exist in other places, just say that others copied your work. If someone says that these things have existed for years, just say that others unfairly anticipated your ideas.

Once it’s in print, it must be true. At the very least, it’s as good as anything else in print. Forget reading, study, careful consideration — just make something up, get it in print, and you’re set. (WARNING: If the press is hostile, make sure you offer nothing quotable. See Technique Number 9, below.)

What are you waiting for?

Techniques of Municipal Distraction (Numbers 1-9)

Imagine that you’re a bureaucrat or long-term politician in a municipality with budget problems, failed police leadership, restrictive enforcement, or other embarrassments.

Yours could be one of countless towns in America.

What to do?

The easiest path, and the one that you’ll likely take, it is commit to techniques of distraction rather than acknowledge, let alone solve, any of your city’s problems.

These are among the most common tactics for a local CYA effort:

1. Admit No Wrongdoing or Fault. In almost all cases, it’s foolish to admit that you might have been wrong about something – it’s not whether you were wrong, but whether someone can prove it.

Relax – few people have good information, and most will neither know nor be inclined to look for independent information.

2. Deny Basic Facts. In most cases, you don’t want to deny anything. It’s too defensive.

If, however, you have to deny something, there are ways to deny effectively. If someone asks if you were somewhere, or said something unrecorded, tell them you weren’t there, or never made those statements. Deny big!

If you think they might be able to prove your conduct, say you can’t recall. They may never investigate further, or may come up empty despite the fundamental truth.

Always deny press inquiries indirectly, if you must, by answering as though you were posed a slightly different question. Never answer a difficult question with a direct, responsive, and candid answer.

You can answer minor questions honestly, but never serious, critical ones. This isn’t a confessional, after all. It’s politics and government, and your conduct is justified for higher ends. Never forget that you have a higher purpose that justifies so-called ‘misconduct.’ You’re above that – you’re practical in pursuit of the profound.

3. Cast Doubt Whenever Possible. If someone, unfortunately, gets word of a truth that you’d prefer remained concealed, you have some solid options: (1) question the accuracy of the information, even if it’s wholly accurate (2) the motivation of those who reveal it, and (3) insinuate there is other information – not yet revealed – that will make all clear, in time.

(Don’t worry about subpoint 3 – you need not have any other information – people will forget about missing the content of your offer, but will remember the offer itself. Say you wish you could say more, but you are unable to do so, based on some present limitation.)

BONUS TIP: Avoid worn-out expressions. For example, never, ever use the phrase “not at liberty to discuss,” as it’s so hackneyed it will be unpersuasive.

4. Forget Your State or Country – It’s All Local. Somewhere in your state legislature, or Washington, there’ll be legislators enacting laws that conflict with what you want. Some of these people are just self-interested politicians like you.

A few, though, are something far worse: do-good reformers who want “to make a difference,” or “make the world a better place.” Don’t be fooled — idealists like this just make it hard for you to conduct business as usual.

Don’t give in – you’re playing a local game, so why not play by local rules? It’s easy to ignore or to counter-interpret state and federal laws. The law is what you say it is, for goodness’ sake. No one checks up on those statutes, anyway.

5. Use the Language of Pop Psychology. Only a fool calls critics idiots – say they’re just confused, or misguided, or angry, and you should express disappointment rather than anger or hostility in reply. Say they “seem” a certain way, and you’re even better off. After all, who really knows?

BONUS TIP: Be careful not to condescend too blatantly. Never offer banal quotations, for example, about enlightenment, inner peace, etc. You’re a public official, not a swami.

Serious public officials – especially ones with career aspirations – never make the mistake of speaking as though they’re better than others. Besides, you’ll just be offering fodder for bloggers, who will hold up your trite remarks as evidence of your arrogance, or cluelessness, or both.

6. Get Your Story Straight. Make sure anyone who might be questioned has a common account and set of talking points. Contradictions in accounts will suggest your own dishonesty, or blame-shifting.

BONUS TIP: Never allow everyone in a chain to use the same peculiar phrase, especially if it’s uncommon, as it will be obvious that you’re on the defensive and huddling together.

7. Find Compliant Reporters. If you’re from a small town, then this should be easy. There will be a local reporter who’ll want access. Give it to him or her, on your terms. Cultivate their trust, and they’ll be less likely to present you with uncomfortable questions about your city’s performance.

8. Write Your Own Stories — Offer them Verbatim. You shouldn’t wait for real news; it’s your job to make good news.

9. Avoid Direct Quotations. When a reporter writes a story that might be unfavorable, but he or she is supportive of you, you should be able to make sure that you’re not quoted on the record. That way, if your statement is questioned, then you’ll be able to say that the reporter misunderstood what you “actually” said.

BONUS TIP: This technique is only likely to work with some reporters; others will see that you’re putting them at risk of blame-casting should the story become controversial.

Next — additional techniques for your assured success.

Techniques of Municipal Distraction (Numbers 10-18)

Here are numbers 10-18 of my list of Techniques of Municipal Distraction, suitable for self-interested politicians and bureaucrats in towns across America.

These are among the most common tactics for a local CYA effort:

10. When Policy is Questioned, Defend on Integrity. If someone questions your actions, then defend by insisting that you’re a good person. Shift the story away from policy. Fast!

11. When Integrity is Questioned, Defend on Policy. If someone questions your integrity, then insist that (1) you have lots of experience, (2) and you’ve always done things this way. (Most people won’t see the irony in this defense.)

12. Insist on the Importance of Prior, Specialized Experience or Knowledge. Always insist on your experience, tenure, and training if you’d think it will help you.

13. Speak to the Core. This isn’t just some hip business psychology mantra, it’s sound advice.

Forget most people – they’re nothing to someone like you, with a career and important responsibilities. The hoi polloi only matter if looking sympathetic to them will get you a few votes.

You should concern yourself with so-called insiders, people of influence, movers and shakers: your core constituency. They count.

It doesn’t matter if others think you’re wrong, or look foolish. They don’t count, especially if you’re unelected.

14. Line Up Toadies to Flack Your Line. Don’t let the truth get you down – fight back with your own version of events. That version needs a voice, and where better to look than a stable of willing sycophants? You should have people ready to comment in support of your views, on cue. Make sure they know how to divert attention from truthful, substantive issues to your town’s official (and admittedly asinine) positions.

15. Be Hypocritical. Look, it’s about time municipal officials realize terms like “hypocrisy,” or “inconsistency” are just bigoted assaults on local government. People who say these things are haters, the worst kind of haters, really: government haters.

If they understood how hard it was, they’d shut up and stay home.

Shift positions to your advantage – embrace a situational ethics. If some seek information, insist on confidentiality. If others seek confidentiality, insist on openness.

BONUS TIP: You don’t have to believe in principle, but you do have to convince others that you do.

16. Blame Outsiders. This works well in small towns with a local group that dislikes outsiders. If you have a small minority of outsiders who are different by ethnicity, or age, your prospects are even better.

The Russian Federation often blames its problems on ethnic minorities, e.g., “Our crops have failed. It must be the Uzbeks again!” Remember, some falsely believe that most of America’s problems are caused by radicals, agitators, students, misfits, vegetarians, Communists, ethnic advocacy groups, or the ACLU.

Make that false notion work for you — blaming any or all of them will seem reasonable to your core supporters. more >>

David Harsanyi: Civility is Overrated – The Denver Post

Over at the Denver Post, David [not Daniel!] Harsanyi has a great column on how civility is overrated. Harsanyi’s right:

A “focus on civility is meant to cloud another issue. Let’s not confuse personal civility with political civility. A ‘civil’ citizenry can mean a pliable citizenry, waiting – sometimes forever – to speak their minds.

We have no duty to say ‘please’ and ‘thank you’ to elected officials. Not yet.”

See, Civility is Overrated.

Daily Bread: September 23, 2009

Good morning, Whitewater

There are no municipal meetings scheduled for the City of Whitewater today.

On this day in 1952, vice-presidential candidate Richard Nixon delivered his Checkers speech, denying allegations of improper campaign financing. The New York Times has a link to the story.

Here’s a video recording of Nixon’s 1952 speech:

The speech seems stilted now, but it was effective in 1952; Nixon stayed on the ticket. There are no libertarians who supported Nixon’s policies, and within his own party, neither Goldwater nor Reagan liked him. Still, one cannot doubt that Nixon was a shrewd man.

I once described one of Whitewater’s bureaucrats as a “little Nixon of Whitewater,” and, on reflection, I am sorry that I did; the comparison was an insult to Nixon’s memory.

Here’s today’s almanac:

Almanac
Wednesday, September 23, 2009 Sunrise Sunset
Official Time 06:43 AM 06:50 PM
Civil Twilight 06:14 AM 07:19 PM
Tomorrow 06:44 AM 06:49 PM
Tomorrow will be: 2 minutes shorter
Amount of sunlight: 12h 7 m
Amount of daylight: 13h 5 m
Moon phase: Waxing Crescent

more >>

Wisconsin: An Over-Taxed State

Wisconsin’s a smaller state, but she ranks in the top ten in property taxes, along with states with troubled economies like Illinois and California.

The Wisconsin State Journal, in a story posted this afternoon, entitled, “Wisconsin ninth in median property taxes,” notes that “Wisconsin’s median real estate tax paid for 2008 was $2,963…” compared “…to the national median of $1,897.”

Our taxes are also above average as a fraction of a home’s value: “Wisconsin also made the top 10 list for highest median real estate tax as a percentage of median home value. The foundation ranked Wisconsin fourth on that list, at 1.71 percent, compared to No. 1 Texas’ rate of 1.76 percent and No. 2 New Jersey’s rate of 1.74 percent. The national median was 0.96 percent.”

(The full report from the Tax Foundation, at http://www.taxfoundation.org/news/show/25197.html, has the grim details.)

Withdrawn: Wisconsin Bill to Allow Secretly Designated Legislative Successors

Today, under pressure from people from across the state, lawmakers withdrew a bill that would have allowed legislators to designate secretly their successors in the event that an attack or disaster should befall Wisconsin. I posted earlier today on the pending legislation. See, New Wisconsin Bill Would Allow Secretly Designated Legislative Successors.

It’s hard to overestimate how wrong and stupid this idea was. Wrong, because it was based on the idea that Wisconsin could only preserve representative government by undermining open and accountable representation. This bill disregards the very tradition of republican government, deriving from the people of this state, as the only legitimate source of political authority.

It is impossible — absolutely impossible — that a free people may have ‘secret’ representatives, unknown to them.

Even as a security measure, it was astonishingly stupid. The bill’s supporters would believe that after a disaster should befall Wisconsin’s sitting legislators, and countless residents, the survivors would support and find comfort in the authority of successors whose names none knew openly before the calamity.

Even the stupidest people, utter buffoons, would grasp that following a tragedy and threat to representative government, these successors would arouse only suspicion, a then-revealed cabal being of no use or confidence to a free, but suffering, state.

I see that Wisconsin State Senator Bob Jauch (D-Poplar) was one of the supporters of this bill (there was a senate version). He was a fool to do so. I have no idea how ignorant each of its supporters is, except to say that every moment anyone spent teaching them was wasted. Both morally and practically, this was a poor and detestable bill, about as shameful as anything our legislature has ever done.

There’s an online link to the legislative history of the bill; six state representatives supported it on July 24th in the Committee on State Affairs and Homeland Security: Young, Pope-Roberts, Roys, Ballweg, Kleefisch and Knodl. To his credit, only Rep. Fred Kessler opposed it.

Over at the Wisconsin State Journal’s fine Four Lakes Politics Blog, Jason Stein quotes Rep. Kessler (D-Milwaukee) as declaring that “[t]his whole thing has almost a banana republic part to it.” (Kessler offered an amendment to make the names of successors publicly known.)

Kessler’s right — this bill did have the stench of a banana republic about it. This is no vulgar hovel, no disgusting place of rule in the name of practicality and expediency. Let Jauch go somewhere else for that, to a foul monarchy, petty dictatorship, or comandante’s regime.

One could scarcely disgrace himself more than to offer the bill; others’ demanding its withdrawal is the least one could expect.

New Wisconsin Bill Would Allow Secretly Designated Legislative Successors

Hard to believe, but true – the Wisconsin legislature is set to consider a bill that would allow Wisconsin legislators to compile a secret list of potential successors in the event of an attack on the state. Should legislators be killed, those from the secret list would serve in a re-constituted legislature.

The bill’s solution to the collapse of representative government in Wisconsin would be a secret, unrepresentative government.

(There is an amendment pending that would make the successor list public.

Every person in our legislature supporting a secret successor list – every last one – is unworthy of representing the people of Wisconsin.

For those who might think all of this a joke, or rumor, it’s not.

Here’s a link to the Wisconsin Assembly bill:

Assembly Bill 317.

More on the story is available at: New Wisconsin Bill Would Allow Secretly Designated Successors.