MJS Editorial Board: Expain Yourself!

OK, we all know the story about the public assistance call center, and how Milwaukee County Executive Scott Walker tried to sabotage it by refusing to fill the positions that were authorized and fully funded in the 2008 budget.

We all know that due to Walker's willful and malicious neglect, poor people were unnecessarily and improperly denied much-need assistance.

We also know that due to the poor performance caused by Walker, there is now a class action lawsuit against the state and the county.

The state, not wanting to have to defend or pay out on a big lawsuit that wasn't their fault, took actions to correct the matter.

With the County Board due to vote on the call center, even with the State initiating their takeover. They faced the daunting task of trying to figure out a way to fix the call center to prevent the take over, and to do it as fast as possible.

In light of the upcoming vote, the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel's Editorial Board dedicates not one, but two, full editorials to it. Both come down in favor of screwing the poor and screwing the taxpayers.

In one, they state, correctly, that the State takeover of income maintenance program services is a bad thing, and they urge the County Board to take measures to fix it ASAP. Dispersed throughout their editorial are factual errors, but they are so absurd that they are almost laughable.

The second editorial is more disconcerting. They actually try to advocate for the more irresponsible, the more costly and less productive plan. Namely, Walker's attempt to privatize the call center:

The Milwaukee County Board has an opportunity today to begin to address what everyone acknowledges is a train wreck at the county's public assistance call center. We think the best solution remains County Executive Scott Walker's proposal to hire a private agency and some University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee personnel to take over the center, and we hope the board votes for the plan today.

[...]

Walker argues that his plan will increase the number of calls the county handles by 87%, going from 13,300 calls per month, assuming a fully staffed call center by county employees, to 25,000 calls per month. The proposal would create a partnership with IMPACT, a private agency that also runs the separate 211 social services hotline for the county, and UWM to take over the call center for $2 million.

The system clearly is not functioning. One study found that out of a million calls placed every month, only about 100,000 callers get through to a worker. A federal lawsuit says clients in need aren't getting the benefits they deserve. Some who deserve benefits may have given up trying to get them because they can't get through to anyone.

The editorial board, once again, ignores the facts reported by their own paper and acts like a press release relay tool for Scott Walker.

Not once do they address the reason why the call center is failing (because then they would have to blame their hero, Walker, for failing to staff it). Not once do they say that the Board's plan would provide more workers for less money, thereby increasing efficiency.

When the County Board finally does the right thing, three months too late, and finally puts the privatization plan down for good, the editorial board feels compelled to lament the wise decision on their blog.

But perhaps they just don't understand. Sigh. I will try - for the umpteenth time - to put it in a way that even they can understand.

The call center is to take phone calls (hence the name "call center") from people needing to update their information, call to renew their benefits, or to check the status on their request for economic assistance. The call center has been failing for a long, long time, because there hasn't been enough workers to take all of these phone calls. Even though the County Board ratified a budget that fully funded 25 workers to be there, Walker has refused to fill those spots.

Now. Walker wants to partially privatize the call center. He wants to have a couple dozen people be paid to answer the phone and take a message. Then this glorified secretary would take the message to one of the only ten people that could actually do anything to help the people who called. The secretary then puts the message with the growing pile of other messages. The benefit is that someone is now answering the calls, even though their problems aren't being solved.

The County Board said that was silly, and wanted to have 30 county workers who could answer the call AND take care of the problem right away. And their plan would have saved taxpayers $42,000 when compared to Walker's plan.

So, now, I sincerely hope that the editorial board would be kind enough to explain, using rational, coherent, and factual statements, why Walker's plan is better. It's more expensive and does less for the people who need the help. How is that better?

You can either answer in the comments, email me, or put something on your own blog, but I really want to know how you think Walker's plan is better, and why anyone would think that you are really invested in what is the best for the community.

And while you're at it, since your paper recently was real busy slapping itself on its own back on what a great job it was doing with their investigative reporting, please tell us why your paper hasn't looked into all that missing money from the 717 fully funded, but unfilled positions. What did Scott Walker do with it?

They Know Not Of Which They Speak

Again, the editorial board at the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel shows that they are either completely obtuse to the goings on in Milwaukee County or that they are so far in the tank for Scott Walker that they do not care.

In this morning's editorial, they admonish the County Board and Walker for not working together in a more productive way. That is the closest they come to a rational sentence in the entire piece.

They try defend Walker's poor behavior, which was based on a grossly overestimated budget deficit:

Walker has to judge matters by the numbers he is given - and the early year numbers were bad, which was to be expected. He may have jumped the gun, and the frustration of county supervisors is understandable.

But Walker acted based on the numbers he had in front of him at the time; that's prudent in this economic climate - maybe even overly cautious - but it's not dishonest or in bad faith, as some supervisors have argued. While the numbers look better now, there is still uncertainty. Walker's office does say that he will rescind the 35-hour workweek order if other savings reduce the shortfall further.

Anyone that has ever done a budget realizes that the beginning of the fiscal year is always bad. This is especially true for the County. Much of the County's revenue comes in during the warmer months, when the golf courses, the pools, the zoo, and park pavilion and picnic area rentals start flowing in.

What Walker was doing would be the equivalent of someone starting out the year adding up their mortgage, taxes, projected energy costs, projected food costs, etc. and then saying they are in a deficit because they did not get all of the year's paychecks by March 31st. Obviously that is a ludicrous way to run a home or a governmental body.

They also try to argue that furloughs still may be the best answer to the remaining deficit projection by Walker's people. But they are forgetting two key things.

The first thing is that one cannot count on Walker for accurate numbers. From the newspaper earlier this week, we see this (emphasis mine)

Another estimate of Milwaukee County's finances released Monday shows a projected county budget shortfall of $4.4 million for 2009.

The figure is $10.5 million lower than the $14.9 million deficit figure Walker relied on to justify imposing the 35-hour workweek and other cuts. The shorter workweek, which amounts to a 12.5% pay cut for the last half of the year, has been challenged by the county's largest union.

The unpaid furloughs would save the county $4.5 million this year but are not included in the new estimate. The new budget shortfall figure was included in a report by Steven Kreklow, the county's budget administrator.

The editorial board apparently does not find it at all interesting or suspicious that in just two months, the County somehow miraculously found $10.4 million. For Walker's numbers to be that far off already shows that his staff is either incompetent and/or liars. Either way, it is hard to find fault with the County Board for not trusting Walker's numbers.

Also missing from the editorial board's thinking process is the fact that the county is still in negotiations with the unions. Based on the stunts that Walker pulled last time, it would not be a big jump to presume that settling the contract would solve this years problems and go a long way towards next years as well. As I wrote last week:

Settle the contract negotiations

This alone could cover the majority of the deficit, if not entirely, for the 2009 budget.

When it came time to negotiate the 2006-8 contract, Walker stalled then as well. After he finally dropped out of the 2006 gubernatorial primary, Doyle sent Dave Reimer (Walker's 2004 opponent for the county executive race) to act as a mediator. Not only did the contract end up being almost identical to the union's original offer, Walker ended up giving everyone a $250 signing bonus.

The county's number crunchers estimated that the county lost several millions of dollars in lost savings by the delay in the contract settlement. the savings came from a higher share of health care payments by the workers, as well as a protracted pay raise schedule.

Based on what I know of his behaviors in this go around, he did not learn from that lesson.

And for those who just may have an irrational hatred of the union, and don't think a mutually advantageous contract is possible, I would simply refer you to the story of the State of Pennsylvania and AFSCME Council 13 and other unions, in which an entire state's budget was helped and there were no furloughs.

All it takes is both sides to sit down and do some honest, good faith bargaining. I know AFSCME is ready and willing. Is Walker?

I guess that makes too much sense. Nor does it do enough to allow Walker to keep up his pretense of being a person competent to be county executive, much less governor.

But what really got me riled were these lines:

What's not needed is more bickering between the executive and the board. Nor is the answer a power grab by the County Board, as proposed this week by Supervisor Michael Mayo Sr.

What's needed instead is a board and an administration that work together to solve serious problems.

Is the editorial board really that far gone? Their own newspaper has been reporting for the past two weeks incident after incident in which Walker has stepped over the line, abused the power of his office, and showed a general disregard to the best interest of the County or its citizens. They can't even bring themselves to mention that Walker has spent the last week riding around the state campaigning (using illegal corporate contributions to do so).

Nor do they offer a solution to what the County Board should do regarding the fact that Walker and his staff have repeatedly been demonstratively and unarguably flat out lying to the Board about everything from the supposed deficit to the stimulus dollars to the annual budget proposals.

There is no reason why the County Board, or the citizens of Milwaukee, should have to tolerate continuously being fed false information

The editorial board also seems to conveniently forget the fact that Walker has already attempted an illegal power grab of his own in which he tried to set policies such as taxing toddlers and robbing the elderly. And it will be soon decided whether he illegally tried to impose a furlough and/or layoffs on the workers.

These continuously false representations of the truth and their constant pandering to Walker makes me wonder one thing: Why do I keep subscribing to them?

A Falsehood Wrapped In A Lie Wrapped In Deceit

Jud Loundsbury of Uppity Wisconsin found some amazing footage of Scott Walker interviewing with the Oshkosh Northwestern's editorial board. A key part of that footage includes this exchange:

Editorial Board Member: Before, we were talking about state employees contributing to their plan, paying their share of the pension plan. Collective bargaining come into that?
Walker: Yep (nodding yes)
Editorial Board Member: How do you get that negotiated and accepted by the state employee unions?
Walker: You still have to negotiate it. I did that at the county as well.

Loundsbury also edited the hour-long video to this:



Loundsbury's find was so notable that Dan Bice of the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel wrote about it.

Kudos and applause to Loundsbury for this big score.

Loundsbury goes on to point out what should be obvious, that while in the video, Walker stated that he was going to negotiate with the unions, but in the sad light of day, we all learned better when he dropped his "bomb" of the Budget Disrepair Bill on the state.

But I'm afraid that my esteemed colleague missed a couple, three things and made a glaring mistake, although it was one that most people probably would have made. In fact, of all the repostings and mentions of it, I hadn't seen anyone else catch it yet either.

One thing that should be emphasized to strengthen the argument that Walker indeed did not campaign on the union busting is Walker's own sworn testimony which he gave before a congressional committee last spring:



Greg Sargent at the Washington Post also hammered that point home.

One thing that Loundsbury and the rest has missed is that around the same time that Walker was meeting with the editorial board, just before the election, he was also contacting the unions, warning and threatening them to cease and desist in their legal efforts to reach a contract, which was already overdue. In hindsight, it's obvious that Walker did not want them to have a contract because that would have thwarted, or at least greatly delayed, his secret scheme to bust the unions.

But where my esteemed colleague went awry was by taking anything Walker says without sufficient skepticism and cynicism:

Walker then goes on to say that he has used furloughs as a bargaining tool at the county level and that "we'd approach a similar strategy for the state," but said that he was open to compromise, saying "we're not locked into saying it has to be exactly the same" and that if unions could provide alternative routes to saving money he would be willing to explore those ideas.

That line Walker used as the furloughs being a bargaining tool, in itself, is the dead giveaway for anyone who works or had worked for Milwaukee County.

For the last two years as Milwaukee County Executive, Walker never once sat down at the negotiating table and offered a contract. He would only make his demands known through the media, trying to gain popular opinion on his dictatorial ways, instead of negotiating anything in good faith.

Despite refusing to negotiate with the unions, he still included the concessions in his budget, thereby making it an illegal budget which would never be balanced:

This brings us to the big black hole that is found in both the Executive’s proposed budget and the Board’s amended version.

In Walker’s proposed budget, he is counting on some 16% pay cuts from union workers, as well as laying at least 200 workers. The Board’s amended version is less drastic, but still requires a considerable pay cut and the lay off of a couple dozen workers.

The expectation of concessions by the unions is completely understandable, and to be expected, especially when one looks at what has happened in other bodies of government such as the City of Milwaukee, Dane County and the State of Wisconsin and their respective unions.

However, terms of the contract between the unions and the County, as well as state and federal labor laws intervene with their plans. The County and AFSCME had reached a Tentative Agreement based on good faith bargaining. Through a series of poor choices, this Agreement was put on hold, and eventually denied by the Board as a whole.

The actions and statements made by Executive Walker, the County Board, and Supervisor Johnny Thomas basically constitute bad faith bargaining and prohibited practices, as defined by the contract and the law.

It is my understanding that AFSCME has already filed lawsuits against the Board and Supervisor Thomas, and other suits are being contemplated at this time.

It also, ironically puts the County in a bargaining disadvantage. Supervisor John Weishan, who sits on the Personnel Committee, pointed out that Walker’s own labor negotiating team admitted that Walker’s proposal has a zero chance of winning in arbitration. That means that as long as AFSCME did not propose anything unreasonable, the odds of the union winning an arbitration was all but guaranteed. To make things even more likely to fall in the union’s favor was the fact that most of all the other local governments had successfully reached negotiations with their unions offering modest raises, along with other concessions from the unions. Milwaukee County did the same thing with the nurses union, eroding the County’s position even further.

It is expected that due to this artificial budget and its faulty suppositions, that there would be anywhere from a $15 million to a $32 million deficit on January 1, 2010. It is further expected that Executive Walker will use this contrived deficit as a reason to call a fiscal emergency and lay off workers.

Walker did impose his furloughs, as many as 26 for one year for some workers (including yours truly)as a punitive measure for failing to concede to the demands he never even once put on the negotiations table.

But even the furloughs were illegal and now cash-strapped Milwaukee County has been ordered to pay back all the furlough time, which comes to millions of dollars, plus 12% interest compounded daily. For every day that the county delays in paying this bill, the taxpayers are getting pounded for some $30,000 in interest.

If someone knows the current Milwaukee County Executive, Chris Abele, tell him I've got a way for him to resolve this crisis without sticking it to the taxpayers.

In summary, even while he was telling the editorial board he was going to negotiate concessions from the workers, he was already threatening the unions in order for him to implement his plan to bust the unions. And he was completely dishonest when he made claims that he negotiated things with the unions in Milwaukee County. The truth is he was trying to extort things from the unions and using them as political pawns.

As a savvy politico once pointed out, Walker's refusal to negotiate with the unions wasn't a sign of a leader, but of a petty little man who had to resort to bullying in place of the leadership skills he lacked.

What Walker did wasn't simply bait and switch. What Walker committed was outright fraud.

Hey, David Haynes And The MJS Editorial Board, Some Apologies Are In Order

The most recent oped piece from the  Editorial Board of the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel has them singing a whole different tune than they have in the past two and a half weeks.  They are finally saying that there are some serious problems with Scott Walker's "Budget Disrepair Bill" and that it shouldn't pass in it's current form:

But no matter how deep the budget hole, Walker and his Republican allies in the Legislature were wrong to try to bust public-employee unions. Workers have a fundamental right to organize, even when it's inconvenient for the rest of us.

Walker's proposals would require an annual vote of members to recertify their union, ban governments from automatically deducting union dues from paychecks and allow public employees to opt out of paying dues and still remain members of a bargaining unit. Unions could negotiate wages but only up to the rate of inflation. That's not negotiating; it's dictating.< Even worse, the bill would apply the new rules unevenly. Police officers, firefighters, sheriff's deputies and state troopers would be exempt. With big cuts coming in state aid, municipalities must control labor costs, but exempting police and fire departments makes that nearly impossible. In Milwaukee, 65% of salaries and benefits flow to those two budget lines. The more radical of Walker's collective bargaining proposals should be killed. The others should cover all unions. Proposals that amount to policy should be stripped out. These include a provision to allow the Department of Administration to sell heating, cooling and power plants without bids and another that would give broad rule-making authority for the Medicaid program to the Department of Health Services. The bill also might imperil federal transit funding for some communities. A fix is needed for that as well.

They're still a far cry from being responsible to the community they are supposed to be advocating for, but it is still better than what they have written in the past.

When the would-be king issued his power-grabbing edict, the MJS Editorial Board thought it was "the right fight."  If anything, they argued that in some aspects, Walker did not go far enough.

They really should be apologizing to their readers for not taking a serious look at the bill before spouting off on how wonderful it is, especially when it's not wonderful at all.

And speaking of taking a serious look at the bill, it took the MJS Editorial Board more than two weeks to figure out that the bill might not be so good after all.  But they, like many Wisconsinites, wouldn't have had the time to actually look at the bill and see it in all of hits horror, if it weren't for the courageous and selfless acts of   the fourteen Democratic Senators that took off with nothing more than the clothes on their backs and fled to another state, all in order to slow things down and give us the chance to look at the thing.

However, the Editorial Board didn't see it that way.  They accused the Wisconsin 14 of having "a tantrum."  In a editorial piece that is so snarky, one would think that Patrick McIlheran had once again had snuck around and gotten unsupervised access to a keyboard, they went over the line in insulting some of the heroes of this whole unfortunate time.

Now that they've had a time to look at the bill because these men and women left town and slowed everything  down, they should not only apologize for their inappropriate sniping, but actually express their gratitude for the Senators' sacrifice.

On a side note, it's been two weeks since I've cancelled my subscription to the paper.  I thought it would be a major upset in my life.  I'm finding that I hardly even miss it.  And then the paper prints dreck like this and wonders why their circulations numbers are dropping almost as fast as Walker's approval numbers...

Scott Walker: Do As I Say, Not As I Do

Last week, Milwaukee County Executive Scott Walker had a major hissy fit about the County Board sending out an informational mailing regarding the sales tax referendum that will appear on the November 4 ballot.

The Milwaukee Journal Sentinel ran a story about Walker's outrage:

A planned mailing from the Milwaukee County Board to voters on the November sales tax referendum should be halted as inappropriate advocacy, County Executive Scott Walker said Wednesday.

[...]

Walker acknowledged the letter was within the law but said it was biased in favor of the sales tax increase proposal. County Board spokesman Harold Mester called the letter factual and neutral.

[...]

Walker called the mailing “outrageous.” He strongly opposes the sales tax increase and tried unsuccessfully to stop the referendum. Even though the letter may be technically legal, it still reads like propaganda aimed at persuading voters to support raising the sales tax, he said.

The very next day, the supposedly liberal editorial board of MSJ fell into line behind Walker with an editorial echoing Walker's outrage:

While the mailer apparently falls within the legal boundaries of what officials can do on referendums — state law prohibits them from advocating in a referendum, but it does allow for informational activities — the letter sends a distinct signal: The advisory referendum is a good idea. Just because “so, vote yes” isn’t explicitly written doesn’t mean it’s not there, in spirit and intent. That’s an inappropriate message for officials to send with taxpayer dollars.

[...]

Holloway argues that the mailing provides necessary information and that the County Board “should encourage voters to participate, regardless of their opinion.” He’s right, but the board shouldn’t advocate. We hope someone does step forward to get that useful information to the electorate. And we hope someone steps forward with the counterarguments for a vigorous debate. But none of the advocacy should be done with tax dollars.

[...]

But taxpayers shouldn’t be forced to pay for a mailing that seems to favor one argument over the other. The mailing comes too close to advocacy. It shouldn’t go out.

I wrote earlier this week that I thought it was questionable of the Board to take this action, but couldn't quite work up the outrage given some of the questionable actions of Walker, with his constant phoning in and emailing to talk shows like Charlie Sykes, Jay Webber, and Vicki McKenna.

But the real outrage is Walker's hypocrisy. While he is lambasting the County Board for wasting tax payer dollars on alleged advocacy regarding the sales tax referendum, he is doing the same damn thing.

On the official Milwaukee County website, Walker has his own page, which, again, is official property of Milwaukee County. A link on Walker's page leads one to another County website called Executive Updates, and is all full of Walker's newsletters. These newsletters are supposed to be informative and let the reader know of upcoming events, improvements to various County properties like the Zoo or the parks, and the such.

Walker's newsletter dated October 10, 2008 opens up to a two-page newsletter. The first page is all about Walker's outrage regarding the referendum and the Board's mailing.

In the left column is an editorial piece called "Message from County Executive
Walker" and it reads like one of his political press releases:

Supporters of the referendum to raise the sales tax by $130 million want to use our tax dollars to send an "informational" mailing out to the voters in Milwaukee County just weeks before the November 4th election.

Anyone can see that the "informational" letter being sent out to voters contains more than just the facts. It is clearly designed to sway voters to their position on the referendum question.

Worst of all, the very same taxpayers who will get stuck paying the bill on a $130 million tax increase (if the sales tax goes through) are the same people getting the
bill for the mailing and printing costs of the "informational" letter. All of this comes just weeks after the I asked all county departments to freeze travel and other
non-essential spending.

The Supervisors who are pushing this letter are the same ones who expect voters to believe that raising the sales tax will somehow lower our property taxes. It did not happen the last time the sales tax went up. In 1991, the County Board passed a sales tax with the promise of property tax relief. From 1992 to 2002, the tax levy went up 55%.

These are the facts but we are not going to use taxpayers funds to print them out and put them in a letter to voters.

Scott

P.S. Kudos to Supervisors Borkowski, Cesarz, Rice and Sanfelippo. They all rejected Chairman Holloway's request to send the mailing into their districts.

Good Lord, but if that doesn't sound like someone advocating against the referendum, I don't know what does. It is also chock full of half-truths and misinformation.

Walker doesn't mention that the County was having to increase taxes because the state legislature, of which he was a member at that time, kept short changing the County on mandated services. Much like he is griping about every year around budget time.

And for the truth about the referendum, you can visit the website for the Quality of Life Alliance by clicking here, or clicking on that big yellow icon in the sidebar.

The worst part is that he is doing this on an official County website, which was designed, supported and updated with the use of our tax dollars. For him to lambaste the Board for doing the exact same thing he does is the height of hypocrisy.

And if that wasn't enough, he continues in the next column, boasting about his press conference to express his faux and hypocritical hypocrisy:

...Walker pointed to Waukesha County businesses as the beneficiary of a sales tax increase in Milwaukee County. A new sales tax that is a full 1.5% higher than several of our neighbors - and the highest in the state - would create a tax island. At a time when the 2008 budget is tight, Walker asks why members of the County Board are spending funds on a campaign mailing to voters just before the November election.

Now, I am not a lawyer. Nor am I an expert on all the ins and outs of using governmental property for politicking. But if Walker and the MJS editorial board feel that the County Board's action, while perfectly legal, smacked to much of advocacy, what the heck are we supposed to make out of Walker's blatant use of County resources to advocate against the sales tax referendum?

To me it seems fairly obvious that if this doesn't run aground of the law, it should definitely be in the area of an ethics violation.

It is my understanding that this has been or is about to be referred to County District Attorney John Chisolm's office. It is also my understanding that members of the County Board have been made aware of Walker's misuse of County resources. I don't know if anything will come of this, but I will keep you, gentle reader, apprised of things as I learn of them.

If you are as angry at Walker's hypocrisy as I am, I encourage you to contact his office to express your anger. It also would be a good thing to let your County Supervisor know of your anger as well. You can find your Supervisor's name and contact information here.

And while we're at it, can we do that recall yet?

ADDENDUM: Not only does Walker use County property to expound his political points, but it is doubtful that Walker would have the necessary skill to produce these newsletters. The additional question would be then: Who did the work, and how were they paid? Was the author county employees? And if not, were tax payers monies used to pay whomever wrote and produced these "newsletters"?

MJS Editorial Board: Three Fails In Three Days

Don't they ever get tired of getting things totally wrong?

In Thursday morning's paper, the fine folks on the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel editorial Board had a piece about the state of the Bureau of Milwaukee Child Welfare and how it needed to be fixed. I pointed out that they were amiss on the point that, instead of lauding State Senator Alberta Darling (R-the nearest golf course), they should have been holding her responsible for her part in the death of all of these foster children, the most recent victim being Christopher Thomas.

Yesterday, they noticed my criticism, and put up a post on their blogsite, defending themselves. Unfortunately, they again failed to either see and/or acknowledge the point I was making.

In this morning's paper, they did it for a third time in as many days.

This time, they fail to support the poor in Milwaukee County. In their editorial piece, they correctly lament the state of the public assistance call center, but then they show that they've ignored their own paper's reporting and would rather believe Scott Walker's propaganda.

I've already written about the issue here and here, but I'll try it again in an effort to help them understand.

The public assistance call center is supposed to help people calling in to update information on their case, to check on the status of their case, or to ask for help in a multitude of different ways. Most of the calls require the worker to access a computer system to either update the information or even to just check on the status of a case. State law requires that the workers who have access to this computer system be public sector employees.

Currently, the county's budget has authorized and fully funded 25 positions for the call center. However, not all of these positions have been filled. In fact, the newspaper itself as reported that there are 717 positions throughout the county that are fully funded, but have not been filled.

This past week, the paper itself reported that there were only seven people of the allotted 25 positions working in the call center. Some of the absences could be attributed to people out sick or on vacation. But the great majority of it comes from Walker and his managers willfully failing to fill these positions in an obvious attempt at sabotaging it, in order to make it easier to privatize it. This has also cost the County money in lost grants due to the poor performance ratings.

Walker offered to fix the problem by not filling all 25 positions but by privatizing it. The number of workers would jump to 38. The catch is that 10 of the new workers would be from UW-Milwaukee. The other 28 would be from Impact, a private agency. That means only ten people, instead of 25, would actually be allowed to do the needed work or find the requested information. The other 28 people would only be answering the phone and taking messages that will require the 10 people to call them back for follow through.

In other words, the number of workers that could do the work will be 40% of what could be now. The rest would be a glorified answering service. This will do nothing to decrease the backlog, and will probably increase it, due to people calling back repeatedly when they don't get return calls. This will require the workers to either sort through the repetitive callers or to waste time calling the same person multiple times on the same issue. Furthermore, there would be no savings to the tax payer, and the other grants would probably still be lost.

The County Boards proposed fix to it would be to demand that Walker and his administrators fill all of the funded positions and five more on top of that. This would be there would be 30 workers who could answer the phones and have access to the computer system, taking care of the matter at hand immediately.

Let's review:

Currently, only 7 of 25 positions filled. Walker's solution would have 38 workers. Only ten of which could address the problem. The other 28 would be an answering service, but couldn't address the problem. The County Board's solution is to have 30 of 30 workers who could answer phones AND address issues immediately.

The MJS editorial board fails the poor with their misinformation. They refuse to hold Walker accountable for willfully failing to fill all 25 position, thereby withholding services to the County's poor and needy. Instead, they use some twisted logic in saying 10 people would somehow be able to be more productive than 30.

Methinks that if the editorial board was genuinely interested in making sure the poor receive the necessary services, they would have argued for having more people that could actually be able to answer the questions and resolve the issues as the better idea. Instead, they promote having less, thinking that will somehow make it better.

And then they wonder why their circulation numbers keep dropping.

First they laud Alberta Darling despite her lack of action or direction regarding foster care. Now they are promoting Walker's proposal to make the call center situation worse. I can't wait to see tomorrow's piece. Perhaps it will be one trying to justify the Iraq War. Maybe it will be about they believe homosexuals don't deserve equal rights. Or maybe it will be on why they think Gableman was correct in willfully telling lies about Louis Butler in the most recent race for the Supreme Court.

MJS Editorial Board: Consistently Inconsistent

Sometimes, one must wonder just what in the world goes on inside the offices of the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel's Editorial Board.  Are they doing drugs? Are they not taking their medicine?  Maybe the board had been sacked due to budget cuts and replaced with chimps?  Whatever the cause, they just have not been doing well at all.

A few weeks ago, I pointed out that even though they said that Scott Walker and his cabal were on the right track, they turned around and said it was the wrong thing to do.  They also criticized the Wisconsin 14 who left the state in order to slow down the Budget Disrepair Bill, even though this action allowed people, including the board, the chance to see what a mess it was.

Their inconsistency continued this week.

First they wrote that the state Republicans did all sorts of questionable, if not outright illegal, things when they passed this maleficent bill:

Reason has taken a holiday in Wisconsin politics. Civility along with it.

In their place is a nastiness rarely seen in a state that long has believed in good government as a guiding principle.

Republicans got what they wanted Thursday: a flawed and divisive bill that strips public employees of most of their ability to bargain collectively. Gov. Scott Walker's party may now reap the whirlwind.

[...]

Senate Republicans acted rashly Wednesday night when they hustled the bill through that body in a matter of minutes. Senators may have violated the state's open meetings law by their actions. But even if they did not, giving less than two hours' notice for a bill with such broad ramifications is irresponsible governance.

[...]

But Republicans should not have stripped unions of their other rights. And they should not have exempted their political friends in public safety unions. They could have broken the bill into parts and considered the most contentious elements separately. Instead, they put their own members at grave political risk, and they have touched off a conflict that will not end with one singularly acrimonious vote in the Assembly chamber. In fact, it is only beginning.

Yet, despite calling the Republicans' behavior as irresponsible and that they should never have stripped people of their rights, they go on to write that people should just live with the injustice, to be good little serfs and not fight for justice or their rights:

People are angry; they have flocked by the thousands to Madison to express their anger. 

They're upset with Democratic senators for leaving Madison or with Republican senators for trying to gut the collective bargaining rights of public employees. They want to throw the bums out at the earliest possible opportunity. The recall efforts target every senator eligible for recall.
We get all that. But none of it warrants a recall. 

Disagreements over policy matters should be decided at regularly scheduled elections, which happen every four years for senators. That's plenty of opportunity to voice your disapproval with an elected official.

Got it? According to the MJSEB, even though the Republicans were irresponsible and shouldn't have done what they did, they shouldn't be held accountable.

On a related note, it's now been four weeks since I cancelled my subscription to their paper.  I've also dropped the paper from up north which is also published by Journal Communications.  I haven't missed either one.

And I'm not alone.  In fact, there is a Facebook group urging people to drop their subscriptions  to the paper which apologetically endorsed Scott Walker even though they had been and still are writing about every reason Walker shouldn't be elected as dog catcher.

And the folks at MJS only have to their editorial board to thank for the drop in circulation.  After all, they've been telling us for months now on how we all need to cut back on our spending.  I, for one, things that by ending our subscriptions is the most appropriate place to start.

MJS Continues To Mislead Readers

Here we go again.

Ernst-Ulrich Franzen, a member of the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel's propagandists editorial board members has come out in favor of hamstringing the Milwaukee County Board. I know, what a surprise that the corporate media supports the plutocratic takeover of Milwaukee County, eh?

In his fantasy piece, Franzen pulls out all of the usual talking points with complete disregard to whether they are even accurate, much less honest.

After the lead in to the story and the unsurprising anti-Milwaukee stance, Franzen tries - and miserably fails - to justify his hateful stance:

The proposal to reduce the size of the board and its budget was blasted as a distraction by Milwaukee County Executive Chris Abele, and he's probably right. The reality is that downsizing the board - which we have supported - without reducing pay leaves supervisors with plenty of time to micromanage county operations as they do currently. Paying them on the basis of a part-time job - as is the case in every other county in Wisconsin - is the way to go. They still can exercise the appropriate check on the administration.

As I and many other people have repeatedly pointed out, Milwaukee County supervisors are paid at the same rate that the supervisors are paid - about a dollar per constituent. Furthermore, Milwaukee County has so much more than any other county that such a comparison is ridiculous. No other county even close to a million people, nor all of the amenities that Milwaukee County has. Such things as world class museums, a correctional facility outside of the county jail, a mental health complex, a transit and paratransit system of our caliber, an international airport and over a hundred parks. One also won't be able to find another county in the state with supervisory districts equivalent to a state representative's.

When the salaries of Milwaukee County Board supervisors were compared to other counties of a similar size, it was found that Milwaukee County supervisors were making about $20,000 a year less than the others.

The facts show that we are getting one helluva bargain with the county board just as it is.

As for Franzen's blatantly ludicrous notion that supervisors are "micromanaging" the county departments, I would point out what Kieth Crum, Treasurer for the Milwaukee Transit Riders Union, eloquently pointed out:

This is perhaps the most outrageous assertion made by the largely conservative, big business backers of downsizing. It’s also flatly untrue. On the contrary, the board has acted on its responsibility to look out for the best interests of Milwaukee County residents, even when that has meant going against the interests of the wealthy corporate elite that run Milwaukee. This includes standing up to the county executive when he proposes unsound ideas. The county board has a history of doing just that; making common sense budget adjustments and saving vital public services from the chopping block in the process.

Franzen isn't done though. He continued with his nonsense:

If the board is to be downsized, we'd favor a smaller number - nine strikes us as about right. Furthermore, cutting the budget by 40% also probably doesn't go far enough: The board currently has far more staffers than it needs.

So Franzen is saying that nine strikes him as about right. As I pointed out when Sheldon Lubar uttered the same inanity:

His idea of a perfect world is one where the Voter Fairness Act does not apply. His utopia is where minorities and poor people don't have equal or effective representation in government. After all, why should the pissant common person be allowed to have representation when it only serves to get in the way of their superiors, like Lubar.

Apparently Franzen is stricken with the same affliction where he thinks that minorities - or most people in general - deserve representative government. He'd rather see a government that only represents the plutocrats, the corporations and other special interests.

As for his claim that the board has "far more staffers than it needs," well, I have no clue what he is basing that on. I suspect he has no clue either.

But I do know that if he had his way, there would be no analysts to allow the board to make informed decisions. There would also be no clerks to record meetings or votes, so there would be no way to know if one's supervisor is representing them well or not.

Perhaps that is what Chris Abele and people like Franzen want. They saw two years ago that when people know the facts and know how they're getting screwed over, they get pretty mad. It's better to keep the people in the dark, including the supervisors, so they can go on with their profiteering in peace.

To sum it all up, I again point the gentle reader to Crum, who wrote:

With the crises that Milwaukee County is facing right now, including the potential for a 30% cut to transit, decrepit parks, unemployment, poverty, homelessness and racial inequality, what we need from state level is a fair shake financially not attacks on our ability to govern ourselves. As Milwaukee County residents and bus riders, we believe that it’s time for the state government to take its hands off our county board and collaborate to help us start improving Milwaukee for everyone before it’s too late.

Indeed.

I would add only that Franzen is as pitiful as his boss, David Haynes, who also has trouble being honest with the readers. I'd question why anyone would buy that paper anymore, but that's like asking why anyone watches Fox News.

Life is much easier for some when they live in an echo chamber that only supports their bigotry and hatred rather than be a member of society.

MJS Advocates For Totalitarianism

The Milwaukee Journal Sentinel has one of the most irresponsible and clueless editorials I have ever seen in this morning's paper. In said editorial, they are calling on the state to limit, if not outright eliminate, the peoples' voice:

Wisconsin voters have had the power to go over the heads of their local governments for more than a century now through the use of direct-legislation referendums. Several movements over the past year suggest that it's time state legislators take a look at the law to see if it can be tightened or perhaps even revoked.

They list off some examples on why they feel that the public shouldn't be allowed to have any say in matters.

Their first example is the paid sick leave ordinance that was passed by the public, but later overturned in court when special interests, including Journal Communications CEO Steve Smith, filed a lawsuit against it. They claim it was bad for business, but given recent news, with many schools closing temporarily due to the flu, causing parents to chose between missing work (and pay) or being neglectful of their children, I wonder which is worse.

They also cite the recent stories of the citizens in Jackson and Pewaukee rising up in outrage when their elected leaders tried to sacrifice public safety over money. Apparently, the Editorial Board doesn't recognize the fact that some people are willing to sacrifice a few dollars in order to have public safety.

What I found particularly outrageous was at the end of their editorial piece:

But public officials shouldn't have to work under such threats if they're just doing their jobs. Disagreement with an official over one issue is not - most of the time - sufficient reason to recall the official or hamstring government with direct-legislation ordinances.

Citizens still have plenty of recourse to make their will known: There are advisory referendums, binding referendums, complaining to local officials, talking to officials and, of course, regular elections. If they don't like what officials are doing, they can boot them out of office. In the meantime, they should let those officials do their jobs.

While those options are indeed valid, there are also times when the public doesn't have the luxury of waiting until the next election, or taking other actions that can and all too often are ignored by elected officials who have their own agenda (like getting elected governor). The public can do and should do what they feel is necessary to prevent irreparable harm from being done to their community.

It is not up to the Editorial Board, or to special interest groups (like the Bradley Foundation or their lackeys) to determine what happens in a community. It is up to the people that live, work and vote in those communities. For the Editorial Board to state otherwise only shows their arrogance and contempt for the public.

See also xoff's piece at Uppity Wisconsin for another take on this issue.

MJS, David Haynes Still Can't Be Honest About Walkergate

The editorial board of the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, led by David Haynes, finally got around to addressing the Walkergate story...sort of.

They have two major flaws with their editorial.

One is the part where they wrote this:

Among the unanswered questions: Has the 2½-year-old John Doe investigation run its course? If not, where might it go from here? The district attorney isn't saying. So far, four people have been convicted.

While there may be nothing illegal about any of what Landgraf says happened, the alleged activities inside the courthouse are the antithesis of good government. And they appear to violate Walker's pledge to separate his work as county executive from the campaign.

Do you see their contradictory statements?

First, they acknowledge that four people, including Darlene Wink and Kelly Rindfleisch, have been convicted. In the next sentence, they say there might not be anything illegal about what happened.

Excuse me, but if it weren't illegal, people wouldn't have been arrested, tried and convicted. Duh! Obviously, what they did was indeed and most emphatically illegal.

The other major problem throughout their editorial can be exemplified by their last paragraph:

We have no idea if there is more here than meets the eye. But what's clear from the emails is that Walker's campaign staff was helping to manage county government for the benefit of only one citizen - Scott Walker. How is that acceptable conduct?

I'm sure the gentle reader has noted that Haynes and company refers to Walker's campaign staff. However, they omit the fact that Walker was an active player in these emails and media group.

They include Walker's name in the list of the members of Walker's "Campaign Group." So why did they not include his role in the fact that the campaign was running the county, but rather blame just his staff? The only logical conclusion is that they omitted it intentionally to deliberately mislead their readers by downplaying Walker's role in this.

Perhaps Haynes and the rest of the editorial board should also be reminded of this statement from Walker:

"Anything that happens in the county, the buck stops with me."

Apparently that doesn't hold true to illegal campaigning, either by Walker or the editorial board.

I won't pretend to know what their motivation for lying to their readers is. It could be because they don't want to eat crow after endorsing Walker twice. It could be that they are being good little corporate media serfs. Or it could be something else entirely.

What I find disconcerting is that, even though they've had a significant drop in subscribers over recent years, there are way too many people who rely on the paper as their only news source. These people are unaware that they are being lied to on a daily basis.

I can't help but wonder if the paper would be honest and objective in their reports and editorials, whether Walker would have even remained in office as county executive, much less ever see the governor's mansion as anything but a tourist.

But to be fair, I have to give Haynes and his colleagues credit on one thing.

Even though their representation of the story was false and misleading, at least they admitted its existence. If someone relied on one of the other propagandists, like Brian Sikma, Owen Robinson, James Wigderson, et alia, for their news, they wouldn't even know that Walkergate existed.

MJS Editorial Board: Failure Number Four And It's A Doozy

What a difference a few hours make. I noticed that this morning's paper has two items about the foster care system, which are different that what I just wrote about last night.

One is the article. Instead of it being Crocker Stephenson, who wrote the article I linked to in last night's post, today's piece is a collaboration between Gina Barton and Meg Kissinger. The stories are fairly much the same, but with two additions to the new one. One is that they add some meat and some emphasis to the part of the story of how La Causa was cutting corners and how this led up the system's failure.

The second part is a little more interesting:

Bringing nurses into the foster care system is one way to ensure other children don't suffer as Christopher and his sister did, said Reggie Bicha, secretary of the state's Department of Children and Families. After all the youngest foster children have been examined, nurses will examine the 4- and 5-year-olds in the system.

"We will see each of those kids and make sure that they are safe," Bicha said.

The nurses will likely be hired and begin their work early next year. In addition, caseworkers will be required to double the number of home visits they make for children under 3 - from once a month to twice a month.

Could this be the review by Children's Hospital and Health System that was referred to in the story by Stephenson? Wouldn't that be just fabulous. The State investigates the State, and the private agency can now investigate the private agency. Can you spell cover up?

Add to that the nurse thing is not a new idea. When the County had control over the system, public health nurses were standard protocol. When the Bureau took over, the nurses were deemed to be too expensive and not necessary. So now we are paying tens of millions of dollars extra in tax monies to have the same system we had before, but only with extra layers of administration to suck up dollars instead of it actually providing services.

The other piece in this morning's paper is the editorial on the matter. The board falls all over itself in praising Bicha and the Bureau for reinventing the wheel at a higher price to taxpayers, and for doing exactly has I said they would two weeks ago, which was a bunch of nothing. Just like they did in the previous two editorials on the subject, the board fails to look in their own archives to see that nothing really has changed.

When I first started in child welfare, I had to go through six weeks of classroom training before I looked at a live case. I also had to go through a week of training just to learn the state statutes regarding child welfare and another several weeks of shadowing experienced workers before I was allowed to work my caseload, and then it was under careful supervision. In that training, we were taught my medical professionals on what all the different signs of abuse were, how to recognize them, how they were caused, and that once we saw these telltale signs, we needed to get the child to the doctor immediately for a formal diagnosis and treatment.

Apparently, training is too expensive, or they have less respect for their employees. I base that on this paragraph from the editorial (emphasis mine):

Officials overseeing the Bureau of Milwaukee Child Welfare told the Editorial Board Friday that, as a result of the death, it is instituting sweeping reforms to prevent recurrence of this kind of tragedy. This includes having every child age 3 and under in foster care evaluated by a nurse during home visits. Social workers are not medical professionals and can miss the red flags of physical abuse.

Guess the system is not all that improved after all. At least it doesn't seem that way to anyone with knowledge on the history of the system, or someone that can do some basic investigation.

The board's summary paragraphs highlight why the system continues to get away with not doing anything to actually fix the system, but just offering placebos of the usual rhetoric:

Bicha said other contractors will be similarly reviewed. But perhaps the best news Friday was the added resources the agency is now committing to home visits and to keeping foster children safe.

Bicha argued that the system is full of hard-working people, dedicated to ensuring that the state's most vulnerable children have safe homes. We agree. Error or negligence that contributes to the death of one child is one death too many.

The agency's response to this death is reasonable, measured - and needed. Now the task is to make sure no one shrinks from this commitment.

Let's keep this in mind when the next foster child is severely abused or killed while under the BMCW's supervision. Nothing of substance has changed, except for the addition of what the county had already been providing. We'll see what these public watchdogs have to say then.

Both MJS Editorial Board, Scott Walker On Wrong Track

The other day, the Editorial Board of the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel said that Scott Walker was on "the right track" regarding his desire to privatize the state's economic development division. Leaving the whole fallacy regarding privatization alone for the nonce, let's look at this part:

The new agency would focus on making it easier for business to grow in Wisconsin. Other states, such as Indiana and Michigan, have done something similar, providing good models for Wisconsin to follow. This new agency must be transparent, especially in revealing how public money is spent. The Indiana version appears to be less open than Wisconsin's Commerce Department.

Really?

Thanks to the tip from a faithful reader, we learn that the good folks in Indiana are having a lot of issue regarding their system, including inflated numbers and secretive contracts. Basically, according to the report, it's a corrupt and inept system that has run amok and people are getting very angry about the whole mess.

And this is the MJS Editorial Board wants for Wisconsin?

This must be their biggest blunder since they endorsed Scott Walker.

Brewtown Gumshoe has more on how bad this editorial is.

The Walker Apologist Board At MJS

Well, I can't say that the Walker Apologist Board at the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel didn't warn us. The WAB, aka Editorial Board, did say that they were going to opine about the state takeover of Milwaukee County's Income Maintenance program.

Their first really offensive line is this:

There is no doubt that the county has failed in its responsibility in these programs, to the discredit of both the county executive and the board, but the state simply has not offered a better solution.

Excuse me, but WTF? As I pointed out a gazillion and a half times before, the Board gave Walker the resources he needed to run the program. The Board sets the policy, and what they put forth was that the call center should have 30 workers. Walker's job was to implement that policy, something which he willfully failed to do by putting less than a third of that number in there.

The Board took Corey Hoze, then director of DHHS to task many times to fill those spots, but Walker wouldn't let him. The only way the Board could be faulted in this would be blaming them for not suing Walker for failure to execute his duties with even a modicum of competence.

The state's solution is to fully staff the center. To do so, they used numbers that Walker's administration gave them. If you really wanted to blame someone for that, again it's Walker.

The very next line in their apology, er, I mean, editorial piece, should get the teabaggers out to MJS's doorstep (emphasis theirs):

As we argued when the state made its takeover announcement, the state should either take over the programs and pay for them, or it should give the county the resources it needs to do the job.

In other words, the WAB is saying that the State should stick it to all of the taxpayers in the state, even though there were already enough funds to have done the job adequately.

In retrospect, I can't say that I am surprised by the WAB's position in this matter. After all, they are the same people that think Walker is honest and has principles, despite all of his obfuscation, hypocrisy and outright lies regarding the stimulus dollars, St. Michael's Hospital and whether his budgets are balanced, to name but a few.

The only thing I'm not sure about is which will come first: Walker letting the cat out of the cellophane bag by officially announcing his candidacy for governor or their endorsement of him in that race.

Milwaukee County's Romper Room

With his bid to grab all the power in Milwaukee County not gaining much traction, Chris Abele is trying to stir up controversy wherever he can.

For those unfamiliar with the dysfunctional government here in Milwaukee County, let me break it down for you.

Last year, Abele slashed the Sheriff's Office's budget and force him to lay off nearly 50 deputies.  Abele was so adamant about the deputies getting laid off, he sued the Sheriff to make sure it happened.  Ironically, due to massive retirements, most of the deputies were hired back, after suing the Sheriff's Office to get him to do the right thing.

Abele's attack on his budget caused the Sheriff to start sniping at Abele.  Meanwhile, he's never like the Board much either and regularly takes pot shots at them individually and as a whole, regardless of the topic.  He did this mostly to maintain his Tea Party credentials.

The Board has been doing what it's supposed to be doing in providing a balance to Abele's madness and trying to be the adults in the courthouse.  They had the audacity to tell Abele no on some of his spendthrift schemes.  They also had the nerve to call for an audit of Clarke's office, which revealed all sorts of problems, including Clarke using taxpayer money for a personal gym.

And for this, they're getting attacked on both sides from these two immature, egomaniacal, power-hungry fools.

But Bice's article on Abele's gossip mongering - and the fallout from it - perfectly illustrates the mess we're in here in Milwaukee County.

First we have Conway, Abele's spokesman, spreading the baseless rumor, which he and the other Abele minions have been spreading on Twitter and Facebook for days*:

An Abele staffer said Sunday that he can't remember the last time the sheriff sat on the sidelines on a major debate. Abele is strongly supporting the Sanfelippo plan.

"Considering the sheriff's track record of sharing his opinions with every reporter, talk show host and extremist with a microphone, I'm surprised he has not weighed in on this issue," said Brendan Conway, spokesman for Abele.

Conway, though, said he believes there's a reason for the reticence.

Late last year, the County Board overwhelmingly overrode Abele's plan to pay the Milwaukee Police Department to patrol the lakefront and other county parks. The move restored 27 deputy jobs that otherwise would have been eliminated from Clarke's staff.

The Abele aide suggested that Clarke and Milwaukee County Board Chairwoman Marina Dimitrijevic - also no fan of Abele - have joined forces "to protect each other." Most supervisors, Conway noted, have zipped their lips over Clarke's use of tax dollars to pay for ads urging citizens to arm themselves and his decision to seek a graduate degree from a California program.

"It seems an unlikely coincidence, especially since both used to put out news releases regularly blasting each other," Conway said.

No proof. No examples. Just innuendo. Of course, that's par for the course for Abele's office. They're the ones who falsely accused former Supervisor Johnny Thomas of taking bribes.

If Abele was looking at getting a rise out of Clarke, he succeeded. Just not in the way he intended.

Clarke responded Sunday evening, on the official Sheriff's Office Facebook page*:

County Executive Abele reveals his true motives. Read the following email from Abele's office to MJS columnist Dan Bice about the bill on County Board size and pay. The email reveals a personal vendetta against the sheriff:

Per your questions about the sheriff.

Considering the Sheriff's track record of sharing his opinions with every reporter, talk show host and extremist with a microphone I'm surprised he has not weighed in on this issue. If the Sheriff wants to support more bureaucracy, unnecessary spending of taxpayer money and go against the will of the voters that's his choice. County Executive Abele supports this reform bill because it will save millions of dollars, make Milwaukee County government more efficient and more accountable to taxpayers.

As to the why he seems so quiet I can only speculate but it seems the Sheriff and Chairwoman Dimitrijevic have come to some agreement to protect each other. The Board gave Clarke $3.3 million more in his budget this year by killing the money saving City/County Parks Patrol Plan that had the support of Mayor Barrett, most alderman, MPD and the vast majority (if not all) of the mayors, village presidents and police chiefs across the county. Now Supervisors are noticeably quiet as Clarke spends taxpayer money on radio ads and spends months out of state. It seems an unlikely coincidence, especially since both used to put out press releases regularly blasting each other. (Examples available upon request but I'm sure you've seen them.)

As an aside, when you say the sheriff seems to really dislike the county executive I will point out that the sheriff seems to really dislike everyone? He has regularly and publicly criticized the mayor, the police chief, the aldermen, the supervisors, the DA, the Chief Judge (a favorite target), and even the JS Editorial board recently. Who DOES the sheriff like?

OK, first of all, it is rather inappropriate for Clarke to use an official county page for his personal rants. I'm not sure, but it might even be illegal, depending on whether one could define this as a political statement.

Secondly, I fail to see any "personal vendetta." All I see is Abele using Clarke as a means to get a dig at the County Board. Which, by the way, wouldn't be the first time. When Clarke came out with his asinine ad advocating that everyone should go out and get a gun, Abele and his crew tried to claim that the Board was too quiet about that. The problem with that is the fact that Supervisor John Weishan did speak out rather forcefully against that foolishness. Does Abele really need all eighteen supervisors to say the same thing before it sinks in his skull?

But I digress.

As for the Board's reaction, Bice's article quotes Chairwoman Marina Dimitrijevic:

For her part, Dimitrijevic on Sunday accused Conway of reaching a new low.

"This is a wild, irresponsible speculation," Dimitrijevic said. "The people of Milwaukee County deserve better, and I will not stoop to his level and respond."

Holy smokes! There's an adult is in the room!

So we have Abele and his crew sneaking around spreading lies and innuendo and stabbing people in the back.  Even the ones they called friends.  All because the Board stood up for the citizens and the taxpayers of the county by telling him no.  Not only does that show a severe lack of leadership, it shows an even greater lack of character on Abele's part.

We also have Sheriff David "Teahadist" Clarke, who is prone to temper tantrums at the drop of his cowboy hat.  He has a history of mismanagement of both staff and finances and has been tied to more than one scandal.  Heck, the Sheriff's spokeswoman is Fran McLaughlin of Walkergate fame.  Just like Abele, Clarke suffers a great deficiency in both leadership skills and personal character.

Yet, somehow, we're supposed to believe that the County Board - the only ones that are going out and listening to their constituents instead of telling them what to think - are the bad guys.  I have a very hard time doing that, since it's pretty obvious that the County Board - or at least the majority of them - are the only adults in this entire situation.

Oh, and by the way, since Abele likes to use Clarke as a weapon against the Board, I feel compelled to point out his hypocrisy.

It was the Board who pushed for the authority over the House of Corrections be transferred from Clarke to Abele because of the bad job Clarke was doing.  Abele vetoed this.  The Board overrode his veto.  Now, Abele is just sitting on his hands due to a lawsuit filed by Clarke.

Apparently, given his resistance to taking over the correctional facility, Abele likes the job that Clarke is doing, even with the excessive overtime and scandals.

But when Clarke loses the lawsuit, that will leave Abele flat-footed with no one to take over.  And guess who gets to pay for all of this folderol.  Here's a hint: It's not Abele or Clarke.

Y'know, it's growing increasingly obvious if we replace both Abele and Clarke, we will have resolved 85-90% of the county's problems.

And we wouldn't have to build a giant romper room for Abele and Clarke to have their tantrums in.


*I have screencaps of these just in case they decide to get smart and try to delete them.

MJS Editorial Board Fails To Support Foster Children

The Milwaukee Journal Sentinel's editorial board sounded off on the murder of Christopher L. Thomas in this morning's paper. Overall, they did fairly well. But not surprisingly, they came up short when it came to putting all of the pieces together.

The editorial starts out well:

The tragic case of 13-month-old Christopher L. Thomas Jr. - who police say died at the hands of his aunt while in foster care - has taken on Orwellian overtones. As protesters outside a Bureau of Milwaukee Child Welfare office demanded Wednesday, the bureau must be held accountable in Christopher's death.

That means state officials in Milwaukee need to respond to the public's outrage and demand for answers. In particular, Denise Revels Robinson, bureau director, has to stop stonewalling.

So far, so good. In the third paragraph, however, they show their cluelessness on the whole situation (emphasis mine):

Madison officials have responded to questions, but attempts to reach Robinson by the Journal Sentinel's Crocker Stephenson, who has led the reporting on this story, continue to be met with silence. Gov. Jim Doyle and the state Legislature need to get involved - as state Sen. Alberta Darling (R-River Hills) already has - to make sure that the bureau starts talking, is held accountable and changes its ways to lessen the odds that this will happen again.

Sigh.

They must not even read their own paper. As I stated over a year ago, the system is screwed up to the point that it will be damn difficult to get it back to a functional program again. In that post, I talked of one of the many, many shortcomings of the child welfare system. Namely, the refusal of the state to adequately support foster parents. And in that same post, I cited a couple of paragraphs from this MJS article, noting that Darling is on the oversight committee.

I'm starting to feel like a broken record, or to be more up-to-date, a scratched CD, but Darling has NOT stepped up to fix anything. She created this mess. She was supposedly overseeing it for the past ten years. And just like Denise Revels Robinson has repeatedly done every time a foster child is killed, Darling wrings her hands, states that some thing has to be done to fix the system, and then crawls back to whatever cave she lives in until the next time she feels there's a chance to get some publicity.

Can anyone tell me just what in the world Darling has supposedly done for the foster children in Milwaukee County in the past ten years? I can not think of one substantial thing that she has done. She says that foster parents deserve better pay, but then votes down any chance for that to happen. She says that the kids need services like therapy and medical care, but then refuses to provide funding for this to happen. The list goes on and on. She just provides lip service, but nothing of substance.

And before commenter Dan or Dad29 have a chance, I will say this: Doyle is just as responsible. While he does not micromanage every office of every state department or division or bureau, he must have heard about this story by now. I find his silence to be disheartening and very disappointing.

But Doyle is not the one on the advisory panel having direct oversight of the Bureau. Darling is that one. And Doyle is not the one who is seeking every opportunity to get some face time on TV or in the papers to grandstand the issue. Darling is that one too.

To go after Revels Robinson, and not Darling, is akin to blaming the helmsman of the Titanic for hitting the iceberg, but exonerating the captain who had ordered the reckless behavior in the first place.

For the editorial board to give kudos to Darling for her abject failure to do her job, and even more so, for her hypocrisy, is absolutely disgusting.

All this shows is that the powers that be at MJS are not really the liberals that the right wants us to believe or that they don't have one whit of understanding of what's really going on or both.

For what it's worth, I do want to commend Journal Sentinel reporter Crocker Stephenson for his diligent efforts to get some answers regarding Christopher's tragic death.

Smalley's Tell

By Jeff Simpson

A tell in poker is a change in a player's behavior or demeanor that is claimed by some to give clues to that player's assessment of their hand. A player gains an advantage if they observe and understand the meaning of another player's tell, particularly if the tell is unconscious and reliable. Sometimes a player may fake a tell, hoping to induce their opponents to make poor judgments in response to the false tell. More often, people try to avoid giving out a tell, by maintaining a poker face regardless of how strong or weak their hand is.

John Smalley is the editor of the Wisconsin State Journal and he likes to appear objective.  Yesterday he wrote an article where he equatedthe ridiculousness of the whole budget process as equal to both parties.  While on its face it is a claim that is laughable enough, then he gives his right wing tell(see if you can spot it):

Well, in reality, it was four actual cooks (Republican leaders who control the budget process) and two cooks-in-waiting (the Democrats who were shut out of the process).

All four of the Republicans who visited — Assembly Speaker Robin Vos, Senate Majority Leader Scott Fitzgerald, Rep. John Nygren and Sen. Alberta Darling — and both of the Democrats — Assembly Minority Leader Peter Barca and Rep. Sandy Pasch — are smart, compassionate, dedicated public servants.

Which, given the decent, well-meaning people running both parties, makes it all the more maddening that the creation of the state budget is an ugly mess of partisanship at its worst.
As an editorial board, we like a lot of what’s in the budget. And we scratch our heads and wonder about plenty of other parts of the budget.

In essentially back-to-back visits with the top minds and leadership of both parties, our editorial board was left with one lingering question: What the heck is going on up there?
The Republicans tout tax relief for everyone and increased spending in K-12 education. Those both seem like good ideas.

The Democrats counter that the tax relief is rigged to help only the wealthy (not exactly true) and the school funding increases are paltry crumbs compared to the big cuts two years ago (mostly true).

 While some would think it is this: 

Which, given the decent, well-meaning people running both parties, makes it all the more maddening that the creation of the state budget is an ugly mess of partisanship at its worst.

While it is immensely inaccurate because everyone in the state knows that the dems did not have a say, beyond the kringle, in the whole budget.  This "partisanship at its worse" can be layed at the feet of one and only one party!   However this is not it - it is right here where he shows his immense bias:

In essentially back-to-back visits with the top minds and leadership of both parties, our editorial board was left with one lingering question: What the heck is going on up there?
The Republicans tout tax relief for everyone and increased spending in K-12 education. Those both seem like good ideas.

The Democrats counter that the tax relief is rigged to help only the wealthy (not exactly true) and the school funding increases are paltry crumbs compared to the big cuts two years ago (mostly true).

Yes the supposed fact checking, only seems to follow democrat claims.  I wonder why that is?

Let me help Mr. Smalley balance his article out, because maybe, as a member of the media, he realizes that any claim a member of the republican party in Wisconsin makes is blatantly false!  

 Republicans tout tax relief for everyone - (mostly false) and increased spending in K-12 education(false - really false - pants on fire false)!  

The Walkersha Journal Sentinel

Scott Walker must have sent out a plea for help to his good buddies that are on the editorial board at the local paper.

It would make sense that he is starting to feel the heat from the County Board, which proved that he is flat out lying about the county budget in order to make a power grab. There is also a growing number of bloggers, from around the state, including yours truly of course, that are dumping on his poor management skills. And he always has the hanging sword of Mark Neumann's awaited candidacy hovering above him.

So, his buddies at the Walkersha Journal Sentinel have responded to the best of their ability. They put up an outrageous editorial in the morning paper, in which they apologize for Walker's attempted power grab without once giving consideration to the people, not just the workers, that will be harmed by Walker's attempts to destroy the county from within.

What is interesting about their editorial is this bit:

Walker was not legally required to share the information about the layoffs with the board. And his argument to us last week that the administration "needed certainty" and "had to have options" once the union said it would challenge the furlough makes sense.

No where do the Walker apologists indicate that they talked to any of the County Board Supervisors, to the union, or anyone else. Hardly an unbiased look at the situation, since most intellectually honest individuals realize the importance of hearing ALL sides of a story before coming down in favor of any sort of position.

They follow this up with a post on their blog in which they echo Walker's feeble talking point about the county grounds sale proceeds not coming in in time to help the 2009 budget. What they don't mention is that even if one were to concede the point of the $5 million, that would make the projected deficit at $5.65 million. That is only one third of one percent of the total budget, and still does not constitute a fiscal crisis.

Furthermore, it in no way justifies the illegal power grab by Walker. It is just an open attempt to take complete control and wipe out any type of resistance that could trip up his run for governor. Too bad for Walker that it won't work.

And of course, trailing the pack is little Preview McIlheran, doing what he does best: Echoing everyone else. But remember, Patrick works hard for his money. (Nudge, nudge, wink, wink.)

All in all, it is another disappointment from the editorial staff, one in a list of many, including their failure to support the foster kids.

But then again, what can one expect from a group that would put up an editorial like the one for Wednesday paper, cheering the killing of the rightfully voted in sick paid leave, without a full disclosure on what their special interest in the matter is.