Early on after the introduction of the Budget Repair Bill, Governor Walker announced that he had received 8,000 emails an hour, all in support of the bill. Many of us were a little baffled by that, since, well, we had sent him emails during that time period, which were very definitely in opposition to the bill.
Luckily, we have an Open Records law in Wisconsin. And luckily, two media sources, the AP and the Isthmus (http://thedailypage.com/walker) recognized this, and asked for copies of all of those emails. And...nothing.
They pressed a lawsuit, and expanded the request to all emails received after February 11th: http://www.thedailypage.com/daily/article.php?article=32667. Soon after, the case was settled, with Governor Walker agreeing to supply the emails, and to pay the $7000 in legal fees (that's seven thousand, not seven million. this number was not estimated by the DOA).
Last week, the records were released: http://www.thedailypage.com/daily/article.php?article=32765
Today, some analysis is announced: http://host.madison.com/wsj/news/local/govt-and-politics/article_ca97c286-fe25-5074-8cb0-5f9a2c240df8.html
Basically, yes, the majority of emails are indeed in support of Walker (62%, compared to 32% opposed). And that makes some sense. Once there was public outcry about this bill (which happened very quickly), those who supported it were probably more likely to email Walker to express that, and those who felt less strongly, were not as likely to email. More interestingly, while the opposition to the bill was largely from Wisconsin (89%), nearly 1/3 of the support in favor of the bill was from outside of Wisconsin.
Pretty ironic, given that from the beginning, Walker has tried to characterize the opposition as "from other places," not the "taxpayers of Wisconsin."
And, most notably, these emails are just from the first week after the bill was announced: February 11-February 18. That's before the first Saturday rally.
The Isthmus also reports these findings at http://www.thedailypage.com/daily/article.php?article=32818&sid=59d97fee67d95e8cb041917441b934f2.
There is another finding: emails sent by state employees were...less in favor of the bill. Warning: Many of the cost-saving measures that are suggested in this article are downright offensive. Pro-union does not mean progressive, and quite frankly, even progressive doesn't mean supportive of social safety net programs, etc. http://host.madison.com/ct/news/local/govt-and-politics/article_ea754cc2-438e-11e0-819e-001cc4c002e0.html. And, also of note, many of us talk about how we think the deficit should be fixed, but I am noticing that often, that involves pointing out the ways that cutting the programs that we each know to be good, while claiming that other programs, which we know very little about, are clearly wasteful. Personal disclosure: I think Medicaid is good. I think childcare subsidies are good. I think land conservation is good. There are other things, which I think are bad. But I don't have nearly as good of a cost/benefit analysis of them. Because I don't care about them as much, I don't know as much. That's not good, but I am noticing that this isn't just me. And it's particularly shocking, at times, when it comes from people who are "on the same side".
Somewhat related, or at least, on the topic of Things The Government Claims, there have been many doubts cast on the accuracy of data released by the Department of Administration (DOA. Yes. Really.), ranging from their crowd estimates (66,000 on the biggest Saturday rally, as the police estimated 85,000-100,000: http://capaccess.blogspot.com/2011/03/capitol-crowd-estimate-at-400-p.html) to their description of damages to the Capitol ($7.5 million? Or perhaps, $350,000: http://www.jsonline.com/blogs/news/117340918.html, followed by http://www.thewheelerreport.com/releases/March11/0304/0304iupat.pdf - it's nice to have all these unions on our side). Most recently, a former staff person place doubt on just about everything coming from that office: http://www.thedailypage.com/isthmus/article.php?article=32774&sid=59d97fee67d95e8cb041917441b934f2
No comments:
Post a Comment