This week, the Assembly passed much needed
reforms to the John Doe process, campaign finance laws, and
Government Accountability Board (GAB).
John Doe
SB 43, authored by
Representative David Craig
(R-Big Bend) and
Senator Tom Tiffany (R-Hazelhurst), was signed
into law today by Governor Walker as
2015 Wisconsin Act 64. This legislation is a
victory for the first amendment right to free speech, the
families who had to endure terrifying experiences of law
enforcement raiding their homes, and witnesses who had gag
orders placed on them so they could not speak about the
proceedings. These reforms come after the State Supreme Court
halted a notable John Doe investigation by concluding that the
“special prosecutor’s legal theory is unsupported in either
reason or law” and Judge John Easterbrook of the 7th Circuit
Court of Appeals said that a “gag order” on witnesses is
“screamingly unconstitutional”.
I took an oath of office to uphold the Constitution, and when
this is the response from our judges, the legislature has a
responsibility to act to protect the constitutional rights of
all who are involved in the case, and to promote transparency. I
was a co-sponsor of this legislation and I voted in favor of
it. The vote was
61-36.
This bill allows John Doe investigations to
continue with some reasonable changes:
• Specifies the types of crimes that may be investigated under a
John Doe proceeding
• Judges must currently be serving instead of using reserve
judges
• The bill specifies when proceedings may be conducted in
secrecy and who the secrecy order may apply to
• Places a 6 month time limit on investigations, unless a
majority of judicial administrative district chief judges find
good cause to extend the time limit
• Limits the investigation to what was contained in the original
request, unless a majority of judicial administrative district
chief judges vote to expand the scope
• The judge conducting the proceeding must order notice to all
persons who have an interest in property seized during the
proceedings
• Records that reflect the cost of a John Doe proceeding are
subject to Open Records
Campaign Finance
I also voted in favor
of
AB 387, authored by
Speaker Robin Vos (R-Rochester) and
Senator Scott Fitzgerald
(R-Juneau), to reform our campaign finance laws. This bill
passed on a unanimous vote,
61-0, since the Democrats shirked
their legislative duty and recused themselves from the vote.
State statute 19.46(3) is clear that public officials are
not prohibited from taking a vote on this type of bill. Yet, Democrats didn't recuse themselves
in committee and they voted on similar legislation in the
past session.
Chapter
11, which is the state law regulating campaign finance, has not
had a major revision since 1973. Several court cases have
addressed campaign finance laws, and we have not evolved with
the courts. Even if you disagree with these court decisions,
they are still the law of the land and the legislature must
respond accordingly.
The goal of this legislation is twofold: make the laws
regulating express advocacy and issue advocacy clear, and to
bring money into the light of day where it is disclosed and
transparent. For more information on the bill and definitions of
express advocacy vs. issue advocacy,
click here.
Highlights of the bill include:
• Maintains prohibition of corporate money going to candidates • Brings Wisconsin’s campaign finance laws in line with recent
court decisions • Clearly indicates the difference between express advocacy and
issue advocacy • Doubles contribution limits that have not been updated since
1973 (if contribution limits were increased by the rate of
inflation, then they would be 5x larger than the current limit) • Increases the number of financial reports that Assembly
candidates must file to 6 times during even years and quarterly
during odd years
GAB
I voted
in favor of
AB 388, authored by
Representative Knudson (R-Hudson) and
Senator Leah Vukmir (R-Wauwatosa), which reorganizes the GAB
into two bipartisan commissions. This passed on a
58-39 vote.
It is
important for Wisconsin to have an agency that is responsible
for ensuring ethical practices among public officials and safe
and transparent elections. That said, the last eight years of
the GAB was a good experiment, but it has not worked. The GAB
did not create a nonpartisan environment. Rather, it participated
in investigations using an unlimited budget that turned into
partisan witch hunts; contrary to what many contend, it has not
served as a national model because no state has copied this
model; and the GAB failed to complete some of their statutory
responsibilities meant to protect our elections.
Please
take the time to read a
recent audit conducted by the nonpartisan Legislative Audit
Bureau regarding the GAB.
Highlights of the bill include:
• There will be an elections commission and an ethics
commission, instead of one entity like the GAB
• The elections commission will have citizen members appointed
by legislative leaders of both parties, and two county/municipal
clerks appointed by the Governor from a list submitted by both
parties
• The ethics commission will have six citizen members appointed
using a similar process to the elections commission
• Each party has equal representation on both boards
• County/Municipal Clerks live and breathe elections and are
better suited than judges to oversee election ethics
The GAB has been in place for eight years. Wisconsin had
consistent and transparent elections prior to the GAB, and I
feel confident that we will have them with an ethics commission
and an elections commission.
|