WI Court recount over, Prosser wins: What now?

The "Immaculate Election" is complete. With the recount now over for the Supreme Court race, it appears David Prosser retains his seat over off-the-charts-underdog JoAnne Kloppenburg whose 200-vote, April 5, election-day victory miraculously turned into a 7,316-vote deficit because one-time Prosser aide and current Waukesha County Clerk Kathy Nickolaus forgot--she forgot!--to count some 14,000 votes from heavily Republicanized Brookfield in Waukesha County (previous post here).  And, amazingly, it just happened to benefit Prosser, the candidate in this non-partisan post that the Walker administration brazenly said would best help advance its agenda.

Although Kloppenburg gained only 306 votes during the recount, the far greater impact was that of restoring faith in the state's election system and its officials.  Kloppenburg said in her statement at the time of the recount request, "We must restore trust and confidence in the integrity of this and future elections."

So, what happens now?  Does Kloppenburg go to court to challenge the recount?  Her camp isn't saying.  Blogger Cieran (writng at the Daily Kos), however, tracked nearly 5,000 votes that were suspicious due to things such as improperly sealed or registered ballot bags, so it appears there could at least be a possibility of some tainted ballots.  In the Journal Sentinel, however, former Supreme Court Justice Janine Geske implied that kind of challenge would be a very tough battle.

If, on the other hand, there is evidence of something more sinister, shall we say, either behind the handling of ballots by Nickolaus or courtesy of some other improprieties, things could get interesting.

To be honest, though, even without a smoking cannon here, the more this stays in the headlines, the more energized the anti-Walker base will be as recall elections come this July. And if this lasts beyond August 1 (when the next Justice term is slated to start), there will be a vacant seat if the collective bargaining bill then comes before the Court, which could lead to a 3-3 tie, in which case, the Journal Sentinel reports, "a lower court might have the last word."

The recount may be over, but the excitement may have just begun.

Photo of Kloppenburg from timesunion.com

Battle lost, but war remains

It's time to call off the troops on the race for Wisconsin Supreme Court. 

Prosser won.  The "unsaved" ballots from Brookfield put him in the lead, and state canvassing has confirmed his victory with a 7,316 vote margin.  (1) Although there should still be investigations into the seeming continued ineptitude of the Waukesha clerk who "forgot to hit save" and didn't annouce it until two days later, the race is done.

Because Kloppenburg lost by a 0.488% margin, her campaign can request a state-funded recount (0.5 % is the Wisconsin threshhold).  (1) It would cost county coffers a total likely in the hundreds of thousands of dollars (6)  (the state summary of recount procedures can be found here).  (2) Minnesota recounted its 2010 gubernatorial results.  Democrat Mark Dayton's margin, at 0.42%, was "a larger unofficial margin than has ever been overturned in a modern-era recount, in any state." (3,4)  Dayton's opponent, Republican Tom Emmer conceded after results confirmed a relatively unchanged margin. (7)  (for thorough and insightful discussion about the insignificance of recount changes, check out Rob Ritchie in the Huffington Post  here). (5)

But Kloppenburg's loss was not without gains.  She was an aftertought in the primary, but yet state voters almost unseated a sitting state justice.  And, hopefully, it will make Waukesha County's vote counts a bit more reliable, and believable, for goodness sakes, in future elections.

Figuratively, there will be many more battles.  And don't think for a minute this single election has determined the way this war will end.

(1) Ballots are now totaled, JS Online, 4/16/11, http://www.jsonline.com/news/statepolitics/119938614.html
(2) Election Administration Manual for WI Municipal Clerks, State of Wisconsin, http://elections.state.wi.us/docview.asp?docid=11826&locid=47
(3) 2010 Election Results, Mpls. Star Tribune, http://elections.startribune.com/returns/mgovsm.html, retrieved 4/16/11
(4) Editorial: ...lower recount threshhold, Mpls. Star Tribune, 11/15/10, http://www.startribune.com/opinion/editorials/108257194.html, retrieved 4/16/11
(5) Contested Recalls Unlikely..., by Rob Ritchie, Huffington Post, posted 11/1/10 http://www.huffingtonpost.com/rob-richie/contested-recounts-unlike_b_777299.html, retrieved, 4/16/11
(6) Potential recount would cost... Wisconsin Reporter.com, 4/14/11, http://www.wisconsinreporter.com/potential-recount-would-cost-local-governments-money-manpower retrieved, 4/16/11
(7) Mark Dayton declared winner, finally, MPRNews, 12/10/10, http://minnesota.publicradio.org/display/web/2010/12/08/emmer-recount-concession/ retrieved 4/16/11

So, it's not a referendum...?

As Scott Walker once more declares that the Wisconsin Supreme Court vote is not a referendum on his administration's policies (1) ,  his Republican colleague Jeff Stone is at home dumbfounded as to why he's not celebrating a victory in Walker's vacated Milwaukee County Executive postition.  Instead, Stone got absolutely trounced (61%-39%) by an inexperienced political unknown, Chris Abele.  And JoAnne Kloppenburg, a non-factor in the Supreme Court primary in February (25% of the vote, compared to Prosser's 55%), is the leader in the clubhouse for the justice post.

Not a referendum, huh?

When Walker won the gubernatorial election in 2010 by a not-landslide-like 52%-47% margin, he was all about how his subsequent policies were what the people of Wisconsin wanted.  He and his Republican colleagues in the Legislature certainly acted as though they felt that was a referendum on his policies (or, at times, perhaps a divine command?) (2)

Unlike that election, though, voters here knew the real costs.  They didn't have their candidates lie about collective bargaining, (3)  or consolidate political power to appease corporate investors (4) , or say things to purposely mislead the people of Wisconsin (see previous posts).

Kloppenburg's possible election may be nothing more than something akin to a mosquito bite on the neck of Walker's administration, but a slew of them may just have him and his friends running for cover.

On, Wisconsin.

(1) Supreme Court vote doesn't shake Walker's resolve, WI State Journal, http://host.madison.com/wsj/news/local/govt-and-politics/article_3e2fac38-60b6-11e0-ae09-001cc4c002e0.html
(2) Scott Walker Believes He's Follwoing Orders From the Lord, The Progressive, 3/7/11 http://www.progressive.org/wx030711.html
(3) Politifact, JS Online, http://www.politifact.com/wisconsin/statements/2011/feb/22/scott-walker/wisconsin-gov-scott-walker-says-he-campaigned-his-/
(4) Yes, a power grab, JS Online, 12/27/10, http://www.jsonline.com/news/opinion/112522499.html

So, um, Prosser never was a judge before, either...?

Amazing. 

The adroit handling of the budget bills by Scott Walker and his pals has turned what should have been a cakewalk for the reelection of State Supreme Court Justice David Prosser into a real dogfight (pardon the mixed metaphors...).  In the Feb. primary, in what was a relatively obscure race, Prosser garnered a commanding 55% of the vote, with Assistant Attorney General JoAnne Kloppenburg receiving but a scant 25%. (1)

Because of the well-warranted attention now given to the importance of this race's outcome and the future course of this state's law interpretation, we Wisconsinites have been subjected to obscene amounts of special interest money pouring into our state and airwaves, (2) literally spouting lies and misinformation from both sides (i.e., Kloppenburg put an 80 year old farmer in jail, Prosser knew about/did nothing about a pedophile priest). (3,4)

So that's given us a chance to focus on other things, such as Prosser's claim he was "deliberately goad(ed)" into calling the Wisconsin Chief Justice "a total bitch"(5)  and the fact that Prosser's biggest personal selling point seems to be that Kloppenburg has never been a judge.

Guess what?  Before his Supreme Court appointment by Tommy Thompson, NEITHER WAS PROSSER! (6, 7)

(From JS Online) "Walker himself dismissed the idea that the race would be a referendum on the bargaining law or his agenda." (8)

Guess what, Governor?  You've made it just that.

And YOU gave Kloppenburg a shot.

Thanks.


ADDENDUM: The commercial pounding the airwaves right now is that Kloppenburg is weak on crime.  Correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't the Supreme Court deal with constitutional issues, not criminals...?

(1) Prosser, Kloppenburg to Face Off in...Election, WI Law Journal, 2/16/11  http://wislawjournal.com/blog/2011/02/16/prosser-kloppenburg-to-face-off-in-supreme-court-general-election/
(2) Report: Outside Interest...ads, WI State Journal, 4/2/11 http://wislawjournal.com/blog/2011/02/16/prosser-kloppenburg-to-face-off-in-supreme-court-general-election/
(3) Politifaxt JS Online, http://www.politifact.com/wisconsin/statements/2011/apr/01/citizens-strong-america/ad-says-joanne-kloppenburg-jailed-80-year-old-farm/
(4) Politifact, JS Online, http://www.politifact.com/wisconsin/statements/2011/mar/29/greater-wisconsin-committee/greater-wisconsin-committee-says-supreme-court-jus/
(5) Supreme Court tensions boil over, JS Online, 3/19/11 http://www.jsonline.com/news/statepolitics/118310479.html
(6) Capital Times, 4/3/11 http://host.madison.com/ct/news/opinion/column/john_nichols/article_9f560a25-5a32-5c2f-834c-cbe3d2b5da30.html
(7) Justice Prosser website http://www.justiceprosser.com/index.php/about-justice-prosser
(8) Bit players dominate state Supreme Court race, JS Online, 4/3/11 http://www.jsonline.com/news/statepolitics/119128299.html