The hazards of judges' campaigns being funded by interest groups and of the politicization of decisions as an election approaches are obvious. I'm also concerned about the problem of low information in judicial elections, where even in a high-profile contest voters may make their decision based simply on whether a candidate is labeled "liberal" or "conservative," which can be a simplistic and misleading way to sum up a judge's record.

Of course, appointive systems present their own problems, some of which are laid out articulately in the article's comments.

Some local conservatives have alleged that the advocates of ending judicial elections are expressing sour grapes over Butler's defeat, or, more perniciously, that we are elitists who don't trust "the people" to make sound decisions. But democracy, like capitalism, only functions smoothly and well when all parties are fully informed. That's why most of us are at a disadvantage when we take our cars to the shop, or ourselves to the doctor: we are not expert enough to evaluate the recommendation, and it comes down to trusting the mechanic or physician.

Similarly, most people — and before you cry "elitist," I include myself — simply don't have the knowledge to evaluate and compare prospective judges' records and qualifications. As voters, we end up trusting TV commercials or local pundits, who may have their own agendas.

It may be that in choosing judges, as in choosing other government officials, democracy is the worst system except for all the others. But I'd like to see a serious, non-partisan consideration of whether Wisconsin's judges should be appointed, and if so, what system might strike the best balance between expertise and accountability.

I would also like a magical sparkle pony.

Key word “some”.

Ziegler doesn’t deserve a medal. Before being elected to her current position on the Wisconsin Supreme Court, Ziegler heard cases where she had a direct financial conflict of interest and ruled against the parties who were before her asking for justice.

Here’s how the Journal-Sentinel described the case:

On Monday, the panel of three appeals judges will hold a hearing in West Bend on Ziegler’s handling of cases as a Washington County circuit judge. Ziegler handled 11 cases involving West Bend Savings Bank, where her husband, J.J., earns $20,000 a year as a director. Judicial rules say judges must step aside in such cases unless they disclose the matter and all the parties involved say they approve of their hearing the matter.

After Ziegler was elected, she admitted wrongdoing in a settlement with the state Ethics Board and agreed to pay a $5,000 forfeiture and about $12,000 in attorney fees for the state.

In a separate investigation covering some of the same cases, the Judicial Commission concluded Ziegler should be publicly reprimanded. Ziegler has agreed that punishment would be appropriate. The panel of appeals judges will make its own recommendation to the Supreme Court.

By cashing in, Ziegler permanently sullied herself as a judge and showed she has a problem understanding the basic concepts of both fairness and justice.

Ziegler brought these problems on all by herself. Her partisan proponents have been claiming she’s some sort of victim but even in her political campaign she showed poor judgement. It started out when she took a picture in front of the Washington county courthouse and her campaign used Adobe Photoshop to show her in front of the signs of several counties. The problem was it was the same picture. The building behind her was the same and the shape of the sign was the same — the only thing that was changed was the words. I’ll admit, I had a little fun with this on Watchdog Milwaukee. One good piece of photoshop creativity deserves another right?

Fast forward to the present and Ziegler has taken $8625 from the Wisconsin Realtors Association‘s political action committee. She’s recused herself in one case, yet another hasn’t stated whether she’ll recuse herself in the other.

For Ziegler, this has the scent of West Bend Savings Bank all over it. Despite the fact that she’s still under scrutiny for her past wrongdoing, she’s not automatically recusing herself where she has a present conflict. It is unfortunate for Ziegler, but even more unfortunate for the public when someone entrusted with such a high profile seat in the judicial system cannot grasp the basic concepts of justice.

Ziegler should step aside in those cases where she’s bellying up to the bar for a shot of campaign cash. Justice isn’t a game and the Supreme Court isn’t a playground. It’s not her place to stand in judgement in a case where she’s been accepting handouts from one of those in front of her.

Imagine if you had a case in front of her and the opposing side was her pal. And what if you, like others who have had their cases before her, didn’t know about her conflicts. If she’ll stand in judgement of you on that day, who’s to say she didn’t make a call the previous day to her pals telling them not to worry — that since they’ve covered her back, she’ll cover theirs. After all, that would be a simple case of loyalty right? Helping the person who helped you, on the surface at least, seems like the right thing to do.

Well the realtors are upset. They don’t want her to recuse herself on cases involving realtors and Ziegler. They shelled out their money, now they want their payday.

It’s a simple fact in a capitalistic society — you don’t get something for nothing.

Still, I can’t even be pleased with his indictment because it was brought by the overly partisan US Attorney Steven Biskupic. This is the same Biskupic who, by some miracle, succeeded in temporarily convicting state administrator Georgia Thompson of steering a contract toward a campaign contributor of Democratic Governor Jim Doyle. I say temporarily because the court of appeals tossed out the case because it was based on a horribly weak premise with no real proof.

Biskupic has shown an unyielding loyalty to his Republican cronies.

At a time when several US Attorneys were fired by the Bush Administration for not being partisan enough, Biskupic’s name was removed from the firing list after he indicted Thompson. Why? Because Biskupic showed he was willing to advance a politically motivated case which made Governor Jim Doyle look bad during an election.

So should I rejoice in the indictment of McGee? Absolutely not. Why? Because I don’t trust Biskupic. He took an oath to uphold the constitution and all it stands for and I think he violated that oath. If anything, Biskupic should have been removed.

Everyone knows that AM talk radio here is dominated by Republican ideas and the GOP agenda. Anyone who hasn’t figured that out is either brain dead or suffering from delusions. Biskupic has shown a willingness to advance that agenda.

But did McGee deserve the indictment? I don’t know but I know I still think he’s among the worst political figures that our community has ever seen. I find him to be a horrible person who I wish voters would toss out but since he won an impressive landslide election in his attempted recall, I figured we would have to deal with him for a very long time.

If convicted, and if it’s not on more of Biskupic’s trademark flimsy evidence, it’s a good thing that McGee will be removed from office. But it’s all about that big “if”.

That’s the crux of this video (click here) featuring State Senator Jim Sullivan (D-Wauwatosa). “It’s a disclosure bill. It’s a right to know bill” said Sullivan. From the floor of the State Senate, Sullivan alluded that his argument wasn’t just about Wisconsin Supreme Court Justice Annette Ziegler, it was about a bigger picture.

Apparently this bill gets Sullivan’s Irish up. As an attorney, Sullivan works with the Judiciary on a regular basis and he’s concerned that to not have this bill would erode public confidence in the justice system.

Sullivan said:

I think that what we have is members of this body who are simply trying to cover the tracks of a recent judicial election after the horse has left the barn. I think there is nothing that can be done about that election right now. I think we should be very clear that this isn’t about a current or past judicial candidate. This is about the publics right to know.

It will be interesting to see what happens to this bill once it hits the Assembly.

This is an unprecedented level of chutzpah!

All public officials should be required to abide by ethical standards and just because Ziegler has been elected to the Supreme Court, shouldn’t mean she is exempt. She may want the public to believe that her ruling on cases where she had a conflict of interest should not matter, but any elected official, not just Ziegler, needs to understand that ethical behavior is tantamount and they must answer questions when posed by an ethics board. If they’re unwilling to answer questions from an ethics board, they should be removed from office.

That time is now.

Republican partisan and US Attorney Steven Biskupic did just that when he went after state administrator Georgia Thompson with the flimsiest of arguments. Biskupic claimed that Thompson steered lucrative travel contracts to Adelman Travel whose owners were also donors to the campaign of Governor Jim Doyle.

Biskupic’s stormtrooperesque efforts were an attempt to smear Doyle right before the election. Unfortunately the mainstream media owes Thompson a huge apology for reporting the GOP press releases as though they were fact. The result is the destruction of Georgia Thompson’s life in an era when we should all know better. Americans were right to hope that reporting had changed since the baseless rantings of former Senator Joe McCarthy were reported as fact.

Here’s another rub — Adelman Travel was the winner of that contract not because of the sole decision of Thompson, but because they had the lowest reasonable bid. Yes, another business was close but their score didn’t put them ahead.

The federal government, whose partisan attack dog persecuted Thompson, should reimburse her for her legal fees. The media who “reported” allegations as facts needs to regain their credibility by apologizing.

Percentages don’t lie and Ziegler had over twice the amount of votes that Clifford had after the race was narrowed to just two candidates.

Could it have been won? The short answer is yes, but it was very, very unlikely.

Clifford would have had to cement herself into voters minds as the perfect candidate. She would have needed to focus her commercials entirely on herself and let the independent expenditures bring out Ziegler’s shortcomings. Her public face needed to be the only one who had argued a case before the supreme court. Clifford also faced another problem — she isn’t a judge and it’s pretty safe to say that people prefer someone to be a judge before elevating them to be a justice.

Other groups needed to point out that Ziegler is only a Judge because Daddy bought her a seat and without the big donations to former Governor Tommy Thompson, she wouldn’t have gotten the appointment.

Ziegler also would have needed to really screw up and her shortcomings needed to become public. For the most part, that did happen and that is the only reason Clifford ended up having a chance.

Add to the soup the fact that Ziegler had an unprecedented amount of special interest spending on her behalf. Wisconsin Manufacturers and Commerce spent $1.45 million to buy Ziegler the seat and clearly they were successful. Compare that to the mere $300,000 that was spent by a pro-Clifford group and you can see how Ziegler had an upper hand in this race.

Some will say that all of this is just Monday morning quarterbacking. To a small extent extent that’s true, but at the same time I’ve been the quarterback and I know how the game is played. Most “Monday morning quarterbacks” have never picked up the football.

###
“I see in the near future a crisis approaching that unnerves me and causes me to tremble for the safety of my country. . . . corporations have been enthroned and an era of corruption in high places will follow, and the money power of the country will endeavor to prolong its reign by working upon the prejudices of the people until all wealth is aggregated in a few hands and the Republic is destroyed.”
President Abraham Lincoln, Nov. 21, 1864
(letter to Col. William F. Elkins)

Whether she’s the best choice or not depends on whether or not you want a Justice with ethics.

In her television commercials, Ziegler is attacking Linda Clifford for bringing to light the fact that, as a Washington County Judge, Ziegler failed to recuse herself from cases in which her own husband had a stake. Ziegler’s husband is on the Board of Directors for West Bend Savings Bank. You would think that a Judge who is ruling on a case before her would actually tell people that she had a stake in the outcome of a case.

But it gets better.

Ziegler has also ruled on cases where she has held stock for one side or another. Again, she failed to disclose her personal bias and investments before ruling on these cases. Once again, her rulings have impacted the profitability of companies she benefits from.

Now she wants us to believe she’s changed? Really, it didn’t affect how I ruled, she protests.

Oh please.

It’s not like she didn’t know she had stock in Wal-Mart. It’s not like she didn’t know her husband was on the Board of Directors for West Bend Savings Bank. Those omissions are lies. They’re not just harmless little white lies which hurt no one — they’ve impacted peoples lives.

But still, Ziegler has the audacity to blame Linda Clifford for playing dirty politics. All Clifford did was to bring up the issue of Ziegler failing to disclose her connections and point out that she should have recused herself. That’s not dirty politics — that’s news. Clifford is simply pointing out facts. This distortion is yet another reason Ziegler is unqualified for the bench.

Despite these two lies by omission, I’m even more concerned over her light touch with pedophiles. I know that Ziegler is using her campaign commercials to tout her toughness against sexual predators but what of the case where she gave a man just one year for molesting his 10 year old step daughter? That makes me sick and it should make everyone sick. Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel Reporter Mike Nichols broke the story a few years ago but her commercials touting her toughness with sexual predators continue to run. Voters should ask themselves what sentence they would have given a man who violated his own step daughter? Annette Ziegler gave him one year in a facility where he still got work release. Even when the girl was trying to watch a children’s movie, the man was molesting her. Still, Ziegler thought the man needed “treatment” instead of hard time. Despite this, Ziegler says she is tough on sexual predators.

That’s another lie.

Is that the kind of Justice you want? Does Ziegler share your values?

Ziegler points to her experience as the main reason voters should consider her. But facts are facts and when Ziegler has been given the power and responsibility of a judge, she has failed. Now she wants a promotion.

Here’s the gist of it: Zweifel received a call from PR flack Tim Scheiderer. Scheiderer offered to set up an off the record meeting with some guy named David W. Simon and Republican blogger and Attorney Rick Esenberg who teaches law at Marquette University. Then Scheiderer starts spouting off the GOP party line on liberal judges. In his column, Zweifel explains that Scheiderer is paid by Virginia PR firm Creative Response Concepts — the same firm who worked on the Swift Boaters smear campaign against Kerry. CRC also does work for the Republican Party, the Christian coalition and other right-wing groups.

So what does Ziegler have to say about all this? Well nothing so far but if what’s happening now is any indication of how this race will up, expect it to get very dirty.

Of the two autocalls I received from a group calling itself the Wisconsin Chamber of Commerce, Ziegler was touted as business friendly. What voters should really look at in April is which candidate is more family friendly.

The problem with Ziegler is her weak sentencing of pedophiles. As the website OneWisconsinNow points out, Ziegler gave a man who molested his 12 year old step-daughter a mere one year sentence. If that is the sort of precedent that Ziegler would follow as a Wisconsin Supreme Court Justice, Wisconsin may find it’s tough laws on pedophiles being struck down.

Is that what we really want for our state?

One thing is certain — overcoming the numbers that Ziegler came through with in the primary is very difficult if voter turnout remains at the pitiful 7% that it was for Tuesday’s election, but her opponent, Linda Clifford still has a narrow chance. There’s really only one way she can pull this one out and that’s if she exposes Ziegler’s record. It’s going to be costly but the real question that voters need to answer is whether they prefer to have the reputation as being a family friendly state?

Her resume is impressive and she is the most even handed candidate in the race.

Although one of her opponents, Annette Ziegler, has been a judge in Washington County for some time, Ziegler has shown a light hand in her sentencing of pedophiles. That alone is enough to disqualify her.

Clifford has done some impressive law work. She has served as an Assistant Attorney General and on the Office of Lawyer Regulation investigative committee. For eight years she served as Chairman of the State Bar’s Media-Law Relations Committee.

Clifford is clearly a strong candidate and would make an impressive Justice.

The big question Ziegler needs to answer is “how could you have given a man convicted of molesting his 10 year old step-daughter just one year in prison”?

The website Progressive Majority resurrected the story (written by Mike Nichols of the Journal-Sentinel) recently, pointing out “the pre-sentence report recommended 15 years — five less than the prosecutor demanded. The defendant’s own attorney suggested five to seven years. But Washington County Circuit Judge Ziegler stayed a 25 year sentence — meaning it wouldn’t apply unless the man failed to go through with treatment. Ziegler also gave him 20 years of probation and one year on work release in the county jail.”

As a father I’m utterly disgusted. What kind of cretin gains pleasure from violating a child? This sicko even molested his step daughter as she watched the killer whale movie “Free Willy“.

What was Ziegler thinking? Could she have sleeping through the trial?

It will be curious to see how republicans defend her. It will be interesting to see how they manage to play their “family values” angle while supporting a candidate who let a pedophile walk after just a year.

Judicial candidates are supposed to be impartial and non-partisan but in reality it's not possible to be completely impartial.  You're a product of your surroundings and your collective experiences.  Unfortunately for Ziegler, that means that she's part of a family who has donated to GOP candidates like convicted felon Scott Jensen as well as former Guv Tommy Thompson.

Does this mean she's unqualified?  Of course not.  But if you look at judicial activism in the courts over the past decade or so, it has all been conservative (read republican) activism.  That activism is dangerous to those of us who value constitutional freedoms.

But do we know how Ziegler would vote on issues of constitutional freedom?  No. 

What we do know is that Ziegler's family contributed $5800 to then-GOP Governor Tommy Thompson's campaign before her judicial appointment.  We do know that an additional $7250 was sent to Thompson after he made good on the appointment.  We do know that after her swearing in ceremony, that Ziegler's father in law sent in a check for $500 to the Guv.  We also know that from 2000 to 2006 the Ziegler family sent nearly $120,000 to Republican candidates for office.

So do we know which way she leans on issues important to people who value constitutional protections?  It's a pretty safe bet that she's not with them.

###

Thanks to One Wisconsin Now for tipping us off to this story. 

Annette Ziegler will face Linda Clifford this spring.

The twist?  Ziegler's website features her standing in front of the Ozaukee, Waukesha and Milwaukee Justice center.

The problem?

It's all the same place.  Someone just digitally edited the names of the centers to reflect the county Ziegler was supposedly standing in front of.

It's amusing but hopefully she won't take anymore shortcuts this campaign season.   She could very well be a great person for the job (or might not).  We'll reserve our judgment for a while.  For the time being, she needs to have a stern talking to with her campaign people.

###

Link: Folkbum snagged the pictures off of the website. We're sure that Ziegler will take them down.  Credit Carrie Lynch from What's Left for breaking the story.