Monkeyleg
Member.
I get emails and phone calls all the time from people asking why it's so hard to get concealed carry passed here.
While it's commendable (and valuable) that people call and write their legislators about the bill, and write rebuttals letters to the editor, it really boils down to pure politics.
With the amount of effort that the NRA, the WCCA, and other groups and individuals have put into the cause, we would have concealed carry now...if we had any governor other than Doyle, Democrat or Republican.
To understand what's happening, you must first understand that Governor Doyle is a True Believer in gun control. He's a product of Madison, having grown up there and been involved in Madison politics for years. During his twelve years as attorney general, he suggested bans on short-barrelled handguns, bans on certain shotguns, bans on "assault weapons," and even helped in the drafting of a bill that would have banned all ammunition except that designed for single-shot firearms.
You must also understand how Doyle works. An example: former state Senator Mark Meyer of LaCrosse, a very pro-gun district. Mark Meyer should have voted for the bill in 2003, if for no other reason than the amount of pressure that gun owners in his district were putting on him.
Instead, he voted against the bill, and then retired. And then Doyle appointed Meyer to be the director of the Public Service Commission, which oversees public utilities and their rates.
WE Energies sought and received from the Public Service Commission permission to increase their rates by a substantial margin.
This is the same Wisconsin Energies that gave massive amounts of money to Doyle's re-election campaign. So, the order of events is Meyer "no" vote>Meyer PSC appointment>WE Energies requesting rate increases>WE Energies giving lavishly to Doyle's campaign>PSC approving WE Energies request.
Here's another case study: former Representative Larry Balow from the Eau Claire area. There's a building in Altoona, outside of Eau Claire, called the "Altoona roundhouse." It's one of those railroad buildings where the locomotives are turned around.
The railroad wanted to tear the building down, but some community groups wanted it restored as a landmark. It was something of a cause 'celeb in the area.
Larry Balow voted for the CCW bill in the Assembly in 2002. But, in 2003, he voted against it. After Doyle found the money to rebuild the Altoona Roundhouse.
Then there's Representative Gary Sherman, who voted for the bill in 2002, signed on as a co-sponsor in June of 2003, voted for the bill in November of 2003, wrote articles in local newspapers supporting the bill, and then in February of 2004 voted to sustain Doyle's veto.
What did he get? Doyle's constant attention and support during Sherman's re-election campaign, with Doyle escorting him all over the state for fund-raisers.
What if Sherman had lost? The speculation--and it obviously is only speculation--is that Sherman would have been appointed to a state appeals court position, a $125,000+ position. Gary Sherman is a very accomplished attorney.
Right now we have two Assembly representatives who have voted for the bill in 2003, voted for the veto override in 2004, voted for the bill in 2005, but have not yet committed to voting for the veto override this year--Terry Van Akkeren of Sheboygan, and John Steinbrink of Kenosha. Both are being strong-armed by Doyle to vote against the veto override.
What will Doyle offer them? We'll only know if we lose.
After reading the press accounts about how former Senate Majority Leader Chuck Chvala extorted over a million dollars from lobbyists during his tenure, it ocurred to me that we might have been able to get our bill passed in 2002...if we had contributed something like $40,000 to Chvala's money-laundering group.
That's how the game is played. The exception is when there's a bill that has supporters inundating their legislators with phone calls, letters and emails. The gas tax indexing bill is a prime example: it wasn't even supposed to get a committee vote, until public pressure was so great that the Republican leadership relented, and the vote was overwhelmingly in favor. Even Governor Doyle felt the pressure to sign it, which he did.
And that's where we are now with concealed carry. Doyle will threaten, and possibly try to bribe, Van Akkeren and Steinbrink.
The only way to counter Doyle is to emulate what supporters of the gas tax bill did: call and write constantly.
While it's commendable (and valuable) that people call and write their legislators about the bill, and write rebuttals letters to the editor, it really boils down to pure politics.
With the amount of effort that the NRA, the WCCA, and other groups and individuals have put into the cause, we would have concealed carry now...if we had any governor other than Doyle, Democrat or Republican.
To understand what's happening, you must first understand that Governor Doyle is a True Believer in gun control. He's a product of Madison, having grown up there and been involved in Madison politics for years. During his twelve years as attorney general, he suggested bans on short-barrelled handguns, bans on certain shotguns, bans on "assault weapons," and even helped in the drafting of a bill that would have banned all ammunition except that designed for single-shot firearms.
You must also understand how Doyle works. An example: former state Senator Mark Meyer of LaCrosse, a very pro-gun district. Mark Meyer should have voted for the bill in 2003, if for no other reason than the amount of pressure that gun owners in his district were putting on him.
Instead, he voted against the bill, and then retired. And then Doyle appointed Meyer to be the director of the Public Service Commission, which oversees public utilities and their rates.
WE Energies sought and received from the Public Service Commission permission to increase their rates by a substantial margin.
This is the same Wisconsin Energies that gave massive amounts of money to Doyle's re-election campaign. So, the order of events is Meyer "no" vote>Meyer PSC appointment>WE Energies requesting rate increases>WE Energies giving lavishly to Doyle's campaign>PSC approving WE Energies request.
Here's another case study: former Representative Larry Balow from the Eau Claire area. There's a building in Altoona, outside of Eau Claire, called the "Altoona roundhouse." It's one of those railroad buildings where the locomotives are turned around.
The railroad wanted to tear the building down, but some community groups wanted it restored as a landmark. It was something of a cause 'celeb in the area.
Larry Balow voted for the CCW bill in the Assembly in 2002. But, in 2003, he voted against it. After Doyle found the money to rebuild the Altoona Roundhouse.
Then there's Representative Gary Sherman, who voted for the bill in 2002, signed on as a co-sponsor in June of 2003, voted for the bill in November of 2003, wrote articles in local newspapers supporting the bill, and then in February of 2004 voted to sustain Doyle's veto.
What did he get? Doyle's constant attention and support during Sherman's re-election campaign, with Doyle escorting him all over the state for fund-raisers.
What if Sherman had lost? The speculation--and it obviously is only speculation--is that Sherman would have been appointed to a state appeals court position, a $125,000+ position. Gary Sherman is a very accomplished attorney.
Right now we have two Assembly representatives who have voted for the bill in 2003, voted for the veto override in 2004, voted for the bill in 2005, but have not yet committed to voting for the veto override this year--Terry Van Akkeren of Sheboygan, and John Steinbrink of Kenosha. Both are being strong-armed by Doyle to vote against the veto override.
What will Doyle offer them? We'll only know if we lose.
After reading the press accounts about how former Senate Majority Leader Chuck Chvala extorted over a million dollars from lobbyists during his tenure, it ocurred to me that we might have been able to get our bill passed in 2002...if we had contributed something like $40,000 to Chvala's money-laundering group.
That's how the game is played. The exception is when there's a bill that has supporters inundating their legislators with phone calls, letters and emails. The gas tax indexing bill is a prime example: it wasn't even supposed to get a committee vote, until public pressure was so great that the Republican leadership relented, and the vote was overwhelmingly in favor. Even Governor Doyle felt the pressure to sign it, which he did.
And that's where we are now with concealed carry. Doyle will threaten, and possibly try to bribe, Van Akkeren and Steinbrink.
The only way to counter Doyle is to emulate what supporters of the gas tax bill did: call and write constantly.
