Senate Votes to Close

In this update: 1. State Senate votes 26-7 to OK key campaign finance bill 2. Supreme Court poised to act on recusal rules Thursday _____________________________________________________ Senate Votes to Close "Issue Ad" Loophole

Email date: 1/19/10

In this update:
1. State Senate votes 26-7 to OK key campaign finance bill
2. Supreme Court poised to act on recusal rules Thursday

______________________________________________________________

State Senate votes 26-7 to OK key campaign finance bill
Moments ago the state Senate approved bipartisan legislation strongly supported by the Democracy Campaign closing the “issue ad” loophole that enables special interests to skirt longstanding disclosure requirements and campaign contribution limitations in Wisconsin law and secretly spend unlimited sums of money to influence state elections.

To see how your senator voted, go here. Before today’s debate and vote, the Democracy Campaign sent a memo to all senators calling approval of this legislation the “single most significant action” senators could take to make elections in Wisconsin better.

The bill now moves on to the state Assembly, where it has already received committee approval and where a majority of members are on record in support of the legislation.

______________________________________________________________

Supreme Court poised to act on recusal rules Thursday
On Thursday Wisconsin’s Supreme Court will revisit whether to adopt new rules allowing judges to rule on cases involving their biggest campaign supporters. Last fall, four of seven members approved rules on the subject written by Wisconsin Manufacturers and Commerce and the Wisconsin Realtors Association. The court later temporarily rescinded the rules as Justice David Prosser said he wanted to make some revisions. Late last week Prosser submitted his proposed changes. There is no practical difference between Prosser’s proposal and the rules written by the two lobbying groups. Both clearly allow all state judges to rule on cases even when they involve their biggest campaign supporters, which is wrong on its face and also is contrary to the U.S. Supreme Court’s recent ruling in a high-profile West Virginia case.