Democratic AG candidate Susan Happ correctly pointed out Schimel's flip floppy hypocrisy.
Take for example the Government Accountability Board, in charge of elections. Brad Schimel says he supports Wisconsin's law banning coordination between candidates and third party groups...
...except when he doesn't support the GAB's interpretation of that law. But the GAB is a government body of retired judges appointed by the governor, and confirmed by the Senate, enforcing laws (one in particular), which Schimel doesn't personally agree with.
The mission of the Board is to ensure accountability in government by enforcing ethics and lobbying laws ... charged with oversight of Wisconsin's campaign finance, elections, ethics, and lobbying laws ... created a year earlier in 2007 Wisconsin Act 1 ... its staff are dedicated to enforcing the election, ethics, lobbying and campaign finance laws vigorously to reduce the opportunity for corruption and maintain public confidence in representative government.The duties are clear, but Schimel still won't support the GAB's legal interpretation of election law. Schimel could represent the GAB and let the courts make that decision, but why go through that hassle?
GOP Rubber Stamp Schimel: He's point blank telling us that. In the debate he said he will clearly contort and politicize our legal system, making challenges a thing of the past. Here's that debate moment of clarity, Brad Schimel's confused state, and Susan Happ's reasoned reaction:
Post a Comment