The Use and Misuse of History

In his novel 1984, George Orwell imagined a future world where a government at war could switch allegiances with the country’s enemies and allies and a docile public would accept the revised version of history unquestioningly.  Orwell, a keen observer of the modern world, recognized that history itself could be manufactured and manipulated in the service of broader purposes.

This morning’s edition of the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel contains an opinion piece by Chrisitian Schneider of the Wisconsin Policy Research Institute (WPRI) entitled “Not What They Meant Democracy to Look Like.”  In it, Mr. Schneider argues that the current effort to recall Governor Scott Walker and other elected state officials runs contrary to the original intent of Senator Bob La Follette and other advocates of the recall provisions of the Wisconsin State Constitution.  His op ed is excerpted from a larger piece that Mr. Schneider has authored for WPRI entitled “The History of the Recall in Wisconsin.”

In the newspaper piece, Mr. Schneider makes the assertion that “a review of documents and press accounts from the time the recall constitutional amendment passed shows that the current use of the recall is far different from what the original drafters had envisioned.”  His argument is that the recall provisions of the Wisconsin Constitution were intended to apply solely to judges and state senators, and not to executive branch officials such as the governor, because the two year term of office in place for governors at the time that the amendment passed would have made the recall of a governor impractical.

The historical record is completely contrary to Mr. Schneider’s assertion.  Moreover, the evidence that he relies upon is completely inadequate to establish the existence of the skewed original intent that he advances.

Continue ReadingThe Use and Misuse of History

In Praise of Flip-Floppers (Part III)

In my last two posts I scrutinized the tendency for voters, the media, and politicians to use flip-flopper critiques indiscriminately. Common usage is indiscriminate in part because it seems to accept without question that position changes by candidates are always a result of pandering, when in fact other, justifiable reasons may be the cause in any given case. Common usage is also indiscriminate because it denounces position changes by candidates for office without paying attention to how the constitutional features of the office influence the validity of the changes.

Given these defects, why does the flip-flopper critique remain so common? I have a few guesses:

First, perhaps voters and the media use the critique in an attempt to simplify the candidate selection process. Position changes complicate candidate identities, and complexity makes it harder to brand and distinguish candidates. By discouraging position changes, the critique facilitates voter choice.

Second, perhaps voters use the critique because they know that electoral mandates are difficult to enforce intra-term. If a candidate elected on one platform changes her position on a matter once in office, it is always possible for the electorate to vote her out upon the expiration of the term. But there is little that can be done until then. And in the meantime the official may work to create laws that reflect her new, unpopular position. Maybe voters scrutinize candidates for position changes to reduce the risk of this scenario. The flip-flopper critique, in other words, fulfills a vetting function, weeding out those candidates who are most likely to change positions in an unforeseeable manner.

Continue ReadingIn Praise of Flip-Floppers (Part III)

New Law School Poll Results: Romney Rebounds, Governor’s Race Is Tight

Former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney has rebounded strongly from a month ago among people expecting to vote in Wisconsin’s Republican presidential primary April 3, according to new results for the Marquette Law School Poll. In February, Romney trailed former Sen. Rick Santorum by 16 points in Wisconsin, but he now leads Santorum by eight points, 39% to 31%, the poll found.

Romney has also narrowed the gap between himself and Democratic President Barack Obama, if the presidential election were to be held today and they were the two major candidates. But Romney continues to trail Obama in Wisconsin – by five percentage points in the new poll, compared to 15 points a month ago – and Obama is ahead of other Republican candidates by 10 points or more.

The results of the third monthly round of the Law School’s year-long polling project show the looming recall election for governor remains very close. When all poll respondents were asked their preference in possible matchups, Republican Gov. Scott Walker led Democratic Milwaukee Mayor Tom Barrett by two percentage points, while Walker led Democratic candidate Kathleen Falk by four points.

Barrett has not announced yet if he will run. If he does, the poll indicated he would have more support than Falk among people intending to vote in a Democratic primary. If he does not, Falk would have a large lead over candidates such as State Rep. Kathleen Vinehout and Secretary of State Doug La Follette. The primary election for governor is expected to be held on May 8, with a final election on June 5.

The results of the polling, which was conducted from March 22 to 25, were released Tuesday at an “On the Issues with Mike Gousha” session at the Law School featuring Professor Charles Franklin, visiting professor of law and public policy and director of the poll. The video of that session can be viewed by clicking here. The full poll results can be viewed by clicking here. And a five minute video of Franklin being interviewed by Mike Gousha, the Law School’s distinguished fellow in law and public policy,  can be viewed by clicking here.

 

Continue ReadingNew Law School Poll Results: Romney Rebounds, Governor’s Race Is Tight
Newer Posts
Older Posts