A central goal of the public policy initiative at Marquette University Law School has been to provide and encourage serious, level-headed, and provocative consideration of major issues. As we come to the end of 2012, it doesn\u2019t seem presumptuous to say that this has been a very successful year in pursuing that goal.<\/p>\n
The Marquette Law School Poll provided insightful, in-depth, and accurate readings on public opinion in Wisconsin throughout a historic year of election after election. The candidates for governor and senator held debates in Eckstein Hall that were televised live across Wisconsin. \u201cOn the Issues with Mike Gousha\u201d offered a rich series of programs, free and open to the public, in which newsmakers and consequential figures shared their thoughts. Academic conferences, major lectures, conferences on mental health law and Milwaukee\u2019s future in the Chicago \u201cmegacity,\u201d the annual Restorative Justice Initiative conference on civility in public discussion, and two education policy events were all components of a year of thoughtful forays into major issues.<\/p>\n
Let us end the year with some highlights of the last two major public policy events of 2012 which we have not reported on this blog previously:<\/p>\n
Wisconsin 2012: The voters have spoken. What did they tell us?<\/strong><\/p>\n December 6, the Appellate Courtroom, Eckstein Hall<\/em><\/p>\n To wrap-up an epic year in Wisconsin politics, an array of experts gathered to talk about what happened, with Mike Gousha, the Law School\u2019s distinguished fellow in law and public policy, moderating.<\/p>\n Charles Franklin, visiting professor of law and public policy and director of the Marquette University Law School Poll, presented a county by county analysis showing dramatic differences in the voting in the June recall election for governor and the November presidential race. The map was predominantly red in June, strengthening arguments that Wisconsin was becoming a more Republican state. But in November, the map was much bluer, and many deep-red counties had turned light red. \u201cThat\u2019s just stunning in five months to see that much difference,\u201d Franklin said. The biggest shifts between the two elections came in counties that voted Republican each time, but with much smaller margins for presidential candidate Mitt Romney than for Gov. Scott Walker. The smaller margins amounted to a gain for President Barack Obama of 158,000 votes, Franklin said. In other words, Obama\u2019s stronger performance in Republican areas, compared to the showing of Democrat Tom Barrett in the governor\u2019s race, was a central aspect of Obama\u2019s victory in Wisconsin. In counties that voted Democratic both times, Obama ran up a margin that was 135,000 votes larger than Barrett had.<\/p>\n Amber Wichowsky, assistant professor of political science, Marquette University, looked at the significant number of people \u2013 about 10% of all voters \u2013 who supported Walker and Obama, despite the strong ideological contrasts between the two. Analysis of Marquette Law School poll results suggests these voters didn\u2019t match some of the presumptions about them \u2013 compared to voters as a whole, they weren\u2019t particularly younger, less educated, or more likely to answer issues questions by saying that they didn\u2019t have opinions or know enough to answer. Wichowsky said that while the state is sharply divided politically overall, there are specific issues, such as whether to cut education spending, where Democratic views are in the majority and others, such as preferring lower taxes over more public services, where Republican views are in the majority. That means the state is more heterogeneous in its views than some might think, making it more plausible that some people would view Obama and Walker simultaneously as their choices. An inclination to support incumbents may also have been a factor, she said. Whatever the reasons, Walker and Obama, despite their differing politics, each rolled up Wisconsin victories by margins of seven percentage points.<\/p>\n Ken Goldstein, president of Kantar Media\u2019s Campaign Media Analysis Group, said the Romney media strategy in Wisconsin and nationwide raised a lot of questions. Goldstein said that until well into the election season, the national Obama campaign had 80 people working on analyzing where to advertise and making ad buys while the Romney team had one. That may be one factor in some major missteps by the Romney campaign. One anecdote: People watching football games tend to be good audiences for Republicans, Goldstein said, and a Packers-Bears game is sure to draw a huge audience in Wisconsin. But when the two teams met on Sept. 13, Obama advertised strongly while Romney ran no ads. \u201cThe Obama campaign did a lot better job of getting the message right,\u201d Goldstein said. \u201cThey defined Romney. Romney didn\u2019t define himself.\u201d<\/p>\n Craig Gilbert, national political reporter for the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, said it was questionable after the Obama victory whether Wisconsin could still be viewed as a presidential battleground state. On the other hand, the recall election gave Walker a large political boost, including a national donor base \u201cthat governors can only dream of,\u201d Gilbert said.<\/p>\n Commenting on the US Senate race in which Rep. Tammy Baldwin beat former Gov. Tommy Thompson, Jeff Mayers, founder and president of WisPolitics.com, said Thompson was not able to pick up politically where he left off in 2000, after 14 years as governor. \u201cHe wasn\u2019t a happy warrior, he was a grouchy warrior,\u201d Mayers said. Thompson\u2019s campaign was hurt by the heated four-way Republican primary and by the Thompson\u2019s inability to get across a strong message about why he should be elected to the Senate.<\/p>\n Keith Gilkes, campaign manager for both Walker and Thompson, and John Kraus, communications director for the Baldwin campaign and a veteran of many Democratic campaigns, presented thoughts particularly on what swung the race for Baldwin. Gilkes said the Thompson campaign was in a tough spot after the August Republican primary, including that it did not have enough money to go on the air quickly with advertising while the Baldwin campaign was running a large volume of commercials. Overall, though, Gilkes said, \u201cthe presidential ballot drives the US Senate ballot.\u201d Nationwide, only one Republican won a Senate race in a state that Obama carried.<\/p>\n Moderator Mike Gousha asked Kraus about how the Baldwin campaign chose the successful advertising theme that Thompson was \u201cnot on our side anymore.\u201d Kraus said the campaign wanted to win over people who liked Thompson as governor. He compared dealing with Thompson\u2019s history to dealing with quarterback Brett Favre\u2019s history. People might remember Favre for taking the Packers to the Super Bowl twice. But if you wanted to undermine those memories, you might say to them, remember when he quit and played for the Jets? And, even more, when he went to play for the Vikings? \u201cYou may have a Brett Favre jersey, it\u2019s hanging in your closet,\u201d Kraus said. \u201cIt\u2019s not a bad thing. But do you really want to put it on and wear it?\u201d<\/p>\n Gousha concluded the session by commenting, \u201cIsn\u2019t this a nice way to end it? You have two guys who probably don\u2019t agree on a lot politically but you can bring them together, sit down, have an honest discussion about decisions that were made.\u201d<\/p>\n It\u2019s the kind of conversation that the Law School promoted throughout the momentous political year.<\/p>\n