Dems should welcome, not attack,Falk's decision to enter AG race

NOTE: I'm updating this throughout the day as there are new developments, rather than posting each as it comes in. That may not be as convenient for readers, but it makes it manageable for me. -- Xoff.

Kathleen Falk makes it official today and becomes a candidate for attorney general.

Her announcement follows a week of some of the hottest Democrat-on-Democrat language Wisconsin has heard in awhile. (I almost wrote that her announcement "ends a week of Democratic infighting about whether she should run." Let's hope it does; she's in now.)

Wisconsin Democrats are usually the party of the Big Primary Tent, where candidates are welcomed even when it would be better for the party to clear the field and settle on the strongest candidate, as Republicans often do.

After Jim Doyle had been running for a year and was building up a head of steam in the 2002 governor's race, I don't recall any Democrats attacking Tom Barrett or Kathleen Falk for deciding to join the race.

When a group of Democratic legislators wrote to Barbara Lawton, to urge her to take on then-State Sen. Kevin Shibilski for lieutenant governor in 2002, Shibilski loyalists didn't go on a public rampage. Many of those who are decrying Falk's move now (including the Capital Times' John Nichols and Fighting Ed Garvey) were leading the cheers for a Lawton candidacy. (Lawton "affirmed her support" for Lautenschlager today.)

But when 10 Dem lawmakers wrote to Falk to urge her to run, some Democrats went nutso.

What makes this different?

I thought that maybe the difference is that Falk wants to take on a Democratic incumbent, AG Peg Lautenschlager.

But that theory falls apart when you consider that many of those complaining the loudest about Falk entering the race are the same people who have been encouraging a primary challenge to Gov. Jim Doyle.

When 10 legislators wrote to Falk to urge her to run, State Rep. Spencer Black had this to say:

...[H]e is supporting Lautenschlager "because she has done a great job as AG. She's a fighter for progressive values - whether it's the environment, fighting crime, or promoting open government. But the one thing she has not done is kowtow to the governor on every issue."

Although they are both Democrats, Lautenschlager and Doyle have feuded over issues ranging from open government to environmental regulation, while Falk has appeared at Doyle's side at several events.

"I think the polls show it's going to be a tough race for attorney general regardless of who the Democratic nominee is," Black said. "A very divisive primary may make it more likely the Republicans will win next November, regardless of who the Democrat ultimately is."

Black, you may recall, is the Democrat who says he is still thinking about challenging Doyle in the primary next year. But none of his arguments apply to himself, apparently.

Even the Capital Times, which loves Lautenschlager and has been negative about Falk's potential candidacy, did concede in an editorial last week that:

Falk has every right to run for attorney general. Indeed, if she thinks she would be a better attorney general than Lautenschlager, she has a responsibility to run.

However, the paper's coverage of Falk's announcement Monday consisted of two negative stories about attacks on her from Lautenschlager and the Republicans, one headlined ("AG rap: Falk's not fit:) with only a couple of sentences from Falk's announcement speech. Fortunately for Falk, only a handful of hard-core Dems still read the paper, as circulation continues its downward spiral.

In an earlier story, the paper found Lautenschlager loyalist Bill Dixon for a quote:

"If Kathleen runs against Peg, Kathleen will lose. It would probably end Kathleen's statewide career, because many of us would be very, very upset with her."

Dixon added that if Lautenschlager is forced to spend her campaign funds on a primary race against Falk, "it's possible we could end up with a right-wing extremist Republican attorney general."

Actually, is is because of the fear that Wisconsin could end up with a right-wing extremist attorney general that other Democrats (including yours truly) have encouraged a Falk candidacy. Lautenschlager's odds of defeating a Republican in November are extremely slim, given her negatives from a drunk driving arrest for which she managed to keep coverage alive for what seemed like months, and subsequent stories about her misuse of a state car, which also was good for quite a series.

Most Wisconsin voters have seen the videotape of her arrest. Those who haven't, or who have forgotten it, can look forward to seeing it again next October if she is the Democratic nominee.

Republicans believe they can beat Lautenschlager and concede that Falk is probably a stronger general election opponent. The Wisconsin State Journal's editorial page editor thinks Rs are licking their chops over the prospect of running against Lautenschlager. "The GOP is so rooting for Peg," he writes. It's clear who Paul Bucher wants to run against, and it's not Falk. In an ill-advised and transparent move to try to help Lautenschlager, Bucher issued a release calling Falk a radical. J.B.Van Hollen seconded the motion, with a release calling Falk "dangerous" to law enforcement. She is dangerouse to Van Hollen's and Bucher's political ambitions. Those two got into the race thinking Lautenschlager was quite beatable; Falk changes the equation.

Jeff Wagner, who ran a losing race for AG against Doyle in 1994, predicts that Lautenschlager could get as little as 40% of the November vote. I don't buy that, but I do think the odds against her winning are long. Wagner, who admits he's straying across the partisan aisle into things he may know little about, also thinks Lautenschlager would beat Falk -- but that Falk probably won't get in the race. He's wrong about the last one, and probably about the other, too.

But it will be a tough, hotly-contested primary, as I said in an earlier analysis. Falk, who has been an assistant attorney general but not a prosecutor, will need to sell her law enforcement credentials to become the top cop. Polls aside, this will be a close race. If Lautenschlager wins it, she will be stronger for having survived the challenge and made her case.

It is worth having this battle between Democrats because the office is important, especially with the legislature in the hands of extremists. Anyone who remembers the Gov. Thompson-AG Doyle years know that having an AG of the opposite party right across the hall can be more than a minor distraction and can cause real problems.

Despite the rancor exhibited last week by some Lautenschlager backers, there is no reason for this to be a negative campaign. Falk and Lautenschlager both have positive cases to make on their own records and their candidacies. Falk's announcement text doesn't even mention Lautenschlager. The Lautenschlager's campaign first response to Falk's candidacy on Sunday threw a couple of jabs. A candidate who starts out attacking her opponent on announcement day for "no experience" shows signs of weakness, especially when that opponent had been an assistant AG for 14 years and executive of the state's second largest county.

A nasty primary campaign could have spillover effects into the general election. Republicans hope there will be a Democratic bloodbath that weakens the primary winner for the November race. But Falk, Barrett and Doyle managed to avoid that in the 2002 governor's primary, and won praise for their conduct. Let's hope Lautenschlager and Falk can do the same and let the two Republican candidates -- who may be lost in the shuffle for awhile -- duke it out.