Rely on this from Walker, Green --
Both are consistently inconsistent
Rep. Mark Green's e-newsletter this week reminds voters that his primary opponent, Milwaukee County Exec Scott Walker, has flip-flopped on the life and death issue of whether to allow people to carry concealed weapons in Wisconsin.
Green's right. Walker did change his position, temporarily, in an example of the kind of posturing and opportunism that gives politics a bad name.
In 1999, Walker co-sponsored a concealed weapons bill, which never came to the floor for a vote.
But in 2001, when a nearly identical bill was introduced, Walker didn't sign on.
And when it came to the Assembly floor for a vote, he was all over the map. He voted in favor of suspending the rules to consider the bill. But the next vote was on a motion to table the bill, and Walker voted yes, although the tabling motion failed.
Next came votes to exempt the City of Milwaukee from the bill, which was tabled 70-28 with Walker voting to table, and to exempt Milwaukee County from the bill, also tabled 67-31,with Walker voting to table.
Finally, when the bill passed 58-40, Walker voted no.
So he flip-flopped multiple times, and even failed to support exempting Milwaukee City or County from the bill, even after he had apparently decided he was opposed to the bill.
What was going on? Why was he so conflicted about a bill he had supported in the previous session?
It's simple. The votes took place in February 2002, and Walker was running for county executive.
Milwaukee is one place people don't support concealed carry, and think we have enough guns on the street. So Walker, trying to add some moderate city dwellers to his supporters, pandered on the issue and simply switched sides. He couldn't bring himself to go all the way and vote to exempt Milwaukee, but he could say he voted against the bill.
When he ran for reelection as county exec, his opponent David Riemer asked him where he stood on concealed carry, and Walker -- now planning a statewide race for governor -- said he supported it.
These days, with the campaign in full swing and Walker trying to win a statewide Republican primary, he is a rabid supporter of concealed carry.
It's just another example of how both Walker and Green do what's in their own political interests at the moment, instead of acting from some principled position.
This week's hoo-haw over repealing the gas tax indexing is another example. Walker and Green are all over it, urging the legislature to stop "taxation without representation." They don't mention that when they were in the Assembly, both of them voted to continue the system of raising the gas tax automatically every year. But that was then, and this is now.
With two candidates who will do or say whatever they think it takes to win, and change positions whenever it's politically expedient, this should be an interesting primary.
1 Comments:
On the topic "candidates who will do or say whatever they think it takes to win, and change positions whenever it's politically expedient" see today's Washington Post,
"Pelosi spokesman Brendan Daly said that while Pelosi estimates more than half of House Democrats favor a speedy withdrawal, she will lobby members in today's meeting against adopting this as a caucus position."
and
"DNC spokeswoman Karen Finney said Dean's comments were taken out of context. Dean, she said, meant the war was unwinnable unless the Bush administration adopts a new strategy."
Post a Comment
<< Home