Jeff Plale and Chris Larson: behind the numbers

Just a few interesting numbers I came across regarding the campaign contributions received by incumbent Democratic State Senator Jeff Plale and his primary opponent, Milwaukee County Supervisor Chris Larson:

Plale & Larson: Behind the Numbers
Jeff Plale Chris Larson
# of donations received from registered lobbyists 29 1
Amount of $ received from lobbyists $7,740 $100
% of donations received from inside the 7th District 19% Over 50%


I can’t wait to read how the Plale defenders out there in the intertubes will try to spin these numbers to defend Sen. Plale.

Share:

Related Articles

32 thoughts on “Jeff Plale and Chris Larson: behind the numbers

  1. So this doesn’t count all the money Spencer Black, Fred Kessler, Jim Doyle and his buddies, as well as the TAA fand other lefty groups rom Madison are spending or planning to spend doing independent expenditure for Larson, right?

    Plus, I didn’t realize lobbyists gave up their first amendment rights to support candidates for elected office. Maybe lobbyists support Plale because he has helpe their clients build roads, bridges, and buildings that put blue collar people to work. Or maybe its because Plale supported domestic partner benefits for states employees in the budget (this is actually law now I believe).

    I know quite a few lobbyists. They are not all big corporate hacks. Plus, if it’s bad Plale took donations from lobbyists then why is it okay Larson did too. It doesn’t matter if its only once, he still did it.

  2. LOL! I don’t expect lobbyists to give up their first amendment rights to contribute to campaigns…and I am glad they are participating in the process…and we all know money is free speech. But it is vitally important that the voters know where the money comes. Only then can they decide for themselves whether an elected official seems to be unduly influenced one way or another.

    The protection and exercise of free speech isn’t the same as anonymous speech.

  3. Zach that’s not true. In fact you challenge the Plale supporters to defend these numbers. That’s a pretty pejorative statement that clearly shows you’re of the belief that Plale has done something that needs to be defended.

    At least own your support for Larson. Saying things like you’re just pointing out where the money is coming from while you encourage donations to Larson from your blog is a bit incredulous…

    1. How is this at all incredulous? Zach is encouraging citizens to make a contribution, not asking for corporate money. Plale’s pretty much got a lock on that.

    2. I didn’t challenge Plale supporters to defend the numbers; I simply expressed my opinion that I couldn’t wait to see how they defended the numbers, since that seems to be the norm for any entry I’ve written discussing Chris Larson and Jeff Plale.

  4. Mr. Haas- corporations can’t give money to campaigns. It’s incredulous because on one hand it seems Zach is saying donations coming from out of the district are bad as are donations from lobbyists. On the other hand he’s encouraging anyone who reads the blog to make a donation to Larson, regardless of where that person lives while also apparently expressing comfort with donations, support and endorsements coming o Larson from out of the district.

    Xoff – you assume lobbyists only give money based on who their clients are. Isn’t it possible a lobbyist would make a donation based on their own politics and not the politics of their client? That’s not unreasonable or even unlikely a I am sure there are democratic leaning lobbyists and GOP leaning lobbyists whose politics are different than their client.

    1. Buster,

      Everything you are saying about where money comes from, where it goes, that lobbyists may contribute differently than there employers, etc, etc. Hell, we often see contributions to both candidates from a single source.

      But what’s wrong with pointing all of this out in a public forum? Are you against disclosure of campaign contributions and who is doing the contributing? I think that information is a key component in making an informed decision at the polls.

    2. By the reasoning that you posted in response to Xoff, all the money from AT&T went to Plale not so that he’d write them a sweetheart deal, but because they thought he’s a swell guy. Did you know that Plale’s staffer went to work for AT&T as a lobbyist after Plale got his bill passed? I’m pretty sure that was because Plale’s bill had given them such an edge that they couldn’t achieve without it, not because she was such a quality person whom AT&T liked. (Assuming corporations have emotions, which is, as you said, incredulous.) I’m fairly certain she got the job because she was good at manipulating the state government to get the bill passed, and her former boss such an enabler of that passage. TO me, that’s why he’s got to go.

    3. Dear Buster, I must say that you are categorically incorrect in your assertion that corporations can’t give money to campaigns. In fact, the opposite is true in large effect thanks to the recent Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission ruling by the U.S. Supreme Court. That ruling opened the flood gates for corporate money in campaigns. Look it up. The truth is out there, and it’s not hard to find.

      1. I am not up to date on Wisconsin campaign finance law…but it is different than federal laws…and I am not sure how the Supreme Court Decision effects a state senate campaign.

      2. To clarify: Citizens United says that corporations can pour money into independent political broadcasts in an elections. While the money may not go to the campaign, per se, the effect will be felt by the campaigns. It’s a distinction without a difference.

        1. “Independent political broadcasts.” Otherwise known as free speech.

          1. No – it’s only free speech when groups like MoveOn, unions and other organizations they agree with do it. It’s completely different when it’s evil corporations.

            International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers spent over $3.3 million dollars in the 2008 elections. That’s OK because they’re representing the interests of people these guys like. ATT’s $3.1 million however, is blood money.

    4. Buster, I’m just sharing some numbers I find interesting from the two campaign finance reports; I’ll let people draw their own conclusions about whether the numbers are good or bad.

      1. No, up until this post, you were posting information in a clearly biased way to get your agenda across. You were called on it and you have slightly changed your tone, but your end result is still the same.

        Like I said in your first post, people do not like hypocrisy, and your posts have been reeking of them.

        1. Yes John, because it’s hypocritical of me to point out the fact that Sen. Plale has collected 81% of his campaign’s contributions from outside his Senate district, while on the flip side Chris Larson collected over 50% of his campaign contributions from individuals living inside the district.

          I suppose it’s also hypocritical of me to question why Sen. Plale has received over $7,000 in contributions from registered lobbyists, while on the flip side Chris Larson has one single $100 donation from a registered lobbyist – a lobbyist who also happens to be the head of Citizen Action Wisconsin.

          I suppose it’s also hypocritical of me to question why Jim Haney of WMC, which is of course a big friend to Democrats, would donate to Sen. Plale.

          By the way, I’m still waiting for you to explain why you’re such a rabid supporter of Sen. Plale.

        2. bias and hypocrisy aren’t the same thing. and I don’t sense any hypocrisy in Zach’s post…but I won’t deny a sense of bias.

          1. I won’t deny a sense of bias….after all, the whole point of a blog is to present information from one’s own perspective, bias and all.

        3. What, pray tell, is or was the alleged hypocrisy of which you speak, dear John?

          So we’re all on the same page, a dictionary definition of hypocrisy is, “the practice of claiming to have moral standards or beliefs to which one’s own behavior does not conform.”

          Ball to you, John.

          1. Look at the previous posts by Zach. It is pretty obvious and I called him on it. He has since changed his tone, good for him.

  5. How much money from lobbyists do county supervisors typically get? I suspect it’s not much since most lobbyists would see it as a waste of resources. So a comparison between Larson and Plale is kinda stupid.

    While I don’t think 1/29th of $7749 (is 7749 a lot for a State-level politician?) is enough to sell one’s soul (assuming he has one) on a particular issue, the fact that over 80% of that money comes from outside his district is probably the one valid criticism in that column.

    1. I see your point about the amount of money County Supervisors might get from lobbyists, but I think the comparison is valid because they’re both candidates for the State Senate.

      1. Why do those numbers make Larson a better candidate? Did any of those $267 (on average) donations totaling a whopping $6269 sway any of Plale’s votes in a direction unfavorable to a majority of Plale’s constituency?

        I suppose this comparison is valid when all you’re looking for is a superficial talking point. But it carries as much water as someone saying, how many arguments and votes has Larson made in the State Senate? Zero? Well, Plale is obviously more qualified.

  6. I took some time to do some thinking and research this weekend, which I think is timely given Mr. Rickman’s comments about his response at doors on the south side this weekend…

    Like most things in politics, the spin on fundraising in never black or white. In painting this awful picture of Plale, you’ve failed to acknowledge the pages of $10, $15, and $50 donations from people in Plale’s district. These people are forking over $10, because they support him. And yes…..most of them are loyal Democrats. They’re not part of the awful conspiracy that you portray.

    You also don’t get very specific about Larson’s report. Here is one stat that struck a chord with me. While Larson touts himself as the grassroots, man of the people candidate, he raised a total of $129 dollars from Cudahy, St. Francis, South Milwaukee and Oak Creek combined. $129 dollars from two thirds of the district he seeks to represent. Only $129, yet he managed to raise $24,000. Where is the rest of his money coming from?

Comments are closed.