WI Republicans’ #1 priority? Not jobs!

According to the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, presumptive Wisconsin State Senate majority leader Scott Fitzgerald (R-Juneau) has made it clear job creation will not be priority number one in a Republican-controlled State Senate:

Scott Fitzgerald said that the first bill introduced in the state Senate next year will not have to do with economic issues but will instead require voters to present photo ID at the polls.

Good to see Republicans have their priorities straight….after all, voter ID is far more important than job creation!

Share:

Related Articles

46 thoughts on “WI Republicans’ #1 priority? Not jobs!

  1. Voter fraud, it’s everywhere!!!!!! It’s insidious!!!!!

    And it very rarely happens.

    McConnell has gone on record saying the same sort of thing. The people voted for Repubs because the economy sucks, right? NO! Not according to Mitch. It’s all about “repeal and replace” of the egregious health care reform.

    It took all of 36 hours and they’re already walking back their promises. They couldn’t care less about the economy.

    1. Oh yeah, photo ID. I can write the script right now.

      Repub controlled legislature passes provably unconstitutional law.

      Instant court challenge.

      “Activist” court left with no option but to overturn it.

      Martyr complex ensues. Fear! Recriminations!

      Wash, rinse, repeat.

  2. First of all, I’m a huge believer in a photo ID requirement for voting. It’s madness that we don’t. BUT, this is a big mistake right out of the gates if the first piece of legislation is directed at anything but jobs and/or the economy. Leadership in the state Republican party has been dreadful in recent years. If this is any indication, things don’t appear to be improving.

  3. Thanks for your selective reporting once again. I guess you missed the next line:

    “Jeff Fitzgerald said the first bill in the Assembly will be a jobs package and might draw on GOP bills from the past session that didn’t pass.”

    1. Some clarification is needed here, since the article talks about both Fitzgeralds.

      According to the article, Scott Fitzgerald says the first bill of the Senate will be Photo ID, while Jeff Fitzgerald says the first Assembly bill will be a jobs package.

      No direct quotes from either on the topic.

      Zach is picking the facts that he likes, forgot the ones he likes and neither are exactly wrong.

      Though I don’t think it’s fair to say that the first bill forward being photo ID makes it “clear job creation will not be priority number one.” As I’ve said, I think it’s a PR and political mistake to do so, there’s really no way that that claim is justified. Talking about what your first bill will be months ahead of time just doesn’t mean what you’re saying it does.

      I could just as easily say that Zach posting on this blog proves that being Treasurer of Jason’s County Supervisor race isn’t really important to him.

        1. Not ambiguous – just as forgot said, selective. Almost literally, half of the story. Your claim and bold title, is Republicans #1 priority is not jobs. Yet your support for the claim is much more narrow – the prospective Senate’s first bill. When the same article says that the Assembly’s first bill will be jobs. That second part, makes your claim false. If your criteria for what their #1 priority is, is what their first bill is about (which is a very simplistic measure, but whatever), then the Assembly’s #1 priority IS jobs. And since they’re Republicans too, your larger claim is untrue.

          But you know this. As I’ve said before, you’re very good at this sort of thing.

          1. Lord knows you can’t tackle more than one issues at a time…oh, wait…that’s exactly what they are doing. Streamlining government already…how refreshing.

  4. As long as they don’t remove same day voter registration? I won’t flip out so much – as much as I dislike voter ID, I’ve learned to simply deal with it over time, on the principle in order to register you need your social security number, address, and so on. I find it repetitive and silly for the most part, because if you don’t have that information they don’t register you. Simple as that.

    However if they remove same day voter registration, I am going to flip the fuck out. They’re just trying to keep in power in that case.

    Thank you for proving me wrong again Republican Party with your inane priorities and not your focus on jobs as you promised. Enjoy your one term in power.

    1. T – I agree with you on same day registration. I think it’s a good thing. Having gone through it this year – re-registering due to a move to a new municipality. Photo ID and proof of address were required. Because of that, allowing same day registration means more people can cast their vote and with very little risk of fraud.

      However, I don’t see showing photo id for voting as being redundant. I just don’t see why it’s unreasonable to require a quick verification that you are who you say you are. Without it, all you need is a name and address and you can commit fraud. Is it widespread? I don’t know – probably not as widely as those in favor of it say and probably more so than those against it say. But it most certainly does happen, and that it can happen so easily, and would be so easily eliminated with such a simple thing…seems like a low hanging fruit, a no-brainer. The state would need definitely need to provide a non-driver’s license photo id free of charge upon request (if they don’t already) though. But this seems like a perfectly reasonable expense for taxpayers to cover for a greater confidence in the sanctity of our voting process.

      1. I’m glad there are some people on the other side who can agree with me – to be honest? I wish Same Day Registration was national because I think it’s bull pies that you need to sign up thirty day before voting because a lot of people don’t turn eighteen until voting day. Voter registration should be as easy as renewing your drivers license.

        I can understand the whole thing on voter fraud, but the only time I seen voter fraud committed was in a case of this poor old guy who had a failing memory up here and accidentally sent his vote in twice. I know there are some cases of voter fraud, what I personally wish there was less voter intimidation on both sides. Luckily, where I lived when I got to vote it was really quick, easy, walked in, voted, walked out of the room to vote to get something to drink and cookies. (Before getting hit by a door that was opened in my face due the door opening outward and someone walking through, but that was just terrible timing on my part and bad luck. Funny story.)

        Personally, I think the state would make us pay for a specific voter’s ID – that’s my issue with it. I got a few identification cards already, Drivers License, my tribal ID, and many others – the fact I have to buy another one seems to get me an automatic knee jerk reaction.

        1. Well same day voting registration won’t be national, because states control voting policies. I don’t think the combination of no ID/same day is good, but I don’t have a problem of same day registration with ID.

          Also, I don’t think any of the proposals require a separate voter’s ID. You would just need to show your drivers license/state ID (maybe they would add requirements onto that). I think there was even a provision that the ID would be paid for the poor who supposedly do not have a state ID now. Although I don’t know how you get by without an ID now…

          1. No car particularly, a lot of people live in the big city sometimes and they probably need to just walk to work. Because of that, they don’t often have an ID. As long as they don’t make us have a separate ID? I’m fine with it, but not everyone is going to carry their social security card and birth certificate everywhere on a whim – especially when someone can up and steal it at random and you can lose it.

            I wouldn’t mind it if the license would be fitting, but a lot of these people think you need to get a separate ID completely – which you and I both can agree is bullpies. It cost me 35 dollars to renew my drivers license, and money doesn’t exactly grow on trees.

            1. Even if you have to walk to work, you surely need a valid ID for something in your life. I never heard of a separate ID for voting so I don’t know where you got that from. I would not think that is necessary. I’m not following your argument about carrying a SS card or birth certificate everywhere you go on a whim. Even if you had to intially take those things to get an ID or at the polling place initially, that is not everyday or on a whim.

              1. Due to a car crash that happened when I was younger, I was terrified to drive a car and am still to a degree. I won’t get into the gory bloody messy details, but it scared me enough not to renew my drivers license for another three years. It didn’t help I was just learning how to drive and it happened on the highway when a semi-truck destroyed my car from behind because the person was overworked and only had a few hours of sleep.

                For a while I just biked to get to work or to places, because even if it was irrational that I could possibly be hit by something on a bike, at least I wouldn’t risk a violent crash like that again. I stayed pretty much without an ID until I was about 19 and I properly learned how to drive at last.

                There’s a ton of individual factors on how people can get through life without say a drivers license. I do think we all eventually get an ID if that is what you’re saying, but a lot of people immediately don’t get one on the principle that it costs a bit out of their pocket – something they might not have at the moment.

                1. For those who don’t drive or don’t want a license, there is such a thing called a state ID. The photo ID bill even compromised to say it would subsidize an ID for those few people who don’t have one and couldn’t afford it.

                  I find it hard to believe very many people have no state ID of any kind, because it is nearly impossible to function in the rest of society without one. Are these the same people who refuse mail delivery?

                  1. Once again: That costs something with money a lot of people don’t have on them at the very moment. I think it’s around the same amount as a drivers license but I might be wrong.

                    The rising cost of fees and expenses living from day to day, or even to get food can make someone go “screw this” if they’re going to get a state ID and keep pushing it off.

                    It is very possible to live without an ID or Drivers License, it’s often during the first years when people are trying to get off the ground – if you have a credit card and know your social security card for instance, you can usually go pretty far. Having to take care of my family, pay for living expenses and going to Paul’s Pantry to keep above water tends to put things into perspective that you literally don’t have much to spend. Many of us, are in that position right now whether you’re aware of it or not.

                    If there is a way to give IDs for people in Wisconsin for free? Then you might have my interest. Until then, I’ll consider it trying to smother out the vote.

                    ( Also, please nobody jump in and derail it into “I KNOW PEOPLE WHO ARE POOR AND IT’S THEIR FAULT BECAUSE THEY SPEND IT USELESS SHIT LIKE VIDEO GAMES FOR KIDS AND ALL THESE CLOTHES.” or “I SEEN BLACK PEOPLE GIVE GLARES WHILE SMOKING OUTSIDE HARASSING WHITE PEOPLE WHO WERE WORKING.”

                    Because Protip: A minority of a minority does not make the majority. Just like saying how all the people in the Tea Party are all bigots, it’s equally not fair to invalidate a problem because one person does something stupid. )

        2. I’m glad there are some people on the other side who can agree with me – to be honest?

          I can be reasonable, every once in awhile 🙂

          Seriously, though, I have my mental list of people who I never, ever listen to or give any consideration to no matter what – many pundits/talking heads like the Limbaughs, Becks, Olbermanns of the world, as well as the party heads nationally and locally since by definition, they are blind partisans. Excepting though, I’ll consider anything. Which “side” says it just doesn’t come into play for me. I’m frugal and generally a libertarian, live & let live kind of guy.

          1. Olbermann is very it or miss with me, once he tends to go into tirades about people being nazis or facists I tend to shut him out but sometimes he makes some reasonable points. Beck, Limbaugh, and especially Palin? I shut them off. O’Reily sometimes has some sense, believe it or not although most of the time like Olbermann I tend to shut him off too.

            I’m pretty live and let live though, I just get up in arms when people do something that doesn’t work by mathematical standards or if it restricts civil rights and we shouldn’t outright ban things and keep them specifically partisan issues – when they should be bi-partisan. (See Gay Marriage, Stem Cell Research, acknowledging minorities do in fact have a harder time, and so on.) The right, has gone too far right for my liking and same with the left to a degree. I do not agree with outright bans on guns, for instance and a ton of pork project… Actually, in general? I dislike all of these guys.

            Overall, I really do wish there were more parties, not the Tea Party but other off shoots. Yes we’re not Europe or any other countries, but these two parties are both way too powerful for so many people.

      2. And what of the people who cant drive or cant get to a place where they can get a “voter ID” card. will the state go find them and print them one?

        Seems to me to justify what I always say about conservatives. If they dont like it we are broke if they do like it money is of no object…

        1. Yes because of liberal objections to the few cases of people with no ID, the provision for the state to pay for it was added. Money is no object? How much do you think it would cost to do that? Like I said, I don’t know how anyone can function without a license or state ID now. I guess they don’t access any state services, rent a movie, or cash a check, etc.

          1. If a form of voter ID needed at the polls was passed, some government entity would have to supply free voter ID cards. It would probably end up being a state unfunded mandate pushed onto the municipalities.

            But to suggest that we use a state drivers license or say a US passport, which I pay relative big bucks for, smacks to me as a poll tax. And last time I checked poll taxes don’t pass muster.

      3. I’m not entirely opposed to the idea of voter IDs, because while I’m a liberal (and therefore in favor of vote fraud, at least according to some conservatives) I do want our elections to be free from fraud.

        My only concern is that there’s a mechanism in place to ensure that all citizens are able to obtain said IDs without having to pay for them, because requiring someone to pay for the right to vote sounds an awful lot like a poll tax.

        1. Actually, that fits pretty well with my opinion on it. Get it in a system like that? It works. Also it will be made for you if you register on the voting day as well. It should be as easy as renewing your license as I stated before, if that makes sense.

        2. I agree as well – and my understanding is that the most recent proposals do in fact provide a means for acquiring a photo ID for those without one. Because you’re right, requiring a separate additional id just for voting is dumb, and requiring purchase of such a thing is clearly wrong.

          Personally, my drivers license has had blue address change stickers on it the majority of my adult life because I refuse to pay the DMV $35 (or whatever it is now) just because I moved. I actually believe I had the last legal non-credit card style ID in the state. I got mine renewed literally the day before they switched and went through a number of those stickers they sent to stick on the id & extend the date.

  5. that pesky Constitution used to get in the way but no longer. I am sure the “tea partiers” will oppose this just like the founders did.

    1. The Supreme Court ruled that states can require voters to produce photo identification without violating their constitutional rights, validating Republican-inspired voter ID laws. In a 6-3 ruling, the court upheld Indiana’s strict photo ID requirement.

  6. I guess i was wrong I thought we would have concealed carry by lunch of walkers first day.

    1. One constitutional right at a time. First I want them to guarantee my votes counts and isn’t watered down by fraud. Then we can move on to right to bear arms, etc.

  7. So where have you lost your constitutional right to vote and when have you ever lost your constitutional right to bear arms?

    1. If fraud is easy, that dillutes my valid vote by counting an invalid vote on par with mine. Is not conceal carry part of the right to bear arms?

  8. Fraud does not really happen so no. Voter caging happens often as we saw reince do but no one seems to care because minorities shouldnt vote anyway I guess.

    Also no, concealed carry has nothing to do with the second amendment, we have already far surpassed what the second amendment was meant for.

  9. Though we kind of got off topic on the subject of voter IDs, I think it’s important to note the GOP didn’t pick up fourteen seats in the State Assembly and four seats in the State Senate because people really, really wanted them to focus on voter ID or saving fetuses or concealed weapons – voters voted for Republicans because Republicans promised to bring us out of the current economic situation and because Republicans promised to create jobs.

    Republicans should be focused on two things: creating jobs and addressing the state budget deficit. Those are the issues folks really care about right now, and if Republicans lose sight of that, they’re likely to end up losing seats in 2012.

    1. voters voted for Republicans because Republicans promised to bring us out of the current economic situation and because Republicans promised to create jobs.

      Not quite. Voters blamed the Democrats for not doing a better job dealing with the problem and by default, voting against them meant for the Republicans. It’s not a distinction without a difference – I really don’t think most have much confidence in the Republicans to fix things either. And in 2012, if things don’t improve, we’ll see it all swing back the other way again.

      should be focused on two things: creating jobs and addressing the state budget deficit.

      Couldn’t agree more. But not just Republicans – the Democrats should be focused on those things too.

  10. Lets be perfectly clear here and stop beating around the bush.

    We have a 7 billion dollar deficit, too high of unemployment, bleeding manufacturing jobs and many small towns and school districts going broke.

    We also have one of the higher turnout states in terms of voting and one of the easiest states to register and vote.

    Keeping that in mind, which one do the republicans want to fix?

  11. We have a 7 billion dollar deficit, too high of unemployment, bleeding manufacturing jobs and many small towns and school districts going broke.

    The record of Democrat control.

    Kudos for admitting it.

    The voter photo ID bill is already written, and has been since 2002, never mind Dufus Doyle’s three vetos. It will be a one day (perhaps one hour) affair of passing it in the senate.

    As far as same day registration, in 2004 83,000 registered on election day in Milwuakee County, more than 20% of all voting-age residents in the county. The state later reported 10,000 of those registrations could not be verified.

    1. Exactly MJM tommy and the rest of the republicans had nothing to do with it. I remember the huge surplus tommy left us( o wait that was bill clinton, nevermind) They are 100% blameless of course. The party of personal responsibility never seems to take any.

      Since you have complete control of the government now, why beat around the bush? Lets enact all of the bills that you truly want. The first can be only white christian men can vote and only women married to such men can vote. Why beat around the bush always crying fruad which is non existent?

      As George Orwell says “when you use euphemisms that means you are either lying or too cowardly to say what you really mean.”

      1. Since you have complete control of the government now, why beat around the bush? Lets enact all of the bills that you truly want. The first can be only white christian men can vote and only women married to such men can vote. Why beat around the bush always crying fruad which is non existent?

        You certainly didn’t beat around the bush now, did you? You just called MjM a racist, sexist, religious bigot. Or are you calling all state Republican legislators that? I won’t bother asking you to provide a shred of support for such a claim. There is none.

        I can get along fine with pretty much everyone else on here despite disagreeing with them on as many issues as I disagree with you on. But baseless, classless accusations like that continue to set you apart.

        1. Locke,

          The biggest reason the republicans are for photo id is because it limits minorities and the poors access to the polls. While there is definitely some racism involved, the biggest motivation is winning elections. The people who it would affect the most vote democrat(largely) so they need to be stopped.

          It is definitely not baseless as we saw this year

          http://www.onewisconsinnow.org/swv2010/swvhome.html

          There was a concerted effort to keep minorities from voting. Luckily they got caught and appear to have stopped their blatantly illegal plans. I know they were innocent(yada yada yada) but if they truly cared about the rights of people to vote they would started in Oostburg or Waukesha, not one of the heaviest minority districts in WI.

          Then we have the State of Florida in 2000 where they illegal knocked 100,000 voters off the rolls for the simple crime of voting while black. http://www.gregpalast.com/one-million-black-votes-didnt-count-in-the-2000-presidential-election-rnits-not-too-hard-to-get-your-vote-lost-if-some-politicians-want-it-to-be-lost/

          Or the voting irregularities in many minority districts
          http://www.dailykos.com/story/2004/12/5/94939/4521

          So no I did not beat around the bush. The fact that they are so adamant that we have a voter id and ignore voter caging speaks volumes. If we have voter Id we have to make sure it is free to everyone and make sure it is free to everyone and everyone has access(if not it will be an unconstitutional poll tax). This will be a big cost to the state.

          So for those scoring at home. the party that is going to get everyone working again first two actions (voter id and killing the train) will add to the deficit and cost us jobs.

          1. Yup, go ahead and try to justify it all you want. You responded to MjM’s post (which contained mostly facts and statistics) by attacking him/her personally and calling him a racist, sexist, religious bigot. As far as I can tell, MjM has no history of anything to justify such slander.

            And worse, when called on it, you refuse to admit it or acknowledge it and make some sort of weak attempt to justify it. It’s comes across about like a wife-beater saying, “She had it coming.” I’m just plain sick of your shit. Sorry to be crass, but that’s exactly what that is. There is no justification for completely unfounded accusations and just being an enormous jerk.

            1. Let me apologize then Locke, to you and MJm or anyone else who mistook it. It was not a direct assault on MM, as I do not know him. It WAS a direct indictment of the republican party platform and antics of the past few years. Making sure people have access to voting, especially those who they know wont vote for them, has not been their priority!

    2. One time I was told I wasn’t verified in voter registration because I wrote ‘dr.” instead of “drive” and it didn’t match up completely with my address and what I normally wrote it as.

      Understandably, I raised hell for that nitpicking. I don’t think a lot of people would do that however, but that is how they say you’re not ‘verified’ to vote. Little details like that.

  12. Providing an ID to vote seems common sense to me. It always shocks me they don’t ask for it. Should it be the first thing on the agenda? Probably not.

Comments are closed.