You want vote fraud? Rep. Joel Kleefisch has your vote fraud right here!

Watch as Republican State Rep. Joel Kleefisch (better known as the Lt. Governor’s husband) votes several times for absent members of his caucus during an Assembly session on February 21, 2012.

Perhaps Republicans who control the State Assembly should institute some measures to prevent vote fraud by their own caucus members.

H/T to the Root River Siren.

105 comments to You want vote fraud? Rep. Joel Kleefisch has your vote fraud right here!

  • I’d have to confirm, but I believe state legislative rules allow for vote by proxy. Also, if this was so bad, why didn’t any of the Democrats raise a stink through Assembly Rule 76 (6)?

    Secondly, amazing how that video was taken in a place where cameras are forbidden.

       0 likes

    • Makes me want to mash my teeth.

         4 likes

    • You mean Assembly Rule 76(6) that says “(5) Only the members present in the assembly chamber may vote.” I searched for the word “proxy” but it wasn’t there. Maybe it’s somewhere else and Kevin bin Versie can find it for us.

      Those darn cameras! We should ban them, as they violate the Second Commandment! Only the State should control what is photographed, what is ingested, what forms of sex can be had, and which campaign contributors should benefit from its legislation! These sorts of videos could harm incumbents! This is the essence of small government. So Mote It Be.

         4 likes

      • John – That’s Assembly Rule 76 (5) you’re pointing out. Thought after all those years of lickspittling to Foley you would have figured out how to read numbering of legislative rules by now…

        Assembly Rule 76 (6) says any member can demand to have another member’s vote which was cast stricken from the record if it can be proven the member was absent when the vote was taken.

        Jeff – I’m not defending the action, I’m just not naive enough like you are to think it doesn’t happen on the other side and folks like Mark Pocan or Fred Kessler aren’t pushing someone else’s button who’s in the building, but not in the chamber.

           1 likes

        • actually thats your whole point in here is to defend him. First by your original post and second by the scooter jensen, who cares if I break the law everyone is doing it defense.

          So can I have someone vote for me in the spring elections? I will be on vacation….

             1 likes

        • Lickspittling? Is that like mashing of teeth?

          But go ahead, tell us why cameras are so bad for democracy. You know, from your experienced and nuanced conservative position.

             0 likes

    • Kevin, what do you have against open government?

      I ask because I fail to understand why you’d have a problem with cameras being allowed in the chambers of our government. After all, what’s to hide?

         2 likes

    • Zuma Bound

      “[A]mazing how that video was taken in a place where cameras are forbidden. ”

      Yeah, “amazing[ly]” cool. It’s funny how turning the “light” on makes the cockroaches scurry.

      It just trips me out (no, Kevin, I’m not quite “mashing [gn]y teeth” over it) that one of the things that bothers you most is the fact that the “light” was turned on.

      Well, I guess that there’s a reason for that.

         0 likes

  • wow surprise surprise KB is here defending this deplorable practice and then making Kleefisch the victim,. How so very predictable. did you get paid for this post?

    I am going to be on vacation during the spring elections can i get someone to just show up and grab my ballot and vote for me?

       3 likes

  • gnarlytrombone

    People are routinely dragged out of the chamber in hogties for violating the camera ban. But in fairness, picking up Kleefisch is no mean feat.

       4 likes

  • tweetster

    Kleefisch is the primerib of the wisconsin assembly!

       0 likes

  • I would say that 30 seconds of video is one thing that kevin and the rest would love hidden but i think it more accurate to say everything Joel Kleefisch does needs to be hidden….

       1 likes

  • Palli

    So the demands to expunge votes from absent members should be made.
    Although chamber business is often deliberately boring and gentlemen’s agreements can free up time for legislators to do other business, I am not sure how trustworthy some of these legislators are. Of course, if all republicans are required to vote in the same way under party discipline this is hardly an issue-except to the constituents!

    Wisconsin governance under this republican leadership has become ‘conveniently’ sloppy. Roberts Rules of Order, legislative law and respectful courtesy are viewed as unnecessary niceties because the radical agenda requires a slapdash style to pass through the dark doors of democracy denied. Votes on bills can be-should be-scheduled ahead of time and pursuant to law so all members can be in attendance. Capitol conduct under the Fitzpatricks has deteriorated to such a degree that the proxy privilege should be, at least temporarily, rescinded.
    Sadly, the bad apples always spoil it for the others.

       2 likes

  • “Lickspittling”….LOL! In this hyper-partisan atmosphere, you would think Kleefisch’s Democrat peers would start blowing their vuvuzelas or running to Illinois in protest of these heinous actions if he had actually done something wrong.

       0 likes

  • At least Joel Kleefisch was getting some exercise, because it looks like he could use it.

       1 likes

  • LikeaHawk

    The same ‘ghost voting’ problem seems to afflict the Texas Legislature: http://www.dailykos.com/story/2011/03/25/960053/-Texas-Lawmakers-use-ghost-votes-to-pass-Voter-ID-Law

    I don’t think ghost voting should be allowed, but I also wonder how much difference it would actually make to ban the practice given the extreme level of party-line/block voting our Legislature has achieved. This could be an overly cynical view, but it seems that no matter who presses the button, it’s the lobbyists who are actually casting the votes. Perhaps more attention should be paid to how closely our legislators’ votes mirror the positions of powerful lobby groups.

       0 likes

  • I think the point here that everyone keeps missing is that while these guys couldnt wait to get voter ID passed when they finally came into power and then go do something like this.

    What would happen if I grabbed a ballot and voted for my wife? Think they would like that? Think that if i got caught doing that it would be on fox news that night? Wisconsin reporter and maciver would combine for a hard hitting expose on the left wing blogger voting fraud? Kleefisch would probably introduce a bill that day to end it……

       4 likes

  • LikeaHawk

    Make no mistake…I recognize the hypocrisy and find it disgusting.

       1 likes

  • Patrick

    There are a few arguments suggesting this is not a big deal that I would concede – mostly regarding the historical practice.

    There is also plenty of hypocrisy on the part of Republicans in passing voter ID and even Walker’s past condemnation of this practice.

    But even with all that, my biggest concern is that as citizens we’re unable to stand together and ask the question “is this good for democracy?” Is this the way we want our government to be run? Is this the way we want things to be?

    It doesn’t have to be like this.

       2 likes

  • On what votes was Kleefisch pushing the button? For whom was he voting and where were they?

    Were those absent in the restoom? At a doctor’s appointment? Out sick? Meeting with a constituent? Hiding in a hotel in Rockford, Illinois? Were they even absent? Were they somewhere else in the room but out of the camera shot?

    Again, if this is such a big deal, why isn’t Peter Barca howling about it to the media?

       0 likes

    • Patrick

      Fortunately, most of Wisconsin isn’t as cynical as that.

         1 likes

    • Roland,

      I think the point your missing, is also the point of difference between the left and the right, and our two blogs even.

      1. I am disgusted that they do this either side, silence from the dems on this does not mean that we then must excuse all behavior. Silence from the dems on this practice disgusts me. NOT to the extent that the voter id crazy republicans do it disgusts me but pretty close.

      2. what also gets me about this, especially in the follow up, is that Kleefisch makes himself out to be the victim. The party of personal responsibility is the victim because he was filmed committing a criminal act.

      Is Kleefisch an exception here or is he the new era republican who has no rules and follows no laws?

      I believe your repeated defense of him answers that question.

         0 likes

      • Maybe Kleefisch did do something wrong here. I’m just saying I want more than an edited-without-context 30 sec clip before I pass judgment.

        I don’t think you should grab a fist full of ballots and cast them for your family members just as I don’t think people should have signed recall petitions for their family members.

           0 likes

  • Roland, would it be ok in the spring elections if I grab some ballots and vote for the rest of my family?

    Did the people he voted for constituents actually vote for the ability for Joel Kleefisch to represent them?

    Is there anything that you wont defend?

       2 likes

  • gnarlytrombone

    Whelp, we know he was voting for Farrow and Knudson.

    Tubby gets the chance to explain what happened on teevee, but chooses to the paranoid flipout instead.

       1 likes

    • He explained what happened. He was the victim of those communist camera phones all because his wife is doing such a great job for the people of WI!

      “Kleefisch has seen the video and calls it another attempt at character assassination.

      “We are targets. My wife is under recall. We are targets. He shoots specific video of me when he could have shot 24 to 50 people at that time,” said Kleefisch”

         1 likes

  • Tim

    And you would be a brownnoser, Kevin.

       0 likes

  • Todd

    I assume there is some kind of letter (legal proof) that is in place when people vote for other people? I mean really, if we can vote absentee why can’t legislators vote absentee? Obviously, there is a docket of some sort when votes are coming up due. You look at the docket and realize you can’t be there. So why not have some kind of absentee voting system for legislators?

    This smells fishy to me. There is no way to justify one member voting for another without some kind of proof.

       0 likes

  • Todd

    It is odd those two guys made unquestionable uncomfortable moves and ducked their heads knowing something fishy was about to happen. And the one guy laughed like I can’t believe you just did that. And then Joel Kleefisch turned around to see if anyone saw him do it.

    Obviously, not everyone understands what the rule is concerning someone just getting up and voting for another member.

       0 likes

  • Todd

    I’m a little slow. Does anyone actually know who Kleefisch voted for? I searched for a few minutes and couldn’t find out who he actually voted for.

       0 likes

  • Todd

    I’m sorry but he totally looks like he committed a crime. He looks like he just did something he shouldn’t have did. I mean really, look at his demeanor. The guy looks like a rookie get away driver in a bank robbery.

       0 likes

Leave a Reply

  

  

  

You can use these HTML tags

<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

Blogging Blue’s “14 in ’14″

Goal Thermometer