Will Kolosso be on the ballot?

Last Friday I noted that despite reports to the contrary, Democratic House candidate Todd Kolosso would be on the ballot as the Democratic opponent to long-time incumbent Rep. Jim Sensenbrenner in the 5th Congressional District, but if the Republican Party of Wisconsin has their way, Kolosso won’t be on the ballot in November. The Republican Party of Wisconsin has submitted a 246 page complaint with the Government Accountability Board alleging improprieties with Kolosso’s nominating paperwork, notably signatures by individuals who don’t live within the 5th Congressional District. Based on the evidence submitted, the RPW complaint certainly seems to have some merit, but the Kolosso campaign was quick to respond to the RPW’s complaint:

In a sign that a Congressional seat Republicans have held for 32 years may not be safe in the current anti-incumbency climate, the Wisconsin GOP mounted a nomination paper challenge against Rep. Jim Sensenbrenner’s opponent, Todd Kolosso, hoping to remove him from the ballot.

“Sensenbrenner’s camp can try using political shenanigans to knock me off the ballot, but it’s not going to work,” said Kolosso. “I have the signatures. I’m in this for long run, and I know I can win. Apparently the Congressman agrees.”

It will be interesting to see how the complaint against Kolosso is resolved, and hopefully Kolosso will remain on the ballot to oppose Rep. Sensenbrenner in the fall, because the voters in the 5th Congressional District deserve nothing less.

Share:

Related Articles

6 thoughts on “Will Kolosso be on the ballot?

  1. how did orients put together a 246 page report? after reading some of his press releases, I would think he peaks at 2 paragraphs. I doubt sensenbrenner left his gated community long enough to even know anyone was running.

  2. It will be interesting to see how the complaint against Kolosso is resolved

    Remind me again…how were the members of the Government Accountability Board selected?

      1. In fairness, ultimately at some point, the GAB may actually prove to a viable oversight entity. In theory, the approach isn’t wrong. At some point down the line, after different Governors have appointed replacements on the Board, hopefully it may be a more balanced body. As is, I hold their rulings in utter contempt since they were all put there by a sleazebag governor who used them to help get elected. And though I understand they’re a group of really old guys who probably are scared of computers, the fact is the GAB is responsible for the Campaign Finance Reporting System. You know the million dollar project given to a Connecticut company that was not delivered on time, featured the skyline of Minneapolis in it’s header image (I’m sure to them all of us in flyover land are all the same anyway) and years later still really sucks. Especially disappointing since it’s not like it was something new and earth-shattering. OpenSecrets has provided a really excellent example of how to do it and it might just be the most significant empowerment to voters since…well since 1965/66.

        1. Yeah, I’m in agreement that OpenSecrets really has provided an excellent template on how campaign finance transparency can be done; hopefully Wisconsin state government can get more savvy when it comes to technology and how it can be used to improve how services are provided.

Comments are closed.