Wisconsin’s Public Integrity Scorecard: C-

Wisconsin, you are not living up to your potential... Your mother and I are very disappointed in these grades. Don't you want to get into a good school?

Wisconsin ranks 22nd out of 50 states in terms of public integrity.  If it weren’t for the formation of the GAB, we would have done much worse, according to a report from The State Integrity Investigation.  The investigation revealed that corruption is a huge risk for state governments.  The creation of the GAB

explains in part why Wisconsin, a state of about 5.7 million, did not score worse….  Its overall ranking was 22rd out of 50, with a grade of C- and a numerical score of 70 percent. Its ratings for political financing restrictions, lobbying disclosures, and judicial ethics were higher than the majority of the states, while those for auditing, pensions funds, and redistricting were below most of the states.

Let’s look at Wisconsin’s scores:

Note the “F” in redistricting.  Is anyone really surprised?  When you conduct the redistricting behind closed doors, you get an F in open government.

Let’s compare Wisconsin to a relatively clean state.  Who was number one?  New Jersey!

Chris Christie is running a well-oiled machine.

But we should all be glad we’re not living in Georgia which received an overall faling grade witha score of just 49%!

Share:

Related Articles

6 thoughts on “Wisconsin’s Public Integrity Scorecard: C-

  1. What’s the difference between Chris Christie and Scott Walker? One is an effective administrator and the other is…Scott Walker.

    Like him or not, Christie is no dummy. He is actually capable of managing the state’s affairs while also executing his extremist agenda. Whereas Scooter seems particularly adept at raising boatloads of cash and little else.

  2. Who is responsible for this report, and what is their motivation? I especially question the rating of “State Pension Fund Management.” It is my understanding that Wisconsin’s state pension fund had been in relatively good shape. The unusual increase in retirements this last year, caused by Walker’s war on public unions, has resulted in unexpected financial repercusions for the fund. Historically, this fund has seen responsible management. Where is the “corruption risk?”

    1. Linda,
      I asked that question on the site and the answer is essentially that it is a corruption scorecard. Specifically for the “State Pension Fund Management” they were looking for transparency in management and ability of the public to detect conflicts of interest for those on the board overseeing the fund. The corruption risk is in the laws and rules governing the fund that provide for confidentiality for those running the funds. They actually have the details of the various categories if you click on them in the scorecard itself on their site. I’m not sure if I would agree with their conclusions, but at least they are open about how they got to them (if you know enough to click the various links).

  3. I would not take the report too serious people it is a far left agenda driven group. The person who did the Wisconsin ‘reserach’ is Kate Golden a know progressive, not what one would call non bias in her reporting

    1. By “far left agenda,” dante means “balanced approach.” The problem with balanced approaches, dante, is you righties normally lose when they’re in play.

      And if it’s biased, how do you explain that New Jersey, run by a Republican governor, rated at the top?

      Reality has a well-known liberal bias.

    2. Dante, please explain what draws you to the conclusion that Center for Public Integrity is a “far left agenda driven group”. Cite your evidence so that we can have an informed discussion instead of dropping grenades like every other troll. Then maybe we’ll take you seriously.

Comments are closed.