Top | Register | Preferences | Suggest Discussion | Discussion Policy | Log In


Discussion group:  EditorialsTop   Discussion group:  Editorials Editorials    Discussion Topic: Jensen & Chvala - Step Down! Jensen & Chvala - Step Down!

<< previous (newer) discussion next (older) discussion >>

Moderated by c3knews   Reply to this DiscussionAdd to this Discussion  
Jensen & Chvala - Step Down!
T O P I C Discussion Started: 02-08-2002, 6:04 PM Add to the Discussion
Q
U
E
S
T
I
O
N
JENSEN & CHVALA - STEP DOWN!

02/10/02

It is time ... no it is past time ... for Assembly Speaker Scott Jensen and Senate Majority Leader Chuck Chvala to resign their leadership positions in the State Legislature.

And it is time for new leadership to step forward.

It's been a two-man legislature for too long, and the damage done to the institution by those two men is a civic embarrassment. They have demeaned the integrity of State Government and they have sullied its reputation.

And they are now inhibiting the investigation into whether their actions have been illegal.

If they won't step down by themselves, the caucuses that elected them must force them to step down.

If caucus members won't take action, they deserve part of the blame. But if Jensen or Chvala have any sense of what is right remaining at all, they'd spare the caucuses the trouble and resign.

It is best for state government.

It is best for the state.

Sign up to have Editorials e-mailed to you.

View Messages: [newest first] | [oldest first]
rdavis1613 04-17-2002, 5:14 AM Add to the Discussion
I am in total agreement. In reference to SB 357, which is a classic example of the abuse of their power. Ignoring the will of the people, these politicians decide what is in our best interest and listen to not one word we the constiuents are saying to them. I definately have seen those two in action, while we are at it, why not include Risser in our quest! It is time for Chvala's lapdog to resign too!

Andrew Swa 03-15-2002, 12:35 PM Add to the Discussion
The action of the Democrats in the senate Tuesday night (March 12) on the concealed carry bill is hard to describe. If I were to sum it up in one word, that word would be "childlike".

On Monday, the plan was to get the concealed carry bill (SB 357) "pulled" to the senate floor for a vote. To do so would require a simple majority vote of 17 of the 33 senators. All of the concerned parties believed that there were at least 18 votes to accomplish this. The "pulling motion" was going to be done either Tuesday or on Wednesday, since the senate was scheduled to adjourn on Thursday.

At the end of the day Monday, Democrat senate majority leader Chuck Chvala pulled a trick out of his hat. He put the entire three days of senate business into Tuesday's session. He waited until the absolute last minute permissible (4:00 pm) when most of the staffers would be gone. Thus, most senate offices didn't know about this until late Tuesday morning.

This change in the senate calendar changed the rules on the number of votes required to approve a pulling motion on the bill. Instead of requiring 17 votes, a pulling motion on the last day of session would require 22 votes (two-thirds majority). There was little possibility of getting 22 votes, although the pressure would be on the "I'm all for the rights of hunters and sportsmen" politicians to live up to their promises. The fear among these so-called defenders of gun rights was almost palpable. They didn't want it to come to a vote.

So, Chuck Chvala and his lapdog, senate president Fred Risser, pulled some stunts like nobody has seen before. Early in the session, Risser promised Senator Zien that Zien would be able to bring up the concealed carry bill in the fourteenth order of business, which was the second-last order of business of the day.

When Senator Zien got his chance to speak, Chuck Chvala made a "point of order," which was nothing more than reading an HCI press release. Senate president (and Chvala lackey) Risser attempted to make that the last point of discussion on the bill. When Senator Zien attempted to respond, Risser wouldn't even acknowledge him or let him speak. At every point, Risser said he'd take comments "under advisement." When challenged by Senator Mike Ellis and others, Risser cited some senate rule 8.x.x. on the process.

Senator Bob Welch picked up the senate rule book and quoted rule 8.x.x, which really is nothing more than the dress code for senators when on the floor, and a rule governing the presence of food and beverages when on the floor. Risser said he'd take Senator Welch's concerns "under advisement."

Senator Schultz asked that Chvala's "point of order" be clarified, since it wasn't any kind of point other than a cheap shot at professor John Lott. Risser said he'd "take it under advisement." Schultz asked if this "advisement" would happen before or after the senate adjourned, and Risser said that Schultz could ask Chvala that question after the issue of concealed carry was over. Meanwhile, Chvala was snickering at the back of the chamber.

Then Chvala pulled his last stunt. He made a motion to move to the next order of business. Republican minority leader Mary Panzer objected, but Risser pretended not to hear her. She reminded him that she had objected to the motion to move on, but Risser was unmovable. He said he'd take her objection "under advisement." To go back to the previous order of business would require a roll call of the senate, and the Democrats had all mysteriously disappeared.

Finally, Chuck Chvala got what he wanted: the senate adjourned without a single vote on concealed carry, or even a discussion of concealed carry.

If all this sounds confusing, that's because it is. So here's the synopsis: Zien was promised a hearing on the bill, but never got it; Rissser cited senate rules that Bob Welch proved had nothing to do with the process at hand; and Mary Panzer's legitimate objections over the motion to move on were ignored. Chvala and Risser made sure that there was no debate, no opposing views, no votes, no proper procedural moves--in other words, our opinions as a citizen are worth nothing to them .

Is this the kind of behavior we choose to support by voting for these representatives? I thought voting was a way of representing our views through them. In my opinion, our views were violated by such childish antics.

Seth Andrew Swain

wraith 02-19-2002, 8:51 AM Add to the Discussion
I agree with Mr. Heinen that these two legislative leaders should step down. I also agree with the other opinions stating they all should resign. The problem with politics in America is that there are usually only two choices, if that, for any one seat in the general election. People may tend to support candidates from one party and are loathe to support a candidate from the other party. Some might say get rid of the incumbent in the primary, but that is only possible when there are challengers. If people are fed up with their representatives, they are going to have to bite the bullet and hope for the best. Citizens who vote will have to support third party candidates, vote for someone else in the primary, or vote for the candidate in the other major party in order to achieve change. The current breed of politician is not about better government. They are about I(getting re-elected), party(power), and "issues". If citizens want better government, they are going to have to make better government the only issue. To me better government means a different relationship between the people and their representatives, an electoral process which serves the people not the candidates and that is not dependent on money, complete accountability and open government, and some fundamental constitutional changes. Fundamental change will not come from politicians, it will have to come from citizens. Jamie Rathman

mohansen 02-11-2002, 3:37 PM Add to the Discussion
Democracy is not a spectator sport! The media conditions us to be passive observers, basking in the warm glow of the TV monitor. Rather than ranting about "kicking out the bums," try one of the following: (1)announce your candidacy for public office; (2) get active in a political party of your choice; (3) knock on 100 doors each weekend between now and election day advocating your positions. (4)Rather than merely being against someone, try taking a public stand FOR something...

Each person can make a difference and everybody must make the effort to try.

Have a nice day.

Sincerely, Mo Hansen

bahr 02-11-2002, 3:02 PM Add to the Discussion
Jensen and Chavala and all legislators should resign. We would all be better off to replace the entire lot. Our employee lawmakers have sold out to large campaign donations, granted the special-interest exemptions from tax, and left the rest of us to pay the bill.

Gary Bahr Belleville

bchmbadger 02-11-2002, 2:48 PM Add to the Discussion
And let's not forget the governor. McCallum has had at least four opportunities to make a dent in the corruption in state government: (1) he could have vetoed all state funding for the caucus staffs in the state budget, (2) he could have vetoed some or all of the special provisions inserted into the budget that were influenced by campaign donations during the budget deliberations, (3) he could have authorized attorney general to file suit to stop the illegal payments being made to lawyers to defend caucus staffers, and (4) he could have provided the no partial veto assurance that ostensibly would have moved campaign finance reform ahead in the senate. He has not stepped up on any of these issues, and I hope that voters remember.a

jessebrain 02-11-2002, 2:13 PM Add to the Discussion
posters are going too far. Chvala and Jensen were elected by their district so shouldn't leave office. But the leadership (or loser-ship) just shows how shallow the Wisconsin Legislature really is. Subtract the eighth grade education that some have, minus the guys who got GED's (in California) and then subtract the second layer of loser- ship that said they were grads of UW-Madison, and there isn't much left. Fred Risser and who else is left...Mike Ellis? If these guys are criminals, let's lock them up.... before they take one more dollar of road builder's money, or write scripts for WMC ads. By the way TV-3, how much money did you get from the Chvala campaign last time?

Jesse the Brain

bchmbadger 02-11-2002, 1:28 PM Add to the Discussion
I agree completely. Chvala and Jensen are fundamentally corrupt politicians, and under them, state government has deteriorated. We deserve better. In spite of Chvala's lip-service to campaign finance reform, he keeps finding creative ways to stop it while deflecting the blame. Much of the current budget crisis can be traced to special tax breaks and favors sold to individuals and special interests during the recent budget deliberations. If you do not have the money to make large campaign donations, progress on issues important to you is now impossible. Voters need to look beyond party allegiances in the next election cycle, and vote for clean government. The situation has gotten so bad, that no other issue has any real importance anymore.

izzybelle 02-11-2002, 8:46 AM Add to the Discussion
Amen! Step down and right out the door of the Capitol, don't look back.

I'm tired of hearing how Chvala wants this so he won't pass that.

Both of you get off your high horses and see what you've done to this Great State.

As stated by another writer, maybe we shouldn't stop there, but Clean House from top to bottom.

badgermama 02-11-2002, 8:19 AM Add to the Discussion
I couldn't agree more with the editorial - let's all us Wisconsinites get our brooms and mops and clean the House!

Page 1 of 2 << Prev Page | Next Page >>