Thursday, June 7, 2012

Who spoke in Wisconsin recall election? MONEY

Although Wisconsin Democrats appear to have regained control of the state senate with the recall of Republican Van Wanggaard by a narrow margin, this was clearly offset by Gov. Scott Walker’s 53-46 recall election victory over Milwaukee mayor Tom Barrett. Walker’s victory could in part be blamed on the failure of state Democrats to more forcefully establish the case for labor rights, and to select a distinctly uncharismatic, unpopular with labor unions candidate to run against Walker so late in the day. Democrats also failed to convince many voters who opposed Walker but nevertheless didn’t understand the need for recall; Walker should have just been allowed to serve out his term—and then something could be done about—a sentiment that the Walker camp took full advantage of. Barack Obama was criticized by some for not doing more to help the cause, but the recall election was so polarizing that it is believed that he preferred to avoid estrangement from independent voters.

But the bigger issue, the one has revealed just how dangerous the U.S. Supreme Court’s Citizens’ United decision—that declared corporation’s “people” and thus allowing them to make unlimited campaign contributions—is to democracy. Walker’s billionaire backers, like the Koch brothers, literally “bought” the election for him; with so much money in till almost immediately after the recall effort was approved, the right spent millions in getting out their “message,” and kept on message right through to election day.

On the other hand, money for Democrats was so tight that it wasn’t until the last few weeks that an attempt could even be made to thwart the Republican onslaught. There have been a lot of figures bandied about, but the pertinent one is that $31 million was spent on the Walker campaign compared to $4 for the Barrett campaign; a Republican-backed state law which allows unlimited campaign contributions from sources outside the state figured heavily in the campaign: Two-thirds of Walker’s money came from sources outside the state. How could the Democrats’ message get out in the face of this onslaught? Especially when that message was that Walker was bought and paid for by extreme-right, anti-labor corporate America.--supplied with the same simple-minded, paranoid slogans of the bought and paid for Tea Party "movement."

What did corporate money hope to buy? Walker still wants to dismantle Wisconsin’s environmental laws, and allow controversial, environmentally-dangerous mining techniques. He also seeks to follow other Republican-controlled states in voter-suppression laws that principally target Democrat-leaning constituencies. These game plans may be less certain now if Wisconsin bare Democratic majority in the Senate ( if John Lehman’s lead holds over Republican Wanggaard, who has not conceded, and Democrats can remain united). Of course, Walker has announced a sudden interest in "bipartisanship," but we've heard such propaganda talk from Republicans before.

What does this election portend for the future of democratic institutions in this country? Initially there was an expectation that Walker would lose the election, but he was able to turn the tide by dominating the “message” machine. This recall election of a sitting governor was the first in the post-Citizens United ruling, and what it proved was that no matter how unpopular a governor might be, a vast influx of money and campaign advertising that drowns out the opponents’ message is just enough to sway enough voters who are either confused about the issues or are easily swayed by the last thing they heard. Money talks—and too many people “listen.”

No comments:

Post a Comment