Supreme Court candidates defend themselves

by Associated Press

Tuesday, February 26, 2008 00:44

The two state Supreme Court candidates sparred at a debate Monday over the truthfulness of a fundraising letter sent by the challenger and whether the incumbent is soft on criminals.

Justice Louis Butler is being challenged by Burnett County Circuit Judge Michael Gableman. The winner in the April 1 election will serve a 10-year term.

Both took questions from members of the Dane County Bar Association during the debate, and Butler tried to lessen the repeated charge by Gableman’s campaign that Butler is weak on criminals.

“I have held criminals accountable,” Butler said.

Gableman, calling himself a judicial conservative, cited his support by a majority of the state’s sheriffs and district attorneys as evidence that he was better thought of within the ranks of law enforcement.

Some of the sharpest comments came when Butler called on Gableman to retract a fundraising letter sent by his campaign that said Butler in 2005 “provided the deciding vote to overturn a sexual predator decision by a circuit court, resulting in the release of the predator into Milwaukee County.”

The offender, Richard A. Brown, was never released from prison. Butler called the letter “simply false,” saying all the court’s ruling did was order a release plan for Brown.

Gableman refused Butler’s call to retract the letter dated Feb. 1 and signed by former Lt. Gov. Margaret Farrow, saying the court’s ruling would have resulted in Brown’s release had it not been for another factor that kept him in prison. He did not say what that factor was. After the debate he declined to comment in detail about the case, saying as a judge he didn’t want to prejudge any case that may come before him.

Butler said the case and the precedent it created can be discussed without talking about how a judge may rule in the future.

Both candidates decried the influence of outside groups already running ads in an attempt to influence the race. Such groups spent more than $3 million in last year’s court race and have already started running television ads this year.

Outside groups should not hijack the campaign, Butler said.

“We are drowned out, and no one knows what we stand for,” he said. “My preference would be that all outside groups stand down. Let us run our own campaign.”

Gableman stopped short of calling for outside groups to get out of the race but called an ad paid for by the Greater Wisconsin Committee attacking him “untrue and unfair” and a distraction.

The debate came after three national, nonpartisan groups — the Committee for Economic Development, Justice at Stake and the Reform Institute — announced their support for public financing for Wisconsin Supreme Court races.

Representatives of the Washington, D.C.-based groups urged the state Assembly to pass a bill providing public money for the races. It cleared the state Senate last week.

But Assembly Speaker Mike Huebsch, R-West Salem, opposes public financing for campaigns, which means the plan likely will not become law this year.

The idea of public financing for high court races has received more attention in Wisconsin since last year’s race in which Annette Ziegler defeated Linda Clifford. The election cost a record $6 million, with about half of that funded by outside groups.

Television ads for this year’s race, to be decided April 1, started airing last week. So far, the liberal Greater Wisconsin Committee and the conservative Club for Growth Wisconsin have run spots, but the candidates have not.

All seven members of the Wisconsin’s Supreme Court, including Butler, signed a letter in December supporting public financing of high court races.

Under the bill that passed the Senate last week, candidates can qualify for $100,000 in grants for the primary and $300,000 for a general election. They would get additional money to offset an opponent or independent group that spends beyond the public financing limit.