The Badger Herald

NEWS

Rule snags ethics board

Looking for a print version?
Simply choose ‘Print’ on your computer and a printer-friendly document will be generated.

Also by Beth Mueller:

Rule snags ethics board (April 9, 2008)
Got a problem? Try new hotline (April 8, 2008)
UW junior found dead in Doty Street home; killer still at large (April 3, 2008)
State sees low traffic fatalities (April 4, 2008)
Armed standoff ends peacefully (April 4, 2008)

by Beth Mueller

Wednesday, April 9, 2008

Two members of the state board that regulates ethics and campaigns resigned Tuesday after an opinion from the attorney general’s office said they were ineligible.

Judge David Deininger and Judge James Mohr served on the relatively new Wisconsin Government Accountability Board as retired judges, like all members of the body, but Attorney General J.B. Van Hollen’s formal opinion on the issue pointed to a constitutional clarification that makes them ineligible.

“We recognized right away this was an issue that you could make a case either way, and we felt because it was that kind of a close call, we would seek the opinion of the attorney of the state,” said the GAB’s director and general counsel, Kevin Kennedy.

Deininger and Mohr had served on the board since just after its formation in early 2007. The board replaced and absorbed the duties of the Wisconsin Ethics Board and the Wisconsin Elections Board, overseeing campaign finance, election ethics and lobbying in the state.

The judges are ineligible because of what the GAB called a “little-known” provision of the Wisconsin Constitution.

Article seven, section 10, subsection one of the Constitution says, “No justice of the supreme court or any court of record shall hold any other office of public trust, except a judicial office, during the term for which elected.”

In his opinion, Van Hollen said the appointed position on the GAB did serve as an office of public trust, though it is not an elected office, and furthermore he said it was not classified as a judicial office, though members of the board must be former judges.

Though both Deininger and Mohr retired from their judicial posts on a court of appeals and circuit court, respectively, their six-year terms have not expired, making them technically ineligible.

“The board cannot allow its authority — to act on questions of the highest import to the State of Wisconsin — to be brought into question by the eligibility of two of its members,” Deininger said in a statement. “We have chosen to resign to protect the integrity of this board and the legitimacy of its future decisions.”

In his opinion, Van Hollen said the board’s work until this point could not be called into question.

“Accountability is our focus, and we are accountable first and foremost to the Constitution,” Mohr said in a statement.

He added the best course would be for the governor and the state Senate to act quickly to replace the two missing members and keep the board’s work on track.

Kennedy said though he was “disappointed that we have to take this detour,” the board would continue to operate without Deininger and Mohr.

“The board can continue to operate. It takes four votes to act. We have four members left,” Kennedy said. “As long as there is agreement, they can still vote and make decisions.”

He said issues with dissent, however, would be put on hold until two new members could be added.

A panel of four appeals court judges will receive applications from eligible former judges and present at least three nominees to the governor, who will select two. The state Senate must then confirm the new board members.

Kennedy said he hopes that process would take place this month.

Feedback

Show all comments

Hide anonymous comments

Anonymous (April 12, 2008 @ 10:32am):

I don't understand what Van Hollen is talking about. Satellite radio is only 5% of the entire radio market. The competition is from terrestrial radio which has the other 95%. A merged satellite company is going to have to do a lot to convince radio listeners that paying for their services is worth their money, considering that they can still have radio for free over the regular airwaves.

Besides, can two formats really compete in the same space? And isn't that a bit of what we are talking about here? Consider the battle between Beta and VHS or the more recent HD DVD and Blu-Ray. Someone's going to beat out the other in the end anyway, and then you'll still only have one company to speak of. Together, these companies can broaden the satellite radio list of programming options for the consumer, giving them more choice and frankly more value. How can this be a bad thing?

And if the merged company gets it wrong? Well, that' simple too. With only 5% of the market, satellite radio is not something that has really caught on so far, so they've got a lot of work ahead of themselves to reel in and then maintain their piece of the market. And if they want to keep the listening public they are ultimately able to capture, they'd better do all they can to keep people listening...and paying.

http://www.springboardblog.blogspot.com

Add a comment

We welcome your thoughts, but please keep your feedback thoughtful, on-topic and respectful. Offensive language, personal attacks, or irrelevant comments may be deleted.