Independent Student Newspaper Since 1969

The Badger Herald

Independent Student Newspaper Since 1969

The Badger Herald

Independent Student Newspaper Since 1969

The Badger Herald

Advertisements
Advertisements

Progressive Dane’s good intentions have poor execution

Every once in a while you get the feeling an issue will be decided a certain way. Public opinion seems behind it, and various interest groups are poised to convert the question at hand into another notch on their belt of activism. But somehow, in the end, everything turns out OK. While Sheriff Mahoney is certainly no Andrew Johnson, and the Dane County Board no Edmund G. Ross, their vote to not withhold funds from the sheriff’s department in protest over its treatment of illegal immigrants was nevertheless an important one. Though within their power to slash the budget of the sheriff’s office, the board correctly recognized such a move as misguided and wrong.

In setting the budget for the coming year, the board has the power to allocate funds to each specific department, and, in doing so, exercises considerable control over how that branch executes the laws. Just as in the federal government, our legislative body may use the “power of the purse” as a means to control executive behavior they deem unacceptable. Without a doubt, it would have been entirely within the board’s authority to deny the sheriff over $200,000 of funding and effectively cut five deputies in the coming year.

However, such a move would have been indefensible. Cutting the law enforcement budget in order to satisfy monetary constraints or trim fat would be completely acceptable, but to do so in order to simply send a message is grossly irresponsible. Sacrificing public safety in order to prove a point is not what the board was elected to do, no matter what Progressive Dane or the Campus Antiwar Network say. At a time when the public has repeatedly expressed its desire for increased public safety through initiatives like the Downtown Safety Initiative and the Downtown Lighting Initiative, it would take either callous disregard of public opinion or extreme arrogance for the board to ignore an issue of such importance to all its constituents to satisfy the demands of a few.

Advertisements

It is difficult to fathom exactly why the bill’s author chose to target the general safety of the public instead of the other alternatives that exist. Cutting funding would work fine if those cuts directly affected the behavior in question, but since it doesn’t really cost anything to call up the men and women of Immigrations and Customs Enforcement, any fiscal penalties would do nothing but impair the ability of the county to enforce its laws.

A more targeted censure, such as cutting the good sheriff’s salary, would certainly get his attention, while at the same time allow the rest of the department to continue doing its job. Or perhaps — if the board was feeling more lighthearted — Sheriff Mahoney could be forced to wear a funny hat every Monday during the coming year. Again, such a move would not be as glamorous as taking $200,000 and change from the department, but it would also threaten public safety a whole lot less.

If Sheriff Mahoney is in such clear violation of the law, as many insist, impeachment could also be an appropriate measure. Such proceedings, however, would reveal just how shaky the case against Mahoney really is. Emotional testimonials reported by the Capital Times, such as, “I feel like my son is being treated like a criminal, when he is just charged with a driving infraction,” ring hollow when it turns out that the son really is a criminal — imprisoned for his second drunk driving offense.

Charges of racism come off as frivolous in light of the legal questions at hand. A 2004 law (the “Sanctuary” Law) prohibiting disclosure of immigration status by county officers (such as the sheriff) only applies to those not suspected of criminal activity. Sheriff Mahoney’s policy appears to be motivated not by racial bias or xenophobia, but rather by a genuine desire to comply with a request made by ICE in 2006.

By a resounding vote of 30 to six, the Dane County Board of Supervisors firmly demonstrated that it knows the difference between having the power and exercising it. In the meantime, I suggest Progressive Dane make like the Cubs and wait until next year.

Joey Labuz ([email protected]) is a junior majoring in biomedical engineering.

Advertisements
Leave a Comment
Donate to The Badger Herald

Your donation will support the student journalists of University of Wisconsin-Madison. Your contribution will allow us to purchase equipment and cover our annual website hosting costs.

More to Discover
Donate to The Badger Herald

Comments (0)

All The Badger Herald Picks Reader Picks Sort: Newest

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *