We've heard the term: Frankenstein Veto, and we have seen what it can do: Doyle's raiding the transportation fund to give to the general fund, comes to mind. But before any Republicans start acting smugly, Tommy Thompson created Frankenstein monsters too. But do you know what it really is?

Mark Belling explained this monster the other day. The Frankenstein Veto uses the trick of the veto pen, altering legislative language, to create something totally unintended. It allows the Governor to eliminate numbers, words, phrases, or sentences from legislation that crosses his desk, and those eliminated parts allow him to alter the intent of that legislation.

Fictitious Example: All monkeys must be licensed by April 15th. The license fee of $10.00 is payable to the City of Brookfield to offset costs incurred by the police department and Elmbrook Humane Society. 

On April 1st, voters will have the power to end the Frankenstein Veto through a Constitutional Amendment. If you want to end this practice, vote YES. You are saying, Yes, we want to alter the state constitution. Of course they don't call it the Frankenstein Veto, they call it the Partial Veto. (Thanks FairlyConservative.)

Both sides of the isle are generally in favor of ending this practice, Belling said. Doyle probably would not want it to end, however, since it gives him the power to create something uninteneded out of legislative language.

Eliminating this type of Partial Veto would still allow a governor to veto certain parts of a law, just not transform the intent of a law.

Links: Brookfield7, Betterbrookfield,  Vicki Mckenna 

Things are really heating up over the controversial Voter ID Constitutional Amendment. The controversy being that around 80% of Wisconsinites--regardless of political affiliation--want a Voter ID requirement, but the Democrat controlled State Senate won't bring the measure up for a vote before the current session ends next week.

So they just get to it next year?  I don't think so. Voter ID is a Constitutional Amendment. It is my understanding that for a Constitutional amendment question to be brought to the voters on a ballot, it first needs to pass both houses for two years in a row.

Voter ID has passed the Assembly two times and the Senate once. This next week is Voter ID's only chance to pass the senate for the second time. If it is not brought up for a vote, then the question of should the state constitution be amended to require Wisconsin voters to show a Voter photo ID to vote cannot be put on the ballot for Wisconsin voters to decide.

Yesterday Assembly Republican, Rep. Jeff Stone and 6 Senate Republicans held a news conference criticizing the Senate Democrats for not bringing Voter ID for a vote. You can read the account on the Wisconsin State Journal.

The squabble escalated until Senate Majority Leader Russ Decker, D-Weston, stepped toward the lone Assembly Republican, Rep. Jeff Stone, of Greendale, and angrily told him to leave.

"Go back to the Assembly and take care of your business there," Decker told Stone.

As Decker quickly turned to leave, Stone replied, "I did. I'm waiting for you to take care of the people's business here." 

I called my State Senator Jim Sullivan's office this morning. The aid (Steve) said they had received a lot of calls on this.  He was rather vague about the issue though. I tried to pin him down as to Sen. Sullivan's position on Voter ID ( AJR17 ) , but he  focused his attention on telling me that the senator would let me know his views on it via letter.

I said I wanted to know Sullivan's position on Voter ID. Steve said, oh, Sen. Sullivan favors a Voter ID. I said then why has he not pushed to bring it to a vote? Again, some talk about how I would hear Sullivan's views in a letter.

I told Steve that Sullivan's 5th District constituents would be watching how Sen. Sullivan acts on this important issue.

According to a caller I heard on Vicki McKenna's radio show today, when he called Sen. Sullivan's office, the aid told him that the Senator favors Voter ID, but as a law, not a Constitutional Amendment!

That sounds like a dodge to me, but if it is true, why has not Sen. Sullivan introduced such legislation? 

More from the Wisconsin State Journal:

With Sen. Spencer Coggs, D-Milwaukee, observing the news conference, the Republicans cited a recent report on voting irregularities in Milwaukee in calling for the voter identification requirement.

Sen. Alberta Darling, R-River Falls, challenged Coggs to explain why he was "afraid to let the people decide" on the constitutional amendment.

Coggs replied that Democrats disagree with Republicans on the issue and that requiring photo identification at the polls wouldn't stop voting irregularities.

Coggs and the Republicans continued to debate the merits of the proposed amendment, with Stone saying, "Let's let everyone in Wisconsin have a voice on something that's a basic principle."

I know I am sounding like a broken record here, but call Senator Sullivan and  Senator Decker. Tell them, Let the people decide, bring AJR17 to a VOTE!

Senator Russel Decker, Senate Majority Leader
Sen.Decker@legis.wisconsin.gov  608-266-2502

Milwaukee Police Department Special Investigation Report on 2004 Election Voter Fraud

Prior Posting: Virtual Schools, Ethanol back in committee, Photo ID languishing in Senate 

Links: Betterbrookfield,  Vicki Mckenna 

Assemblyman Leah Vukmir's office called today in response to an email I sent*. Her aid informed me that the Renewable fuel bill (Ethanol) was going to committee again this Wednesday, Feb. 27, at 10 am.

He also said that Leah Vukmir was in a hearing meeting on the Assembly version of the Virtual Schools bill AB870(?) It was to go to Executive Session (committee) Tuesday, Feb. 26, 10 am. The Assembly version of the Virtual Schools bill did not have the cap restriction as the Senate SB396 version did.

Fifth District Senator Jim Sullivan voted FOR capping the Virtual School program. The capping will eliminate about 3,000 children from this very popular program unless the Assembly comes up with a solution.

Contact the Assembly about the Ethanol bill and Virtual Schools. 

Rep. Jeff Fitzgerald (Assembly Majority Leader), from Horicon. Counties: Columbia and Dodge
Rep. Michael Huebsch (Assembly Speaker), from West Salem. Counties: LaCrosse and Monroe

State Representative Leah Vukmir, Republican, 14th District
Rep.Vukmir@legis.wisconsin.gov  608-266-9180

Representative Rich Zipperer, Republican, 98th District
Rep.Zipperer@legis.wisconsin.gov  608-266-5120 

On another note, the Photo ID bill amendment, AJR17 is stalled in the Senate. Kevin Fisher of New Berlin was filling in for Mark Belling today. He relayed that unless Majority Leader Russ Decker brings it to the floor soon, it will be a dead issue--the 2007 legislative session ends March 13th. 

State Senator Mary Lazich of New Berlin wrote an informative piece on how this simple ID requirement will not adversely effect our election process as Governor Doyle and others suggest.

Kevin stated it is estimated that about 80% of Wisconsin residents would like to have a photo ID requirement for voting. Hey, I would be happy if they would ink our fingers too. Anything to discourage vote fraud.

If you would like to see Wisconsin adopt voter ID, please contact Senate Majority Leader Russ Decker and urge him (politely) to bring this bill to the floor now. As a Wisconsin voter, you have the right to request this vote, since he is blocking this important legislation. Let your Senator know how you feel about voter ID too.

Senator Russel Decker, Senate Majority Leader
Sen.Decker@legis.wisconsin.gov  608-266-2502
 

State Senator Jim Sullivan, Democrat, 5th District
Sen.Sullivan@legis.wisconsin.gov  608-266-2512,  866-817-6061

State Senator Theodore Kanavas, Republican, 33rd District
Sen.Kanavas@legis.wisconsin.gov  608-266-9174, 800-863-8883

Governor Doyle
608-266-1212, 414-227-4344

*(Don't you just love responsive government? Leah Vukmir always emails or calls me back. Even Rich Zipperer and Ted Kanavas email me, and they aren't my representatives! I am still waiting to hear from my State Senator Jim Sullivan on these and other  issues I have contacted him about over the past weeks. My last response from him was about the budget, dated November 2007.)

Familiarize yourself with this issue: Ethanol: The bad bill that just won't die! It's back

A MUST read: Ethanol bill poses conflicts, One sponsor has $20,000 interest in fuel producer, 

Clearing Land for Biofuels Makes Global Warming Worse, The Ethanol Fallacy

Ethanol bill heads to senate Thursday--Speak Up, Ethanol bill: Just what would be a conflict of interest?

Links: Betterbrookfield,  Vicki Mckenna