AFAIK, nobody ever called him stupid.
That’s entirely legal.
Right?
I just showed two cites above for Obama and Reid doing the same thing. They wouldn’t do that if it were legally suspect, right?
Walker coordinating his campaign with “social welfare” groups such as the Wisconsin Club for growth and Americans for prosperity, is not legal. But how much and what kinds of proof are needed, I don’t know.
That’s up to the esquires. I’m not one of them.
At the very least there appears to be a strong appearance of impropriety w.r.t. the $700K. These days many, if not most, politicians accept campaign contributions (or, as in this case, dark money) from companies and individuals whose welfare is then benefited by the politician.) Fifty years ago such persons would have been unelectable. Nowadays, the standards of the public have been shaved down.
In other news:
Wisconsin turned in another subpar job creation report Thursday
State tax collections fall $281 million short of projections
Seems to be similar to the experience of Kansas.
The NY Times has taken notice on its editorial page
I seem to recall from previous articles some of the donations actually came in the next day or just two days later.
Is it illegal for a politician to solicit donations going to a PAC?
Meh. Looks like Kansas with its tax cuts lagged behind Missouri without tax cuts. Could that mean the tax cuts don’t do shit for creating jobs? Missouri outperforms Kansas and doesn’t have a hole blown in its budget. Guess Democratic governors do better than Republicans.
Let’s say they all came in ten minutes later, and each check had a note on the memo line that said, “My donation is the direct result f hearing Scott Walker say what good work you do! XOXO, Donor.”
So what?
It is lamentable that these PACs are not required to justify their existence,
[QUOTE=IRS Code 501§(c)(4)]
(A) Civic leagues or organizations not organized for profit but operated exclusively for the promotion of social welfare, or local associations of employees, the membership of which is limited to the employees of a designated person or persons in a particular municipality, and the net earnings of which are devoted exclusively to charitable, educational, or recreational purposes.
(B) Subparagraph (A) shall not apply to an entity unless no part of the net earnings of such entity inures to the benefit of any private shareholder or individual.
[/QUOTE]
because I for one would like to see how Club for Growth would explain their qualification.
And before you lay out the tu quoque, I would just as soon see the left-wing PACs pony up, as well.
A PAC is not a “social welfare organization”.
PACs are tax free, but must disclose their donors. They can do all sorts of political activities, including coordinating with a campaign.
A social welfare organization does not have to disclose its donors (thus the attraction for millionaires - dark money) and can also be tax free, but there are restrictions on political activities which include not coordinating with campaigns and not having the majority of their activities being political. Otherwise they could lose their tax free status, and apparently in Wisconsin, suffer other legal penalties.
The so-called “IRS scandal” was no more than the IRS beginning to catch up to some of the abusive dark money organizations.
Mark Harris, (Wisconsin) state Democrats criticize ‘irresponsible budgeting’ after revenue shortfall
As mentioned up thread, Fitzwalkerstan, much like Brownbackistan, has lowered income taxes and pie in the sky revenue projections have been shot down by harsh economic reality. (short $281 million) Now this to make matters worse:
There may need to be a budget reconciliation act. The 2011 budget reconciliation act was passed after a big fight to cover just a $31 million shortfall.
edit:
Oh no! This is going to doom Walker for sure!
BWAHAHAHAHAHA!!!
Think it will help?
With any kind of near equal ad budget Burke, will have a very strong shot. Walker has been looking worse and worse the last couple of weeks. So bwahaha from Bricker or not, Walker is in trouble, especially compared to the way the race looked a year ago.
You can tell yourself this until November.
Then you can start telling yourself how Walker stole the election.
New poll. Burke 48% Walker 44%
We Ask America - September 4
Obviously still within the margin of error.
With that gigantic money advantage, why can’t Walker just run away and hide from Burke? Could it be that word of all that out of state money at some point becomes a disadvantage?
Walker’s latest salvo:
[Quote=“[Before It’s News]
(http://beforeitsnews.com/libertarian/2014/09/the-great-republican-hope-scott-walkers-re-election-push-includes-drug-testing-welfare-recipients-2579114.html)”]Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker, in a tight race for re-election, released a 62 page plan for “Greater Prosperity for All.” Among the proposals, as the Milwaukee Journal-Sentimental reported, is the tired old canard of drug testing recipients of food stamps and unemployment.
In 2011 Florida passed a similar law, which was eventually ruled unconstitutional; 2.6 percent of recipients tested positive for narcotics, mostly marijuana and the effort cost more than it saved.
[/quote]
How will this play with Wisconsin voters?
He’s framed it in an Orwell-Rove manner as “justified by compassion”.
For your reference here is Walker’s 62-page pdf mentioned in the quote in my previous post. Jim Doyle’s name seems to appear quite a bit in it, I guess he must be the guy Walker is running against.
Latest Marquette poll shows Walker leading 49% - 46% among likely voters and a tie (46%) among registered voters. Good news for Walker, but still within the margin of error.
Article