NYTimes's Myopic Take on Wisconsin: All About 'Stunning Amount' Spent by 'Corporate Interests and Billionaires'
Wisconsin's reforming Republican Gov. Scott Walker easily turned back a recall attempt by labor activists angry at him for ending collective bargaining for public service unions. But the New York Times, pushing its own agenda, would prefer the story to be about the "stunning amount" of money in politics. The Times and other media have obsessed over the big spending by Walker supporters, which is rather galling considering that it was the left responsible for holding this election in the first place. Also absent: credit to Tea Party activists.
Reporter Monica Davey set the table with Saturday's "Wisconsin Tops Itself in Big-Money Race," portraying the spending as a problem in itself.
The last governor’s race in Wisconsin, in 2010, broke spending records for such campaigns in the state, with more than $37 million expended by the candidates and outside groups. Two years later, in a recall election set for Tuesday, the candidates -- Gov. Scott Walker and Mayor Tom Barrett of Milwaukee -- are the same, but the money has ballooned to an estimated $60 million.
That is an especially stunning amount for a race that has been only months in the making.
Even before Election Day on Tuesday, some groups, including the Wisconsin Democracy Campaign, an independent organization that tracks political money in the state and came up with the latest estimate, were calling on lawmakers to overhaul the state’s financial reporting requirements.
Among the biggest problems, according to Mike McCabe, executive director of the organization, is a lack of transparency about outside groups that are buying ads -- a collection that makes up about $30 million of the spending in this campaign.
Mr. Barrett, a Democrat who campaigned in Milwaukee on Friday with former President Bill Clinton, has raised about $4 million, his campaign reports show. He said this week that he would support calling a special session of the Legislature to work on finance overhauls.
Mr. Walker, a Republican who on Friday visited suburban Milwaukee with Gov. Nikki R. Haley of South Carolina, has raised more than $30 million since the start of 2011, two thirds of that just in the last five months, his reports say.
Davey on Thursday, after Walker's easy win, issued a slightly hostile profile of Walker that also talked up money: "Talk of Higher Office Swirls Around Wisconsin Governor in the Spotlight."
Mr. Walker’s profile clearly has already risen. His list of big donors in the recall election includes many outside Wisconsin, and prominent givers to other conservative causes: among them, Foster Friess, the Wyoming man who donated to a “super PAC” that kept Rick Santorum’s presidential hopes afloat; Bob J. Perry, who helped pay for the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth ads against John Kerry eight years ago; and Trevor Rees-Jones, the chairman of a Texas oil and gas company.
....
His approach, it seems, has always been the same. He is uncompromising, polarizing, headline-grabbing, austere. In Milwaukee County, he once proposed that the government might want to consider abolishing itself. There, he also pushed for privatizing cleaning and food service workers. He also pressed for changes to pension and health care contributions and workers’ hours -- a familiar theme when he became governor.
Michael Shear also found "corporate interests and billionaires" who gave to Walker in his story on the same page, "Looking at Recall Vote As Drawing Lines for All – Taking Note of Strategy, and the Price Tag." Shear contrasted Romney's money with a nonpartisan source – Obama's campaign advisor David Axelrod. Never mind that the Obama campaign has been bragging about how much money they would raise for the 2012 campaign, and that those have predictions have been repeated without criticism in the Times.
Although Mr. Obama kept his distance from the state in the final weeks of the union-led recall effort, his party, his campaign team and his labor allies exerted an enormous joint effort there that proved to be mismatched for the organized and well-financed Republican apparatus.
The corporate interests and billionaires who are pouring cash into Mr. Romney’s “super PACs” gave millions to Mr. Walker. To combat those resources, Mr. Obama’s campaign, aided by union allies, constructed a turnout machine in Wisconsin that they said will be a model for other battleground states.
....
The biggest contributors to Mr. Walker included investments from Bob Perry, the Houston homebuilder whose family has spent more than $8 million this election cycle; Foster Friess, the entrepreneur who was the leading benefactor to Rick Santorum; Sheldon Adelson, the casino magnate who provided millions to Newt Gingrich; and Charles and David Koch, whose group helped finance millions in advertisements.
“The fact that you’ve got a handful of self-interested billionaires who are trying to leverage their money across the country,” said David Axelrod, Mr. Obama’s senior campaign strategist, said in an interview. “Does that concern me? Of course that concerns me.”
State law allowed unlimited contributions to Mr. Walker’s campaign, mirroring the free flow of money into presidential campaigns via federal super PACs that were allowed under the Supreme Court’s 2010 Citizens United decision.
....
But Mr. Axelrod said he was confident that the president’s campaign would be in a better position to respond aggressively than was Mr. Barrett.
“We start off in a better place, and we’re not going to get outspent eight to one,” Mr. Axelrod said. “We are not going to have just a month to run our campaign. You cannot draw that parallel here. We’re in an entirely different situation.”
Actually total spending in the race was not "eight to one" but closer to 2.5 to one through May 21, according to the Times's own figures, showing pro-Walker spending of $45.6 million and pro-Barrett spending of $17.9 million (8-1 may refer to spending by the campaigns themselves).
- Clay Waters's blog
- Login to post comments















Comments
Like the billionaires & Wall Streeters who bankrolled Obama?
Submitted by drsamherman on Thu, 06/07/2012 - 3:25pm.
You mean like all of the glitter, glitz, fashion and vanity that has bankrolled Obama since Day 1?
The New York Times has too many faces to keep track of at one time.
What amazing me is the stupidity of the LEARNED observation.
Submitted by hbnolikeee on Thu, 06/07/2012 - 3:25pm.
Duh Bumbler got 50 times the money McCain received in the 2008 Election, that's fine. However 2 times the amount by Walker (FYI the numbers are 47 million to 19 million) is just out and out election buying and voter tampering and all that bad stuff. HUH?!
Leftists are the dumbest among us
Submitted by ChrisNH on Thu, 06/07/2012 - 3:40pm.
1.) Every bad thing they cause is someone else's fault
2.) They bitterly cling to 'theories' long disproven by reality
3.) They espouse 'fairness' when it suits them and decry it when it doesn't
4.) Their tolerance for diversity stops with the question, "Are you a Liberal or not?"
5.) Freedom of speech is a one-way street: Silence Limbaugh but allow MSNBC and Maher (et al)
6.) Supposed 'wizards of smart' (Gore, Krugman et al) slink away from debates incessantly.
Cost to Wisconsin taxpayers
Submitted by ferv888 on Thu, 06/07/2012 - 3:59pm.
Did he ignoramus at NYT's forget the 21mm that the unions gave? Did they forget the fact that the DIMWITS could raise as much as the GOP? The DIMWITS could not, because people were PO'd. Where is the Times story on the 16mm that this fiasco cost Wisconsin taxpayers?
The liberal media is trying to spin the
Submitted by johnsonl on Thu, 06/07/2012 - 4:39pm.
story as big spending by big business donors. In reality, the DNC/Obamao realized that the Wisconsin recall was a huge mistake initiated by the union thugs and refused to pump money into it. Trumka and his lot are regretting it now that it's blown up in their faces. Trumka and the dems have lost their fundraising through union dues scam and they know it.
All this criticism of fund
Submitted by celator on Thu, 06/07/2012 - 5:32pm.
All this criticism of fund raising while the NYT's favorite president Obama and his little scrungy helpers are scouring every square foot of the country begging everyone for money. You just can't make this stuff up.
Didn't they all go through
Submitted by joedoe on Thu, 06/07/2012 - 5:37pm.
Didn't they all go through the same type of denial leading up to the 2010 election. They always had a million reasons why something didn't go their way, but the obvious was never part of the thinking. Then they got creamed!
On Wisconsin! On America!
Submitted by berlet98 on Thu, 06/07/2012 - 5:55pm.
On Wisconsin! On America!
The debacle of Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker’s recall, an exercise in futility and political partisanship, may be over but, as predicted here, by a million other blogsites, and on Fox News, the liberal, literal, weeping and gnashing of teeth have just begun.
In the aftermath of conservative Republican Walker soundly trouncing liberal Democrat Tom Barrett on Tuesday, thereby proving that intelligent voters realize that the Wisconsin is in dire economic straits, liberal Dems have erupted with a cascade of phony charges and threats.
Hurling unsubstantiated allegations that the GOP stole the election, that dastardy rich outsiders unduly influenced the electorate, that union members were bought, that money and not a deep-rooted sense of fiscal responsibility determined Tuesday’s outcome, Big Labor and its civil service lackeys resorted to every possible ploy to defeat Walker.
And they failed.
After shamelessly undermining the democratic process by lodging every slander short of alleging that Walker had fathered a Jesse Jackson-John Edwards-type love child, the Left was united in condemning the closely-monitored election as a fraud.
And they failed.
Wait, they did try that love child canard and it, too, flopped.
Liberals in the Badger State and in Obama’s mass media reacted to the taxpayer repudiation not by graciously accepting defeat but with an amazing display of sour grapes and continued defamation.
In two exceptional examples of disturbed hyperbole, foul-mouth leftist Ed Schultz on Obama’s MSNBC actually predicted Walker could face a criminal indictment “in the next several days” and at least one tearful Barrett supporter called Walker’s win “the end of democracy” and moaned, “democracy died tonight” on CNN.
Democracy hardly died Tuesday . . .
(Read more at http://www.genelalor.com/blog1/?p=25185.)
What's missing here
Submitted by Demonhunter on Thu, 06/07/2012 - 10:41pm.
What's missing here and every other article on spending in the Wisconsin campaign?
Several people have mentioned union spending. However, everybody seems to have forgotten that Barrett wasn't the union choice. They wanted Falk, and I haven't seen one mention of how much money was spent by Falk's campaign. In addition to that, we have union "organizing" spending money before there was a campaign, starting with the absentee senators and the occupying protesters.
Then, we have the cost to taxpayers for the occupy protests, I heard $6 million. Does that include sick pay for teachers who walked off the job?
Lastly, the DNC was going to send some money for the campaign, but backed off in the final days as they felt it was a lost cause.
I would not be surprised if the left spent far more on this campaign than Republicans and their supporters. And that doesn't even count the in kind contributions of the so-called "mainstream" media.