No Abrahamson at second forum

Listen to this article

Her day job got in the way of Chief Justice Shirley S. Abrahamson’s scheduled appearance at her second public debate against Jefferson County Circuit Court Judge Randy R. Koschnick.

Abrahamson cancelled her Feb. 4 appearance at a judicial election forum hosted by the Milwaukee Bar Association because the date conflicted with oral arguments at the Supreme Court. Milwaukee County District Attorney John T. Chisholm spoke as a “surrogate” for Abrahamson.

MBA Executive Director Jim Temmer explained that the conflict was unavoidable, but not an intentional slight of Abrahamson. The forum also showcased five candidates for two contested circuit court seats in Milwaukee County, and those people were given scheduling priority, said Temmer.

“We were limited as to the available dates before the [Feb. 17] primary and as the Milwaukee Bar Association, our first and foremost priority was to get the circuit court candidates here,” Temmer said. “I can guarantee you that the chief justice wanted to come and we wanted her here. There is not a snub here of Milwaukee or the MBA.”

No Show

Koschnick said the fact that his opponent could not attend the MBA forum was “troubling.”
Without an opponent, the admitted judicial conservative was more general with his criticism of Abrahamson as a “judicial activist” than during the candidates’ first public encounter on Jan. 28 when he cited several cases to support his contention.

At the MBA forum, he suggested that Abrahamson’s entire 32-year career on the Supreme Court is saturated with examples of her “legislating from the bench.”

Marquette University Law School Professor Richard Esenberg suggested that Koschnick’s portrayal of Abrahamson as an activist may help his campaign much like it did for Gableman last cycle, but only if there are enough finances behind the strategy.

“It might work, but the question of the day is whether he can raise enough money to get his message out,” Esenberg said. “At this point, it looks doubtful.”

Chisholm, who has contributed $250 to Abrahamson’s campaign, cautioned against the use of labels which he said have tainted recent judicial elections.

“A judge shouldn’t be in the business of predicting or signaling or winking or nudging what direction they’re going to go when they decide a case,” Chisholm said.

He referred to a statement Koschnick made during the first forum, in which he said that Abrahamson ruled in favor of criminal defendants 60 percent of the time in cases since 2000.

“Number one, there is nothing to back that up and number two, what the reasonable person infers from that is ‘I’m going to favor the state in 60 percent of my cases,’” Chisholm said. “That’s a reasonable interpretation for what’s being put out there.”

Koschnick said he was surprised by Chisholm’s point, given that Abrahamson has raised more money.

“My guess is a justice who has raised $800,000 is more likely to have people expecting that to be returned in some way then a candidate who has raised $50,000,” Koschnick said.

Financial Gap

Although Abrahamson missed the MBA event, she has a decided financial advantage at this point.

Campaign finance reports filed on Feb. 2 with the Government Accountability Board revealed that Abrahamson has accumulated more than $820,000 in donations compared to approximately $14,000 for Koschnick through the end of 2008.

Koschnick said his campaign has since raised in excess of $50,000, but he anticipates raising only a maximum of $400,000 prior to the April 7general election.

Given the absence of traditionally conservative interest groups like Wisconsin Manufacturers and Commerce in this race, Koschnick may have a tough time going dollar-to-dollar with Abrahamson, according to University of Wisconsin Political Science Professor Barry C. Burden.

WMC invested approximately $1.7 million in last year’s election on “issue ads” favoring Gableman and opposing then Justice Louis B. Butler Jr.

“Without WMC supporting Koschnick, she [Abrahamson] is almost certain to win the fundraising race,” Burden said. “She already has name recognition in the state because of her previous campaigns and role as chief justice.

“Having the funds to disseminate her name more widely will only enhance this advantage,” Burden said.

Koschnick said his campaign never counted on third-party promotion, though he conceded that groups, which have announced their abstinence from this election, such as WMC and the Coalition for America’s Families, have traditionally endorsed conservative candidates.

He said his fundraising strategy will remain the same and he wonders whether or not traditionally liberal interest groups will also bow out of this race.

“So we’ll see if the liberal groups decide to support Justice Abrahamson and if they do, it will be interesting for me to see how the criticism comes in,” Koschnick said. “The last two races, most of the criticism has come from liberals who claim the conservatives bought and paid for the candidate.”

Last year, the Greater Wisconsin Committee invested more than $1.4 million in advertising which opposed judicial conservative candidate Judge Michael J. Gableman.

GWC has yet to produce any “issue ads” during this Supreme Court race.