Monthly Archives: January 2011

The Capital Times, in an editorial, is calling for former State Sen. Jeff Plale to step down from his new state post following his admission that he was actively seeking a job in Gov. Scott Walker’s administration when he cast a controversial vote against new state labor contracts.

From the editorial about the one-time South Milwaukee legislator, a Democrat, and new state facilities director.

Plale, whose actions as a Democratic legislator frequently raised ethics concerns, voted as Walker wanted on a definitional issue — approval of state employee labor contracts. That vote saw Plale, traditionally a labor-friendly legislator, vote against unions and their members; as such, it raised questions about whether the legislator was tailoring his votes to appeal to a potential employer.

Those questions are all the more serious because of a failure on the part of Plale to act in a minimally responsible or transparent manner.

“Yes, just to be clear …” notes Journal Sentinel columnist Dan Bice, “Plale was actively seeking employment from Walker when he voted against the union contracts — something Walker wanted him to do — in last month’s lame-duck (legislative session). He did not disclose this at the time.”

Plale should have made that disclosure. And he should have recused himself from the vote on the contract — and on any other vote that might have been of interest to the administration with which he was seeking employment.

Plale’s failure to take these basic steps may be a matter for further investigation by prosecutors and ethics watchdogs. But he has an immediate responsibility to the voters of the state to acknowledge that his misconduct disqualifies him from serving in the Walker administration.

If the former senator does not make that acknowledgment and step down, then Walker will need to remove Plale.

What do you think? Should Plale step down, or should Walker remove him?

Vote in the poll on the right-hand side of this page, and post your comments below.

I admittedly am torn here. As I’ve said, I agree with his vote on the union contracts. Yet Jeff was clearly wrong not to disclose his efforts at gaining employment on Walker’s team while making that vote. At the very least, he owes everyone an explanation.

The Journal Sentinel has more details on Jeff Plale’s new position in Gov. Scott Walker’s administration, including quotes from Plale himself, here.

From the story:

Plale told No Quarter that Walker’s team did not come to him offering a post in state government.

“I turned in my resume to the transition team shortly after the election, had an interview a couple weeks later and was hired this Wednesday,” he said in an e-mail.

Yes, just to be clear, that means Plale was actively seeking employment from Walker when he voted against the union contracts – something Walker wanted him to do – in last month’s lame-duck session. He did not disclose this at the time.

While I’ve stood up for Jeff on his hiring, the fact that he was under consideration for a job with the new regime during the time he was voting on issues impacting his potential new boss should have been disclosed. He was wrong not to do so.

That said, I still think I would have voted the same way on the union contracts issue.

For starters, I don’t believe any substantive legislation should be passed during lame duck sessions like this, especially this lame duck session, after which voters had spoken so strongly against the party in power.

And there’s the whole spring-Jeff-Wood-from-jail-so-he-can-cast-the-deciding-vote-in-the-Assembly thing. That was just wrong, an example of politics at its worst.

Let me be clear: I supported the new contracts. They seemed more than fair, and overdue.

But I am also not one to believe that the ends always justify the means. While the end result here — new union contracts for state workers — would have been positive, the means to get there were nothing short of disgraceful. In other words, I couldn’t have held my nose long enough to cast a “yes” vote.