Wisconsin Democracy Campaign
Campaign Cash

Republican Party is Screnock’s Top Donor

Dallet and Burns have no donations from two parties in state Supreme Court race.

By - Feb 14th, 2018 10:56 am
Sign-up for the Urban Milwaukee daily email
Michael Screnock. Photo from Screnock campaign website.

Michael Screnock. Photo from Screnock campaign website.

The state Republican Party contributed more than half of the nearly $214,000 raised during the first five weeks of the year by conservative Wisconsin Supreme Court candidate Michael Screnock.

Campaign finance reports filed Monday that cover fundraising and spending by the spring election candidates through Feb. 5 showed Screnock’s campaign received about $111,100 in in-kind support for online advertising, mailings, and staff salaries from the state Republican Party.

All told, the three candidates vying for the open seat on the high court raised nearly $385,000 between Jan. 1 and Feb. 5, led by Screnock, who accepted about $213,860 and spent about $200,800 – mostly on digital ads paid for by the GOP, consultants, and mailings.

Milwaukee County Circuit Judge Rebecca Dallet pulled in about $91,750 and spent about $243,250 between Jan. 1 and Feb. 5. Most of her spending was for television ads.

The third candidate in the race, Madison attorney Tim Burns, raised about $79,040 and spent about $60,340 between Jan. 1 and Feb. 5. Most of his spending was for campaign staff salaries and polls.

Neither Dallet nor Burns received any contributions from the state Democratic Party, according to their reports.

The three candidates will face off in the Feb. 20 spring primary. The top two finishers will go on to the April 3 general election to vie for a 10-year seat on the court, which opened up because Justice Michael Gableman decided not to seek reelection.

Categories: Campaign Cash, Politics

12 thoughts on “Campaign Cash: Republican Party is Screnock’s Top Donor”

  1. John Casper says:

    But,….I thought the race was non-partisan?

  2. Rick Douglas says:

    Have you met the other candidates, John? Not sure about Dallet, but Tim Burns seems to be OK with this being a partisan race.

    From the Journal-Sentinel:

    “Wisconsin Supreme Court candidate Tim Burns emphasizes he’s a Democrat in TV ad”

    https://www.jsonline.com/story/news/politics/2018/02/07/wisconsinstate-supreme-court-candidate-tim-burns-emphasizes-hes-democrat-goes-after-scott-walker-tv/313133002/

  3. John Casper says:

    Rick,

    You’re not sure that Judge Dallet’s “…OK with this being a partisan race?”

    Judge Dallet endorsed and contributed to Chief Justice Roggensack’s campaign.

    Judge Dallet’s endorsement page features an appeals Judge, Stark, who Gov. Walker appointed.

    Judge Dallet’s husband is a partner at Hursch Blackwell. They merged with Whyte Hirschboeck.

    Tim’s the only candidate whose opposed to socialism for the elites. Foxconn doesn’t want him on SCOWIS.

    “Foxconn legal appeals go straight to Supreme Court under GOP proposal”

    http://host.madison.com/wsj/news/local/govt-and-politics/foxconn-legal-appeals-go-straight-to-supreme-court-under-gop/article_b342dd57-a5b3-568c-b56a-4d10077cbd23.html

    Remember this? “I pledge allegiance to my Flag and the Republic for which it stands, one nation, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.”

    Don’t see Judge Dallet’s partisan support for the “Pledge of Allegiance.”

    Isn’t Judge Dallet “non-partisan” when it comes to one set of laws for the elites and a different set for everyone else?

  4. PMD says:

    Screnock blasts the other two candidates for being partisan but his biggest donor is the Republican Party. Dallet seems like she is trying to have her cake and eat it too as she courts moderates and liberals. Burns openly positions himself as a liberal. At least he’s being honest. Is he qualified though?

  5. John Casper says:

    Tim’s the only one taking a pay cut.

    At the Federalist Society debate–held at the Wisconsin Club–Burns was the only one with a “judicial temperament.”

    Screnock read Federalist Society talking points.

    Tim didn’t have to bring up Judge Dallet’s support for Roggensack, because Judge Dallet did it for him. That was an unforced error.

    70 percent of SCOWIS caseload is NOT criminal. All of Judge Dallet’s experience is in criminal courts. Burns has pulled her away from the wingnuts, something Tim points out.

    IMHO Judge Dallet is a neocon, cut from the same clothe as Obama, HRC, and Abele. Pro-choice, loud in their support for LGBT, but otherwise they’re Republicans.

    IMHO Burns is pointing out that the Bradley Foundation, WMC, the Wall Street Journal Editorial page, and the other elites didn’t buy the majority on SCOWIS, because they thought they were “non-partisan.” They knew they would be partisan in favor of the elites.

    Economies depend on government to balance risk/reward among shareholders, workers, and consumers. In recent decades shareholders–especially elites–have increasingly been insulated from risk, while taking a greater portion of the rewards.

    Burns will protect the legitimate rights of the three pillars of the economy, shareholders, workers, and consumers. At this point in U.S. history, that’s regarded as “partisan.”

  6. Terry says:

    Wisconsin republicans are as greasy as they come folks.

    Dump Walker 2018

  7. John Casper says:

    PMD,

    Interesting tidbit about the “non-partisan” Federalist Society.

    “It was Bannon and Priebus who kept having to remind him [Trump], and to endlessly repeat, that in one of the campaign’s few masterful pieces of issue-defusing politics, and perfect courtship of the conservative base, it had let the Federalist Society produce a list of candidates. The campaign had promised that the nominee would come from that list—and needless to say, Giuliani wasn’t on it.”

    Wolff, Michael. “Fire and Fury: Inside the Trump White House” (pp. 86-87). Henry Holt and Co.. Kindle Edition.

    Giuliani is pro-choice.

    Could that cost the Federalist Society its 501(c)3?

  8. Jake formerly of the LP says:

    Screnock got the coveted NRA endorsement today. I wish I was kidding.

    As if you didn’t have enough reasons to vote for Burns or Dallett on Tuesday the 20th, there it is.

  9. Thomas says:

    Screnock is clearly beholden to reactionary interests. Dallet is fair minded. Burns is open-minded. ANYBODY BUT SCRENOCK is worthy of a vote in this race. Screnock would be a tiny Trump on the bench of our state’s Supreme Court.

  10. John Casper says:

    Jake, Thomas, as a result of Tim Burns’ campaign, Judge Dallet has modified some of her positions.

    Trolls have infested UM’s comments and the rest of the media’s with the goal of moving the “Overton Window”–window of discourse–to the right.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Overton_window

    IMHO it’s their impact that makes Judge Dallet appear “fair minded.” Reasonable people can disagree about which group does more damage to the Republic: Republicans or Vichy Democrats.

    The two most recent “fair-minded” SCOWIS candidates–Ed Fallone and Judge Kloppenburg–endorsed Burns. Both ran as non-partisans. Both lost.

  11. Terry says:

    Wisconsin Republicans are as crooked as they come folks.

    Dump Walker 2018!
    Dump Screnock today!

  12. Judy says:

    Don’t kid yourself Terry… it’s the Democrat’s that are as “crooked as they come”! My vote
    goes to Judge Screnock. At least he’s not bought off by Soro’s and the Unions!!!

Leave a Reply

You must be an Urban Milwaukee member to leave a comment. Membership, which includes a host of perks, including an ad-free website, tickets to marquee events like Summerfest, the Wisconsin State Fair and the Florentine Opera, a better photo browser and access to members-only, behind-the-scenes tours, starts at $9/month. Learn more.

Join now and cancel anytime.

If you are an existing member, sign-in to leave a comment.

Have questions? Need to report an error? Contact Us