letters
Vote for Protasiewicz, as Kelly’s dubious track record speaks for itself
On April 4, Wisconsin voters will elect a new Supreme Court Justice. The choice between the two candidates couldn’t be more clear.
Candidate Dan Kelly is an outspoken critic of a woman’s right to make her own healthcare decisions; and as an attorney, he gave legal advice to extremist anti-abortion groups and is currently endorsed by them. These groups endorse the restrictive 1849 abortion law now in effect in our state and condone jailing doctors who treat women for reproductive issues, even in the case of rape, incest and the life of the mother. Women who currently need care for ectopic pregnancies and other life-threatening reproductive issues are currently unable to get that care in our state because doctors are afraid of losing their license and going to jail.
Kelly was endorsed by Donald Trump and advised Trump operatives as special counsel in the plot to submit fake electoral votes declaring Trump the winner in Wisconsin’s 2020 election. He didn’t even stop after the Jan. 6 Capitol attack. He was then paid $120,000 to go on a nationwide “election integrity” tour to further spread the Big Lie about the election.
In his short stint on the court, before being voted off in 2020, he un-recused himself from a case after receiving $20,000 from the family of the plaintiff, and he then ruled in his favor.
In contrast, Judge Janet Protasiewicz has pledged to uphold the freedoms and the right to privacy guaranteed in our constitution. She supports a woman’s right to privacy and to make her own healthcare decisions, and her 25-year record as a tough prosecutor proves that she is not weak on crime, as Mr. Kelly’s campaign would have voters believe.
I urge voters to do their homework, examine the facts, and vote on April 4 to ensure our freedoms and privacy by voting for Judge Janet Protasiewicz.
Patt Heise, Williams Bay
Welfare question seems pointless as requirements are already in place
Your partisan majority Legislature is asking, “Shall able-bodied, childless adults be required to look for work in order to receive taxpayer-funded welfare benefits?”
Why? This is an inflammatory topic and it is important to note that the legislators may have proposed this question to appeal to their voter base. Now let’s get down to the nuts and bolts. This question is based on a false premise because unemployment benefits in Wisconsin are funded by employers through the state’s Unemployment Insurance program, not taxpayer-funded welfare benefits.
Furthermore, there are already numerous requirements in place for receiving unemployment benefits, including being able and available to work, actively seeking suitable work, being registered for work at Wisconsin Job Service, not voluntarily quitting a job without good cause, and performing at least four valid work search actions each week. These legislators seem to lack an understanding of the agencies they oversee as they are asking people to vote for something that is already required. Maybe they are not qualified for their positions.
There are two more significantly complex questions on the ballot. If these legislators don’t understand this simple question, how can they be expected to understand the implications of the other two?
Duane Konkel, Elkhorn
Wisconsin Republican Party seems to prefer destroying democracy
The Wisconsin Republican Party has passed the reins to election conspiracy theorists that’d rather thwart our democracy than defend it.
Last year, Republicans in the State Legislature passed a litany of voter-suppression bills and wasted millions of taxpayer dollars on Michael Gableman’s election “investigation.” Extremist election deniers like David Clarke and Scott Presler have traveled statewide campaigning for Republican candidates, and several have launched campaigns centered on election lies.
Unlike many Republicans, I’ve no doubt elections in Wisconsin are safe and secure. Most Wisconsinites feel likewise, having rejected election deniers wherever they’ve appeared. But we can’t let our guard down yet. With such a high-stakes race for U.S. Senate arriving soon, we must ensure election deniers like Gableman, Clarke and Janel Brandtjen are kept far away from power.
Even in the Wisconsin Supreme Court race, the Republican Party has thrown its support behind Dan Kelly, who advised the GOP on their fake elector scheme that would have overturned the legitimate results of Wisconsin’s 2020 election. I have zero confidence that Dan Kelly, or anyone supported by the GOP, would do the right thing to protect our democracy.
I urge you to vote for candidates that will defend Wisconsin’s democracy from those who seek to destroy it.
Merryann Wen, Delavan
Like it or not, all signs point to dairy-free milk becoming more popular
Regardless of the outcome of the Dairy Pride Act, or any other legislation that aims to force producers of dairy-free milks to change their packaging, analysts predict that these healthy, eco-friendly, cruelty-free options will continue to grow in popularity.
According to Morning Consult, “67% of U.S. adults have tried a non-dairy milk, and roughly one in three drink it at least weekly.” Barclays predicts that the global vegan food and drink market could increase by more than 1,000% by the end of the decade.
Unlike dairy products, which are packed with saturated fat and cholesterol, plant milks don’t contribute to heart disease, Type 2 diabetes and Alzheimer’s disease, and they aren’t tied to a higher risk of breast, ovarian and prostate cancer.
A recent National Geographic feature examined the “environmental nightmare” that is the dairy industry and found that, as one source put it, “Across the board, hands down, plant milks are undeniably the environmentally friendly choice.” Almond milk’s water usage, for instance, doesn’t come close to that of cow’s milk, with 144 gallons in every jug.
Since cows only lactate when they are pregnant or have just given birth, dairy farms repeatedly artificially inseminate them and take their babies away — a horrifically traumatic experience that no mother should wish on another.
Humans are the only species that drinks milk beyond infancy and the only one that drinks the breastmilk of another animal. It’s strange, unhealthy and, fortunately, ending.
Michelle Reynolds, Norfolk, Virginia, The PETA Foundation
A vote for Kelly is one for judicial integrity, separation of powers
One of the candidates for the Wisconsin Supreme Court has already pronounced how she will prejudge potential cases coming before her. Ethical judges do not prejudge cases before they hear both sides. She is exhibiting political conduct of a politician, not impartial, ethical judicial conduct.
Supreme Court candidate Justice Daniel Kelly has not stated how he will rule in any case that he may hear on the Wisconsin Supreme Court. His philosophy is that he will strictly follow our State Constitution. This is what an impartial and honest justice must do. His opponent has openly stated how she will rule and change our laws on cases regarding school choice — against — voter ID —against — Castle Doctrine — against — Act 10 —against — and redistricting — against.
The redistricting issue has already been upheld by both Wisconsin and federal courts, but she wants to make her own redistricting law. A justice with a stated verdict, before a case is heard, should ethically recuse themselves from a case. I do not think she will.
Judges do not make laws. In our democracy, laws are to be made only by the Legislature and confirmed by the governor. If judges are allowed to make law as they please, then there is no need for the other two branches of government.
The existence of the Legislature and governor will be moot with a dictatorial judge that ignores the Constitution.
Your future votes for a governor or legislator will not count. In my opinion, to maintain judicial integrity and separation of powers, Justice Daniel Kelly is the correct choice for Wisconsin.
John Surinak, Delavan
