Judge Annette Ziegler was elected to the state Supreme Court as a “strict constructionist” who will enforce the letter of the law in her judicial decisions. Then, as soon as she was elected, she declared that the clearly written law establishing the Wisconsin Ethics Board doesn’t apply to her. Compounding this contradiction, some conservatives who hailed her strict constructionist views now agree the law should be stood on its head to frustrate the Ethics Board investigation of Ziegler. If the courts accept her preposterous appeal, this won’t just let Ziegler off; it will open the door for every future judge, liberal or conservative, to evade such scrutiny.
The Ethics Board was created in 1973 to oversee public officials in all three branches, legislative, executive and judicial. All elected officials must file a statement of economic interests. Ziegler, like all judges, has routinely filed such statements. But after recognizing that body’s legal authority for many years, she has now decided it actually has no power over the judicial branch of government. That’s sticking to the letter of the law.
If her appeal prevails, why would any judge bother to comply with the Ethics Board’s requirements? Why even file a statement of economic interests? After all, only the judiciary (which doesn’t require statements of economic interests) can judge the judges, according to Ziegler.
Ziegler’s conflicts are flagrant. She ruled on some 40 cases involving the West Bend Savings Bank, though her husband was a paid member of the bank’s board of directors and makes additional money through his real estate firm, which leases space to the bank. The Zieglers also borrowed some $2 million from the bank. Did they get a sweetheart deal on the loan’s terms? We don’t know. In addition, Ziegler presided over 22 cases involving other companies in which she owns at least $50,000 in stock.
Ziegler and her supporters have argued that she should only be subject to the oversight of the state Judicial Commission, which is also investigating Ziegler. But there are huge problems with that argument.
For starters, the Judicial Commission hasn’t revealed what the subject of its investigation is. Ziegler has so many conflicts, it’s possible the Ethics Board and Judicial Commission investigations don’t entirely overlap. Secondly, the Judicial Commission’s investigation does not become a public record unless it files a formal action before the Supreme Court. The commission might decide no action is needed, and the citizens of this state would never know why – leaving a cloud of suspicion trailing a Supreme Court member.
Supporters of Ziegler have argued that there is no evidence she financially benefited from her judicial decisions. How do they know? Have they seen the terms of the Zieglers’ loan?
But even if no financial benefit can be proven, the code of judicial ethics was also created to eliminate the appearance of a conflict of interest so citizens can have trust in the judicial system. ‘‘The law’s purpose is to promote citizens’ confidence that government’s decisions are free from favoritism,” said Ethics Board Chairman Jim Morgan in announcing the board’s complaint against Ziegler.
If the courts declare Ziegler can be judged only by judges, they will make a mockery of Wisconsin’s laws. A candidate elected to the state’s highest court would be allowed to operate with the lowest level of scrutiny. And judges across the state would get a free pass for any financial conflicts.
Defending UWM’s Student Loans
On April 22, the Journal Sentinel did a front-page “Watchdog Report” claiming UW-Milwaukee selected Student Loan Xpress even though the company was outbid by other lenders. The story was overplayed and misleading.
Student Loan Xpress has been one target of a national investigation of university student loan practices conducted by New York Attorney General Andrew Cuomo. This has set off the usual pack journalism. The JS initially did a good story localizing the issue, showing that UWM’s director of financial aid, Jane Hojan-Clark, sat on an advisory board for Student Loan Xpress, which had paid her air fare and hotel expenses to attend these meetings.
But its follow-up story, which suggested a rotten deal favoring Student Loan Xpress, fell apart on the jump page. On paper, a student would pay $140 more on a $5,500 loan and a parent would pay $294 more on a $5,000 loan, as compared to the deal offered by M&I Bank. But to get that better deal, a student would have to make payments on time for 30 straight months.
How many students are so punctual in their payments? According to the award-winning Web site Finaid.org, considered the national expert, the vast majority of students, 80 percent or more, do not make all monthly loan payments promptly. Tom Luljak, vice chancellor of university relations at UWM, says university officials referred JS reporter Megan Twohey to the Web site and this information, but the information wasn’t included in the story.
Luljak also says the university had a concern because Wells Fargo admitted it had suffered a computer breach and information on student lenders had been compromised. The company said it had corrected the problem, Luljak notes, but university officials still felt that was a concern. This, too, wasn’t in the story.
It goes without saying that Luljak would put the best face on UWM’s practices. He concedes that Hojan-Clark made a mistake by sitting on a company’s advisory board. But that doesn’t mean the Student Loan Xpress loans were a bad deal. For most students (or for most adults with credit cards), a slightly more costly deal that is more forgiving of late payments might be the better offer.
Beyond Therapy
In the Sunday JS Crossroads section, Milwaukee Public School Superintendent William Andrekopoulos declared that the most important thing is “instruction, instruction, instruction.” But just two days earlier, he announced his budget for the next year would slash more than 100 teacher positions while increasing the combined number of school psychologists and social workers by 25.
Yes, enrollment is expected to decline slightly next year. But the average size of MPS classes has been going up for years in the face of a continual budget crunch. If the goal is instruction, why not grab the chance to reduce class sizes?
I’ll be back in two weeks with another column.
And don’t miss critic Ann Christenson’s Dish on Dining.
