As soon as Spencer Black announced he would not be seeking another term in the state Assembly, a plethora of candidates jumped forth all claiming to be his rightful successor. Long deemed to be one of the state's greatest champions of the environment, those seeking to claim his seat representing the state's 77th Assembly district trumpeted their credentials at the highest levels possible.
However, there is only one Spencer Black, and he is retiring. It would be impossible to find a successor exactly like him. So it seems fitting that The Daily Cardinal Editorial Board has chosen to endorse Fred Wade for the Democratic nomination in Wisconsin's 77th Assembly district race, the candidate who has arguably spent the least time trying to present himself as Black's doppelganger.
Of the five candidates seeking the Democratic nomination, Wade is the only one who has put the University of Wisconsin, along with K-12 education, at the forefront of his agenda. The university system has long been an afterthought of the state legislature —and when it does become a priority, it is usually because Steve Nass is spouting his fringe anti-intellectual invective. Funding has remained stagnant for years, and state dollars only make up a paltry 19 percent of UW-Madison's budget. It makes sense that the representative from the 77th district, which encompasses most of campus, should be a warrior for higher education. Wade vows to increase state funding for the university system, not simply keep it consistent. Even more importantly, Wade wants to increase funding for the Wisconsin Higher Education Grant (WHEG) program, showing he realizes increased financial aid is the way to keep higher education accessible.
In addition, Wade stated that money should be pulled from the ballooning corrections budget and used to partially fund some of his education plans. Lowering the corrections budget was a common theme among the candidates, but is nonetheless appreciated from Wade.
Granted, as a private attorney for the past 30 years, Wade does not have the exhaustive environmental record opponents like Brett Hulsey and John Imes have. However, we doubt that Wade would become a rampant tree killer once elected. He vows to focus on further regulation of pesticides and toxic chemicals, something residents of the isthmus should appreciate.
While Wade's lack of environmental credentials prevent him from being the perfect candidate, all of his competitors have deeper flaws. Hulsey seems less accessible compared to the other candidates, and we disapprove of his support for Dane County Sheriff Dave Mahoney's immigration policy. Meanwhile, Hesselbein's lack of experience could leave the 77th district underrepresented in the Capitol. As for Imes, he has a great deal of private sector experience, but failed to properly show us how it would translate into effective legislation. The last remaining candidate, former Middleton mayor Doug Zwank, has a wealth of experience in federal and state level government, but his budgetary policies are not practical.
In the interest of full disclosure, yes, Fred Wade has been the only candidate placing ads in our paper. But no, that did not affect our decision in the slightest.
This race should be about who will best represent west Madison, not who can do the best Spencer Black impersonation. And in that regard, the best candidate in the Democratic primary is Fred Wade.
In the Republican primary, no endorsement
The purpose of an endorsement is, ostensibly, for a newspaper's editorial board to support the candidate it feels will do best if elected; which candidate the board wants to see in office. For that reason, The Daily Cardinal cannot give an endorsement in the Republican primary between Milwaukee County Executive Scott Walker or former congressman Mark Neumann.
No matter the results of Tuesday's primary, no member of this board, in all likelihood, could see themselves voting for either candidate.Therefore we cannot endorse Walker or Neumann, since we ultimately feel they would both make bad governors.
We debated how we should approach this endorsement—if we would pick the lesser of the two evils or the one we think would be weaker competition for Barrett—and realized endorsing anyone would at least be disingenuous, and at worst a malicious attempt to weaken the general election.
Both men oppose high-speed rail between Madison and Milwaukee, both want to repeal Wisconsin's smoking ban and both would pursue budget policies that could put the university's funding at risk. To say we endorse either candidate would mean saying we endorse those policies, which we do not.
Ultimately, Barrett is the best candidate for governor, and endorsing either Walker or Neumann, even in a contest between the two of them, is something we simply cannot do.
The Daily Cardinal Editorial Board
