I’m feeling probed
Cory Liebmann, formerly of the self-described “partisan” organization One Wisconsin Now, has sent an unbelievably large open records request to State Representative Leah Vukmir’s office. Among the targets of this fishing expedition is, well, me.
1. All email from 7/1/08 through 1/20/10 for Rep. Vukmir, Dean Cady and Matthew Adamczyk (only in his capacity working for Rep. Vukmir) that fit the following search words and names:
“Jim Sullivan”, “Sullivan”, “WPRI”, “Wisconsin Policy Research Institute”, “MacIver”, “Americans for Prosperity”, “AFP”, “Sykes”, “Belling”, “Wisconsin Manufacturers and Commerce”, “WMC”, “Grebe”, “Kohler”, “Bradley Foundation”, “Obama”, “Palin”, “McCain”, “ALEC”, “American Legislative Exchange Council”, “Republican”, “Democrat”, “GOP”, “Barrett”, “Scott Walker”, “Lawton”, “Healy”, “Jensen”, “Zignego”, “Walton”, “Wal-Mart”, “Sprenger”, “Wisconsin Right to Life”, “WRTL” , “Pro-Life Wisconsin”, “Tenth Amendment”, “Tea Party”, “Wisconsin Family Council”, “WFC”, “Wisconsin Family Action”, “WFA”, “Appling”, “Julaine”, “Milwaukee Police”, “Grothman”, “Ed Thompson”, “WVCY”, “global warming”, “marijuana”, “PRESS”, “Parents Raising Educational Standards in Schools”, “Rose Fernandez”, “Fraley”, “Mark Block”, “Dooley”, “Real Debate”, “Owen”, “Wigderson”, “McBride”, “Bucher”, “Boots and Sabers”, “Lightbourn”, “Sheehy”, “Koschnick”, “Memphis”, “Luber”, “Stitt”, “One Wisconsin Now”, “Citizen Action”.
As you can see, included in the list are a number of bloggers and conservative media outlets.
At first I was amused by being included in the list. After all, it shows that I must be having some impact. I like to think that I do.
But the more I think about it, the more I’m annoyed. I really resent someone investigating what I do in the course of my work as a writer for the Waukesha Freeman, the MacIver Institute, this blog, and any other publications. This may come as a shock to Liebmann, but I take my work seriously, and my First Amendment rights seriously. I wonder how Milwaukee Journal Sentinel writers or the Wisconsin State Journal would react if they were included in this little probe of his.
I also wonder who is actually going to pay for this open records request. At $.25 cents/page, this could be a nice-sized bill for Liebmann.
For the record, I don’t think there are any records of me contacting Vukmir’s office, so good luck with that.
I’m a fan of open records, but even I see this request as too broad. These things aren’t meant to be fishing expeditions; the request should seek information to confirm an issue, not search in hopes of finding one. She should ask the request be narrowed to something reasonable before fulfilling it.
Also, $0.25 a page is if you take ownership of that paper. You can request to review the records without charge, and that’s the smart thing to do. Generally an agency will just give them to you rather than have to watch you go through them.
[Reply]
James this isn’t really about you. I am trying to learn about how an elected official uses their state email account. This elected official appears to be engaged with right wing bloggers, so it seems obvious to include some of the prominent ones in my request. If there was a better way to take a look at how an elected official uses a state email account, I would have used it, but there are no real alternatives. The email portion of my request is certainly comprehensive, which is why I asked the officials office to notify me if there is any way that I could adjust my request to make it more manageable for everyone involved. They never responded to me at all…in any way…until after they gave my request to MacIver. Sometimes as a requestor you are going in half blind and if the other party isn’t willing to work with you, you have to just do your best.
I wonder if you have ever seen some of the ORR’s coming from republican folks or people like CRG…several of them make my request look very narrow in scope. You tend to be one of the more consistent conservative bloggers, so I am sure that you would equally criticize their requests.
[Reply]
James Wigderson Reply:
February 14th, 2010 at 12:20 pm
So Cory, which media figures are the subjects of their fishing requests?
[Reply]
James Wigderson Reply:
February 14th, 2010 at 12:21 pm
Also, is this just retaliation for conservative requests? What public interest issue were you investigating?
[Reply]
If one takes seriously what Liebman posted here, he seems to be opposed to Legislators using their legislative email accounts to notify State residents/organizations about legislative actions, initiatives, etc.
Huh?
Is Liebman suggesting that he prefers ‘healthcare legislation’ methodology? Closed-door one-party ‘ram-it-through’ with no disclosure to the public and/or District residents?
I know that he’s hoping there’s a fundraising item somewhere in those several thousand pages. Good luck with that.
[Reply]
John Foust Reply:
February 14th, 2010 at 5:45 pm
Cindy, the law says a request needs to be specific. Cory’s was. It doesn’t say it can’t be extensive. As a practical matter, a narrow request will get a faster answer, no? The law doesn’t require a reason or rationale for the request, so wondering about whether it’s a fishing expedition or a highly targetted investigation is a moot point.
Don’t play innocent, Dad. Are you in favor of politicians of any stripe playing ring-around-the-e-rosie with bloggers during office hours? How do you think Fraley heard about this? Because he asked about a legislative initiative about Liebmann? You have no concerns about campaigning while on the public dime, hmm?
Same for you, Wigderson. If you’re routinely mingling with politicians on paper or in email, you think you should be above public examination? Why? Your good looks? Your track record? How exactly does this infringe on your First Amendment rights? Don’t be dumb. If you don’t want to leave detailed footprints, do it on the phone or in person. As for the MJS, would you consider Sykes and Belling as journalists, political operatives, or entertainers, and why wouldn’t they have piles of faux-rage as you do? They seem far more sensitive than you.
Anyone care to explain why Fraley and MacGuyver heard about this before Liebmann even received a response?
[Reply]
James, you don’t find it at all odd that Brian Fraley from MacIver had a copy of Cory’s ORR before Cory himself received a response about said request?
It would seem to me, given that fact, that Cory wasn’t off base in wanting to take a look to see what Rep. Vukmir emails to conservative bloggers (if she does).
[Reply]
James Wigderson Reply:
February 14th, 2010 at 8:22 pm
Zach, since he lives in her district, I assumed Leah bumped into Brian at a grocery store. Seeing the nuts on display might have reminded Leah of the ORR.
But, seriously, how shocking would it be if Brian bumped into Leah anywhere and asked, ‘Hey, how’s it going?”
“You should see the open records request we just got…’
Sometimes I’m just amazed at the instantaneous grab for the conspiracy theory by the left. What a bunch of maroons.
[Reply]
John Foust Reply:
February 14th, 2010 at 8:39 pm
If you were consistent, you’d suggest that Liebmann’s First Amendment rights were being threatened here, too. They’re not, of course. And neither are yours.
[Reply]
I think it is odd that Fraley has a copy of the ORR before Liebmann had a response. So what? It’s either nefarious or coincidental. Your team will think it’s nefarious, but you assume Fraley blogged about it as soon as he got it. You don’t know that he didn’t have it for several days prior. Again, so what? Was Liebmann’s request filled?
And clearly, Liebmann is driving an agenda here – probably for a client. Look, Team Sullivan and his supporters want to paint Vukmir as a right-wing radical – note the recent pejorative use of “tenth amendment.” Yes, what a quaint idea that Tenth Amendment!
This ORR was to further that notion.
“Sometimes as a requestor you are going in half blind and if the other party isn’t willing to work with you, you have to just do your best.” Really? Are we really supposed to believe that he is going to accommodate Vukmir or rather, blast her for not accommodating him?
The ORR was clearly trying to find evidence of nothing, but rather to find circumstantial material to meet a preconceived scandal.
Whatever. I support his use of the ORR and anyone else’s use of them. But he is no victim here and the story he is trying to spin is really a steaming pile because no one who is being honest believes that Liebmann, based on this request, is some sort of Woodward and Bernstein.
[Reply]
John Foust Reply:
February 14th, 2010 at 8:37 pm
Wait a minute. Sure, maybe Liebmann would eventually use something he’d found, but then we could study the evidence and the story he’d present.
In this case, a conservative blogger launched the “story” of a request for records, even before it was fulfilled. And who launched the conspiracy theories? I quote Fraley: “On the opoosite (sic) end of the spectrum are taxpayer-financed, time-wasting requests that serve as nothing more than free political opposition research fishing expeditions conducted at taxpayers’ expense. With these requests, one can draw more insight about the means, methods and motivations of the person making the request. … It is clear from this request that the liberal special interest machine is ready to portray Vukmir as part of some grand conservative cabal.”
Face it. The open records / open meetings law benefits everyone, left or right, up or down, and is used for oppo research all the time. You need the goods, you need the facts. If you think both sides aren’t doing it all the freakin’ time, you’re an innocent. Fraley is wrong to insult the law. He’s trying to score points with what? The fact that his opponents are looking for dirt?
[Reply]
R.W. Smith Reply:
February 14th, 2010 at 10:10 pm
John,
Actually, I think the public benefitted more from finding out about what you lefties are doing.
It was a pretty shrewd premptive move by Vukmir and more evidence of the oncoming liberal high-speed electoral train wreck that we are about to witness.
I think we all see why you guys are so worked up about this.
[Reply]
I think we’ve established who the top-tier bloggers are…*sniff sniff*
[Reply]
Are you in favor of politicians of any stripe playing ring-around-the-e-rosie with bloggers during office hours?
Umnnhhhh……I think legislators converse–phone, email, letters—with their constituents all day long, every day. It’s their JOB, John. I also know that legislators send emails and letters to NON-constituents all day long, every day. It’s ALSO their JOB, John.
See, John, the term “public” means EVERYONE. Not just the JS reporters, or other Leggies, or staffers. EVERYONE.
[Reply]
John Foust Reply:
February 15th, 2010 at 9:26 am
As the kids say, Dad, “No duh.” So tell me what’s wrong with Liebmann asking questions like this? You don’t like the process? We should simply take Vukmir’s word as gospel, if someone wants to know what her office is doing all day? You think Vukmir be spending her day on lame politics like this, instead of helping her aides handle the usual flood of improperly directed constituent requests? You think Vukmir should delay open records requests and hand them instead to political operatives at supposedly non-partisan groups like MacGuyver?
[Reply]
Actually Dad, that is an interesting question. Just what are office hours for an elected official?
Aren’t they kind of an office-holder 24/7?
And what about politics and policy? What’s the difference?
Even the etymology is bound together. We can’t even differentiate between politicking and policy making because the taxpayers fund politicking newsletters for these schmucks.
I think Zach is just confused, although, I am pretty certain that this is the same Zach who writes Sullivan’s campaign press releases.
I’ll bet you are right their next to Cory wearing your tin foil cap pouring through the documents.
[Reply]
Wow… nothing makes me feel less important as a blogger than being left out of an open records request.
[Reply]
John Foust Reply:
February 16th, 2010 at 7:47 am
Libertarians tend not to suck up to Republicans at the Capitol.
[Reply]
Yes, leggies are leggies all the livelong day, if they’re not working on the railroad.
One COULD distinguish politics from policy. Policy flows from convictions; politics is the means by which policy is finalized.
As to the timing–Fraley having knowledge of the request prior to a response–it strikes me as utterly without significance except to those who should take their meds on the prescribed schedule.
[Reply]
John Foust Reply:
February 15th, 2010 at 9:52 am
I’m drug-free, Dad. How about you? You think it’s insignificant that Fraley was writing about this before the politician responded to an open records request? You’d feel the same way if the shoe was on the other foot? Wouldn’t have a word to say about it? You’d tell the whining conspiracy-theorist Republicans to check their meds? Really? Because in this case, I see Fraley out front, suggesting there’s a “liberal special interest machine” out to attack Vukmir.
What’s your big plan, Dad? How do you think you’ll ever tame the political machine out there, the eeeeviiiiill Gummint P.I.G. boyzzz gnawing away at your retirement? You say you like openness? Isn’t that what Liebmann was doing? Where’s your higher value: in government transparency? Or do different values apply when it’s the other side?
[Reply]
You know, Liebmann kind of botched this.
If he thought there was something buried deep in the e-mails of Vukmir and/or her staff, he just now tipped them off. Surely, if the e-mails in question were partisan or illegal or unethical, they would have been more partidan, more illegal, or more unethical as the election got closer.
By pulling the trigger this early in the year, Vukmir and/or her staff aren’t going to get caught unawares – if they were at all in this instance – again and will be infinitely more conscientious moving forward. He’s probably driven those communications offline via telephone and after hours.
The SSDC or whomever is paying Liebmann should request a refund. This was his one shot and he probably misfired.
[Reply]
John Foust Reply:
February 15th, 2010 at 11:19 am
I think that’s pretty weak logic. Of course Vukmir is “tipped off” anyone asks to see a record. Any politician knows what’s subject to an open records request. If they’re capable, they avoid placing smoking guns in emails. They may quickly delete anything from their inboxes even if they shouldn’t, and the Capitol’s email system doesn’t retain any backups beyond 30 days. What a coinky-dink. It’s almost as if they don’t follow the AG’s own guidelines. Municipalities are told to keep records for seven years, but the Capitol treats itself differently.
[Reply]