Profile Page

District #14 - Luther Olsen (R)

Wisconsin State Senator

Incumbent	Incumbent Web Page	Personal Web Page	Who funds the incumbent?
Luther Olsen (R)	Luther Olsen	Olsen's Personal Page	Follow the Money

See the State Elections Board and new candidates HERE

On the issues - 2008 (See the legislator's 2006/2007 positions on health care, ethics and campaign reform below)

A+ - Public funding of judicial campaigns

(SB171) Incumbent voted FOR passage of public funding of campaigns for judges. In a recent study by Citizen Action, in 75% of the cases reaching the Supreme Court level there was a campaign contributor on one side or the other. Campaigns for judges are being financed by attorneys and business leaders. How's that for justice? ALL Supreme Court Judges came out in support of this bill. 2/19/08 Sequence No. 200

On the issues - 2007 (See the legislator's 2006 position on health care, ethics and campaign reform below)

F - Healthy Wisconsin

Incumbent OPPOSED the Healthy Wisconsin amendment to the state budget. All Democrats voted for it and all Republicans voted against it. Healthy Wisconsin was opposed by the insurance industry and business associations (though not the business members themselves). To understand your representatives vote see Follow the Money (upper right). For more on the benefits of Healthy Wisconsin see Sen. Joe Leean's article HERE

A+ Ethics Reform

(SB1) Incumbent voted to pass an Ethics Reform bill (and also supported it in 2006).

F - Healthcare - HSAs

Incumbent supports Health Savings Accounts, which as a tax subsidy benefit the wealthy. But they are detrimental to the low- and middle-income population who face high health care costs, or have them imposed by employers. See more HERE. HSAs are supported by the insurance industry, bankers, credit card companies and bankruptcy attorneys, all of whom have given campaigns significant contributions to this legislator. See Follow the Money (upper right)

Many politicians refuse to answer the questions in the Project Vote-Smart solicitation because they don't want voters knowing where they stand on the issues! They like being able to fudge and evade when being asked about an issue, and having it on record and posted on the web is the last thing they want. Especially when it can be compared to their voting record while in session.

Project Vote-Smart Rating

INCUMBENT REPEATEDLY REFUSED TO PROVIDE ANY RESPONSES TO CITIZENS ON ISSUES THROUGH THE 2004 NATIONAL POLITICAL AWARENESS TEST

Ratings by Interest Groups: http://www.vote-smart.org/issue_rating_category.php?can_id=BS021436

Votes by Category:

Wisconsin Conservation Voters

Rated Incumbent at POOR acceptance

Conservation Scorecard on your state senator at:
http://www.conservationvoters.org/Public/scorecards/sc05-06.pdf
(Newly elected members will not be listed yet.)

Vote Tracker -- SB1 Ethics Bill
http://www.conservationvoters.org/Public/voteTracker.php?billID=47
(Includes 2007 session)

Past Scorecards:
2003-2004 http://www.conservationvoters.org/Public/scorecards/sc03-04.pdf
2001-2002 http://www.conservationvoters.org/Public/scorecards/sc01-02.pdf

2006 record below

On the issues

F - Universal Health Care

Incumbent has not been supportive of universal health care, and receives significant campaign contributions from the health care community.

F - Campaign Finance Reform

Incumbent has done nothing to move campaign reform forward.

A+ Ethics Reform

Incumbent voted to pass an Ethics Reform bill (SB1).

Incumbent's record on Ethics Reform: Good

Bill - SB1 (11/1/05 Sequence 239)

The Issue

How Senate Voted

Your Representative

Senate Bill 1 - Establish a Government Accountability Board

Introduced by Mike Ellis (R) in the Senate and
Terri McCormick (R) in the Assembly

It was killed by the Assembly Republicans.

This was a vote on whether to bring the ethics bill to the floor and allow a complete up-or-down vote. By voting against an open floor vote the assembly legislators effectively killed the bill and did not have to go on record as officially opposing ethics reform.

Proponents claim: This bill would establish an independent ethics commission to oversee the state legislature and governor.

See www.wisdc.org

Passed by a vote of 28 to 5

Voting for reform:

R = 16*

D = 12

Voting to block reform:

R = 3

D = 2

See entire assembly roll call vote here and the senate roll call here.

+ + + + + + +

* Incumbent voted FOR bringing SB1 to the floor for a vote (this was the vote preferred by reform advocates)

+ + + + + + +

Opponents claim: It is too intrusive, requiring the disclosure of personal finances.

(Isn't that what ethics is all about? How can they legitimately vote on an issue without disclosing any conflicts of interest?)

Republicans voting against reform were Grothman, Lasee and Reynolds, Democrats voting against reform were Decker and Taylor