The Paradoxical Scott Walker
At great cost, a gifted but flawed leader moves the needle on change in Wisconsin
(page 1 of 3)
On Nov. 19, 1955, the modern age of conservatism began with young Bill Buckley publishing the first issue of his new magazine, National Review. Famously, Buckley said in the mission statement that the magazine “stands athwart history, yelling Stop” to the liberalism that had dominated American government for the first half of the twentieth century.
Almost fifty-five years later, inspired by the same beliefs as Buckley, Gov. Scott Walker stood athwart Wisconsin history and yelled Stop to a century’s worth of progressive policies, as he announced his plans to break Wisconsin’s public employee unions as a way to rein in government spending.
The move ignited a cataclysm of protests that remain unabated today. And they helped frame the three paradoxes that mark Scott Walker’s tumultuous first year in office.
Go figure…
- For years, Scott Walker had been a likable and gifted politician—a conservative rock star who could convince Democrats to vote for him for three terms as county executive of decidedly liberal Milwaukee County. Yet today, after pursuing a political agenda that is either remarkably courageous or spectacularly suicidal (maybe both!), the affable Walker finds himself dangerously underwater in the polls, disliked by most Wisconsinites and blamed for the state’s political turmoil.
- Even if Walker is ignominiously recalled from office in 2012, he seems certain to be judged by historians as a transformative governor who changed the political DNA of Wisconsin. In short, public employee unionism will never be the same after Scott Walker, even if liberals sweep to power at the Capitol.
- Walker is an unabashed pro-business governor who has proved surprisingly inept on key development issues. Bereft of savvy business advice in his inner circle, this corporate cheerleader fumbled the crucial venture capital issue, wasting months, and seems prisoner of a simplistic eighties-style of economic thinking. Meanwhile, his brash pledge to oversee creation of 250,000 jobs in his first term could be the petard on which his own political career is blown up.
Make no mistake: the paradoxical Mr. Walker is difficult to explain. The old Kris Kristofferson line —“He’s a walking contradiction, partly truth and partly fiction”—comes to mind.
Count me among the people who underestimated Walker. I interviewed him in May 2009 as a candidate in a gubernatorial election that was still seventeen months away. Walker was earnest and personable and had the easy grace of a political natural. Ask him a difficult question, Walker would lean forward, look you in the eye and calmly explain himself. No bluster, no anger, no sputtering.
Wow, this guy was good!
But demeanor aside, there was a moment when he seemed to float off into that cuckoo-land cloud of conservatism: He kept telling me that as governor he would expect public employees to give back some of their benefits to balance the state budget. AND THEY WOULD GET NOTHING IN RETURN.
This made no sense to me as a gray-bearded guy who grew up in heavily unionized Kenosha, whose dad was a Teamster and who lived on the near-east side of Madison where anarcho-syndicalists outnumber Republicans. Such naiveté! Such foolishness on Walker’s part! Everybody knew that public unions did not give back contracted items without getting something in return. Walker might as well have told me that he would balance the state budget by employing a team of industrious dwarves to spin straw into gold.
Of course, if there was a fool in that interview, it was I. Time proved Scott Walker absolutely right.
"Like him or not, Scott Walker is one of the few politicians who’s elected to do something and actually does it,” says Richard Esenberg, president of the Wisconsin Institute for Law & Liberty, adjunct professor at Marquette University and conservative blogger.
Less than two years later, Gov. Scott Walker had not just pushed state employees into paying sizably more bucks for their health insurance and retirement plans, but he had effectively busted their unions, reversing fifty years of labor law.
Even some Republicans say he botched the politics of it, but Steve Baas, a veteran conservative warrior, says the smack down was necessary. “I didn’t hear any of those geniuses saying that prospectively when this got rolled out,” he says. “What they really mean is: ‘I really like what the governor did to the unions, but I would never have had the balls to do it myself.’
“I’m sorry, but you are not going to change 100 years of a public-sector power trajectory without a polarizing fight,” says Baas, who’s vice president of governmental affairs for the Metropolitan Milwaukee Association of Commerce. “I don’t care if you’re Tommy Thompson, Ronald Reagan or Dale Carnegie. If you pick that fight, it’s going to be a bloody battle.”
This is true.

Email
Print
Reader Comments:
I feel he is both courageous and suicidal in doing what he has done. I firmly believe what he did was needed and all the crybaby liberalsor do i dare say unions should just move on and quit spending the taxpayers money on these recall things. I ask all union members this one little question, what exactly do you get out of your union? I know a couple of people who belong to unions and they gripe that the unions do little if anything for them except take their money. I see why unions members don't like what has happened because they had their cadilac benefits reduced to midsize car benefits just like the rest of us. You all make it sound as if unions were the only ones affected but you are wrong!!
We are trying to teach our kids not to be bullies in school so what do some people do? Fine examples you all make! Knuckleheads all of you. I can tell you this, i am not afraid of any bully idiot. What ever happened to free speech? Is that only allowed if it is in line with your beliefs? I just have to say WTF!
Marc:
As an outsider to the Madison area, I do understand that you have to preach to the choir on this issue (Madison's government workers), however does this give you license to publish inaccuracies such as "Walkers polling numbers are dangerously underwater?" A poll published in this week's Milwaukee Journal article shows Walker ahead against each and everyone of the projected Democrat opponents.
Also, you state that Walker is diliked by most Wisconsinites. In my network of 75-100 or so group of family, friends and acquaintances, the great,great majority are Walker supporters. Granted, there are few Madison area people in my group, however they are all Wisconsinites.
It sure would be helpful for readers like me if you would reference your resources when controversial statements are published in your articles.
Ole, I'm sorry you didn't pick up on the fact that the latest poll results were announced after my story was written and posted. (I make no claims of clairvoyance, other than predicting that the Packers will be in the Super Bowl in 2013.)
Note that an October 2011 poll by the Wisconsin Policy Research Institute (disclosure: I'm the managing editor of its magazine) found only 42% of the respondents somewhat or strongly approved of Gov. Walker's job performance versus 56% who disapproved. Those same respondents were basically evenly split on whether or not the governor should be recalled. On Nov. 15, the St. Norbert College/Wisconsin Public Radio survey found that 58% of respondents felt he should be recalled, up from 47% in its April poll.
So, as I wrote, Gov. Walker was "dangerously underwater" in the polls. Marc