Here we go: Stalin? Hitler? Ahmadinejad?
I admit I didn't see this coming when I quoted from Willian Cronon's oped piece in a recent New York Times disagreeing strongly with the Wisconsin governor's and the legislation's recent labor policies. Now Wisconsin's Republican party is trying to get access to Cronon's private emails "to see if he has been involved in the recent protests in the state. The putative rationale is that Cronon's messages were sent on the University of Wisconsin's email system and therefore are covered by the state's open-records law."
Republicans, as so often in the past, seem to want to shove the Constitution aside and rule without dissent. James Fallows, who writes for the Atlantic, is an acquaintance of Professor Cronon.
He is president of the American Historical Association; he is the Frederick Jackson Turner professor of history at the University of Wisconsin; his Nature's Metropolis and Changes in the Land are books any writer would be proud to claim.
Cronon has posted a copy of the letter the University of Wisconsin's lawyers received from the Republican Party of Wisconsin.
From: Stephan Thompson [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Thursday, March 17, 2011 2:37 PM
To: Dowling, John
Subject: Open Records RequestDear Mr. Dowling,
Under Wisconsin open records law, we are requesting copies of the following items:
Copies of all emails into and out of Prof. William Cronon’s state email account from January 1, 2011 to present which reference any of the following terms: Republican, Scott Walker, recall, collective bargaining, AFSCME, WEAC, rally, union, Alberta Darling, Randy Hopper, Dan Kapanke, Rob Cowles, Scott Fitzgerald, Sheila Harsdorf, Luther Olsen, Glenn Grothman, Mary Lazich, Jeff Fitzgerald, Marty Beil, or Mary Bell.
We are making this request under Chapter 19.32 of the Wisconsin state statutes, through the Open Records law. Specifically, we would like to cite the following section of Wis. Stat. 19.32 (2) that defines a public record as “anything recorded or preserved that has been created or is being kept by the agency. This includes tapes, films, charts, photographs, computer printouts, etc.”
Thank you for your prompt attention, and please make us aware of any costs in advance of preparation of this request.
Sincerely,
Stephan Thompson
Republican Party of Wisconsin
608-257-4765
Makes me want to punch in that number and make a loud, disgusting noise when they answer.
Fallows is writing about all this from China, from where he often reports. This time he writes:
I am staying in a country where a lot of recent news concerns how far the government is going in electronic monitoring of email and other messages to prevent any group, notably including academics or students, from organizing in order to protest. I don't like that any better in Madison than I do in Beijing.
Fallows also refers us to Josh Marshall's interesting comments on the issue. He raises the use of FOIA Republican party.
Let's allow William Cronon the last word on FOIA in the Wisconsin case.
When FOIA is used to harass individual faculty members for asking awkward questions, researching unpopular topics, making uncomfortable arguments, or pursuing lines of inquiry that powerful people would prefer to suppress. If that happens, FOIA and the Open Records Law can too easily become tools for silencing legitimate intellectual inquiries and voices of dissent—whether these emanate from the left or the right or (as in my case) the center. It is precisely this fear of intellectual inquiry being stifled by the abuse of state power that has long led scholars and scientists to cherish the phrase “academic freedom” as passionately as most Americans cherish such phrases as “free speech” and “the First Amendment.”
It is chilling indeed to think that the Republican Party of my state has asked to have access to the emails of a lone professor in the hope of finding messages they can use to attack and discredit that professor. It makes me wonder if they have given even the slightest thought to what would happen to the reputation of this state and of its universities if they were to succeed in such an effort.
It also makes me wonder how a party so passionate in its commitment to liberty and to protecting citizens from abuses of state power can justify resorting to this particular exercise of state power with the goal of trying to silence a critic of its own conduct.
I'd only disagree with Cronon on one point: I don't think Republicans have a discernible "commitment to liberty and to protecting citizens from abuses of state power." The most recent examples include George W. Bush's administration and his use of wiretapping.
But it's fair also to cite, as everyone does, the execrable excesses of Joseph McCarthy, Republican senator, and that was 50-60 years ago. The Republican party, given its heavy dependence on corporate support and its disregard for the American citizen leans in a very clear authoritarian direction and is quite shameless about it's "single party" ambitions.