MILWAUKEE — Judge Janet Protasiewicz believes the latest pre-election fundraising totals are a “positive badge” for her campaign. According to finance reports, the Milwaukee Co. Circuit Court judge has outraised her opponent, former Wisconsin Supreme Court Justice Daniel Kelly, more than 5-to-1 in a race that has shattered national spending records already.
Protasiewicz, who was on the UW-Milwaukee campus Tuesday for a candidate forum hosted by VoteRiders, All Voting Is Local and Campus Vote Project, spoke to Spectrum News 1 afterwards about attack advertisements and the money that has paid for them.
“I look at the fact that we have raised a substantial amount of money, and I am delighted that we have done that because it gives us the ability to communicate with voters across the state,” explained Protasiewicz.
However, with significant contributions from the state Democratic Party, Protasiewicz has also been vocal about her longtime support of a rule to step aside when appropriate.
“I know the Democratic Party has contributed a significant amount of money to my campaign, which is why I have pledged to recuse myself on any case which they are a party,” said Protasiewicz. “My opponent doesn’t believe in a recusal rule. He has not pledged to recuse himself on any case.”
When asked what she would like to set the record straight on, Protasiewicz said the attacks criticizing her past sentencing decisions are “absolutely horrifying.”
“I have been a community protector my entire life,” said Protasiewicz. “I worked in the district attorney’s office for a quarter century protecting people in our community. I’ve been on the bench for almost a decade doing the same thing, protecting people in our community, and the mudslinging and the lies that I have seen about my record, in that regard, are utterly atrocious. My entire life has been dedicated to community safety.”
However, it is not all defense for Protasiewicz and her campaign. She offered her own accusations about her opponent too.
“I think we’re dealing with somebody who is not fair, who is not impartial, and is going to do what he wants to do in these cases,” said Protasiewicz. “To me, it is corrupt conduct on his behalf.”