It's been more than three weeks since the photo-op launching of Madison's new Common Sense Coalition (CSC), a self-labeled "centrist" political coalition that is alternately described as a necessary fresh voice of moderation in the city's political scene, as a fresh manifestation of the ol' boys' network, as a carefully constructed counterweight to the organizing of Progressive Dane (PD), and as a vehicle for the mayoral ambitions of its primary spokesperson, Peter Munoz.

A few things are clear, though, as reported in the piece linked above. One, the coalition's public agenda currently consists of a small constellation of general talking points ("sustainable economic development," "open and responsive government") that one will have a difficult time disagreeing with. Two, the group's creation was instigated at the behest of an undisclosed client of Putnam Roby, a Madison PR tandem consisting of "an unapologetic Republican" and a "kind and gentle Democrat," as described to a State Journal reporter by the latter, Roger Putnam. Three, Putnam either lied about the pending launching of the coalition to a Cap Times reporter in late April, or he was ignorant about online organizing of the group by his business partner, Tim Roby, for nearly four months.

Though nearly a month has passed since its public launching (and nearly six months since the group's domain name was purchased), there has been little new from the group, besides a few broadcast appearances from coalition spokespersons repeating the group's basic talking points. Though it's unreasonable to expect too much (talk or action) from a brand new political lobby, they apparently met last week "to identify priorities," according to a State Journal editorial championing the group's formation. Hopefully the coalition will present something more concrete shortly, as well as disclose the circumstances of its creation.

The unsigned editorial in Madison's morning paper (representing Publisher James Hopson, Editor Ellen Foley, Editorial Editor Scott Milfred, Editorial Writer Chuck Martin, and since-departed Editorial Writer Sunny Schubert) opined in favor of the coalition, concluding that it is "off to a great start."

Given the intersecting association of the State Journal editorial board and numerous coalition members as starters for the Madtown Bears, this is hardly surprising. The Bears are those local pundits, pols, and businesspersons lately and loudly looking to score political points against the mayor and the council's progressive wing by talking down the city's economy, oftentimes contrary to actual evidence. The initial CSC press release was submitted to Wisbusiness.com, republished on a wire dominated by Wisconsin companies, the state Department of Commerce, and interest groups like Wisconsin Manufacturers and Commerce. This republishing on this venue suggests that the ultimate goal for CSC has more to do with organizing the Bears, via inchoate invocations of "dialogue" and "transparency" in city politics.

The editorial prudently noted that the coalition had not offered anything concrete. Beyond this single note, however, the rest of the piece was glowing. It cited without question the coalition's claimed membership numbers, opined approvingly about the group's diversity (though critics point towards an overwhelmingly male composition in their initial photo-op), ignored the group's elitist membership policy (discussed below), and did not mention the earlier mendacity of the coalition's hired organizers vis-à-vis local media, none of which really represent small-c common sense.

Meanwhile, the coalition claims four thousand members, while its membership card includes a field asking applicants for the "number of people you represent." This begs the question of whether the 4,000-member figure given by the coalition actually represents individual paid members, or if it merely represents members of affiliated organizations (i.e., "60 small businesses, 17 labor unions, development firms, and non-profit[s]"). In other words, given that the head of the MPD union, Scott Favour, is a founding member, and that the police union is one of the seventeen cited above, does this mean that every single police officer in the city is considered a "member" of the Common Sense Coalition? Are the employees of the sixty small businesses similarly counted? Putnam Roby, which is currently handling the daily organizational activities of the coalition, should clarify this issue as a token of the group's stated commitment to transparency.

In an essay posted on this website a day after the State Journal op-ed was published, Alder Brenda Konkel discussed her thoughts about the group. Konkel, a member of PD seen by supporters and detractors alike as a local progressive leader, wrote, "their rhetoric does not match their actions." She cited the furtive organizing of the group over the last six months and its photo-op gaffe, and suggested an initial four-point agenda for the group.

Konkel also mentioned the CSC membership policy, writing, "it certainly seems as though they are trying to exclude someone."

The organization's membership policy states;

Translation: Even if you pay us the club fee, the Common Sense Coalition is not open to public participation, and if we think you might not fit in, we may require a loyalty statement. Even so, we might not let you join the club anyways, unless you are popular with a lot of members already.

In recent years, a candidate agreement used by the Progressive Dane party, in which electoral endorsees were required to sign a statement pledging non-endorsement of candidates facing other PD endorsees, has been was roundly criticized as a blood oath (as reported this February in the State Journal), or as a loyalty oath (as opined by the State Journal editorial board two years ago).

However one might characterize PD's candidate agreement, the inclusion of a clause for dealing with ideologically-suspect applicants in CSC's is at least as egregious to a consistent critic. While the PD candidate agreement is directed towards endorsed party candidates (not members), the CSC statement of purpose is pertinent to all organization applicants. This is a far wider net that applies a standard of ideological correctness to every member of the group. Will the State Journal editorial board criticize this? We'll see.

The CSC posted the State Journal editorial in its entirety on the front of their website, headlining it as "what others are saying about the Common Sense Coalition." What about others?

Well, Bill Christofferson mentioned its launching, recalling the 1979 appearance of an identically-named group in Madison.

Lisa Subeck of Go West and Turn Left opined that the coalition "looks like another Good ol' Boys network" to her, after looking at the CSC's group photo. Subeck was a PD-endorsed candidate in the District 1 city council race, which was won by Jed Sanborn. She also examined their stated goals, noting their non-specificity, as well as the group's membership requirements.

In an earlier post on June 7, Subeck reported on a radio appearance by a CSC spokesperson;

Regardless of how one chooses to specifically characterize the agenda of the Common Sense Coalition, primary responsibilities for the group include coming clean about its original funders, as well as its specific paid membership. Both can be answered by Putnam Roby.

In her piece, Konkel closed with this observation;