SPLITTING THE MIDDLE

Nicks And Garton Are Running Safe Campaigns; Steinberg Is Firing Up A
Daring Single Issue

When Diane Nicks talks about her brief tenure as Dane County district
attorney, she's quick to praise her staff: "They've worked hard to educate
me, and I think they've done a good job."

Nicks, 53, appointed to the post last November by Gov. Tommy Thompson, is
seeking a two-year term as the county's top crime-fighter.

She says her experience, including two elected terms (1977-81) as DA in
Columbia County and 16 years as an assistant attorney general with the
state Justice Department (primarily handling criminal trial and appellate
cases), is "broader and deeper" than that of either of her opponents:
Democrat Deirdre Garton and Libertarian Peter Steinberg.

Garton, 47, worked in the Dane County District Attorney's Office from 1989
to 1996, as an assistant and then deputy prosecutor in the juvenile unit.
She's especially proud of her role in organizing groups in response to
child abuse and neglect, and has made child abuse a major theme of her
campaign.

"All you have to do is look at the personal histories of those in prison,"
says Garton, "in which 90% were childhood victims of sexual and/or physical
abuse or neglect." She promises, if elected, "vigorous and speedy
prosecution" of child abuse cases. And she thinks some efficiencies can be
achieved; for instance, she says, municipal courts could take on more minor
criminal cases, easing the county's caseload.

Garton and her husband, Joseph, have successfully operated the popular
Quivey's Grove restaurant in Fitchburg since 1981. She currently presides
over the Dane County Mental Health Board and serves on the board of the
Madison Arts Center.

"This campaign features a wealthy Democrat boasting of her business
connections and a Republican with working-class roots and a union
background," laughs Nicks, alluding to her experience negotiating contracts
and bargaining agreements for the Wisconsin State Attorneys Association.
"It's really kind of odd."

It's also kind of interesting -- in large part due to a third candidate
Nicks didn't mention. While Nicks and Garton stick to conventional themes,
and differ only slightly in promised approaches, Peter Steinberg is
actually raising a serious issue that deserves attention and debate.

Steinberg, 45, has practiced law for more than 20 years in state and
federal courts. He's tried cases in front of both the Wisconsin and U.S.
Supreme Courts. From 1988 to 1997, he worked at the King Street Alternative
Law Office; he's now a solo practitioner. And, unlike Nicks and Garton,
Steinberg has an electoral track record in Dane County. In 1994 he took on
incumbent Judge Patrick Fiedler, garnering 38% of the vote.

Describing himself as a "Thomas Paine Democrat and a Frederick Douglass
Republican," Steinberg is focusing his campaign on a single issue: the War
on Pot.

"I use the following syllogism," he says. "'Any public policy that does
more harm than good is wrong. Prohibition does more harm than good.
Therefore, prohibition is wrong.' Either you disagree with the major or
minor premise, or you accept our argument."

Citing the failure of alcohol prohibition in the 1920s and his own
experience representing clients prosecuted for drug crime, Steinberg
concludes that pot prohibition fails the 'rational relations test.'

"There exists no rational relation between the objectives proponents of
prohibition seek to achieve and the actual outcome of the law," he says.
"I've represented people whose lives have been ruined, who have been
humiliated, impoverished and incarcerated by assistant DAs and the drug
enforcement division of the Dane County DA's office."

Steinberg's argument is not as iconoclastic as one might think. In June, a
group of 500 international scholars, politicians, Nobel laureates, mayors,
police commissioners, clergy, businessmen and journalists -- including
conservative economist Milton Friedman, former Secretary of State (under
Reagan) George Shultz and 2nd District Congressional candidate Tammy
Baldwinsigned a letter published in newspapers across the country pro
claiming the War on Drugs a colossal failure.

Both Garton and Nicks say Steinberg would better serve the community by
taking his concerns to the Legislature. Both insist the prosecutor's job is
to enforce the laws, not repeal them. "While we exercise discretion," says
Nicks, "I took an oath of office to uphold the Constitution. If it's bad
public policy, then we should change the laws."

Steinberg disagrees: "Anyone who tells me I should be working to change the
legislative view of the law is misinterpreting the purpose of the
separation of powers. Nicks interprets the law and uses her discretion
accordingly. In response to Judge Shabaz's ruling on partial-birth
abortion, she used her own interpretation and said, 'I'm not going to
enforce it in Dane County."'

In Dane County last year, there were 1,262 arrests for marijuana, all but
117 for possession. In fact, two thirds of all county drug arrests were for
pot possession. (Statewide, the numbers are similar, with marijuana busts
accounting for 71% of all drug arrests, the vast majority being for
possession.)

If elected, Steinberg says residents of Dane County will have a
constitutional right to smoke marijuana. "All questions of the meaning of
the Constitution are subject to the interpretation of the people of this
country through the franchise of their elected officials," he says. "That's
what separation of powers means -- it's a mechanism by which the political
will of the people is expressed."

Nicks believes Steinberg's proposal would result in little change in the
DA's office. "We make a distinction between the big dealer and the small
user," she says. "Our resources are precious and we want to get at more
serious crimes."

But Steinberg argues Nicks is "completely wrong when she says they don't
prosecute for small amounts of marijuana and paraphernalia." He says the
reason neither Nicks nor Garton is willing to debate him on the issue of
drugs is "because they know they can't win." He finds it baffling: "What
kind of attorney won't attempt to win an argument?"

Steinberg thinks he has a shot, if his maverick cause can draw enough
people to the polls. With little money to fuel his campaign, Steinberg has
taken out a series of informational ads in The Onion. It's either a
brilliant strategy or a quixotic quest. Pot smokers aren't known for
fervent political activism and, for obvious reasons, haven't identified
themselves as a constituency.

But even if Steinberg garners a small share of the vote, he could have a
big impact in a tight race between Nicks and Garton. Nicks' Republican
coattails are no longer a political liability in Dane County; she serves on
the executive board of the Wisconsin District Attorneys Association, and
she has a mainly positive track record in office.

Saying it's important for the public to "see me there the in courtroom "
Nicks has taken a lead role in prosecuting high-profile cases, including
Salim Amara, who severely injured five strangers by igniting gasoline on a
bus; Chad Brown, a young man who sexually assaulted a 74-year-old woman;
and 16-year-old Karry Hilley, who assaulted a Mendota staffer before escaping.

Garton, in fact, has had a tough time piercing the armor of Nicks' incumbency.

In late July, Garton ripped Nicks for her handling of cases involving
election law violations, including the Gary George ethics case. "There
seems to be a wholesale washing of hands," says Garton. "These cases could
have been handled in a timely manner and explained publicly."

Garton says Nicks failed on her promise to make prompt public
determinations on these cases. Nicks replies that she inherited these and
other issues -- including space and resource limitations and a backlog of
cases. "But we've been making steady progress," says Nicks, who promises to
issue more press releases to keep the public informed.

Having recently helped the Wisconsin Department of Administration develop a
computerized case-management system for disrict attorneys statewide, Garton
says an integrated case-management system would give the DA's office more
efficient e-mail access to other agencies. Nicks insists the department is
moving in precisely such a direction.

"I agree with the need for increased technology, though technology is not
going to try a case for you," says Nicks. "It's not something I'm either
ignoring or insensitive about. When I got into the offfice, not all the
computers worked. We've made upgrades, and we are making more."

Noting that offce caseloads have doubled during the last 10 years and that
prosecutors' caseloads have increased 50%, Nicks is focused on finding
additional resources to assist her overburdened staff.

"We know in three or four years, with the new courthouse, the staff will
all be together under one roof," says Nicks. "That will be great for
morale, and, more important, will provide a greater sense of security and a
less stressful atmosphere for crime victims. A big part of my job is
working with the county exec and the State Budget Office to try and make
something happen, to persuade others of the validity of our needs."

In addition to the nuts-and-bolts issues, all three candidates identify
goals that have to do with the office's purpose and functionits moral
dimension, if you will.

Garton vows to manage juvenile caseloads to ensure "consequences come
closer to the crimes committed." She casts herself as tough on crime, but
also touts the importance of prevention as part of a "carrot and stick"
approach.

"We need to be 'tough on crime,' but that doesn't mean we don't need to
prevent crime from occurring," says Garton. "We can reduce crime by
strategically directing the flow of cases through prevention efforts such
as Joining Forces for Families."

Nicks, meanwhile, speaks convincingly as a convert about "restorative
justice"-an approach that at times leads to meetings between offenders and
victims. Nicks says her office is cooperating in the creation of a
mediation program for adult first offenders and their victims.

"Crime is personal," says Nicks. "The victim is a person, the offender is a
person, and the community is made up of persons -- a purely institutional
and sanitized approach is not enough."

Steinberg's candidacy brings the promise of a drug policy based on a new
kind of leadership. Although his endorsements are not as extensive as those
of his rivals, Steinberg is backed by former state Rep. David Clarenbach
and Democratic contender Patrick O'Brien, who impressed a lot of people
during the congressional primary debates. And Steinberg has gained the
admiration of other professionals in the criminal justice system.

"Our generation ought to be ashamed of itself," says Tom Dixon, director of
training and development for the State Public Defender's Office. "We
'boomers' used every drug known to man during our adolescence and through
our 20s. Then we suddenly become 'responsible' citizens and criminalize the
very behavior we engaged in, sending our children off to prison. Is that
hypocrisy or what?"

Although he hasn't made an endorsenent, Dixon says Steinberg is raising
important issues: "Our constitutional rights have been forfeited right and
left by the War on Drugs. The kind of jeopardy we put people into for
behavior that harms absolutely no one is mind-boggling. It's a crying shame
we put such a tiny sum into treatment and such an enormous sum into putting
people away."

Checked-by: Richard Lake