Wood Arrested For OWI AGAIN
We have breaking news out of Tomah tonight, Representative Jeff Wood has been arrested for another OWI today. The Tomah Police Chief tells us he was arrested for OWI and bail jumping and was taken to the Monroe County Jail.
UPDATE: Investigators tell us they did a preliminary breath test, no alcohol registered, but Wood was arrested for OWI.
On September 23, troopers arrested Wood for OWI. Today’s arrest comes less than a month later. At last report, Wood’s office told WEAU 13 News he was working on getting into a rehab program. There’s no word on if he was currently in treatment.
Who wants to start the pool that picks his resignation date?
Posted by Recess Supervisor on October 21, 2009 at 2105 hrs
If he hasn’t resigned by now - he isn’t going to. When will the legislature take action?
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on October 21, 2009 at 2128 hrs
There is a resolution currently before the Assembly to expel him. If he doesn’t resign soon, bet that resolution will be taken up quickly.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on October 21, 2009 at 2137 hrs
As embarrassing as he is, is that really the proper course of action? The Legislature never entertained (or drafted) resolutions to expel Scott Jensen, Chuck Chvala, Brian Burke, or Gary George, and their crimes were all job related. Wood’s indiscretions are personal. Wouldn’t it be better to simply allow his constituents to recall him and handle it that way?
Posted by Recess Supervisor on October 21, 2009 at 2146 hrs
Oct. 15, 2009
Madison—Assembly Speaker Mike Sheridan (D-Janesville) said Thursday he was reluctant to oust Rep. Jeff Wood (I-Chippewa Falls) from the Legislature because of his recent arrests.“I think we have to be real careful of going down that road,” Sheridan said. “To me, it’s kind of like Pandora’s box. Where does this end? If you want to start looking at situations where people have gotten themselves into some sort of jam — where does it start and where does it end?”
It will be interesting what his opinion is of this now. Looks like the dems will have no choice BUT to expel him, otherwise they are looking at some possible ammunition to be used against anyone up for re-election soon.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on October 21, 2009 at 2225 hrs
RS, personal or not, he is a lawmaker. 3 times in 10 months?? By the way, an aide last week said he was in in-patient rehab. He lied about his 2 previous DUI’s and now possibly decieving the public about his so called therapy and treatment.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on October 21, 2009 at 2229 hrs
“Wood’s indiscretions are personal”
Not when he gets behind the wheel of a car and heads down the road during late afternoon drive time. Putting people’s lives in danger is far worse then politicians shaking down lobbyists for campaign cash, or other politicians using their staff as foot soldiers during an election.
How may “personal indiscretions” should he be allowed?
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on October 21, 2009 at 2233 hrs
You really want a group of drunks and adulterers to decide what kinds of indiscretions are or are not acceptable? Is there any doubt that if Wood were a Republican the Democrats would expel him, and that if he were a Democrat they would fully protect them? Is there any doubt that the Republicans would do the same if the shoe were on the other foot? Is this the kind of thing that should really be the subject of partisan politics?
Did the body make any attempt to sanction or expel Lorraine Seratti? Mike Ellis? Russ Decker? Tom Springer? What about Bob Kasten, or Jerry Kleczka, or Peg Lautenschlager, or any of Wisconsin’s other countless officeholders that have tied one on and got behind the wheel? Where was the righteous indignation then?
And what if the next time it’s not the independent mess that is Jeff Wood, but a vulnerable Republican? Hey, let’s just expel him/her for conduct detrimental to the body and try to win the seat in a special.
The voters of Wood’s district are far more qualified to decide the kind of conduct that is appropriate for their legislator than the legislators themselves. Those goofs are the last people I would ever trust with this kind of power, because once they take it for themselves, you know they’ll use it for evil.
The voters of his district can take the recall petitions out in two weeks. Let them handle this.
Posted by Recess Supervisor on October 21, 2009 at 2252 hrs
Wow RS…lots of “woulda, shoulda, coulda’ in that comment.
“The voters of Wood’s district are far more qualified…”
Yea, the same ones that put him there in the first place. I don’t care how he goes, he needs to go. If he doesn’t immediately resign, toss him out. If you want to wait for a recall, so be it. But his actions over the last year, and few weeks, have taken this thing to a whole new level and everyone knows it.
I know they’ll use that power for evil? Really?? Again…wow.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on October 21, 2009 at 2311 hrs
This shouldn’t be a partisan issue. He should be gone. 3 times. 10 months. While supposedly in rehab. Would it be to your satisfaction that he actually kill or maim someone before your criteria changes. This man is a danger to himself and a danger to others. I could care less if it was a republican or a democrat or independent. This has nothing to do with party in my mind, but the partisan politics will come into it. Hell with his arrest in Marathon County, the leadership were reluctant to oust him. They say some people need to hit rock bottom before they want to get help. Let him losing his job be rock bottom as opposed to an innocent person getting killed.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on October 21, 2009 at 2312 hrs
Expel him? Why? This guy is the best overlord, I mean ruler, no wait, lawmaker, nevermind….he’s the best of the whole bad group. He’s too drunk and/or stoned to actually do any damage by helping scribble magic words on pieces of paper that tell the rest of us how to live and how much we’ll pay to do so. We could use more passed out drunk whateveryoucallthems pretending to be representatives.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on October 21, 2009 at 2334 hrs
I agree with brainstew…
The real question is when is this guy going to kill someone?
If he can’t control himself - he’s going to need to be confined, removed from the public. It’s no different than having a murderer on the loose. No question he is going to have an accident at some point with this behavior. Do you want one of your family members or yourself to be the straw that finally puts this guy away? Is that what we are waiting for? This is a loaded gun waiting to go off.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on October 22, 2009 at 0821 hrs
Aren’t we more interested in him losing his license and freedom than in him losing his job? Isn’t that for his employer—his constituents—to worry about?
Posted by scott on October 22, 2009 at 0909 hrs
He’s too drunk and/or stoned to actually do any damage by helping scribble magic words on pieces of paper that tell the rest of us how to live and how much we’ll pay to do so.
Oh, were that true, lest you forget his recent budget votes for $5 billion in new taxes. He’s drunk AND dangerous by your standards, Jay4Liberty. He is not the altruistic Independent/Libertarian he wants people to believe he is.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on October 22, 2009 at 1002 hrs
Look if there’s some established way for the body to kick him out, fine. Surely the voters in his district can do it, too. I"m not nearly as worried about that as I am his continuation to drive while intoxicated. Why are we all breaking a sweat over whether he still has job or not? Aren’t we more worried about keeping him off the streets? C’mon, people.
Posted by scott on October 22, 2009 at 1006 hrs
I am not sure that I understand how removing him from office makes me any safer. It should be left to his bosses.
I also think there are different rules for kicking someone out based on whether it is a felony charge and whether you are convicted as opposed to misdemeanor OWIs.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on October 22, 2009 at 1016 hrs
Scott said, “Why are we all breaking a sweat over whether he still has job or not? Aren’t we more worried about keeping him off the streets? “
I think the collective judges, voters and elected officials of this state have answered that question. No they’re not. The cops are doing their job & keep catching these guys. But judges keep giving them a slap on the wrist. Legislators refuse to pass laws to address the issue, and voters refuse to show that it’s an important issue to them.
There is a culture of acceptance of drinking in this state. I don’t have a problem with giving first time offenders the benefit of the doubt. Could some one please tell me how we have done nothing to protect society from repeat offenders? We routinely see people with their 5th, 8th, 10th offenses. They’re clearly going to continue until they kill themselves or someone else unless we confine them. First offense, fine & 5 years probation. Get a second in 5 years, 1 in prison. Real prison and a real year, no work release. 3rd offense 5 years. 4th, 10 years.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on October 22, 2009 at 1114 hrs
There is a culture of acceptance of drinking in this state.
It’s the same reason why our beer tax is laughably low, I suppose.
I’d like to see first-timers pay a hefty fine. Second offense within five years gets you another fine and a year’s suspended license and probation. Third offense up to a year in jail, another fine, and permanently revoked license. Kill someone while DUI automatically bumps you up to the next offense level.
See, I could be a legislator!
Posted by scott on October 22, 2009 at 1125 hrs
Here’s what I see. People are saying “How does losing his job make me safer?”, well look at it this way. He has to drive from his district to Madison, how many times a week? How far of a drive is it? If he has no reason to come to Madison, that will help alleviate the problem. I agree he shouldn’t be on the road period, but if the man is in jail, how can he vote on issues? How can he properly represent his constituents? Knowing this state though, the governement will provide him with a ride to and from sessions at the capital at taxpayer expense. He needs to be expelled, because it would be a hell of a lot quicker than gathering signatures for a recall. According to the WSJ, a legislator has been expelled in Wisconsin, twice.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on October 22, 2009 at 1202 hrs
Oh, were that true, lest you forget his recent budget votes for $5 billion in new taxes. He’s drunk AND dangerous by your standards, Jay4Liberty. He is not the altruistic Independent/Libertarian he wants people to believe he is.
I wasn’t aware of his voting record. So wow, drunk and dangerous. I wonder if him being sober would make him more dangerous.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on October 22, 2009 at 1206 hrs
It’s the same reason why our beer tax is laughably low, I suppose.
We all know that raising the tax on beer will stop people from doing stupid things. Let’s just ban alcohol and make the problems completely disappear, that’s never been done before.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on October 22, 2009 at 1209 hrs
You misunderstand. I’m not in favor of taxing beer in the hopes that people will stop drinking. I’m in favor of taxing beer in the belief that the industry (and the people who patronize it) should shoulder some of the burden of the problems it creates.
Me in favor of prohibition? I’m the guy who wants to see Marijuana sold in stores. Please.
Posted by scott on October 22, 2009 at 1304 hrs
I wouldn’t be surprised if he’s driving on an occupational license. Remove the occupation and there’s no reason for him to have a license.
Not that it would keep him from driving, let alone getting plastered and then driving.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on October 22, 2009 at 1352 hrs
Me in favor of prohibition? I’m the guy who wants to see Marijuana sold in stores. Please.
I like you
Let’s have a drink on this before the tax is raised.Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on October 22, 2009 at 1411 hrs
My drinking a beer has nothing to do with Woods inability to stop driving drunk. My participation in this activity and the makers of the beer (who also do not go to Woods home and force it down his throat and then hold a gun to his head and make him drive) share no responsibility for Wood’s behavior. The blame stops at Wood make him pay for it, not me.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on October 22, 2009 at 1430 hrs
Hey Joe (where you goin’ with that…ah never mind)
I agree with your point - and to me, that’s what makes the issue and the fact that we are so lenient on drunk drivers so puzzling to me. Drinking is a choice us grown ups make. It’s a separate choice entirely to decide to get in a vehicle and drive drunk. I think part of it is the idea that, “oh well they were drunk, that’s why they made the _bad_ decision to drive when they shouldn’t have.” On it’s face, I don’t understand the sympathy for someone who makes a bad decision because they were drunk when…it’s not like it’s some mystery how you get that way. But whatever - let’s say I grant that premise. The undeniable fact is that the decision on whether or not you’re going to drive home drunk is made while stone cold sober. When you drive to a bar, there are three options:
You don’t drink.
You drink and drive home drunk.
You drink and get home another way.If you choose to drink, and haven’t figured out a sober way home, then you made your choice - long before you were drunk. Can’t blame it on the booze - you made a sober decision to drive drunk.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on October 22, 2009 at 1716 hrs
Well - he isn’t going to resign. Just said he wouldn’t run again. I still want this guy locked up somewhere.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on October 23, 2009 at 2332 hrs
Total Entries: 19656
Total Comments: 129831
Most Recent Entry: 02/11/2012 09:52 pm
Most Recent Comment on: 02/11/2012 04:55 pm
Total Members: 9751
Total Logged in members: 0
Total guests: 97
Total anonymous users: 0
Most Recent Visitor on: 02/12/2012 03:34 am
The most visitors ever was 538 on 12/01/2007 02:11 pm
Protected and licensed under a Creative Commons License (some rights reserved).