Help us improve in just 2 minutes—share your thoughts in our reader survey.

Friends of Scott Walker

From Ballotpedia
Jump to: navigation, search

This article is outside of Ballotpedia's coverage scope and does not receive scheduled updates. If you would like to help our coverage scope grow, consider donating to Ballotpedia.

Friends of Scott Walker
FOSW-logo.png
Basic facts
Location:Waukesha, Wis.
Type:Personal Campaign Committee
Affiliation:Republican
Year founded:1990
Website:Official website
Budget
2015:$5,686,991.20 (through June 30, 2015)[1]
2014:$29,673,716.22
2013:$4,792,525.24
2012:$29,018,539.17

Friends of Scott Walker (FOSW) is the name of Scott Walker's campaign committee. The committee was originally registered on May 29, 1990. The treasurer for the committee is listed as Lane Ruhland.[2] Walker's first campaign for state assembly was in 1990, but he was defeated by Gwen Moore, who was elected to the U.S. Congress in 2004.[3]

John Doe investigations

See also: John Doe investigations related to Scott Walker

Two John Doe investigations, beginning in 2010 and ending in 2015, were launched by Milwaukee County District Attorney John Chisholm (D) into the activities of staff and associates of Gov. Scott Walker (R).[4] On November 1, 2010, the office of Milwaukee County District Attorney John Chisholm (D) served subpoenas for the emails related to the Friends of Scott Walker campaign committee, in connection with the first John Doe investigation.[5] That investigation was closed with no one connected to the campaign committee being charged.[6]

Friends of Scott Walker was also a target during the second John Doe investigation. On August 10, 2012, Milwaukee County DA Chisholm asked for the second John Doe investigation to be opened based on the theory that the Walker campaign had engaged in coordination with social welfare groups making what prosecutors alleged were illegal independent expenditures during the 2012 attempt to recall Walker due to his support for Act 10. Independent expenditures are monies spent on political advertising in support of or against a particular candidate.[7][8] That investigation was effectively halted in early 2014 by both state and federal lawsuits filed against the parties involved in the investigation.[9][10]

See also

External links

Additional reading

Footnotes