On Public TV’s Here and Now, law Professor Ed Fallone refers to himself as a "process conservative."  That basically means he takes a long time and uses a lot of words before reaching his predictably liberal conclusion.  Of course, reading Professor Fallone’s blog, you get the impression he is prone to making judgments without much thought at all.

 He is also prone to conspiracy theories that have no basis in fact:

On his Marquette Law School  blog, Professor Fallone proposes the ludicrous and irresponsible theory that incarceration rates are higher in Wisconsin than Minnesota due to the use of prison labor for private business here. 

Ed Fallone on May 18, 2011 2:07 pm

"I wonder whether other factors are influencing the incarceration rate in Wisconsin, such as the use and promotion of prison labor for private business"


The Professor uses one 16 year old news article to support his theory.  If Fallone had bothered to research the issue, he would have learned that the practice was extremely short-lived and ended years ago.  The truth is that prison labor is being used on a limited basis by the state to build furniture used by the state and university system, and in some municipalities to cut the lawn.  [i]

No Professor Fallone, the Department of Corrections is not sending chain gains out to work in factories. 

It’s incredibility irresponsible for a professor to offer his students conspiracy theories with nothing more than a 16 year old newspaper article to back it up. Is this the "conservative process of which you speak, Professor Fallone.  And does this pass for research in your classroom ? 

 Adam Schrager:

You know, labels tend to get thrown around a lot in these types of races and you have called yourself – I thought it was fascinating – a "process conservative," and I'd like you to expand on what that is and what that means. 

Ed Fallone:

Well, process conservative means that whatever the ultimate policy goal, I believe that decisions are best made whether the process is a good process. You can't guarantee a good decision, but the likelihood is better if the process is deliberate, you hear all sides of the issue. That's one of the grounds on which I have criticized our current supreme court. Too often a rush to judgment, deciding issues they didn't have to decide, deciding them too quickly without a full airing of the issues and say a court of appeals decision. And I believe that the state Supreme Court needs to remember its institutional role and act deliberately and carefully when it speaks. And that's what I mean by being a process conservative, being cautious and careful before the court speaks.