Reading Time: 7 minutes

As Wisconsin Democrats rallied in Madison over the weekend, there was a divide among party die-hards on the best type of candidate to be the party’s gubernatorial nominee. 

Many, including Doris Schoneman, a retired nursing professor from Waukesha County at her 10th Democratic Party of Wisconsin convention with her husband David, prefer Lt. Gov. Sara Rodriguez. Schoneman said Rodriguez, who won the most votes in a WisPolitics straw poll, could appeal to both rural and urban communities.

But an almost equally large contingent, including Vernon County delegate Alexander McDonough, is backing Madison state Rep. Francesca Hong, who came in second in the straw poll. McDonough, who was attending his first convention, said he was inspired by the Democratic socialist.

It’s an all-too-familiar question Democrats will be debating until the Aug. 11 primary with seven candidates on the ballot: Should they choose a candidate who appeals to the average Wisconsin voter in the general election or a candidate who excites the party’s base? 

Wisconsin Democrats have an opportunity to control state government for the first time in 16 years should they win the governor’s office and gain majorities in the Senate and the Assembly. After Republicans won the governor’s office and both chambers of the Legislature in 2010, they drew gerrymandered legislative maps, passed a strict voter ID law and enacted Act 10, which dismantled Democratic-supporting public sector unions. 

“The people in this room led us out of the wilderness,” Democratic Party of Wisconsin chair Devin Remiker told the crowd on Saturday. “The people in this room took back the Supreme Court and made it the people’s court again. The people in this room shattered the gerrymander. The people in this room kept pushing our lines forward year after year, and now we stand at the gates of a castle with walls so high Republicans thought that we would never climb over them, and we are about to.” 

The WisPolitics straw poll found 27.5% of convention-goers backed Rodriguez as the Democratic nominee for governor with Hong a close second at 23.1%.

Some attendees told Wisconsin Watch they were still undecided on who they would vote for in the coming weeks. 

“I’m looking for someone who’s ready to fight and do the work,” said William Garcia, the 3rd Congressional District chair. “I think that we’re gonna win all three. I think we’re gonna win the Assembly, the Senate and the governorship. And that means, in my mind, that I need someone who’s prepared to spend the six months after they’re sworn in doing every policy that we’ve been talking about for 12 years.”

Wisconsin Democrats have not seen a gubernatorial primary of this size since the 2018 race when 10 candidates, including eventual winner Gov. Tony Evers, ran for the chance to go up against then-incumbent Republican Gov. Scott Walker. Democrats won every statewide office on the ballot that year, disrupting nearly a decade of Republican control of the Capitol in Madison. But because Republicans gerrymandered legislative maps in 2011 to insulate themselves from a Democratic wave, Democrats have not held either the Assembly or Senate and were unable to enact any sweeping legislative agenda for all eight years Evers was in office.

The candidate who wins the nomination on Aug. 11 is expected to face U.S. Rep. Tom Tiffany, who is endorsed by President Donald Trump and received the Republican Party of Wisconsin’s endorsement last month. Tiffany has one primary opponent — Andy Manske, a 27-year-old medical service technician. 

Evers on Saturday told the crowd that Democrats need to show up, as a Tiffany victory could put Wisconsin in an “even worse position” than when he took office in 2019. 

“I want everyone to think about all our hard work and all of the progress we’ve made,” Evers told the crowd Saturday evening. “That’s what’s at stake this fall.” 

Gubernatorial candidates make their case

The seven Democrats running for governor walked the convention hallways Saturday afternoon, dipping in and out of meetings of the Black Democrats or the veterans’ caucus with staffers in campaign T-shirts close behind. They held hospitality suites to schmooze convention-goers with themes including disco for Milwaukee County Executive David Crowley, a classroom for teachers-union-endorsed Sen. Kelda Roys, “The Forward Tap” tavern for Rodriguez and dive bar decor for former Lt. Gov. Mandela Barnes. 

And in speeches Sunday afternoon, Hong drew the largest cheers as she walked out to “Golden,” the Oscar-winning song from the Netflix movie “KPop Demon Hunters.” 

She spoke of historical Wisconsin political figures like former Secretary of State Vel Phillips, former Gov. and U.S. Sen. Gaylord Nelson and former Gov. and U.S. Sen. “Fighting” Bob La Follette to suggest that her campaign aligns with the state’s progressive history.

“These folks were called unreasonable, impractical and unelectable and told their ideas should be tempered by convenience. Yet today they’re considered visionaries because possibility is bound only by our ambition,” Hong said. “We must ask ourselves whether conviction is once again strong enough to meet the demands of dangerous and desperate times.”

Missy Hughes, the last candidate to speak and the last place finisher in the straw poll with 1.6% support, found a tepid crowd with some people who got up to leave as she began her remarks. The crowd still gave her a laugh after she compared inheriting challenges from Foxconn as Wisconsin Economic Development Corp. CEO to cleaning up after her children. 

Barnes, who placed second-to-last in the straw poll with 6.9% support, told the crowd about a phone call he received from former President Barack Obama after he lost the 2022 U.S. Senate race to U.S. Sen. Ron Johnson, when Obama reminded Barnes that he lost a congressional race before becoming a U.S. senator and ultimately president. Barnes said his experience from the 2022 race puts him in the best position to fight against Republicans in November. 

“I know that when they swing at you, you get right back up and you fight back twice as hard,” Barnes said. “I can tell you, I came through the fire stronger, and I have more experience than anybody else in this race.”

Joel Brennan, who placed fifth in the straw poll with 8.7%, contrasted Tiffany’s career in the Legislature and in Congress with his work leading the Department of Administration under Evers. 

“We proved that competent, honest government can solve major problems when the people running it believe in it,” Brennan said. “Tom Tiffany is ready to trot out that old playbook, but he’s added some ingredients: Donald Trump’s division, chaos, and neglect. Tom has spent his time in Madison and Washington making things materially worse for Wisconsin families at every turn, but you know what? We are not going back.” 

Crowley, who placed fourth in the straw poll with 13.1%, said his role running Milwaukee County makes him the only candidate with executive experience equivalent to the governor. 

“I’ve brought together labor leaders, business leaders, local governments, advocates, and working families to get things done,” Crowley told the crowd. “And at a moment when Wisconsin needs bold leadership focused on delivering results, I’m ready to bring that same approach to the governor’s office.” 

Roys, who placed third in the straw poll with 19%, leaned on her years in the Legislature to highlight that she has bills and plans to enact as governor, instead of “social posts” or “bullet points.” 

“I’m the only candidate in this race with over two decades of passing progressive legislation,” Roys said. “And this moment demands moral clarity, political courage, and the willingness to use political power to make our lives better.” 

Rodriguez, who ran onstage from the back of the convention hall, compared her approach to the campaign with her career as a nurse. 

“Since I’ve been your lieutenant governor, I’ve done what any nurse would do: show up, listen, care, be there where it counts, and stay until the job is done,” Rodriguez said. “At union halls in Kenosha, at dairy farms in Clark County at small businesses in small towns, 72 counties, every single one, every single year, because the job I’m asking you for starts with showing up and then standing up.”

Who is electable?

Convention delegates and guests were split on who is the right candidate for the party at this moment. 

Some Democrats see this year as the time for progressives to shine. Hong’s supporters say that, as the youngest Democratic candidate in the governor’s race, she is pulling in young voters with a progressive message, such as a moratorium on artificial intelligence data centers and calls to abolish prisons. 

“Francesca Hong has a very serious pull with the younger crowd. A lot of younger voters are looking for someone who is very progressive,” said Sevannah Polsin, member of the Fox Valley Young Democrats. “I think a lot of younger voters are disappointed in the impact that Democrats have had in the past.”

Hong supporters at the convention also compared her to recently elected New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani, who like Hong is a Democratic socialist.

“Seeing Mamdani, for example, in New York, I think those policies would be like ‘now’s the time,’ right?” said convention attendee Nelson Ojeda. “I think (Hong’s) policies will push Wisconsin in the right direction.”

But a top concern among delegates was whether the party’s nominee can beat Tiffany in November. Some convention-goers told Wisconsin Watch the party needs a candidate to grab the attention of rural swing voters needed for a Democratic win.

Lisa Simonds, a delegate from Baraboo and second vice chair of Sauk County Democrats, said her vote will likely go to Brennan for his experience in the Evers administration and effort to campaign in rural areas. She said while other candidates are focused on the larger cities and ignore rural areas, Brennan had visited her county party in rural Sauk County.

“Joel just seems to have the combination of the intelligence, the experience … the understanding of how life works,” Simonds said. “He cares about the issues that matter to me.” 

While Simonds applauded Hong’s drive, she said she is too young to be the party nominee.

Ojeda said Tiffany has a much larger social reach with his endorsements from the state GOP and Trump, as well as launching multiple statewide ad buys. Brennan is currently the only Democrat with a statewide advertisement, which launched last week.

“(Tiffany) has a huge advertising presence, that’s one thing that I felt like is maybe a little bit of a gap,” said Ojeda, who is leaning toward Hong. “I think Democrats have the opportunity to improve there. … I think that’ll change as we get down because of the number of candidates that are running.”

Ojeda said he hopes the primary ballot will narrow before Aug. 11.

Other Democrats were concerned about the lack of a clear front-runner at this point in the race. Convention attendee Ahmed Hollowell said the state party not endorsing a candidate is “creating a detriment.”

Hollowell said he is not making a decision until he learns more about the candidates. 

“I think the only thing that would probably make this accelerate is probably if Gov. Evers were to endorse someone,” Hollowell said. 

Evers did not endorse any candidate over the weekend, but said in his speech that the “Democratic candidate is going to need each and every one of us, and I know that, because that’s how I won.”

Top two in Democratic gubernatorial straw poll highlight classic debate: Appeal to general electorate or the base? is a post from Wisconsin Watch, a non-profit investigative news site covering Wisconsin since 2009. Please consider making a contribution to support our journalism.

In a field consisting mostly of current or former elected officials, Missy Hughes says her background — private sector experience in an agricultural co-op, then serving as the top economic advisor to Gov. Tony Evers — gives her a distinctive edge in the contest to be the Democratic nominee for governor.

For six years Hughes served as the secretary and CEO of the Wisconsin Economic Development Corp., a state agency tasked with helping Wisconsin’s economy grow and expand employment. Before that she was chief legal counsel at Organic Valley, a farmer-owned cooperative specializing in dairy products.

Hughes announced her campaign to seek the governor’s office in September, about two months after Evers announced he wouldn’t seek a third term.

“When Gov. Evers decided not to run and we were a few months into the Trump administration, I realized that my skills could really help the state during this really unpredictable time,” Hughes told a small gathering of Columbia County Democrats at the local party headquarters in Portage in mid-May.

As she has elsewhere, Hughes on that day cast herself as “a Democrat who understands the economy, who understands how to build the economy, who understands how Wisconsin’s economy works — whether it’s dairy or agriculture or manufacturing.”

She’s led with the economic argument at each of nearly a half-dozen forums over the last six months, using it not just as a big-picture case for her campaign but as the frame through which to address specific topics.

At a June 2 event organized by a coalition of unions, Hughes concurred with the rest of the Democrats on the stage in supporting an increase in the state government’s share of the cost of public schools to  two-thirds, taking the burden off local property taxpayers. Then came the moderator’s follow-up question about top education priorities and how the forum participants would navigate lobbies supporting the state’s private school voucher system and “an adversarial Legislature” to achieve their goals.

“The concern I have about the conversations we’ve had about public school funding, about healthcare — all of this costs a tremendous amount of money,” Hughes replied. “And we have to grow our economy. Communities are struggling because they don’t have economic opportunity.”

With manufacturing jobs declining and farmers struggling, “We have to recognize that the reality is we need more resources in this state. We have to grow,” Hughes observed.

“That’s what I want to bring back to this state,” she said. “Manufacturing and strong agriculture, those are the keys to our economy. They make up our economy. You all work in that economy. We all do and we have to build that. That’s how we pay for our public schools. And that’s how we make our public schools again the No. 1 place — the only place where Wisconsin parents want to send their children.”

Art, law and organic farming

Born Melissa Larkin, Hughes grew up in New York City’s northern suburbs. Her parents were doctors and her brother is a cardiologist. She graduated from Georgetown University in 1990 with a double major in political science and fine art. Drawing and sewing were her media, “but really drawing,” she says, and she still practices today.

Hughes got a law degree from the University of Wyoming in 1997. She wasn’t sure what kind of law she was going to practice — only that she wanted to be in the courtroom.

“I was going to be a courtroom litigator,” Hughes says. “And when I went to court the very first time in Gillette, Wyoming, I left saying, ‘I’m never doing that again.’”

Hughes didn’t like the combative nature of the work. “I’ve since said, ‘nothing ever good happens in court,’” she says. “I’d rather work outside to try to find solutions and move things forward than being in a court room.”

Hughes came to Wisconsin in 2002 and joined Organic Valley. The cooperative, headquartered in the Vernon County village of La Farge, was started in 1988 by a group of organic dairy farmers seeking alternative channels of distribution for their products. When Hughes arrived, about 500 farmers belonged and the co-op had “a couple of hundred employees, but it was on a rocket ship of growth,” Hughes told the Portage Democrats.

“I would sit at the table with farmers who were faced with losing their farms” in the face of unstable milk prices and rising costs. “They really had no stability and no future for how they can manage their farm and make a living and pass it on to the next generation,” she said.

Hughes’ job included handling government relations in Washington for the co-op and leading the Organic Food Association. By the time she left to join the Evers administration in 2019, she was general counsel and had the title of “Chief Mission Officer.” The co-op had grown to represent more than 1,500 farmers in states across the country and have 900 employees.

“It was incredibly fulfilling work,” Hughes says, “but it wasn’t easy, because we were fighting Big Ag, we were teaching consumers about good food.”

In her tenure at WEDC, Hughes became the face of Wisconsin’s economic response to the COVID-19 pandemic. And in the years that followed, she and the agency were at the forefront of a series of Evers administration gains, including corporate expansions and a federal grant to strengthen Wisconsin’s biohealth sector.

Cleaning up Foxconn

When Evers named her to the post, she says, he told her that he wanted her for her knowledge of rural communities and agriculture.

On her first day, she told the Portage audience, “they sat me down and said, ‘Great. Now you have to clean up Foxconn.’”

WEDC was created after former Gov. Scott Walker took office in 2011, replacing the Wisconsin Department of Commerce. The new public-private corporation included a board with business executives as well as lawmakers and had been created to deliver on Walker’s claim he would foster the creation of 250,000 new jobs — a goal his administration never reached.

Both the agency and its most prominent Walker-era project — a promised flatscreen manufacturing plant in Racine County that would be built by the Taiwan tech giant Foxconn in return for up to $2.85 billion in tax credits for the creation of 13,000 jobs — had become politically polarizing.

Scornful of the Foxconn deal that had been touted by Walker and President Donald Trump, then in his first term, Evers during his 2018 campaign talked of abolishing WEDC or at least rewriting the agreement with the company. Just before leaving office at the end of that year, Walker signed Republican lame-duck legislation curtailing the incoming Democratic governor’s powers, including a bill that blocked Evers from changing WEDC’s leadership until eight months into his term. Hughes took office when the restriction expired.

The Foxconn renegotiation took “a lot of time,” Hughes told the Portage group. In April 2021 — with Foxconn’s plans repeatedly changing and its flatscreen plant long abandoned — Evers and Hughes announced a new deal. In the end the company qualified for $80 million in tax credits.

WEDC’s most prominent role in its first eight years had been to encourage major business investments, whether by outside companies or expanding companies already in the state, and to negotiate incentives such as tax credits in return.

That continued under Evers and Hughes. But the COVID-19 pandemic that landed in March 2020 and walloped small businesses — especially the hospitality industry — also demanded a pivot at the economic development corporation.

Expanding to small business assistance

Early on, WEDC took the role of offering guidance for employers and enhancing workplace safety when the primary defenses against the virus were frequent handwashing and social distancing. After the federal government began sending pandemic relief funds to Wisconsin, WEDC became the primary vehicle for distributing them.

A second, larger round of relief, enacted in 2021 at the start of President Joe Biden’s administration, helped fund more business grant programs in Wisconsin. National researchers singled out Wisconsin as the leading state for funding small business with its pandemic relief funds.

WEDC also kept its attention on big business, with high-profile expansion projects for companies including Eli Lilly, Milwaukee Tool and Kikkoman, and a Microsoft data center on the land originally developed for Foxconn.

Small business and local economic development were always in theory part of WEDC’s portfolio — but overshadowed, Hughes says.

“We were always saying we can walk and chew gum at the same time — we can help small businesses and we can help big businesses, and we need to do both,” she says. But the small business support wasn’t emphasized, she adds. “It wasn’t measured. It was kind of pushed off to the side.”

Hughes says with WEDC’s decision to invest more deeply in local economic development work, the agency began to examine local tax data. “And when we did that, we saw there is great impact from the programs, so let’s keep doing it and do more of it.”

She brings a similar focus to her policy agenda, which includes proposals for healthcare, childcare and small business. Economic growth informs those concerns “because you can’t grow the economy without those things,” she says.

Embracing ‘progressive,’ backing the budget deal

At a Madison West High School forum organized by students earlier this year, Hughes was asked what people’s biggest misconception about her was.

Her focus on business and the economy “makes people think that I’m very center and very moderate,” Hughes replied.

“I’m reasonable, there’s no doubt about that,” she said. But having worked at Organic Valley reflects “true progressive values,” she added, because a cooperative “is a very, very radical kind of a company” with a culture of long-term thinking and sustainable operation.

Even so, on several points related to education, Hughes has broken ranks with the other leading Democrats in the contest for governor.

She criticized presumed Republican gubernatorial nominee Tom Tiffany for urging his party’s lawmakers to vote against the $1.8 billion deal Evers reached with GOP leaders in the Legislature that would have sent $300 to each taxpayer and $300 million in additional special education money to Wisconsin public schools.

But she also criticized Democrats who voted against the deal, charging in a statement she posted on social media May 14 that “certain self-serving Democratic candidates for governor … would rather boost their own personal political ambitions than serve our kids and taxpayers.”

In an interview with the Examiner later that same day, she defended the deal as an example that showed “compromises are never going to be perfect and everything that everybody wants.” But she also said that its collapse was “demonstrative of a whole broken system” in Wisconsin politics.

“We couldn’t find ways to work together in public, and to me that just shows that we have a lot of work to do in Wisconsin around building the policymaking muscle, and that’s really been diminished in the last two decades,” Hughes said. “We always had that as a strength, but we’ve lost that and we have to rebuild that.”

At the union forum June 2, Hughes was one of three Democrats who said they wouldn’t favor immediately ending Wisconsin’s taxpayer-funded private school voucher programs.

“As governor, I would be really, really realistic about what we can get done and what fights we pick,” Hughes said. “I don’t want to pick the voucher fight. I want to pick the fully funding public schools fight. I want to have a singular focus on making sure that when parents are choosing schools, they absolutely are choosing Wisconsin public schools because they are the best schools for their children.”

Hughes also issued a statement last week saying she would accept a federal voucher tax credit enacted last year, although the deadline for states to accept it will pass before a new governor takes office. Evers vetoed legislation that would have enabled Wisconsin to take part in the credit. 

Navigating talk about Trump

Lingering in the background behind the race for governor has been the Trump administration’s policies and the way they’ve upended the political and social atmosphere. Over the course of the campaign, Hughes has shifted, to some extent, to her own navigation of that subject.

From the start she has targeted Trump, particularly on the subject of tariffs, for driving up the price of household goods. At the same time, earlier in the campaign she turned attention back to Wisconsin.

Asked in an interview after a forum in Milwaukee in January about navigating how much to focus on criticism of Trump, Hughes said, “The key for a governor is, you can control what you can control, and you can’t control what’s happening in Washington right now.”

In that vein, she suggested then, the role of the state, the governor — and by implication one who aspires to be governor — is to step in and help businesses hurt by economic disruption coming from the White House. “Reacting to everything that’s happening, you’ll drive yourself crazy,” Hughes said that evening.

Four months later, she’s become more outspoken in criticizing Trump as well as Tiffany, whose endorsement by Trump led other GOP candidates to cede the field to the four-term Republican congressman.

She name-checked the president several times in talking to the Portage Democrats in mid-May, including criticizing Trump’s unfounded claims of stolen elections as well as the administration’s cancellation of clean energy projects that the state had received support for under the Biden administration.

Ahead of the president’s visit to the Chippewa Valley on June 5, Hughes publicly announced her participation in a protest in Eau Claire. And this week, in a social media post that began, “Enough with Trump’s corruption already,” she attacked Trump and tied Tiffany to the president.

Asked about the shift, she points to the fatal shootings of two people in Minneapolis during the surge of immigration officers there this winter along with the invasion of Venezuela and the war with Iran.

“At some point you kind of got to call it for what it is and start to say, ‘OK, this has just gone too far,’” Hughes says. “When you start to have lives on the line, when you start to really endanger the United States, when you start to endanger soldiers, you know, now you’re really — it’s time to say something.”

Even under those circumstances, however, Hughes says she wants to be circumspect in her language.

“I don’t say things like ‘fascist’ or ‘authoritarian,’”  she says. “You can still call out this bad behavior.”

She says she wants to be able to talk to anyone who might be persuadable.

“I live on this couple-mile-long dirt road, and I have a bunch of neighbors, and I don’t know how they voted,” Hughes says — but she guesses that they’re like the rest of Wisconsin, meaning that there’s a 50% chance they voted for Trump.

“I want to be able to talk to them about why I’m running for governor. And if I call names or if I say, ‘You were wrong for voting for Donald Trump,’ they’re not going to listen to what I have to say.”

Most Wisconsin residents “want to be closer to the center and are closer to the center,” Hughes says. “I want to keep people open and having the conversation.”

Editor’s note: The Examiner is running periodic profiles of the contenders in the Aug. 11, 2026 gubernatorial primary as well as the candidates in the general election Nov. 3. 

Last July, U.S. Rep. Tom Tiffany authored legislation that will allow a Forest County concrete supplier to purchase 14 acres of the Chequamegon-Nicolet National Forest. In October, the owner of the business made his first ever political contribution — $520 to Tiffany’s gubernatorial campaign. 

Tiffany’s bill, the Wabeno Economic Development Act, would allow Tony’s Wabeno Redi-Mix to buy the national forest land adjacent to the company’s current property for “market value.” The purchase of the land includes the mineral rights for extracting underground resources from the current public lands. 

The 14 acres involved in the sale amounts to a miniscule portion of the more than 685,000 acres of federal land in Forest County. Tiffany and other northern Wisconsin officials have frequently complained that the massive amount of public land in the area prevents the growth of private industries. 

But Tiffany also has a history of opposition to public lands, including joining with right-wing anti-conservation groups working to prevent Wisconsin from protecting large swathes of the state’s Northwoods. In Forest County, he assisted efforts to rewrite local land use policy to be friendlier to extractive industries such as logging and mining. 

Tony Smith, the company’s owner, wrote a letter to Tiffany in January 2022 asking for help because his current property was running out of the raw materials he uses to make concrete. 

“We are currently projected to run out of aggregate materials in the next 2-3 years,” Smith wrote. “I have talked to Forest Service district ranger, Mike Brown, several times about the possible trade of these properties and he stated, ‘this would not be a priority to them.’ Tony’s Wabeno Redi-Mix currently owns the west and north side of the proposed property to trade, and we are aware there is adequate material there to continue running Tony’s Wabeno Redi-Mix for many years to come. I have also searched privately owned properties in Forest and surrounding counties with no luck in finding material within a sustainable distance to remain profitable.” 

Last June, Tiffany introduced the legislation, stating in a news release that the sale would allow the company to stay in business. 

“This conveyance will deliver long-term economic growth and protect local jobs for the people of Wabeno and Forest County,” Tiffany said. “It will ensure Tony’s Wabeno Redi-Mix stays open and continues serving the community for years to come.”

The bill passed the House in a 410-1 vote in July. Aside from Rep. Derrick Van Orden, who didn’t vote, all of Wisconsin’s congressional delegation voted in favor of the bill. On Wednesday, the Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources voted to advance the legislation. 

A few months after the bill advanced out of the House, Smith gave $520.51 to the gubernatorial campaign of the lawmaker writing legislation that directly benefits his business. State and federal campaign finance records show that Smith has no prior history of political giving. 

In a statement to the Examiner, Tiffany’s campaign noted the bill’s bipartisan support and touted the legislation as an example of Tiffany fighting for small businesses. 

“Tony’s Wabeno Redi-Mix, a small business with roughly 17 employees, contacted my office in January 2022 after years of getting nowhere with the U.S. Forest Service,” Tiffany said in a statement supplied by the campaign. “I first introduced this bill in 2024, and it has since earned strong bipartisan support, including from Wisconsin Democrats Gwen Moore and Mark Pocan. Standing up for Wisconsin small businesses when federal agencies fail them is part of my job, and I’ll continue to fight for them.” 

The campaign ignored questions about the contribution from Smith. 

In a news release, the Sierra Club of Wisconsin complained that handling the sale through legislation prevents the public from getting to weigh in on the transaction. Sales conducted through the standard U.S. Forest Service process are subject to public input. 

“Tom Tiffany’s track record shows he’s willing to sell the public lands — which belong to all of us — off to the highest bidder for private profit,” Sierra Club spokesperson Megan Wittman said.

Smith was unavailable for comment Thursday afternoon but his statement will be added later if he responds to the Examiner’s request.

The Wisconsin Elections Commission on Wednesday rejected challenges to the nominating papers of four candidates, including three people running to replace U.S. Rep. Tom Tiffany — who is stepping down to run for governor — in the state’s 7th Congressional District. 

At the meeting on Wednesday, WEC finalized all the candidates who will be on the ballot this fall. 

The commission considered most of the ballot access challenges it received in a meeting Tuesday, however four remaining cases were pushed a day because the incumbent officeholders were not seeking re-election but did not file declarations of non-candidacy. 

In the meeting on Wednesday, the commission approved the nominating signatures in the 7th CD for Democrat Fred Clark and Republicans Michael Alfonso and Kevin Hermening. The signatures of all three candidates were challenged by Jessi Ebben, who is also running in the district’s crowded Republican primary. The other Republican candidates in the race did not face any challenges.

WEC also approved the signatures for Jon Aleckson, a Republican running to replace state Rep. Jenna Jacobson (D-Oregon) in the 50th Assembly District, which covers Green County and part of southern Dane County. 

Aleckson’s nominating papers were challenged by Morgan Hess, the executive director of the Assembly Democratic Campaign Committee. 

The Wisconsin Elections Commission met Tuesday to adjudicate more than a dozen challenges to the nominating signatures of candidates for the Legislature, U.S. Congress and Secretary of State. 

During Tuesday’s more than three-hour meeting, the commission largely rejected the candidacy challenges and approved candidates’ efforts to place their names on the ballot. The challenge process gives opponents and political parties a chance to disqualify a candidate before any votes are even cast. Anyone is able to challenge a candidate’s nomination papers — usually on the grounds that the signatures are missing information, not collected from within the proper district, that the forms include errors or the candidate did not fully comply with the nomination requirements. 

Because the challenge process represents a chance for candidates to reduce their competition, challenges are sometimes made to try to winnow out potential primary candidates or get an opposing party candidate off the November ballot. 

Earlier this week, right-wing radio host Dan O’Donnell reported that in a “highly unusual move” the Assembly Democratic Campaign Committee had filed challenges against two incumbent Assembly Democrats — Milwaukee Reps. Russell Goodwin and Sylvia Ortiz-Velez. 

Both Goodwin and Ortiz-Velez have at times been at odds with the rest of the Assembly Democratic caucus. Goodwin voted with Republicans on anti-trans legislation while Ortiz-Velez has frequently clashed with Democratic leadership in the chamber. 

The ADCC denied that it challenged Goodwin’s candidacy and records show that the challenge to his nominating papers came from his primary opponent Jordan Roman, who alleged that Goodwin’s papers included addresses that didn’t exist and forged signatures. The commission found that those allegations couldn’t be proven and approved Goodwin’s candidacy. 

However Morgan Hess, the ADCC’s executive director, did file and then withdrew a challenge to Ortiz-Velez’s nominating papers, WEC records show. 

Hess also filed challenges against Republican candidates in the suburban Milwaukee Assembly Districts 9 and 21 and in the Stevens Point area Assembly District 71. The only successful challenge was against Veronica Diaz, a Republican attempting to run in AD 21, who was disqualified from the ballot because 10 of her signatures came from people outside of the district and she didn’t file the proper paperwork declaring her candidacy and disclosing her financial information with the state Ethics Commission. Diaz’s papers were also challenged by her primary opponent Zach Pfaffenbach. 

Challenges were also made in a number of congressional races. 

In the 3rd Congressional District, where Democrats are seeking to unseat incumbent Republican U.S. Rep. Derrick Van Orden in a closely contested race, the state Republican party filed a challenge against Rustin Provance, who is running for the seat as an independent. 

The party argued that Provance should be disqualified because he used the state’s standard declaration of candidacy form, which includes a line in which candidates swear they’ve never been convicted of a felony — because state law prevents convicted felons from holding state or local office. There is no similar prohibition for federal candidates, and Provance has been convicted of a felony and has publicly referenced his conviction on his campaign materials. 

In the challenge, the party argued that Provance had falsified his information by signing and filing the declaration with the non-felony conviction line included. WEC denied the challenge and granted Provance access to the ballot. 

In the 6th Congressional District, Brian Norby, the chair of the Jefferson County Republican Party, filed a challenge against Democrat Elizabeth Anne Fitzgibbon — arguing that her invalid signatures included college students at UW-Oshkosh whose address was only listed as the residence hall they live in. 

WEC denied the challenge on the grounds that those students’ mail can be delivered with just the dorm listed instead of a street address. 

In the 8th Congressional District, the Republican Party of Brown County and Democratic primary candidate Rick Crosson filed challenges against Democratic candidate Mark Scheffler, arguing that Scheffler’s signatures were collected on the wrong forms and listed the wrong election date. 

WEC denied the challenges and granted Scheffler access. 

In the 2022 election, Democrats challenged the ballot access of Republican gubernatorial candidate Tim Michels because of confusion over which municipality should be listed as his residence on the papers. Michels was allowed to get on the ballot. 

In this year’s governor’s race, no official challenges were made against any candidate’s nominating papers. But left-wing political gadfly and Minocqua Brewing Company owner Kirk Bangstad was officially denied access to the ballot Tuesday after the commission voted to certify that he only turned in 1,504 of the required 2,000 valid signatures. 

Bangstad’s initial nominating papers had a number of problems, including circulators omitting their municipality of residence and missing or incorrect dates. Bangstad filed 15 affidavits in an effort to correct his errors, but WEC did not agree that the errors were fixed. 

This year, the only statewide race to see nomination challenges was the contest for Secretary of State. Challenges were made against Republicans Nathan Pollnow and Cindy Werner and Democrat Eileen Newcomer. Pollnow and Werner were approved but Newcomer was denied access to the ballot because her papers included a number of duplicated signatures. 

WEC is scheduled to meet again Wednesday afternoon to consider more ballot challenges in races for which the incumbent is not seeking re-election but didn’t file a declaration of non-candidacy.

Hess, the ADCC’s director, filed a challenge against Jon Aleckson, a Republican running to replace Rep. Jenna Jacobson (D-Oregon) in south central Wisconsin’s Assembly District 50. In the race to fill Rep. Tom Tiffany’s open 7th Congressional District seat, Republican Jessi Ebben filed challenges against Republicans Michael Alonso and Kevin Hermening and Democrat Fred Clark. 

WEC is scheduled to meet at 3 p.m. Wednesday.

Reading Time: 6 minutes

This article was originally published by Votebeat, a nonprofit news organization covering local election administration and voting access.

The FBI agents arrived at David Bolter’s Milwaukee home on a cool, cloudy Wednesday morning in late May. They were armed with a list of questions for the 2020 poll worker, who had raised concerns about the way local officials handled the 2020 election, Bolter told Votebeat.

President Donald Trump relied on Bolter’s claims in an unsuccessful 2020 lawsuit that sought to throw out more than 220,000 votes. That would have been more than enough to move Wisconsin’s 10 electoral votes from Democrat Joe Biden, who won the state, to Trump. Though courts, several election reviews and many audits rejected Trump’s claims, the Republican never stopped believing that he was cheated out of the presidency in 2020.

That appears to be why, last month, the FBI sent agents back to Milwaukee to question Bolter as part of an expanding national effort by the second Trump administration to investigate long-debunked claims of fraud in the 2020 election.

The investigation into the 2020 election appears to be relying on already disproven allegations from people like Bolter. Bolter declined to divulge more about his conversation with the FBI, which has not been previously reported, but allegations from Bolter’s 2020 affidavit were central to some conspiracy theories about the 2020 election. For example, he alleged that somebody in Milwaukee’s absentee ballot counting facility announced around midnight on Election Day that a “huge truckload of ballots” was going to be delivered — an accusation for which there has so far appeared to be no additional evidence.

Around the same time Bolter says he talked to the FBI, two plainclothes agents with FBI badges showed up at the apartment of a former Milwaukee resident and 2020 poll worker about an affidavit she submitted, according to the former poll worker, who asked to be identified only by her first name, Christine, to give her the freedom to discuss an ongoing investigation.

Christine had also submitted an affidavit about the 2020 election, saying election workers had been told that all votes were counted, but she then saw workers continuing to count ballots around midnight. That affidavit was the focus of the agents’ questions, Christine told Votebeat.

“I suspected wrongdoing, but I’m not saying that it actually happened,” she said. “I’m just one lowly person that was working there.”

During the interview, she added, an agent showed her a photograph of Claire Woodall, the former Milwaukee election chief, asking her if she recognized the former election official who has been central to false allegations about the 2020 election. She identified her by name. Woodall didn’t respond to a request for comment.

Caroline Clancy, a spokesperson for the FBI’s Milwaukee office, declined to comment.

While investigators seem mainly focused on the 2020 vote, some elections experts believe the Trump administration’s wide-ranging probe is actually designed to create more doubts among Americans about future elections, as Republicans face strong political headwinds that could cost them control of Congress later this year.

“This isn’t about the 2020 election, this is about the 2026 and 2028 elections,” said David Becker, executive director of the nonpartisan, nonprofit Center for Election Innovation and Research. “This is about intimidating election officials. This is about creating a stream of disinformation designed to delegitimize an election the president may believe he’s going to lose. This is designed by the president’s underlings to satisfy the unrealistic expectations of a president that still cannot comprehend that he lost an election that he definitely lost, and it’s incredibly destabilizing.”

Wisconsin is the latest known target of the Trump administration’s 2020 investigation. The FBI is looking to interview elections officials and Milwaukee police officers in what some worry could be a precursor to an effort to seize ballots from the 2020 presidential race, as it already has in Georgia.

The Trump administration is revisiting allegations of election fraud that have been repeatedly scrutinized

In January, federal investigators seized 600 boxes of ballots from the 2020 election in Fulton County, Georgia. The heavily Democratic county, home to Atlanta, was key to Biden’s narrow 2020 victory in the state.

As in Wisconsin, the FBI in Georgia has built its investigation on allegations that have already been repeatedly scrutinized by audits, investigations, and courts without unearthing any evidence of fraud or tampering that could have overturned the results.

The Georgia search represented an unprecedented intervention by the federal government into local administration. Even more unusually, Tulsi Gabbard, who will step down at end of this month as director of national intelligence, personally oversaw the seizure and arranged for Trump to speak directly to the FBI agents via cell phone after they carried out the operation.

The Trump administration investigations stretch from Arizona, where federal officials subpoenaed computerized records of a partisan review state lawmakers conducted of Maricopa County’s 2020 election, to Puerto Rico, where the Office of the Director of National Intelligence procured voting machines to examine for potential security risks.

The administration’s investigations aren’t entirely limited to 2020. The U.S. Department of Justice sent a letter in April to Wayne County, Michigan — home to Detroit — demanding all ballots cast in the 2024 election, which Trump won. But even in that case, to support the request, the Justice Department cited accusations of fraud made after the 2020 election, including a lawsuit that was quickly dismissed after a judge wrote that “plaintiffs’ interpretation of events is incorrect and not credible.” Wayne County never handed over the ballots, because it doesn’t have possession of them.

What do the 2020 elections mean for 2026?

The FBI faces challenges in pursuing cases tied to the 2020 election since the five-year statute of limitations that applies to most of the likely charges expired last year. Law enforcement veterans said it is possible that the Justice Department could pursue broader conspiracy charges in the case, but the prospect remains unclear.

FBI Director Kash Patel suggested in April that the Justice Department would soon announce arrests related to the 2020 election, but that has not yet occurred. Officials with the FBI and Justice Department did not respond to requests for comment.

John Keller, a former acting head of the Justice Department’s Public Integrity Section who resigned in 2025 after refusing the Trump administration’s demands to drop corruption charges against then-New York City Mayor Eric Adams, said the administration appeared to be trying to normalize federal investigations of state elections to pave the way for future intervention.

“They are using enforcement directed at the 2020 election as a test run for what they can get away with on Election Day this year, or after, to try and delay certification or invalidate an election” if the results don’t go their way, he said.

Injecting federal law enforcement officials into an ongoing election is a more extreme and serious action than investigating a past one, and it could face stiffer opposition. But it’s clear, at least, that the administration is scrutinizing current elections closely.

Trump last week blasted California’s long vote counting process in its primary election and asserted that Democrats were trying to steal the election and federal authorities were investigating. Last month, Trump also said he was ordering the Justice Department to investigate an error that led to some voters in Maryland receiving ballots for the wrong party in the state’s upcoming primary. State officials in both cases have explained the true causes of the issues and that nothing nefarious was behind them.

Any effort to seize ballots in an ongoing election would create unprecedented new issues, such as a breach in the chain of custody over cast ballots, that could prevent election officials from declaring a winner and throw results into uncertainty.

Catherine Engelbrecht, co-founder of the Texas-based conservative group True the Vote, which has promoted debunked theories about the 2020 election, said she understands Trump’s intentions but believes the 2020 election questions should have been resolved “in the immediate aftermath of the 2020 election.”

“This is not necessarily the way I would have recommended that it would be handled,” she said. “The fact that it wasn’t addressed has left this lingering void.”

In most cases, however, Trump’s claims of voter fraud were addressed in the wake of the 2020 election. Time and again, courts, state investigations, and even the Justice Department concluded that there was no evidence of problems or fraud that would have changed the results.

Engelbrecht said she views the Trump administration’s ongoing investigations as an effort to dig into long-standing concerns about the voting process it wants to address for future elections.

“The past is prologue,” she said. “If we don’t understand what happened, we are doomed to repeat it.”

Dion Nissenbaum is Votebeat’s senior national reporter and is based in Houston. Contact Dion at dnissenbaum@votebeat.org.

Alexander Shur is a reporter for Votebeat based in Wisconsin. Contact Alexander at ashur@votebeat.org.

Votebeat is a nonprofit news organization covering local election integrity and voting access. Sign up for their newsletters here.

The Trump administration’s multiple investigations of the 2020 election may have more to do with 2026 is a post from Wisconsin Watch, a non-profit investigative news site covering Wisconsin since 2009. Please consider making a contribution to support our journalism.

Reading Time: 4 minutes

The state’s most devoted Democrats are scheduled to gather in Madison this weekend for the party’s annual convention where the seven-way race for the Democratic nomination for governor is likely to take center stage. 

Democratic caucus and county party leaders told Wisconsin Watch they are hopeful the convention could be a clarifying moment in the primary campaign on who has enough support to make it to the August primary. None of the main contenders dropped out ahead of last week’s filing deadline, so seven names will appear on the Aug. 11 Democratic primary ballot.

When Democrats convene at the Monona Terrace Convention Center on Saturday, there will be less than 45 days until early voting starts in late July.

“If their message does not ring true to the delegates at the convention, they better listen to the applause because people will be honest with them,” said Susan Chandler, the 1st Congressional District chair and vice chair of the Walworth County Democrats. “Everybody who goes to the convention is a highly engaged Democrat, and for every one of those highly engaged, we all know 10 people who are not. We’re bringing a lot of background to that convention and critically listening to these candidates.” 

After Democratic Gov. Tony Evers decided not to run for a third term, seven Democratic candidates submitted the signatures to make the ballot. They include former Lt. Gov. Mandela Barnes, former Department of Administration Secretary Joel Brennan, Milwaukee County Executive David Crowley, Madison state Rep. Francesca Hong, former Wisconsin Economic Development Corp. Secretary Missy Hughes, Lt. Gov. Sara Rodriguez and Madison Sen. Kelda Roys. 

Meanwhile, Wisconsin Republicans have coalesced around U.S. Rep. Tom Tiffany, who received the Republican Party of Wisconsin’s endorsement at their annual convention in May and was endorsed by President Donald Trump in January. Tiffany has just one primary opponent, Andy Manske, a 27-year-old medical service technician.

“We want to know who is best situated to make bold sweeping change here in Wisconsin to provide a better life for Wisconsinites, and who is best situated to beat Tom Tiffany in a head-to-head,” said Brett Timmerman, the chair of the Milwaukee County Democratic Party. “I think that people are going to the convention looking for somebody to stand out in a meaningful way to deliver that message of why they think they are the best person to carry the torch forward.”

The closest comparison to this year’s field is the 2018 Democratic gubernatorial primary when 10 candidates ran for the opportunity to unseat then-Republican Gov. Scott Walker. Two dropped out in June before the primary that year. 

Evers, who had statewide election experience as the superintendent of public instruction, won the Democratic primary that year with 42% of the vote and later defeated Walker in the general election. Evers didn’t win a majority of primary voters, but his closest opponent only mustered 16.4% of the vote. 

A large primary, like the one in 2018, forces candidates to explain why voters should support their campaign, said Martha Laning, who served as the chair of the Democratic Party of Wisconsin during the 2018 election cycle.

At the 2018 state Democratic convention, the candidates all had the opportunity to make a three-minute pitch to party die-hards on what they would do for Wisconsin, Laning said. A spokesperson for the state party said all seven of the Democrats who made the ballot will also have a chance to speak this weekend. 

“I think it’s great to put all of the candidates up there and to just let people know what their options are,” Laning said. “Again, any of them will be better than Tom Tiffany, so the more people talking about how they would do things and how they would improve people’s lives in Wisconsin is a good thing for us.”

Negativity and consolidation

It’s been a quiet primary among the slew of Democratic candidates over the last six months, with few events that set the campaigns apart. Hong led the field with 14% in the most recent Marquette University Law School Poll in March. The poll also found that 65% of voters were undecided on who to vote for in the primary.

It’s worth watching if the convention is a place where candidates take negative swipes at each other with the August primary on the horizon, said Anthony Chergosky, an associate professor of political science at the University of Wisconsin-La Crosse. 

“This has been a remarkably chill campaign, and I’m wondering if we’re going to see things heat up a little bit,” Chergosky said. 

Hints of discord are emerging in the primary. Hughes last month was the only candidate to publicly support the failed $1.8 billion bipartisan surplus deal negotiated between Evers and Republican legislative leaders. After the deal failed in the Senate, Hughes posted unnamed criticism of “certain self-serving Democratic candidates for governor who would rather boost their own personal political ambitions than serve our kids and taxpayers.” 

The Milwaukee Journal Sentinel last week reported that Hong was sued in May by Capital One for nearly $30,000 in credit card debt, which her campaign said had already been paid. Hong in a video posted on social media said the story showed her “opponents are scrambling.” 

“They are scared of what we’ve built, our platform that’s resonating with working class people all across the state who feel left behind, our organizing infrastructure that’s being built stronger every day,” Hong said. “They want to pull me off track and how dare they.” 

The convention could also serve as a milestone for consolidation in the race in the coming weeks, Chergosky said. A fractured field means one of the candidates could win with just 30% of the vote, but the math changes if someone drops out, he noted. 

For Gloria Hochstein, the chair of the party’s Rural Caucus, the circumstances of a large field of candidates make her wish ranked-choice voting was an option for this primary.

“The problem is that there are some really good people running, and the thoughtful voter is really going to have to decide where his or her vote should be,” Hochstein said. 

But the convention could “turn the tide” for some candidates who might drop out if they see they don’t have the statewide reach among the party’s most faithful, she said. 

“I think that’s the realization, some of the candidates, I hope they come to sooner rather than later,” Hochstein said.

The Democratic field for Wisconsin governor has been static for months. That could all change this week. is a post from Wisconsin Watch, a non-profit investigative news site covering Wisconsin since 2009. Please consider making a contribution to support our journalism.

Reading Time: 5 minutes

This article was originally published by Votebeat, a nonprofit news organization covering local election administration and voting access.

The former Madison deputy clerk who claimed responsibility for the 23 late-arriving ballots in the Wisconsin Supreme Court election has been reassigned within the clerk’s office to non-election tasks.

Jim Verbick — the election office’s former second-in-command who was previously scrutinized and sued for the clerk’s office losing 200 ballots in the 2024 election — admitted to losing track of the absentee ballots that didn’t end up arriving at several polling places until after 8 p.m. on Election Day in April, according to public records obtained by Votebeat.

He told Votebeat that he’s only partially to blame, that understaffing and a lack of communication led to the mistake and that it’s unfair that he got reassigned away from elections. Verbick is now the city clerk’s office’s lead worker for licensing.

“I do admit that I had forgotten about the ballots I secured when I left the post office,” he said, adding that he said the error was exacerbated by unexpected absences and mistakes made by others.

The issue went to court after the Wisconsin Elections Commission ordered Madison not to count the ballots because they arrived after the 8 p.m. deadline in Wisconsin law. A court reversed the commission’s decision, and the ballots were counted in the final canvass.

Verbick’s reassignment was part of a set of personnel changes designed to improve how the clerk’s office manages “the many logistical tasks of administering elections,” Madison Clerk Lydia McComas said in a statement. The city is also hiring two new deputy clerks and a lead employee for absentee voting. But this move doesn’t amount to a net gain of three election positions because one election staff member recently left the office and Verbick was reassigned.

Madison officials said after the election that the clerk’s office — not voters — was responsible for the ballots’ late arrival. Election officials had received and sorted the ballots in time to be delivered: They arrived on the Monday before Election Day and were sorted that same evening, then put on a shelf to be delivered in the afternoon of the following day, records show.

Emails, spreadsheets and Microsoft Teams messages obtained by Votebeat show that Verbick was in charge of absentee ballots and accepted some blame for their late arrival.

Around 4 p.m., Verbick sent a message on Microsoft Teams that he realized he sent out officials to deliver ballots that afternoon without the batch of absentee ballots including the 23 votes that would end up arriving late, former clerk’s office staff member Bonnie Chang said in an email to McComas.

Per that same email, Chang said that about an hour later, she scanned a spreadsheet that showed polling sites were still missing absentee ballots. She then contacted Verbick to find out how many ballots were in the late-discovered bin and whether he needed help delivering them. She wrote that he wouldn’t say how many ballots were found or whether more staff were needed to deliver ballots.

At around 6 p.m., Chang said, the clerk’s office sent additional staff to help deliver the ballots as early as possible. She said most got reassigned to other tasks.

By the time that additional help arrived, Verbick told Votebeat, the ballots had already been sent out for delivery. He said he didn’t think the couriers who were already dispatched to deliver the ballots would have trouble delivering them on-time.

In hindsight, Verbick said, he would have used those additional staff to lighten their load. But he also said he could have planned for the additional staff better had anybody told them that they were en route to help him out.

That night, Verbick sent an email to McComas taking blame for not putting the batch containing the 23 ballots on the planned afternoon drop-offs to polling places.

“Missing the bin of envelopes with the initial afternoon route is my fault,” he emailed McComas at about 10:45 p.m. on Election Day. “I had all of them reviewed this morning and ready to be run with the mail delivery.”

Verbick told Votebeat he forgot about the ballots because election workers in the clerk’s office hadn’t told him about a planned USPS delivery around noon that Tuesday. Believing the delivery had not happened, he went to the post office to investigate.

Before leaving, he said, he moved the batch of ballots that later arrived late into a secure area because there were no other full-time clerk’s office staffers available to watch them while he was gone. It was there that he forgot the ballots.

The error, Verbick told Votebeat, reflected chronic understaffing in the clerk’s office — a problem exacerbated by the increase in absentee voting since the 2020 election.

In an email to McComas, Verbick said he didn’t get additional staff that he thought would help process ballots and that he didn’t intentionally ignore messages from office staff.

Relying on hourly and temporary workers to fill those gaps is not enough, he told Votebeat.

In an email to Madison Mayor Satya Rhodes-Conway sent the night of the incident, McComas said that she would “firmly address the lack of communication” and would have more staff in August and November, including the new deputy to oversee absentee ballots.

Wisconsin Elections Commission chair Ann Jacobs called the latest error “absurd” at a commission meeting in late April. The commission voted to investigate Madison over the error, meaning the agency’s first two authorized investigations in its history both center on Madison: one for the 2024 ballot snafu and one for the latest one.

Ultimately, the votes affected by this year’s error were counted. Officials said these 23 ballots were correctly, legally cast, counted and checked into the pollbooks just like any other valid absentee ballots — the only problem was that they were delivered and counted after polls formally closed. The Wisconsin Elections Commission voted that the city and county erred in counting the ballots since state law held that ballots must be delivered to polling places “no later than 8 p.m. on election day.”

A Dane County judge, however, reversed that order, ruling that the ballots should be counted because they were properly cast, and precedent held that voters shouldn’t be disenfranchised because of clerk errors.

Verbick scrutinized for 2024 election snafu

This was the second time in about two years that Verbick has faced scrutiny over allegations that he failed to act decisively when absentee ballots were at risk of being left uncounted.

The Wisconsin Elections Commission previously scrutinized Verbick for his inaction after the 2024 presidential election, when nearly 200 voters were disenfranchised.

When Maribeth Witzel-Behl, the clerk at the time, was on vacation after the election, Verbick was in charge of the office, Witzel-Behl told the commission in a deposition.

Verbick, on the other hand, “testified that he is generally in charge when Clerk Witzel-Behl is not in the office, but that he is ‘not always the point person on everything in the office’” and wasn’t sure who the point person would have been, according to the commission investigation.

The commission stated that Verbick’s involvement was “minimal” by his own account and that nobody took responsibility for those ballots: “It was always someone else’s job.”

After learning about the ballots, the commission stated, Verbick “did not instruct anyone to determine how to get the ballots counted.”

Verbick was sued in his personal capacity for his role in the error and declined to comment about the 2024 snafu. The case is ongoing, and the plaintiffs are demanding financial damages for being disenfranchised.

Alexander Shur is a reporter for Votebeat based in Wisconsin. Contact Shur at ashur@votebeat.org.

Votebeat is a nonprofit news organization reporting on voting access and election administration across the U.S. Sign up for Votebeat Wisconsin’s free newsletter here.

Former Madison deputy clerk removed from election tasks after misplacing 23 Supreme Court race ballots is a post from Wisconsin Watch, a non-profit investigative news site covering Wisconsin since 2009. Please consider making a contribution to support our journalism.

At a forum hosted by the Madison West High School civics club, former Lt. Gov. Mandela Barnes told students that he would be the strongest Democratic candidate for governor because of his previous statewide experience.

“This will be an incredibly competitive race. It already is. The general election is going to show up fast and furious,” Barnes said in April. “I am the only person who has ever competed at that level.”

Barnes was referring to his 2022 U.S. Senate race, which he lost to Sen. Ron Johnson by about one percentage point. Barnes is now seeking Wisconsin’s top executive office and arguing that nearly winning that Senate seat combined with his statewide experience has uniquely prepared him to take on U.S. Rep. Tom Tiffany, Republican candidate for governor endorsed by President Donald Trump.

Barnes entered the race in December and he’ll need to get through a crowded Democratic primary to make it onto the November ballot. It’s unlikely the rest of the Democratic candidates will drop out to clear the field for him as they did in the 2022 Senate race. Other Democratic candidates on the ballot include state Rep. Francesca Hong (D-Madison), Lt. Gov. Sara Rodriguez, Milwaukee County Executive David Crowley, former Wisconsin Economic Development Corp. CEO Missy Hughes, former head of Gov. Tony Evers’ Department of Administration Joel Brennan and State Sen. Kelda Roys.

Putting in the work

Barnes, 39, grew up in Milwaukee the child of a public school teacher and an auto worker who was a member of United Auto Workers (UAW) union and worked third shift for decades. He first ran for office at 25, winning a seat in the state Assembly. He served two terms in the Legislature before launching a failed campaign for the state Senate.

“I felt that there weren’t enough people who understood what it meant to be born in our state’s poorest and nation’s most incarcerated ZIP code,” Barnes said of his motivation for seeking political office. He came back in 2018 to run for lieutenant governor, winning a spot on the ticket with Gov. Tony Evers in 2018. He served as the state’s first Black lieutenant governor before he challenged incumbent U.S. Sen. Ron Johnson.

Barnes, an avid runner and biker, told the Examiner in an interview that politics is an “endurance sport” and that “sometimes you face setbacks” — adding that he faced setbacks every day in the Assembly and views his loss to Johnson as another setback. There is too much on the line, however, to give up and stop working toward his goals, he said.

“In order for us to truly make Wisconsin the place that it can and should be — not just to catch up to our Midwest neighbors, but to lead this entire country in terms of progress — I have put in that work. I have put in that fight, and there’s nobody who’s put in their work in the advocacy space,” more than he has, Barnes said. “I see becoming governor as the best opportunity to continue that focus, to continue that work.”

Barnes has made it his campaign motto that he will do things the “Wisconsin Way” instead of the “Washington Way.” He criticizes Trump and his ally Tiffany as being “out of control.” 

The Barnes campaign is focused on the rising cost of living for Wisconsin families. 

“There is an affordability crisis that affects almost every household in this state, whether it’s healthcare, whether it’s groceries, whether it’s energy bills, or whether it’s housing, and it feels like there’s no sign of things letting up,” Barnes said. He added that voters are looking for leaders who understand those pressures firsthand.

Barnes spoke with the Examiner about two weeks after the failure of a bill negotiated by Wisconsin’s soon-to-retire Democratic governor and Republican legislative leaders who are also about to leave office that would have spent down the state’s $2.5 billion projected budget surplus to provide tax cuts to Wisconsinites and additional special education funding to schools. He expressed opposition to the deal, which most legislative Democrats along with a handful of Republicans rejected. He said policymakers need to “be more deliberate about negotiating big tasks.” 

An organizer’s mindset

Over the last three years, Barnes has led Power to the Polls Wisconsin, a grassroots voting rights organization dedicated to mobilizing voters, combating voter suppression and advocating for underserved communities of color and working-class families. He also founded Forward Together Wisconsin, a clean energy nonprofit. He brings an organizing mindset to the legislative process.

“People shouldn’t feel like they’re rushed to get legislation passed… I think that there should be more public hearings,” he said, adding, “There’s not a whole lot of public input.”

Barnes said the projected surplus “didn’t just come out of nowhere; it’s because Republicans have withheld investments in our future.” He, like the Democrats who are hoping to win control of at least one chamber of the Legislature in the fall, would like the opportunity to reverse years of Republican budget policy without facing a looming budget deficit, which analysts predicted would result from the tax-cut and school funding deal. 

“The answer to most of our problems is simple,” Barnes said. “It’s just a tax on billionaires, tax the wealthiest, tax large corporations that have every tax advantage at their disposal.” 

“Ultimately, if a state like Wisconsin is a place that fully funds our schools, puts more support into higher education, tech schools, and university system, invests in public transportation,” he added, “that’s how you make the state a much more attractive place.”

Closing tax loopholes

Barnes said he would focus on closing tax loopholes that allow large corporations and wealthy individuals to reduce their tax burden. One example is Wisconsin’s manufacturing and agriculture tax credit, which provides a credit of 7.5% on income from eligible qualified production activities — reducing the effective corporate tax rate on qualifying income from 7.9% to about 0.4%.

Barnes wants to change it so “it benefits our family farmers, not these factory farms, corporate farms” and the “primary benefit also goes to Wisconsin very small businesses versus out-of-state corporations.”

He said he would not seek to raise income taxes on families making $400,000 or less, but those making more should pay more. He didn’t offer specifics, but said that the income tax brackets could change, mentioning Minnesota as an example. Wisconsin’s neighbor’s top income tax rate is currently 9.85%, while Wisconsin’s is 7.65%.

“I’m not saying we’re taxing people into poverty, right? That’s not the case. We’re not taxing people out of the state,” Barnes said. “We’re just looking for a little bit of parity.”

Barnes said that Wisconsin “shouldn’t be left behind anymore.”

Barnes has said he supports increasing state funding so it covers two-thirds of public school costs and has called for repealing Act 10 to restore collective bargaining rights for public employees, including teachers. He also backs increased investment in the University of Wisconsin system and technical colleges, though he has not outlined a specific number. 

Barnes, if elected, will need to win support in the Legislature to advance his agenda. He said he is optimistic about Democrats’ chances of winning the majority, but he would be open to negotiating with anyone should he win office.

“I’m willing to play ball,” Barnes said, though that negotiation commitment would not extend to one of his top promises — Medicaid expansion. He has promised to veto any budget that doesn’t include it, even as candidates have argued over whether an expansion would be the best way to address costs in light of federal changes made by the Trump administration. 

Barnes said an ultimatum would not inhibit his ability to negotiate with lawmakers because the issue shouldn’t be partisan. 

“It is a politicized issue,” Barnes said, noting that Republican-led states including Louisiana have taken the expansion. 

Republican lawmakers who hold the majority in the Legislature, have refused to expand Medicaid since 2010. Barnes said during the student forum that he finds it “very hard” to find common ground with Republicans because the party has become “essentially the Republican party of one person” and he doesn’t want to find himself “in a place where I am validating bad behavior.”

Making a comeback

Barnes argues that his gubernatorial candidacy has the support he needs to win, although there was some public skepticism even before he entered the race. He was the subject of a New York Times article comparing his loss to Johnson in 2022 to former Vice President Kamala Harris’ loss in 2024. The Milwaukee Courier, a prominent Black-owned newspaper, urged him in an opinion piece not to enter the race. 

Barnes said of the criticism that people have “gotta have something to write about.” Asked whether he needed to build back trust with Wisconsin Democrats ahead of running statewide again, he said he didn’t think it was about that. 

“People know how much money was spent against me. People know that I was the most targeted Democrat in the entire country, the target of the largest anti-Democratic candidate super PAC in the country. People know what I was up against and the relationships I built over the course of that race. People know that I was counted out from the very beginning,” Barnes said. “People know how Republican billionaires are willing to spend big, and this is a moment for us to fight back against those corporate interests that have held Wisconsin back, and they’re ready to see this through.”

Barnes’ campaign finance report from December included a mix of donations from Wisconsin-based donors, including those who live in Milwaukee and Madison as well other towns and cities across the state, and many from other states including California, Colorado, Illinois, Massachusetts, New York and Virginia as well as Washington D.C. Barnes also received a donation from the Long Run PAC, a group he launched to support progressive candidates. He has a goal to raise $50 million over the course of the campaign. 

In the first half of the year, Barnes has also received a mix of endorsements from Wisconsin Democrats, including State Reps. Angelina Cruz and Amaad Rivera-Wagner and Green Bay Mayor Eric Genrich and from national political players including California Sen. Adam Schiff, and most recently, the Natural Resources Defense Council Action Fund, a leading environmental advocacy organization. 

Climate change and utility costs

“No one in Wisconsin has done or will do more to tackle the climate crisis while lowering costs for working families than Mandela Barnes,” Jed Ober, managing director of Natural Resources Defense Council Action Fund, said in a statement. 

Barnes has made reducing utility rates one of the key parts of his affordability platform. He says that he’ll seek to freeze rates as governor by appointing commissioners to the Public Service Commission, which regulates utilities and approves rates, who will do so. Utility experts have criticized the plan and said its unclear whether he could carry it out, though Barnes said that criticisms of that plan are being levied by “the industry itself.” 

Barnes has said he would appoint commissioners who have a “demonstrated commitment” through a “thorough interview process” and they will need to have worked alongside the industry and have a “real deep understanding of how we can actually benefit the public to make sure that the PSC is doing its job to represent the public interest.” He added that he would like to increase staffing at the PSC as well. 

Barnes said environmental policy will be a priority. He chaired a climate change task force as lieutenant governor that he noted produced a slate of policy solutions that were later introduced by Democratic lawmakers as a package of 18 bills. 

The Senate race as well as his time serving as the state’s second-in-command helped him enter the race with the most name recognition, according to polling by Marquette Law School. On the other hand, Charles Franklin, the Marquette Law School poll director, looked at the track record of five statewide candidates, Republican and Democrat, who lost an election and ran again for statewide office. He found that name identification and previous campaign experience, including established donors, did not significantly improve the percentage of votes they got in the general election in their second statewide campaign. The last successful “second act” was the 1970s, he said.

Barnes is working to convince enough voters that he can overcome the historical pattern and is the best candidate to compete in November. He is reaching people in a variety of ways, including traveling the state to attend forums and county Democratic Party meetings, where he said he’s been glad to reconnect with people across the state whom he hasn’t seen in a while. 

Through his @MandelaHQ account on X, Barnes has adopted a rapid-response social media style reminiscent of national campaign-style accounts like @KamalaHQ during the 2024 cycle. The account highlights poll results, including a recent one that showed Barnes winning in a matchup against Tiffany, targets Tiffany with humor and memes — one post featuring Tiffany at a farm joked that “cows can smell DC stink” — while also promoting policy proposals through short videos. In one video on banning AI-driven dynamic pricing and hidden fees, a group of children raise the price of lemonade after Barnes passes by on a run.

Barnes told students that one of the biggest misconceptions about him is that he doesn’t “get to be as funny” as he’d like.

“It’s tough because in politics, if you crack a joke or people aren’t able to translate sarcasm, like the story’s getting written the wrong way,” Barnes said. “I can’t be as funny as I want to be… sometimes my humor is a little dry. It’s not for everybody.”

Editor’s note: The Examiner is running periodic profiles of the contenders in the Aug. 11, 2026 gubernatorial primary as well as the candidates in the general election Nov. 3. 

A total of 333 people filed nomination papers with the Wisconsin Elections Commission to run for office in Wisconsin this fall — the first official act in a campaign season that will see the state elect a new governor and potentially change the balance of power in the state Legislature. 

In the races for statewide offices such as the governor’s race, candidates are required to collect at least 2,000 signatures. Candidates for Congress must file at least 1,000 signatures while state Senate candidates must file 400 and Assembly candidates 200.

Any member of the public can challenge the sufficiency of a candidate’s nomination papers. To challenge a candidate, a person must make a verified complaint to WEC by 5 p.m. Thursday. The candidate will get an opportunity to respond, and the commission will meet June 9 to certify or deny ballot access.

The seven major candidates in the Democratic primary for governor all filed enough signatures to ensure ballot access, according to WEC records. 

Minocqua Brewing Company owner and political gadfly Kirk Bangstad did not reach the 2,000 signature threshold after listing the wrong date on a number of signature forms — writing the date of the Aug. 11 primary rather than the Nov. 3 general election. Circulators who gathered signatures for Bangstad also omitted information on the forms such as the municipality they live in. 

Bangstad, who did not announce his run for governor until early May, will have until Sunday afternoon to file affidavits seeking to fix the errors on the forms. 

“Bangstad is NOT DEAD YET,” a post on the Minocqua Brewing Facebook page stated. 

Former Democratic state Rep. Brett Hulsey, who has regularly turned up at political events around Madison in recent months to draw media attention and tout his run for governor, did not file any signatures with the commission, records show. 

On the Republican side, U.S. Rep. Tom Tiffany filed nearly 4,000 signatures. Tiffany cleared the field of serious contenders after he was endorsed by the Republican Party of Wisconsin and President Donald Trump earlier this year. But 27-year-old medical services technician Andy Manske filed 2,040 signatures to get on the Republican primary ballot.

In the race for lieutenant governor, Democrat Sarah Godlewski and Republican Will Martin filed enough signatures. But WEC only counted 1,977 valid signatures from Republican David Varnam. 

In the state’s congressional races, the once-crowded Democratic primary in the 1st Congressional District to unseat Rep. Bryan Steil will have four candidates: Miguel Aranda, Mitchell Berman, Peter Burgelis and Lorenzo Santos. 

Randy Bryce, an ironworker who previously ran for the seat in 2018 and was the first to announce his intention to challenge Steil for 2026, did not file any signatures and announced he was suspending his campaign. 

In the 3rd Congressional District, where Democrats are again focusing their attention in an effort to unseat Rep. Derrick Van Orden, Democrats Rebecca Cooke and Emily Berge both filed enough signatures to gain ballot access. Berge was the first candidate in the entire state to file her signatures with WEC. Two independents, Alexander Valiensi Kent and Rustin Provance, also filed to run in the race. 

Democratic Rep. Gwen Moore in the Milwaukee area’s 4th Congressional District is set to face a primary challenge from Democratic Socialist Amy Donahue. 

Six potential challengers filed to run in the 6th Congressional District, held by Republican Rep. Glenn Grothman. Seven candidates, including three Democrats and four Republicans, filed enough signatures to run in the 7th District to replace Tiffany, and three candidates filed to run in the 8th District Democratic primary to challenge GOP Rep. Tony Wied. 

In four races, candidates were given an extension until 5 p.m. Thursday because Tiffany, Lt. Gov. Sara Rodriguez, state Rep. Dave Murphy (R-Hortonville) and state Rep. Jenna Jacobson (D-Oregon) did not file declarations of non-candidacy. Murphy is retiring while the other three are running for higher office.

Wisconsin State Rep. Francesca Hong (D-Madison), one of the leading candidates in the Democratic primary for governor, is being sued by Capital One Bank over nearly $30,000 in credit card debt, court records show. 

The lawsuit was filed May 26 in Dane County Circuit Court by the bank due to Hong “failing to make the minimum payment” on her Discover credit card — which the records show she’s had since September of 2011. The suit alleges breach of contract and account stated, meaning Hong was notified of the total balance due of $29,344.48 and did not object. 

Hong’s campaign manager Becky Cooper said in a statement that the campaign “will have a letter shortly confirming this debt is paid in full.” 

Since she entered the race last year, Hong, a member of the Legislature’s Socialist Caucus, has emerged as a surprise contender. With two and half months until the Aug. 11 primary, she’s been leading or at the top of a number of polls, picking up early support and energy through an active social media campaign and non-traditional events across the state. 

Hong has centered her campaign on issues of affordability and income inequality, focusing especially on increasing taxes on the state’s wealthiest residents and protecting people from rising utility bills caused by the proliferation of hyperscale data centers in Wisconsin. A chef and former restaurant owner, she was first elected to the Legislature in 2020 after highlighting the toll the COVID-19 pandemic took on working class people. 

Cooper said Hong’s debt is emblematic of the struggles many Wisconsin residents have faced recently. 

“Like 80% of Americans, Rep. Hong has debt, specifically from business expenses that rose astronomically during the pandemic,” Cooper said. “She leads from a place of knowing the endless struggles with bills and the stress that places on families every day. Her policies will help Wisconsin residents develop greater economic stability and success.”

Reading Time: 4 minutes

This article was originally published by Votebeat, a nonprofit news organization covering local election administration and voting access.

Ahead of the Wisconsin Supreme Court election in April, Green Bay election officials accidentally sent duplicate ballots to 150 voters, prompting an administrative complaint before the Wisconsin Elections Commission and conspiracy theories online.

In a slightly different example from this year, some voters in Maryland initially received primary ballots for the wrong party. Election officials then intentionally issued new ballots for the correct party to all voters who had requested a mail ballot, and the original ballots were voided. Nonetheless, President Donald Trump falsely suggested that nobody knew what was happening with the original ballots and that “any Republican running in Maryland doesn’t have a chance” because voters who received them, who were disproportionately Democrats, would be allowed to vote twice.

Despite the heightened attention, election officials accidentally sending duplicate ballots — or sending out an erroneous batch before intentionally sending corrected ballots to the same voters — is a rare but well-understood mistake nationwide that hardly ever results in the type of double voting Trump has warned of.

“Once any ballot is received and accepted, it locks down that voter’s record, so that a second ballot could not be accepted for that same voter,” said Tammy Patrick, chief programs officer of the National Association of Election Officials. “That’s the way it works everywhere.”

Two primary mechanisms keep these accidental duplicate ballots from getting counted: proper record keeping and deterrence, said David Levine, an election security expert and the election director in Richmond, Virginia. Generally, that record keeping is done by putting unique barcodes on absentee ballot envelopes, which prevent people from voting more than once.

“It’s usually not an issue because, one, election officials are pretty good about contingency planning and having procedures in place, so if something like this happens, they know how to either void ballots or segregate them appropriately, so that they’re not going to be counted,” Levine said.

Second, he added, most voters understand that double voting is a crime, and it’s not a practice they want to engage in. A study of 2012 election results found that, at most, one in 4,000 votes cast could be a double vote, but that clerical errors in marking turnout records — not actual double voting — may account for most if not all of that number.

Some of the attention on these mistakes comes from people who are genuinely unaware of the protections that keep double votes from being counted, Levine said. But, he said, there’s also scrutiny from people who are familiar or should be familiar with those safeguards but “choose to try and make a lot of hay out of something that’s largely much ado about nothing.”

Why do duplicate ballots get sent out?

Simply put, election season is an extraordinarily busy time for clerks and the vendors that print their ballots. Sometimes amid their multitasking, they mistakenly send two batches of absentee ballots to the same group of voters, or send an incorrect batch and have to send a second, correct one.

In the Green Bay instance, City Clerk Celestine Jeffreys said election officials were scrambling because a mid-March blizzard closed much of the city, and her staff faced a time crunch to send ballots out on time. The city sent notices to the 152 affected voters before Election Day. Ultimately, just one voter returned two ballots, and both were voided after Green Bay officials alerted the voter about it.

In Maryland, the State Board of Elections said the initial batch of ballots was erroneous because of a coding error with the board’s mail ballot vendor. Since the vendor couldn’t identify which voters received the wrong ballots, the board decided to send new ballots to everyone who had requested a mail ballot in that election and void the old ones in the state’s registration database, so they wouldn’t count even if voters returned them.

Similar errors have happened around the state and country. Ahead of the 2024 presidential election, Madison, Wisconsin, officials sent around 2,200 duplicate ballots because of a data processing error. In Racine, Wisconsin, this year, election officials intentionally sent voters a second batch of ballots because the first set left off a municipal race. Other incidents have happened in Pennsylvania and California.

What keeps those erroneous ballots from getting counted?

One of the best tools election officials in Wisconsin and elsewhere have at their disposal are unique barcodes printed on the absentee ballot certificates that voters receive.

Those barcodes in Wisconsin connect to the statewide voter registration database and are unique to each voter. Other states have similar systems, with unique identifiers tying an absentee ballot to each voter. If an election official scans a duplicate ballot, the system shows that the voter already returned one, and one of the ballots is rejected.

That’s a “very, very established process,” Wisconsin Elections Commission Administrator Meagan Wolfe said after the Green Bay incident.

In examples like Racine, when voters receive a ballot missing a race or containing another error that can be corrected before Election Day, officials will intentionally send another, correct ballot to the voter. The first ballot becomes known as the “A” ballot, and the second one is known as the “B” ballot.

If a voter returns just one ballot, that vote will count — including only valid votes from the erroneous ballot, if that’s the one submitted. If a voter returns both ballots, officials will scrap the “A” ballot and count the “B” since the latter is the correct form.

That’s different from Maryland, where election officials voided all of the original ballots and reissued new ones.

How specific instances of duplicate ballots get resolved — whether that’s canceling out all the original ballots or planning for “A” and “B” ballots like in Racine — can depend on state laws, officials’ discretion and court rulings, Patrick said. How close the error is to election day and the jurisdiction’s budget can also influence how election officials handle duplicate ballots, she added.

Patrick also drew a distinction between officials sending out duplicate absentee ballots and the rare but occasional instances of double voting.

“More often than not, the rare instances where we see it, it’s an individual voting in two different jurisdictions or two different states,” she said. “It’s not so much that a single person is voting in the same election, in the same jurisdiction, under the same name.”

Alexander Shur is a reporter for Votebeat based in Wisconsin. Contact Shur at ashur@votebeat.org.

Votebeat is a nonprofit news organization reporting on voting access and election administration across the U.S. Sign up for Votebeat Wisconsin’s free newsletter here.

Sometimes officials send duplicate ballots. Here’s how security measures prevent double voting. is a post from Wisconsin Watch, a non-profit investigative news site covering Wisconsin since 2009. Please consider making a contribution to support our journalism.

The Wisconsin Supreme Court will hear a challenge to the state’s congressional maps on the grounds that they’re an anti-competitive gerrymander, the Court ruled Friday afternoon. 

In an order that again showed the Court’s partisan divide spilling out into the public, the Court’s four liberals voted to accept the case while Justices Rebecca Bradley and Annette Ziegler accused the majority of acting as tools of the Democratic party. 

The lawsuit against the maps was brought last summer by a bipartisan business group, Wisconsin Business Leaders for Democracy Coalition, represented by the progressive nonprofit Law Forward. Rather than challenging the state’s congressional maps on the grounds that they’re an unconstitutional partisan gerrymander — a tactic that has repeatedly failed — the lawsuit argues the maps purposefully protect incumbents from realistic challenges. 

Because of a state law passed by Republicans in 2011, the lawsuit was first heard by a panel of three circuit court judges. In a ruling late last month, the panel dismissed the lawsuit, finding that the claims were essentially the same as those made in a partisan gerrymander challenge and therefore a question for the executive and legislative branches. 

The panel’s ruling was immediately appealed to the Supreme Court because the 2011 law states that appeals of these panel rulings can’t be heard by the Court of Appeals. 

While accepting the case, the Court denied a request that it be heard on an expedited schedule. With candidates for this fall’s midterm elections required to file ballot access signatures by June 1 and ballots are set to be printed shortly after, it’s unlikely the case will be concluded in time to change the state’s maps before November. 

In response to the Court accepting the case, Bradley and Ziegler vehemently objected — arguing that accepting the case is signaling the majority’s intent to redraw the maps. 

“An astonishingly activist court will once again revisit precedent it doesn’t like in order to do the bidding of its political masters,” Bradley wrote. “The Democratic Party bought multiple seats on this court to achieve yet another outcome unobtainable democratically. Like last time, the United States Supreme Court will likely reverse the majority’s unlawful ruling and protect our Republic. No kings. No queens either.”

Bradley, who frequently cites sources from a wide range of non-legal texts, also quoted George Orwell’s “1984” in her dissent. 

Justice Rebecca Dallet wrote a concurrence to the ruling, defending the majority from the conservative justices’ criticisms and calling them “false, inappropriate, and disingenuous.” 

“Deciding to hear a case does not reflect any weighing of the merits of any party’s claims, let alone prejudgment about who will prevail and why,” Dallet wrote. “Instead, we must — as a majority of this court does — stick to our neutral role, and let the parties argue their case before we render judgment. When the time comes to issue our decision, we will follow the law wherever it leads.”

U.S. Rep. Tom Tiffany said at an event Tuesday in Madison that if elected governor he’d return the state’s current budget surplus to taxpayers while also cutting property taxes, eliminating taxes on tips and overtime and overturning Gov. Tony Evers’ 400-year school funding increase while also increasing the rate at which public schools are reimbursed for special education services. 

Tiffany said he’d do all of that even though he has not “penciled out in detail” how he’d pay for it all. At the event Tuesday hosted at the Madison Club by WisPolitics.com, Tiffany repeatedly lamented “Madison math” that makes people ask what will be cut from the state budget if lawmakers cut taxes, reducing state revenue. 

Several times during the moderated interview and to reporters after the event, Tiffany compared the state budget process to household budgeting. 

“Families figure out what their priorities are, and then they spend accordingly,” he said. “Education is going to be one of my priorities. Transportation will be a priority. Healthcare is going to be a priority. Those things take first call on the budget, and then when we get down to the wants, if some of them fall off, so be it. We’re going to make sure that we take care of the basics first.”

Tiffany is running for governor during a midterm election cycle in which Democrats are planning for the possibility that they can hold trifecta control of Wisconsin’s government for the first time in more than 15 years. President Donald Trump’s declining approval rating, the national political landscape and new voting maps that could end years of Republican legislative control mean that Tiffany is campaigning against the political current. 

Repeating a line from his speech at the Republican Party of Wisconsin convention earlier this month, Tiffany said he was running for governor rather than continuing to hold his safe Republican seat in Congress because he wants to reverse what he sees as a “state in decline.” 

Loyalty

Tiffany, who was first elected to the Legislature in 2010 and then elected to represent northern Wisconsin’s 7th Congressional District in 2020, said “people who know” him know that he’s always been loyal first to the people of Wisconsin rather than the Republican executives — former Gov. Scott Walker and Trump — he’s worked with. 

Tiffany is a member of the right-wing House Freedom Caucus and has rarely broken from Trump while in Congress. Following the 2020 presidential election, Tiffany joined Republican efforts to overturn Trump’s loss. Last week, he told reporters he still had concerns about “improprieties” in the administration of the 2020 election. 

On Tuesday, Tiffany wouldn’t say that former President Joe Biden won the 2020 election, only that Biden was the president from 2021 until 2025. He said that he had concerns about the administration of the election in “a number of states.” 

“We should make sure that those things that were done wrong did not unduly damage that election,” he said. “On January 6 of 2021 it was decided by the Congress that Joe Biden won the presidency, and he became president … and I accepted that. I referred to him as President Biden, and, but I gotta tell you, it was a bad time for the United States of America when you had 10 million people that came in illegally, when we lost our energy independence, when we tucked tail and ran in Afghanistan … it was not a good period of time, but he was president for those four years.” 

Tiffany said he was still “studying the details” of the U.S. Department of Justice’s $1.776 billion slush fund for compensating people who stormed the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6. But he said he didn’t think people who assaulted law enforcement officers should receive any of that money. 

Asked to point to other examples in which he disagrees with Trump, he said he didn’t believe the federal government should allow more Chinese students to attend American public universities such as the University of Wisconsin. 

During the audience question portion of the event, Tiffany was asked about the undocumented workers who make up a large portion of the state’s dairy workforce. Tiffany responded by criticizing Biden-era immigration policy, attacking “sanctuary” policies and claiming that the national decline in violent crime is because of Trump’s crackdown on immigration. 

But Tiffany wouldn’t say if Immigration and Customs Enforcement went too far during its occupation of the Democratic-run cities Chicago, Minnesota and Los Angeles. 

“The President made a decision that he thought that things should be done differently after what happened in Minneapolis, and I think that decision will be born out here as we go forward,” he said. “But remember, Minnesota was an anomaly, Immigration and Customs Enforcement works very closely with law enforcement. Here’s what I would do: I would make sure that local, county and state law enforcement works closely with Immigration and Customs Enforcement and coordinate their efforts to make sure what happened in Minnesota does not happen in Wisconsin.” 

Madison issues 

Tiffany also weighed in on a number of issues that lawmakers in Madison have taken up this year, including the Knowles-Nelson Stewardship Grant program, the legalization of online sports betting and the growth of hyperscale data centers in the state. 

On the stewardship program, which is set to expire at the end of June after legislators failed to reach a deal on extending it past 2026, Tiffany said he’d sign a bill to re-authorize the program if it focuses on maintaining “what we have” rather than acquiring new state land. Tiffany in recent years has often joined Republican state lawmakers in opposing land conservation projects in the northern part of the state through the program. 

Earlier this year, lawmakers enacted a law that would allow the state’s Native American tribes to begin operating online sports betting operations. The bill will require the state’s gambling compacts with the tribes to be re-negotiated. 

Tiffany said he doesn’t support expanding gambling opportunities in the state but that he’d “have to review the details” of the law to weigh in on the compact negotiations. 

Over the past year, the construction of massive AI data centers has become one of the most potent political issues in the state. Tiffany said that the controversial data centers in Port Washington, Mount Pleasant and Beaver Dam have taught the state lessons on how to move forward. He said he would repeal a provision included in the 2023-25 state budget that exempted data center construction costs from the state sales tax, prevent data centers from being built on “productive farmland,” work to keep utility rates stable and prevent the tech companies building the data centers from making local governments sign non-disclosure agreements. 

However he wouldn’t say if legislation would be required to achieve those goals, only saying that “my Public Service Commission” would handle it.

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

In the six years since U.S. Rep. Derrick Van Orden first entered Wisconsin’s political landscape, Democrats have often run against the Prairie du Chien Republican by pointing to his long list of perceived character flaws. 

The multiple instances of yelling at teenagers, attending the protest that preceded the Jan. 6, 2021 attack on the U.S. Capitol, the gun he brought to the airport, tirades against constituents, the hundreds of tweets he sends every week, lying to the press that he didn’t vote to cut Medicaid. Just this week, he’s made online posts calling Palestinians “unrepentant savages” and said a pro-Palestinian protester in New York should “catch a 5.56 with his face,” referring to a type of ammunition commonly used by the military and in AR-15 style weapons. 

Van Orden has also refused to debate his Democratic opponents and has never appeared for an in-person town hall with constituents. People and local government officials in the district complain that he’s difficult to reach for help on local issues — and often openly antagonistic when the people asking for help are Democrats.

Those objections to Van Orden’s temperament are motivating to the Democratic base of the 3rd Congressional District. At the No Kings rally in La Crosse in late March, just the mention of Van Orden was met by one attendee with a fart noise.  

But since Van Orden won the seat following Democrat Ron Kind’s 2022 retirement, those character complaints have not been enough. After losing to Kind in 2020, Van Orden defeated state Sen. Brad Pfaff (D-Onalaska) in 2022 and former nonprofit leader Rebecca Cooke in 2024. 

Van Orden’s seat is once again a national priority for a Democratic Party trying to win back a House majority. Running in the Democratic primary Aug. 11 to unseat him is Cooke and former Eau Claire City Council President Emily Berge. Former Ho-Chunk legislator Rodney Rave had been running for the nomination but dropped out of the race and endorsed Berge last week. 

Both women told the Wisconsin Examiner that they believe the key to winning over Wisconsin’s swingiest congressional district is persuading voters they will do the work to show up for the people of western Wisconsin. 

‘Pragmatic’ or ‘bold change’?

“You can’t just be pointing out why the other side is bad. I think it has to also be like, if Democrats win back the House, if I’m able to flip this seat, what are we going to do differently?” Cooke said. “So talking about what I intend to do in Congress versus just what the failures of Derrick Van Orden, I think is what people are really looking for in what feels like a very hopeless time for a lot of people.”

To instill hope for a future without Van Orden, “I’m talking about the ideas, and policy that I’ve heard, frankly, from voters in this district,” Cooke said.

Berge said that since he was first elected, Van Orden has become increasingly difficult to work with. She pointed to a conversation she had with him about housing and homelessness in Eau Claire a week before President Donald Trump was inaugurated for his second term last January. Van Orden “just yelled and he blamed,” she said.

“What I’m telling people is that we can make change, we just have to elect people that are focused on the voters, we have to elect people that want to bring people together, and to actually create real change,” Berge said. “I am in these small rural towns and cities and villages, and people are showing up like they are ready for a representative to show up and to hear what they have to say and to understand what they’re going through, and that’s different right now.”

The two candidates have identified similar issues as the largest problems facing residents of the district — most notably access to healthcare and the increasing cost of housing, groceries and childcare. Cooke, who calls herself a centrist, tends to propose more moderate ideas than Berge. 

On healthcare, for example, Cooke wants to expand Medicare to cover vision, dental and hearing while working to improve the insurance available to people under the Affordable Care Act. Berge has proposed making Medicare coverage available to all Americans.

“I think that having that kind of broad base of support is going to be helpful in moving things across the line within my own party, within the majority,” Cooke said. “But also I think having that pragmatism of how do we work across the aisle to actually get things done is something that I’ve talked about in all of my campaigns of being more of a centrist and wanting to actually move the ball forward.”

That entails finding “ways to build relationships within the House and even within the Senate to get things done,” she said. “I know that that’s going to be the goal of Democrats is to not just walk the walk when we have a majority this fall.” 

Berge said that rather than thinking about the issues on an ideological spectrum between conservative, moderate and liberal, she views them through the lens of class and the gap between the richest people and the poorest. 

“People want bold change,” Berge said. “It’s not left versus right or middle, it’s bottom versus up, and people are sick of it. You know, we have one billionaire, one billionaire in the 3rd Congressional District, and yet all these federal policies that make his life better.”

She didn’t name names, but John Menard, the home improvement retailer and an Eau Claire resident, is believed to be the district’s only billionaire.

“What about the other 749,000 people?” Berge said. “Like we all deserve a shot at a good life, and that’s the sentiment that people want. So, I don’t know how to categorize that, if that’s moderate, left or right, but it’s just what people want.”

Lopsided odds vs. winning record

Since Cooke announced last March that she’d be running again for Van Orden’s seat, she has been the Democratic front-runner. She’s been endorsed by national political figures including Sen. Bernie Sanders and former Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg and is running with the support of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee. 

Cooke has also built a sizable fundraising operation. Despite a promise not to take corporate PAC money, she raised nearly $6.5 million in the most recent filing period — more than Van Orden. Berge, meanwhile, raised $565,000 for that same period. 

Cooke told the Examiner that her campaign’s recent internal polling shows she has a 46-point lead in the primary. An internal poll the campaign released in March, when it was still a three-way race, showed Cooke was favored by 43 points.

But Berge says that neither the money nor those out-of-state endorsers are registered to vote in the district, adding that she’s not afraid to push against the party’s establishment to stay in the race. 

“It’s this myth that whoever has the most money will win elections,” Berge said. “On one hand, people say let’s overturn Citizens United, and then the other hand they say, ‘well, we have to only support the person with the most money,’ but we need to support people that are showing up for people in local communities, and let the primary play out, and not put fingers, thumbs on the scale.”

Citizens United was a 2010 U.S. Supreme Court ruling that found it is unconstitutional to place limits on the political spending of corporations and labor unions on the grounds that doing so violates the 1st Amendment. 

When voters in the primary head to the polls in August, they’ll be weighing if they should nominate Cooke — who previously lost the 2022 primary for the seat, won the 2024 primary but went on to lose that year to Van Orden. Berge said that on the trail, voters frequently mention Cooke’s 0-2 record as a concern. 

“That does come up as probably the number one thing that people say is that well, she’s lost twice, and that’s why they’re voting for me, because they appreciate I’ve been elected three times,” Berge said. 

But Cooke says that her loss to Van Orden by less than three percentage points, in a year in which the national political landscape favored Republicans, is an asset, not a flaw. 

“I don’t think there is any skepticism about electability,” she said. “I outperformed every Democrat on the ticket in 2024. I outperformed [Kamala] Harris by 9,000 votes, and I outperformed our senator, Tammy Baldwin, by 5,000 votes in this district. And so, in what was a red wave year to perform that well, I think we’re feeling really good about our chances this cycle.”

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

As the long tail of the 2020 presidential election continues to reverberate through Wisconsin politics, a bipartisan pair of former elected officials sought to deliver a message of trust Tuesday in how the state counts votes and runs elections.

Meanwhile, the official Republican nominee for governor, U.S. Rep. Tom Tiffany, has been ramping up his campaign refusing to admit President Donald Trump lost the 2020 election to Joe Biden, including in Wisconsin.

Former Wisconsin Attorney General J.B. Van Hollen and former Milwaukee Mayor Tom Barrett appeared at Viterbo University in La Crosse Tuesday as representatives of the Democracy Defense Project, a bipartisan multi-state initiative to build trust in the country’s election systems. 

“The 2020 election has been litigated and relitigated and relitigated over and over again, and nothing has changed,” Barrett said. 

A day earlier, fresh off winning the GOP endorsement at the party’s weekend convention, Tiffany was asked at a campaign stop in Elm Grove Monday if Biden won the 2020 election. He replied that “the problem with the 2020 election was the improprieties that happened.” 

It was one of multiple appearances in which Tiffany declined to directly engage the outcome of the 2020 race.

Trump’s endorsement of Tiffany earlier this year helped clear out the Republican primary field for the three-term congressman. 

Tiffany was also one of the Wisconsin congressional delegation’s most ardent election deniers following Trump’s 2020 loss — which was affirmed by several reviews, recounts, investigations, audits and lawsuits in the years since. 

On Jan. 6, 2021, Tiffany voted against certifying election results from Arizona and Pennsylvania and told reporters at the time that he would have voted to not accept Wisconsin’s results as well. He also supported a lawsuit from the state of Texas that sought to overturn the election results of Wisconsin and three other states. 

The effort from right-wing congressional Republicans to reject the electoral votes for Biden from swing states was one of the mechanisms that led directly to the attack on the U.S. Capitol that day. 

In the days following the Jan. 6 attack, Tiffany appeared at a closed door rally with other right-wing figures who called for “war.” 

Tiffany’s comments come as the Trump administration has increased its effort to use the U.S. Department of Justice and the FBI to relitigate the 2020 election. Swing states across the country have seen increased scrutiny surrounding previously debunked 2020 allegations and in recent weeks the FBI has begun digging into Wisconsin’s election administration — including questioning Milwaukee election workers. 

On Monday, Tiffany supported the FBI’s work. 

“Whatever they’re searching for, the investigation should be allowed to continue and let’s find out what happened there,” Tiffany told reporters. “If there’s improprieties that happened then there should be charges filed. If not, then you let the investigation cease.”

In La Crosse on Tuesday, Van Hollen and Barrett both lamented the FBI sticking its nose into an issue that’s already been closed. Barrett called the investigation a “fishing expedition” while Van Hollen criticized the waste of FBI time. 

“There are a lot of better uses for our FBI resources right now, so I don’t think that that is a great use of our resources,” Van Hollen said. 

The former attorney general also said the agency’s investigation didn’t concern him. 

“I don’t think the FBI is going to turn out and fabricate something, and if they, for some reason, uncovered something that we hadn’t known in the past, by all means, we want to make sure to enforce our laws as well, to make sure that people have confidence in our election system,” Van Hollen said. “So, is it something that I think is necessary? No. Do I think we should be concerned? Not necessarily.”

The Democracy Defense Project continues previous work done by state and local election officials across Wisconsin who have sought to respond to election conspiracy theories with basic facts about the state’s election system. 

During their visit to La Crosse, Barrett and Van Hollen highlighted Wisconsin’s decentralized election system in which local clerks across the state do the brunt of the work to administer the state’s elections and noted that those local officials are broadly trusted by their communities. 

“The general public believes very strongly in the folks in this room and other people who are running their local elections,” Van Hollen said, citing polling data from the project. “They believe you’re doing a good job, they recognize that you’re doing a nonpartisan job, a very important job.”

Polling shows that a majority of voters “have great respect for the people who are working the polls at a local level — yet they don’t necessarily have a belief that we have election integrity, which seems to me to be a bit of an oxymoron,” Van Hollen added. 

Lack of information is a primary culprit, he said. 

Many people are “just not informed as to the way our elections are run, and when we have so much misinformation out there,” Van Hollen said.

While calling it a problem involving Democrats as well as Republicans, he acknowledged Republicans have been a bigger contributor to the problem. 

“It comes from both political parties of late, certainly a lot more from my party,” Van Hollen said, “which has probably given rise to everybody’s desire to finally step forward and try to inform the public a little more.”

At the Wisconsin Republican Party convention at Kalahari in Wisconsin Dells Saturday, elected officials, party leaders and former governors repeatedly warned that if Democrats do well in this year’s midterm elections they will turn the state into its more liberal neighbor of Minnesota. 

“Look at Minnesota, if you must, look at where taxpayers have been fleeced of millions of dollars by Democrat politicians that chose to look the other way, take a look at Illinois, with their high tax rates, and their politicians that have passed out freebies to illegal aliens, and make no mistake, those same people, they have this state in their sights, and they want Wisconsin to be their next victim,” said U.S. Rep. Tom Tiffany, who was crowned Saturday as the party’s nominee for governor. 

The warning comes after 15 years in which Republicans have controlled majorities in the state Legislature and hold six of the state’s eight congressional districts while Republicans hold both houses of Congress and the presidency. In his speech, Tiffany painted a Wisconsin in decline. 

“This election is about more than politics. It’s about whether Wisconsin is going to continue down this path of decline,” he said.

The national political landscape, President Donald Trump’s sinking approval rating, a faltering economy and a less gerrymandered legislative map have Democrats dreaming of trifecta control of state government. 

“The one thing I am scared about this election is the Democrats are motivated, and they truly believe we’re on the verge of a fascist day or something,” U.S. Rep. Glenn Grothman said. “And because they are so motivated — you see it in the number of protests out there — we have got to match them. To be honest, we’re not matching them quite yet, but they do believe they’re on that verge of losing America, and that that is why they have so many volunteers out there, so many people who are gathering signatures. We have got to find a way to match that enthusiasm.”

State party chair Brian Schimming said Saturday that to staunch that blue wave, Republicans need to lean into “kitchen table issues.” 

“Because wherever we are in this state on the big issues, the big kitchen table issues, the voters are with us,” said Schimming, who in recent weeks has faced internal efforts to oust him. 

During a panel discussion of current and former Republican legislators, Rep. Tony Kurtz (R-Wonewoc) said that the state’s residents are “feeling the economy.”

“When you look at what’s going on right now, it is affordability, it truly is,” Kurtz said. “Let’s not sugarcoat that. Everybody, at least in my district, we’re feeling the economy. So that’s where I think we, as Republicans, we have to say what we have done and what we will continue to do.”

But from the convention stage, officials such as Tiffany, U.S. Sen. Ron Johnson, U.S. Department of Education Secretary Linda McMahon, Washington County Executive Josh Schoemann, former Gov. Scott Walker and U.S. Reps. Bryan Steil and Derrick Van Orden, railed against alleged election fraud, undocumented immigrants, trained protesters fighting the Trump administration and diversity, equity and inclusion initiatives. 

“The left never, never talks about the victims of crime from illegal immigrants,” Johnson said. “But they take those two individuals who they trained and encouraged, put themselves into harm’s way, they died, and they turned them into martyrs and use them as an excuse to defund ICE, defund CBP, refuse to fund DHS, and put all of America, or continue to keep America at risk.”

Repeatedly, speakers highlighted their focus on eliminating protections for transgender people and preventing trans people of all ages from receiving gender-affirming care. 

“Are you ready for a governor that calls moms moms not inseminated persons? Are you ready for a governor that’s going to protect girls’ sports?” Tiffany said in the opening line of his speech. 

Throughout the day, party officials sought to paint Wisconsin Democrats as “radicals” who want to turn the country socialist. 

“The Democrat candidates leave the answer simple: the government should provide,” said Schoemann, who briefly ran in the Republican primary for governor but dropped out after Trump endorsed Tiffany. “They want a government that provides your groceries, your education, your health care, your child care. Should I keep going?”

Speakers bashed the Democratic vision for a government that can solve people’s problems — labeling Wisconsin Democrats such as Attorney General Josh Kaul and state Sen. Jeff Smith (D-Brunswick) as socialists. State Rep. Francesca Hong (D-Madison), who has been leading the polls in the Democratic primary for governor and actually is a Democratic Socialist, was also a frequent target. 

Speakers also often criticized Democratic proposals to raise income taxes on the state’s millionaires, billionaires and corporations to offset rising property taxes. 

In his often meandering 30-minute speech, Johnson argued that if Democrats win back a majority in the U.S. Senate this fall, they’ll use that power to end the Senate filibuster rule to “turn America into a one-party nation.” 

So, he said, to preempt that effort, Republicans should end the filibuster this summer in order to pass the SAVE Act instituting much stricter rules on voting. 

“We better end it first, so we can save this nation,” he said. “If we were to end it, we wouldn’t be doing it to turn this into a one-party Republican party nation. No, we would do it to preserve this nation, to preserve voter integrity, so that no matter who wins we have the confidence that that’s a legitimate result.”

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

Reading Time: 5 minutes

Some of the top speakers at the Republican Party of Wisconsin’s annual convention in the Wisconsin Dells Saturday included 84-year-old former Gov. Tommy Thompson, 77-year-old U.S. Education Secretary Linda McMahon, 71-year-old U.S. Sen. Ron Johnson and 68-year-old U.S. Rep. Tom Tiffany, now officially the party’s endorsed candidate in this year’s governor’s race. 

As the old guard GOP leaders championed unity and warned of the dangers of “radical” Democrats, some took the stage to remind the party faithful they needed to look to the next generation of voters in Wisconsin to win in November.

“Welcome these young people,” said Waukesha County Republican Party chair Terry Dittrich, pointing to the Wisconsin Young Republicans, Turning Point USA and Americans for Prosperity —  groups that had speaking roles or tables with materials in the hallway outside the convention hall. “They are the future. They’re smart, they’re tech savvy and they just need guidance, and in some cases they need us to just listen to their ideas. …We’re all a bit older, but the bottom line is there’s a really nice fledgling group of young people who want to be involved in this process, and they’re the future.” 

Young people could be the key for Republicans hoping to win back the governor’s office and hang on to the Legislature this fall. Support from young men in particular helped President Donald Trump win in 2024, but that support has softened as the national mood has turned against the party that controls the White House and Congress. 

As Republicans attempt to connect with young people in 2026, they do so without Charlie Kirk, the 31-year-old conservative activist and founder of Turning Point USA who was assassinated last year during an event on a college campus. Speakers and candidates on Saturday recognized the need to engage with young voters like Kirk did. 

Conservatives are still reeling from Kirk’s death and haven’t found someone like him to connect with young people, said Michael Alfonso, the 26-year-old Trump-endorsed candidate and son-in-law of U.S. Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy who is among four Republicans and three Democrats running to replace Tiffany in the 7th Congressional District.

“I think having young voices that are brave enough to step up is going to make a huge difference,” Alfonso said. “Because I don’t think one person could ever fill Charlie’s shoes, but I think maybe a thousand could.” 

A CBS exit poll from the 2024 presidential election shows that while voters under age 30 were overall more likely to vote for former Vice President Kamala Harris, Trump made inroads with that age group. In 2020, 60% of under-30 voters favored former President Joe Biden and 39% voted for Trump. In 2024, Harris received 54% of the under-30 vote and Trump won 43%.

A recent Harvard Youth Poll conducted by the university’s Institute of Politics found Democrats leading Republicans 45% to 26% in a generic ballot of registered voters ages 18 to 29. Just 35% of young people surveyed said they will “definitely” vote in this year’s midterm elections, but the Harvard poll found a political enthusiasm gap, with 55% of young Democrats saying they will vote this year compared with 35% of young Republicans and 25% of young independents. 

Former Gov. Scott Walker, who turned 43 the day he was first elected in 2010 and now runs the conservative group Young America’s Foundation, encouraged the mostly middle-aged and older crowd to reach out to young people and build enthusiasm as the country prepares to celebrate the 250th anniversary of the signing of the Declaration of Independence. Walker noted many of the Founding Fathers were younger than 40 when they signed the document. 

“I tell you all those stories here this afternoon, not for a history lesson, although I love history, but to remind you and to remind those that we work with and serve with and live next to that you’re never too old or too young to fight for freedom,” Walker said on Saturday. 

The Republican Party of Wisconsin plans to visit college campuses across Wisconsin and tap campus resources to reach young voters and make the case for conservative candidates, state party chair Brian Schimming said. It’s important for Republicans to connect with young people early, when they’re more likely to stick with a political party throughout their lives, Schimming said. 

“We’re going to have a very active presence on the campuses and our coalition groups, who do campuses as well, AFP, Turning Point, all the other groups,” Schimming said. “We are not leaving the campuses alone.”

Republican U.S. Rep. Derrick Van Orden, who faces a nationally watched tight reelection race for the 3rd Congressional District this November, said Wisconsin Republicans should take young people seriously and engage them with facts about Republican priorities. He noted a lot of people in Saturday’s crowd had white hair matching his beard.

“I didn’t bleach this, so we got to make sure that we have more people with your color hair than mine,” he told reporters on Saturday.

He noted his youngest child is 27.

“These are the young people that were locked in their homes. They were forced to wear masks, they were forced to get an injection that they didn’t agree with or they would not be able to go to college. They were told if they write something wrong on the internet that they would be banned from everything,” Van Orden said. “They saw their hero, Charlie Kirk, assassinated live on television, so the younger generation is completely motivated because they want freedom and they look at the Republican Party as the party of freedom.” 

Tiffany emphasizes affordability as top issue

In the Wisconsin governor’s race, Republicans young and old have rallied around Tiffany as their best chance to retake the governor’s mansion. Wisconsin College Republicans endorsed Tiffany in September, before the party coalesced around his candidacy in late January after the Trump endorsement.

It’s Tiffany’s vision on affordability, from freezing property taxes to lowering utility costs, that has resonated with young Republicans and should connect with young voters across Wisconsin this fall, said Kyle Schroeder, the 29-year-old chair of Wisconsin Young Republicans, who spoke on stage at the convention Saturday.

“Even though that is a broad stance for everyone, it resonates so much with the younger generation,” Schroeder said about affordability. “We’re starting families and we are trying to plant our roots in a community post-college. We have great universities around Wisconsin. Whether we want people staying here in Wisconsin or moving to another state, we need to attract those workers and young workers, too.” 

Tiffany is about a decade older than the oldest top Democratic gubernatorial candidates. The current top-polling candidates, Madison state Rep. Francesca Hong and former Lt. Gov. Mandela Barnes, are in their late 30s. Tiffany joined the state Assembly in the 2010 Republican wave that now risks losing legislative control for the first time in 16 years.

Tiffany told reporters Saturday he believes young people are pessimistic about economic opportunities in Wisconsin during Democratic Gov. Tony Evers’ eight years in office, but emphasizing affordability will help him make inroads with young voters. 

“I want them to be optimistic about Wisconsin, and how you do that is you make the state more affordable,” Tiffany said. “We reduce property taxes, then freeze them. We reduce utility rates.” 

Emily Stuckey, a Democratic Party of Wisconsin spokesperson, described Tiffany in a statement Saturday as the “GOP’s most expensive choice for governor.”

“From his unfettered commitment to Washington Republicans’ MAGA agenda that drives up healthcare premiums and guts coverage, to his support for tariffs that devastate farmers and policies that continue to drive gas and grocery prices higher by the day,” Stuckey said. “The Republican Party of Wisconsin endorsed a candidate who is ready and willing to squeeze every last dollar he can out of working Wisconsinites.”

At annual convention, Wisconsin GOP’s old guard urges party to engage young voters is a post from Wisconsin Watch, a non-profit investigative news site covering Wisconsin since 2009. Please consider making a contribution to support our journalism.

In the past two years, a dozen states have either approved new U.S. House maps or are moving toward doing so — a highly unusual mid-decade revamp prompted by President Donald Trump and a U.S. Supreme Court ruling late last month. And the situation isn’t settled yet — even as ballots are being printed and early voting is already underway in some places. Pending litigation could scramble the situation even further.

Redistricting, the process of redrawing the geographic boundaries of U.S. House and state legislative districts, usually takes place every 10 years following the census.

Trump upended that schedule early last year, when he began pressuring state GOP officials to redraw their maps to help Republicans hold onto a slim, five-seat majority in the U.S. House ahead of potentially grim 2026 midterm elections for his party.

The Supreme Court recast the redistricting fight with its ruling in Louisiana v. Callais. That decision all but nullified a provision of the federal Voting Rights Act that required states to draw electoral maps to give racial minority voters the opportunity to elect their chosen candidates.

A total of nine states — Alabama, California, Florida, Missouri, North Carolina, Ohio, Tennessee, Texas and Utah — have redrawn their maps since last year. At least three other states — Georgia, Louisiana and South Carolina — appear likely to follow suit, though Georgia’s new maps would not be in effect for the upcoming midterm elections.

As things currently stand, Republicans are likely to gain up to 17 seats, while Democrats are likely to gain up to six seats.

In the aftermath of the Callais decision, hundreds of protesters have gathered at statehouses in recent weeks, particularly in the South, to decry what they say is a concerted effort to dilute Black voting and governing power. Republicans argue that maps should be “colorblind.” Gerrymandering to benefit one political party over another is legal at the federal level, though some states have their own laws restricting it.

The latest redistricting efforts are changing elections that have already begun. Some candidates must now pivot to races in brand-new districts with just a few weeks until their primaries. They’ve spent money and time reaching people who can no longer vote for them, fighting opponents different from the ones they now face. At least one Tennessee Democratic candidate no longer lives within the new boundaries of the district he’s seeking to represent.

Voters in states such as Alabama will now be asked to turn out for primary elections in both May and August, in addition to the November general election.

Here’s where things stand now.

Nine states already have redrawn their maps

Alabama

Republicans could gain 1 seat.*

A 2023 court order required Alabama to draw a congressional map with a second majority-Black district. But after the Callais decision last month, Alabama’s Republican state officials asked the U.S. Supreme Court to let them reinstate the old map, which has just one majority-Black, majority-Democratic district and which the court had previously ruled racially discriminatory. The high court quickly agreed.

Republican Gov. Kay Ivey has announced new primary elections in August for the affected districts. These will be held in addition to next Tuesday’s statewide primaries for other federal and state offices.

Alabama is also appealing a separate ruling requiring it to redraw two state Senate districts. That case is still ongoing.

California

Democrats likely to gain 3-5 seats.

California Gov. Gavin Newsom last year led the Democratic response to Trump’s call for Republican-led states to redraw their congressional maps.

In November 2025, California voters approved Newsom’s proposal to temporarily override the state’s independent redistricting commission and instead to allow the Democratic-dominated legislature to redraw the maps to create districts more favorable to Democrats. The new map is valid through 2030.

Florida

Republicans likely to gain 1-4 seats.

Last month, the Republican-majority Florida Legislature approved Republican Gov. Ron DeSantis’ new congressional map that could net the GOP up to four new congressional seats.

Both DeSantis and the voting rights organizations suing to block the new map agree it violates parts of the state constitution. But DeSantis argues the constitution’s anti-gerrymandering amendments, which were overwhelmingly adopted by Florida voters in 2010, are invalid, partly due to the Callais ruling.

Missouri

Republicans likely to gain 1 seat.

Earlier this week, the Missouri Supreme Court upheld the state’s gerrymandered 2025 congressional map, handing Republicans a victory. Last summer, Trump pressured Missouri Republicans to help maintain the GOP majority in the U.S. House, so lawmakers met in a special session to draw a map that likely will give them an additional seat by carving off parts of Kansas City into surrounding rural districts.

The new map will be used in Missouri’s August primary, the state Supreme Court ruled this week, because it’s uncertain whether a referendum petition seeking to repeal the map will succeed.

North Carolina

Republicans likely to gain 1 seat.

At Trump’s behest, North Carolina’s Republican-controlled legislature redrew the state’s congressional map last fall. It was an effort to make the state’s only competitive district solidly Republican. The maps passed strictly along party lines. The state’s congressional delegation is now likely to be 11 Republicans and three Democrats. North Carolina Gov. Josh Stein is a Democrat, but redistricting isn’t subject to the governor’s veto.

Ohio

Republicans likely to gain up to 2 seats.

Last fall, Ohio Republican House Speaker Matt Huffman publicly rebuffed Trump’s national push to gain more seats in Congress, while state Democrats proposed their own maps. An Ohio redistricting commission eventually approved a new map last October that is likely to yield 12 Republicans and three Democrats, compared with the current 10-5 split. GOP and Democratic lawmakers called it a “compromise.”

That map will be in place for the next six years. But political operatives told the Ohio Capital Journal they expect to see more redistricting efforts in 2030.

Tennessee

Republicans likely to gain 1 seat.

In a chaotic special session earlier this month, Republican lawmakers in Tennessee redrew congressional maps to shatter the state’s only majority-Black, majority-Democratic district. The newly passed map now favors Republicans in all nine Tennessee districts. Hundreds protested at the Tennessee statehouse as House Republicans voted on the new map and House Democrats gathered at the front of the chamber, locking arms in a show of solidarity.

This week, Tennessee House Speaker Cameron Sexton, a Republican, punished his Democratic colleagues for their protests by stripping them of committee and subcommittee appointments. On Friday morning, longtime Democratic U.S. Rep. Steve Cohen announced he would not seek reelection after his district was carved up in the redrawing of the maps.

Texas

Republicans likely to gain 3-5 seats.

The nation’s redistricting battle kicked off in Texas last summer, after Trump pressured the Texas GOP to redraw the state’s congressional map to add up to five more Republican seats. State House Democrats pushed back, fleeing the state temporarily in August to halt the vote. But the map eventually passed after they returned. Civil rights groups sued, saying the new map was racially discriminatory.

In April, the U.S. Supreme Court permanently upheld the new map, ensuring it remains in place for the 2026 midterms.

Utah

Democrats likely to gain 1 seat.

In 2018, Utah voters approved an anti-gerrymandering ballot measure that created an independent redistricting process, but Utah’s Republican-dominated legislature repealed and replaced it in 2021. Voters rights groups sued, arguing the resulting new map was a partisan gerrymander.

Eventually, after a multi-year legal battle, a new court-ordered map in 2025 gives Democrats a chance to win one of the state’s four congressional districts. The Utah GOP proposed a ballot initiative this year to ask Utah voters to officially repeal the 2018 anti-gerrymandering law, but it failed last month after thousands of petition signers removed their signatures.

Three states are in the process of redrawing their maps

Georgia

Georgia Republican Gov. Brian Kemp has refused to pursue redistricting ahead of this year’s elections, which are already underway. But Kemp announced Wednesday that he will call a special session to redraw the state’s political maps for the 2028 elections. Georgia’s congressional delegation currently has nine Republicans and five Democrats.

Louisiana

Republicans could gain 1 seat.

The day after the U.S. Supreme Court struck down Louisiana’s existing congressional districts as an unconstitutional racial gerrymander, Republican Gov. Jeff Landry suspended the state’s congressional primaries to give lawmakers enough time to pass new maps.

This week, in a nearly 10-hour overnight committee hearing, Louisiana lawmakers advanced a bill that would eliminate one of the state’s two majority-Black districts. The new map, if it passes, likely would give Republicans another seat in Congress.

The new map must win approval from both chambers by June 1. Litigation over the decision to delay primaries is ongoing.

South Carolina

Republicans could gain 1 seat.

South Carolina legislators will gather Friday for a special session to redraw the state’s congressional lines just 12 days before early voting opens. Lawmakers have set a deadline of May 26 to pass a new map. Republican Gov. Henry McMaster, who previously said the matter was for the legislature to decide, called for the special session under pressure from the White House and state GOP.

The South Carolina GOP’s goal is to pass a bill that would delay U.S. House race primaries until August while keeping other primaries on schedule for June. One proposed map would cut South Carolina’s lone congressional Democrat, U.S. Rep. Jim Clyburn, out of the seat he’s represented since 1992 and create all seven Republican seats.

At least a half dozen other states are interested in redrawing their maps

Mississippi

This week, Mississippi Republican Gov. Tate Reeves canceled a special legislative session he’d called to redraw districts for the state’s Supreme Court. Some GOP officials had hoped he’d add congressional redistricting to the agenda. Instead, he said this week, he’s working with Trump and the White House on a plan to redraw Mississippi’s congressional districts and legislative districts in the future. Reeves wants a map that would boot the lone Democrat in Mississippi’s U.S. House delegation, Rep. Bennie Thompson, from his seat.

If that happens, Republicans would likely gain one congressional seat.

Virginia

The Virginia Supreme Court earlier this month struck down a voter-approved redistricting amendment that could have given Democrats a 10-1 advantage in the state’s U.S. House delegation. Virginia voters last month had approved a referendum that would have netted Democrats three or four additional seats. Earlier this week, Virginia Democrats asked the U.S. Supreme Court to revive the amendment, in a case that’s ongoing.

Arizona, New Jersey, New York, Washington 

Officials in Arizona, New Jersey, New York and Washington all have suggested drawing new maps following the Callais decision, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures.

The Colorado Voting Rights Act, passed last year by the state’s Democratic-majority legislature, will likely prevent the state from embarking on a redistricting effort. The state’s congressional delegation is currently split 4-4 between Democrats and Republicans. But a Democratic-led group is gathering signatures for ballot measures that would allow the state to change its maps ahead of the 2028 election.

*Seat gain predictions from The Cook Political Report.

This story was updated to include the Friday morning announcement by Tennessee Democratic U.S. Rep. Steve Cohen that he will not seek reelection. Stateline reporter Anna Claire Vollers can be reached at avollers@stateline.org.

Reading Time: 6 minutes

Click here to read highlights from the story

• Wisconsin Gov. Tony Evers, Assembly Speaker Robin Vos and Senate Majority Leader Devin LeMahieu struck a compromise to spend $1.8 billion in surplus state funds on tax rebates, special education funding and lower property taxes. The state Senate rejected the proposal Wednesday night.

• The rejection leaves the money on the table for the next governor and Legislature to use in the next biennial budget, raising the stakes for who wins the November election.

• Lead Republican gubernatorial candidate U.S. Rep. Tom Tiffany and several of the Democratic contenders slammed the proposal, though Democrat Missy Hughes criticized her opponents for opposing it.

A bipartisan deal struck between Democratic Gov. Tony Evers and Republican legislative leaders to spend $1.8 billion of Wisconsin’s projected budget surplus failed in the Senate late Wednesday night after days of criticism that put both Evers and GOP leaders at odds with members of their own parties. 

The fallout has become a blame game over who is responsible for the deal’s failure:

• Republicans blamed Democrats for not being willing to provide assistance to Wisconsinites.
• Senate Democrats blamed Republicans and Evers for not involving them in negotiations and described the bill as “reckless” and “irresponsible” spending. 
• Several Assembly Democrats criticized the deal for not providing long-term structural changes to education funding or property taxes.
• Evers blamed both Democratic and Republican lawmakers and Republican U.S. Rep. Tom Tiffany, the likely GOP gubernatorial nominee in the governor’s race.
• Tiffany called the proposal a “backroom relief deal” that “fails to deliver lasting relief to Wisconsin taxpayers.” 
• The Democratic gubernatorial candidates split on whether the bill was a good idea. 

The underlying reason for all of the statements, social media posts and comments debating the surplus spending is that future control of the Capitol hangs in the balance come November, said Anthony Chergosky, an associate professor of political science at the University of Wisconsin-La Crosse. 

“It’s very interesting that this agreement was struck by three politicians who will not be in office this time next year, when the upcoming budget process is taking place,” Chergosky said. “There are a lot of people involved in the politics of this agreement who will be around potentially and are kind of wondering about the wisdom of three lame-duck members of state government striking a significant deal that will have potential ripple effects, whether they be positive or negative.” 

Evers, Assembly Speaker Robin Vos, R-Rochester, and Senate Majority Leader Devin LeMahieu, R-Oostburg, who are not seeking reelection this year, announced the deal on Monday. It followed months of negotiations that began after state leaders learned of the projected surplus in January. The nearly $2.4 billion surplus far exceeded projections made last year as lawmakers crafted the state’s 2025-27 budget. 

The deal would have directed over $300 million to Wisconsin school districts through special education reimbursement, another $300 million for school districts to lower property taxes and $870 million through income tax rebates for those who filed state income taxes in 2024. It also would have permanently eliminated state income taxes on tips and overtime wages, which Evers vetoed in Republican-led bills in April. 

Here are a few lessons we learned from the failed surplus deal debate. 

Democrats are increasingly splitting with Evers 

Not too long ago, legislative Democrats had to be ready to defend Evers’ vetoes from Republican overrides. 

This week, all 15 Senate Democrats and 32 in the Assembly broke with the two-term governor on the surplus deal. Ten Assembly Democrats, including several running in close districts this fall, voted with Republicans to pass the bill in the Assembly. 

In statements and comments, many looped Evers in with Vos and LeMahieu as lame-duck elected officials leaving the Capitol in the coming months. 

“This is a completely reckless proposal stitched together in a backroom deal by three people who will not be running around and won’t be here when the consequences of a multibillion-dollar deficit comes home to roost,” Senate Minority Leader Dianne Hesselbein, D-Middleton, said ahead of the Senate vote. “It’s simply something I can’t support.”

Even the majority of the seven top Democratic candidates for governor criticized the deal. Only Missy Hughes, the former CEO of the Wisconsin Economic Development Corp., directly supported the surplus spending plan. 

“@GovEvers bargain with the GOP is bad for Wisconsin,” Democratic gubernatorial candidate and state Rep. Francesca Hong, D-Madison, said in a social media post this week explaining her no vote. “This backroom deal is a payday loan taken out at the expense of our children, our infrastructure, our economy, and our future.”

Evers this week did not hesitate to return criticism to the lawmakers of his party. He told CBS58 that Democrats calling the bill irresponsible was “the dumbest thing I’ve ever heard.” 

“Wisconsin’s kids and schools aren’t going to get the investments they desperately need this year because Tom Tiffany and a few Republican and Democratic lawmakers chose to blow up a bipartisan plan to invest in our K-12 schools, lower property taxes, and help working families afford rising costs, all because they’d rather do what’s best for the next election than what’s right for the people of our state,” Evers said in a statement immediately after the Senate vote. “So many Wisconsinites feel left behind, frustrated, and disillusioned by politics these days because they think a lot of politicians in the Capitol are only here to serve themselves. And, today, they’re right.” 

Strange bedfellows on good governance

For nearly eight years, Republican lawmakers have frequently sparred with Evers both in the Capitol and the courts.

The debate over the surplus deal saw legislative Republicans defending Evers against criticism from Democratic lawmakers. Several thanked Evers for being willing to compromise and work with Republicans. 

“You’re going to hear from my Democratic colleagues that they want to save the money because they want to invest it in growing the size of government. That’s what they’re going to say, even though they might not use those words, we know the truth. We want to give it back. Some Democrats want to keep it,” Vos said on the Assembly floor. “Luckily, Tony Evers isn’t one of those. He actually had the ability to say, let’s compromise, let’s each give, let’s find a consensus, because the people of Wisconsin expect us to do better than to just stand up and shake our fist.” 

On the other hand, many Democratic lawmakers urged caution against approving the spending for the projected surplus when there are economic uncertainties at the federal level.

Sen. Kelda Roys, D-Madison, who is running for governor, said she was “shocked” to agree with Tiffany and state Sen. Steve Nass, R-Whitewater, a hard-line fiscal conservative, in their criticism of the deal. 

“This is a deal that does not help us fix the significant long-term structural problems we have, namely the way we have robbed our children of their futures in defunding public education,” she said during the Joint Finance Committee meeting Tuesday. 

Nass, who is not seeking reelection, was one of three Republicans who sided with Senate Democrats on Wednesday in opposing the deal. Sen. Chris Kapenga, R-Delafield, and Sen. Rob Hutton, R-Brookfield, also voted against it.  

Nass asked Senate Republicans to reject the proposal for concerns about financial stability. 

“I’ve enjoyed standing up for we, the people, especially financially, as I’m doing this evening, and until my final day, I will vote in a way that financially protects those I represent,” Nass said during Wednesday night’s Senate floor debate. “What we’re doing now is mortgaging our future and our children’s future, to some extent, for the temporary convenience of the present. And the only way that can stop is for us to resist it and to vote no.” 

The surplus as an election issue

Legislative inaction on the surplus likely means the next governor and whoever holds majorities in the Assembly and the Senate in January will control how that money is or is not spent. 

Assembly Minority Leader Greta Neubauer, D-Racine, told reporters on Thursday that future election criticism about the deal’s failure should be directed at Republicans. 

“Republicans are in the majority, and they failed to get this bill out of the state Senate with their own members,” she said. “That’s something that they’re going to have to answer for, as well as, of course, 16 years of failing to address these issues and creating an affordability crisis.”

Tiffany said if he is elected governor, the surplus funds will “be returned to taxpayers where they belong.”

It’s possible, for the slew of candidates running in the Democratic gubernatorial primary, that this is a turning point in what has otherwise been a quiet campaign so far, Chergosky said. 

“This might be the thing that gives the nomination race a little kick in the pants or a little nudge to start getting moving because we are seeing some daylight between the candidates,” Chergosky said. 

For example, Hughes, the lone Democratic gubernatorial candidate who directly supported the deal, in a social media post on Thursday criticized Tiffany but slammed, without naming names, “certain self-serving Democratic candidates for governor who would rather boost their own personal political ambitions than serve our kids and taxpayers.”

“Imagine if those candidates had acted like the leaders they profess to be. Imagine if they had paused before sending press releases and Twitter threads and jumping to name calling. Imagine if they had set aside their bruised egos and leaned in,” Hughes said. “Ultimately, they could still have voted no or opposed the bill, but they never even gave it due diligence. That’s not leadership, that’s gamesmanship. These Democratic candidates exposed themselves for lacking the maturity and responsibility a governor must have if they are to move our entire state forward.” 

Former Lt. Gov. Mandela Barnes said the deal delivered “meaningful dollars” to schools, but did not fix the state’s “broken system” to help working people. 

The Milwaukee Journal Sentinel reported that Joel Brennan, the former Department of Administration secretary under Evers, criticized the deal negotiations for not being done in public. 

Milwaukee County Executive David Crowley said “a one-year property tax break is not a long-term affordability plan.” 

Lt. Gov. Sara Rodriguez called the deal “a compromise that’s far from perfect.”

Wisconsin’s $1.8 billion budget deal collapses, exposing rifts within both parties is a post from Wisconsin Watch, a non-profit investigative news site covering Wisconsin since 2009. Please consider making a contribution to support our journalism.