Reading Time: 5 minutes

When Madison residents went to vote in a special election this month, they didn’t have to stand in line according to their last name or wait for poll workers to flip through paper lists to find their names. For the first time, election officials there used electronic pollbooks to check voters in, allowing them to search for voters’ names and collect signatures on digital pads.

They could also use the e-pollbooks to process absentee ballots, register new voters and issue voter numbers, just as they did with paper poll books, but with less chance of error.

The pilot program in the state capital offered a glimpse of both the technology’s potential — and its current limitations. Poll workers praised the state’s in-house e-pollbook system, known as Badger Book, for its speed and accuracy. But its high costs, limited vendor options, and a lack of state funding for support staff have stalled broader adoption, especially in large cities. 

Now, with the Wisconsin Elections Commission beginning to evaluate commercial e-pollbook vendors, clerks are hoping new options might offer a more sustainable path forward.

Deploying the state’s system in a city as large as Madison is “just not practical at this point,” Mike Haas, Madison’s interim clerk, said after the June 17 county supervisor election. “We looked at it more as an opportunity to get familiar with the technology.”

Funding is just one challenge. Adopting the e-pollbook in a city like Madison could cost well over $1 million. While the software is free, the hardware for running it — including a tablet-like device and a printer — costs well over $2,000 for each station, and each of the city’s 120 polling locations would each likely need several. Milwaukee, with over 180 sites, would face even higher costs. And in small, cash-strapped towns, setting aside even $10,000 for e-pollbooks can be unrealistic. 

Another challenge is access to support. Badger Book is the only approved e-pollbook in the state, and it’s designed and maintained by the Wisconsin Elections Commission. 

While any municipality can use it, commission staffers would likely be limited in their ability to provide Election Day support for a city as big as Madison or Milwaukee, unless they got more funding from the Legislature.

Larger jurisdictions using Badger Books would have to manage some of the logistics and troubleshooting on their own, said Ann Jacobs, a Democratic appointee and current chair of the Wisconsin Elections Commission.

“I would love it if we could have the staff sufficient to have a little Badger Book division and be able to service Badger Books statewide,” she said.. “That would be terrific. That’s not our current reality.”

Sun Prairie confronts the costs of an upgrade

Sun Prairie, northeast of Madison, was the first municipality in Wisconsin to adopt the e-pollbook after the technology rolled out in 2018. Now around 400 out of the state’s 1,850 municipalities use it. It’s an excellent tool that saves hours of staff time, said Sun Prairie Clerk Elena Hilby, but the city’s hardware is aging and beginning to slow down, and as long as Badger Book is the only system available, she worries about the cost of updating it. 

Currently, only one company in Wisconsin — PDS, A Converge Company, which is based in Oconomowoc — is authorized to replace the hardware used to operate the e-pollbooks. 

When Hilby asked the company for a quote on a machine in January, the cost was $2,011, she said. In April, she said, it was $2,441, an increase that the company attributed to tariffs. 

“We are literally fish in a barrel,” Hilby said. “They can make it cost whatever they want, and we’re stuck, because they’re the only ones we can use.”

And she doesn’t want the Badger Books the way they are. “I want WEC to give me other options,” she said.

Commercial alternatives may not be much cheaper, said Ben Adida, founder and executive director of election technology vendor VotingWorks. And either way, the investment can be worth it, Adida said, because e-pollbooks reduce staff time. That’s especially true at the end of the night when poll workers upload voter data, a task that’s “incredibly tedious” without e-pollbooks, he said.

One advantage of an in-house system is that it can be tailored to a particular state or jurisdiction, said Tammy Patrick, chief programs officer for the Election Center, a nonprofit group representing election officials. Commercial products start off with a basic menu of services, and customizing them can require more time and money, she said. 

The disadvantage is that the extent of state support depends on government funding. Commercial options can fluctuate in their ability to support clients, she said, but they aren’t as “susceptible to the whims of legislators and appropriators.”

Commercial alternatives could be coming

The Wisconsin Elections Commission is looking at how to give local election officials access to more options and support.

On May 2, the commission invited clerks to join a committee to evaluate commercial e-pollbook options, working with vendors and the general public. The topic is likely to be discussed at the commission’s July meeting. The commission “looks forward to addressing the committee’s feedback,” said WEC Administrator Meagan Wolfe.

The committee won’t assess Badger Books, according to the email sent to clerks, and its work “does not mean that Badger Books will be discontinued.” Other states, the email noted, have multiple approved pollbook models.

The Wisconsin Municipal Clerks Association and Wisconsin County Clerks Association have also formed a task force on the future of e-pollbooks, said Hilby, who’s co-leading the group with Portage County Clerk Maria Davis. They aim to compile a list of clerk concerns and expectations by July.

Can commercial options match Badger Book on security?

Forty states had at least one jurisdiction that used e-pollbooks in the 2022 general election. Wisconsin, Michigan, and Colorado use e-pollbooks developed in-house. Other states, like Alabama and Florida, have multiple commercial options. Some states just use one commercial vendor.

Jacobs, the election commission chair, said an advantage of Badger Book is that the commission has access and control over the product, which makes it more secure. It never connects to the internet, unlike many of the added features in commercial products that clerks have said they’d like to have, she said.

“I’m skeptical that a commercial product, especially those that connect to the internet, would be of sufficient security and usability for us to allow for them to be used within our system,” she said.

Haas, Madison’s interim clerk and the former Wisconsin Elections Commission administrator, said the commission also opted for an in-house system because the state’s elections are decentralized and have unique laws. The initial idea, he said, was to see how the in-house system works before considering whether private vendors could move into the market.

While the pilot project worked out, he said, Madison is unlikely to implement e-pollbooks anytime soon. In the long term, he said, the decision will depend on whether the city council wants to pay for it, and whether the election commission can provide enough support.

“Based on what I’ve heard from the staff in working with the technology, I think they would be happy to be able to implement it,” Haas said.

Alexander Shur is a reporter for Votebeat based in Wisconsin. Contact Alexander 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.

Wisconsin to consider more electronic pollbook options, as in-house system faces limitations 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: 3 minutes

Wisconsin’s rate for vaccinating 5- and 6-year-olds against measles, mumps and rubella (MMR) has continued to slide since the COVID-19 pandemic began, with 74.1% of such children receiving two doses of the shot in 2024 — down from 79.3% in 2019. 

Nearly every Wisconsin county last year vaccinated a lower share of kindergarten-aged children for MMR than before the pandemic. Menominee County, home to the Menominee Indian tribe of Wisconsin, was the lone exception, according to Wisconsin Department of Health Services data. 

After dipping from nearly 80.7% in 2019 to as low as 74.7% during the height of the pandemic, Menominee County’s MMR vaccination rate for kindergartners grew to nearly 83.6% in 2024, the state’s highest rate. 

That success was due to local health officials “being proactive” and conducting outreach that included “looking up kids that were behind, reaching out to parents and encouraging them to bring them in,” said Faye Dodge, director of community health nursing services at the Menominee Tribal Clinic.

Vaccination rates matter because measles is highly contagious and potentially dangerous.

Before the 1960s, hundreds of thousands of Americans faced measles infections each year. The advent of vaccination eliminated the disease in the United States by 2000. But outbreaks have returned to some U.S. communities as trust in vaccines wanes in many communities.

The U.S. Centers for Disease Control though June 19 confirmed more than 1,200 measles cases this year in 36 states, including every state bordering Wisconsin. About 12% of cases sent patients to the hospital. Three people have died.  

Wisconsin, which has some of the nation’s lowest vaccination rates for children, has been lucky to have dodged cases so far, said Margaret Hennessy, a pediatrician and member of the Wisconsin Council on Immunization Practices.

Wisconsin’s risk of outbreaks will grow as families with children travel over the summer.

“They’re going to be traveling all over the country,” Hennessy said. “Realistically, it’s likely a matter of time for somebody who’s not vaccinated or doesn’t have immunity to get the disease.”

Wisconsin Watch analyzed statewide vaccination data for 5- and 6-year-olds in the state, conducted other research and spoke to public health officials.

Here are some takeaways:

• The COVID-19 pandemic disrupted local vaccination programs, leaving children behind in their vaccination schedules. Understaffed, under-resourced counties have struggled to catch up. 
• Creating relationships with trusted community members and reducing access barriers is the most effective way to inoculate more children against contagious diseases like measles, public health officials say. 
• No Wisconsin county comes close to reaching the vaccination rate of 95% that is considered the benchmark for herd immunity protection. That was true in 2024 and before the pandemic. 
• Just three counties — Manitowoc, Marathon and Kewaunee — fully vaccinated at least 80% of kindergarten-aged children in every year from 2019 to 2024. 
• While vaccination rates are lagging from pre-pandemic levels in most counties, 28 of Wisconsin’s 72 counties reported vaccination gains between 2023 and 2024 — four more than the previous year. Still, the majority of counties saw declines.

Vaccination rates are plunging in Clark County, which consistently ranks lowest statewide for vaccinating 5- and 6-year-olds against measles. Just 42.9% of those children received both MMR doses in 2024, down from 57.9% in 2019. 

Brittany Mews, Clark County’s health officer and director, cites a range of challenges in her sprawling county. Those include distances between few clinics in communities with no public transportation, low levels of health insurance access and diverse populations who face language barriers — and may adhere to cultural norms that prioritize traditional remedies over Western medicine.

But the county has found some success in partners ranging from school districts and child care centers to faith communities, Mews said. The health department has asked schools to notify parents when their children need vaccines, for instance, and positive feedback prompted the scheduling of multiple vaccine clinics at the schools and community churches.

Community partnerships in familiar places make people feel more comfortable — particularly in the county’s diverse communities, including those with language and cultural differences. 

Clark County is also working to increase vaccine access by partnering with neighboring health departments to offer vaccination clinics six times a year at a church food pantry, creating a “one-stop-shop” system, Mews said.   

Forging personal connections can grow trust and spread accurate information at a time when disinformation is running rampant online, Hennessy said. Hearing about positive vaccination experiences from a parent, neighbor or other trusted source can hold more weight than information a physician shares. 

“It’s unfortunate that we all can’t be everywhere all the time to fill that,” Hennessy said.

Heather Feest, a Manitowoc County public health nurse manager, said patience and understanding of concerns are also key to increased vaccinations.

“We’re not trying to persuade one way or another, it’s giving that information and answering questions — and allowing them to get factual information and have a conversation without judging,” Feest said. “It’s harder now than what it used to be.”

DataWatch: Measles will likely arrive in Wisconsin. Here’s where vaccination rates are trending 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

On a day of high drama and chaos — Donald Trump’s military parade, nationwide street protests and a political assassination in Minnesota — Wisconsin Democrats convened in Lake Delton to try to forge a way forward.

The theme of the party’s state convention was “the road to 2026,” with elections for governor, the Legislature and Congress at stake.

But how to counter Trump and his ascendant brand of smash-mouth politics was front and center for attendees interviewed Saturday at the Chula Vista Resort.

“When you’re dealing with a ruling party that is not interested in actual governance, that’s a problem,” said Victor Raymond of Madison, referring to Republicans controlling the White House and Congress. “So, there needs to be more efforts made to establish an actual resistance.”

Raymond, who was not a delegate, said he was attending his first state party convention “because I’m concerned about the encroaching fascism in this country.” 

He said more Democrats must resist the Trump administration the way U.S. Sen. Alex Padilla did last week because “what the right wing wants is for everyone to be intimidated.” 

Padilla, a California Democrat, interrupted a news conference Thursday held by Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem to try to ask a question. He was forcefully removed and handcuffed by officers as he tried to speak up about the administration’s immigration raids.

“There’s a need for the Democrats to show just how extreme the Republicans are and how it’s not even close to the values that they say they’re supposedly upholding,” Raymond said.

Another first-time attendee, Dane County delegate Christie Barnett, said she is becoming politically active for the first time because she believes the country is sliding into autocracy.

Barnett acknowledged that the day felt heavy, particularly after a gunman shot and killed one Democratic Minnesota state lawmaker and wounded another in separate incidents. But her focus was on trying to counter Trump.

“If people like me are getting involved, who haven’t been, maybe that’s the hope right there. I don’t know,” she said.

Eleven Wisconsin Democratic lawmakers were named in a list police obtained from the suspected gunman’s vehicle, the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel reported. Police officers were stationed outside the convention center, and they periodically walked through the halls. After a manhunt, the gunman was arrested and charged with murder on Sunday.

At the state GOP convention last month, rank-and-file Republicans cheered the sheer speed of Trump’s actions since starting his second term and yearned for further moves to the right.

Last week, Republican U.S. Rep. Tony Wied, who represents the Green Bay area, introduced legislation that would direct the Justice Department to publish a list of state or local governments that are “anarchist jurisdictions.”

That’s the mood in Waupaca County, which voted for Trump by a 2-to-1 margin in November, said Democratic delegate Wendy Skola. “You bring up anything to do with Democrats, you’re shot down,” she said. 

Skola said Trump’s presidency led her to participate in a recent protest and attend her first state party convention. She said she feels the need to stand up because, the way Trump has governed, people feel “we can all do whatever the hell we want.”

More than 700 delegates and about 150 guests attended the convention. That included delegate David Shorr, a former Stevens Point alderman who also voiced fears about autocracy.

“The country’s in trouble, very, very dangerous, dark times,” he said. “You have a president who demonizes a lot of people …. He’s been very comfortable for many, many years talking about violence should be used against these people.”

But how to counter Trump is unclear, Shorr said.

“There is no easy answer,” he said. “I don’t have any easy answer, except that we can’t give up.” 

In reflecting on the weekend’s events, including Trump’s military parade in Washington, D.C., the “No Kings” protests that drew millions of demonstrators across Wisconsin and the U.S., and the Minnesota shootings, delegate Sophie Gloo of Racine said the antidote is kindness and taking care of each other.

“I don’t think we should kid ourselves into saying that everyone’s getting along really well because clearly there’s a lot of clashing,” Gloo said. “I think the best way to continue to do good work is to stick together and just make sure that you’re supporting one another.”

That extends to elections, said Gloo, who has worked on state legislative campaigns. The Democratic Party needs to be visible away from campaign season by attending events and knocking on doors year round, she said.

“I think, as a party, you have to be consistent about showing up for people. People who lean one way or the other might not feel like the Democratic Party has been listening to them,” she said. “They’re upset that we only come around when the elections happen.”

More outreach was a theme of the three candidates who ran to succeed Ben Wikler, who stepped down after six years as party chair.

Delegates chose senior state party adviser Devin Remiker of Reedsburg, who was endorsed by Wikler, over Milwaukee-area communications consultant Joe Zepecki and La Crosse-area party leader William Garcia in Sunday’s election.

“I think we have a lot of trust building to do, and that is going to be a major focus of mine, is showing up,” Remiker told Wisconsin Watch last week. “Not to ask people to vote for us, but just to ask them to keep an open mind and rebuild those relationships of trust that have been damaged.”

Wisconsin Democrats search for answers as fear of autocracy galvanizes grassroots 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: 3 minutes

Wisconsin Republicans want to require that all proposed constitutional amendments come with a plain-language explanation, a move that they say would help voters better understand complex ballot questions.

The proposal has drawn broad support. But some lawmakers are concerned about whether the measure as proposed would leave the interpretation of ballot questions vulnerable to partisanship. And even some supporters say the bill should have more specific standards for what constitutes plain language.

In its current version, the bill calls for the Legislature to pass a plain-language explanation along with any proposed constitutional amendment. The explanation would be drafted by the Legislative Reference Bureau, a nonpartisan legislative agency that helps draft bills, but legislators would be able to revise it. Neither the explanation nor the amendment would be subject to a governor’s veto.

The proposal has the support of a wide swath of voting organizations: The ACLU of Wisconsin, the city of Madison, League of Women Voters of Wisconsin, All Voting Is Local Action and Common Cause in Wisconsin are all registered in support of it. No group has registered in opposition.

“Most of our voters do not have law degrees to interpret many of these questions,” Rep. Jerry O’Connor, R-Fond du Lac, the bill’s author, said at a June 3 public hearing before the Assembly elections committee. “It leaves individuals unprepared to really make an informed decision.”

But Republicans and Democrats expressed concern at the hearing that the bill, as written, gives too much control of the process to the legislative majority. 

O’Connor maintained that crafting the explanation should ultimately be the Legislature’s responsibility. He didn’t respond to Votebeat’s request for comment. 

Proposal leaves plain language undefined

States that require plain-language summaries of their ballot proposals vary widely in how they craft them. Oregon uses a demographically representative citizen panel. Arizona leaves it to a legislative council controlled by the majority party.

The drafting process is often contentious, and litigation over fairness is common, said Thomas Collins, executive director of the Arizona Citizens Clean Elections Commission.

There’s no gold standard for laws on plain-language explanations, said Michael Blasie, an expert on the subject and an associate professor at Seattle University School of Law. Regardless of who writes the explanation, he said, the key is user testing: giving drafts to readers and checking whether they understand them as intended. 

The Wisconsin bill doesn’t require that. Without testing and feedback, Blasie said, the bill is a positive step but won’t have a meaningful impact unless it’s followed by further reforms.

There are about 1,100 plain-language laws across the country at the federal, state and local levels, including in Wisconsin, Blasie said. Some of them broadly require jurisdictions to provide plain-language explanations of proposals; others are more specific, defining criteria like sentence length or prohibiting passive voice.

The Wisconsin proposal falls into the former category, requiring plain language without defining what that means, or how to enforce it. That’s a common approach and allows for more flexibility, Blasie said. 

“You can adapt as the needs of voters in Wisconsin change,” he said. 

“The downside is drafters really have no specific guidance and no way of knowing whether they have met that standard,” he said.

One of the groups that registered in support of the proposal, Disability Rights Wisconsin, urged lawmakers to include a standard to determine what constitutes plain language.

Concerns over changing who writes explanations

Under current law, it’s up to the Wisconsin attorney general’s office to write the explanations of constitutional amendment proposals voters see on their ballots. This bill would eliminate that role. 

State Rep. Scott Krug, R-Rome, vice chair of the Assembly Committee on Campaigns and Elections, said the explanations that come out of the attorney general’s office are often confusing. Some are written at a 12th grade reading level, whereas plain-language guidelines typically call for writing them at an eighth grade level.

Green County Clerk Arianna Voegeli, a Democrat, acknowledges that the current system needs improvement. But she said she doesn’t support the bill as written, arguing that a partisan body like the Legislature can’t produce what should be a neutral explanation for voters.

“It’s almost certain that whoever is in the majority trying to pass this legislation is going to craft it in a way that leans towards the outcome that they’re desiring, Republican or Democrat,” she said.

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’s free national newsletter here.

Wisconsin proposal to require simple explanations of ballot questions needs work, critics say 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.

Tesla CEO Elon Musk listens as President Donald Trump speaks to reporters in the Oval Office of the White House on May 30, 2025 in Washington, D.C. (Photo by Kevin Dietsch/Getty Images)

The Wisconsin Democracy Campaign is suing billionaire Elon Musk over allegations that he violated multiple state laws, including the election bribery statute, when he offered voters a potential $1 million award for signing a petition as part of his effort to sway the result of Wisconsin’s April Supreme Court election. 

Represented by Wisconsin’s Law Forward, Democracy Defenders Fund and New York-based law firm Hecker Fink, the lawsuit accuses the world’s richest man of implementing “a brazen scheme to bribe Wisconsin citizens to vote.” 

Musk and his political action committee, America PAC, played a major role in this spring’s election becoming the most expensive judicial campaign in American history. Musk’s involvement in the race, which came as he was leading President Donald Trump’s cost-cutting initiatives and firing thousands of federal employees through the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), was widely seen as causing a backlash and helping Dane County Judge Susan Crawford defeat Musk-backed Waukesha County Judge Brad Schimel. 

Musk and his PAC spent more than $20 million on the race. 

Prior to the election, America PAC offered voters $100 if they signed a petition “in opposition to activist judges,” and another $100 if they referred another voter to sign the petition. Later, at a pre-election rally in Green Bay, Musk handed out two $1 million checks to voters, which had been advertised as awards “in appreciation for you taking the time to vote.” 

The lawsuit, filed in Dane County court, notes it is against the law to offer anyone more than $1 to induce them to go to the polls, vote or vote for a particular candidate. 

“By offering and paying Wisconsin citizens amounts far greater than $1 to vote, Defendants violated Wisconsin’s election bribery law,” the lawsuit states. “Defendants’ payments and offers of payment to Wisconsin voters, made with the clear intent to aid one candidate and induce Wisconsinites to vote, threatened the integrity of the election and damaged public confidence in the electoral system.”

Jeff Mandell, Law Forward’s general counsel, said the lawsuit was meant to prevent efforts like Musk’s from becoming a regular occurrence. 

“We are fighting for free and fair elections,” Mandell said. “We believe our democracy demands better than schemes like the one detailed in our complaint. So, we are working to hold Musk accountable and stop this from becoming the new normal.”

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

A decision is imminent in three of the four cases that will determine whether individual health information for legal reproductive care remains protected by a 2024 federal rule.

Dr. Eve Espey has many stories she can tell about patients who travel to her clinic in New Mexico from their homes in Texas, where abortion laws are some of the most restrictive in the country.

In one recent case, Espey said a patient flew from Texas to Albuquerque for an abortion after her doctor advised that an autoimmune disease she has made being pregnant incredibly dangerous. At the same time, she had an IUD placed as future contraception.

Shortly after returning home, the patient had some cramping and discomfort that prompted her to have the placement of the IUD checked and make sure it hadn’t moved. But her doctor turned her away because she’d had an abortion.

“She flew back to New Mexico to get her IUD examined,” Espey told States Newsroom.

In this case, Espey’s patient voluntarily told her doctor that she’d had an abortion. But if a rule exempting reproductive health information from law enforcement investigations is struck down or altered by one of three federal cases brought by Republican attorneys general from more than a dozen states, that information could become mandatory to disclose.

A decision is imminent in three of the four cases that will determine whether individual health information for legal reproductive care remains protected by a 2024 federal rule under the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA), including a case in Texas before the same judge who tried to revoke government approval of an abortion drug.

The plaintiffs in the cases, which include 17 states that heavily restrict or outright ban abortion, say the rule undermines their state rights to investigate waste, fraud and abuse. Chad Kubis, spokesperson for Tennessee Attorney General Jonathan Skrmetti, told States Newsroom via email that the office could not comment because of the ongoing litigation. But the complaint in the case led by Tennessee said, “The final rule will hamper states’ ability to gather information critical to policing serious misconduct like Medicaid billing fraud, child and elder abuse, and insurance-related malfeasance.”

HIPAA is a federal law passed nearly 30 years ago to protect the privacy and security of patient health information, especially as that information travels between clinics in an increasingly all-digital world. It includes some exceptions under limited conditions, such as law enforcement investigations. After the 2022 Dobbs decision returned abortion regulation to the states, prompting more than a dozen to pass abortion bans, advocates worried that such records could be used by state officials and law enforcement to investigate and prosecute patients seeking an abortion and those who help them.

Former Democratic President Joe Biden’s administration sought to remedy those concerns by adding a rule to the HIPAA law in 2024 restricting disclosure of the information. Meanwhile, states with legal abortion passed their own shield laws to protect providers and patients from out-of-state investigations.

In New Mexico, doctors like Espey are protected by a shield law that covers patients, providers and those who help someone obtain an abortion. Even with that, Espey worries and makes sure she’s careful with the notes she puts into writing. Lawmakers in New Mexico have considered going further with the shield law to require patient consent for any release of reproductive health records, but that could become an issue in emergencies.

“That is a colossal barrier to a provider,” Espey said. “Somebody could come into the ER and you can’t access the fact that they had an abortion two days ago.”

Lauren Paulk, senior research counsel for If/When/How, a nonprofit that offers legal support to those seeking reproductive health care, said the rule is important to keep intact because it helps patients and providers feel safe. Without it, more people will be turned away from clinics and hospitals, she said.

“Since Dobbs, there have been documented cases of at least seven people who have died in part because they were afraid to seek care or were denied care. We know that patients see these stories too,” Paulk said. “We also run a help line, so we hear people calling in every day who are scared to seek health care.”

For many years, people have considered health privacy to be a basic right, Paulk said, and have taken it for granted that when they see a doctor, the information shared will be confidential. But she said it’s vital that it stays that way.

“Having the state involved in health care poisons the well of the patient-provider relationship,” Paulk said. “When I go to my health care provider and I can’t be frank with them, it means I’m not going to get care to the extent that I need.”

Since Republican President Donald Trump’s administration took office in January and Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. is now at the helm of U.S. Health and Human Services, the agency that administers the rule, the suits have become more complicated, including how the government is responding to each case.

They are:

State of Missouri v. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services: Republican Missouri Attorney General Andrew Bailey filed this lawsuit in January, claiming that the rule infringes on state powers to investigate fraud, abuse and public health violations. U.S. District Judge John A. Ross, who was appointed by former Democratic President Barack Obama, is weighing the Trump administration’s request to dismiss the case for lack of standing. 

State of Tennessee v. HHS: Republican Tennessee Attorney General Jonathan Skrmetti filed this lawsuit in January, also claiming that the rule infringes on state powers of investigation. Republican attorneys general in 14 other states joined as plaintiffs. U.S. District Judge Katherine A. Crytzer, an appointee of Republican President Donald Trump, has been asked by the Trump administration to dismiss the case for lack of standing or grant the states’ request to block the rule. 

Purl, M.D. v. HHS: Dr. Carmen Purl, the sole owner of Dr. Purl’s Fast Care Walk In Clinic in Dumas, Texas, sued in October because she said the rule creates a conflict with the laws requiring her to report child abuse. The case is before U.S. District Judge Matthew Kacsmaryk, an appointee of Republican President Donald Trump. Kacsmaryk granted a preliminary injunction, but is expected to rule soon on a permanent injunction. 

State of Texas v. HHS: Republican Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton sued in September, claiming the 2024 rule violates state investigative authority. Paxton argued the underlying 2000 HIPAA rule should be struck down as well — a move that could open many more avenues for state investigations if it is granted. U.S. District Judge James Wesley Hendrix, a Trump appointee, has given the federal health agency two extensions of time to decide whether they want to rescind and rewrite the rule.

The judges presiding over the cases in Missouri and Tennessee, as well as the Purl case in Texas, could issue decisions at any time Missouri filed its lawsuit alone, while 14 other states with Republican attorneys general joined Tennessee’s lawsuit as plaintiffs: Alabama, Arkansas, Georgia, Idaho, Indiana, Iowa, Louisiana, Montana, Nebraska, North Dakota, Ohio, South Carolina, South Dakota and West Virginia. All but three of those states either heavily restrict or outright ban abortion, and if the lawsuits are successful, records kept by doctors and pharmacists in other states could be subpoenaed.

If the underlying 2000 HIPAA privacy rule is somehow altered by court rulings in Texas, it could have even more effects, Paulk said. If/When/How receives phone calls from therapists living in states with abortion bans who are afraid of facing criminal charges just for talking about abortion with a patient, or for not reporting a person considering an abortion to the police, she said. That’s not true under existing laws, but if privacy rules change, records like therapy notes could also be subject to investigation.

“It’s clear to me that the folks who are pursuing the overturn of these laws and the folks who are in states where they’re trying to get access to health information are seeking to criminalize people and further stigmatize health care like abortion and gender-affirming care,” Paulk said. “They want people to be afraid to access care and providers to be afraid to provide it, and they’re using this specter of punishment to do that.”

DOJ asked two courts to dismiss Republican-led lawsuits

Democracy Forward, a nonprofit legal organization, is representing the cities of Columbus, Ohio, and Madison, Wisconsin, and Doctors for America, and has attempted to intervene in all four cases — Kacsmaryk denied the request, but the other three are still pending. If any of the motions are granted, attorneys for Democracy Forward could defend the rule, because they do not think the DOJ attorneys will adequately defend it, said Carrie Flaxman, the nonprofit’s senior legal adviser.

The cities and Doctors for America filed a friend-of-the-court brief after Kacsmaryk’s denial, arguing that HIPAA is vital to protecting patient confidentiality, including the 2024 rule.

At the end of March, Trump’s Department of Justice attorneys asked the federal courts in Missouri and Tennessee to dismiss the cases for lack of standing, saying the states have not demonstrated any harm.

“Missouri’s complaint vaguely alleges that the rule impedes state investigations and requires the state to expend resources to comply with the rule’s requirements,” the motion to dismiss says. “But absent from the complaint are any concrete facts supporting these conclusory assertions of harm, which one would expect to see if the rule truly posed the risks that the state alleges.”

In Texas, Kacsmaryk ordered the Department of Justice to provide an update about the health services agency’s review of the Biden-era rule in May, and asked if they wished to pause the court proceedings while they conduct that review. Acting Assistant Attorney General Yaakov Roth told the court in a brief that the rule remains “under consideration” but no imminent action on the rule is expected. He added that they were not requesting any pause in the case.

That response differed in Paxton’s suit, which was already on hold. DOJ attorneys asked for more time to “evaluate the agency’s position in this case and determine how best to proceed.” The judge granted the extension, and another update is expected in July.

“Blocking either or both of these rules could pave the way for government investigations by Attorney General Paxton or others and threaten the foundations of medical privacy that we all rely on,” Flaxman said. “Patients nationwide should be concerned about investigations … into the most personal of their medical records.” 

Reading Time: 4 minutes

Republican President Donald Trump may have won Wisconsin in November, but Badger State Democrats see a pathway to winning a “trifecta” in state government in 2026.

How they get there will be at the heart of the party’s state convention this upcoming weekend in the Wisconsin Dells.

Winning a trifecta means holding onto the governor’s seat, whether or not Gov. Tony Evers seeks a third term — and winning majorities in the state Assembly and Senate, both of which Republicans have controlled since 2011. Democrats flipped 14 seats in November after the Supreme Court tossed out Republican-tilted legislative maps, and 2026 is shaping up to be an even more favorable year for the party out of power in Washington.

A key step will be choosing a successor to Ben Wikler, who is stepping down after six years as the state party chair. Under Wikler, the party raised $63 million in 2024 — more than any state party, Democratic or Republican, in the country. In April, it helped Dane County Judge Susan Crawford cement a liberal majority on the state Supreme Court race until at least 2028. 

The three candidates vying for the two-year term as chair are Devin Remiker, Joe Zepecki and William Garcia.

Remiker served as the party’s executive director under Wikler and has his endorsement. Zepecki is a communications veteran with extensive election campaign experience and big-name endorsements of his own. Garcia is a dark-horse candidate — but with the party using ranked-choice voting for the first time to choose a chair, there’s a new election dynamic. In ranked-choice voting, the votes for the last place candidate are distributed to those voters’ second choice until a candidate gets a majority of the total vote.

Reaching out to Democrats around the state, not just in population centers, and shoring up the party’s reputation are common priorities of the candidates.

“I think fundraising is a really important task,” state Sen. Kelda Roys, D-Madison, said about the next chair. “But we are a grassroots party and the reality is, money doesn’t mean much if you’re not on the ground in every community.”

The insider

Remiker, 32, now a senior adviser to the state party, lives in the Reedsburg area, about an hour northwest of Madison. He said the state party needs more focus on rural areas and voters of color, in part to repair its image.

“I think that we have fallen short, and not just the state party, but also the national Democratic Party and how people perceive us,” Remiker said. “I think we have a lot of trust building to do, and that is going to be a major focus of mine, is showing up, not to ask people to vote for us, but just to ask them to keep an open mind and rebuild those relationships of trust that have been damaged.”

At a WisPolitics event last week, Wikler said he’s been making phone calls on behalf of Remiker and described him as the architect of Crawford’s successful Supreme Court strategy of turning the race into a referendum on billionaire and Trump efficiency czar Elon Musk, who heavily backed her conservative opponent. 

Remiker described more engagement at events such as festivals and farmers markets, even away from election campaign season, as the way to maintain the momentum from the Supreme Court election.

“People take for granted that if we just show up and start talking about issues, issues that the vast majority of voters agree with us on,” that Democratic candidates will win votes, Remiker said. “But if they don’t trust the messenger, if they think that they can’t trust the Democratic Party to actually deliver or actually focus on these issues, we’re not actually able to break through.”

Remiker also has endorsements from former state Democratic Party chairs Martha Laning, Martha Love and Jeff Neubauer; U.S. Rep. Gwen Moore of Milwaukee; state Senate Minority Leader Dianne Hesselbein and state Assembly Minority Leader Greta Neubauer.

The communicator

Zepecki, 43, lives in the Milwaukee suburb of Shorewood and runs his own communications firm. His election campaign experience includes serving as communications director for Mary Burke’s 2014 gubernatorial campaign and Barack Obama’s 2012 Wisconsin presidential campaign.

Zepecki said he wants to “fine-tune” party mobilization and get-out-the-vote efforts.

“I think over the last six years, the approach has become a little too top-down, a little too  one-size-fits-all,” he said. “We need to have a system that is flexible enough for local leaders to have a voice in the strategy because they’re the ones doing the work at the local level.”

Zepecki also said the party needs to improve communication to increase trust.

“This is not unique to Wisconsin. The Democratic Party nationally has a brand problem. Our communications and messaging are not landing,” Zepecki said.

“We have to try stuff, we have to innovate,” he added. “It might not all work, but shame on us if we don’t try and we don’t listen to the voters who are telling us they don’t believe us and they’re not hearing enough from us. That’s on us, not on the voters.”

Zepecki’s endorsements include former state party chair Linda Honold; the party chairs in Milwaukee, Racine, Waukesha, Marathon and Rock counties; and Tina Pohlman, who is co-chair along with Garcia in La Crosse County.

The dark horse

Garcia, 52, of La Crosse is a Western Technical College instructor. He is party chair for the 3rd Congressional District in western Wisconsin.

Garcia said he’s running because the county parties have been “left behind,” lacking enough resources from the state party on things such as party members, voters and communications.

“Because at the end of the day, commercials are really important, social media is really important, but it’s really the one-on-one in-person contacts that emanate from the county parties that persuade and flip voters,” he said.

Garcia, who lacks big-name endorsements, said his position as a county party leader positions him well in the election.

The state party “does so much really well, this is the blind spot right now, and that’s why I think I’m the best choice to fix it, because I’m the one that’s kind of lived in that blind spot for years,” he said.

As Wisconsin Democrats eye ‘trifecta’ wins in 2026 elections, party leaders urged to rebuild rural infrastructure 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.

American Family Children's Hospital, part of the UW Health system, is seen in Madison, Wis., on April 1, 2020. (Photo by Dee J. Hall/Wisconsin Watch)

Click here to read highlights from the story

• Health care systems including SSM Health, Aurora Health, UW Health and, most recently, Ascension have removed from their websites language related to diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI).

• The changes have come in the months since President Donald Trump has signed executive orders abolishing federal DEI programs.

• UW Health publicly announced changes such as the removal of anti-racism modules titled “Being a leader in anti-racism” and “anti-racism funding” and replacement with modules called “Being a social impact leader” and “Community giving.”

Republished from Wisconsin Watch. 

Multiple Wisconsin health care systems have removed diversity, equity and inclusion language or resources from their websites in the wake of President Donald Trump’s federal ban on funding for DEI programming.

The systems include SSM Health, Aurora Health, UW Health and, most recently, Ascension. Froedtert ThedaCare Health has maintained its DEI webpage, though it removed a link to its equal employment opportunity policy in recent months.

Aurora Health, Ascension, Froedtert and SSM Health made the changes quietly, without directly alerting the public. UW Health, however, released an op-ed in Madison 365 April 8 explaining the changes.

“As we enter the next phase of this important work, we are further aligning with our organizational mission under the name of Social Impact and Belonging,” the op-ed said. “This reflects both the evolved nature of the work and our desire that these mission-focused priorities endure despite the current tumultuous political environment.”

The changes occurred in the weeks after President Donald Trump’s executive order abolishing DEI programs from all federally funded institutions and programs.

The executive order, issued Jan. 20, states the “Biden Administration forced illegal and immoral discrimination programs, going by the name ‘diversity, equity, and inclusion’ (DEI), into virtually all aspects of the Federal Government, in areas ranging from airline safety to the military.”

In response to attacks on DEI programs by the federal government, some organizations have pushed back, arguing Trump’s actions are a threat to a multiracial democracy. Some institutions are also suing the federal government for its actions, such as threatening to withhold federal grants and funding.

Harvard University has filed a lawsuit, citing First Amendment principles to protect “academic freedom” and “private actors’ speech.”

But while some federally funded institutions are pushing back, others are not.

Different approaches to DEI purge

In the past couple of months, SSM Health removed the word “diversity” from its website, including changing a page titled “Our Commitment to Diversity” to “Our Commitment to Culture & Inclusion.”

SSM has hospitals located throughout Wisconsin including Ripon, Fond du Lac, Waupun, Baraboo, Janesville, Madison and Monroe.

In changing the webpage, SSM Health also removed an entire section regarding its commitment to fostering a diverse workplace and health care center, including a section that read, “​​SSM Health makes it a point to work with diverse organizations broadening our reach into the communities we serve to support and promote a more inclusive society.”

SSM Health also notably replaced the section discussing diversity with comment on SSM Health’s mission as a Catholic ministry. On the updated page, the system discusses its commitment to follow in the footsteps of its founders to ensure “all people have access to the high-quality, compassionate care they need.”

In removing the word “diversity,” SSM replaced the statement “At SSM Health, diversity is an integral part of who we are and a reflection of our mission and values” with “At SSM Health, inclusion is an integral part of who we are and a reflection of our Mission, Vision and Values.”

”Today, our belief that every person was created in the image of God with inherent dignity and value calls us to foster a healthy culture, inviting each person to be the best version of themselves,” SSM Health communications consultant Shari Wrezinski said when asked for comment.

Wrezinski said the organization’s mission has remained the same, and its communications, policies, programs and practices reflect the organization’s mission.

“This has not and will not change,” Wrezinski said. “As such, our website and other communications materials are continually updated as we strive to clearly convey our commitment to a welcoming environment where everyone feels valued and respected.”

Despite removing the section on diversity, SSM Health has maintained its equal opportunity section.

Froedtert did the opposite, by maintaining its webpages on diversity, equity and inclusion, but removing its equal opportunity policy document from the pages.

The equal opportunity document, which can still be found online but was removed from the DEI website, specifically outlines Froedtert’s commitment and policy to maintain equitable and nondiscriminatory recruitment, hiring and human resources practices.

The document outlines two policies specifically: “FH is committed to its affirmative action policies and practices in employment programs to achieve a balanced workforce” and “FH will provide equal opportunity to all individuals, regardless of their race, creed, color, religion, sex, age, national origin, disability, military and veteran status, sexual orientation, gender identity, marital status or any other characteristics protected by state or federal law.”

Froedtert did not respond to requests for comment.

The Froedtert system serves patients primarily in the Milwaukee area. Froedtert recently merged with ThedaCare, serving Wisconsin residents in the Fox Valley and Green Bay. In 2020, the system reported receiving tens of millions in federal funding through the CARES Act in response to the COVID-19 pandemic.

While removing a link to an equal opportunity document may be a simple change, the Rev. Marilyn Miller, a partner in Leading for Racial Equity LLC, said every small change pushes society further back in achieving full access and equity.

“So it might be a small tweak now, but what does that open the door to later? So, yeah, it’s impactful because any change that’s stepping back from full equity is a problem,” Miller said. “There’s populations that don’t feel any security anymore.”

Aurora Health Care also has removed DEI language in the past couple of months since the executive order.

In 2018, Aurora merged with Advocate Health, a system with more than 26 hospitals throughout the Midwest. Advocate Aurora Health later merged with Atrium Health in 2022, creating the third largest nonprofit in the nation.

Earlier this year, Aurora removed an entire page on diversity, equity and inclusion. The page now redirects to Advocate’s page titled “Access & Opportunity.”

That change cut statements such as: “Our diversity, equity and inclusion strategy is anchored by our purpose to help people live well and to deliver safe, consistent, and equitable health outcomes and experiences for the patients and communities we serve.”

A spokesperson for Aurora Health Care said the organization will continue to “deliver compassionate, high-quality, consistent care for all those we serve.”

“As our newly combined purpose and commitments state, we lift everyone up by ensuring access and opportunity for all,” the spokesperson said. “To provide our patients and communities clear and consistent information that explains our programs, policies and services, we are making various changes to our websites.”

Ascension, one of the largest nonprofit hospital systems in the nation, took down the entire page on diversity, equity and inclusion. The health care system currently operates at over 165 locations in Milwaukee, Racine, Appleton and Fox Valley.  The system still has modules on “Identifying & Addressing Barriers to Health” and “Ensuring Health Equity.” Ascension did not respond to a request for a comment.

Making a statement

UW Health removed its page on diversity, equity and inclusion, replacing it with a page titled “social impact in belonging.” In doing so, UW Health removed “anti-racism” from its entire website. It used to be one of the main themes.

UW Health removed the anti-racism modules titled “Being a leader in anti-racism” and “anti-racism funding,” and now in their place are modules called “Being a social impact leader” and “Community giving.”

Chief Social Impact Officer Shiva Bidar-Sielaff and CEO Alan Kaplan addressed the changes in a video, stating social impact and belonging align with their mission, values and strategies as a health care organization.

“At UW Health, social impact refers to the effects health care policies, practices and interventions have on the well-being of individuals and communities, improving health outcomes, access to care and quality of life,” Bidar-Sielaff said. “Belonging is the understanding that you are valued and respected for who you are as an individual.”

UW Health reported receiving $315 million in federal funding, totaling over half of the $622 million in grant funds — federal and non-federal — awarded to the School of Medicine and Public Health. That total is 37% of all grant funding awarded to UW-Madison.

Despite claims by health care centers that missions remain the same, advocacy groups in Wisconsin are raising concerns regarding the impact these changes could have on communities in Wisconsin.

Chris Allen, president and CEO of Diverse & Resilient — an advocacy group focused on health inequities for LGBTQ+ people in Wisconsin — said these quiet language shifts are significant.

“They send a message that commitments to addressing disparities may be weakening, even if that’s not the stated intention,” Allen said.

William Parke Sutherland, government affairs director at Kids Forward, a statewide policy center that advocates for low-income and minority families, said many health care partners feel pressured to preserve funding sources.

In Wisconsin, maternal mortality rates are 2.5 times higher for Black women than white women. Maternal morbidities — or serious birth complications — were the highest among Black women and people enrolled in BadgerCare, the state’s largest Medicaid program. From 2020 to 2022 there were 7.8 stillbirth deaths per 1,000 births among Black babies, compared with 4.5 among white babies.

Disparities in maternal and infant mortality rates could be attributed to stress caused by poverty, lack of access to quality care, or systemic racism, according to health care researchers. If a mother is stressed over a long period of time, that can cause elevated levels of stress hormones, which could increase premature births or low birth weights for infants.

For Black women, midwives have been found to reduce the disparities they otherwise may experience during pregnancy, reducing the risk of maternal mortality or morbidity. Access to midwives is currently covered by Medicaid, so losing federal funding could harm these services.

Regardless of language, “Wisconsin’s racial disparities in health access and outcomes aren’t going away on their own,” Sutherland said in an email.

Removing language that acknowledges DEI efforts will not reduce the health care disparities felt by Wisconsin residents, Sutherland said. Federal funding cuts could also hurt rural families in Wisconsin, specifically those who rely on Medicaid for their health care needs.

“We cannot begin to address these challenges if we’re not willing to acknowledge them,” Sutherland said. “A colorblind approach has not helped in the past.”

This article first appeared on Wisconsin Watch and is republished here under a Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.

Reading Time: 5 minutes

The U.S. Justice Department has sent letters to election officials in at least two key swing states, threatening action against the states if they don’t comply with provisions of a 2002 federal election law.

Lawyers from the department’s civil rights division sent letters in recent weeks to both Arizona and Wisconsin. The Arizona letter said that state officials are not properly verifying voters’ identities as dictated by the Help America Vote Act, and it warned of a lawsuit. The Wisconsin letter said the Wisconsin Elections Commission is not properly resolving administrative complaints as required by the same law and threatened to withhold federal election funds over that issue.

The Justice Department recently sued North Carolina also, claiming that the state has not been properly verifying voter identity.

The department issued a press release and publicly released the Wisconsin letter, dated June 4; Votebeat obtained the previously unreported Arizona letter, dated May 20, through a records request.

The letters are an early sign of how President Donald Trump’s administration is scrutinizing state election practices after his March executive order on elections, which called for stricter citizenship checks and revised voting machine standards, among other things. The Justice Department has also dropped or withdrawn from several voting rights cases dating from before Trump took office again in January.

Arizona Secretary of State Adrian Fontes, a Democrat, responded in a June 2 letter to the Justice Department that state election officials conduct a complete residency and citizenship check and fully comply with the Help America Vote Act when someone registers to vote. 

“Arizona has a long history of adherence to voter registration requirements, both state and federal,” Fontes wrote.

The Wisconsin Elections Commission declined to immediately comment on the letter that it received, which noted that the commission has declined to adjudicate administrative complaints against itself since at least 2022, due in part to a Wisconsin Supreme Court decision.

The letter said the commission’s actions “justify a bar” on future grants to the state from the U.S. Election Assistance Commission. 

The DOJ appears to be raising a “legitimate” violation in that case, David Becker, the executive director of the Center for Election Innovation and Research and a former attorney in the voting section of the Justice Department, said after reviewing the letter. But he characterized it as minor and stressed that the agency has limited resources to devote to enforcing voting laws.

The DOJ didn’t immediately respond to requests for comment about the letters.

How Wisconsin Elections Commission handles conflict of interest

Under the Help America Vote Act (HAVA), any state receiving money for elections must also establish an administrative process allowing people to file complaints about alleged violations of the law. If the state determines there’s a HAVA violation, it must provide an appropriate remedy, the law says; if not, it can dismiss the complaint.

But in recent years, the WEC has been summarily dismissing HAVA complaints that are about the agency’s own actions. 

In rejecting those complaints, the commission cited a 2022 Wisconsin Supreme Court opinion in which Justice Rebecca Bradley, a conservative, said it would be “nonsensical” for the Wisconsin Elections Commission to adjudicate a complaint against itself. Bradley was joined in her opinion by two other justices, and a fourth justice echoed her in a separate opinion in the case.

Becker said that WEC practice probably doesn’t comply with the federal law, which supersedes state laws, especially for federal elections.

While the election commission said it would be a conflict of interest to adjudicate complaints against itself, Becker said other agencies “do investigations of themselves all the time.”

Because of the WEC’s position, complainants are left “without any recourse,” Assistant U.S. Attorney General Harmeet Dhillon wrote in the letter. The commission’s actions jeopardize future federal funding, she wrote.

But in at least some cases, the agency has told complainants they can appeal a WEC ruling in court, Rob Yablon, a law professor at UW-Madison, pointed out. Yablon also said it’s unclear whether WEC’s position that it can’t resolve the complaints could itself count as a determination that meets the requirements in HAVA. 

Right now, Wisconsin doesn’t stand to lose much in federal funding over the issue. The U.S. Election Assistance Commission allocated about $272,000 in election security grants to Wisconsin in the 2025 fiscal year, money that has yet to come in, according to WEC Chair Ann Jacobs, a Democrat.

“The commission would have to decide to take it. We would have to know the conditions of receiving it,” Jacobs said, adding that she questioned “whether or not the work that would be involved in (administering the grants) would justify the receipt of the money when … it would amount to $147.03 per clerk.”

It would take a majority vote of the commissioners for the WEC to begin adjudicating claims against itself, Jacobs said, but she wouldn’t be in favor of it.

“I think our legal analysis is correct: It’s improper for us to be the adjudicating body on whether or not we did something wrong,” she said. “I think that we can have both statutes, both federal and state law, harmoniously work together. And I think that is, in fact, what’s going on.”

WEC member Don Millis, a Republican, didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment.

Following the DOJ letter, Republicans in charge of the state’s budget committee delayed a planned session to finalize the election commission’s budget, saying they had to review the Justice Department’s allegations first.

Arizona’s ID number checks are at issue

In both the North Carolina lawsuit and the Arizona letter, the DOJ asserted that the states have failed to require applicants’ driver’s license numbers when they register to vote.

North Carolina has since fixed its form to require this information, but it hasn’t contacted every voter who registered through the faulty registration form to provide the missing information. The issue of missing identification numbers was central to the recent challenge to results of the state’s Supreme Court race.

In the letter to Arizona’s secretary of state, Maureen Riordan, senior counsel and acting chief of the voting section of the civil rights division, wrote that HAVA requires the state to request the applicant’s driver’s license number if the applicant has one. If not, a Social Security number is acceptable, she wrote.

The DOJ claims Arizona improperly allows registrants to use either ID number, regardless of whether the applicant has a driver’s license.

The division asked the state to revise the form and retroactively check all applicants who provided only a Social Security number “to identify any non-citizens.”

Fontes in his response explained that since 2005, Arizona has required voters who register to vote in state and local elections to provide evidence of citizenship and has designed its form to meet that requirement as well as HAVA requirements.

When someone applies, an election official completes what the state calls a “HAVA check” using the state’s driver’s license database to check the driver’s license data, as well as to confirm citizenship, he said. 

“Our system and processes ensure that if those individuals have MVD credentials, the number of such credential is included in their voter record,” he wrote.

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

Jen Fifield is a reporter for Votebeat based in Arizona. Contact Fifield at jfifield@votebeat.org.

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

US warns Wisconsin and Arizona over compliance with federal election law 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

A Republican-backed bill would make it easier to go to court to challenge the Wisconsin Elections Commission’s rulings on administrative complaints — a shift that could increase the number of election-related lawsuits.

The proposal, Assembly Bill 268, seeks to reverse a recent Wisconsin Supreme Court ruling that limited who has the right to appeal such rulings. If passed, it would allow more residents to bring election challenges into the court system, rather than leaving accountability solely in the hands of the commission. 

If the bill fails, supporters argue, holding election officials accountable for breaking the law would be difficult or even impossible.

As the law stands now, under the Supreme Court’s interpretation, “unless a person is personally, legally harmed by a WEC decision, the decision is unappealable,” Republican state Sen. Van Wanggaard, the bill author, said at an Assembly elections committee hearing Tuesday.

Complaints to the Wisconsin Elections Commission are frequent

State residents of all political affiliations regularly file complaints with the Wisconsin Elections Commission, which is the legally required first step for most election-related challenges, unless they are brought by district attorneys or the attorney general.

Liberals have filed complaints over concerns about towns that switched to hand-counting ballots and alleged inaccuracies on candidate nomination forms. Conservatives have filed complaints over allegedly being denied poll worker positions. Other complaints have involved allegations that clerks refused to accept ballots at polling places and unproven accusations of ballot tampering.

In one prominent case after the August 2022 election, then-Racine County Republican Chair Kenneth Brown filed an administrative complaint with the commission, accusing Racine of illegally using a mobile voting van for city residents to cast in-person absentee votes. Brown alleged, among other things, that the van was stationed around more Democratic areas of the city, illegally providing an unfair partisan advantage.

The commission rejected Brown’s complaint, finding no probable cause to suspect that the use of the van was illegal. Brown, represented by the conservative legal group Wisconsin Institute for Law & Liberty, appealed. State law allows election officials or complainants “aggrieved” by a commission order to appeal it to circuit court.

Courts disagreed over whether Brown was qualified to sue under that standard. The Wisconsin Supreme Court’s liberal majority ultimately dismissed the case, ruling that Brown had not shown the commission’s decision made it harder for him to vote or harmed him personally.

“Because Brown was not injured by WEC’s decision,” liberal Justice Jill Karofsky wrote in the majority opinion, he “does not have standing to seek judicial review.”

Republicans panned the decision. Liberals were mostly happy with the outcome of the case, but some objected to the court’s legal reasoning on standing and complained that the justices should have addressed the underlying dispute in the case — that is, whether the use of the mobile voting van was legal.

Clerks, meanwhile, largely supported the justices’ interpretation of who has standing to challenge a commission ruling in court. They expressed concern about the Wanggaard bill, which would negate that ruling.

“This concept of legal standing exists because it prevents the courts from becoming overburdened with speculative, ideological or purely political lawsuits,” Green County Clerk Arianna Voegeli, a Democrat, said at the hearing. The bill, Voegeli said, opens the door to politically motivated complaints “aimed at harassing election officials or disrupting election administration.”

Proponents say bill would provide a check on the WEC

Assembly Bill 268 would explicitly allow any complainants to appeal any commission order that doesn’t give them what they’re asking for, “regardless of whether the complainant has suffered an injury to a legally recognized interest.”

Lucas Vebber, deputy counsel of the Wisconsin Institute for Law & Liberty, which registered in favor of the bill, told Votebeat that in voting disputes, courts should decide cases on the underlying legal arguments, rather than focusing on who has the right to sue.

“It’s important that any government actor who’s making decisions (has) some kind of a mechanism in place to review those decisions in every case,” Vebber said.

“Both sides have filed these types of complaints,” he continued, “and I think all of them, regardless of political affiliation, should have their opportunity to have a day in court.”

Courts are already weighing in on an increasing number of voting disputes — including cases on drop boxes, whether voters can spoil their ballots and whether municipalities can forgo accessible voting machines for people with disabilities.

Rock County Clerk Lisa Tollefson said in a statement that the proposal could lead to more harassment and a “surge in litigation” against clerks since anybody in the state could file a complaint against the clerk, whether or not they were harmed, and then continue to pursue the case in court.

Wanggaard, the bill author, said it’s not his goal to put more pressure on clerks. Clerks weren’t getting flooded with cases before the Supreme Court restricted who could sue over commission complaints, he said.

Rep. Scott Krug, the Republican vice chair of the elections committee, said the bill’s language might be overly broad and suggested changes that would draw some limits on who could challenge a commission ruling in court.

For example, he said, lawmakers could clarify that only people who live in the jurisdiction where the alleged violation occurred could appeal a commission ruling.

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.

Clerks worry that Wisconsin bill would mean more election disputes end up in court 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 percentage of Wisconsin schoolchildren not receiving state-mandated vaccinations because of their parents’ personal beliefs is four times higher than it was a generation ago.

That rise in personal conviction waivers has driven a decrease in all immunizations among Wisconsin children ahead of new measles outbreaks hitting the U.S. that are linked to three deaths.

Wisconsin’s measles vaccination rate among kindergartners was the third-lowest in the nation in the 2023-24 school year, behind Idaho and Alaska. (Montana didn’t report data.)

Here’s a look at how we got here.

Vaccine laws in all 50 states

Immunizations are so common that all 50 states have laws requiring them for schoolchildren. Wisconsin was among the first, in 1882.

In the 1950s, the child mortality rate was 4.35%, largely due to childhood diseases. That rate dropped to 0.77% by 2022, according to the nonpartisan Wisconsin Legislative Fiscal Bureau.

“Vaccines have brought about one of the largest improvements in public health in human history, making diseases that once caused widespread illness and many deaths, such as measles, mumps, and rubella, rare in the United States,” the agency reported.

For the 2024-25 school year, Wisconsin required seven immunizations (18 doses) for children to enter school. That included shots for measles (MMR), polio and hepatitis B. COVID-19 and influenza vaccines are not included.

Overall, the vast majority of Wisconsin students, 89.2%, met the minimum immunization requirements in the 2023–24 school year, according to the state’s latest annual report. 

That’s essentially unchanged from the previous two school years. 

But it’s down more than three percentage points from 92.3% in 2017-18.

For highly communicable diseases such as measles, a threshold above 95% is needed to protect most people through “herd immunity.”

More parents refusing to get kids vaccinated

Wisconsin had been a national leader in childhood immunizations. 

But increasingly, Wisconsin parents are opting out:

• For all childhood immunizations, vaccination rates statewide were lower in almost every quarter from 2020 through 2024, in comparison with the average rate in the three years before COVID-19.

• Wisconsin was one of the states with the largest drops in the measles vaccination rate for kindergartners between the 2022-23 and 2023-24 school years, and no county had an MMR vaccination rate above 85%, The Economist reported.

• By a different measure, the measles vaccination rate for 2-year-olds in 2024 was as low as 44% in Vernon County and under 70% in 14 other counties.

On exemptions, Wisconsin differs from most states

All states have exemptions that allow parents not to have their children vaccinated. Medical and religious reasons are the most common. 

In Wisconsin, there’s also a third waiver.

Wisconsin regulations say the Wisconsin Department of Health Services shall provide a waiver for health reasons if a physician certifies that an immunization “is or may be harmful to the health of a student”; or, if the parent of a minor student, or an adult student, submits a signed statement that “declares an objection to immunization on religious or personal conviction grounds.”

That philosophical exemption, based on personal beliefs, exists only in 15 states, including Wisconsin, Michigan and Minnesota.   

“The bottom line is: If you don’t want your child vaccinated, you don’t have to,” said Kia Kjensrud, interim director of Immunize Wisconsin, which supports vaccination organizations.

In 2023-24, 6.1% of Wisconsin students used a waiver. 

That includes 5.2% who had a personal conviction waiver — a rate more than four times higher than the 1.2% in 1997-98.

Waiver use has increased because the number of required vaccines and the legal protections given to vaccine manufacturers have “fueled skepticism about vaccine safety and testing rigor,” Wisconsin United for Freedom said in an email. The De Pere-based group works to protect “rights to medical freedom” and promotes vaccine skepticism. 

Rep. Lisa Subeck, D-Madison, one of the lawmakers who introduced legislation in 2023 to repeal the personal conviction waiver, said she believes some parents have genuine convictions against vaccinations. But “many of the folks who are choosing this exemption are doing it because of misinformation” claiming that vaccines are dangerous, she said.

Groups that registered to lobby in favor of Subeck’s bill included associations of physicians, nurses and local health departments. Wisconsin Family Action, which works to advance Judeo-Christian values, opposed it. The bill did not pass.

Kjensrud also blamed Wisconsin’s declining immunization rates on misinformation. But she said that rather than legislation, her group wants to improve “messaging the safety, efficacy and lifesaving importance of vaccines, and increasing vaccination rates however we can.” 

Bipartisan support for personal exemption

Wisconsin’s modern student immunization law was passed in 1975 with only the medical and religious waivers. In 1980, the Legislature added the personal conviction waiver. 

The waiver was included in a broader amendment proposed by 10 Democratic members and 11 Republican members of the Assembly.

The lead sponsor was the late Richard Flintrop, who represented Oshkosh and was known as a child welfare advocate. He also was a former staff member to maverick Democratic U.S. Sen. William Proxmire.

Wisconsin United For Freedom said the recent measles outbreaks “raise valid concerns,” but that “the focus should be on balanced public health strategies that prioritize sanitation, nutrition, and informed choice alongside vaccination, rather than relying solely on mandates.”

Wisconsin Watch wants to hear your perspective on vaccinations. Do you have questions about measles, its vaccine or how to keep your family safe? Or do you have perspectives to share about prevention efforts in your community?

If so, fill out this brief form. Your submissions will shape the direction of our reporting and will not be shared publicly.

Wisconsin, once a leader in childhood vaccinations, now a leader in vaccine skepticism 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

Wisconsin Republicans are proposing an expansion of early voting, with new requirements for municipalities statewide, but some local officials say the one-size-fits-all mandate wouldn’t make sense for Wisconsin’s smallest communities.

The proposal would require every municipality in Wisconsin, regardless of its size, to offer at least 20 hours of in-person absentee voting at the clerk’s office, or an alternative site, for each election. The bill’s authors say they want to reimburse local governments for the added costs, though they haven’t yet clarified how they would do that. 

Sen. Rachael Cabral-Guevara, a Republican, said she wrote the bill after noticing the stark difference in early voting availability between rural and urban municipalities.

In the Fox Valley cities that used to be part of her district — Appleton, Oshkosh and Neenah — early voting was widely available, she said. But in many of the rural areas that she began serving after the latest redistricting cycle, she said, “nobody has early voting.”

She argues the proposal would provide more flexibility for voters and offer an alternative for those who are uncomfortable voting by mail.

Local election officials generally welcome increased access, but worry about the 20-hour mandate being a burden on smaller communities. 

Acknowledging the pushback, Cabral-Guevara said, “Why should we have hesitation about giving people the opportunity of voting? Why shouldn’t there be equity across the state for rural versus urban?”

In-person absentee voting access varies across Wisconsin

In cities like Madison and Milwaukee, voters have nearly two weeks before an election to cast an in-person absentee ballot. They can vote in one of multiple locations, and at almost any time of the day. 

That isn’t the case in rural Wisconsin.

Some rural municipalities provide just a one- or two-hour window for in-person absentee voting during that two-week period. In others, in-person early voting is done by appointment only at a clerk’s home, which acts as an official office for that purpose. Many have no clear policy at all for in-person absentee voting.

Clerks in smaller towns expressed mixed feelings about the proposed changes.

In Luck, a northwest Wisconsin town with about 900 residents, Patsy Gustafson serves as a part-time clerk, generally working three or four hours per week and arranging in-person early voting by appointment only. This proposal would require her to work over double her normal hours during the early voting period.

“I think I’d be sitting around a lot of that time for nothing, but hopefully it would make more people that wouldn’t otherwise vote come,” she said.

Gustafson said she supports state reimbursement to municipalities — “elections are expensive,” she said — but questions how the state would cover her added costs, especially because she’s salaried. 

Cabral-Guevara said the funding formula is still being finalized.

In Elcho, a town of about 1,200 people in northern Langlade County, the 20-hour requirement would be unnecessary, Clerk Lyn Olenski told Votebeat. 

“I guess I wouldn’t want that,” she said about the proposal. “We don’t have that many people that want to vote early.”

The 20-hour mandate would make even less sense for smaller municipalities, Olenski said.

“If we had 100 people, I sure wouldn’t want to sit in there for 20 hours,” she said.

Cabral-Guevara said she believes behavior could shift as early voting becomes more accessible.

“I believe that there is a duty as a clerk to make sure that there is easy access for people to be able to vote,” Cabral-Guevara said. “And if they’re sitting around, well, then they can find other things to do if they would like.”

That may be wishful thinking in places like the village of Yuba, which has only 43 registered voters. Clerk James Ueeck, who also works full time for the county in another role, said he would have to request time off from his main job to be able to provide 20 hours of early voting. 

Even if every voter in the village cast a ballot early, the total time required wouldn’t come close to 20 hours. And his office would still have to keep polls open on Election Day.

“For us, it makes no sense,” he said. “I would rather just leave it where I can do it by appointment.”

Ueeck added that many clerks in Richland County also work full-time jobs and might resign their clerk positions if the mandate becomes law.

Rep. Scott Krug, a Republican from Rome and co-author of the measure, told Votebeat that he has heard concerns from small-town clerks over the 20-hour requirement. He said he’s open to tweaking the measure — for example, requiring fewer hours in communities with fewer than 250 voters. But he said there must be “access everywhere” to early voting.

Similar versions in Washington County and Connecticut

The Republican proposal mirrors a local initiative in Washington County, where officials have offered to cover the costs for municipalities that voluntarily expand early voting hours.

For the April 2025 election, the county compensated municipalities at 150% of the added cost for extending their early voting hours beyond what they were in the April 2023 election. About 90% of the municipalities in the county participated. Unlike the state proposal, Washington County’s plan had no mandated minimum hours.

Early voting has been taking off across the country, too. At this point, 47 states offer some version of in-person early voting. In Connecticut, which recently passed an early voting initiative, the program requires every municipality to be open between four and 14 days for early voting, depending on the election, regardless of population size. 

In Union, Connecticut — a town of just 800 residents — Clerk Heidi Bradrick said only eight voters showed up during the 14 days of early voting in May.

“I understand their desire to have it,” she said, “but they definitely need to take into account the size of the municipality. We always laugh, like, ‘What if we get everybody to vote the first day? Can we close?’”

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.

Wisconsin election officials seek more flexibility in proposed early voting mandate 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

ROTHSCHILD — Far from the liberal capital, Republicans gathered over the weekend to assess the state of a party in full control of the federal government, but showing signs of continued collapse in Wisconsin.

There were plenty of middle-aged white guys, one towing “Trump” the service dog and one in a Carhartt polo talking about conspiracist Alex Jones. Among the handful of African American attendees was a man sporting a “Black Guns Matter” T-shirt. An Appleton 25-year-old in a suit and tie talked up the need for more young people in leadership. A Dane County woman shared her thoughts on clamping down on illegal immigration and onshoring manufacturing jobs, as another attendee walked past in an American flag dress.

What many of these rank-and-file Republicans shared, as they gathered for the Wisconsin Republican Party’s annual convention, was applause for the sheer speed of President Donald Trump’s actions in office — and a desire for more moves to the right in the 2026 elections.

In purple Wisconsin, that film has played out before, and it didn’t go so well for Republicans. After Trump’s first election in 2016, the party lost control of the governor’s office and the state Supreme Court. April’s Supreme Court victory for Dane County Judge Susan Crawford means liberals will control the court through at least 2028 and could reshape the state’s congressional maps to help Democrats retake Congress in the midterms.

While there was some talk of blaming GOP state chair Brian Schimming for the poor April showing, none of that materialized in Rothschild. Instead, the party talked up the November victory and how to double down on the same Trumpian rhetoric heading into 2026.

Here’s how several of the 500 convention attendees at the Central Wisconsin Convention & Expo Center near Wausau assessed the first four months of Trump’s second term and what they want to see from GOP leaders going forward.

How state Republicans view Trump 2.0

Delegates were animated in their praise of Trump for keeping his campaign promises.

“It gets better every day,” said Rock County delegate Michael Mattus, accompanied by his Belgian service dog. “I’m happy every day. Wake up and thinking, what’s he gonna do today?” 

Adams County GOP chair Pete Church, who was elected chair of the state party’s county chairs at the convention, said he only wishes the U.S. House and Senate picked up the pace.

“It would be great if we could get Congress to actually put some of these things into law,” he said. “None of us really wants to see a government run by executive order, but that’s where we’re at.”

Delegates lauded Trump’s visit last week to the Middle East and his crackdown on illegal immigration.

“I have uncles, I have aunts that came over here illegally. I don’t associate with them,” said Martin Ruiz Gomez, 39, a one-time Milwaukee-based MMA fighter attending his first state GOP convention. “It’s not nothing against them, but they’re not doing things right.” 

The delegates even backed Trump initiatives that have less public support, such as tariffs. The on-again, off-again measures are viewed by some as making international trade fair and encouraging companies to create manufacturing jobs in the U.S., but recent polling has found more than 60% of Americans oppose them and worry they will raise prices. Rising prices was an issue that fueled Trump’s victory in November.

“Well, I was a little nervous about the tariffs when my (retirement savings account) went (down), but he’s doing what he set out to do,” said Calumet County delegate Linda Hoerth.

Portage County delegate Michael Zaremba agreed, saying the tariffs will eventually return more manufacturing jobs to the U.S.

“Just like with a pregnancy, you have to grow it, and then you have to experience the pain,” said Milwaukee County delegate Cindy Werner, who ran for the GOP nomination for lieutenant governor in 2022. “But then there’s joy that comes after that.”

Delegates happy with Trump’s performance were mild with any criticism.

“Trump hasn’t always been a big supporter of the Second Amendment. I mean, he is, but he also isn’t super firm on that,” said 25-year-old Reive Pullen, a gun-rights supporter from Outagamie County. 

Dane County delegate Tya Lichte could have done without Trump’s talk of taking control of Greenland or making Canada the 51st state.

“I understand he always likes to lead big and then heel back,” she said.

What more they want from GOP leaders

Soon, attention will turn to 2026 and the election for governor. Democratic Gov. Tony Evers hasn’t said whether he’ll seek a third term. His 2018 win over Republican Gov. Scott Walker marked the end of eight years of GOP rule in Wisconsin and came as Democrats flipped 41 seats to take back control of the U.S. House.

Hoerth, a board member of the Calumet County GOP, wants the next governor to “get rid of all this DEI (diversity, equity and inclusion)” and push for a state referendum on at what stage of pregnancy abortion should be legal in Wisconsin.

Hoerth likes the background of military veteran and Washington County Executive Josh Schoemann, the only announced Republican candidate for governor, based on Schoemann’s recent visit with her and other Calumet County Republicans.

“He got the entire group wound up looking at their phones, checking some different websites that he was telling us about,” she said. “It was great.” 

Another Republican mentioned as a potential gubernatorial candidate, northern Wisconsin U.S. Rep. Tom Tiffany, sounded like one. He used much of his convention speech to criticize Evers, but not to make any big announcements. 

Lichte, of Dane County, said she wants the next governor to follow Trump’s lead on reshoring jobs and to try to make Milwaukee a technology hub.

Milwaukee County GOP chair Hilario Deleon said reducing crime, taxes and the size of state government are top priorities.

Rock County’s Mattus, who called abortion “pro-murder,” said he became more active because “this world (is) becoming more communist and I’m not for that.” 

In the name of election integrity, Portage County’s Zaremba wants Republicans to get rid of the state Elections Commission and return to hand-counting paper ballots.

Some delegates expressed hope that their party can mend fences with nonprofits such as Turning Point USA in their efforts to elect Republicans. During the recent Supreme Court race there were disputes about how to campaign that went public and exposed rifts among conservatives.

“It’s all right that we don’t always agree, but when we’re taking those arguments to social media for the whole world to see, that’s where I don’t like it,” said Church, the new head of the county chairs. “The only way it can be fixed is through cooperation.”

How die-hard Wisconsin Republicans rate Trump 2.0 and what they want in a governor for 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: 2 minutes

Just six months ago, the Wisconsin Republican Party was flying pretty high. 

Despite an unsuccessful attempt to jettison U.S. Sen. Tammy Baldwin, the GOP held its Wisconsin seats in the U.S. House and its majorities (albeit smaller) in the state Legislature. Donald Trump’s win in the Badger State put him over the top for a second term in the White House. 

Soon after, Brian Schimming was re-elected to a second two-year term as the party’s state chairman.

But, like a sudden drop in cabin pressure, things in politics can change quickly.

There is unrest among some Republicans as they prepare to gather for the state party’s annual convention on Saturday.

The meeting comes some six weeks after a stinging loss in the state Supreme Court election, in which Dane County Judge Susan Crawford defeated GOP-backed Waukesha County Judge Brad Schimel by 10 points, cementing a liberal court majority until at least 2028.

A few vocal critics blamed Schimming, who has promised an ”investigation” into what went wrong. Schimming declined an interview request. 

The party will meet in Rothschild, a village south of Wausau in Marathon County. One of the county’s leading Republicans, state Rep. Brent Jacobson of Mosinee, doesn’t blame Schimming for Schimel’s loss.

“That Supreme Court race was a reaction to Trump’s victory in November,” said Jacobson, who was elected to his first term last fall. “Democrats were super energized, and they simply turned out in far greater numbers than Republicans did.”

Jacobson said he is satisfied with Schimming’s performance and wants his fellow Republicans to turn the page. He credited Schimming with encouraging Republicans to embrace early voting during the November election, which Jacobson called “a difference maker,” and getting Trump to visit Dane County during the campaign.

“In politics, you have to have a short memory about losses,” he said. 

Julia Azari, a political science professor at Marquette University, said Schimming has a difficult job because Wisconsin “has a very unclear relationship with Trump and Trumpism.”

On the one hand, she said, Wisconsin helped Trump to victory in 2016 as well as 2024, but policies such as tariffs in his second term have met with pushback.

Azari also pointed to factors other than Schimming’s leadership for the Supreme Court outcome. She cited the involvement of billionaire Elon Musk in pushing Schimel’s candidacy as more important.

“A lot of it is related to resentment about Musk coming in from on high,” Azari said of Schimel’s loss. “I think Wisconsin voters are resistant to nationalization, and that the nationalization of party politics has had a limited impact here.”

For his part, Jacobson is looking ahead to the governor’s race in 2026, hoping for party unity. 

Democrat Tony Evers has not said whether he will seek a third term; so far one Republican, Washington County Executive Josh Schoemann, is in the race.

Jacobson said he expects more Republican candidates, but hopes not to see a repeat of 2022. He said that year’s GOP primary battle between businessman Tim Michels, who defeated former Lt. Gov. Rebecca Kleefisch for the nomination, left the party hobbled against Evers.

“We can always learn from history and I would hope that we did that from 2022, so that we can not only be united but come out of the primary process with a lot more resources” in 2026, Jacobson said.

Wisconsin Republicans look for a reset at their upcoming state party convention 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

When the clerk of Rock County, Wisconsin, gets a public records request for images of election ballots, much of it is easy to fulfill. For most municipalities in the county, it’s just a matter of uploading a photo of the ballot that’s already captured when it gets tabulated.

But for two of the county’s largest cities — Janesville and Beloit — it’s a lot more complicated, and time-consuming, because of a state law governing places that use a central counting facility for their absentee ballots.

For those ballots, Clerk Lisa Tollefson must redact the unique identifying numbers that the law requires poll workers to write on each one. Otherwise, the number could be used to connect the ballots to the voters who cast them. And because the numbers don’t appear in the same place on each ballot, Tollefson must click through the ballot images one at a time to locate and blot out the number before releasing the images.

To respond to records requests for this year’s April election, she had to redact the numbers from 10,000 ballot images. In November, it was over 23,000.

Given her other job duties, Tollefson says, fulfilling these requests can take months. Without that step, she says, she could fulfill public records requests in “no time at all.”

And it’s all due to a law that she and other clerks in the state say is not only outdated, but also a potential threat to the constitutional right in Wisconsin to ballot secrecy.

Tollefson and other county clerks said they support an ongoing legislative effort to repeal the law requiring election officials to write down those numbers. The proposal has come up in past legislative sessions but hasn’t gone far. It will be revived again this year, said Rep. Scott Krug, a Republican legislative leader and vice chair of the Assembly elections committee.

Number is obsolete and creates security risk, clerks say

The law might have been useful in the past, Tollefson said, when voters who changed their minds or made errors on absentee ballots that had been cast but not yet counted could void their ballot and cast a new one. The ID number allowed election officials at central count facilities to locate the ballot and cancel it before issuing a new one. 

But courts have since blocked voters from spoiling their absentee ballots, rendering the numbers obsolete. Now, if a voter tries to cast an in-person ballot after already voting absentee, the voter would be flagged in the poll books as having voted and would be turned away, Tollefson said.

Moreover, the labeling of ballots could pose a privacy risk at central count locations, where observers and poll workers might be able to match up numbers to deduce how someone voted, Tollefson said. The number written on each ballot corresponds with the voter’s number on the poll list, a public register that election officials use to enter information about voters.

There are rules in place to prevent an observer from connecting a ballot to the voter who cast it, Tollefson said, but she added, “We have laws that people shouldn’t steal, but they still do.”

Marathon County Clerk Kim Trueblood, a Republican, said the increased presence of election observers in recent years exacerbates that risk.

So far, there’s no indication that any observers or poll workers have intentionally used the numbers to link voters to their absentee ballots at central count. But election officials told Votebeat that the law creates an unnecessary risk, to go along with the significant added workload.

After the 2020 presidential election, Milwaukee County was asked to release images of its ballots as part of Donald Trump’s request for a recount in the county. The county had over 265,000 absentee ballots, all marked with identifying numbers that had to be redacted individually, Elections Director Michelle Hawley recalled. 

Given time pressures, the county hired its election vendor, Election Systems & Software, to do the redactions. It cost $27,000, which the Trump campaign covered as part of its recount request.

The county has since looked for ways to streamline the redactions and avoid outsourcing it, Hawley said. But the state law remains “extremely time-consuming,” she said. In addition to complicating records requests, she said, the law slows down absentee ballot processing as election officials at central count must write a number on every ballot.

Repealing little-known practice has had little momentum

Trueblood said the biggest obstacle to repealing the law may be simply that too few people know it exists. She said she has “talked to every” legislator from Marathon County and some were “horrified to learn” about what the law entails. 

“Hopefully the Legislature will do something about it,” she said.

Last session, the proposal to repeal the law had bipartisan support. The Assembly elections committee unanimously approved it after its Republican author, former Rep. Donna Rozar,  encouraged committee members not to discount the bill just because she wrote it with a Democrat. 

But the proposal was never introduced in the Senate and never got a floor vote in the Assembly.

Trueblood hopes the Legislature will act before 2026, when there will be an April Supreme Court election and legislative primaries and a general election later in the year.

If they just “cross off that little line in the state statute,” said Tollefson, “we would be good to go.”

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.

Clerks say an obsolete Wisconsin law creates needless work — and a threat to ballot secrecy 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: 7 minutes

A couple of years ago, Lorraine Beyersdorff was ready to retire from her job as clerk of the town of Texas, Wisconsin, after 34 years of service.

“I will not run again,” she said in a community Facebook post in late 2022. “Nomination papers can be circulated for signatures beginning December 1st. If interested, call me for more information.”

About a dozen people thanked her for a job well done. But no one filed nomination papers. Nobody called. And because of a quirk in Wisconsin law, no one from outside of the 1,600-person town could take the job. 

State law requires all elected town clerks — and the appointees who replace clerks departing mid-term — to live in the town where they serve. 

Beyersdorff, 73, knew there was another option: The town could switch from electing its clerk to appointing one. That would allow officials to consider candidates from outside the town’s borders.

But in small towns such as Texas — those with fewer than 2,500 residents — making that change is slow and cumbersome. It first requires a vote at a town meeting to put the measure on the ballot, then another vote by residents to approve it.

In Beyersdorff’s case, that months-long process stretched into years. She remained on the job until voters finally approved the switch in November. In April, the town appointed a new clerk, whom Beyersdorff is training. The clerk job is part-time — about 20 hours a week, though that varies depending on elections and other town business. 

“I wanted to get out, but I was OK hanging in,” Beyersdorff said. “After so many years, you’re almost scared to not have it. It’s been part of my life for so long, and because you can do it from home, it’s kind of intermingled with cooking and doing laundry and everything else.”

A proposal to make switching easier

Now, Wisconsin lawmakers want to streamline the process for towns like Texas. A bill introduced April 16 with bipartisan support would allow towns under 2,500 people to switch to appointing a clerk with a simple vote at a town meeting — no referendum required.

The proposal would also eliminate another hurdle: Under current law, even if a town approves the switch, it can’t take effect until the end of the current clerk’s term. The bill would let towns make the change immediately if the clerk position is vacant or becomes vacant.

The legislation passed committees unanimously last year but never received a full floor vote. The proposal authors, state Sen. Romaine Robert Quinn, a Republican who represents a northern Wisconsin district, and state Rep. Alex Dallman, a Republican from central Wisconsin, didn’t respond to requests for comment about the proposal. In a public hearing last year, Dallman said the proposal “will allow towns to operate more efficiently.”

Beyersdorff agrees. “You’d have a much quicker way to replace (clerks) and a bigger pool,” she said. “It can happen that somebody dies in the middle of the term, and then how do you replace them?”

Even in less dire situations, she said, appointing clerks can be advantageous because it allows the town to weigh qualifications heavily. In elections, Beyersdorff said, sometimes small communities vote for the people they know best, without caring “if they have any qualifications or even are capable of doing it.”

The multiple hurdles that small towns face under current law make it challenging for them to recruit and train qualified clerks, said Sam Liebert, a former clerk who is now the Wisconsin state director for All Voting is Local. “Giving local communities the flexibility to appoint their clerks is a common-sense solution.”

About one-third of Wisconsin towns now appoint their town clerks, and more are considering the switch, said Joe Ruth, government affairs director and legal counsel for the Wisconsin Towns Association. The role has become increasingly complex, and the longtime clerks who held the position for decades are aging out, he said.

It can be easier for towns to look for already qualified candidates who might live outside their municipal limits, he said, an option only available if the town appoints its clerk. By forgoing the currently required referendum that small towns need to make that change, towns can save the costs of administering that ballot question.

Ruth said that he often fields calls from towns that are desperate for help.

“We often hear the question, ‘We just lost our clerk. What do we do?'” he said. “Or, ‘We lost our clerk last year, we appointed someone to fill that vacancy, and now that person quit, and we can’t find anybody else.’ Those situations are really what have driven us towards these types of changes.”

The bigger challenge that towns face, Ruth said, is when elected clerks quit early in their tenure and no other town residents seek to replace them. Because state law prohibits towns from switching to appointing clerks until the end of the current term, towns can sometimes go one or two years without a clerk — a problem that this proposal would fix, he said. 

More complications in town of Wausau

While Beyersdorff was OK continuing in her job until the town could find a replacement for her, that wasn’t the case 10 minutes away in the town of Wausau.

Late last year, the longtime clerk retired and moved out of town. The town supervisors thought they had the situation under control: They appointed a town resident. That person quit after two weeks. 

Scrambling to find a clerk before the Wisconsin Supreme Court election in April, town supervisors advertised the opening in the town’s newsletter, during a budget meeting and on its website, said Sharon Hunter, a town supervisor.

People were interested in the job, she said, but they were typically working full time or had part-time jobs. “So the concern was the number of evening meetings, all of the responsibilities of the clerk, and especially running the elections,” she said.

Ultimately, nobody stepped up for the April election, so two town supervisors filled in. Hunter said she had been putting in an extra 20 hours of work per week between processing permits, licenses, keeping meeting minutes and preparing agendas, doing paperwork on the annual budget, and filing reports.

The town was lucky to have a chief election inspector — the official in charge of the town’s only polling place — with detailed knowledge, she said, because it would have been time-consuming for her to learn those duties.

In the April election, the town put forth a referendum to switch to appointing clerks, but voters  rejected it by a narrow margin. Hunter attributes the loss to the failure of supporters to explain why it was necessary. The town will try the referendum again in the future, she said.

For now, at least, the town has a clerk. In the April election, voters elected another clerk, who ran unopposed.

“I’m sure she’ll do a wonderful job,” Hunter said. “My concern is stepping in and not realizing all that is involved. Maybe she finds out that this is something she really doesn’t want to do and then she resigns. Well, then we’re in the same situation again, without a clerk for two years.”

Town clerk takes on extra role after nobody else steps up

If you were to stumble across Sam Augustin at her northern Wisconsin house early on a weekday, you would find her sipping a coffee at her table, surrounded by four laptops. 

One is a personal laptop. One is issued by Forest County, where she’s a board member. Another is from the town of Armstrong Creek, where she’s an elected clerk, and the last one from the town of Caswell, where she’s an appointed clerk.

It’s good to have all those laptops open at once, she said, because if she gets a call for help at any of her three public service jobs, she just has to wake up one of her laptops rather than locate it and start it up. It also helps that they’re four different colors, Augustin said.

Work for her didn’t used to be as complicated — or busy. Originally, she held the clerk position only in Caswell, where she lives. After the Armstrong Creek clerk died in late 2020, though, town officials approached her to become the clerk there, too.

“Nobody will step up in the town,” she said. “My grandparents said, ‘If you can help, you will help.’ Did I want to? Not necessarily, but I could not have, in good conscience, said no when I knew I could do it.”

Serving as a clerk in two communities is sometimes the reality in outstate Wisconsin, where about 30% of clerks leave their positions every year and, in Augustin’s view, younger people “don’t want to serve their community” despite more and more older clerks retiring.

It’s even more challenging because of frequent internet outages in rural Wisconsin. In big cities, Augustin said, clerks are used to the internet operating virtually everywhere.

“We have to go, ‘Oh no, the wind’s blowing the wrong way here. That means it’s going to knock out,’” she said.

Augustin said having Starlink, a satellite internet service, ensures she typically has internet.

“Most people don’t have that option up here because it’s not cheap,” she said.

When residents or town officials seek her help, she said, she can receive calls anytime from 7 a.m. until 10 p.m.

“You never know if they’re going to knock on your front door because everybody knows where you live,” she said. “So heaven forbid you don’t answer your phone. If they see your vehicle at your house, they’re going to stop.”

To be able to manage elections in two towns, she said, “you have to make sure you have good chief inspectors in place.”

“I have one town that’s better at it than the other,” she said, “so I tend to spend more time with one town than I do with the other.”

On Election Day in November, Augustin had to drive to the county seat in Crandon, 30 minutes away, to get more paper ballots for each of her towns, which are 11 miles apart. 

On top of that, she has to adjust to rapidly changing election laws, she said.

“You just have to make sure you’re keeping your poll workers trained,” she said. “You have to keep, make sure you’re keeping everybody abreast of everything. And it changes so fast.”

The demands of her job go far beyond just running elections.

In mid-April, she said, she had an accounting meeting at the county at 1 p.m., an annual meeting in Caswell at 5:30 p.m. and then work in Armstrong Creek at 6:30 p.m.

“Two would be my limit,” she said. 

Because towns of different sizes have to follow varying sets of laws, the best-case scenario is for people to be the clerk of two comparably sized towns, she said.

Augustin told Votebeat that she “definitely” supports the proposal. 

It can cost $1,000 or more to hold an election on a referendum to switch to appointing a town clerk, Augustin said, “and small towns don’t have that kind of extra money laying around.”

“The process would be a heck of a lot simpler,” she said, “because it can be delayed by a great deal of time, the way they make you do it.”

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.

Wisconsin towns facing clerk shortages seek an easier way to hire election officials 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

Want to understand the levers of power in Wisconsin? Our statehouse team writes a weekly preview of what’s on the agenda in state politics and why it matters. It’s called Forward. The analysis below is an example of what you can expect in your inbox every Monday if you subscribe here. (Our newsletters are free, like all of our journalism).

Milwaukee County Circuit Court Judge Hannah Dugan was arrested on Friday for allegedly helping a man living in the United States without legal status evade federal immigration authorities. Dugan faces two federal felony counts — obstruction and concealing an individual.

Dugan’s case is similar to a 2019 case brought by federal prosecutors against Massachusetts Judge Shelley M. Richmond Joseph. In that case, Joseph was accused of helping an unauthorized immigrant avoid an Immigration and Customs Enforcement agent after a court appearance.

In both cases, federal officials alleged the state judges allowed the defendants to exit their courtrooms through alternative routes to avoid federal immigration officials waiting outside the courtrooms in publicly accessible areas.

In a criminal complaint filed last week, federal officials alleged that Dugan confronted immigration enforcement officials outside of her courtroom as they waited for a defendant who was scheduled to appear before her finished his court business. Witnesses reported that Dugan “was visibly upset and had a confrontational, angry demeanor,” according to the complaint. Dugan asked to see the warrant the immigration officials were acting upon and then referred them to see the county’s chief judge.

After returning to the courtroom, Dugan then escorted the man and his attorney through a door that leads to a “nonpublic area” of the courthouse, the complaint states.

A similar series of events unfolded in the Massachusetts case. After learning that an ICE agent was waiting to arrest a defendant, Joseph eventually had the man exit the courtroom through a nonpublic exit, federal authorities alleged in a 2019 indictment. A separate court official then helped him exit the building through a back door.

The Massachusetts case was dismissed in 2022. In exchange, Joseph referred herself to the Massachusetts Commission on Judicial Conduct, per The New York Times.

One key difference between the two cases: Joseph was indicted. Dugan was served a criminal complaint. To secure an indictment, prosecutors have to present evidence to a panel of everyday Wisconsin residents and convince them there is probable cause a crime has been committed. For criminal complaints, officials only have to get the sign-off of a federal judge, but then later have to secure an indictment from a grand jury, two former federal prosecutors told Wisconsin Watch.

Now, the federal government has 21 days to seek an indictment, according to Laurie Levenson, a law professor at Loyola Marymount University and a former federal prosecutor. 

“It is unusual that this happened with an arrest and complaint because there really is no indication that the Judge was a flight risk or danger to the community,” she told Wisconsin Watch in an email. “They easily could have gone to the grand jury first and summoned her in IF the grand jury wanted to indict.”

Stephen Kravit, a Milwaukee area attorney and former federal prosecutor, said criminal complaints are rare in the Eastern District of Wisconsin and are usually reserved for “an exigent situation where the defendant’s whereabouts aren’t specifically known or the presence in this area is temporary.”

“None of that applies to a sitting Circuit Court Judge,” he added in an email.

Instead, Kravit said, “this was done in a hurry to make a political point.” He added, “Normally, a person charged even with felonies aged 60+ with no record and no chance of fleeing would be summoned to show up at an appointed time for booking and arraignment. Not here. And that was the point.”

🚘 Budget road trip. The Joint Finance Committee will hold a pair of hearings on Monday and Tuesday this week, stepping away from the Capitol in Madison to hear from Wisconsin residents in Hayward and Wausau about what they want included in the state’s next two-year budget.

It will be the third and fourth time so far that the committee has heard from the public on the spending plan. But as the GOP-controlled committee continues to go through the motions of crafting the budget, Assembly Speaker Robin Vos, R-Rochester, indicated last week that Republican lawmakers could punt on passing a new budget altogether.

Vos was reacting to a Wisconsin Supreme Court decision that left intact a move from Gov. Tony Evers that provided for annual public school funding increases for the next 400 years. “It’s certainly a possibility if we can’t find a way for us to get to a common middle ground,” Vos said of spiking the funding plan last week on the “Jay Weber Show.” “But that’s not the goal.”

“It’s something we’re talking about, but it wouldn’t be the first go-to,” Vos added, noting that it has never happened before. The state has passed a budget every two years since 1931, according to the nonpartisan Legislative Reference Bureau.

But even if the Legislature were to pass on sending a new spending plan to Evers, things in the state wouldn’t shut down. In Wisconsin, the state continues operating at the existing spending levels until a new budget is approved. 

📈 Student homelessness rising. Homelessness among K-12 Wisconsin students reached a new high in 2024, increasing 9% over the previous year despite total enrollment declining slightly.

That’s according to a new report from the Wisconsin Policy Forum, which found that a little more than 20,000 Wisconsin students were homeless in 2023-24. If that figure seems high, it’s because it is. Homelessness among students is counted using a definition that is more expansive than the one employed by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development. The federal McKinney-Vento Act defines homeless children and youth as those “who lack a fixed, regular, and adequate nighttime residence.”

It’s the third straight year that student homelessness increased in Wisconsin, the report found, reaching a new high since the state Department of Public Instruction started keeping data in 2019.

“The number of students affected by homelessness has grown and is likely to continue to remain high in the near future as an insufficient supply of affordable housing remains a lingering problem throughout the state,” the report concludes. “Addressing the needs of this high-risk group of students could benefit not only them but also Wisconsin’s educational outcomes overall.”

Wisconsin Watch’s Hallie Claflin has been documenting the state’s rural homelessness crisis, including in her latest report about police departments transporting homeless people outside their jurisdiction. We’ll be watching the budget process closely to see if lawmakers address this issue or similarly treat it as out of sight, out of mind.

Arrest of Milwaukee judge echoes Massachusetts case — with one key difference 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: 3 minutes

President Donald Trump’s fluctuating tariff policies have kept the world guessing.

Uncertainty about what’s next — and how U.S. companies will absorb new costs —  has stirred anxiety among investors, business owners and consumers. 

“That whipsawing back and forth, that creates a tremendous amount of uncertainty,” said  Steven Deller, a University of Wisconsin-Madison professor who researches the state’s agricultural and manufacturing economy. “And one thing that the economy hates is uncertainty.” 

What does it all mean for Wisconsin? Fast-shifting policies make that difficult to definitely say. But Wisconsin Watch spoke with experts and examined economic numbers to provide some context. 

First, what are tariffs and why is Trump issuing them? 

Tariffs are a federal tax American importers pay when goods arrive from other countries. 

The U.S. previously forged free trade agreements with 20 countries that limited tariffs in trade. Trump’s tariffs have blown up the status quo and prompted retaliation that has harmed some domestic producers and further rattled the global economy. 

The Trump administration has cited several justifications for his policies, some of them conflicting. It says tariffs will boost manufacturing by encouraging Americans to buy domestic goods, reduce U.S. trade deficits and pressure countries to cut deals on other issues — like curbing the fentanyl trade and illegal immigration. 

To what do Trump’s tariffs apply?

First Trump added “national emergency” tariffs ranging from 10% to 25% on imports from China, Canada and Mexico. After adjusting those tariffs several times, he announced on April 2 a baseline 10% tariff on goods from all countries that export to the U.S., along with higher “reciprocal” tariffs on countries with which the U.S. has trade deficits — a move that set the stock market plunging. Trump paused most reciprocal tariffs days later. 

As it stands, most Chinese imports face tariffs of 145%, while Canada and Mexico face 25% tariffs, along with 10% for most everyone else. 

Trump has exempted some goods from reciprocal tariffs, including copper, pharmaceuticals, lumber and electronics such as smartphones and laptops. However, Trump administration investigations of the national security and economic effects of importing items he exempted could result in additional tariffs. The White House has placed a 25% tariff on steel and aluminum imports.

How is this playing in Wisconsin? 

Wisconsin’s large manufacturing and agricultural sectors make its economy strong, said Missy Hughes, secretary and CEO of the Wisconsin Economic Development Corp. But business leaders she works with are increasingly hesitating to make big investments.

“It’s frustrating because our businesses were doing really well, and the Wisconsin economy is strong and has been strong for the last two years,” she said.

How much does Wisconsin import? 

Wisconsin imported more than $38 billion in goods last year, about half from countries facing the highest Trump tariffs: China, Canada and Mexico.

Machinery and electronic products made up about one-third of Wisconsin’s total import value last year. Pharmaceutical products, some of which Trump has since spared from tariffs, made up 12%.

Who bears the cost of tariffs?  

Importers pay tariffs to Customs and Border Protection when goods enter the country. The companies may absorb those costs or pass them to consumers by hiking prices — a common scenario.

Deller calls tariffs a regressive tax because they most affect people with lower income.

“They tend to spend their money more on goods than services,” he said. “They’re more likely to shop at a Walmart or a Dollar General-type store, and a lot of the goods that are sold in those kinds of stores come from international markets.”

How might tariffs affect Wisconsin manufacturers? 

“U.S tariffs might benefit domestic manufacturers if they serve as a negotiating tool to encourage other countries to lower their own tariffs or other barriers to trade,” according to a recent Wisconsin Policy Forum report. “They might also insulate Wisconsin manufacturers from international competition at home.” 

But they can harm Wisconsin producers by raising prices on raw materials or components that they import, such as steel or aluminum, the report added. Additionally, Trump’s tariffs have prompted retaliation that makes U.S. exports more expensive — at the risk of prompting foreign companies to drop Wisconsin suppliers.  

Wisconsin’s top exports are particularly vulnerable to retaliatory tariffs: industrial and electrical machinery, accounting for $10.9 billion or nearly 40% of state exports in 2024, according to the Wisconsin Policy Forum.

A New York Times analysis shows that Wisconsin workers may be among those hit hardest by retaliatory tariffs because affected industries support so many jobs in the state. 

“Economists don’t agree on anything except for tariffs. You put a hundred economists in the room, and you ask them are tariffs a good policy —  and 99 of them are going to tell you, no,” Deller said. “This is bad policy. At least the way that Trump is doing it. Everybody loses.”

DataWatch: Trump’s tariffs and Wisconsin’s economy 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

After two high-profile cases in which candidates were unable to remove their names from the ballot, Wisconsin lawmakers are weighing a change to one of the nation’s strictest withdrawal laws.

Under current Wisconsin law, once candidates qualify for the ballot, they can only be removed if they die. 

The restriction received renewed attention in August 2024, when Robert F. Kennedy Jr., running as an independent, unsuccessfully sought to withdraw from the Wisconsin presidential ballot — a request that ultimately reached the state Supreme Court. 

More recently, in January, Madison Ald. Dina Nina Martinez-Rutherford announced she was dropping out of her reelection race and endorsing her opponent, citing two major life events. Despite her public withdrawal, she remained on the ballot and was reelected in April.

On Tuesday, the Assembly Committee on Campaigns and Elections held a public hearing on the proposal written by Rep. David Steffen, a Republican, to allow candidates for certain statewide, congressional and legislative offices and independent candidates for president and vice president to withdraw from the ballot any time before the Wisconsin Elections Commission certifies candidates’ names. 

Steffen said he’s working on an amendment to address concerns raised by election clerks about how the proposal could disrupt tight ballot production timelines.

Calling the current law outdated, Steffen told lawmakers that candidates deserve a straightforward way to remove themselves from consideration before Election Day.

Clerks raise timeline concerns; Steffen promises amendment

While the bill would not apply to local or off-cycle races like Martinez-Rutherford’s, election clerks say even the limited version could still cause issues. They warned that allowing candidates to withdraw up until the day of certification doesn’t give them enough time to finalize ballots, which are often already in production before that point.

“I have no problem if a candidate wants to remove their name,” Columbia County Clerk Sue Moll, a Republican, said. “I just want to make sure that the timeline is such that we can meet our deadlines.”

Most states provide nominees who wish to drop out of a race some sort of off-ramp. Many states allow nominees to drop off the ballot between 60 and 85 days before an election. Some states require polling places to have notices clarifying candidates’ withdrawal if they drop out after ballots are already printed. 

Wisconsin law used to allow nominees to drop off the ballot if they declined to run, but it changed in 1977 to the current policy — allowing withdrawal only in the event of death.

Under the proposal presented on Tuesday, nominees could drop off the ballot anytime before the election commission certifies candidate names. 

Processing a candidate’s withdrawal on that last day would put clerks on a “really tight” timeline, Moll said.

Even with a head start to prepare ballots, county clerks are scrambling at the last minute to get their ballots programmed, printed and sent to municipal clerks in time for them to send out by the state’s legal deadline, which is 47 days before a federal election, Moll said. 

It would have taken about an extra half-day of work to reprogram everything if Kennedy dropped off the ballot last-minute, she said. It could take more time in counties that rely on vendors to prepare their ballots and program voting equipment, she added.

When a candidate changes his or her mind and drops out, Moll said, “Well, OK, that’s one candidate. What happens if there’s five candidates?”

Rock County Clerk Lisa Tollefson, a Democrat, told Votebeat that clerks would risk going past the deadline for sending out ballots if candidates waited until the last minute to drop out.

If the deadline to withdraw was about a week before the commission certifies candidates’ names, Tollefson said, “we should be OK.”

Steffen, the author of the proposal, said at the Tuesday public hearing that an amendment in the works would do exactly that: Require nominees to withdraw at least seven business days before the Wisconsin Elections Commission meeting to certify nominees. The amendment would require clerks to be notified of a nominee’s withdrawal at least five days before the meeting.

At the hearing, Tollefson said she agrees with the amendment. She told Votebeat that the timelines would still be tight under the amendment, particularly in bigger counties like Milwaukee County and Dane County, but that clerks should be able to get their ballots done in time. 

February and April elections don’t have long enough window

Giving nominees a path to withdraw their candidacy for the February and April elections — like the one Martinez-Rutherford won after trying to exit — would be virtually impossible because those elections are run in such a short time span, clerks told Votebeat.

Clerks only have about a week between the February and April elections to prepare their ballots, get them printed and send them out to municipal clerks, Moll said.

If the amended measure becomes law and plays out well, Steffen said he may introduce a separate proposal that addresses local races. But he also acknowledged the tight timelines that clerks face in February and April elections.

Just after the hearing, at the Eastmorland Community Center in Madison, Martinez-Rutherford, the candidate who won a city council seat in April despite informally dropping out of her race, said that she would remain on the council but that it would be “reasonable” to create a process for candidates to formally drop out.

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.

Dying to get off the ballot? Wisconsin bill offers another way out 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: 2 minutes

The April 1 Wisconsin Supreme Court election was the most expensive U.S. court race in history, drawing more than $100 million in campaign spending. 

That eye-popping figure has drawn plenty of headlines — as did the millions spent by billionaire Elon Musk to support Republican-backed Waukesha County Judge Brad Schimel, who lost handily to Dane County Judge Susan Crawford, backed by Democrats.

But the race also set another record in Wisconsin for a spring election not featuring a presidential primary contest: in voter turnout. 

More than 2.3 million people cast ballots in the election, according to Associated Press tracking. That amounts to nearly 51% of the voting age population, shattering the previous record for such elections of 39% in 2023.

The high turnout is part of a trend in Wisconsin politics since President Donald Trump’s first election in 2016, Marquette University’s John Johnson wrote in an analysis last week.

“Wisconsin’s electorate is just plain extremely engaged,” he wrote. “Scour American history and you’ll struggle to find an example of (a) state as hyper-engaged with, and narrowly divided by, electoral politics as Wisconsin in the present moment.” 

Last week’s election offered good news for Democrats, aside from the top-line figures in Crawford’s 55%-45% win. (The Supreme Court is officially nonpartisan, but Democrats backed Crawford, while Republicans backed Schimel.) 

When comparing the high-turnout 2024 presidential election to the latest Supreme Court race, voting shifted toward the Democratic-backed candidate in all 72 counties.

The biggest difference in the latest election, according to Johnson: “A majority of the million voters who stayed home are probably Republicans, or at least Trump supporters.” 

More broadly, it’s clear that the high stakes of the Supreme Court race drove most to cast ballots in an election that also included an officially nonpartisan contest for state superintendent of public instruction and a successful ballot measure to enshrine voter ID requirements in the Wisconsin Constitution. 

Nearly 200,000 people who cast ballots did not choose a superintendent candidate. Democratic-backed incumbent Jill Underly prevailed over Republican-backed Brittany Kinser by a 53%-47% margin — closer than the Supreme Court race. 

Additionally, about 76,000 voters did not weigh in on the voter ID amendment.

DataWatch: Record spending. Record turnout. We crunched some numbers from the Supreme Court contest 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.