The Wisconsin Elections Commission on Thursday declined to send the state’s unredacted voter rolls to the federal government, joining more than a dozen states pushing back against disclosing sensitive voter information.
The commission’s move comes as the U.S. Department of Justice has asked all 50 states for their voter files — massive lists containing significant personal information on every voter in the country — claiming they are central to its mission of enforcing election law.
“The U.S. DOJ is simply asking the commission to do something that the commission is explicitly forbidden by Wisconsin law to do,” said Don Millis, a Republican appointee on the Wisconsin Elections Commission. “There’s a clear consensus that personally identifiable information is to be protected.”
While pieces of these lists are public, election officials typically redact voters’ Social Security numbers, driver’s license information and dates of birth before issuing them in response to records requests. The DOJ, in many cases, has asked for information not traditionally made public. That was also the case in Wisconsin: The DOJ requested voters’ partial Social Security numbers, license numbers and dates of birth.
The Wisconsin Elections Commission — which is made up of three Democrats and three Republicans — ultimately voted in closed session to send the DOJ a letter declining the request for unredacted voter information. Republican commissioner Bob Spindell appeared to be the only member in favor of cooperating with the federal government and said Wisconsin will likely face a lawsuit as a result of the commission’s choice.
The letter, signed by every commissioner except Spindell, says state law “explicitly prohibits” sending the unredacted voter list.
Officials in both Democratic and Republican states have pushed back on disclosing their voter rolls in response to these requests. On a podcast with conservative talk radio host Joe Pags, Assistant U.S. Attorney General Harmeet Dhillon said these states were refusing to cooperate because they were embarrassed that their voter rolls were not sufficiently cleared of inactive or unlawful registrants.
Rather, many states, like Colorado, have said the federal government isn’t entitled to unredacted voter information that could put voters at risk. The DOJ, they say, has not provided sufficient explanation for how the data will be used.
In early December, after receiving a memorandum of understanding similar to the one sent to Wisconsin, Colorado Secretary of State Jena Griswold told the DOJ to “take a hike,” adding that she “will not help Donald Trump undermine our elections.” The DOJ sued Griswold just over a week later.
All 50 states were asked to turn over their voting rolls, Dhillon said on the podcast: Four states have voluntarily cooperated, 12 are in negotiations, and 14 have been sued by the DOJ over their refusal.
Wisconsin election officials have repeatedly said that federal officials can obtain the publicly available, and therefore redacted, voter roll the same way anybody else can: by purchasing it online for $12,500.
Alexander Shur is a reporter for Votebeat based in Wisconsin. Contact Shur at ashur@votebeat.org.
Voters at the Wilmar Neighborhood Center on Madison's East Side cast their ballots. (Henry Redman | Wisconsin Examiner)
The Wisconsin Elections Commission on Thursday denied a demand from the U.S. Department of Justice for the state’s full voter registration list, including personally identifiable information such as dates of birth, driver’s licenses and Social Security numbers.
At a special meeting Thursday afternoon and in a letter sent in response to the DOJ demand, WEC stated that Wisconsin law explicitly prevents the commission from sharing the personal information of voters.
“The U.S. DOJ is simply asking the commission to do something the commission is explicitly forbidden by Wisconsin law to do,” commissioner Don Millis said.
This is the second time this year the DOJ has requested Wisconsin’s voter database. Both times, the department has been informed that Wisconsin state law requires that the commission charge a fee to obtain the list.
Since the summer, the DOJ has requested the voter databases of several states — raising concerns over why the department is seeking massive amounts of voter data, especially as President Donald Trump has remained fixated on conspiracy theories that his 2020 election loss was rigged.
In its demand for the data, sent Dec. 2 as a “confidential memorandum of understanding” the department said it was seeking the data to check if Wisconsin is properly complying with the National Voter Registration Act and the Help America Vote Act.
“The Justice Department is requesting your state’s [Voter Registration List] to test, analyze, and assess states’ VRLs for proper list maintenance and compliance with federal law,” the memo states.
However the WEC response questions the authority with which DOJ is asserting its right to the records. For one, Wisconsin is exempt from the NVRA because it offers same-day voter registration at polling places. Also, WEC wrote in its response letter that HAVA does not grant the DOJ access to confidential voter data.
Compliance with HAVA and the thoroughness of states’ compliance with voter list maintenance requirements have become regular talking points among Republicans who say they’re concerned that there are thousands of people who have active voter registrations when they should be ineligible to vote because they’ve moved, died or otherwise are unable to cast a ballot.
The sources of those complaints include the Wisconsin Institute for Law & Liberty, a right-wing law firm that in October sent a letter to the DOJ asking for the department to assess Wisconsin’s compliance with HAVA.
WEC has said repeatedly that the commission and Wisconsin’s municipal election clerks are properly maintaining the voter rolls. They’ve also noted that the concerns are often overstated because even if a voter is ineligible and their file is deactivated in the database, their name will still appear in the system.
“The joint effort between state and local election officials enhances the integrity of the system by ensuring responsibilities are distributed across thousands of officials in every city, village, and town, rather than concentrated among a small handful of state employees in the Capitol,” the WEC response letter states. “The vast majority of list maintenance work consists of routine updates, and the processes also serve to identify attempts at wrongdoing. Each year, Wisconsin election officials at all levels of government identify and refer to criminal prosecution: felons attempting to vote, double voters, non-citizens, and others trying to circumvent election law.”
In the WEC decision to deny DOJ’s request as well as to release the DOJ memo and the response letter, Republican commissioner Bob Spindell was the lone vote against. Spindell pointed to a provision of state law that allows WEC to share restricted information in the voter database with law enforcement agencies. Spindell has often used his role on the commission to indulge conspiracy theories and cast doubt on the security of the election system.
“This is a highly, highly controversial issue throughout the country at this point in time, and my point of view is that this information can be released,” Spindell said. “I believe that through the HAVA Act, the federal government has the appropriate ability to see if we’re doing everything that’s correct and OK. I’ve talked forever about we need to have, in the state of Wisconsin, an independent audit, or whatever, of the registration list to satisfy the many individuals and groups and so forth that question it. And all HAVA is doing here, the federal government is asking for a chance to take a look at us.”
But commissioner Mark Thomsen said there is no way that a provision meant to help law enforcement find information about suspects in criminal investigations could be interpreted to mean WEC can give the personal information of every Wisconsin voter to the federal government.
“Our rights as commissioners are limited by the Fourth Amendment, by state law itself,” Thomsen said. “Mr. Spindel is just flat out wrong that this one provision that he relies on would allow us to legally give Wisconsin citizens’ private information off to someone for some unknown reason. It’s not just a person that’s suspected of a crime, it’s everybody, and Wisconsin has never stood for the proposition that any government is entitled to all this data anytime someone asked. So I think Bob, you’re just making up the law there.”
Sign for the Wisconsin Elections Comission. (Wisconsin Examiner photo)
The Wisconsin Elections Commission voted unanimously Monday to modify its order imposing a number of requirements on the Madison city clerk’s office due to the loss of nearly 200 absentee ballots in the 2024 election.
In August, the commission ordered the city to make a number of changes to its election practices in an effort to prevent the loss of future ballots.
The original order requires the city to develop an internal plan delineating which employee is responsible for statutorily required tasks, change the absentee ballot processing system so bags and envelopes aren’t lost, update instructional materials for poll workers and complete a full inspection of all materials before the scheduled board of canvassers meeting after an election.
In a special meeting on Monday, the commission voted 6-0 to approve a request from newly appointed clerk Clerk Lydia McComas to modify a section of the order about the timing of printing and preparing poll books.
Under the original order, Madison is required to print its poll books no earlier than the Tuesday before an election and must arrange to receive those books no later than the Friday before the election.
McComas told the commission in a memo that the city had found a vendor that could print the poll books on the Friday before an election and deliver them by the Sunday before the election. This would allow the final printed poll books to include as many absentee ballots as possible, limiting the number of absentee ballots that are returned after the poll books are printed.
In her memo, McComas wrote that the modification would allow the city to achieve its “shared goal” with the commission of reducing “the chance of human error.”
Wisconsin candidates now have a path to get off the ballot besides dying, thanks to a proposal Gov. Tony Evers signed into law on Friday.
The proposal was triggered by 2024 presidential candidate Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s failed attempt to withdraw from the ballot in a bid to boost President Donald Trump’s candidacy. The case made its way to the Wisconsin Supreme Court, which rejected Kennedy’s argument after a lower court ruled that death was the only way for nominees to drop off the ballot.
Under the measure that Evers, a Democrat, signed into law, candidates can now get off the ballot as long as they file to withdraw at least seven business days before the Wisconsin Elections Commission certifies candidates ahead of the August and November elections and pay processing fees to the Wisconsin Elections Commission. The measure doesn’t apply to the February and April elections.
Many county clerks had opposed an earlier version of the legislation because the originally proposed deadline to drop out would have disrupted tight timelines to prepare, print and send off ballots on time. That deadline would have allowed candidates to get off the ballot any time before the election commission certified candidates’ names.
To address those concerns, Rep. David Steffen, the Republican author of the measure, amended the proposal to require candidates to let the commission know at least seven business days ahead of time. The law also would charge anybody impersonating a candidate to get off the ballot with a felony.
The measure passed the Assembly with a voice vote. It passed the Senate 19-14, with just two Democratic votes in favor.
Steffen called the new law a win for Wisconsin voters, adding in a statement that it will “reduce unnecessary voter confusion.”
Clerks say they can adjust to ballot law
The new law won’t change operations much, said Wood County Clerk Trent Miner, a Republican in a county of about 74,000. Miner’s office programs and prepares the county’s ballots, which he said would make readjusting the ballots easier.
La Crosse County Clerk Ginny Dankmeyer, a Democrat, said a candidate dropping out at the last minute would still lead to extra hours of work since ballots are generally ready to be printed by then. But Dankmeyer added that it’s still doable and won’t stress her out. She said the new deadline is far better than the originally proposed one.
The Wisconsin law prohibiting withdrawal in cases besides death stood out nationwide as unusually strict. The state used to allow nominees to drop off the ballot if they declined to run, but it changed the policy in 1977 to the one that was active until Evers signed the new law last week.
Many other 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.
His lawyers requested that clerks cover up his name on the ballot with stickers, a proposal that clerks said could lead to tabulator jams and disenfranchised voters. Kennedy still received 17,740 votes, or about 0.5% of the vote. Trump won the state by a little less than a percentage point.
The Wisconsin Elections Commission on Friday appealed a Waukesha County judge’s order requiring election officials to verify the citizenship of all registered voters and people seeking to register.
Attorneys for the Wisconsin Department of Justice wrote that the Waukesha County Circuit Court decision was “impermissively vague” and would require election officials to disregard multiple voter registration laws.
The appeal follows a request for a stay, filed last week, in which the attorneys told the court it would be virtually impossible for the election commission to implement Judge Michael Maxwell’s decision by the February statewide election, and that it would illegally have to shut down online voter registration in the meantime.
In response, Maxwell stayed the part of his ruling that required citizenship verification for new registrants, but let stand the part requiring the Wisconsin Elections Commission to verify the citizenship of all currently registered voters.
Maxwell’s ruling did not specify how the commission should go about verifying the citizenship of registered voters: whether it should check them against other databases, confirm that they properly attested under oath to their citizenship when they registered, or demand documentary proof from registered voters, as some other states now require.
The case has further escalated a political debate in Wisconsin over how to ensure that only citizens can vote. Last fall, Wisconsin voters overwhelmingly approved a constitutional amendment to ban voting by noncitizens across the state, and other states enacted similar bans.
Across the country, Republicans have also been pushing for laws requiring documentary proof of citizenship to register to vote, on the grounds that they’re needed to prevent noncitizen voting.
But there’s no evidence of widespread voting by noncitizens, and a Votebeat analysis and other studies have shown that such requirements can disenfranchise eligible U.S. citizens.
Wisconsin has lagged behind other states in seeking such measures through legislation, but the case in Maxwell’s Waukesha County court has sped up bill writing on the issue. Since his early October court ruling, Republicans have introduced a bill requiring an audit of potential noncitizens on the voter rolls, and directing election officials to compare those rolls against state and federal citizenship data, and they have raised the issue in political campaigns.
When Democratic Attorney General Josh Kaul, who’s seeking reelection, filed a motion for a stay on Maxwell’s decision, Republican U.S. Rep. Tom Tiffany — now running for governor — accused Democrats on social media of wanting “illegal aliens voting.”
That talking point has dominated conservative talk radio, while Democrats have stayed mostly quiet outside court filings.
How the state has responded to the lawsuit
The lawsuit in Maxwell’s court, filed last year by a Pewaukee resident represented by conservative attorneys, seeks to require citizenship verification checks of all new registrants and to require the Wisconsin Department of Transportation to provide the Wisconsin Elections Commission with its data on citizenship so that it can compare them against the voter roll.
Maxwell ruled Oct. 3 that the election commission was failing to ensure only lawful voters remained on the rolls, citing statutes limiting voting to citizens. He ordered the agency to check for noncitizens by February, but didn’t specify how, other than suggesting a match with DOT data, as the plaintiffs demand.
The election commission has told the court that there’s no state law requiring documentary proof of citizenship.
Kaul, the attorney general, has argued in court that launching a citizenship verification program before next year’s elections would be unfeasible, and that relying on DOT data that may be inaccurate could wrongly disenfranchise newly naturalized citizens. In the appeal, Justice Department attorneys said Maxwell’s ruling could disenfranchise eligible voters unable to meet Maxwell’s “undefined verification criteria” and lead Wisconsin’s 1,850 clerks to apply inconsistent standards.
Bryna Godar, a staff attorney at the University of Wisconsin Law School’s State Democracy Research Initiative, said Maxwell’s decision conflicts with Wisconsin election law, which calls for requiring proof of certain qualifications to vote, like residence, but not others, including citizenship, competence, or clean criminal record.
Existing laws already deter noncitizens from voting, Godar argued. “Noncitizens who register to vote face criminal liability under state law,” he said, “and if they vote, it also renders them permanently inadmissible under federal immigration law, which means deportation and other immigration consequences.”
Flawed tools for citizenship verification
There’s no standardized method used in states that require or retroactively check for proof of citizenship, but two methods have been recommended for Wisconsin for already registered voters.
The first is to check the voter rolls against citizenship records held by other state agencies, such as driver’s license information, as the plaintiffs in the Waukesha County case have suggested.
But the state Department of Transportation has told the court that its citizenship data can be inaccurate and outdated.The department records applicants’ citizenship status based on their proof of citizenship or legal residence at the time the license is issued. Those cards typically remain valid for eight years, and current state law doesn’t require applicants to update their citizenship status with the department if it changes during that time.
Because many people become U.S. citizens well before their licenses expire, the department’s data can quickly become outdated — a problem that grows as the number of naturalizations spikes ahead of major elections, a Wisconsin Department of Justice official said in a court hearing last October.
Another method that some states use — and that conservative legal groups such as the Wisconsin Institute for Law & Liberty recommend — is to use the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services’ SAVE program. SAVE is a search tool designed for states to check whether their residents qualify for certain public-benefit programs, but the Trump administration has encouraged states to use it for checking voter rolls as well.
But its data can also be incomplete and outdated, according to an analysis by the Brennan Center for Justice, which found it should be “considered useful, but not definitive” for citizenship verification.
Jasleen Singh, counsel for the Brennan Center’s voting rights program, told Votebeat the SAVE database includes only immigrants known to the U.S. government. Undocumented immigrants who haven’t interacted with federal agencies wouldn’t appear, and citizens born before 1978 may also be missing, since the Social Security Administration didn’t collect citizenship data until then.
What citizenship checks in other states have turned up
Louisiana ran its voter rolls through the SAVE program this year as part of an investigation into noncitizen voters. It found 390 potential noncitizens in records going back to the 1980s, including 79 people who voted at least once in that period. That’s a minuscule share of Louisiana’s registered voters.
Democrats say these figures show noncitizen voting is rare enough that it doesn’t need a blunt legislative solution that could disenfranchise anyone. But Republicans argue that even a single illegally cast ballot undermines election integrity.
In Arizona, those who haven’t shown proof of citizenship can vote only in federal elections. About 35,000 people as of last December, or just under 1% of the state’s voters, are on this “federal only” voter roll. A Votebeat analysis found these voters are concentrated on Native land, college campuses, and near the state’s main homeless campus; they tend to be younger, and vote at lower rates.
In Texas, about 1% of the voting-age population lacks proof of citizenship and another 6% would struggle to locate it, according to a University of Maryland study, which found Black, Latino, young, and Republican voters are particularly likely to face those challenges.
The Wisconsin Institute for Law & Liberty has proposed a multistep noncitizen audit — including matching voter rolls against DOT data as well as the SAVE database, checking for discrepancies, and then providing time for flagged voters to provide citizenship proof. Republican state Rep. Scott Krug, a Republican, introduced a proposal this month requiring a noncitizen audit that follows these steps.
Mequon City Clerk Caroline Fuchs already follows a similar process, using the DOT database to check registrants’ citizenship and sending flagged names to a U.S. Department of Homeland Security contact. She said the agent found about a dozen voters incorrectly marked as noncitizens in the DOT database, but none of those identified by DHS disputed the finding.
Fuchs told Votebeat in early October that she was pleased to see the Waukesha County judge’s order, but said she and other clerks weren’t rushing to implement it since they knew it would be appealed.
A Waukesha County judge on Friday ordered the Wisconsin Elections Commission to determine whether any noncitizens are registered to vote and to stop accepting voter registrations without verifying that the applicant is a U.S. citizen.
A Pewaukee resident, represented by conservative attorneys, filed a lawsuit last year seeking to require the election commission to verify citizenship of registered voters and applicants. The suit also sought to force the Wisconsin Department of Transportation to compare its citizenship information against voter rolls.
The election commission opposed the initial request, saying that no state law called for requiring documented proof of citizenship. It also argued that the DOT has no obligation to match citizenship data with voter records.
Waukesha County Circuit Court Judge Michael Maxwell rejected the commission’s argument, saying that the agency is failing in its duty to ensure that only lawful voters make it to the voter rolls. He cited several statutes that he said made clear that only citizens could cast a ballot.
Maxwell didn’t specify how the election commission and local clerks should verify citizenship of new registrants, or how the commission should check for noncitizens on the voter rolls. He only called for the parties to figure out a plan, whether that be through matching the DOT’s citizenship data or using “other lawfully available means.” He called for that process to be substantially completed before the next statewide election, which is February.
Currently, applicants for voter registration in Wisconsin and most other states must attest, under penalty of perjury, that they are U.S. citizens who are eligible to vote, but they are not required to present proof of citizenship.
Republicans praised the decision, with state Rep. Amanda Nedweski calling it a “great win for election integrity.”
Democrats and the respondents in the case were largely mum.
Election commission spokesperson Emilee Miklas didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment. Riley Vetterkind, a spokesperson for the Wisconsin Department of Justice, which represents the commission and the Department of Transportation, declined to say whether the agencies would appeal the decision.
The current plaintiffs, Pewaukee resident Ardis Cerny and Waukesha resident Annette Kuglitsch, sued the election commission, the Department of Transportation and officials in both agencies. They have argued that the election commission is violating their voting rights by not checking for noncitizens already registered to vote and seeking to vote.
Maxwell agreed, saying they “have a clear legal right to not have their votes diluted by a non-citizen casting an unlawful ballot.”
It’s unclear how the commission would verify the citizenship of all of Wisconsin’s registered voters by February. Bryna Godar, a staff attorney at the University of Wisconsin Law School’s State Democracy Research Initiative, said the decision will “definitely be appealed” and that the lower-court decision could be stayed while the appeal goes through the courts.
If the case reaches the Wisconsin Supreme Court, the liberal majority could overturn the order of the conservative-leaning Waukesha County Circuit Court.
Alexander Shur is a reporter for Votebeat based in Wisconsin. Contact Shur at ashur@votebeat.org.
Wisconsin’s controversial practice of randomly removing ballots to resolve discrepancies between the number of ballots and the number of voters would be prohibited under new draft legislation that requires meticulous audits in every county.
The draft proposal, obtained by Votebeat from Republican Rep. Scott Krug, will be formally released this week. Krug said the proposed ban on removing random ballots, known as drawdowns, was inspired largely by a Votebeat investigation highlighting election officials’ reluctance to use the practice and questions about its constitutionality.
“That practice undermines public trust,” Krug said, calling drawdowns “outdated.”
Wisconsin’s law allowing drawdowns is almost as old as the state, and it appears to be used most often in recounts. Other states have had similar laws, but most have repealed them.
Drawdowns occur when records show more ballots cast than the number of voters who cast ballots. These discrepancies usually stem from minor recordkeeping errors or process mistakes.
For example, if poll workers discover an absentee ballot envelope was improperly filled out but had already been separated from its ballot, the ballot still counts, leaving more ballots than valid voters. Because ballots are generally unidentifiable, the law would call for election officials to remove one ballot at random.
Multiple Wisconsin clerks have told Votebeat that they loathe the practice, and national election experts have been flabbergasted that it exists.
A legislative study committee in 2005 questioned the practice’s constitutionality without resolving the issue. Courts have similarly scrutinized its use. The Wisconsin Elections Commission has said a drawdown should be reserved as a last resort “when you cannot explain why you have more ballots than voters.”
Sam Liebert, Wisconsin state director of the group All Voting Is Local and a former clerk, said he once had to conduct a drawdown. He called it “one of the most gut-wrenching things I think I’ve ever done.”
“Every one of those ballots — it’s an American citizen’s hopes and dreams of the candidate or candidates that they want to represent them,” he said.
Although drawdowns are rare and usually limited to recounts, they’ve drawn national attention.
When President Donald Trump tried to overturn the results of the 2020 election in Wisconsin, his team invoked the law to seek a drawdown of 220,000 absentee ballots in Dane and Milwaukee counties, calling the practice “the only legally available remedy” to account for what it alleged were unlawfully cast ballots. The Wisconsin Supreme Court narrowly rejected the effort.
Other states typically require officials to explain discrepancies rather than resolve them by discarding ballots. Krug’s legislation would require exactly that — for election officials to document the discrepancy and record the number and type of excess ballots.
Proposal would require risk-limiting audits
The bill also requires risk-limiting audits, a kind of post-election review designed to give statistical confidence that votes are accurately tallied.
In these audits, workers review a statistically significant sample of ballots that should mirror the vote totals. If the sample doesn’t align with official results within the allowed margin of error, officials review more ballots until it does. The number of selected ballots varies from election to election, depending on how close a race is and how many ballots were cast.
The math behind risk-limiting audits is complex, but election experts and officials have long supported the practice.
Jennifer Morrell, CEO of The Elections Group, a consulting firm, said she has long promoted risk-limiting audits because they can include more ballots than other reviews. They can be laborious in close races but less burdensome in lopsided ones.
Morrell said jurisdictions that have implemented risk-limiting audits have become better at accounting for their ballots and reconciling vote totals, knowing that any issues would become obvious during an audit.
Liebert, from All Voting is Local, called risk-limiting audits “an effective way to ensure a correct count and detect any statistical anomalies,” while boosting voter confidence.
Closer races require larger samples, and in very tight contests, such audits may require a full hand count. Rock County Clerk Lisa Tollefson said that could happen often, as races across the county tend to be quite close.
Krug’s proposal calls for county clerks to perform a risk-limiting audit for the contest garnering the most votes at each general or spring election before they certify the election results. It also calls for an additional audit of a random contest in those elections that the Wisconsin Elections Commission selects.
A pilot program would begin in 2026, with full implementation in 2027.
Alexander Shur is a reporter for Votebeat based in Wisconsin. Contact Shur at ashur@votebeat.org.
The Wisconsin Elections Commission ordered Madison election officials to follow several specific election procedures to ensure that ballots don’t go missing again in the capital city, rejecting arguments by the interim clerk that the orders may exceed the agency’s legal authority.
The commission’s 5-1 vote Friday came a month after it withheld a first set of proposed orders amid pushback from Madison and Dane County officials and asked the city to propose its own remedies. Madison interim Clerk Mike Haas said the specificity of the commission’s original proposed orders “would set a troubling precedent.”
The city did submit its proposals, but the commission rejected them as overly broad and finalized orders that were largely similar to the ones it proposed in July, with some minor revisions, including citations of the legal basis for each order.
The orders require Madison officials to create an internal plan detailing which election task is assigned to which employee; print pollbooks no earlier than the Tuesday before each election; develop a detailed record to track absentee ballots; and search through election materials for missing ballots before the city’s election canvassing board meets to finalize results.
The WEC action responds to lapses by the Madison clerk’s office, then headed by Clerk Maribeth Witzel-Behl, after the November 2024 presidential election, when staffers lost track of 193 ballots and did not report finding them until well past the state deadline for counting. The commission launched its investigation into the matter in January.
Clerk’s cookie baking factored into commissioners’ discussion
During discussions ahead of the vote, Commissioner Don Millis, a Republican, cited Votebeat’s reporting that Witzel-Behl spent a long post-election vacation at home — not on an out-of-state trip, as he had believed — baking thousands of cookies when some lost ballots were discovered. That, he said, factored into his vote for stricter orders.
“She couldn’t be bothered to turn off the oven, to come to the office to figure out if the Ward 65 ballots could be counted,” he said. “The failure to mention that the clerk was readily available to address this issue, along with the fact that none of the city officials we depose felt it was their job to get the ballots counted, makes me even more determined that the Commission must impose the directions in our order.”
Similarly, commission Chair Ann Jacobs, a Democrat, said it was “peculiar” that clerk’s office staff never told commissioners during their monthslong investigation that they rented cars on city time to deliver cookies after the ballot discovery.
Those deposed “were all part of the cookie crew,” she said ahead of her vote. “Why didn’t they tell us about that? Why didn’t the city of Madison ever mention this? Why did nobody bring this up?”
In a memo circulated ahead of the meeting, commission staff said the scope of the error “warrants a detailed order from the Commission correcting (Witzel-Behl’s) office’s policies and procedures, and ensuring those issues are actually fixed before the next statewide election.”
Haas, who was formerly the commission administrator, disagreed with the original proposed orders. He said the commission’s authority “does not extend to requiring the future implementation of specific procedures in excess of those required in the statutes.”
But commission staff pushed back, calling it “unreasonable and absurd” to read state law as barring the commission from ordering specific remedies.
In some cases, the commissioners made the requirements more stringent than what Madison proposed, but more lenient than the commission’s originally proposed orders.
For example, one order the commission initially proposed would have required Madison to print pollbooks no sooner than the Thursday before Election Day, despite state law calling on officials only to have the “most current official registration list.” Haas requested an order more in line with what state law outlines, printing the ballots as close to Election Day as possible.
The final order sets the deadline for printing pollbooks on the Tuesday before Election Day — two days earlier than first proposed — and requires that they be delivered no later than the Friday before the election.
Witzel-Behl’s office printed pollbooks for the two wards that lost ballots on Oct. 23, nearly two weeks before Election Day. The commission said printing that early made it harder for officials to track absentee ballots returned before Election Day and harder for poll workers to see how many ballots went uncounted.
Interim clerk’s objections to the commission’s order
Haas, who took over as interim clerk after Witzel-Behl was suspended in March, told Votebeat on the Tuesday ahead of the meeting that it was “way too early” to think about whether Madison would appeal the commission’s orders in court. In a statement after Friday’s vote, he said he was grateful that the commission altered some orders after the city’s feedback.
“The question is which level of government is best suited and authorized to determine specific procedures that work for the municipality in going above and beyond what the statutes require,” he told Votebeat. “We look forward to working with the Commission to ensure compliance with state law.”
Mark Thomsen, a Democratic commissioner, said he wasn’t comfortable with the agency beating up on Madison over mistakes made under a former clerk when a new permanent clerk hasn’t yet been hired.
At the meeting, Thomsen said he was uncomfortable imposing burdens on a new clerk that “no one else has to follow.”
“This order seems spiteful, and I don’t want to go there,” he said, before casting the lone dissent. Republicans Millis, Bob Spindell and Marge Bostelmann joined Democrats Carrie Riepl and Jacobs in approving the orders.
State law allows the commission to “require any election official to conform his or her conduct to the law, restrain an official from taking any action inconsistent with the law or require an official to correct any action or decision inconsistent with the law.”
Many of the orders, such as assigning specific staff to each election task, are not explicitly mentioned in statute.
Addressing claims that the orders were too detailed, commission staff attorney Angela O’Brien Sharpe said, “If the Legislature intended for the commission to only be able to issue general orders, they would have written a law to say just that.”
In a statement following the vote, Madison Mayor Satya Rhodes-Conway said the city is reorganizing the office to improve efficiency and accountability.
“We appreciate the Wisconsin Elections Commission considering our input and amending its orders to reflect that feedback,” she said. “I hope the WEC’s investigation can help inform best practices for election clerks around the state.”
Alexander Shur is a reporter for Votebeat based in Wisconsin. Contact Shur at ashur@votebeat.org.
Members of the Wisconsin Elections Commission expressed alarm Thursday at how much time former Madison Clerk Maribeth Witzel-Behl spent on vacation while a crisis was erupting in her office: the discovery of 193 missing ballots from the November 2024 election that never got counted.
In its 400-page investigative report, finalized at a meeting by a 5-1 vote, the commission said that Witzel-Behl began her vacation in mid-November, days after the election, “and then had little to do with the supervision of her office until almost a month later.” No staffers took responsibility during the extended absence, the commission chair, Democrat Ann Jacobs, complained before the vote. The missing ballots were not reported to the commission until mid-December.
Records obtained by Votebeat provide some clarity into what Witzel-Behl was doing around the time: baking thousands of cookies and calling on her staff to help deliver them.
Most of that activity began after Dec. 2, when the second batch of uncounted ballots was found.
These records have not been publicly reported and were not included in the investigative report finalized Thursday.
“This is remarkable,” Republican Commissioner Don Millis said when Votebeat showed him some of the findings. “None of the witnesses we deposed disclosed her cookie staycation.”
After approving the report, the commission voted 4-2 to delay action on proposed corrective orders after city and county officials argued that the requirements were overly specific and exceeded state law. The city now has until Aug. 7 to provide a more complete response to the recommendations, and a follow-up meeting has been scheduled for Aug. 15.
Witzel-Behl didn’t respond to a request for comment.
‘Cookie extravaganza’ featuring ‘100 different types’
Emails show that Witzel-Behl took time off for all or part of 17 days between Nov. 11 and Dec. 6 and said, according to an event invite, that part of it was for “devoting a staycation to baking.”
According to the commission, Witzel-Behl knew about the first batch of ballots on Nov. 12. That was well before the cookie event.
The second batch of uncounted ballots was discovered on Dec. 2 by office staff. Witzel-Behl was out of the office that day and for the rest of that week. She told the commission she learned of the second batch of ballots on Dec. 10. “While on vacation, she did not inquire of her staff whether there were absentee ballots in the bag,” the report reads.
On Dec. 10, she sent an email to three staffers, including Deputy Clerk Jim Verbick, saying she’d reserved three cars for cookie deliveries. “Maybe each of you can make at least one cookie delivery to a library,” she wrote.
She also arranged additional deliveries and rented more cars for later the following week, an email sent Dec. 13 shows. “We still have several packages of cookies, so feel free to pick a few agencies for another delivery,” she suggested to 16 staffers across her office and other city departments the same day.
“I had assumed — obviously erroneously — the clerk was vacationing in some faraway place,” Millis told Votebeat, denouncing Witzel-Behl for not personally managing the discovery of the uncounted ballots.
The clerk’s staff didn’t tell the commission about the missing ballots until Dec. 18. By that point, the state had already certified the election and the missing ballots couldn’t have counted.
‘She worked her ass off’ — on the cookies
Jacobs said before the vote that she was surprised by Witzel-Behl’s “complete lack of action” during the relevant time period. Marge Bostelmann, a Republican appointee on the commission and the former longtime Green Lake County clerk, said that even if she had been on vacation in such a situation as a county clerk, she would have remained accessible if urgent questions arose.
Commissioner Bob Spindell, a Republican, was the lone dissenter on the vote to approve the report, saying he didn’t want Witzel-Behl to be “crucified.”
One person close to the Madison Clerk’s Office, who requested anonymity to speak candidly, told Votebeat that the task of making thousands of cookies and arranging deliveries “became all-consuming” for Witzel-Behl. “You could see how she was not focused on getting through reconciliation or whatever.”
“For some people, baking is calming,” that person continued. “It seemed like she needed a break. But then she worked her ass off (on the cookies). It was a huge operation.”
Between early and mid-December, city employees from a variety of departments thanked Witzel-Behl for her cookies. It’s not clear how many cookies she ultimately made.
On Dec. 16, one person in the city’s transportation department sent a clerk’s office staffer an email asking, “Are these cookies for the entire first floor? The entire building? The entire universe?”
Alexander Shur is a reporter for Votebeat based in Wisconsin. Contact Shur at ashur@votebeat.org.
Former Madison Clerk Maribeth Witzel-Behl violated multiple state laws when her office failed to count nearly 200 absentee ballots in the 2024 presidential election, according to a draft report released Wednesday by the Wisconsin Elections Commission.
The commission cited a lack of leadership in the clerk’s office, referring both to Witzel-Behl and the deputy clerk who assumed control during her vacation shortly after the election.
Witzel-Behl, who was put on leave by the city after the error and then resigned, broke state law by failing to supervise absentee ballot handling, neglecting post-election processes, and by not training poll workers to check the bags used to transport ballots, the commission concluded.
“There is no evidence that the City Clerk took any steps to investigate the uncounted ballots once they were brought to her attention,” the commission wrote. “The evidence demonstrates that the City Clerk began her vacation on November 13 and then had little to do with the supervision of her office until almost a month later.”
The draft report follows a months-long investigation into the 193 ballots that went missing on Election Day. The ballots were found over the next several weeks — some of them before final certification of results — but were never counted. Commission Chair Ann Jacobs, a Democrat, jointly led the investigation alongside Republican commissioner and former Chair Don Millis.
For months, Madison election officials have been saying that the ballots that went uncounted were delivered to two polling sites but weren’t unopened. But the commission found no evidence the ballot bags were ever delivered. A chief inspector at one site testified he was confident there was no unopened bag in the supply cart sent to his ward.
The errors have already prompted significant changes in Madison’s election processes. Officials have overhauled ballot tracking procedures, which Madison and Dane County leaders say should prevent a repeat of the 2024 mistake.
Still, the commission emphasized “it is essential that the public understands what has occurred, so that municipalities throughout the state can review their own processes and make certain that they too do not find themselves in this very unfortunate situation.”
The commission’s sharp criticism extended beyond Witzel-Behl, noting that “the staff of the City Clerk’s office failed to take any action regarding those ballots.”
Deputy Clerk Jim Verbick said that his post-election involvement was “minimal” and that he didn’t think it was his job to do anything about the missing ballots, the commission’s findings state.
“However, he did not attempt to speak to the City Clerk about the matter,” the review continues. “There was nobody who took responsibility for these ballots. It was always someone else’s job.”
Madison Interim Clerk Mike Haas said in a statement that the city is reviewing WEC’s report and that he hopes that it can provide lessons that prevent similar errors in the future. He did not respond to a request for further comment.
Former clerk violated laws, gave contradictory statements
The report focused on lapses in training by the clerk’s office. For example, it said, Witzel-Behl stored absentee ballots in green courier bags, but didn’t mention that in poll worker training, and the bags weren’t labeled as carrying absentee ballots. She also failed to train poll workers that absentee ballots could also be stored in red security carts, which the commission said contributed to the ballots going uncounted. That lack of training broke state law, the commission stated.
The commission also found that Witzel-Behl violated a law requiring her to supervise absentee ballot handling. In her deposition, she “could not answer basic questions about absentee ballot handling procedures in her office.”
The commission’s report highlights contradictions between Witzel-Behl’s actions in office and deposition testimony. Although she claimed not to know about the uncounted ballots until December, the commission said she messaged an election worker in late November with instructions on how to handle the first batch of uncounted ballots.
Upon learning of the missing ballots in November, the commission said, Witzel-Behl should have alerted the city attorney, the County Board of Canvassers and the commission and immediately investigated her office’s procedures — but she didn’t.
The commission also alleged she violated laws by printing pollbooks too early, failing to oversee poll workers and inadequately preparing for the city’s review of election results.
Draft findings include several orders for Madison compliance
The report lists draft recommendations that the commissioners will vote on at their July 17 meeting. These include requiring the Madison Clerk’s Office to create a plan detailing which employee oversees which task; printing pollbooks no earlier than the Thursday before each election; clearly labeling and tracking the bags carrying absentee ballots; checking all ballot bags and drop boxes before the city finalizes election results; and explaining how it’s going to comply with each of the orders.
Witzel-Behl’s office printed pollbooks for the two affected wards on Oct. 23 — nearly two weeks before Election Day — despite state guidance to print them as close to the election as possible.
Had they been printed later, absentee voters whose ballots had already been returned would have been marked automatically, alerting poll workers that those ballots were in hand but not yet counted.
But printing pollbooks no earlier than the Thursday before an election could be challenging, said Claire Woodall, who was formerly Milwaukee’s top election official. Cities like Madison and Milwaukee must print tens of thousands of pollbook pages, often using private printers, and distribute them to chief inspectors.
“It seems like you’re rushing a process” with the Thursday requirement, Woodall said. “The last thing you want is for voters to show up at 7 a.m. and discover you don’t have the correct pollbook.”
Alexander Shur is a reporter for Votebeat based in Wisconsin. Contact Shur at ashur@votebeat.org.
Login
