Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

Wisconsin governor trying to shame legislators to stop partisan gerrymandering

Wisconsin Capitol building

The governor created a nonpartisan panel he dubbed "The People's Maps Commission," which will travel the state taking testimony and then come up with "fair, impartial maps."

Coy St. Clair/Getty Images

Wisconsin's Democratic governor has an idea — at once innovative and as old as time — for combating the gerrymandering he expects next year from the Republicans running the Legislature: He hopes to embarrass them to do the right thing.

On Monday he ordered the creation of an independent commission to show how the state's political lines could be drawn to promote political competition and minimize ridiculous contours. Once that work is done, Gov. Tony Evers said, he'll dare the GOP powers in Madison to spurn those nonpartisan maps in favor of their own.

The Republicans were quick to answer that the shaming strategy won't work, because on the pretty safe bet they win continued control in November they'll feel no restraint in drawing boundaries that keep it that way for another 10 years.


Evers had been calling for legislation turning over the next decade's redistricting to a panel of citizens, and leaders of the Republican majorities at the capital had been laughing at the idea.

So, in last week's State of the State speech, he vowed to act on his own by creating a nonpartisan panel he dubbed "The People's Maps Commission," which will travel the state taking testimony and then come up with "fair, impartial maps for the Legislature to take up next year" after the census provides the required data about population shifts.

He signed an executive order fulfilling that promise Monday, decreeing the members will come from all eight of the state's congressional districts and have expertise in redistricting but have no connection to lobbying or partisan politics.

"People should be able to choose their elected officials, not the other way around," Evers said at a news conference in his Capitol office. Of the Republicans, he said: "Certainly I would hope that they see the light and adopt our maps."

GOP leaders were plain in the message that they won't take the bait. "He can form whatever fake, phony, partisan process he wants to create, but I have no doubt in the end we will do it the way we always have, which is to follow the constitution," Assembly Speaker Robin Vos told the Wisconsin State Journal.

State Senate Majority Leader Scott Fitzgerald said he thought the governor's plan would violate the state constitution. Democratic state Attorney General Josh Kaul said the commission would be perfectly legal.

Wisconsin stands as one of the best remaining examples of GOP power-play mapmaking in the country during the 2010s, now that the party's efforts in Pennsylvania and North Carolina have been struck down as violating those state constitutions. After Republicans took total control of state government away from the Democrats a decade ago, they made sure all the new maps were colored assertively in red, by packing as many Democrat as possible into districts in Milwaukee and Madison.

The approach worked as designed in four straight elections – culminating in the 2018 midterm, when Republicans won 63 of the 99 state House seats with just 45 percent of the overall legislative vote and five of the eight U.S. House seats with just 46 percent of the overall congressional vote.

Under current law, congressional and state legislative district boundaries are drawn by the courts if the governor ends up successfully vetoing maps proposed by the Legislature. So the Democrats, with Evers in office until 2022, already have more power than they had last time – and they could have more if the governor persuades the courts to consider the alternative maps his new commission produces.

"When the governor vetoes their maps and they go to court, they'll have to make an argument for why the court should accept their rigged maps," Sachin Chheda, who runs the Fair Elections Project, an advocacy group that promoted the Evers idea. "If the Republicans choose not to use the people's maps, then that will be their choice, but we're all going to know what we're dealing with."

A Marquette University Law School poll a year ago that asked about redistricting showed that 72 percent of Wisconsinites favored giving the job to a nonpartisan commission and just 18 percent wanting the job to remain with the Legislature.


Read More

Trump’s Anti-Latino Racism is a Major Liability for Democracy

Close-up of sign reading 'Immigrants Make America Great' at a Baltimore rally.

Trump’s Anti-Latino Racism is a Major Liability for Democracy

Donald Trump’s second administration has fully clarified Latinos’ racial position in America: our ethnic group’s labor, culture, and aspirations are too much for his supporters to stomach. The Latino presence in America triggers too many uneasy questions (are they White?), too many doubts (are they really American?), and too much resentment (why are they doing better than me?).

Trump’s targeted deportations of undocumented Latinos, unwarranted arrests of Latino citizens, and heightened ICE presence in Latino neighborhoods address these worries by lumping Latinos with Black people. Simply put, we have become yet another visible population that America socially stigmatizes, economically exploits, and politically terrorizes because aggrieved White adults want to preserve their rank as our nation’s premier racial group. The cumulative impacts are serious: just yesterday, an international panel of investigators on human rights and racism, backed by the U.N., found that such actions have resulted in “grave human rights violations.”

Keep ReadingShow less
Just the Facts: The SAVE Act and the Future of Voter ID Rules
A close up of a window with a sticker on it
Photo by Zach Wear on Unsplash

Just the Facts: The SAVE Act and the Future of Voter ID Rules

Last week, I wrote a column in the Fulcrum entitled “Just the Facts: Voter ID, States’ Powers, and Federal Limits.” The facts presented in that writing made it clear that the U.S. Constitution does not require voter ID and left almost all election administration—including voter qualifications—to the states. However, over time, constitutional amendments and federal statutes have restricted states’ ability to impose discriminatory voting rules, but they have never mandated voter ID.

The SAVE America Act

The national debate over voter ID has entered a new phase with the introduction of the SAVE America Act, the most sweeping federal voter‑identification and citizenship‑documentation proposal in modern history. For more than two centuries, voter eligibility rules—ID included—have been primarily a matter of state authority, bounded by constitutional protections against discrimination. The SAVE America Act would shift that balance by imposing federal requirements for both photo identification and documentary proof of citizenship in federal elections.

Keep ReadingShow less
Posters are displayed next to Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) as he speaks at a news conference to unveil the Take It Down Act to protect victims against non-consensual intimate image abuse, on Capitol Hill on June 18, 2024 in Washington, DC.

A lawsuit against xAI over AI-generated deepfakes targeting teenage girls exposes a growing crisis in schools. As laws struggle to keep up, this story explores AI accountability, teen safety, and what educators and parents must do now.

Getty Images, Andrew Harnik

Deepfakes: The New Face of Cyberbullying and Why Parents, Schools, and Lawmakers Must Act

As a former teacher who worked in a high school when Snapchat was born, I witnessed the birth of sexting and its impact on teens. I recall asking a parent whether he was checking his daughter’s phone for inappropriate messages. His response was, “sometimes you just don’t want to know.” But the federal lawsuit filed last week against Elon Musk's xAI has put a national spotlight on AI-generated deepfakes and the teenage girls they target. Parents and teachers can’t ignore the crisis inside our schools.

AI Companies Built the Tool. The Grok Lawsuit Says They Own the Damage.

Whether the theory of French prosecutors–that Elon Musk deliberately allowed the sexualized image controversy to grow so that it would drive up activity on the platform and boost the company’s valuation–is true or not, when a company makes the decision to build a tool and knows that it can be weaponized but chooses to release it anyway, they are making a risk-based decision believing that they can act without consequence. The Grok lawsuit could make these types of business decisions much more costly.

Keep ReadingShow less