Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

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

Connecticut: Democracy, Innovation, and Economic Resilience

The 50: Connecticut

Credit: Hugo Balta

Connecticut: Democracy, Innovation, and Economic Resilience

The 50 is a four-year multimedia project in which the Fulcrum visits different communities across all 50 states to learn what motivated them to vote in the 2024 presidential election and see how the Donald Trump administration is meeting those concerns and hopes.

Hartford, Connecticut, stands as a living testament to American democracy, ingenuity, and resilience. As the state’s capital, it’s home to cultural landmarks like the Mark Twain House & Museum, where Twain penned The Adventures of Tom Sawyer, embodying the spirit of self-governance and creative daring that defines the region.

Keep ReadingShow less
Hand blocking someone speaking

The Third Way has recently released a memo stating that the “stampede away from the Democratic Party” is partly a result of the language and rhetoric it uses.

Westend61/Getty Images

To Protect Democracy, Democrats Should Pay Attention to the Third Way’s List of ‘Offensive’ Words

More than fifty years ago, comedian George Carlin delivered a monologue entitled Seven Words You Can Never Say on Television.” It was a tribute to the legendary Lenny Bruce, whose “nine dirty words” performance led to his arrest and his banning from many places.

His seven words were “p—, f—, c—, c———, m———–, and t—.”

Keep ReadingShow less
Fox News’ Selective Silence: How Trump’s Worst Moments Vanish From Coverage
Why Fox News’ settlement with Dominion Voting Systems is good news for all media outlets
Getty Images

Fox News’ Selective Silence: How Trump’s Worst Moments Vanish From Coverage

Last week, the ultraconservative news outlet, NewsMax, reached a $73 million settlement with the voting machine company, Dominion, in essence, admitting that they lied in their reporting about the use of their voting machines to “rig” or distort the 2020 presidential election. Not exactly shocking news, since five years later, there is no credible evidence to suggest any malfeasance regarding the 2020 election. To viewers of conservative media, such as Fox News, this might have shaken a fully embraced conspiracy theory. Except it didn’t, because those viewers haven’t seen it.

Many people have a hard time understanding why Trump enjoys so much support, given his outrageous statements and damaging public policy pursuits. Part of the answer is due to Fox News’ apparent censoring of stories that might be deemed negative to Trump. During the past five years, I’ve tracked dozens of examples of news stories that cast Donald Trump in a negative light, including statements by Trump himself, which would make a rational person cringe. Yet, Fox News has methodically censored these stories, only conveying rosy news that draws its top ratings.

Keep ReadingShow less
U.S. Flag / artificial intelligence / technology / congress / ai

The age of AI warrants asking if the means still further the ends—specifically, individual liberty and collective prosperity.

Getty Images, Douglas Rissing

Liberty and the General Welfare in the Age of AI

If the means justify the ends, we’d still be operating under the Articles of Confederation. The Founders understood that the means—the governmental structure itself—must always serve the ends of liberty and prosperity. When the means no longer served those ends, they experimented with yet another design for their government—they did expect it to be the last.

The age of AI warrants asking if the means still further the ends—specifically, individual liberty and collective prosperity. Both of those goals were top of mind for early Americans. They demanded the Bill of Rights to protect the former, and they identified the latter—namely, the general welfare—as the animating purpose for the government. Both of those goals are being challenged by constitutional doctrines that do not align with AI development or even undermine it. A full review of those doctrines could fill a book (and perhaps one day it will). For now, however, I’m just going to raise two.

Keep ReadingShow less