Good in theory, bad in practice, worse in process: Why you should vote “no” on two statewide referendum questions to amend the Wisconsin Constitution
Election denier conspiracy theories are fueling these statewide referendum questions. Voters should reject them.
The Recombobulation Area is a ten-time THIRTEEN-TIME Milwaukee Press Club award-winning weekly opinion column and online publication written, edited and published by longtime Milwaukee journalist Dan Shafer. Learn more about it here.
The upcoming Spring Election is not quite like others in recent years in Wisconsin.
Unlike one year ago, there is no statewide race for Wisconsin Supreme Court. There is also not going to be a competitive presidential primary, since Donald Trump has already locked up the Republican nomination. Here in Milwaukee, races for mayor and county executive are mere formalities, with Cavalier Johnson and David Crowley set to cruise to second terms. There are important races up and down the ballot in every county and municipality in the state that are tremendously important
But on every Spring Election ballot across Wisconsin, there are two statewide referendum questions being asked of voters that would amend the state constitution.
Election Day is April 2 and early in-person absentee voting is already underway. So, what exactly are these questions asking, and why are they on the ballot?
The first question regards the “use of private funds in election administration.” Here is the full text of how it will appear on the ballot:
In theory, a question on whether “private funds” should be allowed in election administration should have a simple answer. Devoid of context, it might make the most sense to keep private dollars out of elections. But any look under the hood will show you that this is not a genuine attempt to solve a real problem. What this is instead is an effort to placate the election deniers within the Republican Party who have been whipped into a frenzy by conspiratorial claims of “Zuckerbucks” impacting election results.
People should vote “no” on both of these referendum questions.
Election deniers who did not get their way in the 2020 presidential election should receive no sympathy or special treatment to cater to their pet causes. The “Zuckerbucks” lie, like so many of the others about the 2020 presidential election, has been thoroughly debunked and should not be taken seriously. It certainly should not be the basis for amending the Wisconsin Constitution.
The “Zuckerbucks” nonsense is centered around funds received from the nonprofit organization the Center for Tech and Civic Life (CTCL), funded by Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg and his wife, Dr. Priscilla Chan, to help municipalities run an election during the Covid-19 pandemic. That organization did issue grants, which were used by more than 100 municipalities in 38 of Wisconsin’s 72 counties, with the majority of those funds going to the state’s five biggest cities. But as this WUWM article puts it, “multiple courts and the Wisconsin Elections Commission since found that the funds were legal.” There was nothing illegal or nefarious happening here.
The second question, too, centers around a conspiracy theory having to do with a consultant in the city of Green Bay and their connection to the Center for Tech and Civic Life, but reports have since found that Green Bay handled its 2020 election properly.
Instead of a genuine effort to ensure proper public funding of election administration in Wisconsin, what this is is an attempt by Republicans and their right-wing allies to appease the election deniers that make up such a huge part of the party’s base. Republicans who might be dealing with the consequences of their actions after bending over backwards to appease election deniers for years should perhaps think twice about where continuing to follow this path might lead.
This referendum effort is also yet another attempt from Republicans to avoid having to work with Democrats and do much of anything in a bipartisan fashion. An earnest attempt to curtail the use of public dollars in election administration would be a topic that is very much worthy of debate in the Wisconsin State Legislature. There’s an opportunity to seek actual reform here. But when Republicans passed a bill on this in 2021, they did so with no Democratic votes in either the Assembly or Senate and Gov. Evers vetoed the bill in its entirety.
In this era of divided government in Wisconsin, Tony Evers has vetoed many, many bills. But instead of trying to send the governor a bill he might actually sign, Republicans are choosing to circumvent the legislative process entirely. The state constitution can be amended if state legislators pass a proposed amendment with a majority vote in two successive legislative sessions, and then it is passed by ballot referendum. That is what’s happening here.
So, even if you might agree that “private funds” should not be used for election administration —and that’s a more than valid position, one I might actually agree with in principle— for one, it’s important to note that a) this has not created any actual problems in the real world, and b) this referendum does not provide any actual solutions.
Election administration is consistently underfunded. Keeping up with the needs of modern elections — technology, equipment, accessibility, etc. — requires funding. And Republicans with the power of the purse in the Wisconsin State Legislature tend to underfund needs like this. Just last year, the Republican-controlled Joint Finance Committee cut a funding request from the Wisconsin Elections Commission to add staff. And since Wisconsin’s elections are administered at the municipal level — and Wisconsin has 1,850 municipalities — that could put funding needs for election administration in competition with needs for public safety and other critical services. Local governments have relied upon grants to administer elections without issue for some time, and while it might on the surface sound like solving a problem to ban “private funds” in election administration, this constitutional amendment is a solution in search of a problem.
This idea to ban “private funds” from election administration is better in theory than in practice, and gets there by way of a problematic process that would set a terrible precedent. That is ultimately why these referendum questions to amend the state constitution should be rejected by voters.
Because in practice, this is a plan with no funding and no way to implement changes, brings undue burden and complications to a job that has withstood intense scrutiny over an election that has endlessly proven to be free, fair and secure, and does so by way of bad process to amend the state constitution in this referendum instead of simply passing a bill with bipartisan support.
Perhaps it’s no surprise that so many good government organizations are lining up against these referendum questions.
The League of Women Voters of Wisconsin, Common Cause, American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), Wisconsin Conservation Voters, Wisconsin Democracy Campaign, and All Voting is Local have all voiced opposition to these referendum questions, encouraging people to “vote no.”
"The discussion needs to be about how to properly fund our clerks," said Sam Liebert, Wisconsin state director for All Voting is Local, to The Recombobulation Area. "The legislature should not be in the practice of amending the constitution every time they can’t pass a bill."
Says the League of Women Voters: “These constitutional amendments are rooted in disinformation and a lack of consideration for voters and our hard working local election administrators. Let’s keep conspiracies out of our elections.”
If Wisconsin wants to ban “private funds” from election administration, the solution should not be through the convoluted phrasing of this referendum to amend the state constitution. The solution should be to commit a dedicated funding source to properly fund elections with public dollars and do so by passing a bipartisan bill in the Wisconsin State Legislature, a bill the governor would be able to sign.
We are not going to be able to take real steps to move past the conspiracy theories of the 2020 presidential election if we vote to adopt these conspiracy-fueled amendments in our state constitution. Vote “no” on both questions.
Dan Shafer is a journalist from Milwaukee who writes and publishes The Recombobulation Area. He’s also written for The New York Times, The Daily Beast, Heartland Signal, Belt Magazine, WisPolitics, and Milwaukee Record. He previously worked at Seattle Magazine, Seattle Business Magazine, the Milwaukee Business Journal, Milwaukee Magazine, and BizTimes Milwaukee. He’s won 17 Milwaukee Press Club Excellence in Journalism Awards. He’s on Twitter at @DanRShafer.
Subscribe to The Recombobulation newsletter here and follow us on Facebook and Instagram at @therecombobulationarea.
Already subscribe? Get a gift subscription for a friend!
Part of a group who might want to subscribe together? Get a group subscription for 30% off!
Follow Dan Shafer on Twitter at @DanRShafer.
Thank you for the informative post on the spring 2024 referendums. It was difficult to find information about them. Would you consider posting this type of information farther ahead of the election? Early voters and mail-in voters would need it earlier. Many older people vote by mail and they would find this useful.