United States Politics: ∆τ_i*ε*φ*m_i<0 where ε=4 and φ=0.25

[killamajig]

https://www.npr.org/2025/04/01/nx-s1-5345862/wisconsin-supreme-court-crawford-schimel-election-results

MADISON, Wis. – County judge Susan Crawford has won election to the Wisconsin Supreme Court, according to a race call by the Associated Press.

Crawford defeated Brad Schimel, who received financial support from Elon Musk and an endorsement from President Donald Trump. Her victory means that the nonpartisan court's 4-3 liberal majority will remain in place.

The race was projected to be the most expensive state supreme court election ever by The Brennan Center for Justice, a think tank and democracy advocacy group. Spending by the candidates and their supporters reportedly topped $100 million.

Wis State Supreme Court

Candidate            votes           pct.
Susan Crawford 1,301,128     55.0%  
Brad Schimel     1,063,244     45.0%  (Musk's guy)


Also

State Superintendent of Public Instruction

The other statewide race is for state superintendent. Incumbent Jill Underly was challenged by Brittany Kinser, a former principal and special education teacher. Underly is backed by Democrats and Kinser by Republicans.

And

Voter ID question
All Wisconsin voters had to vote on a proposed constitutional amendment regarding the state's Voter ID law:

Photographic identification for voting. Shall section 1m of article III of the constitution be created to require that voters present valid photographic identification verifying their identity in order to vote in any election, subject to exceptions which may be established by law?

Candidate       votes           pct.
Yes             1,435,487      62.8%
No              851,746          37.2%

Voter ID Background
https://statedemocracy.law.wisc.edu/featured/2025/explainer-the-proposed-voter-id-constitutional-amendment-on-wisconsins-april-ballot/

Spoiler:  (click to show)(click to hide)

In 2011, the Republican-controlled Wisconsin legislature enacted a voter ID requirement that is among the strictest in the country. It requires voters to present an acceptable photo ID in order to vote. Acceptable IDs include a range of state, federal, tribal, and student IDs, such as a Wisconsin driver’s license, U.S. passport, or certain university and college IDs. If a voter does not have an acceptable ID at the polling place, they can vote via provisional ballot but must present an acceptable ID to certain election officials by 4 p.m. on the Friday after election day in order for the vote to count.

The 2011 law faced numerous lawsuits that paused its implementation for several years, but the voter ID requirement ultimately survived legal challenges and has been in effect since 2016. No legal challenges are currently pending, but some Republican legislators have raised concerns about possible attempts to overturn the law now that there is a liberal-leaning majority on the Wisconsin Supreme Court, and they have cited those concerns as the motivation for seeking to constitutionalize the voter ID requirement. The proposed amendment passed the legislature on party lines, with Republicans supporting it and Democrats opposing it, and lawmakers chose to place it on the ballot at the same election that will determine whether the state supreme court retains a liberal-leaning majority.

Impact of Proposed Voter ID Amendment
The proposed amendment would not change the current voter ID requirements that are outlined in state law. Instead, if approved by voters, the amendment would make it more difficult for a court or future legislature to walk back the existing requirements.

First, the amendment would limit options for challenging the current voter ID laws in state court. For example, a claim that the state’s voter ID law violates the Wisconsin Constitution’s protections for the right to vote would be far less likely to succeed if the constitution explicitly says that voters must present a photo ID to cast a ballot. Meanwhile, if the amendment is approved, a court would be far more likely to strike down a statute that says voters do not need to provide photo IDs than one that requires them.

Second, by inserting an express photo ID mandate in the state constitution, the amendment would bar future legislatures from repealing the existing requirement altogether, except through another constitutional amendment. In Wisconsin, a proposed amendment must pass the legislature in two successive legislative sessions and then gain approval by voters to take effect. This is typically a more difficult hurdle than a regular bill, although it bears noting that the governor cannot veto proposed constitutional amendments. So when the legislature and governor’s office are controlled by different parties, as is currently the case, constitutional amendments sometimes become a more feasible path for advancing legislative priorities that the governor opposes.

Under the proposed amendment, the legislature could still make some modifications to the state’s current voter ID requirements through conventional lawmaking. Specifically, the amendment authorizes the legislature to (1) “establish acceptable forms of photographic identification” within the listed parameters, (2) dictate the “time and place” at which an elector who casts a provisional ballot would need to present a photo ID to have their ballot count, and (3) “establish exceptions” to the photo ID requirement. Future legislatures could potentially utilize this “exceptions” provision to soften existing statutory requirements, even if they could not do away with photo ID entirely.

TLDR: 
Republicans placed the question on the ballot in hopes of protecting the law from being overturned by a liberal-controlled state Supreme Court.

Raising the law to the constitution also makes it difficult for Democrats to get rid of voter ID if they eventually gain a majority in the legislature. They'd have to go through the amendment process again to take it back out of the constitution passing the change two sessions in a row, then putting it to voters.


Anecdotal but the Musk thing made a lot of Trump guys uncomfortable when he started throwing money around trying to buy votes. The rural farmers don't like how much power Trump has given him. Even if they agree with his gutting Government they don't like Musk or his DOGE team of "kids" going through their SS/Medicare benifits.