Monthly Archives: December, 2023

California lieutenant governor Eleni Kounalakis urged state secretary Shirley Weber to “explore every legal option” to remove former president Donald Trump from the 2024 primary ballot, claiming “California must stand on the right side of history,” and that “this is a dire matter that puts at stake the sanctity of our constitution and our democracy.”

On Tuesday, the Colorado Supreme Court voted 3-4 to block former President Donald Trump from receiving votes on the 2024 presidential primary ballot, saying he is disqualified because he “engaged in an insurrection,” a reference to his role in the Jan. 6 Capitol protests gone awry.

Noting the list of certified candidates for the 2024 primary must be certified by December 28, the letter from Kounalakis cited the Colorado decision, which she says is “about honoring the rule of law in our country and protecting the fundamental pillars of our democracy,” as the impetus for her call for Weber to act.

The Colorado decision does not take effect until Jan 4., giving the U.S. Supreme Court two weeks to intervene in the case.

The Colorado Supreme Court ruling Tuesday that former President Donald Trump could not appear on the 2024 presidential ballot has launched a wave of backlash with many saying it will help Trump electorally.

“Unprecedented, unAmerican, and illegal election interference,” Rep. Elise Stefanik, R-N.Y., wrote on X, formerly known as Twitter.

A key line of attack on the decision is that it does what Trump’s opponents have always accused him of: Undermines Democracy.

“The Colorado Supreme Court’s decision to disqualify President Trump from the 2024 ballot is an abuse of power and an attempt to silence the voice of millions of voters,” Rep. Diana Harshbarger, R-Tenn., wrote on X.

The Colorado majority opinion admitted that the U.S. Supreme Court could intervene, and as a result postponed the effect of its ruling until Jan. 4, giving the higher court about two weeks. The Colorado secretary of state is require to certify the ballot by Jan. 5.

"We are mindful of the magnitude and weight of the questions now before us,” the court wrote in its majority, adding that the justices are “likewise mindful of our solemn duty to apply the law, without fear or favor, and without being swayed by public reaction to the decisions that the law mandates we reach.

The idea is spreading, with California Lt. Gov. Eleni Kounalakis calling on state secretary Shirley Weber to “explore every legal option” to oust Trump from the 2024 primary ballot.

“The Colorado courts weaponizing the law against Donald Trump should alarm everyone,” Rep. Nancy Mace, R-S.C., wrote on X. “Trump haters are abusing the Constitution and the rule of law to attempt to keep him out of office (again).”

Other critics argued that the effort in Colorado, a state Trump has never won in a general election, will actually boost Trump’s electoral chances.

“One thing is clear: this will help Donald Trump,” said Sen. Mike Lee, R-Utah. “Do these Colorado clowns in black robes not realize that?”

The best evidence for that claim is how Trump’s poll numbers soared after the FBI raided his Mar-a-Lago home in the classified documents indictment. Former Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis seemed to have a real chance of challenging Trump, based on polls at the time, but since the FBI raid Trump’s numbers have soared, leaving his primary challengers with little hope of catching him.

Even some of Trump’s Republican primary competitors came to his defense, including DeSantis and businessman Vivek Ramaswamy, who has said he will withdraw from Colorado and California’s ballot in protest.

Trump himself reacted Tuesday.

“Joe Biden is a threat to Democracy,” Trump said during remarks in Iowa responding to the news. “They are weaponizing law enforcement for high-level election interference because we are beating them so badly in the polls.”

The Colorado state Supreme Court voted 3-4 Tuesday to block former President Donald Trump from receiving votes on the 2024 presidential ballot, saying he is disqualified because he “engaged in an insurrection,” a reference to his role in the Jan. 6 Capitol protests gone awry.

The majority opinion acknowledged the U.S. Supreme Court could weigh in, and as a result postponed the effect of its ruling until Jan. 4, giving the court about two weeks. The Colorado secretary of state has until Jan. 5 to certify the 2024 ballot.

"We are mindful of the magnitude and weight of the questions now before us,” the court wrote in its majority, adding that the justices are “likewise mindful of our solemn duty to apply the law, without fear or favor, and without being swayed by public reaction to the decisions that the law mandates we reach.

“We are also cognizant that we travel in uncharted territory, and that this case presents several issues of first impression,” the opinion added.

The news immediately drew fiery pushback and calls for the U.S. Supreme Court to reverse. The court, though, would be on an unusual expedited process given the immediacy of the certification deadline.

“Joe Biden is a threat to Democracy,” Trump said during remarks in Iowa responding to the news. “They are weaponizing law enforcement for high-level election interference because we are beating them so badly in the polls.”

Even some of Trump’s Republican primary competitors came to his defense, including businessman Vivek Ramaswamy and Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis.

“The Left invokes ‘democracy’ to justify its use of power, even if it means abusing judicial power to remove a candidate from the ballot based on spurious legal grounds,” DeSantis wrote on X, formerly known as Twitter. “SCOTUS should reverse.”

(The Center Square) – Planned Parenthood of Wisconsin is not waiting until the challenges to the state’s 1849 abortion law are settled to resume abortions in Sheboygan County.

Planned Parenthood has begun booking appointments.

“Being able to provide this essential care at another health center is important to the health and well-being of Wisconsin women and people across the gender spectrum who need care,” Tanya Atkinson, president and CEO of Planned Parenthood of Wisconsin said.

Sheboygan is one of three cities in Wisconsin where women could get an abortion pre-Dobbs. Milwaukee and Madison were the others.

Sheboygan is also where the challenge to the recent ruling that Wisconsin’s abortion ban doesn’t really ban abortions is coming from.

District Attorney Joel Urmanski has already promised to challenge the ruling from a Dane County judge who declared that Wisconsin’s near-total ban on abortions doesn’t ban consensual abortions, and only applies to killing babies.

Urmanski has not filed a case against a woman or a doctor seeking an abortion, and Atkinson said she’s confident he won’t be able to make that case.

“We are very confident in our decision to resume services,” she said during a weekend interview on Milwaukee TV.

Planned Parenthood has already resumed abortion services in Milwaukee and Madison. The DAs there went on record months ago, promising not to enforce the state’s abortion ban.

“While we are grateful to be resuming medication abortion care at the Sheboygan Health Center, there is more to be done,” Atkinson said. “We will continue essential work to help protect and expand reproductive freedom in Wisconsin so that everyone who needs comprehensive reproductive health care in our state can get the nonjudgmental and compassionate care they deserve.”

Urmanski has said he will take his challenge to the Dane County judge’s ruling all the way to the Wisconsin Supreme Court.

That’s what almost everyone has expected since Janet Protasiewicz won the race for the high court back in April.

(The Center Square) – Just days after the University of Wisconsin agreed to a deal that some regents said “sold out minority students,” the university is promising a free education for Wisconsin’s native American tribes.

The university said the Wisconsin Tribal Educational Promise will cover the costs for students who are “enrolled members of federally recognized Wisconsin Indian tribes.”

“As a university, we are deeply committed to a future of mutual respect and cooperation with the American Indian tribes in Wisconsin,” UW-Madison Chancellor Jennifer Mnookin said. “This program is another tangible, meaningful step in that direction.”

The offer includes tuition and fees, as well as housing, meals, books and other educational expenses for students who are admitted to the university.

There are about 650 students at UW-Madison who belong to an Indiana tribe, though not all of them are members of a Wisconsin tribe, and not all of them are enrolled members of their tribe. Those students would not be eligible under the new program.

It’s also unclear how many students from Wisconsin’s tribes would be able to get into the Universities of Wisconsin.

The ACT reported that in 2019, 559 American Indian graduates from Wisconsin took the ACT and had an average score of 16.8.

That’s compared to 44,567 white graduates from Wisconsin who took the ACT and had an average score of 23.2.

“The creation of this program marks a significant step in the partnership between the American Indian tribes in Wisconsin and the University of Wisconsin–Madison,” Shannon Holsey, the president of the Stockbridge-Munsee Band of Mohican Indians and chairwoman of the Great Lakes Inter-Tribal Council, said in a statement. “While several other states have programs with similar goals, we are not aware of another effort that goes this far financially to help Native students afford higher education. This program sends a strong message that our students are important to the state’s flagship university.”

Madison’s state Sen. Melissa Agard, D-Madison, cheered the decision.

“It is the right thing to do!” she said on social media.

The Tribal Educational Promise will begin next fall and cover both new students and native students already on campus.

The university says the program will cover four years of expenses for undergrad students. The school says the price tag for that is $115,664. The university says the program will cover two years of tuition for doctorate and masters graduate students. Their books and living expenses will not be covered.

Newly released polling data shows President Joe Biden's approval rating has hit a new low on the eve of 2024, when the president will seek a second term in the White House.

Monmouth University on Monday released the poll, which show's Biden's approval rating has dropped to 34% approval, the lowest rating Monmouth has collected since Biden became president.

The same poll shows Biden has 61% disapproval rating, the highest since Biden took office.

In particular, voters have a problem with the president's handling of five key issues.

"Specifically, just over 2 in 3 disapprove of the president's performance on immigration (69%) and inflation (68%), while more than half feel the same about the way he has handled climate change (54%), jobs and unemployment (53%), and transportation and energy infrastructure (52%)," Monmouth University said.

Other polling shows that inflation in particular, along with jobs and the economy, are the top concerns for voters this election cycle.

Inflation has soared about 20% since Biden took office and wages have failed to keep up.

The poll showed that 44% of Americans "say they are struggling to remain where they are financially."

"Just 31% of the American public says Biden has been giving enough attention to the issues that are most important to their families," the poll said. "The vast majority (65%) wish he would give more attention to those issues."

As expected, Democrats back Biden's job performance on the issues more than Republicans and Independents. However, even Democrats are split on Biden's handling of immigration, which has soared since he took office.

Millions of illegal immigrants have poured across the southern border since Biden took office as overwhelmed border agents are unable to keep up. Hundreds of those migrants are on the terror watch list, according to federal data.

The poll found 47% of Democrats disapprove of the job Biden has done on immigration while 50% approve.

"The Biden administration keeps touting their infrastructure investments and a host of positive economic indicators," Patrick Murray, director of the independent Monmouth University Polling Institute, said in a statement. "Those data points may be factual, but most Americans are still smarting from higher prices caused by post-pandemic inflation. This seems to be what's driving public opinion. There is political danger in pushing a message that basically tells people their take on their own situation is wrong."

(The Center Square) – There is a plan at the Wisconsin Capitol to create a new statewide Office of Violence Prevention.

Rep. Shelia Stubbs, D-Madison, wants to set-up the new office in the state’s Department of Health Services.

“Violence is a public health issue, one that has haunted our communities for years with senseless tragedy. Too frequently, the lives of our neighbors are claimed or permanently altered by a preventable act of violence. In order to create and sustain safe communities where all can grow and thrive, we must stop interpersonal violence at its source,” Stubbs said in a statement.

The Republican-controlled legislature has tried to address the spike in violence in Wisconsin by adding new punishments for reckless driving and some gun charges. Many of those plans, however, have been vetoed by Gov. Evers.

Milwaukee and Madison are both seeing increases in crime, including violent crime. Milwaukee set records for homicides in 2020, 2021 and 2022. Police in Madison say crime stats are down so far this year, but the city’s police chief says many people continue to not feel safe.

There are Offices of Violence Prevention in both the city of Milwaukee and in Dane County. Though Milwaukee is moving its OVP out of the city’s health department in the new year.

“By creating the [statewide] Office of Violence Prevention in the Department of Health Services, we seek to address the myriad of violent crimes claiming and affecting lives in our communities,” Stubbs said. “The office will address the systemic root causes of violence such as gun violence, domestic abuse, and child mistreatment in order to develop proactive solutions to these crimes. It will also issue grants to fund efforts in the community that have been proven to reduce violence. By collaborating with community leaders and organizations that are already working to address these public health and safety issues, we will develop a strong network of support to protect all those who call Wisconsin home.”

Stubbs did not say if she has any support from Republican lawmakers, or even the governor. But she pressed lawmakers to take-up her proposal as quickly as possible.

“We cannot continue addressing violence on an individual case-by-case basis—we must collectively address the root causes of patterns of violence in Wisconsin. We all must work together if we are to envision a Wisconsin free of bloodshed and abuse, as well as to heal from the scars previous violence has inflicted on our communities,” Stubbs added.

(The Center Square) – Children in schools across the country are a step closer to finding chocolate milk in their school lunchrooms.

Northwoods Republican Congressman Tom Tiffany says his chocolate milk protection plan cleared the House.

The plan, which would stop the Biden administration from banning chocolate milk in schools, is part of House Resolution 1147, the Whole Milk for Healthy Kids Act of 2023.

The ban on flavored milk for school children out of a concern for too much sugar was proposed in February. Tiffany said getting rid of chocolate milk would likely lead to fewer youngsters drinking milk.

Tiffany cited the Journal of the American Dietetic Association in saying removing flavored milk from schools would result in a 62% to 63% reduction in milk consumption by kids in kindergarten through fifth grade, and a 50% reduction in sixth through eighth grades.

His chocolate milk protection plan would also protect strawberry milk.

“Some may ask why we are focusing on this issue," Tiffany said. "Unfortunately, it’s because the USDA has its sights on getting rid of chocolate milk in schools. It is now up to us to act.”

The Department of Agriculture said, in its proposed rule, that its public hearings in 2022 showed a growing concern about what chocolate and other flavored milks mean for students in the nation’s schools.

“Some respondents cited concerns about the amount of added sugars in flavored milk, suggesting that USDA address this concern,” the USDA said in its argument for a flavored milk ban. "A few respondents recommended that USDA disallow all flavored milks in the programs; one advocacy organization was concerned that offering flavored milk every day would train a child's palate to prefer sugar-sweetened foods. Another advocacy organization focused on public health suggested that if USDA continues to allow flavored, low-fat milk, it should establish a limit to prevent schools from serving flavored milks that are high in added sugars."

Tiffany said he trusts parents and families more than the USDA or advocacy groups.

“For those of you with young children or grandchildren, go and ask them what they think about USDA’s new rule," Tiffany said. "I think I can speak for most folks when saying that when I was young, chocolate milk was usually the highlight of having lunch at school. But this new rule would mean that the roughly 30 million students who participate in the USDA’s school meal programs would no longer be able to have chocolate milk, or any flavored milk for that matter.”

New Mexico Democratic Congressman Gabe Vasquez is the co-sponsor.

(The Center Square) – The right to work law could be the next issue headed for voters and perhaps the Wisconsin Constitution.

The Institute for Reforming Government is working on a constitutional amendment that would ensure Gov. Tony Evers or the new liberal-majority Supreme Court could not roll back the state’s 2015 law that stopped unions from requiring membership.

“Lawmakers need to enshrine worker freedom in the state constitution,” Chris Reader, executive vice president of the group, told The Center Square. "To not act could allow union bosses to once again force workers to join unions and pay fees and dues against their will if their lawsuit is successful

Wisconsin became the 25th state in the nation to ban mandatory union membership when former Gov. Scott Walker signed the law.

But it has remained unpopular with Democrats and labor unions.

There has been a resurgence in talk about possibly repealing the law after Judge Janet Protasiewicz tipped the state Supreme Court to a 4-3 liberal majority in August.

Reader said nothing has changed about the law or about the argument against the law. He said the only thing that has changed is the makeup of the Wisconsin Supreme Court.

“The state statute has already been ruled constitutional – yet the unions are relying on the same failed legal argument, hoping that the new court majority will rule differently,” Reader said. “We can't go back to a time when union bosses, and politicians they elect, decide worker benefits for public workers. Worker freedom is imperative to keep that from happening.”

The law was the second major change that impacted unions in Wisconsin. It came after Wisconsin’s Act 10, which changed how public sector unions could negotiate their contracts and prevented them from requiring membership.

Since 2011 when Act 10 became law, union membership dropped from 17.8% in 2000 to 7.9% in 2021, according to federal numbers.

Reader said that can’t be blamed all on Act 10 and the right to work law. He said Wisconsin’s economy was transitioning even before the Walker-era reforms.

“When given the choice, workers left the unions that weren't providing value," Reader said. "Even before Act 10 and right to work. Wisconsin has gone from union membership of over 20% in the 1980s and ’90s, to 15% before Act 10 and right to work, and now it's down to 8%. If given a choice, workers want to look out for their own interests, not rely on union bosses.”

In March, Michigan repealed its right to work law through the new majority Democratic legislature.

Republican lawmakers have proposed a series of constitutional amendments that cover everything from requiring a two-thirds majority to raise taxes to a constitutional ban on outside money for elections.

Republican lawmakers say using the constitutional amendments takes their issues directly to voters and avoids a veto or a court challenge.

(The Center Square) – There is not a lot of Republican support for a plan to change how Wisconsin would vote in upcoming elections.

The Senate Committee on Elections heard a plan to introduce ranked choice voting in the state.

“Right now, the parties are incentivized to hold power, and they do that through party primaries,” former Wisconsin Republican Congressman Reid Ribble, said during the hearing. “What final five [voting] does is eliminate partisan primaries.”

The ranked voting plan has support from both Republicans and Democrats at the Wisconsin Capitol.

A score of Republicans criticized the plan after the hearing.

Rep. Rick Gundrum, R-Slinger, said ranked-choice voting makes elections less secure and less transparent.

“It will reduce voter confidence, and threaten accurate ballot counting, Gundrum said.

Rep. Barb Dittrich, R-Oconomowoc, went further.

“Final five or ranked-choice voting has to be one of the most foolish pieces of legislation I've seen introduced this session, and that's saying a lot,” Dittrich said on social media.

She said Wisconsin needs more election transparency, not less.

Ranked choice voting has the top five vote-getters in the primary election move on to the general election, regardless of party. From there, voters would rank the candidates from first choice to last choice. The candidate with the most overall votes, not just first place votes, would win.

Maine and Alaska are currently the only states that use a ranked-choice system. Though a number of counties and cities across the US use it for local elections.

Sen. Duey Stroebel, R-Cedarburg, said ranked-choice voting would be a terrible fit for Wisconsin.

“Not only does it over complicate the process, it completely erodes the principle of ‘one person, one vote,’” Stroebel said.

Stroebel and other Republicans have introduced a constitutional amendment that would ban the use of ranked-choice voting in the state.