Gulf of Mexico Oil Spill Blog Wisconsin JoAnne Kloppenburg

Wisconsin JoAnne Kloppenburg

Wisconsin JoAnne Kloppenburg

With 100% of vote counted, Kloppenburg clings to narrow lead; recount expected

By Patrick Marley, Jason Stein and Lee Bergquist of the Journal Sentinel

Madison — Unofficial results Wednesday showed Assistant Attorney General JoAnne Kloppenburg with a paper-thin lead over Justice David Prosser after a race marked by massive voter turnout, Gov. Scott Walker’s union bargaining plan and record spending by outside interest groups.

As of 2:15 p.m., The Associated Press had tallied results for all of the state’s 3,630 precincts and Kloppenburg had taken a 204-vote lead after Prosser had been ahead most of the night by less than 1,000 votes.

Kloppenburg declared victory based on the AP’s results.

“Wisconsin voters have spoken and I am grateful for, and humbled by, their confidence and trust,” she said in a statement.

Kloppenburg pledged to be an impartial justice and said she would decide cases “based on the fact and the law.”

That last precinct counted was in the Town of Lake Mills, where town officials met just before noon to count the last of the paper ballots.

The Jefferson County clerk’s office reported that Prosser picked up only two votes in the electronic vote in Lake Mills and that 24 handwritten ballots were not yet counted.The town’s board of canvassers began meeting at 11:45 a.m. to count ballots, said Jane Hintzmann, a deputy county clerk.

The meeting was publicly noticed and it was her understanding that members of the public were on site in the Town of Lake Mills watching the vote counting.

Hintzmann said the town did not complete its work Tuesday because the process of counting both write-in ballots and paper ballots was not done properly. She did not provide details on what steps were not followed correctly.

Some paper ballots were used in the town because officials ran out of official ballots.

Jefferson County’s board of canvassers will meet Thursday to certify the vote, Hintzmann said.

Even with the precinct reported, the tally is not final. The Associated Press said that it was rechecking all of the totals in all 72 counties to make sure it has an accurate count in each county. The wire service said it anticipated getting the final numbers later Wednesday.

That close margin had political insiders from both sides talking about the possibility of the first statewide recount in more than two decades. Any recount could be followed by lawsuits – litigation that potentially would be decided by the high court.

Brian Nemoir, Prosser’s campaign director, said Wednesday morning he had been through approximately 10 recounts in his political career, but none involving a statewide race.

“There’s no playbook for this,” he said.

The slim margin in the race was the latest twist in Wisconsin’s ongoing political turmoil. The state has drawn the attention of the nation in recent weeks because of the fight over Walker’s controversial law repealing most collective bargaining by public employees, which caused massive weeks-long protests in the Capitol, a boycott of the Senate by Democrats and attempts to recall senators from both parties.

Interest groups on both sides had portrayed the judicial election as a referendum on Walker and his collective bargaining law. Conservatives backed Prosser, and liberals supported Kloppenburg, even though the candidates themselves insisted they were politically neutral.

Legal challenges to the new law – which would eliminate most collective bargaining for most public employees – are expected to reach the high court, but it’s not clear if the justices would take up the case before this race’s winner is scheduled to be sworn in Aug. 1.

In the contest for a 10-year term, Kloppenburg is trying to accomplish the rare feat of unseating a sitting justice. Michael Gableman defeated then-Justice Louis Butler in 2008, but before that it had been 41 years since an incumbent lost a race for a high court seat. Unlike Butler, who was appointed to the post, Prosser was elected to his current term.

Campaign managers on both sides were cautious in their statements as the lead seesawed back and forth between the candidates throughout Tuesday night and into Wednesday.

Nemoir said Wednesday that with a recount looming in the Supreme Court race between Prosser and challenger JoAnne Kloppenburg, the next step is to make sure “ballot integrity” is protected.

Nemoir said the campaign was beginning the process of checking with vote counters in each of the state’s 72 counties to make sure ballots are protected and not tampered with.

He said the campaign would work to make sure there is a reconciliation between the number of votes the media were reporting and what the counties were reporting. Unofficial election returns suggest there are some precincts in the state, including in Milwaukee County, that have not been tallied.

Nemoir said the next phase after that would be looking at the ramification of a recount.

“I think we’re confident. We have had a record turnout, but it will be a close election,” Nemoir said.

At 1:12 a.m. Wednesday, Kloppenburg came out to meet a cheering crowd at the Edgewater Hotel in downtown Madison.

“It’s not over and we are still hopeful,” she said. “Let’s get a good night’s sleep and see what tomorrow brings.”

At the Seven Seas Restaurant in Hartland, Prosser told a handful of supporters at 1:40 a.m., “There is little doubt there is going to be a recount in this race.”

“I had a rip-roaring victory speech prepared,” Prosser said. “I also had a concession speech.” What he did not have was a speech for an impasse.

Either candidate can request a recount once the votes have been officially canvassed. If the margin between the candidates is less than 0.5%, the state charges nothing to conduct the recount. If the margin is between 0.5% and 2%, the candidate asking for the recount must pay $5 per ward.

With a statewide vote total of nearly 1.5 million in that race, the margin separating the two candidates amounted to just a few hundredths of 1% – easily within the state’s trigger for a recount at no cost.

The cost of a recount for government is steep, likely well over $1 million, with those costs largely borne by counties that have to recount the ballots, said Kevin Kennedy, head of the Government Accountability Board.

Candidates can’t yet formally request a recount from the Accountability Board because county officials haven’t finished putting together their official vote totals, Kennedy said.

The earliest a recount could begin would be next week, he said.

The last time a statewide recount occurred was in 1989 and involved a voter referendum rather than a race between candidates, Kennedy said. The referendum involved a proposed amendment to the state constitution that would have allowed state officials to provide income tax credits on property taxes or sales taxes paid by taxpayers, Kennedy said.

The proposal lost by 650 votes in the first official count and after the recount ended up still losing by the wider margin of 1,098 votes, he said.

“Recounts usually don’t make a difference,” he said.

Here’s how the process would work in the coming days:

By 4 p.m. Wednesday, municipal clerks must deliver all their materials to the offices of county clerks around the state.

By 9 a.m. Thursday, county boards of canvassers have to start meeting and making an official report on ward by ward vote totals. Those reports will be sent to the Accountability Board.

The Accountability Board technically has until May 15 to certify the results, but Kennedy said a recount could begin as soon as Tuesday.

Once official statewide results are in, the losing candidate has three business days to decide whether or not to request a recount.

If a recount is requested, the Accountability Board would issue an order that it start simultaneously in counties around the state. Workers would essentially sort through all the voting materials, double-check that they have the proper number of voters in each area, and recount ballots.

Observers could challenge ballots, which would then be set aside for further review.

In Wisconsin, about 90% of ballots are counted by running a paper document filled out by a voter through an optical scanner, Kennedy said.

Once counties complete their work on a possible recount, the new official totals would be sent to the Accountability Board again.

Because of the closeness of the race, a Milwaukee election commissioner has asked police to guard ballots overnight. Robert Spindell, who sits on the city’s Election Commission and is active in Republican politics, wrote in an email that he had made the request “until such time that a more formal procedure can be set in place.”

After any possible recount, the issue could still go to the courts.

In one twist, state law calls for Chief Justice Shirley Abrahamson to appoint the state judge who would hear the case if the loser of a recount in a statewide election goes to court over the outcome. Abrahamson and Prosser have clashed on the court. Prosser’s private remark calling Abrahamson a “total bitch” was the subject of a recent political ad attacking Prosser.

State law says the trial judge in the case should be a reserve judge if one is available.

Once there is a ruling, it may be appealed to the District IV Court of Appeals based in Madison, a court made up of five members: Margaret Vergeront, Brian Blanchard, Gary Sherman, Paul Higginbotham and Paul Lundsten.

None of the five judges on the appeals court endorsed either candidate. Blanchard and Kloppenburg shared the same campaign manager, Melissa Mulliken.

The statute says the appeals process outlined above is the “exclusive judicial remedy” in the case of a recount dispute. It does not explicitly say whether the finding of the Court of Appeals could then be appealed to the state Supreme Court, on which Prosser sits.

But Kennedy of the Accountability Board says he understands the law to mean that a decision by the Court of Appeals on the state Supreme Court race could in fact be appealed to the state Supreme Court.

“I don’t think there’s any question it can go there after the Court of Appeals,” said Kennedy.

From the start, the campaign has been a proxy war, driven by strong feelings about people who aren’t on the ballot, issues that may come before the court and, above all, control of a court narrowly split between conservatives and liberals.

Much of that debate has been conducted by outside groups supporting one candidate or the other. Prosser and Kloppenburg both said they would rule impartially, although each disputed the other’s ability to do so. And with both candidates accepting public funding and its limits on campaign spending, most television advertising has come from third parties.

The Brennan Center for Justice at the New York University Law School estimates interest groups spent more than $3.5 million on TV ads, breaking the $3.38 million record set in the 2008 Gableman-Butler contest, with four conservative groups backing Prosser spending a total of 37% more than one liberal group backing Kloppenburg.

During the primary, all three of Prosser’s opponents appeared to be running more against Gableman than against Prosser. It was Gableman’s defeat of Butler that swung the court majority from 4-3 liberal to 4-3 conservative, with Prosser frequently – but not always – in the conservative bloc.

Gableman’s victory also was controversial because of a misleading television ad he ran against Butler. The court deadlocked, 3-3, over whether he violated the judicial ethics code, with Gableman abstaining and Prosser siding with conservatives against disciplining him. Prosser’s support of Gableman became a campaign issue.

In the general election, the focus shifted to Walker and his fellow Republicans, who control the Legislature. Anger against the bargaining law mobilized unions and their Democratic and liberal allies. Both sides seized on the nonpartisan court race, with unions urging support for Kloppenburg and conservatives backing Prosser.

As in 2007 and 2008, business groups spent heavily on ads backing the more conservative candidate, in this case Prosser, seeking to ensure rulings favorable to their interests. Kloppenburg was portrayed as soft on crime and overzealous in enforcing environmental laws.

Meanwhile, the liberal Greater Wisconsin Committee ran ads that played up Prosser’s 2010 outburst against Chief Justice Shirley Abrahamson, leader of the liberal bloc – in which he called her a vulgar name and threatened to “destroy” her – and his 1978 decision, as a district attorney, not to prosecute a priest later convicted of sexually abusing children.

Prosser, 68, served two years as Outagamie County district attorney and 18 years as a GOP state representative, rising to Assembly minority leader in 1989 and speaker in 1995. After Prosser lost a 1996 bid for Congress, Republican Gov. Tommy G. Thompson appointed him to the state Tax Appeals Commission in 1997 and to the Supreme Court in 1998.

Kloppenburg, 57, was an intern for Abrahamson while in law school, then a clerk for U.S. District Judge Barbara Crabb. At the state Department of Justice, she spent two years defending the state in civil rights cases, then 20 years as a prosecutor in the department’s environmental unit, which she led from 1993 to 2003.

Just five Wisconsin Supreme Court justices have been unseated by challengers since the court was created in 1852 – Samuel Crawford in 1855; Robert M. Bashford in 1908; James Ward Rector in 1947; George R. Currie in 1967; and Butler in 2008.

Lee Bergquist, Don Walker and John Fauber of the Journal Sentinel staff contributed to this report.

source: With 100% of vote counted, Kloppenburg clings to narrow lead; recount expected  – JSOnline

About these ads
This entry was posted in Gulf of Mexico Oil Spill, Wisconsin and tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s