# Wisconsin GOP tries to forestall special elections **URL:** \ **Category:** Politics & Elections\ **Created:** [March 24, 2018, 3:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wisconsin-gop-tries-to-forestall-special-elections/811118 "2018-03-24T15:37:35Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 5
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [March 28, 2018, 1:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wisconsin-gop-tries-to-forestall-special-elections/811118/81 "2018-03-28T01:47:57Z")
Are you actually claiming McConnell acted properly? That isn’t even in the GOP’s own dogma. ---
**Author:** ![Lance\_Turbo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lance_turbo/32/6156_2.png) [@Lance\_Turbo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lance_Turbo)\ **Post date:** [March 28, 2018, 1:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wisconsin-gop-tries-to-forestall-special-elections/811118/82 "2018-03-28T01:51:50Z")
There’s lot’s of threads for discussion of McConnell’s abrogation of responsibility. This thread is about Scott Walker’s abrogation of responsibility. I can see why you’d want to change the subject. In both cases you have to ignore common sense to make the argument, but in the Walker case you have to ignore two court orders from two separate judges on top of that. “I should give the benefit of the doubt to the governor who failed to do his duty and caused the confusion?” - Judge Richard Niess responding to the argument that calling a special election would cause confusion. ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [March 28, 2018, 1:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wisconsin-gop-tries-to-forestall-special-elections/811118/83 "2018-03-28T01:51:58Z")
Nm ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [March 28, 2018, 2:02am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wisconsin-gop-tries-to-forestall-special-elections/811118/84 "2018-03-28T02:02:20Z")
> [@doorhinge](#): > > Elections have consequences. - > Barack Obama No, they don’t. - Merrick Garland Yes, and that’s why we can’t risk having them. - Scott Walker ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [March 28, 2018, 3:31am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wisconsin-gop-tries-to-forestall-special-elections/811118/85 "2018-03-28T03:31:59Z")
> [@Stranger\_On\_A\_Train](#): > > …Also, wolves and sheep will breed and produce hybrid offspring known as “wheeps” and “sweeps”… In America, lamb chops _you_! ---
**Author:** ![Johnny\_Ace](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/6bbea6/32.png) [@Johnny\_Ace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Johnny_Ace)\ **Post date:** [March 28, 2018, 6:35am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wisconsin-gop-tries-to-forestall-special-elections/811118/86 "2018-03-28T06:35:06Z")
> [@doorhinge](#): > > If you don’t like it, elect somebody else. That’s the way the system was designed to work. If you can’t elect your someone else, you have the option of demanding that the elected official govern like the candidate that you didn’t manage to get elected. Of course, the majority of voters probably wouldn’t approve of the actual winner of the election governing like the loser of the election would have. > > Elections have consequences. - > Barack Obama Conservativespeak for “We got what we wanted. Fuck off.” ---
**Author:** ![BobLibDem](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/boblibdem/32/3149_2.png) [@BobLibDem](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BobLibDem)\ **Post date:** [March 28, 2018, 12:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wisconsin-gop-tries-to-forestall-special-elections/811118/87 "2018-03-28T12:53:33Z")
> [@Iggy](#): > > Sigh. > > Please read some history on the matter. It has been absolutely beaten to death in discussions on this site with extensively referenced histories. Even one of my cites in the post you are responding to lists how the nominees were (or were not) dealt with disposed of by the Senate. Voted up. Voted down. Tabled and ignored. Senate downsized Supreme Court rather than act on nominee. Nominee declined to be seated after confirmation. Nominee died. Senate Ignored. And so on. > The Senate has, from time to time, simply ignored a nomination sent to them by the then-sitting president. From time to time being not really since Millard Fillmore. Rutherford Hayes nominated Thomas Matthews as he was about to leave in 1881, since there was already a president-elect in Garfield this nomination was not acted on. Fillmore had two nominations not acted upon, and Tyler one. But never before has the Senate majority leader indicated that they didn’t give a flying fuck WHO the president nominated, they weren’t going to consider it- until Mitch McConnell stole a nomination from Barack Obama. Back to Wisconsin, why are they bothering to block the election? Right now they have a 63-35 edge in the state House, they are in no danger of being in the minority until November. ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [March 28, 2018, 1:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wisconsin-gop-tries-to-forestall-special-elections/811118/88 "2018-03-28T13:35:18Z")
The important thing to remember is that both sides do it - Republicans AND Whigs. ---
**Author:** ![DSYoungEsq](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/c6cbf5/32.png) [@DSYoungEsq](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DSYoungEsq)\ **Post date:** [March 28, 2018, 2:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wisconsin-gop-tries-to-forestall-special-elections/811118/89 "2018-03-28T14:26:03Z")
Uh, I probably long-since deleted my summary, but as I recall, there was an example of failure to act on a nomination in the 1960s. Perhaps someone can remind us of the circumstances. As for their “duty”, the Constitution does NOT say that the Senate MUST make a determination. Indeed, a very cogent argument can be made that, absent a “yes”, the result is a “no,” since the appointment must be made with the “consent” of the Senate. In short, it’s only a polite act on the part of the Senate if they actually send back a voted “no”. Now, in England, which has a constitution lacking any one written document spelling such things out, scholars might argue that the behavior of the Senate in the past established a constitutional procedure. However, even in that case, if the Senate decides sua sponte to change the procedure, it’s not clear that the constitutional precedents would force the Senate to actually hold hearings. More likely, the change in behavior would indicate a change in the constitution. In short, the Senate doesn’t HAVE to hold hearings, or take a vote. The document doesn’t mandate it, and prior behavior doesn’t require that the same thing be done in futuro ad infinitem. In the same way, the fact that the Senate has for some years had a rule about filibustering that allows for a cloture motion based upon a super-majority doesn’t require that that motion remain unchanged. As always, in any political system, the measure of what is “required” is the consequence of taking an action. ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [March 28, 2018, 2:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wisconsin-gop-tries-to-forestall-special-elections/811118/90 "2018-03-28T14:31:11Z")
“The Senate”, as you use it, meaning 1 or 2 individuals with partisan grudges. Right? If you’re thinking of Nixon’s nominations of Haynsworth and Carswell, or LBJ’s of Fortas, those were voted down by the full Senate. ---
**Author:** ![Stranger\_On\_A\_Train](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/13edae/32.png) [@Stranger\_On\_A\_Train](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Stranger_On_A_Train)\ **Post date:** [March 28, 2018, 3:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wisconsin-gop-tries-to-forestall-special-elections/811118/91 "2018-03-28T15:29:52Z")
> [@DSYoungEsq](#): > > In short, the Senate doesn’t HAVE to hold hearings, or take a vote. The document doesn’t mandate it, and prior behavior doesn’t require that the same thing be done in futuro ad infinitem. In the same way, the fact that the Senate has for some years had a rule about filibustering that allows for a cloture motion based upon a super-majority doesn’t require that that motion remain unchanged. As always, in any political system, the measure of what is “required” is the consequence of taking an action. Technically, the Senate isn’t legally required to do anything but convene, pass a budget or continuing resolution to keep the government running, and vote to adjourn. (And some apparetly feel that passing budget or CR is not mandatory, either.) But setting the baseline expectation at “show up and then agree to go home” is not how our representative democracy works. That the Senate isn’t required to hold hearings by the Constitution, or that some Congress in the past century once refused to hear a candidate is not justification for _refusing to follow the process that has been applied in living memory for all Presidential nominees for the Supreme Court_. It is a bullshit evasion for trying to undermine the democratic norms that we have collectively agreed upon as essential procedures to maintain an operating government. The Constitution is just a document, written, debated about, and ultimately adopted by a handful of (white, mostly slave-owning) men, and applied as a set of governing principles, but despite the veneration lauded upon it by some sectors in politics, that piece of parchment is not what keeps our government functioning and civil unrest at bay; following consistent processes and assuring (or at least giving the appearance that) everyone of majority age has some form of input into how the government works and the decisions it makes is a fundamental axiom of democratic governance. Ignoring established procedures and making decisions in a back room out of public view to control how a critical pillar of government is constituted is an egregous lapse of civility and legitimacy. Many people questioned the suitability of Robert Bork to a seat on the Supreme Court and his nomination was even rejected in the Judiciary Committee by a broad (9 to 5) margin. Nonetheless he got his hearing and the public got to see what they would be getting in a Supreme Court justice (a partisan ‘originalist’ who disagreed with many decades of prior court rulings on freedom of expression and right to privacy), and his nomination was denied. Garrick didn’t even get that basic dignity. This is the respect your modern GOP has for long-standing democratic institutions and governance. Stranger ---
**Author:** ![RTFirefly](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/c77e96/32.png) [@RTFirefly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RTFirefly)\ **Post date:** [March 28, 2018, 4:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wisconsin-gop-tries-to-forestall-special-elections/811118/92 "2018-03-28T16:59:01Z")
To get back to the constitution that’s more germane to this thread: > [@Chisquirrel](#): > > Not a law. The Wisconsin Constitution. > [@Chronos](#): > > The governor is required by the state constitution to hold elections. He’s refusing to hold them. Could one of you folks please come up with a cite for that? I did a bit of digging into the Wisconsin constitution, and I came up empty here. ---
**Author:** ![BobLibDem](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/boblibdem/32/3149_2.png) [@BobLibDem](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BobLibDem)\ **Post date:** [March 28, 2018, 5:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wisconsin-gop-tries-to-forestall-special-elections/811118/93 "2018-03-28T17:11:15Z")
> [@RTFirefly](#): > > To get back to the constitution that’s more germane to this thread: > > Could one of you folks please come up with a cite for that? I did a bit of digging into the Wisconsin constitution, and I came up empty here. From Article IV: > [@](#): > > Filling vacancies. SECTION 14. The governor shall issue writs of election to fill such vacancies as may occur in either house of the legislature. ---
**Author:** ![N9IWP](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/n9iwp/32/3154_2.png) [@N9IWP](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/N9IWP)\ **Post date:** [March 28, 2018, 5:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wisconsin-gop-tries-to-forestall-special-elections/811118/94 "2018-03-28T17:15:43Z")
More specifically, statute 8.50(4)(d): > **[Wisconsin Legislature: 8.50(4)(d)](https://docs.legis.wisconsin.gov/statutes/statutes/8/50/4/d)** > > Nominations, Primaries, Elections > [@](#): > > Any vacancy in the office of state senator or representative to the assembly occurring before the 2nd Tuesday in May in the year in which a regular election is held to fill that seat shall be filled as promptly as possible by special election. However, any vacancy in the office of state senator or representative to the assembly occurring after the close of the last regular floorperiod of the legislature held during his or her term shall be filled only if a special session or extraordinary floorperiod of the legislature is called or a veto review period is scheduled during the remainder of the term. The special election to fill the vacancy shall be ordered, if possible, so the new member may participate in the special session or floorperiod. ---
**Author:** ![RTFirefly](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/c77e96/32.png) [@RTFirefly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RTFirefly)\ **Post date:** [March 28, 2018, 5:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wisconsin-gop-tries-to-forestall-special-elections/811118/95 "2018-03-28T17:22:50Z")
Yeah, I saw that, **Bob**. But it doesn’t set a timetable for _when_ the election must be held. That seems to be state law, rather than the state constitution. And that’s the issue here: not _whether_ the vacancies must be filled, but _when_. The state constitution appears to be silent on the latter point. **Chisquirrel** and **Chronos** appear to be arguing that Walker’s violating the state **constitution** by refusing to hold elections this spring, so any legislative fix is moot. I don’t see it. ---
**Author:** ![BobLibDem](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/boblibdem/32/3149_2.png) [@BobLibDem](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BobLibDem)\ **Post date:** [March 28, 2018, 5:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wisconsin-gop-tries-to-forestall-special-elections/811118/96 "2018-03-28T17:33:55Z")
> [@RTFirefly](#): > > Yeah, I saw that, **Bob**. But it doesn’t set a timetable for _when_ the election must be held. That seems to be state law, rather than the state constitution. That’s how I see it. He has to issue writs of election but there appear to be no limits on when he must do so. Seems to me the argument is that the people in those districts are being unreasonably denied their representation. ---
**Author:** ![gnoitall](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/bb73d2/32.png) [@gnoitall](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gnoitall)\ **Post date:** [March 28, 2018, 5:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wisconsin-gop-tries-to-forestall-special-elections/811118/97 "2018-03-28T17:44:52Z")
> [@RTFirefly](#): > > Yeah, I saw that, **Bob**. But it doesn’t set a timetable for _when_ the election must be held. That seems to be state law, rather than the state constitution. > > And that’s the issue here: not _whether_ the vacancies must be filled, but _when_. The state constitution appears to be silent on the latter point. **Chisquirrel** and **Chronos** appear to be arguing that Walker’s violating the state **constitution** by refusing to hold elections this spring, so any legislative fix is moot. I don’t see it. Perpetual open-ended “later” is the same as “no.” My twelve-year-olds try this shit. I’m amazed purported grownups try it. ---
**Author:** ![Lance\_Turbo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lance_turbo/32/6156_2.png) [@Lance\_Turbo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lance_Turbo)\ **Post date:** [March 28, 2018, 5:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wisconsin-gop-tries-to-forestall-special-elections/811118/98 "2018-03-28T17:46:26Z")
Judge Niess seems to have a problem with this. They are calling a special session of the legislature to legally deny these people representation while these people are being denied representation. That seems a little unfair. ---
**Author:** ![Chisquirrel](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/6bbea6/32.png) [@Chisquirrel](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chisquirrel)\ **Post date:** [March 28, 2018, 6:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wisconsin-gop-tries-to-forestall-special-elections/811118/99 "2018-03-28T18:02:24Z")
> [@RTFirefly](#): > > Yeah, I saw that, **Bob**. But it doesn’t set a timetable for _when_ the election must be held. That seems to be state law, rather than the state constitution. > > And that’s the issue here: not _whether_ the vacancies must be filled, but _when_. The state constitution appears to be silent on the latter point. **Chisquirrel** and **Chronos** appear to be arguing that Walker’s violating the state **constitution** by refusing to hold elections this spring, so any legislative fix is moot. I don’t see it. He’s not filing a writ of election, the seats have been vacant for months, and he’s **made clear that he’s not going to**. There’s no wishy-washy _advise and consent_ bullshit for him to hide behind. The Constitution says “he will”, and Walker says “I won’t”. ---
**Author:** ![RTFirefly](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/c77e96/32.png) [@RTFirefly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RTFirefly)\ **Post date:** [March 28, 2018, 7:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wisconsin-gop-tries-to-forestall-special-elections/811118/100 "2018-03-28T19:28:49Z")
> [@gnoitall](#): > > Perpetual open-ended “later” is the same as “no.” > > My twelve-year-olds try this shit. I’m amazed purported grownups try it. There’s a big difference between “November 6” and “perpetual open-ended ‘later’.” [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wisconsin-gop-tries-to-forestall-special-elections/811118.md?page=4) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wisconsin-gop-tries-to-forestall-special-elections/811118.md?page=6)