We Were Right About Supreme Court Justice David Prosser

Prosser tried to deny it after he admitted it, but we were right about him when we believed he would rule against the rights of Wisconsinites. What we didn't expect is for his corporate loyalty to be so blatant and swift. It makes me think back to the recent election and the 14,000 votes that won Prosser the seat for another 10 years, and it begs the question, is Prosser paying someone back?

There were very serious issues with that election that aren't being properly investigated, particularly with the lack of publicly verifiable election machine integrity and accuracy, including, most troubling, ballot security issues. Given the closeness of the election, the seriousness of the issues, and now doubts as to Prosser's impartiality and prudence raised by Supreme Court Chief Justice Abrahamson, I believe the election deserves a proper and full investigation by a group unaffiliated with Wisconsin elections.

Yes, I realize I'm getting very close to tinfoil hat territory here, but what's important, whether something nefarious occurred in the election or not, is closing the wide gaps in the openness and security of our elections so there isn't a doubt in future elections. And this clearly won't happen unless we get serious about investigating and fixing these issues, as serious as the Republicans are about suppressing Wisconsin voters and stripping rights from Wisconsinites.

Kloppenburg enumerated some of the issues when she conceded the election. Of the most serious issues, more than 150 ballot bags were open or torn. Kloppenburg said,

"Waukesha County had twice as many torn, open or unsealed bags as every other county in the state combined. In many cases, municipal clerks in Waukesha testifed the bags weren't torn when they left cities, towns and villages. So the security breaches occurred sometime when the bags were in Waukesha County's custody."

However, there wasn't enough information to conclude whether something nefarious occurred or not. Hence the need for a full investigation and reform. We'll be in a lot more trouble if we're questioning the integrity of not just a Supreme Court election but also 9 Senate recall elections, which could likely happen if these serious issues aren't fixed before. Yet, there's been no response that I'm aware of to Kloppenburg's letter from the GAB.

The GAB can't properly investigate the election, because, at the very least, they wrote the software that caused Waukesha County Clerk Kathy Nickolaus's "human error." Notice how everyone is being careful to not call it what it is, a computer error. They definitely want us to believe the software had nothing to do with it, but that's wrong.

Besides software, the GAB works with and trains the very same people they are supposed to investigate. The GAB doesn't have the outsider's perspective required of a proper investigation. Plus, how can the GAB be trusted to fully investigate when the fault of many possible issues rests in their hands?

Also, the GAB is notoriously secretive. They need to change that behavior now, and although they improved a bit during the recount, it's another reason why they're not the right entity for investigating the election. Any investigation must be open and transparent, so we know exactly what's being investigated and how the conclusions were drawn. We haven't gotten that from the GAB.

The Democrats are even questioning the GAB's certification of the recall petitions for the 3 Democrats by filing a complaint in Dane County court to challenge the certifications. So, there's definitely enough doubt surrounding the GAB that it's clear they need to do some clean up of themselves and they're not fit for investigating the April 5th election.

We need to know our elections are truly open, clean and fair, and we must know before any more elections.

Wisconsin Supreme Court Election Recount Complete Except Waukesha County

Every county in Wisconsin has completed their recount except Waukesha County. Now, I'm not going to complain that they're taking too much time, because I think it's reprehensible that people want our officials to conduct such an important recount quickly. Mistakes will happen when you try to rush things, so why rush this recount? Of course we don't want them to drag on without reason either, which is why an extension must be sought through the courts.

Still, as I've explained before, we don't have enough information to believe most of the vote counts that have been submitted to the GAB. Since our officials have made it clear that they're not concerned with our confidence, we need a proper and thorough investigation.

We shouldn't be hearing about unsealed ballot bags from bloggers or anyone else. It's absolutely ridiculous that some people are simply shrugging these issues off saying that they happen all the time and probably happen in other counties. What?! Ballot bags are ripped open all over Wisconsin, and no one seems to care? Not only could votes be added, but they could be lost. How does anyone know that votes didn't fall out of the bags at some point? We don't.

It's not as if our officials haven't been given enough time to clarify unresolved issues. We expected every county in Wisconsin to finish their recount yesterday. Why are we, today, still fighting to get clarification on simple issues such as how a computer can lose election results? This all feels so surreal.

We must seek out the issues in our elections, because such issues are inherently buried by their perpetrators, and then we must fix them.

So, I'll say it again, if the recount ends (May 26th) without the start of a proper investigation, I will rightly denounce the validity of the winner's victory every chance I can.

Proper Investigation Required in Wisconsin Supreme Court Election

Regardless of who wins, we can't believe most of the vote counts provided to the GAB for the Wisconsin Supreme Court election, because there are so many unresolved and unexplained issues. There's no certainty in any of the counts from vote counting machines, because we know they rarely count votes correctly and are easily manipulated. Once one begins to also consider the issues with insecure ballot bags, one realizes just how unclear the results of the recount are.

The Kloppenburg campaign has the burden of showing that something improper occurred, but with very little information, and officials refusing to provide further information*, that will be very difficult to show. Unfortunately, there isn't much proof that something improper didn't occur. So, unless a thorough investigation is conducted, we won't know what to believe.

I wrote more on this here, including how Minnesota properly conducted a statewide recount in 2008.

However, I want to be sure this point is heard loud and clear: Unless we get more clarity, there's no reason to believe the results of this election and its recount.

If the recount ends (May 26th) without the start of a proper investigation, I will rightly denounce the validity of the winner's victory every chance I can. I vow to do this whether the winner is Prosser or Kloppenburg, because I just want to know the truth, and I will have no qualms congratulating the winner once the true winner is determined.

*This has gotten so bad that it's really starting to beg the questions: Why aren't we getting clarity from the officials responsible for doing so? What possible motives could someone have for withholding such information?

Alarming Lack of Clarity in Wisconsin Supreme Court Election Recount

I hammered away for days if not weeks after the election, demanding a recount, so that we could have some confidence in the election results. Given the issues with our computer election equipment, which were brought to light by the fiasco in Waukesha County, there's not a single person who can say all of the vote counts throughout Wisconsin are correct. The only counts we can say are correct are those that were hand counted, but that occurred in only parts of 31 of our 72 counties (and a few that don't have machines). Even then, with unresolved ballot bag issues, there may be reason to suspect some hand recounts.

So many questions have gone unanswered (which causes more questions given this is all supposed to be transparent) from why election software can lose votes to why ballot bags are left so insecurely. Some issues get explained, but such issues never seem to be the ones we're concerned about. I don't understand why the people who are supposed to be explaining these things to us continue to refuse to do so. There's no reason they can't quickly address the issues to increase our confidence, especially given all of the suspicions. This recount isn't giving us any confirmation that the election was open, fair and clean, but that's what recounts are supposed to be for.

In 2008, the nation witnessed how a recount is properly conducted. The Minnesota recount in Senator Al Franken's election was entirely a hand recount and issues were resolved out in the open. In fact, the recount was broadly reported on, and they even posted all disputed ballots online for all to see. No one could say at the end of that recount that Franken didn't win.

Unfortunately, we won't have the same confidence in this recount. What's worse, whoever wins sits for ten years. With so much at stake, and so many questions, why the heck aren't we properly and transparently conducting this recount for all to see?

I'm grateful that Waukesha County is live streaming their recount, but I don't understand why this wasn't setup for every county. There's little time and expense in setting up such a live stream, but it provides a large increase in transparency and confidence in our elections. For example, the public knows about most of the ballot bag issues simply because one concerned Wisconsinite has been watching the live stream quite intently. How many other counties had issues with ballot bags that we don't know about because those counties' recounts weren't streamed online? It's a shame that we use computers to count votes, but still live in the dark ages when it comes to recounts.

Sure the issues with ballot bags are great for news stories and conspiracy theories, and there really may be lost or improper votes from those bags, but the real problems lie with the fact that our vote counting machines could very well be counting our votes incorrectly. It doesn't take a conspiracy for thousands of votes somewhere in Wisconsin to have been incorrectly counted. This issue hasn't been addressed or resolved.

By the way, the new tally from the recount brings more suspicion by itself. I bring this up again because we have so little information to work with. Since we presume Prosser has more votes than Kloppenburg, he should also have a majority of new votes from the recount. However, so far, Kloppenburg is leading the new votes by quite a large margin (548-296). It's not proof of issues with the vote count, but it can be a red flag. Unless this wide margin doesn't hold or is explained, it's additional cause for concern that the vote counts somewhere are incorrect.

I'm going to say this completely factual statement now in the hopes that we get some more clarity. Unless we get more clarity, there's no reason to believe the results of this election and its recount.

If the recount ends (May 26th) without the start of a proper investigation, I will rightly denounce the validity of the winner's victory every chance I can.

Serious Questions In Supreme Court Election Recount

Some serious questions are being asked in Waukesha County during the recount for the Wisconsin Supreme Court election. This morning, the Kloppenburg campaign objected to the counting of votes from six "improperly sealed" ballot bags from the City of Brookfield, the city whose votes were presumably not counted by Kathy Nickolaus on election night because of computer error. Unbelievable!

Even though the Kloppenburg campaign objected, those in charge pressed to count the votes. Amidst strong opposition, the retired judge appointed to temporarily take Nickolaus's place allowed the Kloppenburg campaign representative to question the Brookfield City Clerk on the record first. However, the judge abruptly stopped the questioning before the clerk had answered all of the questions.

If there were ballot bags in Wisconsin that needed to be handled with more care than others, it's the ballot bags from Brookfield. I'm absolutely shocked, and it's evident that a real investigation of Waukesha County must occur. What's worse, many people (including Prosser) say these issues are normal. Such carelessness with our elections is inexcusable!

There's video, transcript and more analysis written by the DailyKos's great Giles Goat Boy here. A copy of his transcript of the questioning follows:

JK Representative: To your knowledge were the bags secure while you, while they were in your possession?

Schmidt: Yes they were and…we keep them in a locked vault until they’re taken to the county. It’s always a problem with sealing these. They have one hole in the bag. Unfortunately when you just fold them over, if you have too many in there, you can see how they will tear when you pick them up like this.

JK Representative: These weren’t torn, Kris, they were open…

Schmidt: I understand, but they will also come apart. If you take a look at that. When you see the ones we do in the absentee canvas, I seal them and…I actually punch holes and weave something in there. This is a training experience for me to tell my co-workers. I guarantee you these ballots were put in and not tampered…with…until they left my…city hall and were taken to the county and I’m sure the same situation was there.

JK Representative: Can I ask, who other than you has access to the vault?

Schmidt: To the vault? My staff. Other people can go in but I guarantee you we are not friendly after an election. They don’t come and visit us.

(After some crosstalk, the Prosser reps ask a couple softball questions, then the judge continues)

Judge Mawdsley: Ok, all right why don’t you do this…you can ask the clerk questions on the side if...(unintelligible)

JK Representative: I’d like to get this on record, though. After you’ve taken them into your possession, they’re stored in the vault. There’s another step, though before they arrive here, is there not?

Schmidt: Yes

JK Representative: Would you go over those steps?

Schmidt: Essentially they usually put them – the fellows from the highway department, which most clerks use to transport things – put them in boxes and them bring them in to the county. And that’s done the next day. I think we left ours…(unintelligible)...we left ours about 3 o’clock in the afternoon to go to the county.

JK Representative: And do you know what happens to them when they arrive at the county?

Schmidt: Actually, not. I think they had to call… (waves her hand dismissively at the questioner) You can’t expect (unintelligible)…

Judge Mawdsley: OK. That’s enough for now, you can talk to the clerk on your own…(unintelligible)

Why Is Prosser Still Complaining About the Recount?

Even though there have been significant issues in Waukesha County and around the state including torn ballot bags and missing seals/labels, the Prosser campaign has set up a ridiculous website* which calls the recount a "disaster". The only thing that could be called a disaster in this recount is Wisconsin's elections.

They shouldn't be complaining about a very useful service to the people of Wisconsin, because they want to spend a lot more money yearly on the Voter Suppression Bill, which will absolutely not solve any problems.

The only reason to be against this recount is to prevent us from learning the true vote count and the truth about our elections. I find it really odd that only a few weeks ago, Prosser's campaign rightly said they were open to a recount. Only more issues have surfaced since then. Why question the recount now?

Not only that, but Prosser's website makes you believe that Kloppenburg's campaign has taken away 148 votes by displaying it as "-148". However, the number 148 doesn't reflect removed Prosser votes, it mostly reflects votes that weren't originally counted, just like the 7,000 some that Prosser claims gives him the lead. This website is not fitting of a local politician much less a Wisconsin Supreme Court Justice.

The website asks you to "Preserve the Prosser Victory." See, that's where the problem lies. Kloppenburg isn't asking for a recount to take away Prosser's supposed lead. Kloppenburg's goal is to help us determine the true vote count, because we know the "official" count is not correct. Asking people to preserve your victory in an election recount is asking people to say you've won regardless of the truth.

Prosser's campaign should remove this website and start spending money to preserve our elections - not anyone's victory.

I'd like to have an effective discussion about the real issues in our elections. I've compiled a list of the significant issues that we've seen during this election as well as ideas for solving the issues here. I'll continue to add to the list if more issues come to light.

*This is the website: www.kloppenburgometer.com. Thanks to illusory tenant for spotting it!

What Can the Recount Tally Changes Tell Us?

There's one critical piece of information that I'm paying careful attention to in the recount for the Wisconsin Supreme Court election, the updated vote tallies. The changes to the election results from the recount are not only important because they tell us who presumably is the winner, but they *should* also confirm the winner.

There appears to be at least 8 issues with the chain of custody of ballots in Waukesha County such as torn ballot bags and missing seals/labels. So there's definitely ways in which those ballots could have been modified. Of course, the media reported the issues with the ballot bags in the first few days of the recount, but there's been no mention of the more recent issues or how any of the issues were resolved. The GAB also hasn't explained the resolution of these ballot bag issues or even acknowledged many others. This is very concerning, because the whole idea behind the recount was to get to the bottom of issues, not to continue hiding them.

So, how can we tell if there are unresolved issues with the election results? Theoretically, and with a large enough amount of votes, the distribution of changes in results should match the final distribution of results. That is, if Prosser has a majority of the overall votes, he should also receive the majority of newly-counted votes. So if, say, Prosser retains the lead in the overall results when the recount is complete, but Kloppenburg received a majority of the newly-counted votes, then there is reasonable concern to doubt the vote tallies from one or more precincts.

This is particularly true if there is an unexplained wide gap between the two distributions and is a result of the mathematics of probability. If Prosser has a majority of the overall results when the recount is complete, but didn't receive a majority of the newly-counted votes, we could have a problem. It wouldn't be proof that an unresolved issue exists, but it would be a bright red flag.

So where do things stand now? Well, Kloppenburg is leading 437 to 140 in the newly-counted votes. That's 50% of the newly-counted votes going to Kloppenburg which is also 75% of the newly-counted votes cast between Kloppenburg and Prosser. If the recount were complete, these numbers would be cause for concern. However, I must stress that the latest numbers from the GAB are unofficial, and we can't make any judgements until almost all counties complete the recount (if we can at all before the full recount is complete). Also, this technique won't always uncover issues and it may imply issues when none exist, so we must carefully make judgements when using it.

Still, since we're getting very little information from the GAB and the news media, I thought I'd share this bit of helpful information now rather than later. If the distribution of results continue the way they are currently, we're going to want a strong argument for further investigation.

Kloppenburg Gains 148 Votes In Recount

Kloppenburg has gained 148 votes in the recount so far, but few people know it. There's been very little media coverage of the recount for the Wisconsin Supreme Court election. Which is odd given all of the issues, some potentially very serious, seen thus far. How are we the people of Wisconsin supposed to know everything has been handled correctly? The GAB hasn't specifically addressed any of the issues seen thus far, and no one seems to be asking them to.

Some people may want the media to stay silent, because they'd like us to continue feeling a false sense of security, but we already know how fragile our elections are. Now more issues have been exposed, and the GAB continues to stay silent?

Hopefully, Waukesha County isn't an indicator of how messed up our elections are in other counties, but I wonder how it couldn't be.

Thanks to Giles Goat Boy at DailyKos for watching the Waukesha County recount live stream so carefully and keeping us all up to date!

The Wisconsin Voter Suppression Bill - Assembly Bill 7

I was calling Senate Bill 6 the Voter Distraction Bill, but now the Republicans have introduced Assembly Bill 7 which goes even further. Plus, they want to pass it quickly and before any recall elections. So I find it fitting to call AB7 the Voter Suppression Bill, as many others have called SB6 and AB7. Calling it the voter ID bill isn't appropriate, because the bill won't create a "voter ID" as the name implies. Calling it the photo ID bill also isn't appropriate, because it's vague and the bill won't allow for the use of just any photo ID as that implies. If you want to call AB7 something appropriate, the Voter Suppression Bill is the most appropriate name Wisconsin has come up with.

Both SB6 and AB7 will give Wisconsin the strictest photo ID requirement in the country and reduce the number of people who can and will actually vote in our elections. Not only that, but the bills will cost Wisconsin taxpayers yearly more than the current recount will, and the problem they're trying to solve, voter fraud, has only added at most 20 improper votes in the last few years. In fact, neither bill would have prevented any one of those 20 improper votes. This bill is a fraud.

Voter fraud is nowhere near one of the significant issues in our elections. The fact that Kathy Nickolaus or nearly anyone else could easily add thousands of improper votes is the real issue that we all should be furious over. To have any influence, voter fraud requires a true conspiracy on a level the United States has not seen. However, by manipulating voting machine tallies, one person can swing a statewide election. That doesn't require a conspiracy. Wisconsin elections, and many other issues in our state, require real solutions not fake solutions such as these Voter Suppression Bills.

Some of the significant differences between SB6 and AB7 limit absentee voting. AB7 limits absentee voting to a few specific reasons. The bill also would reduce the limit of in-person absentee voting from the current 30 days to one week before an election. If there are relevant issues with absentee voting, they're not solved by limiting absentee voting to very specific reasons or reducing the amount of time people may vote.

Another significant restriction in AB7 is on the required amount of time an eligible voter must be living in Wisconsin to vote. AB7 increases that time from 10 days to 28 days before election day. This provision will clearly deny more legitimate Wisconsin citizens from having a vote, and again for no good reason. Both bills already include a restriction banning student IDs for the photo ID requirement.

AB7 also removes our ability to vote a straight party ticket. Whether you like it or not, it's a convenience that many people appreciate. Making someone work harder to vote for no good reason is un-Wisconsin.

The non-profit Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights Under Law submitted testimony on AB7 that is a wonderfully succinct rebuttal of the bill and its goals.

I want to have an effective discussion about the relevant issues with our elections and possible real solutions. I'm hoping we can use this recount to bring real change and confidence to our elections. I've assembled a list of the issues we've encountered during the Supreme Court election and the recount as well as my arguments for open election systems as a solution to many issues. I will continue to add to the list as more legitimate issues come to light, and I'd like to add more solutions to the list as well. So, don't hesitate to share your concerns and ideas.

Updated: (May 2, 6:39pm) I've now read through AB7, and it's nothing more than a very expensive distraction from the real issues and will only suppress the votes of legitimate Wisconsin citizens, particularly those who already struggle to have a voice. So, I made a few edits for clarification and added some great testimony on AB7 from the non-profit Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights Under Law.

PolitiFact Wisconsin Barking Up The Wrong Tree

So, PolitiFact Wisconsin has gotten into the "recount is not warranted" mix by again writing an article that doesn't belong on such a website. You can't claim something is "Barely True" just because the person saying it doesn't cite enough convincing evidence for you.

They aren't convinced that the Kloppenburg campaign gave enough evidence of "legitimate and widespread anomalies." Did they even think to consider that the Kloppenburg campaign wouldn't necessarily release information related to possible criminal activity? If you're going to state whether something is true or not, you have to do the research.

When will we get a legitimate PolitiFact Wisconsin that includes at least one other organization?

I've assembled a list of the issues we've encountered during this election which are reasons to demand a recount and an impartial investigation. I will continue to add to the list as more legitimate issues come to light. Anyone who claims these don't warrant a recount in such a close election, or really any election, wants to keep secrets from the people of Wisconsin.

Why Are Prosser Supporters Still Complaining About Recount

According to the Journal Sentinel, the Club for Growth has issued a statement against the recount for the Wisconsin Supreme Court Election. They say the Kloppenburg campaign wants "to invent reasons why Kloppenburg should be awarded thousands of phantom votes no one’s heard of yet; and to get in front of a judge willing to buy their arguments. Since a Dane County judge will likely decide, expecting this to work may not be stupid at all." They also posit if Kloppenburg can "steal a win."

It's as if they're trying to get ahead of some news they expect. The only reason to be against this recount is to prevent us from learning more. I find it really odd that only a few weeks ago, Prosser's campaign rightly said they were open to a recount. Nothing changed publicly since then. This all makes me quite confident that if anyone is trying to "steal this election" it's the Prosser campaign.

According to WisPolitics, there's already been two new discrepancies in Waukesha County. Wisconsin needs this recount, not just because of Kathy Nickolaus's suspicious behavior, not just because of the GAB's involvement in the Waukesha County error, not just because of other issues in the state, but also because Wisconsin hasn't seen a statewide recount in decades. Hopefully, a full investigation of our voting systems (if our leaders give us one) and a recount will give us some confidence.

You can watch a live stream of the recount in Waukesha County here.

Update: (April 29, 4:26pm) So, PolitiFact Wisconsin has gotten into the mix, again writing an article that doesn't belong on such a website. You can't claim something is "Barely True" just because the person saying it doesn't cite enough convincing evidence for you. Did they even think to consider that the Kloppenburg campaign wouldn't necessarily release information related to possible criminal activity? If you're going to state whether something is true or not, you have to do the research. When will we get a legitimate PolitiFact Wisconsin that includes at least one other organization?

Wisconsin GAB Wrote Erroneous Software For Waukesha County Clerk Kathy Nickolaus

Milwaukee News Buzz reports that the computer program that caused Waukesha County Clerk Kathy Nickolaus to erroneously report vote counts for the Wisconsin Supreme Court election was written by the Government Accountability Board. This fact alone puts into question the impartiality of the investigation into Waukesha County's election issues by the GAB. They can't properly investigate their own software.

Not only was the GAB program written poorly, but the GAB has refused to provide details on the computer program. The GAB cannot be expected to impartially investigate Waukesha County and its election systems. The GAB should publicly post the source code for the software, since Wisconsin owns it, but they won't even tell us more than Nickolaus has. It's clear that the GAB should not be in charge of investigating elections, and their refusal to provide further details is particularly concerning.

I'm out of new ideas as to how we can get an impartial investigation. One Wisconsin Now is still collecting names for their petition for a separate bipartisan investigation. However, contacting your government representatives and the press will probably be most effective.

People better start talking because Wisconsin is sick of the secrets in what are supposedly open and transparent elections!

Wisconsin Supreme Court Candidates Agree To Hand Recount in 31 Counties

As I reported earlier, 31 Wisconsin counties don't have enough memory to run an electronic recount while preserving the data from the original count. The Government Accountability Board did in fact request permission to delete the data, which bewilders me. However, the candidates agreed in court to a hand recount in those 31 counties in order to preserve the vital original data. Only the parts of those counties that lack enough memory will undergo a hand recount.

The voting equipment in question is the Optech Eagle, and the needed memory cartridges are no longer manufactured. In the private sector, we get contracts that specify how long hardware will be manufactured, and we don't select hardware that can't be maintained for the desired length of time. The military also requires strict hardware contracts, stricter in most cases. So, it's not unusual to demand memory for the expected life of a machine, it's required in many situations. We definitely have some serious issues with our computer election systems in Wisconsin.

The Government Accountability Board lists very little information about our computer election systems on their website, but there doesn't appear to be any information on the Optech Eagle beyond which municipalities use it.

The candidates were right in agreeing to a hand recount, just as Kloppenburg was right for requesting a recount.

Kloppenburg Was Right To Request A Recount

Kloppenburg was right to request a recount. I don't know who wouldn't request a recount in such a close election. Wisconsin State law provides for a "free" recount when the result is this close. There's even a level in between "free" and having to fully finance a recount. Also, past elections do not necessarily predict future results. Just because most recounts in previous elections haven't changed the winner, it doesn't mean that there's any less of a chance of a recount unveiling a different winner. Mathematically, there's a much higher likelihood of the recount showing that Kloppenburg truly won than you winning the jackpot from that lottery ticket you bought earlier today.

However, as I've stated before, closeness shouldn't be the only reason to request a recount. There are many reasons that a reasonable person might think the official vote counts using tallies from the election computers are incorrect, because there are many ways for that to happen and the election computers in Waukesha County are extremely suspect. To my knowledge, the GAB didn't fully inspect their integrity - an example of the very little clarity in this situation. I'm not going to enumerate here all of the various questions and ways vote counts could be changed, because I've already posted more than enough times, and so have many other people. Kloppenburg shouldn't have been expected to make a decision to recount without more clarification about what happened in that county, and there are many reasons to think that a recount will uncover serious discrepancies in at least Waukesha County.

Waukesha County Clerk Kathy Nickolaus could have prevented a lot of criticism by simply telling the public about the error when she verified it occurred. It only hurt her by waiting, and I still can't understand why she did. Even still, Nickolaus had nearly two weeks to address the questions regarding her explanation, but she didn't once. Not only could Nickolaus have prevented criticism by offering further explanation, she may very well have prevented a recount by doing so. However, that isn't to say there aren't or may not be significant issues in other counties, but the lack of clarity in Waukesha and her refusal to offer any further details magnified the concerns that something could have happened there as well as other counties.

Republicans bring up issues with elections all of the time. Although they tend to focus on voter fraud. Voter fraud is easier to detect than computer errors and manipulations, but voter fraud hasn't been shown to be a factor. Republicans should be just as suspicious of what may have happened in Waukesha County and around the state, because any deliberate actions or incidental errors that change the count could easily be repeated in a Democratic controlled county unless we determine exactly what happened and put prevention measures in place. And who's to say something didn't happen in a Democratic controlled county? I argue that it's out of ignorance or selfishness that a Republican would deny there are real issues that require impartial investigation and a recount, because they yell so loudly about much smaller election issues.

Waukesha County was just one example of how computer errors can skew elections, and we don't even know exactly what happened there. People who say this recount is unwarranted and point to Waukesha County saying it's resolved are wrong, and you can tell by their weak statements. We don't know for sure the vote counts from any count match the actual vote counts. Nothing has been resolved in Waukesha County, and the Government Accountability Board (who may be suspect in this as well) is still not finished with their investigation.

In Kloppenburg's announcement of her request for a recount, she listed several other reasons to suspect that the official vote counts from other counties don't match the actual counts. From long lines to photo-copied ballots, we'll be given more details about these issues in the coming days. We must carefully examine the issues in all counties, because we want to ensure the integrity of our elections.

With the closeness of this election, the relevance of these anomalies increases. Every vote counts, but in wide elections, a few thousand votes don't change the outcome. They do in this election. We'd like to think anomalies always matter, and I argue they do, but people are reluctant to spend money to look into them unless they could potentially change the outcome. Since Kloppenburg requested a recount, we have a chance to determine what the issues are and hopefully fix them in future elections. This is how the recount can benefit the entire state of Wisconsin.

We need to know our elections are fair, accurate and secure, and the only way to determine that in this election is to do a statewide recount and investigate at the very least Waukesha County's system and processes. We need some clarity, we must ensure our elections are in fact fair, accurate and secure. Don't you want to be sure of that?

If Prosser is shown to be the true winner, I will be one of the first to congratulate him and his supporters. However, right now there's absolutely no proof that Prosser is the winner.

Update: (12:26pm) I just saw this at WisPolitics, and I didn't think to consider the recount wouldn't be a hand recount. At the very least, we need to inspect the way election computers are inspected and verified, but the only way we can know the true vote count is to do a hand count. There's no way around that fact.

Update: (3:32pm) Other people have noted that this recount will likely cost Kloppenburg a lot of money. However, she can accept donations for the recount to ensure the integrity of Wisconsin's elections on her website http://kloppenburgforjustice.com/.

Update: (4:10pm) The candidates have agreed to a hand recount in the 31 counties that didn't have the memory to run an electronic recount. This will go a long way in helping to ensure the vote-counting machines are accurate. Proving an electronic vote-counting machine can be inaccurate or potentially compromised is not difficult. If there are other suspicions, we must make them heard now.

GAB To Request Permission To Delete Voting Machine Memory Before Recount

According to the Journal Sentinel, the Government Accountability Board "will file paperwork Thursday in Dane County Circuit Court to seek permission to clear the memory devices on some voting machines," destroying evidence from the original Wisconsin Supreme Court election results. They state 31 counties need to clear their devices "so ballots can be run through them again for the recount." The GAB must ask the court for permission, because Wisconsin law says that the devices cannot be cleared during a recount.

This appears to be true given this memo from the GAB on April 14th,

"We are receiving information from some county clerks who use [PROM] packs with tabulating equipment for their voting systems, and they report that they are unable to get sufficient additional [PROM] packs from their respective vendors to conduct the recount, while at the same time preserving and retaining intact the Election Day prom packs.

...This may mean getting judicial permission to clear memory devices for reuse during the recount"

This is absolutely unacceptable, and it's just another example of a real issue with our election systems in Wisconsin.

Update: (4:07pm) The candidates have agreed to a hand recount in these 31 counties. No erasing will be done. Thank God!

Update: (5:28pm) I posted more information here.

JoAnne Kloppenburg Officially Requests A Recount and Full Investigation In Wisconsin Supreme Court Election

WisPolitics reports that the Government Accountability Board says the Kloppenburg campaign has officially requested a statewide recount.

Kloppenburg announced the request at about 4pm to very loud sustaining cheers and "thank you"s. She's also asking for a full investigation into Waukesha County.

Kloppenburg said there are "widespread anomalies and questions within Waukesha County and across the state." She listed the cities of Milwaukee and Racine as well as Waukesha County. She also mentioned issues with "long lines, photo-copied ballots" and the vote counts in the city of Fond du Lac and Winnebago County. Kloppenburg said these issues "necessitate a statewide recount," adding, "Wisconsin deserves to know the election was legitimate."

"A recount will have shined a necessary and appropriate light on an election that to so many people appears suspect."

Kloppenburg addressed the Prosser campaign saying that a recount is "frivolous" by saying, "My opponents don't want a recount and that surprises me. A recount benefits everybody." She later said, "It's called American democracy."

"If there is doubt we must remove it."

"Going forward we must make sure" there must be real change in the elections in Waukesha County. "We must have a full investigation by a trained independent investigator."

The Kloppenburg campaign is questioning certain communications between the GAB and the Waukesha County Clerk's office. They have submitted those communications to the GAB.

Kloppenburg responded to questions about the Prosser campaign saying a recount is "frivolous" by saying, "The Prosser campaign made threats."

To questions that the unions or anyone else has asked Kloppenburg to do this, she said it was "her decision" and "other people have tried to [stick] her with the unions." Kloppenburg reiterated that she has been an independent throughout the campaign and looks at the facts when making decisions. She said she "has been consistent throughout that we need to do what the law says. And the law says we need a recount."

The reactions and statements from the two campaigns in the last week clearly show who's the more careful, thoughtful, and reasoned candidate - qualities one looks for in a judge.

Thank you, JoAnne Kloppenburg, and everyone who worked to bring out the truth in this election!

You can donate to the Kloppenburg campaign's fund for recount efforts on their website.

Please forgive me if my quotes aren't exact.

Update: (5:34pm) Prosser has responded, and they're clearly afraid of the public finding out the truth, calling the recount a pursuit of a "nakedly political goal." I'm sorry, but "vigorously" preventing a recount in this situation, as Prosser says he plans to do, is a "nakedly political goal."

"Justice Prosser’s recount team will work diligently in the weeks and months ahead to protect the votes of Wisconsin citizens at the same time Ms. Kloppenburg’s campaign works to take them away." What do they mean by "take them away"? No one is looking to take any votes away, that is unless they aren't real votes.

"And now, ironically, less than 24 hours after the Government Accountability Board concluded that the April 5th canvass in Waukesha County was correct, she today insists that it needs further examination."

The GAB has NOT concluded their investigation! It appears they issued the early statement so that the deadline to request a recount wouldn't need to be extended. Their short statement shows how much more remains to be done.

Also, for those who don't think tax payer money should be spent to find out the truth, you had your chance to demand answers from Kathy Nickolaus and you declined. Now we have to find out the truth ourselves. This is on Waukesha County Clerk Kathy Nickolaus.

Update: (5:50pm) The video of Kloppenburg's announcement is well worth your time and can be found at WISN and on YouTube.

Update: (April 21, 1:46am) There are reports that Prosser "sent a heckler and two fake reporters" to the Kloppenburg announcement to "challenge her with loaded questions." I'm not sure how factual the reports linking them to Prosser are at this point.

The Journal Sentinel is reporting that the Kloppenburg campaign believes Prosser met with Governor Scott Walker the day after the election.

"And in her complaint seeking a probe of Nickolaus, Kloppenburg alleges Prosser had a one-on-one meeting with Republican Gov. Scott Walker on the day after the election - an explosive charge in an officially nonpartisan race where the candidates questioned each other's claims of political independence.

The next day, Walker's administration asked the Supreme Court to quickly get involved in a Dane County case that has blocked implementation of Walker's controversial plan to sharply limit collective bargaining for public employees.

Melissa Mulliken, Kloppenburg's campaign manager, said she had been in touch with two or three people with knowledge of a Prosser-Walker meeting, including at least one who observed Prosser entering the meeting."

The article also states that the GAB is requesting "permission to clear the memory devices on some voting machines." Who in their right mind thinks this is a good idea?! No erasing! Get new memory devices or do a hand recount. We cannot erase evidence.

Update: (April 21, 10:23am) WisPolitics has published documents relating to Kloppenburg's request for a full investigation of Waukesha County Clerk Kathy Nickolaus here.

Kloppenburg Must Request A Recount In Wisconsin Supreme Court Election

It shouldn't have come to this, but since we're not sure exactly what happened in Waukesha County, it's a step towards getting some answers. People are rallying around the Capitol right now to show JoAnne Kloppenburg we support her. Anyone who says a recount is not warranted in this situation clearly wants to keep information from the public. This isn't just a case of possibly finding a few votes here and there. If serious discrepancies are found with the vote counts from Waukesha County, Kloppenburg could turn out to be just as far in the lead as Prosser appears now.

I have a strong feeling that we will find some serious discrepancies, criminal or not.

Our scrutiny shouldn't end with Waukesha County. The error causing the missing votes could have been an honest mistake, but it's shown us how easily our elections can be skewed by those who run them. We need to look deep into every county in Wisconsin with the same diligence as we do in Waukesha County.

You can still make your voice heard on this issue. Here are some easy and effective ways.

Update: (3:43pm) According to the State Journal, Kloppenburg will make an announcement regarding her decision to request a recount at 4pm.

Update: (3:52pm) The State Journal is tweeting that the GAB says Kloppenburg has officially requested a recount. I'll make a separate post when there's something more official to cite.

Update: (4:37pm) Info on the announcement is here. Short summary: Kloppenburg requesting statewide recount and full investigation.

Government Accountability Board Finds Few More Anomalies With Waukesha County - Still Investigating

Today, the Government Accountability Board announced that after speaking with Waukesha County Clerk Kathy Nickolaus and reviewing documents, they have found only a few more minor anomalies with the 2011 vote count in Waukesha County. However, the report says, "The G.A.B. will continue to review additional documentation and correspondence from the Waukesha County and Municipal Clerks' offices relating to all issues identified for investigation." So, it doesn't appear as though they have completed their investigation. They say a more "detailed report will be completed in the next 60 days."

Since the GAB's investigation into the vote counts in Waukesha County has barely touched the surface and they won't look at the actual ballots, none of us can be sure at this point that all of the numbers are correct. We have more than enough reason to suspect that votes in Waukesha County could have easily been lost or changed. There's so much reason that the decision to request a recount shouldn't be based on the latest vote counts without a full bipartisan investigation. However, it seems we're on that path.

Waukesha County Clerk Kathy Nickolaus should have given us many more details by now out of duty to her office, and that's why I've called for her resignation. We should be able to trust a county clerk's word, and if there are doubts, such a clerk should be willing to help us understand. We can't have open and transparent elections when county clerks behave as Nickolaus has.

I put together a bit of a timeline of the events after Nickolaus's press conference here.

Yesterday, the Prosser campaign said that they plan to "vigorously" prevent any recount, even though they were previously open to a recount. Prosser is only ahead now because of the controversial vote counts from Waukesha County. So it's imperative that we express our doubts and get answers now.

Here are some easy and effective ways you can do that:

Tens of thousands of Wisconsinites have already signed a petition for a bipartisan investigation into the vote counts in Waukesha County started by One Wisconsin Now. I urge you to add your name to the petition here and tell your friends and family about our request for a bipartisan and impartial investigation.

Wisconsinites can file a complaint with the Wisconsin Government Accountability Board regarding issues with the processes and security of the Waukesha County election system, the delayed explanation we were given for the missing votes, and Nickolaus's refusal to give a clear explanation for over a week. The GAB has a complaint form here: http://gab.wi.gov/node/1282. The election official in this case is Waukesha County Clerk Kathy Nickolaus.

You can join the wave of rallies across Wisconsin happening every day. Wisconsin Wave is a non-partisan effort to unite Wisconsinites together in support of democracy, workers' rights and other fundamental Wisconsin values. They have a list of their events here. Many other events are listed at Defend Wisconsin. There are probably many other events not included in those two lists, but they're good places to start.

We must demand real solutions to problems with our elections. Unlike pseudo-solutions such as the Voter Distraction Bill (Senate Bill 6), which requires an ID to vote and only seeks to stifle valid voters, there are solutions that would noticeably improve our elections.

The most important thing you can do right now is help us push Kathy Nickolaus to answer our relevant questions before the recount deadline. Spread the word. Tell your friends and family about the questions you have, why you think Nickolaus should answer those questions before a recount is conducted, and how they can help. Contact the press and your state representatives, and demand a clear explanation before a recount.

Contacting the press may prove to be most effective, and Facebook and Twitter are effective as well, so don't forget them.

Finally, don't forget to email Scott Walker, because I'm sure he'll tell us how many supporters have emailed him: govgeneral@wisconsin.gov. All you need is a brief message stating that you don't have confidence in the vote counts from Waukesha County and a full bipartisan investigation should be conducted.

Rinse and repeat as necessary.

Time is of the essence.

Latest Info On Wisconsin Supreme Court Election - Prosser Attempting To Squash Democracy

According to WisPolitics, tweets by the State Journal, and a TPM article, the Prosser campaign plans to "vigorously" block any effort for a recount, even though they were previously open to a recount. Now I'm extremely skeptical, we need answers now! This is an attempt to squash democracy in its clearest form!

I also keep getting asked what's the latest information on the Supreme Court election and the vote count in Waukesha County. So I decided I would write a post with all of the latest news. The short answer is nothing.

Here's what I know at this point:

• The latest vote counts can be found here.
• Waukesha County Clerk Kathy Nickolaus still hasn't clarified her explanation for the missing votes that she gave during the press conference on April 7th.
• The day after Nickolaus's press conference, U.S. Congresswoman Tammy Baldwin asked U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder to investigate the vote count in Waukesha County. The request is being reviewed.
• Two days after the press conference, One Wisconsin Now began collecting signatures for a petition to request a bipartisan investigation. In less than 48 hours they had collected over 10,000 signatures. You can sign the petition here.
• Last week Monday (4/11), the Waukesha County Canvass Board member who is the only non-Republican member and has been used to legitimatize the vote counts, Ramona Kitzinger, wrote a statement saying that she "was never shown anything that would verify Kathy's statement about the missing vote" and she told Nickolaus that she doesn't "understand anything about computers."
• Later that day, the Government Accountability Board Director Kevin Kennedy told WisPolitics they didn't at that point see "any criminal activity." WisPolitics added that the GAB is in the "process of matching those numbers for all Waukesha County wards." I note that criminal activity in this situation can be very difficult if not impossible to detect, and the GAB is not looking at the ballots.
• Wednesday, nine state Democrats wrote a letter to the Republican chairs of the Elections and Judiciary committees asking those committees to investigate Waukesha County Clerk Kathy Nickolaus. There's been no response that I'm aware of.
• Thursday, the Democratic Party of Wisconsin asked the GAB to investigate the vote counts in Waukesha County going back to at least 2006. The GAB then confirmed they are investigating election results from that county going back at least five years.
• All of the counties finished their canvass last week Friday with Prosser in the lead only by using the controversial new vote counts from Waukesha County.
• The GAB hasn't completed their investigation into Waukesha County's vote counts yet.
• Kloppenburg has until Wednesday at 5pm to request a recount, and nothing specific has come out of that campaign that I'm aware of.
• The Prosser campaign won't comment on the vote count in Waukesha County even though they're demanding there be no recount and will "vigorously" prevent any attempt. Prosser's a Wisconsin Supreme Court Judge, but he says he has no position on the matter. It sounds like Prosser needs more information about the missing votes before drawing a reasoned conclusion, too. However, then it's absolutely wrong to claim there's no need for a recount.
• Tuesday (4/19), the GAB issued a statement saying that they see no major discrepancies in the 2011 vote counts from Waukesha County and only a few more minor anomalies have been found thus far, but they're still continuing their investigation. I note that there are still many ways the vote counts could differ from the actual counts for which the GAB hasn't looked into.
• Wednesday, JoAnne Kloppenburg announced her request for a statewide recount and a full investigation, citing many unanswered questions and unresolved issues with the election.

Considering this was a non-partisan election, it's sad that more Republicans aren't asking for clarification so that we can determine and fix the issues in Waukesha County. I'd be demanding answers no matter what, because I know our elections have issues and I would like them solved. Instead, the Republicans in the State Senate are trying to quietly pass the Voter Distraction Bill (SB6) to spend lots of money to try to fix a near non-issue in our elections, voter fraud (more below).

Prosser's right, we shouldn't have to pay for a recount to get answers, and we shouldn't base a recount on controversial vote counts. So we need clarification now. However, it's absolutely wrong to prevent a candidate from executing a recount when there's so much doubt surrounding the one thing preventing that candidate from winning.


Tens of thousands of Wisconsinites have already signed a petition for a bipartisan investigation into the vote counts in Waukesha County started by One Wisconsin Now. I urge you to add your name to the petition here and tell your friends and family about our request for a bipartisan and impartial investigation.

I implore you to help fix the issues with the election system in Waukesha County, and Wisconsin as a whole, by demanding clarification now. Here are some easy and effective ways to help get that clarification.

We must demand real solutions to problems with our elections. Unlike pseudo-solutions such as the Voter Distraction Bill (Senate Bill 6), which requires an ID to vote and only seeks to stifle valid voters, there are solutions that would noticeably improve our elections.

Update: (April 19, 6:31pm) Updated to include the latest statements from the Government Accountability Board.

I also find it interesting that the only two things the Journal Sentinel appears to have left out of this article is the Prosser campaign statements saying they plan to "vigorously" block a recount and the fact that the GAB is continuing their investigation.

Update: (April 21, 8:18am) Added JoAnne Kloppenburg's recount and investigation announcement.

It's Not Clear That Prosser Has Won Wisconsin Supreme Court Election

There have been many questions surrounding the official vote count provided by Waukesha County Clerk Kathy Nickolaus. Currently, the Government Accountability Board is investigating the vote counts in Waukesha County for elections going back at least five years, and will not certify the results until they have completed the investigation. The public has no confidence in the count provided by Nickolaus.

The only reason Prosser is ahead now is because of the new numbers from Waukesha County, see the latest count. So, the vote counts in Waukesha County are critical, and we must know the truth. The Government Accountability Board won't certify the numbers until they finish their investigation, but they won't look at the actual ballots. We must demand answers now from Nickolaus before we can reach any reasonable conclusion.

Then, Kathy Nickolaus must resign for refusing to provide us trust and clarity.


Tens of thousands of Wisconsinites have already signed a petition for a bipartisan investigation into the vote counts in Waukesha County started by One Wisconsin Now. I urge you to add your name to the petition here and tell your friends and family about our request for a bipartisan and impartial investigation.

I implore you to help fix the issues with the election system in Waukesha County, and Wisconsin as a whole, by demanding clarification. Here are some easy and effective ways to help get that clarification.

We must demand real solutions to problems with our election systems. Unlike pseudo-solutions such as the Voter Distraction Bill (Senate Bill 6), which requires an ID to vote and only seeks to stifle valid voters, there are solutions that would noticeably improve our elections.