Tauchen reviving election reform legislation

An effort is underway in the Wisconsin Assembly to change how electors in the Electoral College vote for presidential candidates, and Rep. Gary Tauchen is leading the charge.

Tauchen is circulating a bill that would stop the winner-take-all stance that Wisconsin and most other states use when voting for candidates and instead make it so that the electors representing the various congressional districts cast votes on how the voters on that district voted. For example, if the Eighth Congressional District had a majority of votes in favor of Donald Trump instead of Joe Biden, the elector for the district would have cast his or her vote for Trump when the Electoral College met.

Maine adopted such a system in the 1970s, according to Craig Arrowood, Tauchen’s spokesman, and Nebraska went to that style in the 1990s. Wisconsin would only be the third state that would have a divided elector system.

Although it might appear that the bill is coming up due to the contentious nature of the 2020 election, this is not the first time that Tauchen has brought the bill up. He introduced similar legislation in 2007, according to Arrowood.

“From his perspective, he didn’t like the idea of a complete popular vote, because that would completely dilute Wisconsin’s importance in the election process,” Arrowood said. “The reason he felt the Maine and Nebraska models worked in this state was because it’s a very purple state, and if there’s any issues in a Congressional district, it essentially creates a firewall so that the problem doesn’t spread to the other Congressional districts.”

He noted that, in 2012, some issues came up in Waukesha County with its vote tally. Under Tauchen’s bill, the electoral irregularity would impact that district’s vote and possibly the two statewide electors, but would not result in all 10 of Wisconsin’s electoral votes being affected.

“It doesn’t take all 10 votes with it,” Arrowood said. “From my boss’s perspective, making sure that Wisconsin remains important with the electoral vote. It also makes sure that, if any issues do pop up, it’s limited to one electoral vote rather than all 10.”

Wisconsin was one of the states whose votes were challenged by lawsuits from the Trump campaign, but those challenges were rejected, and the 10 electoral votes went to Biden.

Arrowood noted that the votes for Biden were mainly from results from Milwaukee and Dane County, the two most populous areas and Democratic strongholds in a state where many rural residents tend to vote for Republicans.

“It was a very segmented and fractured sort of vote,” Arrowood said. “The two populous regions voted for Biden, and the rest voted for Trump.”

The main argument opponents had for Tauchen’s 2007 legislation was that presidential candidates would be more likely to come to the state to stump if there was a package of 10 votes up for grabs instead of having to battle for individual electoral votes, Arrowood said.

“The more visits, the more prestige the state gets — that’s the argument we heard against it,” he said.

Tauchen sees it as a compromise between full election reform and the current winner-take-all system, according to Arrowood.

The bill is seeking additional sponsors from the Assembly and Senate, but it has received few nibbles as of Jan. 7, according to Arrowood. The deadline for responses is Jan. 22.

“We’ve got a handful of sponsors,” Arrowood said. “It’s still fresh.”

The bill would likely first go before the Assembly’s Campaigns and Elections Committee and go through a public hearing process, Arrowood said, and if it’s successful, it would then go before the Assembly and Senate for votes.

“We hope that we can get it on the governor’s desk,” Arrowood said.

lpulaski@newmedia-wi.com