The Wisconsin Recall Process and Timeline

Summary: What to know about State Senate Recalls in Wisconsin this year.

On Friday, grassroots organizers in the La Crosse area announced they had collected more than twice as many signatures as they needed to recall GOP State Senator Dan Kapanke.

Many Wisconsinites, and non-Wisconsinites alike, have been asking about the exact process and timeline for the recall of state senators this year.

This is the jist of it.

The recall process is complex and, due to the unprecedented number of recall efforts happening at the same time, specific timelines for recalls in any individual State Senate district are uncertain.

Petition Due Dates
Recall petitioners have 60 days to collect the appropriate number of signatures needed to initiate a recall election following the registration of their committees.

The number of signatures a recall petition committee needs to collect is equal to 25% of the number of votes in the most recent race for Governor in that district.

The following table reviews the petition due dates and signatures needed for every State Senator facing recall efforts.


*Recall petitions completed.

Timeline for Recall Elections

General Timeline

The normal timeline (according to state law) for recall elections is as follows:


*Depending on when the closest Tuesday is to that timeline.

Thus, the earliest any general recall election will take place (Kapanke’s) would be July 19th. The latest any recall election (Lassa’s and Hansen’s) can happen this year is September 6th.

Consolidated Recall Elections

The Government Accountability Board has not yet determined what actions it may take to try to consolidate recall elections to the same dates. There is no rule or legislation in Wisconsin for consolidating recall elections because no one ever thought there would be this many recall efforts happening simultaneously.

Nonetheless, the GAB has indicated that they may use the court system to consolidate these elections, arguing that it is unfair to voters who might be confused as to what exact date they are supposed to vote in the recall election in their district.

What Losing Unions Means for Democrats

Summary: Why Wisconsin's "budget repair" bill is really about giving the GOP unlimited power.

By now, everyone is aware of what’s happening here in Wisconsin.


Our newly elected governor, Republican Scott Walker, has introduced a “budget repair bill” that would strip public-sector workers of their collective bargaining rights.

Although there are budget-balancing measures in the bill, it goes far beyond that.

What the bill would do to public-sector labor organizations:
• Prevent collective bargaining over salaries and wages beyond cost-of-living adjustments
• Ban collective bargaining over pensions and health care benefits as well as working conditions
• Stop unions from receiving dues through paycheck deductions
• Require the unions to hold annual elections among their members for the recertification of the union.

When you put all these things together, it is obvious that many public employees will ask the same question: why keep the union?

Make no mistake, if this bill passes in the form Walker is demanding, it will dissolve public employee unions.

Walker claims the bill is to prevent a $137 million shortfall in the state’s budget, and to close the gap public employees needed to put approximately 6% of their income toward their pensions and 12% of their income toward their health care plans.

The unions conceded on those grounds long ago.

So state Democrats issued a proposal that would balance the budget -- and give Walker virtually everything he wants -- while leaving collective bargaining untouched.

Walker: “not good enough.”

Then, state Republicans offered another proposal. It would give Walker virtually everything he wants, with a two-year moratorium on collective bargaining.

Walker: “still not good enough.”

So why does Walker insist on busting unions?

At this point, it is clear that the controversial bill has nothing to do with balancing the budget. It doesn’t even have to do with destroying unions. It has to do with Democrats.

It’s often said that the Democratic Party is a “big tent” party. Well, if the Democrats are a big tent, the unions are the poles that hold it up.

Back when I worked on a congressional campaign in northeast Wisconsin, and my organization needed to quickly round up volunteers, I always told my interns to contact three groups of people:

1) Previous volunteers
2) Leaders in the local county Democratic Party.
3) The United Steelworkers

Unions are critical to the Democrats. No one else in the tent offers the same structural support. Environmental groups, LGBT groups, minority groups, and even women’s advocacy groups tend to be little more than social clubs that offer their votes and -- occasionally -- a little money.

Unions, on the other hand, are well financed and well organized for the mass support efforts needed to win elections. And with the exception of SEIU and a few others, public-sector unions like AFSCME and the teachers are the only ones left with any real strength.

Without organized labor, Democrats will lose easy votes, a ready-to-assembly pool of volunteers, and most importantly, a lot of massive PAC checks.

(Want further proof? The three public employee unions who endorsed Walker and who tend to be more conservative -- the Professional Fire Fighters of Wisconsin, the Wisconsin Professional Police Association, and the Wisconsin Troopers’ Association -- were all exempt from his proposal.)

Simply put, without organized labor, Democrats will be neutered.

To be fair, the Republicans have a lot of similar resources (like the Tea Parties) rooted in business groups (Koch Industries being the most notorious these days). But business groups are at no risk of being broken up, especially in the age of Citizens United.

As a political operative for Democratic candidates, I have real concerns about staying in Wisconsin if this bill passes. If labor groups don’t survive, how will my party survive? If my party doesn’t survive, how will I survive?

Make no mistake; this bill is about destroying the opposition -- not balancing the budget.

Editorial: The Difficulty in Facing November

Summary: Dave speaks to the fears that Democrats have moving forward.

Taking a look at this blog, comparing this year’s posts to last year’s posts, you can see a burgeoning trend.

Whereas last year I commented much more on Tea Parties, day-to-day embarrassments for the GOP, and Obama’s job approval ratings, I’ve now started talking more about things like the effectiveness of campaign ads and the British elections from earlier this year.

It’s because I’m finding it harder and harder to speak of good news for the Democrats going into November’s midterm elections.

It’s not difficult for Democrats to feel a bit frightened right now. Even those who (unlike me) can’t ignore the topic altogether -- those who work on Democratic congressional campaigns at the moment -- are still doing their best to practice cognitive dissidence. It’s the only way to proceed and do their jobs without falling apart emotionally.

But like all Democrats, I have to confront this fear for the moment, and speak to the reality of the political environment.

November 2, 2010, is going to be a bad day.

I’m not going to say we’ll definitely lose the House of Representatives, and I actually doubt we’ll lose control of the Senate. But I will say this much: don’t expect a terrific Congress or terrific state governments next year.

I look toward my own state, Wisconsin, as a golden example of this reasonable pessimism.

Here in the Badger State we have a governor’s race, U.S. Senate race, and two Congressional races that could easily flip their respective offices from Democratic to Republican.

We cheeseheads have proudly gone blue in the past five presidential races, two gubernatorial races, and eight U.S. Senate races. Our Congressional Delegation, State Senate, and State Assembly all have Democratic majorities.

Yet the model statesman we have always been most proud of -- Senator Russ Feingold -- is currently trailing a millionaire GOP insider named Ron Johnson by a 52%-41% margin.

The Congressional seat held by retiring Appropriations Committee Chair Dave Obey is leaning Republican. Another seat -- held by Democratic Dr. Steve Kagen -- is considered a “toss up” in the midst of a race against a Republican businessman who moved to the district (only a matter of months ago) specifically to run for Congress.

Our Governor’s mansion is also at risk of going to Tea Partying Milwaukee County Executive Scott Walker -- a man notorious for flip-flopping and lacking in anything that resembles an intellectual capacity.

Why? One simple reason: the economy is bad right now.

It doesn’t matter what party screwed the economy up, nor does the fact that the same party has no real ideas to solve the problems they complain about.

As political scientists (Niemi and Weisberg, Nadeau and Lewis-Beck, Miller and Shanks, Lodge and Steenbergen) have pointed out for decades, people blindly vote against incumbents when the economy is bad. And for the past few years now, the economy has been really, really bad.

That is the nature of the problem: voters will treat 2010 like a referendum and not as a choice between leaders and their ideas.

Democrats have tried to explain to voters how they should not treat this election as a referendum. But this argument can, in practice, only limit the inevitable damage.

When this election is over, there will certainly be things the Democrats did wrong that we can point to, trying to explain our failures (after the election, I plan on writing an extensive piece on the abysmal failure that was OFA). But most of the problem really boils down to factors that are out of our control as Democratic campaigners.

So until then, let’s do all we can ever do in these scenarios, a plan of action I have come to learn well as a political operative…

…brace for the worst and hope for the best.

Why the Barrett Campaign Can Win in November

Summary: Tom Barrett’s gubernatorial campaign in Wisconsin applies new and traditional techniques alike to defy the odds in 2010.

I can’t really count how many times now I’ve said on this blog that Democrats will have a rough year in 2010. Across the country, the GOP looks poised to retake offices up and down the ticket.

In Wisconsin, two Republican candidates – Milwaukee County Executive Scott Walker and former U.S. Rep. Mark Neumann – have been campaigning for several months (years, arguably) in a gubernatorial race that should theoretically be a pretty easy GOP pick-up.

Democrats, luckily, have managed to secure the bid of Milwaukee Mayor Tom Barrett who made national headlines last summer when he put himself in harm’s way to protect a grandmother outside the Wisconsin State Fair. The “Hero Mayor” status he received will go a long way towards securing the hearts of Wisconsin voters in a year that should bolster conservatives.

But the Mayor’s campaign has been doing more than relying on this status. They’ve been applying both new and traditional tactics that will go a long way come November.

For starters, they’ve been focusing hard on fundraising. Entering the race later than his Republican counterparts – in part because of Governor Jim Doyle’s late retirement announcement and in part because of the incident at the State Fair – he has had to do call-time and fundraisers at a much faster pace.

From Wispolitics.com:

Walker's campaign said the Republican county exec raised almost $1.8 million during the reporting period and ended the year with more than $2 million on hand.

GOP guv rival Mark Neumann filed his report earlier this year. It showed he raised just more than $1.3 million during the reporting period after putting almost $1.1 million of his own money into his campaign.

Dem frontrunner Tom Barrett raised more than $750,000 over 47 days after getting into the race in mid-November and had more than $1.5 million cash on hand. His war-chest got a boost from the more than $800,000 he already had in his mayoral account when he got into the race.

Sure, the Walker campaign might have more cash-on-hand at this point, but when you break it down this is approximately what each campaign was raising per day by the end of the filing period:

Walker: $9,890/day

Neumann: $7,142/day

Barrett: $15,957/day

That’s pretty impressive.

Next, the Barrett campaign has been keeping the political community in Wisconsin confident in his chances. Just look at this email they sent regarding his fundraising numbers and a disappointing Rasmussen Poll:

The impressive outpouring of support was raised in just 47 days, making it the best fundraising start to a gubernatorial campaign in Wisconsin history. The total brought Barrett’s cash-on-hand to more than $1.5 million…

…[Scott Walker] raised just $1.79M in 6 months. For the GOP frontrunner, for a guy who's been in race for 5 yrs, in the best GOP electoral climate in 15 yrs, this is a pretty weak showing.

He has to have spent $800K-$900K this period, a staggeringly high burn rate. His administrative incompetence has wreaked havoc with the County, now it’s hurting his campaign. Can Wisconsin afford this awful mismanagement in the governor’s office?...

…

Rasmussen Poll Numbers

- Their methodology is unreliable

"Other pollsters and political observers have long complained that Rasmussen polls are conducted through automated phone calls that reflect only the views of the most fervent likely voters because others are likely to hang up on a computerized caller."

--Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, 1/29/09


- Rasmussen oversamples conservative voters. In the recent Wisconsin gubernatorial poll, for example, nearly 60% of respondents oppose Obama, including most strongly, a high number given 2008 election results

Alan Abramowitz, an Emory University political scientist, said there was “huge concern right now” that Rasmussen was polling a universe of largely conservative-minded voters. “How is Rasmussen selecting likely voters almost a year before the election? And why would you even screen for likely voters in measuring presidential approval?” said Abramowitz. “My guess is that it's heavily skewed toward older, white, Republican voters.”

--Poltico.com 1/2/10

Emails like this are exactly the kind of thing that kept Obama supporters confident during the 2008 presidential primaries, when people were convinced Hillary Clinton would be the inevitable Democratic nominee. Obama’s primary upset over Clinton would not have been possible otherwise. In 2010, it will be tactics like this that will send Barrett to Madison.

For those who have signed up for the Barrett email list, they’ve also been receiving important updates about the race that keep them engaged and give them a sense for who the man is. This is especially important when voters cannot see speeches day-in and day-out like they did in 2007 before the Iowa Caucuses.

Take this email for example:

Dear Friend,

Tom visited a worker training facility in Kaukuana today and he sent me this note on how he thinks we can get Wisconsin's economy moving again…

Phil Walzak
Senior Advisor
Tom Barrett for Wisconsin

Begin forwarded message...

From: Tom Barrett
Sent: Thursday, February 4, 2010 1:37 p.m.
To: Phil Walzak
Subject: What I saw in Kaukuana today

Phil-

I had a great time today visiting the worker training facility in Kaukauna, WI. What I saw was incredible, and represents the kind of vision and commitment to partnership that I will bring to the governor's office to create jobs, expand opportunity, and get Wisconsin's economy working again.

The training center is a 41,000 sq. ft. facility that provides apprenticeship training programs to workers in a broad range of fields. It is operated by the Plumbers and Steamfitters Local 400, which is comprised of 2,000 people working in 18 counties throughout Northeast Wisconsin.

Local 400 works in partnership with 125 businesses across the region to train and supply the skilled workforce these companies need to get the job done. Basset Mechanical is one of these firms, and a representative of the company joined us for today's tour.

What I saw is a great example of the collaboration we need to get our economy working again -- organized labor and business management coming together to make sure people have jobs, and workers have the skills they need.

These are exactly the types of partnerships that I will fight to build and expand as governor, so let's be sure we are doing all we can to highlight them during this campaign.

See you back in the office,

Tom

Supporters love to see things like this because they are not fabricated. When Barrett sent the email, he clearly didn’t think it would be forwarded to supporters like it was. But by sending out an internal email like that, Walzak knew that he would make supporters feel like part of the team by giving them unmitigated access to the candidate’s informal update.

It also spoke to Barrett’s broader vision of what politics is about: not left v.s. right or Democrat v.s. Republican, but rather “let’s get the job done” – also, it's always a winning message.

And of course, the campaign was sure to let supporters know when they did well in a poll. Here is the breakdown of the latest poll taken regarding a Barrett-Walker match-up:

Milwaukee Mayor Tom Barrett and Milwaukee County Executive Scott Walker are locked in a dead heat in the race for Governor, with Barrett leading by a 1-point margin (40% Barrett, 39% Walker). This is virtually unchanged from a survey we conducted in September 2009, where Barrett led by a 2-point margin (39% Barrett, 37% Walker).

Both candidates show strength in their partisan bases, with Barrett leading among Democrats by a 79% to 4% margin, and Walker leading among Republicans by 82% to 5%. Barrett holds a slight 2-point lead among independents (32% Barrett, 30% Walker).

Barrett and Walker are each known to just over half of the Wisconsin electorate, though Barrett is slightly better liked among those who know each. As illustrated in the chart to the left, Barrett’s favorables are 1 point higher than Walker’s, while his unfavorables are 2 points lower. The same is true among independents, with Barrett (35% favorable, 15% unfavorable) garnering somewhat stronger favorability ratings than Walker (36% favorable, 21% unfavorable).

How will it all turn out in the end? It’s impossible to know who will win at this point, obviously. Despite Barrett’s many strengths, Walker is a formidable opponent and he is proven to be politically-savvy.

But in a year where Democrats are expected to do poorly, Barrett has been leading a remarkable campaign thus far. It really is the best chance Democrats could have of keeping the Governor’s Mansion in 2010.

Political Shake-Up in Wisconsin

Today WALYA reports on local politics from Wisconsin.

Today Gov. Jim Doyle (D-WI) announced he will not be seeking a third term for the state’s highest office. When news broke of his decision over the weekend it caught many in the media by surprise.

Last month, we commented on how state Democratic incumbents across the country were at risk in 2010. Doyle’s own approval rating at the time was 43%, and not long after we finished the post, another poll revealed his approval had dropped to about 34% - with 60% of voters disapproving of his performance.

Of course, Doyle has had a fairly successful second term and he made a point of it in his announcement today, listing a wide range of successes over the past year and a half. But with the impossible predicament of this year’s budget crisis - a result of revenue shortfalls attributable to the recession - no decisions he made were going to be popular.

Now, the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel reports on the scramble for the governor’s seat:

With his decision - 15 months before the 2010 general election and lacking an heir apparent - Doyle has left potential successors on both sides enough time to run a competitive race and an open field for Democratic candidates.

Much will depend on who decides to jump in to the race for governor.

"There's no clear (Democratic) front-runner, certainly," said Joe Heim, a University of Wisconsin-La Crosse political scientist.

The obvious speculations for the Democratic ticket have been on Lt. Governor Barbara Lawton, U.S. Rep. Ron Kind (D-WI) and Milwaukee Mayor Tom Barrett.

The liberal Badger State blog, BloggingBlue.com, gives their thoughts on such candidacies:

Lieutenant Governor Barb Lawton – There’s absolutely no doubt Lt. Gov. Lawton will run to succeed Gov. Doyle. According to campaign finance documents, Lt. Gov. Lawton ended the last reporting period with $50,904.18 case on hand, and once Gov. Doyle formally announces he’s not running, you can expect to see Lt. Gov. Lawton’s fundraising kick into overdrive. Lawton’s weaknesses – as I see them – are the fact that she can be tied to the Doyle administration, and as such she’ll likely face criticism for some of Gov. Doyle’s more unpopular moves as Governor. What’s more, Lawton hasn’t proven she can shine running a campaign of her own, so it will be interesting to see how she does when her campaign isn’t tied to Gov. Doyle’s.

Representative Ron Kind – Though not a full-fledged “Blue Dog” Democrat, Rep. Kind is definitely a centrist Democrat, a fact that could aid him in the parts of Wisconsin that aren’t Milwaukee or Madison. However, I’m not sure how well known Rep. Kind is in the parts of the state that don’t include his Congressional district, and so he’d have to overcome that lack of name recognition in comparison to the other Democratic challengers.

Milwaukee Mayor Tom Barrett – Mayor Barrett ran for governor in 2002, finishing second to then-Attorney General Jim Doyle in the Democratic gubernatorial primary, and I wouldn’t be at all shocked to see Barrett throw his name into the ring for 2010. Barrett was reelected Mayor of Milwaukee in 2008 by the largest margin in 40+ years, and during his time as Milwaukee’s Mayor he’s shown he’s a capable administrator/”chief executive.”

Another potential candidate that has gotten a good deal of attention since Doyle’s intentions were leaked is Dane County (Madison) Executive Kathleen Falk, who ran against Doyle in that 2002 primary and was the unsuccessful Democratic nominee for Attorney General in 2006.

Blogger “Zack W” says he wouldn’t be surprised if Falk ran again, but her loss in the “very winnable” AG race didn’t inspire confidence.

A few other names we’ve heard thrown out there are State Sen. Jon Erpenbach (D-Waunakee) and even Assembly Majority Leader Tom Nelson (D-Kaukauna).

Of course, none of these politicians have said whether or not they will run, but chances are there will be a very competitive Democratic primary.

And on the GOP side, there was already a very competitive primary. Milwaukee County Executive Scott Walker - while probably in the lead - faces a challenge from former U.S. Rep. Mark Neumann (R-WI) and the politically unknown Appleton businessman Mark Todd.

But this will be the first time a sitting Wisconsin governor wasn’t up for re-election in 28 years, and three Republican challengers for the seat will probably not be all we see come September 2010.

Now three more Republican names have been thrown into the mix. Two of them have confirmed that they’re considering: lobbyist Bill McCoshen and former 4-term Governor Tommy Thompson, who left in 2001 to become Bush’s Secretary of Health and Human Services and later a presidential candidate in 2008. Thompson has also been speculated as a possible challenger to U.S. Senator Russ Feingold (D-WI) who is up for re-election next year.

And depending on who does run, it will create a ripple effect (like the one we’ve seen in Illinois) for other Wisconsin races.

If Kind runs, for example, his rural Wisconsin seat will become extremely competitive. He was already being challenged by State Sen. Dan Kapanke (R-La Crosse) for a seat that could easily go red in 2010 without an incumbent in the race. Depending on what candidates the Democrats can produce out there (no names have yet been mentioned) it could turn into Wisconsin’s ugliest battle next year.

Similar things could happen if or when Lawton, Erpenbach, Barrett, or any other Republicans get into the race for governor. Several replacement candidates have - no doubt - already considered the ripple effect possibilities.

It will also be interesting to watch what kind of message the Democratic candidates use to try to hold on to the seat. The Journal Sentinel seems to think that Lawton will try to engage her supporters in the progressive wing of the party while distancing herself from Doyle, and that Kind will use his moderate legislative history to bring in votes from rural areas (presumably). In other words, they will try to run on a “change” basis despite the fact that their party has been in charge.

Or, they might try to build on the successes Democrats have had in Wisconsin lately - with the Great Lakes Compact, BadgerCare expansion, etc. - and hope that they can take credit for improvements in the local economy.

The Republicans will also have to rethink their message (although Walker is telling the press otherwise) because they won’t have a sitting-incumbent to attack. And depending how what kind of improvements happen locally, primary fighting could become intense on both sides.

Either way, Doyle’s decision is going to make Wisconsin a premier battleground in 2010.

Campaign Politics Here and Abroad

It’s Friday, June 12, 2009. Here’s what we’re looking at:

The Service Employees International Union is making a rather strange move to press Sen. David Vitter (R-LA) into supporting the Employee Free Choice Act. Instead of sending their new mailer against him to his constituents in Louisiana, they’ve been sending it to his friends and his part-time neighbors in Alexandria, VA - one former staffer even received it in North Carolina.

Democrats in Wisconsin have some good news and some bad news to talk about at their State Convention tonight. A new DailyKos poll finds that despite the fact that many Democratic politicians aren’t viewed so favorably there – Sen. Russ Feingold being the major exception – the Badger State would still choose them over Republicans in 2010.

Just next door, the Minnesota Senate race from last year takes another interesting turn. A Ramsey County court ruled yesterday that (soon-to-be-former) Sen. Norm Coleman owes (soon-to-be) Sen. Al Franken nearly $95,000 in court fees for continuing to make appeals. The question now is whether this race will ever actually end.

Meanwhile, it’s Election Day in Iran! Some analysts say it’s so close that Iran ’09 could be just like Florida ’00. Let’s hope not. The elections are being extended to make sure everyone has the chance to vote, so it looks like it will stay reasonably clean, although the challenger is very worried about rigging.

Plus journalist and political scientist Stephen Kinzer says this democratic practice could bring America and Iran closer together.

For more coverage of the Iranian election, visit the special Huffington Post page.

Wisconsin Heads to the Polls Next Week

Today WAYLA reports on local politics from Wisconsin.

The Badger State will vote for two important, non-partisan, state offices on Tuesday, April 7th - the State Supreme Court and State Superintendent.

State Supreme Court
The typical issues of crime and excessive lawsuits have come up recently in the race for state Supreme Court. While these issues have done well to elect conservative judges to the high court recently, it may not be as relevant this time around.

As we mentioned in a post in early February, the state’s business lobby - Wisconsin Manufacturers and Commerce - has decided to stay out of the race. So far they have certainly kept their word.

Unlike in years past - where conservative Supreme Court candidates won almost entirely because of WMC support - conservative judge Randy Koschnick faces an uphill battle against incumbent Chief Justice Shirley Abrahamson. Koschnick trails Abrahamson by considerable margins in campaign money and no third-party group has come to assist him.

Nonetheless, Koschnick remains optimistic. He says that because more than 4 in 10 likely voters are undecided he has a real chance knocking off the incumbent. But local political scientists disagree.

"In Wisconsin Supreme Court races, there is a large incumbency effect," said UW-Madison professor Katherine Cramer Walsh. "People don't follow the doings of the state Supreme Court."

Charles Franklin, a UW-Madison professor and co-founder of the Internet site www.pollster.com, was also hard-pressed to explain Koschnick's optimism.

"Challengers in nonpartisan spring elections face a huge problem gaining enough visibility and name recognition to mount an effective challenge," Franklin said. "To do so, they need large amounts of money, or the backing of powerful interests who advertise independently."

In an independent poll taken late last month, Abrahamson led Koschnick 41% to 13%. And since then Abrahamson has ramped up the campaign with ad-buys, where as Koschnick has suffered the consequences of poor fundraising and been unable to get on TV.

Even if Koschnick were to build name-recognition now it would likely be too late. Most of the time, the voters that wait until the final few days before the election to make their choice end up splitting their support about 50-50. Mathematically, Koschnick is almost entirely unable to win.

State Superintendent
It has become a heated race between the current deputy State Superintendent, Tony Evers, and the self-proclaimed outsider, Rose Fernandez.

Fernandez recently attacked Evers for an email exchange between him and a school administrator in Green Bay regarding a fundraising event. Jeff Dickert, the school administrator, did not realize it is illegal to use a state email account to discuss political fundraising. Fernandez called it a “win-at-all-cost mentality” that sets a poor example for Wisconsin schoolchildren.

Evers then countered with a press release from State Rep. Don Pridemore's office which called Evers “a bad choice to lead Wisconsin's Department of Public Instruction.” Evers' campaign manager Peter Knudsen said he did not have any evidence that Fernandez was involved, but “that's what we'd like to know.”

But the biggest issue in the race appears to be the involvement of WEAC - the state’s teachers union - which supports Evers. WEAC’s PAC has spent a total $574,000 on the race so far. Fernandez - who is running as the candidate of change to emulate the success of the Obama message, despite being the conservative candidate in the race - has attacked the union as a principle source of failure in the Wisconsin education system.

So who is more likely to win?

It’s a tough question - there is evidence for victory on both sides.

Evers has the support of WEAC which not only helps him financially, but WEAC is organized and can get teachers to the polls. There are already reports of calls to members telling them to vote early for Evers, and the calls can be expected to increase come GOTV weekend. There is no counter-WEAC group organized enough to give the same meaningful support to Fernandez.

Fernandez does, however, have plenty of support. She trailed Evers in the primary by only 4 points, and actually beat him in Milwaukee. Additionally, there are rumors that internal WEAC polling shows Fernandez ahead going into the general election.

For both races, we’ll know for sure a week from tonight.