Constitutional Amendments on the Spring 2024 ballot:
| Ballot Language |
|
Question 1: Use of private funds in election administration. Shall section 7 (1) of article III of the constitution be created to provide that private donations and grants may not be applied for, accepted, expended, or used in connection with the conduct of any primary, election, or referendum? Question 2: Election officials. Shall section 7 (2) of article III of the constitution be created to provide that only election officials designated by law may perform tasks in the conduct of primaries, elections, and referendums? |
| Constitution Language |
|
Question 1: Section 7 (1) No state agency or officer or employee in state government and no political subdivision of the state or officer or employee of a political subdivision may apply for, accept, expend, or use any moneys or equipment in connection with the conduct of any primary, election, or referendum if the moneys or equipment are donated or granted by an individual or nongovernmental entity. Question 2: Section 7 (2) No individual other than an election official designated by law may perform any task in the conduct of any primary, election, or referendum. |
Grassroots North Shore Recommends Voting NO on Both Ballot Questions.
What your vote on Question 1 means:
| ✓ | A "YES" vote supports this amendment to prohibit any level of government in the state from applying or accepting non-governmental funds or equipment for election administration. |
| ✓ | A "NO" vote opposes this amendment to prohibit any level of government in the state from applying or accepting non-governmental funds or equipment for election administration. |
What your vote on Question 2 means:
| ✓ | A "YES" vote supports this amendment to provide that only election officials designated by law may administer elections. |
| ✓ | A "NO" vote opposes this amendment to prevent anyone from performing tasks in the conduct of primaries, elections, and referendums unless they have been designated by law as eligible to perform those tasks. |
Why Grassroots North Shore recommends voting NO on these proposals:
There are several good reasons to VOTE NO (amended from the League of Women Voters' Toolkit):
- A good reason to vote NO on Question 1: Our state relies on critical funding to ensure our elections run smoothly, to educate voters, and to train poll workers. Prohibiting our state from receiving grants to fund our elections doesn’t improve election integrity, it worsens it. Our democracy depends on an election system that is fair and accessible to all voters.
- A good reason to vote NO on Question 2: Elections are a lot of work. Clerks rely on a whole host of outside experts, volunteers, and community members to make sure our elections are run smoothly and the results are accurate. A handful of politicians want to make the jobs of our election heroes even harder.
- The right to vote is an American freedom. When elected officials try to pass knee-jerk laws that affect the safety and security of our elections, they are preventing voters from making their voices heard. In April, we’re voting no to both constitutional amendments because we know how important it is to have fully-funded and fully staffed elections to ensure all eligible voters have their voices heard. If these amendments pass, the infrastructure that provides us with free and fair elections will be damaged.
Understanding why the MAGA Republicans have proposed these amendments is crucial: Both of them were originally passed as bills with NO support from Democrats in the Assembly and the Senate. Governor Evers vetoed both of them. Because they lacked enough votes to override the veto, right-wing Republicans then passed them as constitutional amendments, presumably becaused the governor cannot veto proposed amendments to the constitution. But in order for them to be adopted, a majority of Wisconsin voters must approve them. This end-run power grab to evade Governor Evers's veto demands that we VOTE NO!
Question 1 and Question 2 are also opposed by All Voting is Local Action Wisconsin, Wisconsin Conservation Voters, and Wisconsin Democracy Campaign. Sam Liebert, state director of All Voting is Local Action Wisconsin, said, "These proposals, under the guise of protecting our elections, are nothing more than thinly veiled attempts to restrict voting rights and undermine the very foundations of our democratic system. It is our duty to stand firm in defending the rights and inclusivity of all eligible voters in our democracy."
See Ballotpedia for more information about Question 1 and Question 2.