137

Wisconsin voters are deciding whether to ban private money support for elections (apnews.com)

submitted 7 months ago by MicroWave@lemmy.world to c/politics@lemmy.world

3 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Wisconsin voters on Tuesday were deciding on two Republican-backed constitutional amendments, one of which would ban the use of private money to run elections in reaction to grants received in 2020 that were funded by Facebook creator Mark Zuckerberg.

The other proposal would require that only election officials designated by law can administer elections. That is already the law, but adding that language to the Wisconsin Constitution would make it harder to repeal.

Democrats opposed both measures, which they argued would make it more difficult to conduct elections in the presidential battleground state.

Polls are open 7 a.m. to 8 p.m. following an early, in-person absentee voting period that began two weeks ago.

top 3 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[-] whoreticulture 35 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

To me, this headline was misleading. I assumed it was about funding campaigns, but this is for the actual process of voting itself.

The money was spent in a wide variety of ways — protective gear for poll workers, public education campaigns promoting new methods to vote during the pandemic, and new trucks to haul voting equipment.

The Republicans keep using the same strategy, restrict voting as much as possible. They won't adequately fund elections, and they are making it illegal for private funders to do so.

[-] autotldr@lemmings.world 3 points 7 months ago

This is the best summary I could come up with:

MADISON, Wis. (AP) — Wisconsin voters on Tuesday were deciding on two Republican-backed constitutional amendments, one of which would ban the use of private money to run elections in reaction to grants received in 2020 that were funded by Facebook creator Mark Zuckerberg.

Democrats opposed both measures, which they argued would make it more difficult to conduct elections in the presidential battleground state.

Both proposed constitutional amendments are in response to grant money that came to Wisconsin in 2020 from the Center for Tech and Civic Life, a liberal group that fights for voter access.

The argument came amid false claims made by former President Donald Trump and his supporters that widespread voter fraud led to Biden’s 2020 win.

Opponents of the amendments worry they could lead to attempts to stifle current practices enhancing voter participation.

Three courts and the bipartisan Wisconsin Elections Commission rejected complaints challenging the legality of the grant money.

The original article contains 458 words, the summary contains 153 words. Saved 67%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!

[-] Dkarma@lemmy.world 1 points 7 months ago

Time to start insisting that this referendum prevents all private money from being used in anything related to elections including candidates.

This referendum established only public funds are legal to be used in elections in any way.

this post was submitted on 02 Apr 2024

137 points (100.0% liked)

politics

19120 readers

2286 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

• Register To Vote

• Citizenship Resource Center

• Congressional Awards Program

• Federal Government Agencies

• Library of Congress Legislative Resources

• The White House

• U.S. House of Representatives

• U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

• News