By allowing ads to appear on this site, you support the local businesses who, in turn, support great journalism.
Novak, Tranel introduce ‘Iowa Model’ redistricting bill
Tranel-Photo
On Sept. 12, Wisconsin Republicans introduced a nonpartisan redistricting bill based on the “Iowa Model” in the Wisconsin State Assembly.

MADISON — State Representative Todd Novak (R-Dodgeville) and State Representative Travis Tranel (R-Cuba City) on Tuesday introduced a nonpartisan redistricting bill based on the “Iowa Model” in the Wisconsin State Assembly. Like the “Iowa Model,” this bill creates a nonpartisan redistricting commission to draw legislative maps in accordance with state and federal law, to be voted on by the legislature and signed into law by the governor.

“We have long supported a nonpartisan redistricting approach,” said Rep. Tranel. “We have seen how well this model has worked in the State of Iowa and feel it could be equally effective here in Wisconsin.”

Currently, the Legislature draws district boundaries after every U.S. census to reflect population changes and the governor approves them. Iowa’s approach to redistricting has long been seen by scholars and political observers as the most fair and transparent in the nation. The agency drafts districts that are uniform in population, compact and contiguous which puts fairness and integrity above partisan politics. 

Although the Legislature is currently under Republican control and current maps are viewed as heavily favoring the Republican Party, Rep. Novak and Rep. Tranel represent districts that are among the most competitive in the legislature. Both representatives have advocated and previously co-sponsored legislation based on the “Iowa Model” before co-authoring the most recently introduced bill. About 63% of Wisconsinites support switching to a nonpartisan committee model for drawing legislative maps.

“This is a piece of legislation we have worked on for years,” Rep. Novak added. “After nearly a decade of listening to constituents ask for this to be implemented, I am thrilled that we have finally been able to convince our Republican colleagues that this is the way forward. I look forward to the Governor signing this historic piece of legislation into law soon.” 

Representative Novak can be reached by phone at (608)-237-9151 or by email at rep.novak@legis.wisconsin.gov.


The Iowa Model, explained

Since 1980, Iowa’s districts have been drawn each decade by nonpartisan legislative staff. According to the National Conference of State Legislatures, Iowa follows a strict set of criteria, including a prohibition on the use of political data. Iowa is one of only a handful of states with such a prohibition. The prohibition is broad in scope, and encompasses the addresses of incumbents, the political affiliations of registered voters, previous election results and demographic information not required by the federal constitution.

Every 10 years after the U.S. Census is conducted, the Legislative Services Agency holds three public hearings on a proposed set of maps, then submits a report on the maps to the state’s General Assembly, which then votes to approve or reject the maps. No amendments are allowed other than corrections to errors.

Iowa state law requires the districts to be as close to equal in population as possible, to try not to divide cities and counties, to be contiguous and to be reasonably compact. It is a blind process that should not favor political parties or incumbents or be used to enhance or dilute the voting strength of minority groups. A five-member advisory commission holds public hearings.

The Iowa Model also has its potential flaws. While Iowa has never rejected all three proposed maps, the model allows for the General Assembly to draw its own maps for the fourth try — essentially the process that Wisconsin currently uses.

“The Vos-style redistricting bill before us today is not a serious attempt to create a fair redistricting process,” said Representative Lisa Subeck of Madison, referencing Wisconsin, Assembly Speaker Robin Vos, a Republican. “It is simply a pathway for Republicans to maintain the status quo with a few extra steps.”

In fact, every year between 2011 and 2018, the Iowa Model was introduced in Wisconsin, but has not had a single hearing during a legislative session.

Should the model get approved in Vos said it would take effect for the 2024 election cycle.

Part of the aim is to avoid potential lawsuits that could arise in front of the Wisconsin State Supreme Court that could rewrite the current maps.

“Hopefully it means that we will take all of the money that has been wasted by the liberal interests suing us over the maps and instead we get to say we don’t need to waste those taxpayer dollars because we can adapt the process that has been used flawlessly in Iowa,” Vos said Tuesday.


Is Wisconsin red, blue, or purple?

Wisconsin is known as a swing state, with tight races at the national level. Tammy Baldwin (D) and Ron Johnson (R) are both in their second term as U.S. Senators. 

The state was a Democratic stronghold in presidential races from 1988 through 2012, with Donald Trump carrying the state by 106,674 votes in 2016. However, in 2020, Joe Biden defeated Trump by 38,491.

During the Democrats’ run in the 1990s and 2000s, Republican Tommy Thompson was elected as Governor four times. Democrat Jim Doyle then served from 2002-2010, when he was replaced by Republican Scott Walker, who then served eight years before Evers was elected in 2018.

Most recently, judge Janet Protasiewicz was elected to the Wisconsin Supreme Court in April 2023, winning by more than 11.1%. While technically a 10-year, nonpartisan position, Protasiewicz ran on a liberal platform. Her election swung the court to a liberal majority for the first time in 15 years. 

While Iowa’s district maps rules require the regions to be contiguous, or all connected, in Wisconsin, multiple districts have “islands”, where an unconnected portion of a district is split off from a neighboring district. 

In fact, Democrats around the state, and even the nation, discount the current legislative maps as being gerrymandered to favor Republicans by a percentage greater than they deserve. 

For instance, Republican Assembly candidates gained 53.6% of the vote, but ended up with 64% of the seats. Republicans in the state senate received 61.1% of the total votes, and hold 66% of the available seats. Democrats went from 38 seats to 35, and Republicans, with the recently redrawn maps, were a district away from a 2/3 supermajority, a majority that was clinched in a special election in July 2023. Evers, meanwhile, won the gubernatorial race with 51.1% of the vote.

Part of Protasiewicz’s campaign was in regards to putting an end to gerrymandering in the state, striking down the current maps and moving to a nonpartisan model. Her comments from the campaign trail caught ire from state Republicans and Vos, who have hinted at the notion of impeaching her from the bench before she even hears a single case if she doesn’t recuse herself.

According to the state Constitution, officers can only be impeached for crimes or corruption, which could make it hard — or even impossible — for Protasiewicz to be impeached. Since the threats, Democrats have launched a $4 million ad campaign in recent weeks. Vos and Republicans have since quieted such talk.


Not everyone is on board

Wisconsin’s Democratic Gov. Tony Evers rejected the model, saying Republicans were “making a last-ditch effort to retain legislative control by having someone Legislature-picked and Legislature-approved draw Wisconsin’s maps.”

Senate Democratic Leader Melissa Agard (D-Madison), called out the sudden reversal.

“Speaker Vos and legislative Republicans are masters of distraction and this most recent attempt is utterly absurd. As we’ve seen for years, the GOP does nothing unless it benefits them. After decades of defending their gerrymandered maps, we’re expected to believe that they have the best interest of voters at heart with this legislation?” Agard said. “Let me be clear, Republicans have done nothing to honor the will of the voters when it comes to nonpartisan redistricting. They ignore the values of the majority session after session. We cannot trust that cheaters will start playing fair now. 

“The Legislature has proven they cannot be impartial with the redistricting process, and it is time for the Supreme Court to focus on the redistricting case that is before them. This Republican stunt is disingenuous and offensive, and Senate Democrats will not play a part in the charade.”


State Senate votes to fire elections administrator

On Sept. 14, the Republican majority in the Wisconsin State Senate voted to reject the supposed appointment of Wisconsin Elections Committee (WEC) Administrator Meagan Wolfe.

“The Wisconsin State Senate cannot entertain a confirmation for an appointment that is not properly before them. Yet, today, they voted to reject the confirmation of Meagan Wolfe as the Administrator of the Wisconsin Elections Commission. The actions taken today are illegitimate and Meagan Wolfe should continue to serve in her current position,” Agard said.

Wolfe was previously the WEC deputy administrator and IT director. In 2011, she joined the staff of the Wisconsin Government Accountability Board, which was later reestablished as the WEC. She has served in her current role since 2018, first as the interim administrator, then was unanimously confirmed by Democrats and Republicans alike 2019, with the term set to end on June 30, 2023.

Agard said Wolfe “is well-regarded and trusted by election officials across the nation” and “played an integral role in the administration of elections throughout the duration of a global pandemic and she continues to ensure that Wisconsin’s elections remain free, fair, and secure.”

Wisconsin Attorney General Josh Kaul announced on Thursday the filing of a lawsuit seeking an order declaring Wolfe is lawfully holding over in her current position and the Senate has no power to reject her.

“The story today is not what the senate has purported to do with its vote. It’s that the senate has blatantly disregarded state law in order to put its full stamp of approval on the ongoing baseless attacks on our democracy,” said Attorney General Kaul. “We are going to court to minimize the confusion resulting from today’s stunt and to protect a pillar of our democracy — the fair administration of elections.”