SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
A UW-Madison study found 11.2 percent of registered voters who didn't vote last November in Milwaukee and Dane counties were deterred by the state's voter ID law. (Photo: Wisconsin State Journal)
Highlighting the effectiveness of such laws to decrease voter turnout, a new study out of Wisconsin shows that somewhere between 16,000 and 23,000 people did not vote in the state's 2016 November elections due to a newly-imposed restrictive voter ID law passed in the state by the Republican legislature and signed by Gov. Scott Walker.
"Gov. Walker and his co-conspirators ought to be ashamed of what they have done."
--Analiese Eicher, One Wisconsin
According to the Urban Milwaukee:
Thousands and thousands of legal voters in Wisconsin were prevented from casting a ballot in the November 2016 election because of the state's strict voter ID law, according to a study of registered voters conducted by University of Wisconsin-Madison Professor Ken Mayer.
The study was based on a survey of registered voters in Dane and Milwaukee County funded by the Dane County Clerk's Office.
The stunning results include findings that over 11 percent of voters eligible to cast a ballot but who did not cited the voter ID as the deterrent, translating into between roughly 16,000 and 23,000 votes between Dane and Milwaukee counties. The overwhelming majority of those surveyed who reported being unable to or deterred from voting in 2016 did cast a ballot in 2012.
Mayer explained to the New York Times that his study does not claim that the voter ID laws in Wisconsin actually swung the election in Donald Trump's favor, but he would not rule it out either.
"The survey did not ask any questions about how people would have voted or about their party identification," Mayer told the Times. "But it's certainly possible that there were enough voters deterred that it flipped the election."
What's obvious, as many point out, is that discouraging voter turnout is not simply an unfortunate side effect of such law, but the essential reason they have been--and continue to be--pursued by Republican-controlled legislatures in the first place.
\u201cAlternative headline: Wisconsn's Voter ID Law Worked As Intended. https://t.co/KyE755Xmi1\u201d— Adam Smith (@Adam Smith) 1506431296
Writing for Mother Jones, Ari Berman add:
The study also found socioeconomic and racial disparities among those impacted by the new law. "The burdens of voter ID fell disproportionately on low-income and minority populations," writes Mayer. More than 20 percent of registrants coming from homes with incomes less than $25,000 say they were kept from voting by the law; 8.3 percent of white voters surveyed were deterred, compared with 27.5 percent of African Americans.
The new study also suggests that the number of voters disenfranchised by the law is far greater than the number of fraud cases that it was designed to stop. In 2014, during a federal trial where Wisconsin failed to present a single case of voter impersonation that the law would have prevented, a federal judge found that 300,000 voters lacked the strict forms of ID required by the state.
"The number of people who were deterred from voting is many thousands of times greater than the number of cases of voter impersonation that are prevented by this law," Mayer says.
"Gov. Walker and his co-conspirators ought to be ashamed of what they have done," said Analiese Eicher, program director for One Wisconsin, a pro-democracy advocacy group in the state.
Trump and Musk are on an unconstitutional rampage, aiming for virtually every corner of the federal government. These two right-wing billionaires are targeting nurses, scientists, teachers, daycare providers, judges, veterans, air traffic controllers, and nuclear safety inspectors. No one is safe. The food stamps program, Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid are next. It’s an unprecedented disaster and a five-alarm fire, but there will be a reckoning. The people did not vote for this. The American people do not want this dystopian hellscape that hides behind claims of “efficiency.” Still, in reality, it is all a giveaway to corporate interests and the libertarian dreams of far-right oligarchs like Musk. Common Dreams is playing a vital role by reporting day and night on this orgy of corruption and greed, as well as what everyday people can do to organize and fight back. As a people-powered nonprofit news outlet, we cover issues the corporate media never will, but we can only continue with our readers’ support. |
Highlighting the effectiveness of such laws to decrease voter turnout, a new study out of Wisconsin shows that somewhere between 16,000 and 23,000 people did not vote in the state's 2016 November elections due to a newly-imposed restrictive voter ID law passed in the state by the Republican legislature and signed by Gov. Scott Walker.
"Gov. Walker and his co-conspirators ought to be ashamed of what they have done."
--Analiese Eicher, One Wisconsin
According to the Urban Milwaukee:
Thousands and thousands of legal voters in Wisconsin were prevented from casting a ballot in the November 2016 election because of the state's strict voter ID law, according to a study of registered voters conducted by University of Wisconsin-Madison Professor Ken Mayer.
The study was based on a survey of registered voters in Dane and Milwaukee County funded by the Dane County Clerk's Office.
The stunning results include findings that over 11 percent of voters eligible to cast a ballot but who did not cited the voter ID as the deterrent, translating into between roughly 16,000 and 23,000 votes between Dane and Milwaukee counties. The overwhelming majority of those surveyed who reported being unable to or deterred from voting in 2016 did cast a ballot in 2012.
Mayer explained to the New York Times that his study does not claim that the voter ID laws in Wisconsin actually swung the election in Donald Trump's favor, but he would not rule it out either.
"The survey did not ask any questions about how people would have voted or about their party identification," Mayer told the Times. "But it's certainly possible that there were enough voters deterred that it flipped the election."
What's obvious, as many point out, is that discouraging voter turnout is not simply an unfortunate side effect of such law, but the essential reason they have been--and continue to be--pursued by Republican-controlled legislatures in the first place.
\u201cAlternative headline: Wisconsn's Voter ID Law Worked As Intended. https://t.co/KyE755Xmi1\u201d— Adam Smith (@Adam Smith) 1506431296
Writing for Mother Jones, Ari Berman add:
The study also found socioeconomic and racial disparities among those impacted by the new law. "The burdens of voter ID fell disproportionately on low-income and minority populations," writes Mayer. More than 20 percent of registrants coming from homes with incomes less than $25,000 say they were kept from voting by the law; 8.3 percent of white voters surveyed were deterred, compared with 27.5 percent of African Americans.
The new study also suggests that the number of voters disenfranchised by the law is far greater than the number of fraud cases that it was designed to stop. In 2014, during a federal trial where Wisconsin failed to present a single case of voter impersonation that the law would have prevented, a federal judge found that 300,000 voters lacked the strict forms of ID required by the state.
"The number of people who were deterred from voting is many thousands of times greater than the number of cases of voter impersonation that are prevented by this law," Mayer says.
"Gov. Walker and his co-conspirators ought to be ashamed of what they have done," said Analiese Eicher, program director for One Wisconsin, a pro-democracy advocacy group in the state.
Highlighting the effectiveness of such laws to decrease voter turnout, a new study out of Wisconsin shows that somewhere between 16,000 and 23,000 people did not vote in the state's 2016 November elections due to a newly-imposed restrictive voter ID law passed in the state by the Republican legislature and signed by Gov. Scott Walker.
"Gov. Walker and his co-conspirators ought to be ashamed of what they have done."
--Analiese Eicher, One Wisconsin
According to the Urban Milwaukee:
Thousands and thousands of legal voters in Wisconsin were prevented from casting a ballot in the November 2016 election because of the state's strict voter ID law, according to a study of registered voters conducted by University of Wisconsin-Madison Professor Ken Mayer.
The study was based on a survey of registered voters in Dane and Milwaukee County funded by the Dane County Clerk's Office.
The stunning results include findings that over 11 percent of voters eligible to cast a ballot but who did not cited the voter ID as the deterrent, translating into between roughly 16,000 and 23,000 votes between Dane and Milwaukee counties. The overwhelming majority of those surveyed who reported being unable to or deterred from voting in 2016 did cast a ballot in 2012.
Mayer explained to the New York Times that his study does not claim that the voter ID laws in Wisconsin actually swung the election in Donald Trump's favor, but he would not rule it out either.
"The survey did not ask any questions about how people would have voted or about their party identification," Mayer told the Times. "But it's certainly possible that there were enough voters deterred that it flipped the election."
What's obvious, as many point out, is that discouraging voter turnout is not simply an unfortunate side effect of such law, but the essential reason they have been--and continue to be--pursued by Republican-controlled legislatures in the first place.
\u201cAlternative headline: Wisconsn's Voter ID Law Worked As Intended. https://t.co/KyE755Xmi1\u201d— Adam Smith (@Adam Smith) 1506431296
Writing for Mother Jones, Ari Berman add:
The study also found socioeconomic and racial disparities among those impacted by the new law. "The burdens of voter ID fell disproportionately on low-income and minority populations," writes Mayer. More than 20 percent of registrants coming from homes with incomes less than $25,000 say they were kept from voting by the law; 8.3 percent of white voters surveyed were deterred, compared with 27.5 percent of African Americans.
The new study also suggests that the number of voters disenfranchised by the law is far greater than the number of fraud cases that it was designed to stop. In 2014, during a federal trial where Wisconsin failed to present a single case of voter impersonation that the law would have prevented, a federal judge found that 300,000 voters lacked the strict forms of ID required by the state.
"The number of people who were deterred from voting is many thousands of times greater than the number of cases of voter impersonation that are prevented by this law," Mayer says.
"Gov. Walker and his co-conspirators ought to be ashamed of what they have done," said Analiese Eicher, program director for One Wisconsin, a pro-democracy advocacy group in the state.
"If the 4.8% fall in S&P 500 futures at the Asian opening isn't reversed, then it's on course for its worst three-day selloff since the Black Monday crash of October 1987."
U.S. President Donald Trump late Sunday openly embraced the global chaos sparked by his sweeping tariffs, careening headlong into a potentially catastrophic trade war as worldwide financial markets plummeted and American retirees began to panic.
In a post on his social media platform, Trump declared that his tariffs are "already in effect, and a beautiful thing to behold."
"Some day people will realize that Tariffs, for the United States of America, are a very beautiful thing!" Trump wrote as recent retirees and people near retirement expressed fear and astonishment at the swift damage the president's policy decisions have done to their investment accounts.
One retiree, a 68-year-old former occupational health worker in New Jersey, told NBC News that she is "just kind of stunned, and with so much money in the market, we just sort of have to hope we have enough time to recover."
"What we've been doing is trying to enjoy the time that we have, but you want to be able to make it last," the retiree, identified as Paula, said on Friday. "I have no confidence here."
Trump's post doubling down on his tariff regime came as Asian markets cratered and U.S. stock futures opened bright red, signaling that Monday will bring another broad sell-off in equities. One of Trump's top economic advisers claimed in a Sunday interview that the president is not intentionally crashing the stock market, even as Trump—returning from a weekend golf outing in Florida—characterized the tariffs as "medicine."
"I don't want anything to go down," the president said. "But sometimes you have to take medicine to fix something."
Bloomberg's John Authers wrote early Sunday that "if the 4.8% fall in S&P 500 futures at the Asian opening isn't reversed, then it's on course for its worst three-day selloff since the Black Monday crash of October 1987."
Though the stock market and the economy are not synonymous, economist Josh Bivens recently noted that they are currently "mirroring each other: Stock market weakness is reflecting broader economic weakness."
"While the stock market isn't the economy, the stock market declines we have seen in recent weeks are genuinely worrying," wrote Bivens, the chief economist at the Economic Policy Institute. "They are a symptom of much larger dysfunctional macroeconomic policy that will likely soon start showing up in higher unemployment and slower wage growth for the vast majority."
"This was an illegal act," said U.S. District Court Judge Paula Xinis.
A federal court judge on Sunday declared the Trump administration's refusal to return a man they sent to an El Salvadoran prison in "error" as "totally lawless" behavior and ordered the Department of Homeland Security to repatriate the man, Kilmar Armando Abrego Garcia, within 24 hours.
In a 22-page ruling, U.S. District Judge Paula Xinis doubled down on an order issued Friday, which Department of Justice lawyers representing the administration said was an affront to his executive authority.
"This was an illegal act," Xinis said of DHS Secretary Krisi Noem's attack on Abrego Garcia's rights, including his deportation and imprisonment.
"Defendants seized Abrego Garcia without any lawful authority; held him in three separate domestic detention centers without legal basis; failed to present him to any immigration judge or officer; and forcibly transported him to El Salvador in direct contravention of [immigration law]," the decision states.
Once imprisoned in El Salvador, the order continues, "U.S. officials secured his detention in a facility that, by design, deprives its detainees of adequate food, water, and shelter, fosters routine violence; and places him with his persecutors."
Trump's DOJ appealed Friday's order to 4th Circuit Court of Appeals, based in Virginia, but that court has not yet ruled on the request to stay the order from Xinis, which says Abrego Garcia should be returned to the United States no later than Monday.
"You'd be a fool to think Trump won't go after others he dislikes," warned Sen. Ron Wyden, "including American citizens."
Democratic Sen. Ron Wyden of Oregon slammed the Trump administration over the weekend in response to fresh reporting that the Department of Homeland Security has intensified its push for access to confidential data held by the Internal Revenue Service—part of a sweeping effort to target immigrant workers who pay into the U.S. tax system yet get little or nothing in return.
Wyden denounced the effort, which had the fingerprints of the Elon Musk-led Department of Government Efficiency, or DOGE, all over it.
"What Trump and Musk's henchmen are doing by weaponizing taxpayer data is illegal, this abuse of the immigrant community is a moral atrocity, and you'd be a fool to think Trump won't go after others he dislikes, including American citizens," said Wyden, ranking member of the U.S. Senate Finance Committee, on Saturday.
Last week, the White House admitted one of the men it has sent to a prison in El Salvador was detained and deported in schackles in "error." Despite the admitted mistake, and facing a lawsuit for his immediate return, the Trump administration says a federal court has no authority over the president to make such an order.
"Even though the Trump administration claims it's focused on undocumented immigrants, it's obvious that they do not care when they make mistakes and ruin the lives of legal residents and American citizens in the process," Wyden continued. "A repressive scheme on the scale of what they're talking about at the IRS would lead to hundreds if not thousands of those horrific mistakes, and the people who are disappeared as a result may never be returned to their families."
According to the Washington Post reporting on Saturday:
Federal immigration officials are seeking to locate up to 7 million people suspected of being in the United States unlawfully by accessing confidential tax data at the Internal Revenue Service, according to six people familiar with the request, a dramatic escalation in how the Trump administration aims to use the tax system to detain and deport immigrants.
Officials from the Department of Homeland Security had previously sought the IRS’s help in finding 700,000 people who are subject to final removal orders, and they had asked the IRS to use closely guarded taxpayer data systems to provide names and addresses.
As the Post notes, it would be highly unusual, and quite possibly unlawful, for the IRS to share such confidential data. "Normally," the newspaper reports, "personal tax information—even an individual's name and address—is considered confidential and closely guarded within the IRS."
Wyden warned that those who violate the law by disclosing personal tax data face the risk of civil sanction or even prosecution.
"While Trump's sycophants and the DOGE boys may be a lost cause," Wyden said, "IRS personnel need to think long and hard about whether they want to be a part of an effort to round up innocent people and send them to be locked away in foreign torture prisons."
"I'm sure Trump has promised pardons to the people who will commit crimes in the process of abusing legally-protected taxpayer data, but violations of taxpayer privacy laws carry hefty civil penalties too, and Trump cannot pardon anybody out from under those," he said. "I'm going to demand answers from the acting IRS commissioner immediately about this outrageous abuse of the agency.”