On Election Day, Wisconsinites voted to amend an article in the state’s constitution pertaining to suffrage.
The ballot question specifically asked, “Shall section 1 of article III of the constitution, which deals with suffrage, be amended to provide that only a United States citizen age 18 or older who resides in an election district may vote in an election for national, state, or local office or at a statewide or local referendum?”
The Wisconsin Constitution currently reads, “Every United States citizen age 18 or older who is a resident of an election district in this state is a qualified elector of that district.”
Therefore, the amendment will change the wording of “Every United States citizen age 18 or older” to “Only a United States citizen age 18 or older.”
State Democracy Research Initiative Executive Director Bree Grossi Wilde explained the importance of this Wisconsin constitutional referendum.
The amendment was part of a national trend, with several states adopting similar measures to close the door on the possibility of non-citizens voting in the future, Grossi Wilde said. But Grossi Wilde restated that it’s already illegal for non-citizens to vote in federal and state elections.
“The main thing this amendment does is close the door to the possibility that a city or town in Wisconsin might in the future decide to allow non-citizens to vote in local elections, which a small number of places around the country have done,” Grossi Wilde said.
But, Grossi Wilde said that this scenario is not currently an issue in Wisconsin, as no municipalities have indicated an interest in extending voting rights to non-citizens. This has left many voters questioning the purpose of the amendment.
Grossi Wilde said the lack of context and explanation on the ballot made it challenging for voters to understand the implications. She said those opposing the amendment believed it was designed to create a misimpression that non-citizens were currently voting illegally, which isn’t the case.
Grossi Wilde said the lack of comprehensive voter guides and explanations in Wisconsin, unlike some other states, made it even more challenging for voters to understand what they were voting for.
“If you read the ballot question, it’s not even clear that the now prior version of our Constitution still had a requirement that you be a citizen in order to vote, to be an eligible voter,” Wilde said. “So if you don’t know that, and don’t have that history, and you’re just reading it, it makes sense to me why people are voting yes on it.”
This lack of voter education may have contributed to the amendment’s passage, Grossi Wilde said. Dane County was the only county in the state where over 50% of residents voted “no.”
League of Women Voters of Wisconsin Communications Director Molly Carmichael offered additional information and opinions from the organization.
Carmichael said that the key factor was changing ‘every,’ an inclusive word, to ‘only,’ an exclusive word.
The League of Women Voters of Wisconsin sees this change as an opportunity to add voting barriers, so despite being a non-partisan organization, they took a ‘no’ stance on this amendment, according to Carmichael.
“We saw this constitutional amendment as potentially opening the door for barriers that could essentially disenfranchise eligible voters,” Carmichael said.
Carmichael, like Grossi Wilde, suggested that the wording of the ballot question may have contributed to voter confusion and the ultimately high approval rate across the state.
Back in 2011, Wisconsin passed a law requiring voters to present a valid photo ID. Wilde said that a possible effect of this change could require voters to prove their citizenship by presenting a birth certificate, a document that some US-born citizens may have trouble locating or proving.
The League of Women Voters has expressed concerns that this amendment could open the door for future legislative efforts to restrict voting rights in Wisconsin. Carmichael said that there’s a need for clear and understandable ballot measures, as well as improved voter education efforts, to ensure that citizens are fully informed when casting their ballots.
“We’re not anti-constitutional amendment. It’s just when that’s the only way [legislators are] getting things done, because you can’t work with the governor, you can’t work with your peers… it’s not effective governing,” Carmichael said.
The passage of this amendment has sparked concerns among voting rights advocates like Carmichael, who fear it could lead to a gradual erosion of voting rights in the state. As Wisconsin continues to grapple with the implications of this change, the need for transparent and accessible electoral processes remains an issue.
