Mike Van Someren
Mike Van Someren (Democratic Party) is running for election to the Wisconsin State Senate to represent District 33. He declared candidacy for the 2026 election.[source]
Elections
2026
See also: Wisconsin State Senate elections, 2026
General election
The general election will occur on November 3, 2026.
General election for Wisconsin State Senate District 33
Mike Van Someren is running in the general election for Wisconsin State Senate District 33 on November 3, 2026.
Candidate | ||
 | Mike Van Someren (D) | |
| ||||
 = candidate completed the Ballotpedia Candidate Connection survey. | ||||
| If you are a candidate and would like to tell readers and voters more about why they should vote for you, complete the Ballotpedia Candidate Connection Survey. | ||||
Do you want a spreadsheet of this type of data? Contact our sales team. | ||||
Endorsements
Ballotpedia is gathering information about candidate endorsements. To send us an endorsement, click here.
2022
See also: Wisconsin's 5th Congressional District election, 2022
General election
General election for U.S. House Wisconsin District 5
Incumbent Scott Fitzgerald defeated Mike Van Someren in the general election for U.S. House Wisconsin District 5 on November 8, 2022.
Candidate | % | Votes | ||
| ✔ |  | Scott Fitzgerald (R) | 64.4 | 243,741 |
| Mike Van Someren (D) | 35.6 | 134,581 | |
| Other/Write-in votes | 0.1 | 201 | ||
| Total votes: 378,523 | |||
| = candidate completed the Ballotpedia Candidate Connection survey. | ||||
| If you are a candidate and would like to tell readers and voters more about why they should vote for you, complete the Ballotpedia Candidate Connection Survey. | ||||
Do you want a spreadsheet of this type of data? Contact our sales team. | ||||
Withdrawn or disqualified candidates
- James Kidd (Independent)
Democratic primary election
Democratic primary for U.S. House Wisconsin District 5
Mike Van Someren advanced from the Democratic primary for U.S. House Wisconsin District 5 on August 9, 2022.
Candidate | % | Votes | ||
| ✔ | | Mike Van Someren | 99.9 | 44,305 |
| Other/Write-in votes | 0.1 | 62 | ||
| Total votes: 44,367 | |||
| = candidate completed the Ballotpedia Candidate Connection survey. | ||||
| If you are a candidate and would like to tell readers and voters more about why they should vote for you, complete the Ballotpedia Candidate Connection Survey. | ||||
Do you want a spreadsheet of this type of data? Contact our sales team. | ||||
Withdrawn or disqualified candidates
Republican primary election
Republican primary for U.S. House Wisconsin District 5
Incumbent Scott Fitzgerald advanced from the Republican primary for U.S. House Wisconsin District 5 on August 9, 2022.
Candidate | % | Votes | ||
| ✔ | | Scott Fitzgerald | 99.4 | 118,411 |
| Other/Write-in votes | 0.6 | 769 | ||
| Total votes: 119,180 | |||
| = candidate completed the Ballotpedia Candidate Connection survey. | ||||
| If you are a candidate and would like to tell readers and voters more about why they should vote for you, complete the Ballotpedia Candidate Connection Survey. | ||||
Do you want a spreadsheet of this type of data? Contact our sales team. | ||||
Campaign themes
2026
Ballotpedia survey responses
See also: Ballotpedia's Candidate Connection
Mike Van Someren has not yet completed Ballotpedia's 2026 Candidate Connection survey. If you are Mike Van Someren, click here to fill out Ballotpedia's 2026 Candidate Connection survey.
Who fills out Ballotpedia's Candidate Connection survey?
Any candidate running for elected office, at any level, can complete Ballotpedia's Candidate Survey. Completing the survey will update the candidate's Ballotpedia profile, letting voters know who they are and what they stand for. More than 22,000 candidates have taken Ballotpedia's candidate survey since we launched it in 2015. Learn more about the survey here.
Help improve Ballotpedia - send us candidate contact info.
2022
Mike Van Someren completed Ballotpedia's Candidate Connection survey in 2022. The survey questions appear in bold and are followed by Van Someren's responses. Candidates are asked three required questions for this survey, but they may answer additional optional questions as well.
| Collapse all
Washington is beyond broken. The extreme polarization of our politics and constant infighting is detrimental to our country and is antithetical to our shared goals. I’m running to do the hard work of governing because I believe in the potential of functional government. I’m running for Congress to get the federal government back to work improving lives and advancing the best interests of this great country and its people.
- The middle class is the foundation of this country and we need to enact economic policies that help the middle class grow and thrive. Right now too many government policies only allow those at the very top to succeed while leaving the rest of us behind.
- The government, especially the federal government, is a tool that everybody, not just the super-wealthy and mega-corporations, should get to use to help improve their lives, and this help is not a handout.
- We need to demand accountability of our elected officials and they need to be held to high standards that are enforced.
I’m concerned about the recent increase in crime & believe we need to invest in crime reduction, including more law enforcement. We need to reform policing to ensure good cops are trained, supported & respected, and hold bad cops accountable. We should also decriminalize low-level offenses, like marijuana and homelessness, and handle these issues with professionals other than officers. We must also implement reasonable gun regulations that are supported by the vast majority of Americans, including gun-owners.
Our healthcare system provides incredible outcomes, but is inaccessible for many Americans & this needs to change. We need to improve access by expanding insurance coverage & remove the root causes of skyrocketing costs through price transparency and utilizing the government's negotiation power, especially on prescription drug prices.
Note: Ballotpedia reserves the right to edit Candidate Connection survey responses. Any edits made by Ballotpedia will be clearly marked with [brackets] for the public. If the candidate disagrees with an edit, he or she may request the full removal of the survey response from Ballotpedia.org. Ballotpedia does not edit or correct typographical errors unless the candidate's campaign requests it.
Campaign website
Someren's campaign website stated the following:
| “ |
A COMMON SENSE PLAN TO RESTORE AMERICA’S DEMOCRACY Participation and voting in free & fair elections and the peaceful transition of power have been the cornerstones of our country since its founding. On January 6, 2021, these cornerstones were attacked by people who tried to substitute their will for that of a majority of the American people. This violent and horrifying act did not represent most Americans on either side of the aisle but it did serve as a reminder that democracy is fragile and is under attack. One party has continued the attack on America’s democracy by challenging the legitimacy of elections, gerrymandering legislative maps, and passing laws that make it harder for Americans to vote and easier for candidates to receive anonymous donations. As a student of history, a lawyer, and a passionate believer in American democracy, the current state of democracy has me gravely concerned. Our most fundamental right as Americans is the right to vote for our leaders and make our voices heard through that vote, and we as Americans should demand that this fundamental right, to be a government of the people, be protected above all others. To do this, we need federal legislation that creates a clear baseline of voting protections for citizens of every state in the Union. States that wish to provide more protections and take additional steps to increase the integrity and ease of voting should be free to do so, as long as they meet these basic standards. THIS BASELINE NEEDS TO CONSIST OF THE FOLLOWING: Ban voter suppression laws. We need to make sure that everybody that wants to vote is able to do so, and further ensure that laws passed in the name of “election integrity” don’t have the effect of preventing people from voting. Promote voting. We need to encourage participation in our democracy by ensuring there is plenty of time and a variety of methods for voters to securely participate in the electoral process and vote. End gerrymandering. Gerrymandering is an underhanded way to usurp the will of the people and is wrong, no matter which party is doing it. Constituents need to select their elected officials, not the other way around. We need to end gerrymandering by taking map-drawing out of the hands of politicians, and instead have independent commissions draw district maps. We must also provide courts a standard in law by which to evaluate whether an apportionment plan is gerrymandered for political or partisan purposes, thus, giving the courts a clear path to ensure every vote counts. Reduce big-money influence. The Citizens United case opened the floodgates to corporations and other big-money donors to secretly influence campaigns. We need to ensure that organizations that spend big money in elections, including SuperPACS, social welfare groups, 527s, and anyone else, are forced to disclose the names of their donors and the amounts given by those donors. Ensure election integrity. We need to embrace voter ID as a method of providing faith in our election system while still ensuring full access to the polls for every voter. We can do this by ensuring that more forms of ID are acceptable for voting, and by making it easy and free to obtain IDs for voting purposes. BAN VOTER SUPPRESSION LAWS Voter suppression laws rarely take the form of an outright ban on certain voters or groups of voters. Rather, they usually pretend to protect the “integrity” of elections – the same excuse used to impose poll taxes or literacy tests on Black voters in the Jim Crow south. Reinstitute Pre-clearance - As is proposed in the John Lewis Act, any state that has 15 or more voting rights violations in the previous 25 calendar years or has 10 or more voting rights violations, at least one of which is committed by the state itself, would need to get federal approval before instituting any new election rule. A voting rights violation would include any court decision that prevented a new election policy or procedure in a state or any political subdivision thereof. Prevent Criminalization of Assistance - A number of states have passed laws that would criminalize various forms of assistance to voters. These laws include handing out food and water to voters waiting in line to vote; returning completed absentee ballots for people with disabilities or voters otherwise restricted in their ability to get to the polls; and encouraging voters to request mail-in or absentee ballots in the first place. These laws should be subject to pre-clearance and struck down as the harm outweighs the potential benefit of these laws. States enacting these laws would be committing voting rights violations and would become subject to pre-clearance. Allow Greater Flexibility in Voting Locations - Voters who arrive at the wrong polling location should be able to cast a vote at that location if the voter’s polling place had changed within two months of the election. This will ensure that states cannot utilize underhanded techniques to limit participation in the voting process. PROMOTE VOTING Very closely related to preventing voter suppression is taking steps to promote participation in the electoral process and voting in particular. We need to encourage maximum participation by the population as a whole to ensure that all voices that want to participate can participate. We can do this with the following measures: Longer Timeline for Early Voting - I propose federal regulations that would require at least two weeks of early voting immediately before election day with at least two weekends in that two week period. This will reduce lines and allow citizens ample opportunity to exercise their right to vote when it fits their schedule. It also provides more flexibility in the event emergencies arise that would otherwise prevent somebody from voting on election day. Finally, for people working hourly jobs, many of which start hours before the polls open, participating in an election can act as a poll tax because they are forced to miss work (and forgo hourly compensation during that time) to vote. While most states have laws protecting workers from being terminated for missing work to vote, it still often results in lost wages which is unfair to those workers. Make Election Day a National Holiday - The United States is the world’s oldest continuous democracy and that democratic process should be celebrated. A national holiday on federal election days would be a good way to both honor that which makes our country great while also expanding the ability to participate in that democratic process. This would further support people working for organizations that recognize federal holidays as work holidays because they would not be missing work to participate in the electoral process. Automatic Voter Registration - States should utilize state department of motor vehicle records as well as federal tax return data to automatically register those citizens eligible to vote. Increase Access to Mail-in and Absentee Ballots - The US Postal Service has consistently and securely delivered mail for the country for hundreds of years. This mail has included billions of dollars in commerce annually and the ballots of our service men and women serving overseas without any allegations of fraud or impropriety in such ballots. In light of this, there is no reason to believe the mail cannot be trusted to facilitate voting by our citizens. I propose requiring states to expand access to mail-in and absentee ballots for any reason while also instituting security features to ensure ballots are accurate and secure. This will not only increase participation but will also make it harder for states to suppress the vote through tactics such as closing or relocating polling places. END GERRYMANDERING Partisan gerrymandering has existed in our country since its founding. However, with recent technology and data processing, the effectiveness of gerrymandering has never been greater. Gerrymandering, and partisan gerrymandering in particular, has the effect of nullifying the voice of a large portion of the electorate by packing groups together so their opinions are over-represented in fewer districts or cracking groups apart so their influence is diluted over many districts. In either scenario, gerrymandering allows for elected leaders to pick their constituents rather than constituents picking their leaders, limiting the ability to hold leaders accountable at the voting booth. Lack of accountability ultimately results in lower participation and faith in elections in general, and in turn creates a ruling class that is free to enact whatever policies it desires without fear of rebuke from their constituents. I propose we address gerrymandering in two main ways: Require States to form Independent Commissions for the Drawing of Legislative Maps - Currently 4 states have independent commissions that draw legislative maps. I propose this be the standard for the rest of the country. Independent commissions made up of members from both parties as well as independents but, most importantly, the commissions would not include current or recently retired public officials and lobbyists. This ensures that a variety of voices are heard and that districts are designed in a way that promotes competitive elections rather than building in a structural advantage for one party or the other. Competitive elections can then be decided based on the merits of ideas rather than what team has the built-in advantage in any particular district or precinct. Provide a Standard by which Courts can Determine Gerrymandering has gone too far - The US Supreme Court recently held that courts could not determine whether a state’s legislative maps were unfairly gerrymandered based on partisanship. The Court supported this holding on the basis that such a determination constitutes a political question that courts are not equipped to be involved in. The courts did not feel comfortable determining whether an electoral map is overly partisan-gerrymandered. While this seems absurd based on the fact the courts have made determinations regarding gerrymandering in the past, the easiest solution is to provide the courts with an objective standard to use in determining whether electoral maps are gerrymandered. To do this, I propose looking at the statewide election results for the previous decade (statewide elections not being subject to gerrymandering) and if the results of legislative races do not fall within 5% to 7% of the statewide race results, then the maps may be subject to judicial review. In Wisconsin’s 2020 state assembly and state senate races, Democratic candidates won about 46% of the total votes cast for the assembly but won only 38% of the seats and in the senate Democratic candidates received 47% of the total state senate votes cast but only won about 36% of the state senate seats. These maps would be subject to judicial review and the courts could throw them out as being illegally partisan gerrymandered. REDUCE BIG-MONEY INFLUENCE Money in politics is one of the most persistent problems plaguing the American democratic process. It consistently polls as one of the largest reasons why Americans don’t trust elected leaders and stop participating in the process. It is also one of the most difficult issues to tackle since the Citizens United case held that placing limits on certain entities’ ability to advocate for candidates violated the First Amendment rights of those entities. This has led to a flood of money pouring into races from various groups, most of which do not disclose their funding sources. The only way to truly stop this is through a constitutional amendment which has little likelihood of passing in the immediate future. In the meantime, we need to implement measures to lessen the impact of this money and allow people to make informed decisions on the truthfulness of political ads based on who has paid for and produced the ads. This disclosure requirement will not substitute for the constitutional amendment, which we should continue to pursue, but will help bring market forces to bear on these organizations and allow voters to more fully evaluate the intentions behind political advertising. Pass the DISCLOSE Act - The DISCLOSE Act is intended to enhance the amount of disclosures and the speed with which disclosures of donors to groups spending money in political advocacy. These covered groups would include “social welfare organizations” and superPACs. All political expenditures and donations of $10,000 or more would need to be publicly disclosed within 24 hours of expenditure or receipt. Any government contractors would need to publicly disclose their campaign spending activities of $10,000 or more in the same manner as other covered groups. Perhaps most importantly, pre-recorded telephone calls would require a disclaimer as to who is paying for the calls. These changes would provide voters with the tools to critically evaluate the content of political ads. Violations of the DISCLOSE Act should come with hefty fines to ensure that paying fines does not just become a budget item, but actually discourages the unwanted actions. Require Public Companies to Disclose Political Expenditures - Similar to the DISCLOSE Act, the Securities and Exchange Commission should require all publicly traded companies to disclose all political expenditures by the companies and their highest officers of $5,000. Again, these rules should also come with fines as punishment that are substantial enough to make companies comply with the rules rather than budget for violations of the rules. ENSURE ELECTION INTEGRITY While there are no credible allegations of widespread voter fraud from the 2020 election, it is important to ensure everybody has faith that the election results are accurate. Voter ID - Voter ID is something that many Americans believe in and want to see implemented to ensure the integrity of elections. I support requiring voter ID for in-person voting so long as the acceptable forms of ID include not just drivers’ licenses, but also utility bills, insurance documents, bank statements and similar documentation. Voter ID should not be a barrier, but truly something that protects the integrity of elections. Also, I propose making such IDs free of charge and requiring states that wish to utilize a voter ID law to make issuing offices open for at least one Saturday a month in the three months leading up to an election so that the IDs can be obtained by voters if they wish to obtain them. Paper Ballots - Just about everybody uses computers every day, and we trust the information stored in or produced by those computers. However, we also all understand how easy it is to manipulate computer data. In light of this, I propose that every state be required to maintain paper ballots for all votes cast in person and to store those ballots for at least 6 months after the election. Voters who vote on screens should be able to review their choices on a paper print-out immediately, so there’s no question their vote was recorded as they expected. These ballots would be subject to audit by state officials and chain of custody protocols to ensure no tampering or destruction of the ballots. There would be criminal penalties for anybody caught tampering with or destroying paper ballots. Cybersecurity Improvements - As voting machines become even more widespread, we need to take the time to ensure that our systems are secure from hacking. Generally speaking, voting machines are not usually connected to the internet, and I propose enshrining that rule in federal law – voting machines should never be connected to the internet, which will protect them from being hacked. Data from voting machines should always have a paper back-up, and can only be transmitted from other machines, not the voting machines themselves. Reform the Electoral College and the Electoral Count Act - I believe our President should be the person who gets the most votes, but that there is a role for the Electoral College. First and foremost, we must reform the Electoral Count Act so that it’s even more clear that the Vice President and Congress can’t easily overturn the will of the people through the shenanigans we saw last year and in the infamous PowerPoint. I also support changing the Constitution so that if no candidate wins the Electoral College, that instead of a majority of House delegations, the winner of the national popular vote becomes President. I also support the idea of eliminating any risk of “faithless electors” – the Electoral College vote should reflect the vote of the state, without any shenanigans or unanticipated risk. CONCLUSION This is a living, breathing plan. As the campaign continues, we may make additions and adjustments to it. The truth is, our democracy needs constant maintenance, like a car, a furnace, or a human relationship. It’s not “set it and forget it.” We must take care to ensure it survives for the long term. But if we work together, if we agree on the basics - that our nation relies on the consent of the governed, we will be in much, much better shape.
Violent crime has been increasing in southeastern Wisconsin since 2019. One of the best ways to reduce crime and restore public safety is to make sure the economy is robust and working for everybody, and that everyone has access to good quality, affordable health care, including mental health care. In addition to improving economics and health care, we still need to address the crimes that do occur in a thoughtful and comprehensive manner. This plan will help to restore public safety and address the increase in violent crime in four main ways: 1) investing in law enforcement; 2) a realistic approach to gun safety; 3) better crime prevention; 4) criminal justice reforms, and 5) addressing Alcohol & Drug Addiction and Mental Health. INCREASE INVESTMENT IN LAW ENFORCEMENT It’s time to invest more in our police departments, in common-sense ways that will help improve public safety. To start with, we need to support the officers that we have. To support our law enforcement community, we need to offer competitive salaries, promote continuing education & training and encourage scheduling that allows officers sufficient time to rest. They need to be adequately outfitted with proper equipment and technology. We expect a great deal from these individuals and we must set them up for success. Federal funding should be made available to states and communities to ensure that current officers and new recruits should all receive improved training. This will ensure officers and recruits are equipped to deal respectfully and responsibly with people of all racial, ethnic, and religious backgrounds, as well as different gender identities and sexual orientations . In addition to improving the substance of training, we need to make sure that officers’ training time is sufficient. Our military men and women train constantly so as to perform as close to perfect as possible to minimize negative outcomes when that training is to be called upon. Our law enforcement should also be afforded this opportunity. Many Wisconsinites are concerned as they see levels of violent crime increasing while seeing the number of officers per capita decreasing. An adequately-maintained police department working with other community leaders will help to deter crime, though a one size fits all approach seldom works. Investing in law enforcement can look different depending on the community. It is important to understand the workload of departments and adjust staffing of such departments based on those workloads. Investing in law enforcement could mean more officers, but it could also mean investing in existing officers and potentially using their skills differently. When new officers are hired, emphasis must be placed on adding highly qualified individuals who are held to high standards. Those who fall short must be held accountable. To put more good recruits in the pipeline, we should invest in training programs and partner with schools to promote law enforcement as an attractive career option. To help hold poor performing officers accountable, we need federal whistleblower protections within the ranks. Finally, we need to allow our valuable, highly trained, sworn officers to focus on stopping dangerous criminals to keep our communities safe. Our police shouldn’t need to be social workers or mental health experts. Instead, we need to fully fund creative alternative response programs with teams to complement sworn officers. It will take time to investigate and determine the appropriate responder whether it be a social worker, police officer, or other professional (or any combination) in any given response. The federal government should provide resources and encourage local governments to adequately fund mental health and addiction treatment to keep people out of crisis, thus lowering potential police calls, as well as funding both in-patient and community based mental health programs that individuals and law enforcement can turn to for immediate assistance. This, in addition to appropriately staff a variety of professionals and develop creative responses to homelessness, drug abuse as well as violent crime, in a way that best serves those communities, will help lower our crime rates and increase the effectiveness of our police force. STOPPING THE EPIDEMIC OF GUN VIOLENCE I’m a gun owner, and many of my neighbors are too. We own them for hunting, for personal protection, and as a hobby. I fully support the Second Amendment’s protection of responsible gun ownership. At the same time, I don’t think people have the right to own grenade launchers, fully automatic machine guns, or tanks. I know I’m not alone in this belief. With that in mind, I support universal background checks and the enforcement of straw purchase laws, and cracking down on dealers who violate the regulations. In states in which universal background checks are in place, gun deaths have decreased. Meanwhile, states that have not implemented universal background checks have seen their gun deaths increase. I will work to improve coordination and communication between federal agencies like ATF and FBI and state & local law enforcement agencies to quickly identify dangerous individuals and share information. There are a number of laws on the books that don’t serve the intended purpose. Statistics show that people who commit domestic violence are more likely to commit gun violence. However, a number of loopholes exist in the background check process that allow for people who commit domestic violence to still obtain a gun. We need to clean up these laws so that a person cannot get a gun if (i) a person is convicted of committing domestic violence, regardless of relationship status at the time of the domestic violence; (ii) is convicted of stalking a person; or (iii) is subject to a temporary restraining order in connection with a domestic violence allegation. Additionally, the record system must be modernized to ensure an accurate background check. Again, all the policies outlined above are common-sense changes to existing laws, which would have the effect of keeping guns out of the hands of those people, who most gun owners agree, should not have guns. PREVENTING CRIME IN THE FIRST PLACE Here, we need to invest in community-based, evidence-driven violence prevention programs, which have been shown to reduce violence by as much as 60%. This includes addressing the critical lack of mental health resources, such as community mental health programs and clinics. We should also expand summer and after-school youth programming to give teens and young adults productive outlets while fostering a sense of community. As noted above, improving economic opportunities for all Americans will reduce crime. Numerous studies show that poverty and lack of economic opportunities is strongly correlated with higher crime rates. A successful economic policy that works for all Americans is also a good public safety policy. REFORM OUR CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM Finally, restoring public safety means changes in our criminal justice system. Let me be clear — Racial disparities in the criminal justice system must end. National statistics show that the way Black men are affected by the justice system demonstrates racial disparity, which needs to be addressed. This is completely unacceptable and we must reverse this trend through reforms in education and training throughout the criminal justice system (including judges, prosecutors, defense attorneys, police, social workers, and corrections officers), better community relations, and further exploration of the problem. We need to reform our bail system so that dangerous criminals and those who are a threat to others are kept behind bars while awaiting trial, while those who are not dangerous or a threat are not jailed before trial simply because they can’t afford reasonable bail. We need to reduce sentencing guidelines for non-violent crime, especially for marijuana-related crimes. In fact, legalization of marijuana would free up significant police resources while also adding tax revenues to the state and allowing for the regulation of the production and sale of marijuana. A regulated marijuana industry not only provides tax revenue but also increases safety to consumers utilizing marijuana and removes a lucrative funding source from criminal organizations. We need to increase funding to our courts and public defenders so that the guilty receive the representation to which they are Constitutionally entitled and the innocent poor are able to put up a fair fight rather than plead guilty to crimes they did not commit. All of this needs to be done quickly so that the innocent can return to their lives with minimal interruption. Those who go to prison should not be condemned once completing their sentence, having the opportunity to successfully reintegrate into communities upon release. For this to happen, challenges including addiction and mental health problems must be addressed. Successful reintegration requires economic opportunities, starting with training for in-demand skills while in prison and after being released. This will address recidivism by giving people the tools to legitimately support themselves and their families after prison. Without the skills to find and maintain gainful employment, returning crime is often the only realistic option. All Wisconsinites deserve to feel safe in their communities. We must be purposeful in our approach to improving public safety by investing in our police; having a realistic approach to gun safety; implementing stronger crime prevention; and reforming the criminal justice system.
The middle class in America has been on the decline for over 40 years thanks to economic policies that have enriched the super-wealthy and megacorporations. The middle class has become hollowed out because its members have had too much money to qualify for programs providing economic assistance to low-income families but not enough money to benefit from the tax breaks and other policies that have helped the super-wealthy expand their share of the pie. In 1970 families classified as upper income earned approximately 29% of all income generated in the US and in 2018 upper income families earned approximately 48% of all income generated in the US. Meanwhile, those families classified as middle income earned approximately 62% of income generated in the US in 1970 and in 2018 those families earned approximately 43% of all income generated in the US. The American middle class was the economic engine of the world at one time and it needs to be rebuilt and strengthened by ensuring that Americans at the bottom of the socioeconomic ladder can get into the middle class and those in the middle class are secure in that status with little risk of falling out. 1. THE MIDDLE CLASS The term middle class has a meaning beyond dollars and cents. It is a lifestyle that a person’s economic circumstances allow the person to live. This lifestyle is being able to pay for the person and their family’s costs of living, including a home, a car, an annual vacation, and saving for the future and for retirement while working 40 hours a week. This is what our grandparents, and to a lesser degree, our parents were able to do in the American economy. This was what defined the American middle class in the past and it is the bare minimum of what the American economy should be able to deliver to middle class workers today. 2. EMBRACING AMERICAN CAPITALISM - RESTORING COMPETITION IS KEY We learn in high school that capitalism works because of competition. There was a time in our past when capitalism left without government regulation, known as laissez-faire capitalism, which led to robber barons and the Gilded Age. The US enacted antitrust laws and other regulations to ensure competition and put guardrails on business practices, harnessing capitalism and amplifying its benefits while reducing its costs. Our government has systematically dismantled many of these laws and regulations over the last 40 years. Because of this competition has declined and wealth has begun to concentrate in the hands of a lucky few one again. Companies have gotten larger with greater global footprints leading to fewer American employees. American’s have lost purchasing power as mark-ups on goods have increased from 21% in 1980 to 61% in 2019. The rate of start-up company formation has declined by 50% from the 1970s and high-growth companies have declined, which has led to lower hiring. Further, wages have stagnated or fallen with the median income being $72,375 (adjusted for inflation) in 1980 to $41,535 in 2020. Finally, businesses have drastically reduced research and development investments, resulting in a scenario in which research and development dollars totaled $404 billion while stock buybacks totaled over $1 trillion in 2018.Making the rich richer and leaving us vulnerable to foreign countries beating us on the innovation front Smaller urban, suburban, and especially rural, communities have been hurt most by this shift. Smaller and locally-based businesses have been shown to return more money to the community. Further, communities with higher concentrations of small, locally-owned businesses have been shown to have higher wages and lower poverty rates. It is time that our leaders address these kitchen table issues and help everyday Americans regain their footing. We can do this by taking the following actions.
Congress needs to enact clear disclosure rules for investment advisors and brokers so that clients know exactly how these entities and individuals are being paid and the investing public can evaluate the advice that is being given. 3. REBUILD AND STRENGTHEN THE MIDDLE CLASS Fewer and fewer people are moving up to the middle class and those in the middle class are in greater and greater danger of falling out of the middle class. We need to strive for Americans working 40 hours a week to be able to move into the middle class and while increasing business competition is a key component to that, we also need to make changes on the labor side of the equation.
4. MAKE THE GOVERNMENT WORK FOR US To make the programs and policies outlined above work, we need to ensure that everybody is being held to an equal standard. that fraud is being fought and that everybody is paying their fair share. This requires a government that has the staffing and the necessary tools to do the job asked of it. For example, we currently have up to $1 trillion dollars in income taxes owed to the federal government but not collected each year. Most of these uncollected tax dollars are owed by the wealthiest among us who are illegally evading taxes. These taxes need to be collected as this is truly their fair share of taxes. To do this, we need to increase the budget of the IRS to ensure it has the manpower and resources to audit high net worth tax evaders that hide behind high-priced lawyers and accountants to avoid paying the taxes they owe. Related to the rooting out of fraud and corruption, congress needs to ensure that there are penalties that will deter companies and people from engaging in that fraud or corruption in the first place. Congress should also increase the fines and other penalties for the largest companies that are found to have violated the law. Currently, fines are often seen as a cost of doing business by the largest companies and thus, compliance becomes less of a concern. If companies are planning to simply pay a fine and continue breaking the law, then these fines are not sufficient and need to be raised. White collar crime is still crime and it needs to be treated as such. This increase in fines together with a greater potential for personal liability for executives for the most blatant violations of law should make it clear the law applies to everybody equally. Finally, a small financial transactions tax for high frequency trading individuals and firms should be imposed. Exemptions would be made for those people or entities making fewer trades as well as trades made in connection with a pension fund, 401K, IRA or similar retirement based fund. This tax will curtail a practice that hurts regular investors by giving the high frequency trade the ability to make a purchase immediately before the regular investor and driving up the price. Thus, depriving the regular investor of the benefit of any increase in value of the stock. CONCLUSION We have a market economy with a number of broken markets. These broken markets have created an economy with higher prices, fewer jobs with family-supporting wages, fewer jobs overall, a distorted media, and a tenuous food supply chain. Fixing these markets through the policies outlined above will go a long way to actually solving the problems facing everyday Americans and will not just transfer some wealth from the very wealthy to the working poor. They will allow Americans to work and get ahead from that work. Better yet, they will put America back on a path to being on the cutting edge of new technologies, products, and living standards.
In June 2022, for the first time in U.S. history, the Supreme Court took the unprecedented step of removing a fundamental right that had previously been recognized for the citizens of this country. Because of this decision, millions of people will now have a private medical decision criminalized. This decision does not “just” restore power to the states for the people of those states to decide whether they want abortion to be criminalized. It sends private medical decisions to states where the majority doesn’t elect their government anymore thanks to gerrymandering. It creates a legally unworkable web of laws that may very well result in our privacy rights being invaded by the state to ensure that an abortion has not taken place. It changes how people have to live their lives. The government does not belong in the private medical decisions of citizens of this country. Whether to have an abortion is a health care decision that is to be made by the person who is pregnant and whomever they decide to include in making their deeply personal choice. Congress has failed to codify Roe, despite Americans’ overwhelming support for the fundamental right to privacy and access to abortion care. Now, millions of people across the country are stripped of their ability to self-determination and freedom. Here in Wisconsin, abortion is almost entirely banned due to an outdated law on the books from 1849 — meaning if your pregnancy isn’t life-threatening, you cannot access abortion care in your home state. And it requires doctors and hospitals to risk a lawsuit every time they perform an abortion, just because somebody may disagree with the assessment that the mother’s life was threatened. This is already leading to delays and denials of necessary services that are having tragic consequences. The effects of the fall of Roe and Wisconsin’s near-total abortion ban are already devastating, and could have been avoided had Congress and Rep. Fitzgerald listened to their constituents, and made the choice to act, codifying Roe as the law of the land. Moving forward we need to elect representatives interested in preserving the rights of all citizens, not just the ones who agree with us. As your next Congressman, I am dedicated to ensuring people have the ability to exercise bodily autonomy, the right to self-determination, and keeping the government out of private healthcare decisions. Not only will I show up for you, I will fight for you, your rights, your families, and everyone’s futures. YOU deserve better.[1] |
” |
| —Mike Van Someren's campaign website (2022)[2] | ||
Campaign finance summary
Note: The finance data shown here comes from the disclosures required of candidates and parties. Depending on the election or state, this may represent only a portion of all the funds spent on their behalf. Satellite spending groups may or may not have expended funds related to the candidate or politician on whose page you are reading this disclaimer. Campaign finance data from elections may be incomplete. For elections to federal offices, complete data can be found at the FEC website. Click here for more on federal campaign finance law and here for more on state campaign finance law.
See also
2026 Elections
External links
Footnotes
- ↑ Note: This text is quoted verbatim from the original source. Any inconsistencies are attributable to the original source.
- ↑ Mike Van Someren for Congress, “Home,” accessed September 14, 2022
