Recall of Wisconsin State Senators (2011)

• Recall efforts
  • Recall efforts by state
  • Recall efforts by office
  • Recall efforts by year
  • Upcoming recall elections
• Local recalls
  • City council recalls
  • Mayoral recalls
  • County commission recalls
  • County official recalls
  • School board recalls
  • Sheriff recalls
  • Special district recalls
• State and federal recalls
  • State executive recalls
  • State legislator recalls
  • U.S. Congress recalls
• Laws governing recall
  • States that have pre-petition signature requirements for recalls
  • States that require grounds for recalls
• Analysis
  • What are recalls?
  • Recall terms
  • Analysis (2010-present)
  • 2025 mid-year analysis
  • 2024 year-end analysis
  • 2024 mid-year analysis
  • 2023 year-end analysis
  • 2023 mid-year analysis
  • 2022 year-end analysis
  • 2022 mid-year analysis
  • 2021 year-end analysis
  • 2021 mid-year analysis
  • 2020 year-end analysis
  • 2020 mid-year analysis
  • 2019 year-end analysis
  • 2019 mid-year analysis
  • 2018 year-end analysis
  • 2018 mid-year analysis
  • 2017 year-end analysis
  • 2017 mid-year analysis
  • 2016 year-end analysis
  • 2016 mid-year analysis

Wisconsin State Senators recall
Officeholders
Robert Cowles Alberta Darling Sheila Harsdorf Dave Hansen Jim Holperin Randy Hopper Dan Kapanke Luther Olsen Robert Wirch
Recall status
Recall defeated Recall approved
Recall election date
August 9, 2011 August 16, 2011
See also
Recall overview Political recall efforts, 2011 Recalls in Wisconsin Wisconsin recall laws State legislative recalls Recall reports

Recall campaigns directed against 16 Wisconsin state senators were launched in the wake of events surrounding the introduction of Wisconsin Assembly Bill 11, also known as the "Scott Walker Budget Repair Bill,” in February 2011. Among these events were the demonstrations that took place in Madison, Wisconsin, in opposition to the bill.

Recall sponsors filed signatures on petitions targeting nine state senators - six Republican and three Democratic. Challenges were filed in all nine of those campaigns, and the Wisconsin Government Accountability Board (GAB) approved the six campaigns against Republicans at meetings on May 23 and May 31, and approved the three campaigns against Democrats on June 8.

Heading into the November 2, 2010 Wisconsin state senate election, there were 14 Democrats and 19 Republicans serving in the Wisconsin State Senate. Democrats gained two seats from the recall elections, leading to a 17-16 Republican majority. Estimates as of September 20, 2011, put total campaign spending at a record breaking $44 million. Democrats outspent Republicans by a little under $3 million, while the recalls cost state and local governments approximately $2.1 million.

At the time of the election, the laws governing recall in Wisconsin said that an elected official must have served at least one year of the term for which he or she was most recently elected before he or she could be targeted for recall. This meant that eight Republican state senators (out of 19) were eligible for recall and eight Democratic state senators (out of 14) were eligible for recall before 2011 elapsed.

What made the recalls of 2011 so unique is the focused nature of multiple state officials targeted at once. Historically, recalls were aimed at one specific legislator. "Recall is usually an individual matter, rather than a group sport," said Gary Moncrief, a political science professor at Boise State University who studies state legislatures. Ultimately, two GOP senators -- Dan Kapanke and Randy Hopper -- were recalled and defeated by Democratic opponents in 2011.

Prior to 2011, the last time Wisconsin voters recalled a state senator was in 2003, when Gary George was recalled. The George recall was preceded by the 1996 recall of George Petak.

Recall timeline

Before a recall could occur, the Wisconsin Government Accountability Board had to certify the signatures and set a recall date.

Recalls against the six Republicans were all certified on June 3, which set the date for the recall election for July 12, 2011. However, since multiple candidates filed to run against the incumbents, a primary was held on July 12 while the actual recall took place four weeks later, on August 9, 2011. Recall primaries against two Democrats were held on July 19, 2011, with the recalls occurring on August 16, 2011. Because there was only one Republican candidate running in District 30, that recall took place on July 19 - incumbent Dave Hansen (D) retained his seat against David VanderLeest (R).

2011 Wisconsin Recall Campaigns
District	State senator	Winning % in 2008	Recall papers filed	Recall signatures required	Recall signatures submitted	Recall signatures validated	Percentage of signatures validated	Opponent	Recall primary date	Recall election date
12	Jim Holperin	51.2%	February 19	15,960	23,300	19,255	82.63%	Kim Simac	July 19	August 16
22	Robert Wirch	66.7%	February 24	13,537	18,300	17,138	93.65%	Jonathan Steitz	July 19	August 16
30	Dave Hansen	66.1%	February 25	13,852	18,872	15,540	82.34%	David VanderLeest	N/A	July 19
2	Robert Cowles	Unopposed	March 2	15,960	26,000	23,959	92.15%	Nancy Nusbaum	July 12	August 9
8	Alberta Darling	50.5%	March 2	20,343	30,000	22,243	74.14%	Assemblywoman Sandy Pasch	July 12	August 9
10	Sheila Harsdorf	56.4%	March 2	18,816	23,000	23,685	102.97%	Shelly Moore	July 12	August 9
14	Luther Olsen	Unopposed	March 2	14,733	24,000	22,207	92.52%	Assemblyman Fred Clark	July 12	August 9
18	Randy Hopper	50.05%	March 2	15,269	22,500	22,953	102.01%	Jessica King	July 12	August 9
32	Dan Kapanke	51.4%	March 2	15,588	30,000	21,776	72.58%	Assebmlywoman Jennifer Shilling	July 12	August 9

Signature challenges

There were three steps in the challenge process.

1. Challenge (by the incumbent to the signatures validity)
2. Rebuttal (by the recall group to the challenge)
3. Reply (by the incumbent)

As of May 18, all deadlines were completed based on the following table:

Timeline of GAB Recall Certification Hearing Requirements
Committee	Challenge	Rebuttal	Reply
Committee to Recall Kapanke	April 15	April 22	April 26
Committee to Recall Hopper	April 21	April 28	May 2
Committee to Recall Olsen	May 2	May 9	May 11
Committee to Recall Harsdorf	May 3	May 10	May 12
Recall Dave Hansen	May 5	May 12	May 16
Jim Holperin Recall Committee	May 5	May 12	May 16
Taxpayers to Recall Wirch	May 5	May 12	May 16
Committee to Recall Darling	May 5	May 12	May 16
Committee to Recall Cowles	May 9	May 16	May 18

May 23 meeting

May 23 was the first of two originally scheduled GAB meetings to certify signatures. At that meeting, the Board voted to approve recall elections against Randy Hopper, Dan Kapanke, and Luther Olsen, rejecting most of the challenges to the signatures. This cleared the way for a recall election to be held for these three members on July 12. At the meeting on May 31, the GAB approved recalls against Robert Cowles, Alberta Darling, and Sheila Harsdorf. All six recalls were officially certified on June 3, setting the election for July 12.

May 31 meeting

On May 27, the Wisconsin Government Accountability Board announced it would be unable to consider the recall petitions for the three Democratic incumbents at the May 31 meeting. Citing "numerous factual and legal issues," the Board said in its statement that more time was needed to ensure that a complete record would be available for examination -- particularly since the decision would likely be appealed to the courts.

In a release, GAB officials said they did not expect to be able to hold a hearing on the recalls of Democratic incumbents until the week of June 6, which raised potential legal issues, as the initial extension granted to the GAB for certification required it to ultimately make determinations before June 3.

The board went ahead with hearings on May 31 for the recalls of Republican incumbents Sheila Harsdorf, Robert Cowles and Alberta Darling. Officials released a 125-page memo on May 27 concerning the signatures and legal challenges. Signatures were verified against all three and officially certified on June 3.

The GAB filed a brief on June 1 asking the court for a one-week extension, which would give them until June 10 to finish working on the three Democratic recalls. The case was heard in Dane County Court at 1:30 pm on Friday, June 3. Dane County Judge John Markson ruled that there was good cause for the extension, and that the GAB did not violate any rules by taking up the petitions out of order.

June 8 meeting

FOX 11 report on the future of recalls in Wisconsin

On June 8, the GAB met to discuss the recall petitions for the three Democratic incumbents. The day before, on June 7, GAB officials posted four memos for the meeting - one each for Senators Hansen, Holperin, Wirch, and an additional memo providing context to the first three. The GAB memos left the matter of whether the recalls were likely to be certified or rejected unresolved.

In the memos, GAB officials invalidated some signatures in much the same way they did for the Republican incumbent petitions. Based on the initial verification process, the following totals of signatures were considered valid:

• Hansen: 15,636
• Holperin: 19,446
• Wirch: 17,139

Those figures were sufficient to trigger a recall, but at the end of each memo, officials pointed to the possibility that an even greater number of signatures could be invalidated. The end of each memo reads:

...valid verified signatures, but all subject to review of signatures and involved petition pages pursuant to the circulator address and fraud allegations discussed in the accompanying Memorandum.

GAB officials did not make a recommendation on whether petition circulators violated Wisconsin statute §8.40(2) and Wisconsin Administrative code §2.05(14). In its memo, GAB officials requested that the Board determine whether it would enforce certain provisions of those laws regarding the residential addresses of circulators. Those two statutes pertained to the physical address of petition circulators, and Democratic challenges to the recall petitions called into question the validity of the addresses for some circulators. If a circulator violated those statutes, then all signatures on those petitions could in theory have been invalidated.

In its memo, GAB officials provided several pages of background and context regarding the certification of recalls. They also posted exhibits on the challenges for Wirch, Holperin, and Hansen.

The next step appeared to be whether the six-member Board would make an ultimate decision regarding the two areas of Wisconsin law in question. If the Board ruled that the recall campaigns did not violate those laws, then it would likely indicate that the recalls had sufficient numbers of signatures to continue. That would then open the door for possible Democratic lawsuits to bring the recall challenges to the courts -- much like three Republican incumbents had already done.

However, if the Board ruled that the recall campaigns did indeed violate the two statutes, then that opened the possibility for the Board to invalidate enough signatures to bring the recall campaigns below the required threshold. According to the GAB memo, the Board -- if it were to enforce the two statutes -- could invalidate any petition page submitted by circulators that were named in the Democratic challenge. Thereby the recalls would be deemed insufficient and no election date called.

After nearly nine hours of deliberations, the Wisconsin Government Accountability Board certified the recalls of three Democratic incumbents and set an initial election for July 19. Thousands of signatures considered invalid or fraudulently collected were struck from the petitions, but the resulting number was not enough to reject any of them outright.

After hearing challenges to the petitions made by the incumbents, as well as presentations from the respective recall committees and board staff, the Board certified 19,255 signatures to recall Jim Holperin, 17,138 to recall Robert Wirch, and 15,540 to recall Dave Hansen. Jeremy Levinson, the attorney for the Democratic incumbents, did not indicate whether an appeal would be filed based on the GAB’s ruling.

Arguing before the Board, Levinson said widespread fraud put into question all of the petitions submitted against Democratic senators, stating, "Part of our presentation today is the way in which this was done makes it clear that not enough signatures appear on these petitions to trigger a recall, and more cannot be relied upon because of the fraud and malfeasance that permeates the entire process.” Democrats also questioned the use of paid petition circulators, which, they said, led in part to the fraud. Eric McLeod, representing the recall campaigns, accused the Democrats of “perpetrating fraud on the board,” and referred to the Democrat’s assertion of fraud as “empty rhetoric.”

GAB staff attorney Shane Falk said the question the Board had to decide was whether the will of the electorate could be determined due to the alleged fraud and the use of paid circulators. "At a certain point, the will of the electorate cannot be determined because of malfeasance," he said. In the end, the six members of the Wisconsin Government Accountability Board acknowledged the claims of fraud brought by Democrats, but decided they were not enough to throw out entire petitions. GAB Judge Gordon Myse led a push to remove over a hundred signatures collected by one circulator due to repeated claims that she misrepresented the reasons for the petition. Four of the six GAB members agreed to strike the signatures in order to show the use of deceit while circulating a petition is unacceptable and carries a penalty.

Democratic spokeswoman Gillian Morris expressed disappointment in the decision, but said "I'm confident that voters of Wisconsin will support senators who stand up for working families and seniors."

Dan Hunt, who led the campaign to recall Sen. Wirch, expressed satisfaction with the board's final decision and how his campaign was run, saying, "there were no major allegations of fraud in our district, therefore, we can rightfully say that we ran our recall with integrity." Hunt went on to say, "Recalls are the last resort in the political process and should be used only in egregious circumstances. The voters in District 22 demonstrated that they want a chance at voting for a representative that will not abandon them but tough things out and ultimately do their job."

Possible legal action

With the nine recalls certified, one looming question remained over the possibility of legal action to try and delay the recall.

There was some precedent for this from the last time a sitting Wisconsin State Senator was recalled. In 2003, Gary George (D) was recalled by voters and lost in the Democratic primary on October 21, 2003. However, prior to that date, George filed legal challenges that were heard in trial court, appeals court, and ultimately before the state Supreme Court -- before any recall vote could actually take place. The initial signatures for that campaign were filed in June 2003 -- meaning nearly four months elapsed between signature submission and the recall date.

After the GAB certification on May 23, 2011, both state political parties gave vague answers regarding the possibility of legal recourse. Mike Tate, chairman of the state Democratic Party, told the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel that he would not deny that Democrats might consider going to court to try to prevent recall elections against the incumbent Democrats. Meanwhile, Mark Jefferson, executive director of the state Republican Party, hinted that the Republican decision would hinder on whether the Democratic Party pursued legal recourse first.

Actions by Republicans

Attorneys for Luther Olsen, Dan Kapanke, and Randy Hopper filed petitions in Dane County Court on May 31 seeking to stop the recall elections against them. They based their argument on improperly filed paperwork, similar to the argument they previously used before the GAB and saw rejected. The court petitions alleged that recall petitioners did not correctly register with the GAB and thus the 60-day period to collect signatures did not start, meaning every signature collected was "dated outside the circulation period" and therefore invalid.

On June 7, Alberta Darling, Sheila Harsdorf, and Robert Cowles joined their fellow Republicans in filing suit against the Wisconsin Government Accountability Board in Dane County Circuit Court. Their lawsuits alleged that signatures on the recall petitions were invalid because of improperly filed paperwork. Jeremy Levinson, attorney for the Democrats, filed motions with the court on June 14, asking them to throw out the Republican's challenges.

Actions by Democrats

Following the certification of the recall petitions against three targeted Democrats on June 8, Levinson did not immediately indicate whether an appeal would be filed based on the GAB’s ruling. Soon after, the party appealed the decision with the Dane County Circuit Court due to what they said was widespread fraud.

State Chairman Mike Tate said, "The GAB agreed that out-of-state circulators hired by the Republican Party to gather recall signatures committed repeated and flagrant acts of election fraud upon the people of Wisconsin. A higher authority should review this stunning conspiracy to defraud the voters, and throw out all the signatures gathered by these deceitful circulators."

While thousands of signatures were rejected by the Board, Democrats said that if Wisconsin statutes were followed to the letter there would not be enough signatures for any of the recalls.

• Summons and Complaint by Sens. Hansen, Holperin & Wirch against the GAB - June 15, 2011

Consolidating the lawsuits

Attorney for the Republicans, Eric McLeod, said on June 20 that he supported consolidating all of the cases brought by Republicans and Democrats into one case to expedite the process. The following day, the state Department of Justice, on behalf of the Wisconsin Government Accountability Board, filed a motion to consolidate all of the cases into one. Attorney for the Democrats, Jeremy Levinson, said it would slow down the process.

Hearings

The first hearing took place on June 22 in Dane County Circuit Court to address issues dealing with lawsuits concerning the recalls.

Judge Richard Niess said voters should assume that primary elections for challengers in the six recalls against Republicans would go ahead as planned on July 12. Niess planned to rule on lawsuits brought by the nine incumbent senators prior to the first primaries and ordered that all of the lawsuits be consolidated into one case.

Attorneys for the Democrats, the Republicans, and the Wisconsin Government Accountability Board all agreed to expedite their arguments in the case, with a June 29 deadline for initial briefs and July 7 for final arguments.

After hearing arguments on July 8, Judge Niess ruled that all of the nine recalls should proceed, saying that election officials had already thoroughly and correctly addressed the complaints. GAB director and general counsel Kevin Kennedy said of the decision, “I want to express my gratitude that the court upheld the well-thought-out decisions of the Government Accountability Board, which were backed up by the incredible hard work of the Board’s dedicated staff to ensure all the parties received fair consideration of their recall petitions and challenges.”

Republican-aligned candidates running as Democrats

GOP officials recruited Republican-aligned candidates to run on the Democratic ballot in order to force a primary, effectively delaying the actual recall elections by four weeks.

There were six Republican-aligned candidates who ran as Democrats in the July 12 primary. All six were defeated. They were:

• Otto Junkermann, District 2. Junkermann is a former Republican member of the Wisconsin State Assembly. He lost to Nancy Nusbaum in the primary.
• Gladys Huber, District 8. Huber was a longtime supporter of Republicans. She lost to Sandy Pasch in the primary.
• Isaac Weix, District 10. Weix previously ran for the state Assembly as a Republican. He was defeated by Shelly Moore in the primary.
• Rol Church, District 14. Church is retired. He has a history of donating to Republican candidates. Church lost to Fred Clark in the primary.
• John Buckstaff, District 18. Buckstaff is retired. He has a history of donating to Republican candidates. He was defeated by Jessica King in the primary.
• James Smith, District 32. Smith is a former member of the La Crosse County Republican executive committee. Jennifer Shilling defeated him in the primary.

Placeholder candidates

On June 10, the group We Are Wisconsin called on Democrats to run candidates in the Republican primaries as well. Communications Director Kelly Steele issued a statement saying, "Given the situation Republicans have so despicably concocted to manipulate these recall elections, it is the opinion of We Are Wisconsin that it would be in the interest of Democrats to run candidates in the Republican primaries to ensure the dates of the general election are predictably on August 9th, and that Republicans are forced to win a primary election instead of diverting their unlimited resources to back their “fake” candidates against “legitimate” Democrats."

The following day Mike Tate, Chairman of the Democratic Party of Wisconsin, released a statement saying the party would not run fake GOP candidates - "We cannot and will not stoop to the Republicans' level by encouraging candidates to lie about their party affiliation, or recommending that people try to deceive voters. We never have done that, and won’t start now. This is something that every single one of our six challengers has said they adamantly oppose. Fred Clark, Jess King, Shelly Moore, Nancy Nusbaum, Jen Shilling and Sandy Pasch -- along with Senator Miller -- all contacted the party over the last 24 hours to make it crystal clear this was absolutely the wrong tactic."

However, Tate went on to say that Democrats would be running "placeholder" candidates in order to force primaries. Gillian Morris, press secretary for the state Democratic Party, said that they were not worried about splitting the primary vote as the placeholder candidates would not be campaigning.

There were three individuals who had been called placeholder Democratic candidates. They were:

• Mert Summers, District 2.
• Nicholas Brehm, District 8.
• Robert Forseth, District 14.

Following the news that all six Republican-aligned candidates running as Democrats had turned in their final paperwork to get on the ballot, the Democratic Party of Wisconsin announced that it would not be running their placeholder candidates in the recalls as they were no longer necessary. Party Chair Mike Tate explained, "The goal of the placeholder candidacies was to create an insurance policy against further Republican attempts to exploit the recall election schedule through dirty tricks and cynical plots."

All three had filed nomination papers with a sufficient number of verified signatures.

Reactions

Leadership

• Stephan Thompson, Executive Director of the Republican Party of Wisconsin, issued a statement on June 6 indicating that the party was advocating that protest candidates run because Republicans were at a disadvantage. "Because of this disadvantage, and the outrageous nature of elected officials facing recall for standing up for a balanced budget, the Republican Party of Wisconsin has advocated that protest candidates run in Democratic primaries to ensure that Republican legislators have ample time to communicate with voters throughout their districts after the state budget is approved," he said.

• Wisconsin Democratic Party Chair Mike Tate - "This is sixth-grade, student council stuff."

• Democratic Senate Leader Mark Miller called the move a "partisan, coordinated attack on democracy," and "Nixonion tactics," saying, "we don't need to waste taxpayer money on phony elections to help these Republicans duck the voters and needlessly delay these elections."

• Senate Majority Leader Scott Fitzgerald came out in support of protest candidates as a tool to give Republican incumbents more time to campaign.

Incumbents

• Randy Hopper said he would have liked the recall election to happen as soon as possible, and hoped that there was no primary race.
• A spokesman for Sheila Harsdorf said she did not support the protest candidacy and had nothing to do with it.
• Luther Olsen - "I have no idea if it will hurt or help. If it stretches the election out I don't know if that's good or bad. There are so many strange things happening in this business."
• Alberta Darling released a statement saying, "In no way whatsoever was I involved in the efforts by the Republican Party of Wisconsin to recruit and run a protest candidate against my opponent."

Democratic candidates

• Shelly Moore released a statement, saying, "the Republican Party must immediately shut down this partisan, coordinated attack on democracy that wastes taxpayer dollars. These elections must get underway so the State can heal. These underhanded tactics serve no purpose but to divide us further."

• Jessica King said Senator Hopper should tell the fake candidate to stop the process, but said it wouldn't change her strategy. "I just get four more weeks to campaign and talk with voters. It's a longer campaign. It may increase my budget, but I'm not worried about it," she said.

• Nancy Nusbaum called the move "a mockery of the democratic process," and "a sign of desperation."

• Sandy Pasch said, "It's a little appalling to me that they are running a fake Democrat."

Republican-aligned candidates running as Democrats

• John Buckstaff wrote, "After watching the protest in Madison led by the unions and Democratic Party I have decided to run as a protest candidate against Jessica King in the Democratic primary. I make no apologies for this action as I view the recall of Senator Hopper as wrong. Hopefully everyone will see this as another example of what democracy looks like...Liberals aren't the only ones with a right to protest and I want to bring people's attention to what is happening to a person (Hopper) who did the job we elected him to do while others fled the state."

• James Smith explained his candidacy - “I want to bring light on the issue that 22,000 signatures can pretty much overturn an election where even the loser got 40,000 votes.” Shilling’s campaign declined to comment on his candidacy.

• Otto Junkermann, when asked if he was a "spoiler candidate," replied, “I don’t know how I could avoid being considered that.”

Republican-aligned candidates running as Democrats in context

The practice of running a candidate in another party's primary is not unprecedented. In the 2010 race for the 25th Assembly district in Wisconsin, Andrew Wisniewski ran as a Republican against incumbent Independent Robert Ziegelbauer and Democrat Kerry Trask.. Wisniewski was reportedly recruited to run by Jason Sidener, a political action representative for the union ASFCME. "It is in our interest to see that Bob is defeated and having opponents from both parties helps that," Sidener said. Ziegelbauer, meanwhile, said, "It's pretty obvious to everyone that the Madison Democratic machinery put up a fake candidate to put a name on the ballot because they think it will screw up our election in the 25th Assembly District." The chairman of the Manitowoc County Republican Party -- where Wisniewski is from -- wrote in a letter to the Manitowoc Daily Herald that Wisniewski was not a Republican.

Other states have encountered the practice as well. There have been allegations that former Illinois Speaker of the House Michael Madigan (D) ran against recruited candidates in 2006, 2008, and 2010 in order to give the appearance of competition. While election results showed he faced Republican opponents, local GOP officials said they had never heard of the candidates.

Additionally, in 2010, a Republican in Arizona recruited homeless people to run on the Green Party ticket, and a Democratic Party official in Michigan resigned for his role in running 23 candidates on the Tea Party ticket.

Chances of winning

While the Republican-aligned candidates who ran in the Democratic primary were generally seen as protest candidates put on the ballot to give the Republicans more time to campaign, there was a possibility that they could win. Because Wisconsin had an open primary system, voters did not have to be registered to a specific party in order to cast a vote in the primary. Therefore, Republican-leaning voters could have crossed over to the Democratic primary and vice-versa.

According to Mordecai Lee, a political science professor at the University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee and former Democratic state lawmaker, none of the races were safe wins for the “real” candidates. "For all six of them, this is a real threat. This is a real election; this is not a walk for anybody,” he said. Lee cited low turnout rates for primaries and the possibility of heavy spending by Republicans to get out the vote as major factors on the outcome.

Others, however, saw the chance of one or more of the Republican-aligned candidates winning as possible, but not probable. Charles Franklin, also a political scientist at UW-Madison, said a win would require “a tremendous amount of coordinated effort" to turn voters towards a certain candidate, and then actually get them to show up at the polls.

Wisconsin Democratic Party spokeswoman Gillian Morris said they were “not concerned” about the primaries, while state Republican Party spokeswoman Katie McCallum said that the GOP was not going to help any of the Republican-aligned candidates running in the Democratic primary with advertising or vote efforts, and that none of them were expected to win.

Supporters

In favor of Democratic candidates

• AFL-CIO
• America Votes Action Fund
• Citizen Action of Wisconsin
• Democracy for America
• Democratic Legislative Campaign Committee
• EMILY’s List
• Greater Wisconsin Committee
• Kirsten Gillibrand, U.S. Senator from New York
• MoveOn.org
• Matt Damon
• People for the American Way
• Planned Parenthood
• Professional Firefighters of Wisconsin
• Progressive Change Campaign Committee
• SEIU
• Sierra Club
• We Are Wisconsin
• Wisconsin Education Association Council
• Wisconsin League of Conservation Voters
• Wisconsin Professional Police Association

In favor of Republican candidates

• American Federation for Children
• Campaign To Defeat Barack Obama
• Citizens For A Strong America
• Club for Growth
• Family Research Council
• GOPAC Wisconsin
• Jobs First Coalition
• Patriot Advisors
• The Presidential Coalition
• Republican State Leadership Committee
• State Government Leadership Foundation
• Wisconsin Family Council
• Wisconsin Farm Bureau Federation
• Wisconsin Manufacturers & Commerce
• Wisconsin Right to Life
• Wisconsin Corn Growers Association

Individual recalls

After recalls were initiated on all 16 eligible senators, a total of nine campaigns officially submitted signatures to the Wisconsin Government Accountability Board.

On May 23, the Wisconsin Government Accountability Board rejected most challenges brought against the petitions to recall Randy Hopper, Luther Olsen, and Dan Kapanke. This cleared the way for recall elections against them on July 12. On May 31, the GAB rejected most challenges against the petitions to recall Robert Cowles, Alberta Darling, and Sheila Harsdorf.

Robert Cowles

See also: Robert Cowles recall, Wisconsin State Senate (2011)

About 26,000 signatures to recall Cowles were filed on April 28, 2011. This set of signatures was the ninth set of signatures filed in the 16 different state senate recalls that occurred in Wisconsin. On May 31 the GAB rejected most of the challenges to the signatures, giving the go-ahead for a recall election. Democrat Nancy Nusbaum ran against him. The GAB officially certified the recall election on June 3. Since multiple candidates filed, a primary was held July 12 and the recall election was August 9.

Otto Junkermann, a former Republican member of the Wisconsin State Assembly, ran as a protest candidate in order to necessitate a Democratic primary between himself and Nancy Nusbaum. Mert Summers was running as a "placeholder" Democrat but did not file final paperwork.

Nusbaum defeated Junkermann in the July 12 primary.

July 12 Democratic primary
Candidates		Votes	Percent
Nancy Nusbaum a		14,197	65.04%
Otto Junkermann		7,578	34.72%
Scattering		54	0.25%

• Mert Summers Note: Summers filed nomination papers with sufficient signatures but did not file final papers to be on the ballot.

Cowles defeated Nusbaum to successfully retain his seat.

August 9 Recall - District 2
Candidates		Votes	Percent
Robert Cowles (R)		27,037	57.44%
Nancy Nusbaum (D)		19,974	42.43%
Scattering		62	.13%

Polling

Conducted July 21-24

August 9, 2011 Recall - District 2 - Daily Kos/PPP Poll
Candidate	Party	Percent
Robert Cowles	Republican	51%
Nancy Nusbaum	Democratic	47%
Undecided		2%

Alberta Darling

Wisconsin Senate Districts with recall signatures filed in 2011.

See also: Alberta Darling recall, Wisconsin State Senate (2011)

About 30,000 signatures to recall Darling were filed on April 21, 2011. On May 31 the GAB upheld some of the challenges to the petition, but ultimately gave the go-ahead for a recall election. Democratic Assemblywoman Sandy Pasch ran against her. The GAB officially certified the recall election on June 3. Since there were multiple candidates, a primary was held on July 12, and the recall election took place on August 9.

Gladys Huber, a longtime Republican supporter, ran as a protest candidate in order to necessitate a Democratic primary between herself and Pasch. Nicholas Brehm was running as a "placeholder" Democrat but did not file final paperwork.

Pasch defeated Huber in the July 12 primary.

July 12 Democratic primary
Candidates		Votes	Percent
Sandy Pasch a		21,657	64.13%
Gladys Huber		11,865	35.14%
Scattering		246	0.73%

• Nicholas Brehm Note: Brehm filed nomination papers with sufficient signatures but did not file final papers to be on the ballot.

Darling defeated Pasch to retain her seat.

August 9 Recall - District 8
Candidates		Votes	Percent
Alberta Darling (R)		39,449	53.62%
Sandy Pasch (D)		34,071	46.31%
Scattering		56	.08%

Polling

Conducted July 21-24

August 9, 2011 Recall - District 8 - Daily Kos/PPP Poll
Candidate	Party	Percent
Alberta Darling	Republican	52%
Sandy Pasch	Democratic	47%
Undecided		1%

Sheila Harsdorf

See also: Sheila Harsdorf recall, Wisconsin State Senate (2011)

About 23,000 signatures to recall Harsdorf were filed on April 19, 2011, about 7,000 more than the 15,744 that were necessary. On May 31, the GAB threw out most of the challenges to the petition, giving the go-ahead for a recall election. Democrat Shelly Moore ran against her. The GAB officially certified the recall election on June 3. Since multiple candidates filed, a primary was held July 12, and the recall election took place on August 9.

Isaac Weix, a Republican supporter, ran as a protest candidate in order to necessitate a Democratic primary between himself and Moore.

Moore defeated Weix in the July 12 primary.

July 12 Democratic primary
Candidates		Votes	Percent
Shelly Moore a		19,300	53.98%
Isaac Weix		16,029	44.83%
Scattering		427	1.19%

Harsdorf defeated Moore to successfully retain her seat.

August 9 Recall - District 10
Candidates		Votes	Percent
Sheila Harsdorf (R)		37,102	57.6%
Shelly Moore (D)		27,257	42.32%
Scattering		52	.08%

Polling

Conducted June 23-26

August 9, 2011 Recall - District 10 - Daily Kos/PPP Poll
Candidate	Party	Percent
Sheila Harsdorf	Republican	50%
Shelly Moore	Democratic	45%
Undecided		5%

Conducted August 5-7

August 9, 2011 Recall - District 10 - Daily Kos/PPP Poll
Candidate	Party	Percent
Sheila Harsdorf	Republican	54%
Shelly Moore	Democratic	42%
Undecided		4%

Dave Hansen

See also: Dave Hansen recall, Wisconsin State Senate (2011)

About 18,870 signatures to recall Hansen were filed on April 21, 2011. In early May, the Wisconsin Government Accountability Board verified 17,099 signatures on the petition, enough to force a recall. They disqualified over 1,700 but still had to review some 5,500 that had been challenged by Hansen.

The GAB was initially scheduled to review the challenges on May 31, but that was delayed until June 8. At that meeting, the Board validated 15,540 signatures, enough for the recall, setting the election date for July 19. Republican Assemblyman John Nygren and leader of the recall campaign David VanderLeest were running against him, but the Wisconsin Government Accountability Board found Nygren was two valid signatures short of the required 400.

Nygren appealed the GAB decision in circuit court, but the original decision was upheld. Nygren blamed the outcome on “Democrat-appointed GAB staff that has constantly worked against me as I defended myself from the Democratic Party’s frivolous challenges.”

Hansen defeated VanderLeest in the recall on July 19.

July 19 Recall
Candidates		Votes	Percent
Dave Hansen (D) a		22,051	65.93%
David VanderLeest (R)		11,054	33.05%
Scattering		340	1.02%

Jim Holperin

See also: Jim Holperin recall, Wisconsin State Senate (2011)

About 23,000 signatures to recall Holperin were filed on April 21, 2011. The GAB was initially scheduled to review challenges to the position on May 31, but it was delayed until June 8. At that meeting the GAB verified 19,255 signatures, enough for the recall, setting the election date for July 19.

Kim Simac defeated Robert Lussow in the Republican primary on July 19.

Holperin defeated Simac in the recall on August 16.

July 19 Republican primary
Candidates		Votes	Percent
Kim Simac a		11,300	58.53%
Robert Lussow		7,765	40.22%
Scattering		242	1.25%

Polling

Conducted August 12-14

August 16, 2011 Recall - District 12 - Daily Kos/PPP Poll
Candidate	Party	Percent
Jim Holperin	Democratic	55%
Kim Simac	Republican	41%
Undecided		4%

Randy Hopper

See also: Randy Hopper recall, Wisconsin State Senate (2011)

A total of 23,946 signatures to recall Hopper were filed on April 7, 2011. This set of signatures was the second set of signatures filed in the 16 different state senate recall campaigns that took place Wisconsin. On May 23, the GAB rejected most challenges to the petition, clearing the way for a recall election. Democrat Jessica King ran against him. Hopper's attorneys filed papers in Dane County Court on May 31, seeking to stop the recall election, but this was ultimately rejected. The GAB officially certified the recall election on June 3. Since multiple candidates filed, a primary was held July 12 and the recall election took place on August 9.

John Buckstaff, a Republican supporter, ran as a protest candidate in order to necessitate a Democratic primary between himself and King. Hopper said he wanted the recall election to happen as soon as possible.

Supporters of Hopper began distributing flyers in the district to get out the vote for Buckstaff in the July 12 primary. The flyer described King as a "Pro-Union Extremist" who would put unions first "even if it bankrupts Wisconsin." Meanwhile, Buckstaff was described as "Pro-Wisconsin," saying he would "eliminate special privileges for government unions." The flyer was paid for by a group called "Patriot Advisors."

King defeated Buckstaff in the July 12 primary.

July 12 Democratic primary
Candidates		Votes	Percent
Jessica King a		19,562	68.21%
John Buckstaff		8,995	31.37%
Scattering		120	0.42%

King defeated Hopper in the recall.

August 9 Recall - District 18
Candidates		Votes	Percent
Jessica King (D)		28,191	51.1%
Randy Hopper (R)		26,937	48.83%
Scattering		42	.08%

Polling

Conducted June 23-26

August 9, 2011 Recall - District 18 - Daily Kos/PPP Poll
Candidate	Party	Percent
Jessica King	Democratic	50%
Randy Hopper	Republican	47%
Undecided		3%

Conducted August 5-7

August 9, 2011 Recall - District 18 - Daily Kos/PPP Poll
Candidate	Party	Percent
Jessica King	Democratic	48%
Randy Hopper	Republican	49%
Undecided		3%

Dan Kapanke

See also: Dan Kapanke recall, Wisconsin State Senate (2011)

Needing 15,588 to force a recall, petitioners submitted an estimated 30,000 signatures to the Wisconsin Government Accountability Board on April 1, 2011. The signatures submitted to recall Kapanke were the first set of signatures submitted in the overall recall battle. On May 23, the GAB rejected most challenges to the petition, clearing the way for a recall election. Democratic Assemblywoman Jennifer Shilling ran against him. Kapanke's attorneys filed papers in Dane County Court on May 31, seeking to stop the recall election, but this was ultimately rejected. The GAB officially certified the recall election on June 3. This set the stage for a July 12 election, but since multiple candidates filed, a primary was held July 12 and the recall election took place on August 9.

At a meeting of the La Crosse County Republicans on May 25, a secret recording captured leaders considering running a spoiler candidate against Shilling in order to necessitate a primary and push back the recall election. La Crosse County Republican Party Chair Bill Feehan said he met with an attorney and would file suit against the person who made the recording. On June 7, James Smith, a recent member of the La Crosse County Republican executive committee, announced he would run as a protest candidate in order to necessitate a Democratic primary between himself and Shilling. He explained his candidacy - “I want to bring light on the issue that 22,000 signatures can pretty much overturn an election where even the loser got 40,000 votes.”

Shilling defeated Smith in the July 12 primary.

July 12 Democratic primary
Candidates		Votes	Percent
Jennifer Shilling a		25,340	70.19%
James Smith		10,664	29.54%
Scattering		98	0.27%

Kapanke lost to Shilling in the recall.

August 9 Recall - District 32
Candidates		Votes	Percent
Jennifer Shilling (D)		33,193	55.38%
Dan Kapanke (R)		26,724	44.58%
Scattering		25	.04%

Polling

Conducted June 23-26

August 9, 2011 Recall - District 32 - Daily Kos/PPP Poll
Candidate	Party	Percent
Jennifer Shilling	Democratic	56%
Dan Kapanke	Republican	42%
Undecided		3%

Conducted August 5-7

August 9, 2011 Recall - District 32 - Daily Kos/PPP Poll
Candidate	Party	Percent
Jennifer Shilling	Democratic	54%
Dan Kapanke	Republican	43%
Undecided		3%

Luther Olsen

See also: Luther Olsen recall, Wisconsin State Senate (2011)

About 24,000 signatures to recall Olsen were filed on April 18, 2011. On May 23, the GAB rejected most challenges to the petition, clearing the way for a recall election. Democratic Assemblyman Fred Clark ran against him. Olsen's attorneys filed papers in Dane County Court on May 31, seeking to stop the recall election, but this was ultimately rejected. The GAB officially certified the recall election on June 3, setting the stage for a July 12 election. However, since multiple candidates filed, a primary was held July 12 and the recall election took place on August 9.

Rol Church, a Republican supporter, ran as a protest candidate in order to necessitate a Democratic primary between himself and Fred Clark. Robert Forseth was running as a "placeholder" Democrat but did not file final paperwork.

Clark defeated Church in the July 12 primary.

July 12 Democratic primary
Candidates		Votes	Percent
Fred Clark a		15,052	66.7%
Rol Church		7,346	32.55%
Scattering		169	0.75%

• Robert Forseth Note: Forseth filed nomination papers with sufficient signatures but did not file final papers to be on the ballot.

Olsen defeated Clark in the recall to successfully hold on to his seat.

August 9 Recall - District 14
Candidates		Votes	Percent
Luther Olsen (R)		26,553	52.1%
Fred Clark (D)		24,355	47.79%
Scattering		56	.11%

Polling

Conducted July 21-24

August 9, 2011 Recall - District 14 - Daily Kos/PPP Poll
Candidate	Party	Percent
Fred Clark	Democratic	49%
Luther Olsen	Republican	47%
Undecided		4%

Conducted August 5-7

August 9, 2011 Recall - District 14 - Daily Kos/PPP Poll
Candidate	Party	Percent
Fred Clark	Democratic	47%
Luther Olsen	Republican	50%
Undecided		3%

Robert Wirch

See also: Robert Wirch recall, Wisconsin State Senate (2011)

About 18,300 signatures to recall Wirch were filed on April 21, 2011. The GAB was initially scheduled to review challenges to the petition on May 31, but it was delayed until June 8. At that meeting the GAB verified 17,138 signatures, enough for the recall, setting the election date for July 19. However, since multiple candidates filed, a primary between the two was held July 19, with the recall on August 16.

Kenosha County Board supervisor Fred Ekornaas said in early May he planned to run against Wirch if a recall election happened. As of May 7 he had not be endorsed by the Republican Party. Attorney Jonathan Steitz announced his bid on May 17, 2011.

Dan Hunt, the organizer of the recall campaign, was said to have considered running.

Steitz defeated Ekornaas in the July 19 primary.

July 19 Republican primary
Candidates		Votes	Percent
Jonathan Steitz a		5,981	61.06%
Fred Ekornaas		3,369	34.39%
Scattering		446	4.55%

Wirch defeated Steitz in the recall to retain his seat.

August 16 Recall - District 22
Candidates		Votes	Percent
Robert Wirch (D)		25,524	57.35%
Jonathan Steitz (R)		19,662	42.51%
Brian Harwood (Write-in)		23	.05%
Scattering		42	.09%

Polling

Conducted August 12-14

August 16, 2011 Recall - District 22 - Daily Kos/PPP Poll
Candidate	Party	Percent
Robert Wirch	Democratic	55%
Jonathan Steitz	Republican	42%
Undecided		3%

Campaign contributions

See also: Advertisements in the 2011 Wisconsin State Senate recalls

The tables below detail campaign contributions as reported to the Wisconsin Government Accountability Board by the incumbents and recall committees. However, these contributions are only those that were required to be reported by the GAB. Donations to 501c4 organizations were not subject to disclosure to the GAB, and therefore are more difficult to track. These spending figures are only visible when the organization files a 990 with the federal government. The 2011 calendar year form is due to the government by May 15, 2012. Because organizations can extend that to October at no penalty, by the time the form is turned in and eventually released to the public, it is likely to be sometime in 2013.

But even the 990 itself does not actually reveal very many details. The form does not require revealing expenditures or vendors. Expenditures are typically lumped into one category. In other words, the 990 would not reveal how much spending for an organization went to one reason or another.

Therefore, it was expected that the bulk of spending on the recall campaigns would be likely to come from outside groups like 501c4’s that were not affiliated directly with any particular campaign. The recent Prosser election indicated the spending would likely be in the multi-millions.

For example, the Prosser and Kloppenburg campaigns each received $300,000 in public funds for the election. But according to the Brennan Center -- a nonpartisan public policy and law institute that studies campaign finance -- 501c4 groups spent more than $3 million on tv ads alone earlier this year. That does not include online advertisements, newspaper ads, or other non-tv forms of ad spending.

The Prosser election was built up as the undercard to the main event of the recalls. Therefore, it was expected that an even greater sum of outside money would flow into the recall races.

Mike McCabe, executive director of the nonpartisan Wisconsin Democracy Campaign, referred to the amounts being raised for the recalls as "ungodly sums." "It's safe to say that we're going to see some million-dollar-plus senate elections here. We've seen some seven-figure spending in senate races before in Wisconsin, but it's very rare. You'll see that in these recall elections," he said. McCabe also said that the Citizens United Supreme Court case will have a dramatic impact on the recalls. "The candidates will be bystanders in their own elections," McCabe said.

Funds raised by incumbents

Here are the following sums of campaign funds raised by the nine incumbents facing recall. All figures are as of June 1, 2011.

Campaign Finance Status of Recall Elections as of June 1, 2011
District	Incumbent	Total funds raised	Cash on Hand
8	Alberta Darling	$421,939.81	$219,730.51
30	Dave Hansen	$127,437.34	$179,491.22
10	Sheila Harsdorf	$110,166.80	$59,472.00
12	Jim Holperin	$150,903.89	$75,319.92
18	Randy Hopper	$131,446.60	$105,615.72
32	Dan Kapanke	$180,309.84	$99,061.24
14	Luther Olsen	$34,735.59	$34,527.26
22	Robert Wirch	$50,964.95	$101,007.39
	TOTAL	$1,207,904.82	$874,225.26

Funds raised by recall committees

Here are the total funds raised by recall committees and their cash on hand as of June 1, 2011. Out of the nearly $450,000 raised, all was spent but about $9,000.

Campaign Finance Status of Recall Committees as of June 1, 2011
District	Targeted Incumbent	Total funds raised	Cash on Hand
2	Robert Cowles	$145,963.60	$214.55
8	Alberta Darling	$91,380.93	$6,504.28
30	Dave Hansen	$1,359.45	$0.00
10	Sheila Harsdorf	$123,694.35	$220.90
12	Jim Holperin	$8,393.00	$459.91
18	Randy Hopper	$48,325.57	$490.00
32	Dan Kapanke	$17,987.42	$0.00
14	Luther Olsen	$ -	$ -
22	Robert Wirch	$12,783.52	$1,144.15
	TOTAL	$449,887.84	$9,033.79

Expenditures by incumbents and recall committees

This chart shows the expenditures by incumbent senators targeted for recall and the recall committees against them as of June 1, 2011. Nearly $1 million was spent between them.

Expenditures of Incumbents and Recall Committees as of June 1, 2011
District	Incumbent	Expenditures by Incumbent	Expenditures by Recall Committee
2	Robert Cowles	N/A	$145,749.05
8	Alberta Darling	$206,424.98	$84,876.65
30	Dave Hansen	$54,549.42	$1,359.45
10	Sheila Harsdorf	$61,240.05	$123,473.45
12	Jim Holperin	$91,737.71	$7,933.09
18	Randy Hopper	$39,330.64	$47,835.57
32	Dan Kapanke	$90,392.13	$17,987.42
14	Luther Olsen	$637.38	N/A
22	Robert Wirch	$2,808.55	$11,639.37
	TOTAL	$547,120.86	$440,854.05

July Continuing Reports

Recall Fundraising Update as of July 6, 2011
District	Candidate	Candidate Type	Total funds raised for quarter	Cash on Hand	Total funds raised for year
2	Nancy Nusbaum	Democrat	$177,300	$133,682	$177,300
2	Otto Junkermann	Protest	$750	0	$750
2	Robert Cowles	Incumbent	$100,522	$62,168	$100,522
8	Sandy Pasch	Democrat	$431,302	$216,439	$431,302
8	Gladys Huber	Protest	$750	0	$750
8	Alberta Darling	Incumbent	$536,478	$401,382	$958,412
10	Shelly Moore	Democrat	$236,728	$91,587	$236,728
10	Isaac Weix	Protest	$1,200	$480	$1,200
10	Sheila Harsdorf	Incumbent	$217,566	$141,963	$327,733
14	Fred Clark	Democrat	$226,501	$163,197	$226,501
14	Rol Church	Protest	$750	0	$750
14	Luther Olsen	Incumbent	$72,376	$70,656	$107,111
18	Jessica King	Democrat	$221,932	$190,647	$221,932
18	John Buckstaff	Protest	$750	0	$750
18	Randy Hopper	Incumbent	$95,260	$92,461	$226,708
32	Jennifer Shilling	Democrat	$271,385	$156,634	$271,385
32	James Smith	Protest	N/A	N/A	N/A
32	Dan Kapanke	Incumbent	$545,604	$123,824	$725,913
	TOTAL		$3,137,154	$1,845,120	$4,015,747

Recall Fundraising Update as of July 13, 2011
District	Candidate	Candidate Type	Total funds raised for quarter	Cash on Hand	Total funds raised for year
12	Jim Holperin	Incumbent	$185,698.99	$169,618.23	$336,602.88
12	Kim Simac	Republican	$89,407.00	$33,555.81	$ 89,407.00
12	Robert Lussow	Republican	$350.00	$ 350.00	$350.00
22	Robert Wirch	Incumbent	$130,805.68	$139,221.51	$181,770.63
22	Fred Ekornaas	Republican	$4,783.25	$262.29	$4,783.25
22	Jonathan Steitz	Republican	$6,350.00	$12,476.10	$33,547.40
30	Dave Hansen	Incumbent	$189,412.77	$250,798.75	$316,850.11
30	David VanderLeest	Republican	$2,000.00	$715.12	$2,000.00
	TOTAL		$608,807.69	$606,997.81	$965,311.27

Special Pre-Election Report

Recall Fundraising Update as of July 25, 2011
District	Candidate	Party	Total funds raised for quarter	Cash on Hand	Total funds raised for year
2	Nancy Nusbaum	Democrat	$61,808.47	$104,333.00	$239,608.56
2	Robert Cowles (I)	Republican	$64,824.55	$98,816.62	$166,996.22
8	Sandy Pasch	Democrat	$190,903.08	$63,942.72	$622,679.89
8	Alberta Darling (I)	Republican	$165,155.26	$135,429.29	$1,123,573.59
10	Shelly Moore	Democrat	$95,032.11	$111,610.36	$335,037.73
10	Sheila Harsdorf (I)	Republican	$106,488.12	$97,343.15	$434,180.66
14	Fred Clark	Democrat	$67,750.23	$67,455.42	$294,251.50
14	Luther Olsen (I)	Republican	$64,744.40	$97,431.57	$171,855.67
18	Jessica King	Democrat	$96,372.32	$106,078.86	$318,153.92
18	Randy Hopper (I)	Republican	$106,102.96	$157,351.25	$332,810.90
32	Jennifer Shilling	Democrat	$61,270.20	$80,088.76	$332,654.72
32	Dan Kapanke (I)	Republican	$ 156,467.53	$48,379.86	$882,381.01
	TOTAL		$1,236,919.23	$1,168,260.86	$5,254,184.37

Recall Fundraising Update as of August 8, 2011
District	Candidate	Candidate Type	Total funds raised for quarter	Cash on Hand	Total funds raised for year
12	Jim Holperin	Incumbent	$140,609.77	$141,630.69	$490,952.65
12	Kim Simac	Republican	$109,790.97	$49,698.65	$221,448.75
22	Robert Wirch	Incumbent	$53,427.35	$91,687.88	$237,728.98
22	Jonathan Steitz	Republican	$38,676.00	$23,257.06	$72,223.40
	TOTAL		$342,504.09	$306,274.28	$1,022,353.78

Campaign finance complaints

The Wisconsin Democracy Campaign filed campaign finance complaints on June 7 against Republicans Randy Hopper and Dan Kapanke, and Democrat Dave Hansen for failing to disclose occupation and employer information about campaign contributors. Hopper’s campaign report covering January 1 to April 18 was found to be missing employer information on 23 contributions totaling $42,650. Kapanke’s report from the same period was missing data on 12 contributions totaling 6,150, while Hansen had missing info on 14 contributions totaling $2,939. Under Wisconsin law, any contributor who gives over $100 in a calendar year must disclose their occupation and employer.

The Wisconsin Democracy Campaign announced that they found undisclosed occupation and employer information for four of the other campaigns as well. But the Hopper, Kapanke and Hansen campaigns were by far missing the most information. On the Democratic side, Robert Wirch was missing information on five contributions totaling $1,225 and Jim Holperin did not properly identify one contributor who gave a total of $150. For the Republicans, Sheila Harsdorf did not have information on three contributions totaling $1,325 and Alberta Darling had missing info on four contributors totaling $950. Luther Olsen’s report properly identified all of his donors, while Robert Cowles did not file any campaign finance reports.

GAB-3 Documents Filed after July 5, 2011
Organization	Contribution Received
We Are Wisconsin	$1,683,641.98
America Votes Action Fund	$220,000
League of Conservation Voters	$60,000
Greater Wisconsin	$50,000
Wisconsin Women Vote	$42,750
TOTAL	$2,056,391.98

Official reports

Spring Pre-Election

• Alberta Darling Spring Pre-Election Report April 15, 2011
• Dave Hansen Spring Pre-Election Report April 15, 2011
• Sheila Harsdorf Spring Pre-Election Report April 14, 2011
• Jim Holperin Spring Pre-Election Report April 28, 2011
• Randy Hopper Spring Pre-Election Report April 15, 2011
• Dan Kapanke Spring Pre-Election Report April 15, 2011
• Robert Wirch Spring Pre-Election Report March 28, 2011

Special Pre-Election

• Alberta Darling Special Pre-Election Report April 25, 2011
• Dave Hansen Special Pre-Election Report April 25, 2011
• Sheila Harsdorf Special Pre-Election Report April 22, 2011
• Jim Holperin Special Pre-Election Report April 28, 2011
• Randy Hopper Special Pre-Election Report April 25, 2011
• Dan Kapanke Special Pre-Election Report April 25, 2011
• Luther Olsen Special Pre-Election Report April 25, 2011
• Robert Wirch Special Pre-Election Report April 25, 2011

Impact on redistricting

See also: Redistricting in Wisconsin

During the recalls, the Wisconsin legislature was in the midst of redrawing state and congressional districts, which had to be completed by the end of the 2011 session. Republican control of the governorship, House, and Senate gave them power over the process. However, the recall elections had the possibility to alter that. If Democrats were able to hold onto their three senate seats and win an additional three, the balance of the senate would swing into their control, giving them power over redistricting in that body and creating a divided government.

Democratic Party of Wisconsin Chair Mike Tate issued a statement regarding the Republican-led redistricting process, saying, in part:

Wisconsin's redistricting process has never gone forward under such a dark ethical cloud. Conceived in darkness and obscured from the voters, this heinous redistricting plot now is foisted on Wisconsin as a fait accompli.
Never before in Wisconsin's modern history has the process taken place without local participation and the creation of wards. Never before have the people of this state had so substantial a decision made in such an absence of democratic principle.

It was reported on June 23 that legislative leaders had redrawn state Senate and Assembly maps, but were keeping them mostly secret, even from their own party members. Speaker of the Assembly Jeff Fitzgerald said he shared the maps with fellow Republicans in his chamber and was deciding whether to pass them in July, prior to the recall elections.

Republican state Senators Luther Olsen and Robert Cowles, both of whom faced recall elections August 9, as well as President of the Senate Michael Ellis, said they had not yet seen maps of their own districts. While the legislature was not scheduled to be on the floor during July, a special session was held to pass the maps prior to the recalls.

During the last redistricting cycle following the 2000 census, Democrats controlled the Senate and Republicans the Assembly. Unable to agree on a map, the task was ultimately completed by the courts.

Impact of Voter ID law

Prior to the recall elections, the Wisconsin State Legislature passed a voter ID bill that would, among other changes, require voters to show photo identification when they go to the polls. Democrats criticized the measure as an act of voter suppression and disenfranchisement. Republicans, on the other hand, argued the bill would help to reduce voter fraud. In a statement, Gov. Scott Walker (R) said, "If you need an ID to buy cold medicine, it's reasonable to require it to vote." He signed the bill into law on May 25, 2011. While Republicans had pushed for similar bills in the past, some Democrats criticized the timing, calling it a deliberate act to influence the recall elections in their favor. During the recalls, however, the law was in a "soft implementation" phase, where voters were asked for photo ID, but not required to show one. Full implementation will not take place until February 2012. Due to this incremental implementation, there was concern voters would be confused, something the Wisconsin Government Accountability Board sought to prevent though an educational campaign that included billboards, radio, and television ads. The bill did not include any funding for implementation or education. Several organizations, including the League of Women Voters, also planned similar campaigns to inform the public of the changes. Estimates show the cost to implement the bill could range between $5 and $7.5 million.

Other changes brought on by the voter ID bill included the following:

• In order to vote, citizens are required to live in the state for 28 days prior to an election, increased from 10 days.
• For the recall elections on July 12, in-state residents who move to a new house or apartment after June 14 had to vote in their old district.
• Neighbors could no longer vouch for one another and parents can no longer vouch for voting-age children who live in their house.
• The period for absentee ballot voting was shortened from three weeks to two.
• Cutoff date for accepting absentee ballots was changed from the Monday before an election to Friday before the election.

The League of Women Voters of Wisconsin planned to have volunteers serving as poll watchers during the recalls to ensure the new law worked correctly. Executive director Andrea Kaminski said, "We’ll also be looking for any signs of voters who are disenfranchised whose votes might not count because of it."

Free IDs

The DMV began offering free IDs to many voters on July 1. A new form for those getting or renewing an ID now includes a box asking if they will be 18 by the next election, are an American citizen and need a free ID card to vote. If that criteria is met, along with proof of name, birth date and address, the ID is provided free of charge. Officials are projecting the free IDs will result in a loss of $1.9 million to the state transportation fund.

New law in practice

The first time the new law was put into practice was during the July 12 Democratic primaries. Although the law was in the "soft implementation" phase, clerks in Fox Valley said they did not have any major problems. Outagamie County Clerk Lori O'Bright said, "Things ran very smoothly. This election, things went very well."

GAB spokesman Reid Magney said there were a few issues at the polls due to the law, but that most were misunderstandings.

Additional reading

• GAB information on Voter ID bill

National impact

Michigan

Months into Rick Snyder's first term as Governor of Michigan, a formal effort to recall him was launched. Michigan's governor could not be recalled for 180 days after taking office; recall signatures, however, could be gathered as soon as 90 days after the inauguration, provided they were not officially submitted until the 180th day or later. In this case, the earliest date for any signatures to be submitted was July 1, 2011.

Working under the group FireRickSnyder.org, petitioners began collecting signatures on May 21, 2011. The law allowed them a 90-day window to circulate petitions, meaning they had until August 20, 2011 to amass the minimum of 806,522 valid signatures, a number equal to 25% of the ballots cast for the governor in the most recent election. Anticipating that one in five signatures would be discarded, the group sought 1.1 million signatures. Organizers worked to meet that number earlier – by August 5, 2011 – the deadline to place a ballot initiative on the November 8, 2011 ballot.

The same group also targeted five other Republican state officials. Senators John Moolenaar, Howard Walker, and Tom Casperson, respectively of the 36th, 37th, and 38th Districts faced recall efforts, as did Representatives James Bolger of the 63rd District and Joel Johnson of the 97th District. Rep. Bolger was Speaker of the Michigan House at the time.

Maine

Maine did not have citizen recall for state officials in 2011, but organizers began working to create that process in order to recall Republican Governor Paul LePage. The effort began after LePage ordered the removal and storage of a mural hanging in the state's Department of Labor. A spokeswoman for the Governor said the action was taken after his office received complaints alleging the mural theme was pro-union. “When you walk into that lobby, there’s a clear message that comes across,” she said. Critics of the move, however, said that the removal of the mural was emblematic of the Governor’s sentiments towards labor issues. “It just goes to show their attitude toward organized labor,” said Sen. Troy Jackson, an Allagash Democrat.

Democrat Cynthia Dill, then a member of the Maine House of Representatives, began a petition process to bring recall to Maine. Her site, run jointly with MoveOn.org, at SignOn.org, said Maine needed recall and began collecting the 20,000 signatures needed. By June 8, 2011, the page had gathered 18,940 names. Dill also sponsored a bill in the Maine House of Representatives, HP1006, that would have created a process to recall the Governor. The bill was indefinitely postponed and then placed in the legislative files on April 14, 2011. The Senate never took action.

National focus and support

The Wisconsin recalls received focus, as well as support, from organizations and events around the country.

• The Wisconsin recalls were a major focus at the sixth annual Netroots Nation meeting, a Progressive conference, held June 16-19 in Minneapolis. The first day included a panel titled, "The Wisconsin 14, the Recall and the Impact of National Organizing in Wisconsin," which included speakers from the Progressive Change Campaign Committee, Democracy for America, and MoveOn. Freshman Wisconsin state Sen. Chris Larson was slated to be on the panel but canceled in order to stay in Madison and vote on the state budget. Later in the day the impact of bloggers was the focus of a panel called, "Bloggers Unite! How the Netroots Rallied in Wisconsin."

• At RightOnline, a Conservative conference that was also held in Minneapolis on June 17-18, Wisconsin was also a central focus. Americans for Prosperity, who funded the conference, sponsored the "Wisconsin Freedom Phonebanks," which AFP-Wisconsin state director Matt Seaholm said was "set up for citizen identification, asking people where they stand on the issues -- just kind of identifying people to see what they think of the recalls going on, but also the governor's plan on collective bargaining." He estimated 150 Wisconsin activists attended the conference.

• In Seattle, a concert was held on June 18 in support of the recall efforts against Republicans. All proceeds went to the Wisconsin Recall Task Force to be used for the July and August elections. Performer and organizer Gary Kanter said, "The people of Wisconsin need to know that their friends and neighbors throughout our nation have their backs and that their fight is our fight as well." Along with the musical acts, Washington state Senator Maralyn Chase (D) and state Representative Luis Moscoso (D) also spoke at the event.

• EMILY’s List (dead link), a national organization which lists its mission as "electing pro-choice Democratic women to office," announced on June 14 that it would donate funds to five Democratic candidates in the recalls. The organization set up a website (dead link) for the campaign, which included profiles on the candidates - Jessica King, Shelly Moore, Nancy Nusbaum, Sandy Pasch, and Jennifer Shilling. While not disclosing how much they planned to spend, a press release from the group stated they would "operate entirely as an independent expenditure organization," a move which exempted them from the legal limits that campaigns and political parties must adhere to.

• Democracy for America, a group founded by Howard Dean, promised at the Netroots conference to spend $1.5 million on the recalls, stating that the group had already spent $200,000 to support the 14 Democratic state senators while they were in Illinois. The organization also bussed activists from the convention to Wisconsin in order to knock on doors for the Democratic candidates in the recalls.

• A fundraiser benefiting the recall efforts against Republicans was held on July 7 in Washington D.C. Individual tickets started at $250, while the cost was $2,500 for patrons, $5,000 for sponsors, and $10,000 for hosts, with all of the money going to the America Vote Action Fund. The event was headlined by U.S. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, and featured Democratic Wisconsin Representatives Ron Kind, Gwen Moore and Tammy Baldwin.

In reaction, Stephan Thompson, Executive Director of the Republican Party of Wisconsin, stated, “Wisconsin Democrats just aren’t finding the support they need at home, so in an act of desperation they’ve turned to Nancy Pelosi’s influence among D.C.’s liberal lobbying crowd to save the day. If we needed another sign of how out of touch Wisconsin Democrats truly are, this is it.”

• The American Federation for Children, a national organization promoting school choice, became involved in the recalls in mid-July with an ad in support of Alberta Darling and a call for donations in order to "counter the resources of anti-reform special interest groups."

Background

Targeted Democratic senators

Eight Democratic state senators were eligible for recall in the first part of 2011 because they were elected to the terms they were currently serving in November 2008 and therefore, the year in office that must elapse before they can be subjected to a recall election had elapsed. Four additional Democratic members of the Wisconsin State Senate were sworn-in on January 3, 2011. They were therefore not subject to a recall petition prior to January 3, 2012.

All eight Democratic state senators who were eligible for a recall in 2011 had recall petitions taken out against them.

On April 21, recall supporters filed signatures with the Wisconsin Government Accountability Board with the objective of qualifying special recall elections targeting Democratic state senators Dave Hansen, Jim Holperin and Robert Wirch.

Recall organizations

• Citizens for Responsible Government was involved in the recall efforts directed against Dave Hansen, Jim Holperin, Mark Miller and Robert Wirch.

• A group called the American Recall Coalition filed petitions against seven of the eight targeted Democratic state senators: Taylor, Coggs, Miller, Wirch, Lassa, Risser, and Hansen. According to the Wisconsin Government Accountability Board's website, as of March 12, the American Recall Coalition did not file a recall petition against Jim Holperin. The organization was listed as an inactive recall committee, as of May 2011. According to the GAB website, certain conditions of the recall were not met by the American Recall Coalition. On March 7, an email was sent to the director of the American Recall Coalition that stated a paper version of a Statement of Intent was still missing for the Miller recall attempt.

Targeted Republican senators

Eight Republican state senators were eligible for recall in the first part of 2011 because they were elected to the terms they were serving in November 2008 and therefore, the year in office that must elapse before they can be subjected to a recall election had elapsed. The nine additional Republican members of the Wisconsin State Senate were sworn in on January 3, 2011. They were therefore not subject to a recall petition prior to January 3, 2012.

Recall petitions against all eight Republicans who could be recalled were taken out on March 2, 2011.

A total of 22,561 signatures to require a recall election for Dan Kapanke were submitted to the Wisconsin Government Accountability Board on April 1, 2011. The signatures submitted to recall Kapanke were the first set of signatures submitted in the overall recall battle.

About 22,500 signatures to recall Randy Hopper were filed on April 7, 2011. This set of signatures was the second set of signatures filed in the sixteen different state senate recalls.

Signatures to recall Sheila Harsdorf were filed on April 21, and signatures to recall Alberta Darling were filed on April 21.

Recall process

See also: Laws governing recall in Wisconsin

• In order to force a recall election, signatures must be collected on recall petitions. The number of signatures that must be collected is 25% of the number of votes cast for the office of Governor of Wisconsin in the most recent gubernatorial election in the district where the recall is sought
• Recall signatures are to be submitted to the Wisconsin Government Accountability Board, which must check the signatures to ensure that enough of them are valid to meet the minimum threshold for a recall election.
• Once the Government Accountability Board says that sufficient signatures have been submitted, the recall election must be conducted six weeks later.
• The name of the targeted incumbent automatically appears on the ballot for the special recall election, unless the incumbent specifically declines to have his or her name on the ballot.
• Candidates who wish to run for the seat that will become vacant if the recall succeeds can collect signatures to have their name appear on the special recall election ballot. As a result, the seat can be made vacant (if voters approve the recall), and re-filled, on the same day and in the same election.
• However, if more than one person from a political party files to run in the special recall election, the recall election date becomes a de facto primary, and the final election must be held 4 weeks later.

Compared to other states

In the 18 states that allow state legislative recall, the shortest time granted to recall organizers to collect the required number of signatures is 60 days. Only three states allow just 60 days, and Wisconsin is one of them. (The other two that allow just 60 days are Colorado and Idaho.) Seven states allow 90 days and the remaining eight states allow more than 90 days.

In the 18 states with state legislative recall, 15 states base the number of signatures required to force a recall election as a percentage of the number of votes cast in the most recent election for the office held by the incumbent whose recall is sought. Wisconsin is just one of three states (the other two being Michigan and Oregon) where the number of signatures is a percentage of the number of votes cast for the office of governor in the legislative district where the incumbent is targeted.

Seven of the 18 states that allow state legislative recall require that specific types of wrongdoing or lack of fitness for serving in office be the case before a recall can go forward; Wisconsin is not one of those states.

Possible changes

Republican leaders said on June 20 that they were considering legislation for the fall that would make it more difficult to recall state officials. Assembly Speaker Jeff Fitzgerald said the recalls were slowing down the legislative process and that he believed some Democrats would support changing the laws governing recall.

Assembly Minority Leader Peter Barca disagreed, stating, "I think it's extremely unlikely that they would get support (from Democrats). I don't think they are going to get any traction on this. From a political standpoint, it looks like politicians trying to avoid accountability."

In order to change the laws, legislation would have to be passed during two legislative sessions and then approved by voters in a statewide referendum.

State legislative recalls

See also: State legislative recalls

The right of voters to recall state legislators was first adopted in 1908 in Michigan and Oregon. Sixteen additional states subsequently granted the right of state legislative recall so that now, altogether, state legislators can be recalled in 18 states.

The first state legislative recall in the United States was in 1913 in California, when Marshall Black was recalled after being convicted of embezzlement.

Altogether, between 1913-2010, there have been 20 state legislative recall elections. In spite of the fact that state legislative recall is available in 18 states, all of the 20 state legislative elections that have occurred have occurred in just five states: California, Idaho, Michigan, Oregon and Wisconsin.

• 13 of the recall elections were directed at state senators. Eight of the 13 were recalled.
• Seven of the recall elections were directed at state representatives. Five of the seven were recalled.

Of the 20 state legislative recall elections prior to 2011, 13 out of 20 resulted in the state legislator being recalled.

Ineligible for recall in 2011

Senators

Seventeen of Wisconsin's 33 incumbent state senators won election or re-election on November 2, 2010; a recall campaign could not be waged against them for at least a year following. They were:

1. Chris Larson
2. Dale Schultz
3. Frank Lasee
4. Jon Erpenbach
5. Joseph Leibham
6. Kathleen Vinehout
7. Leah Vukmir
8. Michael Ellis
9. Neal Kedzie
10. Pam Galloway
11. Rich Zipperer
12. Robert Jauch
13. Scott Fitzgerald
14. Terry Moulton
15. Tim Carpenter
16. Tim Cullen
17. Van Wanggaard

Scott Walker

Republican Gov. Scott Walker was also elected on November 2, 2010 and was ineligible for recall until 2012. Democrats at their annual state convention on June 3-4 indicated that they intended to launch a recall effort against Walker. It was reported on June 15 that People First Superior set up a phone bank to rally support for the possible recall, and that they were going to continue to hold phone banks weekly.

The "Chequamegon Bay Committee to Recall Walker" was formed in June 2011. The Political Action Committee planned to hold fundraisers and assist "local citizens obtain their Wisconsin state IDs so they are able to vote," according to an email sent by the committee treasurer, Darlene Neff. A total of 540,208 valid signatures were needed to trigger a recall election of Walker.

Following an appearance in Washington, D.C. in June, Walker said most voters in his state were not interested in the recalls and "[were] ready to move on." He went on to say, “And I don’t just mean one party or another. I think just in general. The average citizen in Wisconsin I talk to, it’s like they’ve had it … They want us to be talking about jobs. They want us to be focused on that … And so having another political campaign -- it’s going to happen, it’s not like they can avoid it. But it’s not something they’re particularly interested in.”

See also

• Recall campaigns in Wisconsin
• Laws governing recall in Wisconsin
• State legislative recalls
• Timeline of events of the Recall of Wisconsin State Senators in 2011
• Advertisements in the 2011 Wisconsin State Senate recalls

External links

• Government Accountability Board information on Wisconsin recalls
• A primer on recall in Wisconsin

Websites targeting Democrats

• Recall Dave Hansen
• Recall Robert Wirch
• Recall Jim Holperin
• Recall Mark Miller

Websites targeting Republicans

• Recall the Republican 8
• Recall Robert Cowles
• Recall Alberta Darling
• Recall Glenn Grothman
• Recall Sheila Harsdorf
• Recall Randy Hopper
• Dan Kapanke recall
• Recall Mary Lazich
• Recall Luther Olsen

Footnotes

Political recall elections

Recalls
by year

Upcoming recalls • 2025 • 2024 • 2023 • 2022 • 2021 • 2020 • 2019 • 2018 • 2017 • 2016 • 2015 • 2014 • 2013 • 2012 • Historical recalls • Recall statistics and analysis

Recalls
by office

Governors • State legislators • County officials • County commission • Sheriffs • Mayors • City officials • City council • School board • Special district

Recalls
by state

Alabama • Alaska • Arizona • Arkansas • California • Colorado • Connecticut • District of Columbia • Delaware • Florida • Georgia • Hawaii • Idaho • Illinois • Indiana • Iowa • Kansas • Kentucky • Louisiana • Maine • Maryland • Massachusetts • Michigan • Minnesota • Mississippi • Missouri • Montana • Nebraska • Nevada • New Hampshire • New Jersey • New Mexico • New York • North Carolina • North Dakota • Ohio • Oklahoma • Oregon • Pennsylvania • Rhode Island • South Carolina • South Dakota • Tennessee • Texas • Utah • Vermont • Virginia • Washington • West Virginia • Wisconsin • Wyoming

Recall
laws

Alabama • Alaska • Arizona • Arkansas • California • Colorado • Connecticut • District of Columbia • Florida • Georgia • Hawaii • Idaho • Illinois • Kansas • Louisiana • Maine • Maryland • Massachusetts • Michigan • Minnesota • Missouri • Montana • Nebraska • Nevada • New Hampshire • New Jersey • New Mexico • New York • North Carolina • North Dakota • Ohio • Oklahoma • Oregon • Rhode Island • South Dakota • Tennessee • Texas • Vermont • Virginia • Washington • West Virginia • Wisconsin • Wyoming • States that require grounds for recalls • States that have pre-petition signature requirements for recalls