Madison.com: Madison officials propose stiffer penalties for threatening, harassing election workers

Alexander Shur, Wisconsin State Journal

Citing threats and harassment to election workers in Madison, city leaders on Tuesday announced the introduction of an ordinance that would create a new penalty for disorderly conduct targeting election officials.

The total forfeiture listed on a citation under the proposed ordinance for disorderly conduct against election staff would be $691, compared with the total forfeiture of $439 for typical disorderly conduct citations, according to a Tuesday memo. The memo says the maximum forfeiture would be $1,000 for disorderly conduct against election officials, the same as for other types of disorderly conduct.

“Here in Madison and elsewhere, too many election officials have suffered serious threats and continued harassment just because some people disagree with the results of the last election,” Madison Mayor Satya Rhodes-Conway said at a press conference Tuesday.

The proposal — which Rhodes-Conway, Ald. Patrick Heck, City Council President Keith Furman and Vice President Jael Currie plan to introduce July 19 — came just days after the Wisconsin Supreme Court ruled ballot drop boxes are illegal. The ongoing battle over the use of drop boxes has persisted since the 2020 election, due in part to unfounded claims of election fraud by former President Donald Trump, who lost Wisconsin to President Joe Biden by about 21,000 votes.

“The majority’s decision to take away a voting option that allowed more flexibility for voters, more options for city clerks and a greater path toward people participating in a democratic process underscores why we need to make sure that these election poll workers and those in our communities are kept safe,” said Dane County Circuit Judge Everett Mitchell, who’s running for a Wisconsin Supreme Court seat opening next year.

Almost two of every three local election officials nationwide believe false information is making their jobs more dangerous, according to a March poll by the liberal Brennan Center for Justice. The biggest reason retiring clerks didn’t want to continue in their jobs was “too many political leaders are attacking a system that they know is fair and honest,” the poll found.

Madison officials on Tuesday did not provide specific examples of harassment or threatening behavior toward local election officials, but referenced reports that such behavior has been increasing generally.

Response to ruling

Rhodes-Conway said the city would leave its drop boxes locked in place but not use them, adding that she would comply with the law.

She slammed the state Supreme Court’s decision, saying it tossed a safe and secure voting method out the window, “simply to legitimize fears of fraud that have repeatedly proven to be false.”

She said the ordinance is, in part, a response to the Supreme Court ruling on drop boxes as well as a response to “the progression that we see of the continuing attacks on our democracy.”

Republicans in many states have for years sought to add photo ID requirements and other hurdles to voting, and most recently have sought to tighten voting procedures that were loosened to make voting accessible during the COVID-19 pandemic, when public health officials were warning against large crowds, such as at polling places.

At the same time, states have increasingly adopted early voting hours so that people can cast ballots prior to Election Day and turnout in presidential elections has remained about the same or increased over the last 13 presidential elections.

Separate violations

Under the proposed ordinance, each instance of disorderly conduct would be charged under a separate violation, a city press release states. And if the conduct is repeated or poses a “significant threat,” law enforcement could refer the matter to the district attorney, according to the press release.

“The idea behind the disorderly conduct ordinance is to increase accountability for those who harass or threaten local election officials because of their job,” City Attorney Mike Haas said Tuesday.

Gov. Tony Evers raises more than $10 million in first half of 2022

Asked how the city would distinguish between disorderly conduct and First Amendment-protected speech aimed at government, Haas said that some actions categorized under disorderly conduct include “violent, abusive, indecent, profane, boisterous, unreasonably loud or otherwise disorderly conduct” that tends to cause or provoke a disturbance or has the intent of harassing or annoying the recipients.

“As everybody knows, free speech is not unlimited,” Haas said. “It’s a responsibility.”

Read the original article here.