In recent days, there has been some talk of attempting to recall WI Gov. Scott Walker over his attempts to eliminate collective bargaining rights for public employees. However, by law, Walker could not become the subject of a recall effort until 2012, and it would take over 500,000 signatures to put the issue on the ballot. (Wisconsin’s total population is just 5.65 million.)
But the state senate is elected in alternating cycles, and eight Republicans – all of those in even-numbered districts, i.e., who last ran in 2008 – are eligible for recall now. That’s state Sens. Robert Cowles, Alberta Darling, Sheila Harsdorf, Luther Olsen, Randy Hopper, Glenn Grothman, Mary Lazich and Dan Kapanke. (Of course, Dems elected in 2008 are potentially subject to recall as well.) And it would take about 15-16K signatures apiece for a successful recall petition, according to ThinkProgress.
So here’s a look at the presidential vote breakdown in all 33 Wisconsin state senate districts to help gauge who might be most vulnerable to such an effort. The “Margin” column is the incumbent’s margin of victory in his or her last election. Remember, you can click on each column header to sort the table, so you can see which incumbents had the narrowest victories, or which Republicans sit in the bluest seats, and so forth. (You can find our original spreadsheet here.)
| District | Senator | Party | Age | First Elected | Margin | Seat Up | Obama | McCain | Kerry | Bush |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Frank Lasee | (R) | 49 | 2010 | 20.2% | 2014 | 53% | 45% | 44% | 55% |
| 2 | Robert Cowles | (R) | 60 | 1987 | 99.4% | 2012 | 52% | 46% | 42% | 57% |
| 3 | Tim Carpenter | (D) | 50 | 2002 | 22.5% | 2014 | 63% | 36% | 58% | 42% |
| 4 | Lena Taylor | (D) | 44 | 2004 | 98.8% | 2012 | 86% | 13% | 80% | 19% |
| 5 | Leah Vukmir | (R) | 52 | 2010 | 4.5% | 2014 | 51% | 47% | 46% | 53% |
| 6 | Spencer Coggs | (D) | 61 | 2003 | 98.9% | 2012 | 89% | 11% | 83% | 16% |
| 7 | Chris Larson | (D) | 30 | 2010 | 14.4% | 2014 | 61% | 38% | 56% | 43% |
| 8 | Alberta Darling | (R) | 66 | 1992 | 1.0% | 2012 | 51% | 47% | 46% | 53% |
| 9 | Joe Leibham | (R) | 41 | 2002 | 46.3% | 2014 | 53% | 46% | 47% | 52% |
| 10 | Sheila Harsdorf | (R) | 54 | 2000 | 12.9% | 2012 | 50% | 48% | 48% | 51% |
| 11 | Neal Kedzie | (R) | 55 | 2002 | 50.8% | 2014 | 40% | 59% | 33% | 66% |
| 12 | Jim Holperin | (D) | 60 | 2008 | 2.5% | 2012 | 53% | 46% | 46% | 53% |
| 13 | Scott Fitzgerald | (R) | 47 | 1994 | 38.4% | 2014 | 48% | 51% | 41% | 59% |
| 14 | Luther Olsen | (R) | 59 | 2004 | 99.4% | 2012 | 52% | 47% | 43% | 56% |
| 15 | Tim Cullen | (D) | 66 | 2010 | 18.0% | 2014 | 63% | 35% | 57% | 42% |
| 16 | Mark Miller | (D) | 68 | 2004 | 99.3% | 2012 | 66% | 32% | 58% | 41% |
| 17 | Dale Schultz | (R) | 57 | 1991 | 25.2% | 2014 | 61% | 38% | 51% | 48% |
| 18 | Randy Hopper | (R) | 45 | 2008 | 0.2% | 2012 | 51% | 47% | 42% | 57% |
| 19 | Michael Ellis | (R) | 69 | 1982 | 99.0% | 2014 | 54% | 44% | 45% | 54% |
| 20 | Glenn Grothman | (R) | 55 | 2004 | 60.6% | 2012 | 36% | 63% | 30% | 69% |
| 21 | Van H. Wanggaard | (R) | 58 | 2010 | 5.1% | 2014 | 55% | 43% | 50% | 49% |
| 22 | Robert Wirch | (D) | 67 | 1996 | 33.4% | 2012 | 57% | 41% | 51% | 48% |
| 23 | Terry Moulton | (R) | 64 | 2010 | 8.5% | 2014 | 55% | 43% | 49% | 50% |
| 24 | Julie Lassa | (D) | 40 | 2003 | 35.4% | 2012 | 59% | 39% | 51% | 47% |
| 25 | Robert Jauch | (D) | 65 | 1986 | 2.6% | 2014 | 59% | 40% | 56% | 43% |
| 26 | Fred Risser | (D) | 83 | 1962 | 99.1% | 2012 | 81% | 17% | 75% | 23% |
| 27 | Jon Erpenbach | (D) | 50 | 1998 | 23.7% | 2014 | 67% | 32% | 59% | 40% |
| 28 | Mary Lazich | (R) | 58 | 1998 | 99.2% | 2012 | 39% | 60% | 35% | 64% |
| 29 | Pam Galloway | (R) | 55 | 2010 | 4.6% | 2014 | 53% | 45% | 46% | 53% |
| 30 | Dave Hansen | (D) | 63 | 2000 | 32.2% | 2012 | 56% | 42% | 47% | 52% |
| 31 | Kathleen Vinehout | (D) | 52 | 2006 | 0.7% | 2014 | 58% | 41% | 52% | 46% |
| 32 | Dan Kapanke | (R) | 63 | 2004 | 2.9% | 2012 | 61% | 38% | 53% | 46% |
| 33 | Rich Zipperer | (R) | 36 | 2010 | 99.5% | 2014 | 37% | 62% | 32% | 67% |
One name which stands out here is Dan Kapanke. He’s in the bluest district held by a Republican, and he won by less than 3% last time he faced voters. If his name sounds familiar, that’s because he waged a pretty high-profile challenge against Dem Rep. Ron Kind (WI-03) last year, losing narrowly. I’m sure Kind has a pretty fat oppo file on Kapanke he’d be willing to share….
Sorry. Probably best I sit this one out.
Julie Lassa. She lost a congressional race to Sean Duffy CD7. So Wisconsin senate was like 0-2 in congressional races in 2010. So much for stepping stones.
Who drew the State Senate map?! By the Obama/McCain numbers it looks like a Republican gerrymander.
Also, recall all those bastard Republicans. When I grew up, my parents’ unions were my livelihood. Screw those who think that recalls smell funny (or something). Walker is putting livelihoods at stake.
Recalls are very tough to pull off, but if they were attempted and even one was successful, it would be interesting to see. Looking at the numbers, Republicans did not have enough capital to really overreach and this thing with the unions could prove disastrous.
Going by 2008 margins, Hopper, Darling and Kapanke all seem extremely vulnerable – very slim margins in Democratic districts. But we would have to run in the table in these three to win the State Senate. By the numbers, Harsdorf might be vulnerable as well, but I think the viability of this effort would depend on challenging the R Senators in Obama districts who went unchallenged last time(Cowles and Olsen). Anybody know if these two might? Did they go unchallenged as a result of local candidate recruiting failure, or do they have genuine bipartisan appeal?
But there’s no question that we have some slim pickings. . .
It is very interesting. I hope you post it at DailyKos, sure you have a big success with this diary.
Then Kapanke is just the most vulnerable state senator to a recall and the five first of the list are in decent danger since they represent districts what Obama wins. Very good new. It would be necessary a succesful recall of three of these republicans.
I read someplace was whining that our Dem guys could be recalled too in retaliation if we tried recalled these GOP guys.
This data shows that none of the Democrat state senators are really vulnerable at all thanks to the gerrymandered districts.
Tweet from for Political Comm Dir for AFL-CIO.
http://twitter.com/#!/evale72
This is slightly off topic, but I’m trying to clear up some possible confusion I may have.
When did the Senate Democrats accept the budget cuts and increased contributions, at the beginning or within the last day or two? My impression was that the Democrats had accepted the cuts before they left the state, but an article I read today seemed to suggest otherwise. Which is it?
2 Cowles R R+1
4 Taylor D D+33
6 Coggs D D+36
8 Darling R R+2
10 Harsdorf R R+3
12 Holperin D _+0
14 Olsen R R+1
16 Miller D D+13
18 Hopper R R+2
20 Grothman R R+17
22 Wirch D D+4
24 Lassa D D+6
26 Risser D D+28
28 Lazich R R+14
30 Hansen D D+3
32 Kapanke R D+8
Dems in order of increasing PVI
12 Holperin D _+0
30 Hansen D D+3
22 Wirch D D+4
24 Lassa D D+6
16 Miller D D+13
26 Risser D D+28
4 Taylor D D+33
6 Coggs D D+36
Repubs in order of decreasing PVI
32 Kapanke R D+8
2 Cowles R R+1
14 Olsen R R+1
8 Darling R R+2
18 Hopper R R+2
10 Harsdorf R R+3
28 Lazich R R+14
20 Grothman R R+17
Looks like, given generic candidates and an even year, they’re more at risk.
The large base of liberals in the Twin Cities could certainly do a lot of work Kapanke’s district and do a lot for GOTV operations. (Roughly two car ride to the district from MSP.) There is also a liberal college town of 27k residents across the river from Kapanke’s district along with a few other river towns with easy bridge access.
Kind of ironic that they don’t need a 2/3 vote to pass that.
Though, how about the Dems make a bill that has tax breaks require a 2/3 vote? Or would that be counterproductive?–in which case we can always tell the senate Repubs to go back and pass Walker’s tax breaks by a 2/3 vote, or malign them for it.