Wisconsin outcome shows reform opportunity for Minnesota GOP and DFL

Minnesota DFLers are celebrating the enormous boost their neighbors to the east gave the national party when Wisconsin voters elected Susan Crawford to the state Supreme Court by a large margin.

When the celebrations quiet down, though, Minnesota Democrats should see in the Wisconsin win both an opportunity and a threat. The opportunity is to be the party that puts its faith in voters by proposing to collaborate with Republicans on a broad election reform package. The threat is Donald Trump and his executive order to require proof of citizenship for voting.

Democrats certainly have reason to see a brighter political future than was apparent before the Wisconsin vote. Crawford’s win is especially satisfying in its scale – Crawford garnered about 55% of the vote – and in the spanking it gave Elon Musk who spent an estimated $25 million on behalf of the losing conservative candidate Brad Schimel.

Democrats also should keep in mind that in 2023, liberal Janet Protasiewicz won her state Supreme Court race by a comparable 10-point margin. Just a year later, Donald Trump won the state’s electoral votes. “Past performance does not guarantee future results,” as they say in financial circles.

Democrats would do well to not lose sight of the other result from the Wisconsin election. The same voters who elected Crawford endorsed voter ID by an even larger margin. More than 62% of voters decided to make the current state law requiring voter identification a constitutional requirement. Surveys consistently show that while Americans of all stripes generally trust the integrity of elections, the Wisconsin outcome suggests support for measures to reinforce the eligibility of voters is growing even among Democratic voters.

More troubling is that some Republicans are moving beyond current voter ID laws, claiming they aren’t strong enough. President Trump recently signed an executive order to require that voters must show proof of citizenship in federal elections.

Proof of citizenship, if required by Trump and Republicans, significantly would raise the bar for many voters. In many jurisdictions and for many voters, showing documentary evidence of citizenship could mean a passport, a document held by fewer than half of all Americans.

The evidence is that voter fraud is minimal across the country and especially in Minnesota. But making sure people TRUST that voter fraud is minimal has value. Democracy is strengthened when more people vote; more people could be encouraged to vote if they trust the outcome. A voter ID law with safeguards to assure that valid IDs are conveniently and affordably available is a reasonable takeaway from the Wisconsin vote.

In return, Republicans should join Democrats in passing legislation to implement ranked choice voting in every race, local, state and federal, throughout Minnesota. A big ask for Republicans, to be sure, but like voter ID, anything that promotes more confidence in elections should be embraced by all politicians.

Democrats generally have backed RCV as a concept, but with tepid support in practice. The last few years, though, should have taught the Minnesota DFL that the current system is inflicting damage on the DFL brand in the state and Democrats nationally. Remember “defund the police” and the political burden that label continues to inflict on Democrats?

Contests in Minneapolis too often are between the extreme and the very extreme, between the dominant Democratic Socialists and more mainstream DFLers. The present system, especially in a one-party city like Minneapolis, rewards extremism. Elections often are decided in primaries; the general election becomes merely confirmation of what the few voters who showed up in August decided. RCV makes more moderate candidates viable and tempers the incentive of candidates in primaries to win by building a coalition of the most dedicated far left voters.

Republicans, for their part, should take a hard look at two realities. First, their party increasingly is facing challenges from the right. Candidates who have little chance of winning general elections are gaining strength in local and state conventions and in primaries. Do Republicans want to be defined by the likes of Royce White, the 2024 Senate candidate, in future elections?

Second, the demographics of the state don’t bode well for Republicans. With more voters moving to the metro area, Republicans may have a harder time keeping their legislative power base after the 2030 redistricting. While geography isn’t destiny, people increasingly vote like their neighbors. Minnesota’s eight congressional races in 2024 had an average margin of victory of 28%. In the Second District, the one most analysts consider to be the most competitive, Angie Craig won by a very comfortable 13%. What happens when the four mostly rural Republican districts are balanced with more metro voters after 2030?

Then there is the matter of political money. Wisconsin voters showed that money isn’t everything, turning their backs on Musk’s $20 million-plus spending spree. But money sure helps, and Minnesota Republicans are losing the money chase. In last year’s presidential election, Minnesota donors gave more than three times as much to joint fundraising committees, PACs and principal campaign committees for Kamala Harris as Republican donors gave to organizations supporting Trump.

More and more, money is being spent to tell voters who NOT to support. Negative campaign ads prevail, driving fear and loathing of the candidate on the other side. Trump’s most effective ads in 2024 both created and leveraged fears of transgender people and immigrants.

RCV minimizes the impact of political money and the fear it is used to create. Voters can choose the candidate they think is best without falling victim to the ploy used by both parties of the “wasted vote” or the “lesser of two evils.”

All the arguments against RCV fall apart upon scrutiny. “Survey data consistently show that voters are perfectly capable of ranking. The overwhelming majority of voters experiencing a ranked-choice voting election, even for the first time, say they understand how it works,” according to political analysts Lee Drutman and Maresa Strano.

In Minnesota, RCV is used in local races in the state’s two largest cities and in Bloomington, St. Louis Park and Minnetonka. When given the opportunity to renew support for RCV, Minnesotans have done so, defeating referenda to repeal the law.

There are other arguments to be made for RCV. Candidates have less incentive to go on the attack if they know there is value in being the second choice of opponents’ voters. When there is less attacking, there is more promoting. Candidates have the opportunity to distinguish themselves by thoughtful, innovative proposals. RCV gives more control to voters and less power to big money.

Collaborating in political reform that includes RCV and a reasonable voter ID requirement is a win for voters. And every so often, political parties should set aside their own interests and do what is best for democracy.