Wisconsin audit confirms 2020 election results, looks to future

The state of Wisconsin has completed one of two investigations into the results of the 2020 presidential election. The audit shows the elections were “safe and secure” and also makes recommendations for how the state could improve.

Wong Maye-E/AP
Poll workers sort early and absentee ballots at the Kenosha Municipal Building on Election Day in Kenosha, Wisconsin, Nov. 3, 2020. Wisconsin is one of several states investigating the outcome of the 2020 presidential election.

A highly anticipated nonpartisan audit of the 2020 presidential election in Wisconsin released Friday did not identify any widespread fraud in the battleground state, which a key Republican legislative leader said shows its elections are “safe and secure.”

The report from the nonpartisan Legislative Audit Bureau did make dozens of recommendations on how the state might improve its elections. It also determined that dozens of voting machines it reviewed worked correctly. Some conservatives have called for reviews of all voting machines.

“Despite concerns with statewide elections procedures, this audit showed us that the election was largely safe and secure,” tweeted Republican state Sen. Robert Cowles, who co-chairs the Legislature’s Audit Committee, which assigned the audit bureau to conduct the review. “It’s my hope that we can now look at election law changes & agency accountability measures in a bipartisan manner based on these nonpartisan recommendations.”

The audit didn’t offer any evidence that the election won by President Joe Biden was “stolen” from Donald Trump, as Mr. Trump and some fellow conservatives have falsely claimed. Mr. Biden’s roughly 21,000-vote win over Mr. Trump in Wisconsin has withstood recounts and multiple court rulings.

Democrats hailed the audit as evidence that elections are safe, secure, and accurate, but said they feared Republicans would cherry pick the findings to sow distrust.

The Audit Bureau report did identify inconsistent administration of election law based on surveys of ballots it reviewed across the state. It made 30 recommendations for the Wisconsin Elections Commission to consider and 18 possible legal changes for the Legislature to weigh.

Republican state Sen. Kathy Bernier, a former county elections clerk and current chair of the Senate elections committee, said the audit “did not reveal any sizable or organized attempt at voter fraud.” But it did show “sloppy” and inconsistent election administration that must be addressed, she said.

Republican state Rep. Samantha Kerkman, the other Audit Committee co-chair, said the report will serve as a “blueprint” for the Legislature to address areas identified where current election law is not being followed.

“It is critically important that we restore trust in our elections process,” she said.

In an unusual move, state auditors did not give elections officials subject to the review a chance to respond and have their comments be a part of the report. The Audit Bureau said it didn’t solicit comment because so many people were involved with the audit, it would have compromised the confidentiality of its work.

Meagan Wolfe, administrator of the Wisconsin Elections Commissions which oversees elections in the state, called the move a “missed opportunity” and that the agency was still reviewing the 168-page report to determine its response.

The report is one of two investigations in Wisconsin.

Republican Wisconsin Assembly Speaker Robin Vos ordered a second investigation after Mr. Trump criticized him for doing too little to scrutinize the election. That probe is being overseen by conservative former Wisconsin Supreme Court Justice Michael Gableman who said last year that he thinks the election was stolen.

Mr. Vos said the audit showed the need for more investigation into the election.

On Thursday, Democratic Wisconsin Attorney General Josh Kaul asked a court to block a subpoena for Ms. Wolfe, the state’s top elections official, issued by Mr. Gableman. A judge set a Monday hearing on the request.

Mr. Gableman did not immediately respond to a message Friday seeking comment.

Wisconsin is one of several states pursuing investigations into the 2020 presidential election.

The audit said the elections commission should issue a rule, which would need legislative approval, saying whether local elections clerks can fill in missing information on absentee ballots or allow drop boxes.

The audit reviewed a sample of 14,710 absentee ballots that were cast in 29 municipalities across Wisconsin. It found that nearly 7%, or 1,022 ballots, had partial witness signatures; only 15 ballots did not have a witness address in its entirety; eight did not have a witness signature and three did not have a voter signature.

It also found that state law requires clerks to write their initials on absentee ballot certificates in certain situations, but fewer than 1% of the certificates reviewed were initialed.

The audit also found just 24 people who might have two active voter registrations and of those, only four who might have voted twice. The names of the four people, which weren’t included in the audit summary, were referred to the elections commission, which could forward them to local prosecutors.

The findings back up the fact that few cases of election fraud have been charged in Wisconsin. Only four cases have been brought to date, including one involving a man accused of having voted twice. It wasn’t immediately clear if that man’s case was among the four discovered by the audit.

This story was reported by The Associated Press.

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.