Category: fox-news/topic/associated-press

Wisconsin GOP leader downplays pressure to impeach nonpartisan elections czar

Posted on by Latest Political News on Fox News

Wisconsin's Republican Assembly leader on Tuesday downplayed pressure he's receiving from former President Donald Trump and fellow GOP lawmakers to impeach the state's nonpartisan elections administrator, saying such a vote is "unlikely" to happen.

Some Republicans have been trying to oust state elections administrator Meagan Wolfe, who was in her position during the 2020 election narrowly lost by Trump in Wisconsin. The Senate voted last month to fire Wolfe but later admitted the vote was symbolic and had no legal effect.

Five Assembly Republicans in September introduced 15 articles of impeachment targeting Wolfe, a move that could result in her removal from office if the Assembly passed it and the Senate voted to convict. The Republican president of the Senate has also called on Assembly Speaker Robin Vos to proceed with impeachment.

WISCONSIN REPUBLICANS MOVE TO IMPEACH STATE ELECTIONS CZAR

A group led by election conspiracy theorists launched a six-figure television advertising campaign last month threatening to unseat Vos if he did not proceed with impeachment. On Monday night, Trump posted a news release on his social media platform Truth Social from one of GOP lawmaker's who sponsored the impeachment. The release from state Rep. Janel Brandtjen criticized Vos for not doing more to remove Wolfe.

Vos on Tuesday said Republicans were "nowhere near a consensus" and no vote on impeachment was imminent.

"I can’t predict what’s going to happen in the future, but I think it is unlikely that it’s going to come up any time soon," Vos said.

Vos has previously said he supports removing Wolfe, but he wanted to first see how a lawsuit filed on her behalf to keep her in the job plays out.

The Assembly can only vote to impeach state officials for corrupt conduct in office or for committing a crime or misdemeanor. If a majority of the Assembly were to vote to impeach, the case would move to a Senate trial in which a two-thirds vote would be required for conviction. Republicans won a two-thirds supermajority in the Senate in April.

WISCONSIN SENATE APPROVES 3 NEW CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENTS IN ELECTION SECURITY PUSH

Wolfe did not immediately return a message seeking comment Tuesday. In September, Wolfe accused Republican lawmakers who introduced the impeachment resolution of trying to "willfully distort the truth."

Vos called for moving on from the 2020 election.

"We need to move forward and talk about the issues that matter to most Wisconsinites and that is not, for most Wisconsinites, obsessing about Meagan Wolfe," Vos said.

The fight over who will oversee elections in the presidential battleground state has caused instability ahead of the 2024 presidential race for Wisconsin’s more than 1,800 local clerks who actually run elections. The issues Republicans have taken with Wolfe are centered around how she administered the 2020 presidential election and many are based in lies spread by Trump and his supporters.

President Joe Biden defeated Trump in 2020 by nearly 21,000 votes in Wisconsin, an outcome that has withstood two partial recounts, a nonpartisan audit, a conservative law firm’s review and multiple state and federal lawsuits.

Wisconsin Republicans advance election reform-centric constitutional amendments

Posted on by Latest Political News on Fox News

Republicans who control the Wisconsin Legislature have advanced a series of constitutional amendments that would outlaw private funding for elections ahead of the 2024 presidential contest, bar municipalities from allowing non-U.S. citizens to vote in local elections and enshrine existing voter photo ID requirements in the state constitution.

The proposals debated Tuesday at a joint hearing of the Senate and Assembly elections committees stem from false claims made by former President Donald Trump and his supporters that widespread voter fraud tipped the 2020 presidential election in favor of President Joe Biden.

Constitutional amendments must be passed in two consecutive sessions of the state Legislature before being ratified by voters in a statewide election. The governor cannot veto a constitutional amendment.

EX-WISCONSIN SUPREME COURT JUSTICE FIGHTS SUBPOENA OVER PROTASIEWICZ IMPEACHMENT ADVICE

Democratic Gov. Tony Evers has previously vetoed more than a dozen Republican-backed elections proposals, including a 2021 bill to outlaw private elections grants.

The Legislature approved the amendments requiring voters to be U.S. citizens and outlawing private elections grants in its last session. The voter ID amendment is a new proposal this year, which means the soonest it could be put on the ballot for voter approval is 2025.

Assembly Majority Leader Tyler August said Tuesday that he hopes to put the amendment outlawing election grants before voters in the statewide April 2024 election and put the citizenship requirements on the November 2024 ballot.

Conservatives were outraged in 2020 by a nonprofit that distributed hundreds of millions of dollars in grants, mostly funded by Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg, to local election offices. Opponents termed the money "Zuckerbucks" and claimed it was an attempt by the billionaire to tip the vote in favor of Democrats, although there was no evidence to support that. Since 2020, GOP lawmakers in at least 20 states have outlawed private elections grants.

There has also been a recent push for states to specifically make clear that only U.S. citizens can vote in state and local elections. Some cities and towns across the country have allowed noncitizens to vote in local elections. Federal law already requires U.S. citizenship to vote in national elections and no state constitutions explicitly allow noncitizens to vote in state or local elections.

The Wisconsin Constitution guarantees that every U.S. citizen age 18 and over is a qualified elector. But it does not specifically say that only U.S. citizens are qualified to vote in state or local elections.

"I don't think anyone in this room believes noncitizens are going to gain the right to vote in the state of Wisconsin anytime soon," said Jamie Lynn Crofts, policy director for Wisconsin Voices. "It should be up to people at the local level to decide if noncitizens should be able to vote in their local elections."

The photo ID amendment would enshrine the state's current photo ID law, enacted in 2011, in the state constitution. The Legislature could still pass exceptions to the requirement.

WISCONSIN ALLOCATES $402M TO COMBAT PFAS, OTHER WATER POLLUTANTS

The move to make photo ID a constitutional requirement comes after the Wisconsin Supreme Court flipped to liberal control. There is no current legal challenge to the state's voter ID requirement, which is one of the strictest in the country. But other election-related lawsuits challenging restrictions on absentee voting and ballot drop boxes could be taken up by the state Supreme Court.

Republican supporters at Tuesday's hearing said the voter ID law is designed to ensure that only qualified voters cast ballots. But opponents say voter ID requirements make it more difficult for people to vote, particularly those with disabilities, the elderly and people who don't have driver's licenses.

Under current law, and the proposed amendment, voters must provide one of a list of approved photo IDs in order to cast their ballot. Acceptable IDs include a Wisconsin driver’s license, U.S. passport, tribal ID, U.S. military ID or student ID. Absentee voters must provide a photocopy of their ID when requesting a ballot.

Voters who do not have one of the required photo IDs can vote a provisional ballot and then return by the deadline with the identification to have the ballot counted. The ability to cast a provisional ballot does not change under the proposed amendment.

Ex-Wisconsin Supreme Court justice fights subpoena over Protasiewicz impeachment advice

Posted on by Latest Political News on Fox News

A former Wisconsin Supreme Court justice is fighting a subpoena ordering her to appear in court in a lawsuit related to advice she gave about possible impeachment of a current liberal justice, calling it "unreasonable and oppressive."

Republican lawmakers have threatened possible impeachment of current Justice Janet Protasiewicz related to comments she made during the campaign calling GOP-drawn legislative maps "rigged" and "unfair." She joined with the liberal majority of the court in agreeing to hear a lawsuit supported by Democrats that seeks to overturn the GOP maps and enact new ones.

Wisconsin Republican Assembly Speaker Robin Vos asked three former conservative Supreme Court justices for advice on impeachment. Two of the three told him that impeaching Protasiewicz was not warranted. The third, former Chief Justice Patience Roggensack, has not said what her advice was and Vos has repeatedly refused to disclose it.

TOP WISCONSIN REPUBLICAN STANDS BY PROTASIEWICZ IMPEACHMENT THREATS

The liberal watchdog group American Oversight filed a lawsuit alleging that the three former justices researching impeachment for Vos had violated both the state open meetings and open records laws. American Oversight wants the judge to order the former justices to meet in public and to release records related to their work. It was also seeking attorneys fees.

Last week, Roggensack received a subpoena compelling her to attend a hearing in the case was scheduled for this Thursday. On Monday, she asked to be released from the subpoena.

"I believe it would be unreasonable and oppressive to require me to appear at a hearing on a motion for preliminary injunction and even for the Court to consider such a motion," Roggensack wrote.

The judge scheduled another hearing for Wednesday afternoon, likely to address Roggensack's request.

Roggensack, in her affidavit with the court, said the order being sought, which included requiring the former justices to meet in public, would impair her First Amendment rights of freedom of expression, peaceably assembling and petitioning the government.

Roggensack said that Vos, the Republican legislator, asked for her advice on impeachment. Roggensack said she told him she had been researching the issue on her own "because I found the topic to be interesting and because I had not previously considered the standards for impeachment of a Supreme Court justice."

Roggensack said she never considered Vos’s request to mean she was becoming part of a governmental body or committee as American Oversight alleged in its lawsuit.

Vos himself called the effort a panel when he announced in September that he was seeking their advice.

Roggensack said she had a lunch with the other two former justices, David Prosser and Jon Wilcox, along with Vos’s attorney. Prosser and Wilcox have also said that was the only meeting the three former justices had. They all said that they separately advised Vos and did not collaborate on their advice.

FORMER WI SUPREME COURT JUSTICE REFUSES TO NAME THOSE INVOLVED IN PROTASIEWICZ IMPEACHMENT PUSH

American Oversight filed open records requests with the former justices. Prosser released the email he sent Vos that included his impeachment advice, as well as voicemail messages from Roggensack and text messages they exchanged.

Neither Wilcox, Roggensack, nor Vos’ office have responded to its requests for records, American Oversight said.

Vos originally said he was considering impeachment if Protasiewicz did not recuse herself from the redistricting case. She didn’t recuse. Vos didn't move to impeach her, following the advice against impeachment from the former justices. But now he's suggesting he may attempt to impeach her if she does not rule in favor of upholding the current Republican maps.

The Wisconsin Constitution reserves impeachment for "corrupt conduct in office, or for crimes and misdemeanors."

Wisconsin Gov. Evers finds $170M in federal funds to continue COVID-era childcare subsidies

Posted on by Latest Political News on Fox News

Democratic Gov. Tony Evers will use newly discovered federal dollars to keep a pandemic-era child care subsidy program going for another year and a half, his administration announced Monday after Republican legislators refused to devote any more money to the program.

Officials with Evers’ administration said Monday they will use $170 million from the Federal Emergency Management Agency pandemic response operations to keep the Child Care Counts program running through June 2025. Evers ripped Republicans in a news release, saying that it’s "unconscionable" that the GOP wouldn’t extend the program.

"It’s time for Republicans to get serious about solving our problems and join us in doing the right thing for our kids and families, our workforce, and our state," Evers said.

TOP WISCONSIN REPUBLICAN STANDS BY PROTASIEWICZ IMPEACHMENT THREATS

Spokespersons for Assembly Speaker Robin Vos and Senate Majority Leader Devin LeMahieu didn't immediately respond to messages seeking comment.

Launched in 2020, the Child Cares Counts program provides child care providers across the country with money to help retain staffs as well as cover curriculum, utility and rent costs. The program handed out almost $600 million dollars to nearly 5,000 child care providers in Wisconsin between March 2020 and March 2023, according to the state's nonprofit Legislative Fiscal Bureau.

FEDS, LOCAL OFFICIALS PLEDGE $450M TO DREDGE OUT MILWAUKEE WATERWAYS

The program is set to expire in January, leading many to warn that the loss of the subsidies could lead to child care providers shutting their doors or a decline in early education services, particularly in rural areas.

Evers has been trying to persuade Republicans to use Wisconsin's $7 billion surplus to keep Child Care Counts afloat in Wisconsin. His state budget called for spending $300 million in state money for the program over the next two years.

GOP lawmakers stripped the plan from the budget. Evers called a special legislative session last month in hopes of prodding Republicans to take action, but they have refused to cooperate with the governor.

Top Wisconsin Republican stands by Protasiewicz impeachment threats

Posted on by Latest Political News on Fox News

The Republican leader of Wisconsin’s Assembly refused to back down on Thursday from possibly impeaching a newly elected liberal state Supreme Court justice over her refusal to step aside in a redistricting case, even after two former conservative justices advised him against the unprecedented move.

"No, absolutely not," Assembly Speaker Robin Vos said when asked at a news conference if impeachment of Justice Janet Protasiewicz was off the table.

"If they decide to inject their own political bias inside the process and not follow the law, we have the ability to go to the U.S. Supreme Court," Vos said, "and we also have the ability to hold her accountable to the voters of Wisconsin."

FORMER WI SUPREME COURT JUSTICE REFUSES TO NAME THOSE INVOLVED IN PROTASIEWICZ IMPEACHMENT PUSH

The Wisconsin Democratic Party said the comments are a signal that Republicans are backing off from impeaching Protasiewicz "by moving the goalposts in an effort to save face."

Vos first floated the possibility of impeachment in August after Protasiewicz called the Republican-drawn legislative boundary maps "rigged" and "unfair" during her campaign. Impeachment has drawn bipartisan opposition and two former conservative Wisconsin Supreme Court justices, asked by Vos to investigate the possibility, told him in the past week it was not warranted. Vos refused to say what advice he got from the third retired justice.

Protasiewicz refused to recuse from the redistricting lawsuit last week and sided with the liberal majority in accepting the lawsuit. Vos suggested Thursday that impeachment may hinge on how Protasiewicz rules on that case.

"She said she’s going to follow the law," Vos said. "The most important aspect of the law is following past precedent."

Vos also said Protasiewicz’s acceptance of nearly $10 million from the Wisconsin Democratic Party would unduly influence her ruling.

Protasiewicz last week rejected those arguments, noting that other justices have accepted campaign cash and not recused from cases. She also noted that she never promised or pledged to rule on the redistricting lawsuit in any way. A state judiciary disciplinary panel has rejected several complaints against Protasiewicz that alleged she violated the judicial code of ethics with comments she made during the campaign.

With Vos tying impeachment to how Protasiewicz rules on redistricting, it’s nearly certain that Democratic Gov. Tony Evers would be able to name a replacement if the Legislature removes Protasiewicz from office or she resigns.

A special election is only triggered if a vacancy occurs before Dec. 1. Oral arguments in the redistricting case are set for Nov. 21, which makes it nearly certain a ruling won’t come until after the special election deadline.

That means if the Legislature moves to impeach and convict Protasiewicz, they would do it knowing that Evers would name her successor — who would certainly be another liberal.

ETHICS COMPLAINTS OVER WI JUSTICE PROTASIEWICZ'S CAMPAIGN STATEMENTS REJECTED

Other justices, both conservative and liberal, have spoken out in the past on issues that could come before the court, although not always during their run for office like Protasiewicz did. Current justices have also accepted campaign cash from political parties and others with an interest in court cases and haven’t recused themselves. But none of them has faced threats of impeachment.

The legislative electoral maps drawn by the Republican-controlled Legislature in 2011 cemented the party’s majorities, which now stand at 64-35 in the Assembly and a 22-11 supermajority in the Senate. Republicans adopted maps last year that were similar to the existing ones.

Wisconsin’s Assembly districts rank among the most gerrymandered nationally, with Republicans routinely winning far more seats than would be expected based on their average share of the vote, according to an Associated Press analysis.

Both lawsuits ask that all 132 state lawmakers be up for election in 2024 in newly drawn districts.

US judge upholds New Mexico Gov. Grisham’s suspension on gun-carry rights in public parks, playgrounds

Posted on by Latest Political News on Fox News

A federal judge cleared the way Wednesday for enforcement of a public health order that suspends the right to carry guns at public parks and playgrounds in New Mexico's largest metro area.

The order from U.S. District Judge David Urias rejects a request from gun rights advocates to block temporary firearms restrictions as legal challenges move forward.

It marks a victory for Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham and her advocacy for temporary gun restrictions in response to recent shootings around the state that left children dead.

NEW MEXICO GOV. GRISHAM DEFENDS EFFORTS SUSPENDING GUN-CARRY RIGHTS IN PUBLIC PARKS, PLAYGROUNDS

The standoff is one of many in the wake of a U.S. Supreme Court decision last year expanding gun rights, as leaders in politically liberal-leaning states explore new avenues for restrictions.

In New Mexico, the restrictions have ignited a furor of public protests, prompted Republican calls for the governor’s impeachment and widened divisions among top Democratic officials.

Lujan Grisham, a Democrat, continued to argue this week that some sensitive public spaces should be off limits for open or concealed carry of firearms.

Gun rights advocates have filed an array of lawsuits and court motions aimed at blocking the restrictions in her order, arguing that even a new, scaled-back version would deprive Albuquerque-area residents of 2nd Amendment rights to carry in public for self-defense.

But in denying the request for injunction, the judge ruled that the plaintiffs had not shown a substantial likelihood of success in court. He rejected arguments that gun restrictions for "sensitive" places should apply only to locations for core government functions, such as polling places, and not playgrounds.

"Given the Supreme Court’s recognition of schools as sensitive places and the sound analogy between schools and playgrounds ... the court finds that the recognition of what constitutes a sensitive place could very well be determined by the type of function occurring at those locations as well as whether a vulnerable population — such as children — utilize such locations," Urias wrote.

NEW MEXICO LEGAL CHALLENGE EXAMINES GUN-CARRY RESTRICTIONS AMID STATE GUN CONTROL EFFORTS

Urias also said it appears "plausible, although not certain" that the governor may "demonstrate a national historical tradition of firearm restrictions at public parks within cities."

Zachary Fort, who is a plaintiff in several consolidated lawsuits challenging the gun restrictions, said he carries in public parks for self-defense when he can.

"I was disappointed in the judge’s decision today, but I think it’s too early to say now what our next steps are going to be," Fort said.

The governor’s initial order would have suspended gun-carry rights in most public places in the Albuquerque area, while the current version applies only to public parks and playgrounds with an exception that ensures access to a municipal shooting range park. The restrictions were tied to a statistical threshold for violent crime that applies only to Albuquerque and the surrounding area.

State police have authority under the order to assess civil penalties and a fine of up to $5,000, but the sheriff and Albuquerque’s police chief had refused to enforce it.

The rest of the public health order has remained intact, including directives for monthly inspections of firearms dealers statewide, reports on gunshot victims at New Mexico hospitals, wastewater testing for illicit substances at schools, safe-surrender programs for gun owners who choose to decommission firearms they no longer want and more.

A temporary restraining order that previously blocked the gun restrictions was to expire at the end of Wednesday.

Former WI Supreme Court justice refuses to name those involved in Protasiewicz impeachment push

Posted on by Latest Political News on Fox News

One of three former Wisconsin Supreme Court justices asked to review possible impeachment of a current justice refused to tell a judge Friday who else was looking into that question.

Former Justice David Prosser called a lawsuit alleging violations of the state open meetings law "frivolous," saying those looking into impeachment met once but are operating independently and not as a governmental body subject to the law.

Prosser and the attorney for Republican Assembly Speaker Robin Vos both refused to tell the judge during Friday's hearing who else was tabbed by Vos to review impeachment. Vos is looking into possible impeachment of liberal Justice Janet Protasiewicz if she does not recuse herself from a pair of redistricting lawsuits.

ETHICS COMPLAINTS OVER WI JUSTICE PROTASIEWICZ'S CAMPAIGN STATEMENTS REJECTED

The liberal watchdog group American Oversight sued Monday, alleging the group of justices was violating the state open meetings law by not letting the public attend its meetings. Prosser is the only former justice to say publicly that he is among the group.

Prosser indicated during the hearing before Dane County Circuit Judge Frank Remington that three former justices met at least once.

"Three people had lunch together," Prosser said. "We had lunch together because we didn’t know what we were really supposed to do. If other people are going to have input, it’s going to be their input, not my input. I think this is an absolutely frivolous case."

When asked directly by the judge if he would name who the other two former justices were, Prosser said, "No." Likewise, Vos attorney Matthew Fernholz said he would not disclose their names without first consulting with Vos. Vos has repeatedly declined to name who he asked, only saying he tabbed three former justices to look into impeachment.

None of the eight other living former justices, six of whom are conservatives, have said they are a part of the review. The most recently retired justice, conservative Patience Roggensack, hung up when contacted by The Associated Press to ask if she was on the panel.

The judge asked Prosser if the group intended to meet again.

"The people that I had lunch with had the same view of what we might say and we would do it individually," Prosser said. He said the group was not producing a formal report and Vos never told him he was creating a panel.

"The word ‘panel’ never came up," Prosser said. "Certainly we were not ordered to do anything. ... This is not a governmental body by any stretch of the imagination."

Vos himself called it a panel when he announced its formation Sept. 13.

"I am asking a panel of former members of the Wisconsin Supreme Court to review and advise what the criteria are for impeachment," Vos said on WISN-AM.

Vos said he was asking the group to "come back with an analysis to say whether or not (impeachment) is possible and how it should occur."

Prosser and Fernholz on Friday both asserted that the former justices were like any other constituent that a public official may meet with to gather advice.

"That’s done all the time," Prosser said. "That is not something that is going to require notices and people coming and listening to everything that’s happening. That’s just not realistic at all."

Fernholz took it a step further, saying "The secret panel does not exist."

American Oversight had asked the judge to order the group not to meet. But Judge Remington said he can't consider the case until after the district attorney has 20 days to investigate American Oversight's complaint. That deadline is Oct. 9. Remington set another hearing for Oct. 19.

"It could be very well, Justice Prosser, that this is not a committee that is not subject to public meetings law," Remington said. "We just don’t know because the facts are uncertain."

Dane County District Attorney Ismael Ozanne said in court Friday that it appeared to him the group may be violating the open meetings law, calling it "astonishing."

"If nothing else they should be meeting in public," Ozanne said.

But he said his investigation hasn’t gotten far, in part, because he doesn’t know who the other former justices working on the issue are.

WISCONSIN SUPREME COURT FLIPS FROM CONSERVATIVE TO LIBERAL CONTROL FOR FIRST TIME IN 15 YEARS

American Oversight attorney Christa Westerberg said the group of justices is subject to the open meetings law because Vos created it to advise him, it has a defined membership and he asked that it report back to him with recommendations.

"We don’t have secret panels in Wisconsin," she said. "The work of government isn’t secret. I don’t think this is a very heavy lift. ... It just boggles my mind that all of this can be done in secret."

Protasiewicz’s installment in August flipped the high court to liberal control for the first time in 15 years. Vos has called for her to recuse herself in the redistricting cases because of comments she made on the campaign trail calling the state’s heavily gerrymandered, GOP-drawn electoral maps "unfair" and "rigged," as well as the nearly $10 million she accepted from the Wisconsin Democratic Party.

Protasiewicz has yet to decide whether she will recuse herself from the cases. The court has also yet to decide whether it will take up the lawsuits.

Wisconsin Republicans move to impeach state elections czar

Posted on by Latest Political News on Fox News

A group of Republican Wisconsin lawmakers on Thursday proposed impeaching the battleground state's top elections official as Democrats wage a legal battle to keep the nonpartisan administrator in office.

Democrats say the GOP-controlled state Senate acted illegitimately when it voted along party lines last week to oust Wisconsin Elections Commission Administrator Meagan Wolfe. In a lawsuit challenging the vote, Democratic Attorney General Josh Kaul accused Republicans of attacking the state's elections.

The resolution introduced Thursday by five Assembly Republicans makes Wolfe the second state official GOP lawmakers have threatened with impeachment this month. Assembly Speaker Robin Vos, Wisconsin's top Republican, created a panel last week to investigate the criteria for impeaching liberal Justice Janet Protasiewicz, whose installment in August tipped the Wisconsin Supreme Court to liberal control for the first time in over a decade.

WISCONSIN DEMOCRATS LAUNCH $4M AD BLITZ TARGETING GOP LAWMAKERS CONSIDERING IMPEACHMENT OF NEW LIBERAL JUSTICE

Wolfe has been targeted by conspiracy theorists who falsely claim she was part of a plot to rig the 2020 election in favor of President Joe Biden. The lawmakers proposing her impeachment have played a role in advancing those claims and some pushed to decertify the results of the 2020 election.

"A gaggle of well-known election deniers is once again attacking Meagan Wolfe, a nonpartisan election administrator who has served Wisconsin and our democracy with the utmost respect and dignity," Democratic Senate Minority Leader Melissa Agard said in a statement.

The 23-page impeachment resolution reiterates conspiracy theories about the 2020 election and faults Wolfe for election administration decisions that were made by elections commissioners. As the elections commission’s nonpartisan administrator, Wolfe has little decision-making power and instead implements decisions made by the three Democrats and three Republicans on the bipartisan commission.

WISCONSIN DEMOCRATIC GOV. EVERS’ SPECIAL ELECTION ON CHILD CARE, WORKER SHORTAGES REJECTED BY GOP LEGISLATURE

"No matter how many times some politicians misrepresent my actions and how this agency works, it does not make what they’re saying true," Wolfe said in a statement. "It’s irresponsible for this group of politicians to willfully distort the truth when they’ve been provided the facts for years."

Republican Rep. Janel Brandtjen, one of the resolution's authors, lost her position as chair of the Assembly elections committee and was even kicked out of a GOP caucus last year after Republicans said they lost trust in her for promoting election lies. Brandtjen has frequently butted heads with Vos and other GOP leaders, and she endorsed Vos' Republican primary opponent in the 2022 midterm.

The resolution to impeach Wolfe would need approval from Vos to move forward. He did not respond to an email or text message seeking comment Thursday. Senate Majority Leader Devin LeMahieu also did not respond to emails seeking comment.

Numerous reviews have found that the 2020 election in Wisconsin was fair and the results were accurate. Biden defeated then-President Donald Trump in 2020 by nearly 21,000 votes in Wisconsin, an outcome that has withstood two partial recounts, a nonpartisan audit, a conservative law firm’s review, and multiple state and federal lawsuits.

A look ahead at Pennsylvania’s special election on Tuesday

Posted on by Latest Political News on Fox News

For the third time in less than eight months, a special election will decide control of the narrowly divided Pennsylvania House of Representatives and provide political reinforcements to either the commonwealth’s Democratic governor or its Republican-controlled Senate.

On Tuesday, voters in the heavily Democratic 21st legislative district will choose a replacement for former state Rep. Sara Innamorato, who stepped down in July to focus on her bid to be Allegheny County’s next county executive. Her resignation bumped Democrats from a one-vote majority in the chamber to a 101-101 tie with Republicans.

The Democratic nominee is Lindsay Powell, director of Workforce Strategies for InnovatePGH, an economic development nonprofit, and a former aide to U.S. Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, U.S. House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, and former Pittsburgh Mayor William Peduto. She faces GOP nominee Erin Connolly Autenreith, a real estate agent and chairwoman of the Shaler Township Republican Committee. Her father, Thomas Connolly, served as mayor of nearby McKees Rocks in the 1980s.

PHILADELPHIA POLICE COMMISSIONER RESIGNS AMID CRIME WAVE

The winner will complete the remainder of Innamorato’s two-year term and be up for reelection in November 2024.

District 21 is located in the heart of Allegheny County in southwestern Pennsylvania and includes parts of Pittsburgh as well as the suburbs of Etna, Millvale, Reserve and Shaler to the north. Innamorato won the district in 2022 with 63% of the vote. Allegheny County has Pennsylvania's second-largest population and votes reliably Democratic, supporting Hillary Clinton and Joe Biden in the last two presidential elections with 57% and 60% of the vote, respectively. U.S. Sen. John Fetterman received 63% of the county vote in 2022 over Republican nominee Dr. Mehmet Oz.

In the 2022 midterm election, Democrats won a majority in the Pennsylvania House for the first time since 2010, but Republicans occupied more seats by the time the term began in January because of three vacancies that were created after the election. Two Democratic members resigned to assume other offices –- lieutenant governor and U.S. representative — while a third died before Election Day and was reelected posthumously.

Democrats regained their numerical majority in February after winning special elections to fill the three vacancies. Two additional vacancies, one by a Republican who was elected to the state Senate and another by a Democrat who resigned amid sexual harassment allegations, forced another round of special elections in May that would once again determine control of the House. Those elections resulted in the 102-101 Democratic edge that stood until Innamorato’s resignation in July.

Yet another special election that could determine control of the Pennsylvania House may be in the works early next year if Democratic state Rep. John Galloway is elected to a district judgeship in November, as expected.

The House is scheduled to reconvene on Sept. 26.

Here’s a look at what to expect on election night:

ELECTION DAY

The special election for Pennsylvania state House District 21 will be held on Tuesday. Polls close at 8 p.m. ET.

WHO GETS TO VOTE

Voters must be registered in House District 21 to participate in the special election. The deadline to register was Sept. 5.

DECISION NOTES

Under its current boundaries, District 21 heavily favors Democrats. Innamorato won the 2022 general election with 63% of the vote. She performed best in the southern half of the district, which includes parts of Pittsburgh, where she dominated most of the city’s 6th, 9th, and 10th wards with between 80% and 89% of the vote.

The Republican that year, Frank Perman, carried only 16 of the district’s 79 wards, all of them in Shaler Township. This year, Autenreith would have to outperform the 50%-59% Perman scored in the eastern and western parts of Shaler, as well as cut into the Democratic lead in the rest of the township, which is conceivable considering she is the local Republican committee chairwoman. But to win, she would also have to force Powell to underperform in Pittsburgh and neighboring wards, which is a tall order considering the area’s voting history.

The AP does not make projections and will declare a winner only when it’s determined there is no scenario that would allow the trailing candidate to close the gap. If a race has not been called, the AP will continue to cover any newsworthy developments, such as candidate concessions or declarations of victory. In doing so, the AP will make clear that it has not yet declared a winner and explain why.

PENNSYLVANIA SENATE RECONVENES FOR UNUSUAL AUGUST SESSION AS 2-MONTH BUDGET STALEMATE CONTINUES

Pennsylvania has automatic recounts in statewide races if the margin between the top two candidates is 0.5 percentage points or less. In district races, Pennsylvania law allows recounts if three voters in the district request and pay for the recount, regardless of the winning margin.

The AP may declare a winner in a race that is eligible for a recount if it can determine the lead is too large for a recount or legal challenge to change the outcome.

WHAT DO TURNOUT AND ADVANCE VOTE LOOK LIKE

As of Monday, there were 47,682 voters registered in Pennsylvania’s House District 21, according to the Pennsylvania Department of State’s website. Of those, 59% are Democrats, 26% are Republicans and 11% are not affiliated with any party.

The AP's preliminary turnout estimate as of Thursday is 16,000 votes, based on the results of previous contests in the district as well as those of other Pennsylvania House special elections this year in comparison to the turnout in those districts in the 2022 general election.

In the 2022 general election, 27% of ballots were cast before Election Day. The Democratic incumbent won 84% of those advance votes. As of Thursday morning, 3,600 ballots had been cast, with 82% by registered Democrats and 12% by registered Republicans.

HOW LONG DOES VOTE-COUNTING USUALLY TAKE?

In the 2022 general election in District 21, the AP first reported results at 8:39 p.m. ET, or 39 minutes after polls closed. The election night tabulation ended at 10:33 p.m. ET with about 98% of total votes counted.

In Montana, former firearms executive Ryan Busse seeks to unseat GOP Gov. Greg Gianforte

Posted on by Latest Political News on Fox News

Former firearms executive turned gun industry critic Ryan Busse is seeking the 2024 Democratic nomination to challenge first-term Republican Gov. Greg Gianforte in Montana.

Busse told The Associated Press about his intentions in advance of a planned public announcement Thursday. It's his first run for public office.

If the 53-year-old from Kalispell makes it past next June's primary, he faces an uphill battle in trying to unseat Gianforte, who is able to draw from immense personal wealth to bankroll his campaign and whose party has dominated Montana during recent election cycles. Former President Donald Trump won the state in 2020 with a 16-point advantage over Joe Biden.

EXTRAMARITAL AFFAIR DETAILS SURFACE IN HISTORIC IMPEACHMENT TRIAL OF TEXAS AG KEN PAXTON

But Busse suggested that Republicans are vulnerable in the state after failing to keep housing prices affordable, not taking action to prevent potential property tax increases and threatening women’s health care by passing several abortion restrictions.

"To me this is a narrative about Greg Gianforte making this a playground for the wealthy and ignoring the people of Montana," Busse said Wednesday. "They had time to extend massive tax breaks to industry, to profitable industry. They had time to blow a $2.8 billion surplus. They had time to discuss the impacts of this tax increase to Montana homeowners, and they chose to do nothing about it."

Recent increases in home valuations could lead to an $80 million spike in residential property taxes in each of the next two years, the Revenue Department estimated. The agency suggested a change in the state’s tax rate on residential property to avoid a tax increase, but the Republican-controlled Legislature did not adopt it, instead passing a $675 property tax rebate for resident homeowners in each of the next two years.

During a 25-year career in the firearms industry, Busse said, he directed the sale of almost 3 million guns from the manufacturer Kimber America. But he became disaffected as the increasingly politicized industry began aggressively marketing military-style assault rifles such as those used in numerous mass shootings.

Since leaving the industry in 2020, Busse has served as a policy adviser for Biden’s 2020 campaign and written a book and articles highly critical of the National Rifle Association and gun manufacturers.

His remonstrations against America's gun culture could become a flashpoint in the campaign given the strong support for gun rights in Montana politics. Busse, who favors background checks before purchases but opposes bans on assault rifles, predicted Republicans will portray him as anti-gun.

MAYOR ERIC ADAMS PREDICTS MIGRANT CRISIS 'WILL DESTROY NEW YORK CITY'

"I know there’s a vast, frustrated majority out there that are decent, responsible gun owners, and those are the people I represent," he said.

Busse's two sons were among 16 young plaintiffs in a high-profile climate change lawsuit that resulted in a groundbreaking ruling last month that said Montana agencies were violating their constitutional right to a clean and healthy environment by allowing fossil fuel development without considering greenhouse gas emissions.

"Ryan Busse is straight out of the far left’s central casting – an anti-gun extremist and radical environmentalist," Montana Republican Party Chairman Don K. Kaltschmidt said in a statement.

Gianforte spokesperson Kaitlin Price declined to say if he intends to seek another term. She said his accomplishments in office include increasing funding for schools and teachers, paying off the state’s debt and cutting taxes.

"Governor Gianforte remains focused on building upon what he committed to do and has proudly accomplished so far," Price said in a statement.

Gianforte is a former tech industry entrepreneur who first won public office with a victory in a special U.S. House election in 2017, a day after gaining national attention for assaulting a reporter covering his campaign.

He was reelected to the House in 2018 and two years later rolled to the governorship in a race against Lt. Gov. Mike Cooney. Gianforte spent millions of his own money on that campaign, which broke state spending records.

His victory wrested control of the governor’s seat from Democrats, who had held it 16 years.

Republican State Rep. Tanner Smith of Lakeside plans to challenge Gianforte in the primary. Smith is a business owner and school board trustee who said he would ensure high-quality education, increase teacher pay and support responsible fiscal policies that would allow the state to reduce taxes.

The filing deadline with the Secretary of State's Office for candidates to run in next year's election is March 11.