In this discussion, John Nichols, an associate editor at The Capital Times and electoral politics expert, dives into Wisconsin's unprecedented Supreme Court race. He examines how Elon Musk's staggering $19.3 million contributions have transformed a traditionally nonpartisan election into a high-stakes battle for control. Nichols discusses Musk's influence on voter behavior and the ethical implications of money in politics. He also highlights the contrasting ideologies of the candidates and the race's broader impact on voting rights and gerrymandering in Wisconsin.
The Wisconsin Supreme Court race has become the most expensive in U.S. history, driven by significant financial contributions from Elon Musk.
Voter concerns about economic issues like Medicare and Social Security are critically influencing the judicial election's dynamics and voter behavior.
Deep dives
Record-Breaking Spending in Wisconsin Politics
Wisconsin's Supreme Court race is witnessing unprecedented financial spending, projected to reach approximately $100 million, marking it as the most expensive in both the state and U.S. history. This record can be attributed to significant contributions from Elon Musk, who has already pledged around $19.3 million to support one of the candidates. The influx of money reflects a trend of escalating costs in elections that are pivotal within swing states like Wisconsin. This surge in campaign finance raises concerns regarding the influence of wealth on judicial independence, especially with Musk's unconventional strategies, including offering monetary incentives to voters for signing petitions against ‘activist judges’.
Implications of a Nonpartisan Race
While Wisconsin Supreme Court races are officially nonpartisan, the dynamics of the current election reveal distinct ideological divides between the candidates. Progressive Susan Crawford has a strong public service record, contrasting sharply with her opponent, Republican-affiliated Brad Schimmel, who previously held partisan roles in law enforcement. This election is significant as previous progressive victories in nonpartisan races transformed the court's balance, allowing it to influence critical issues such as gerrymandering and abortion rights. Voter sentiment indicates this election could serve as a referendum on the impact of Musk's backing and the broader trends in Wisconsin's political landscape.
Voter Sentiment Amid Economic Concerns
Despite the focus on the Supreme Court race, voters express a pervasive concern regarding larger economic issues, such as threats to Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security. These concerns are increasingly intertwined with the judicial election, as Musk's involvement introduces a spotlight on potential policy changes that could affect citizens' welfare. The blend of judicial politics and economic anxiety highlights the growing complexity of voter priorities, suggesting that decisions on the court race may also reflect dissatisfaction with broader national political dynamics. This intersection of judicial elections with pressing economic issues demonstrates the nuanced voting behavior in a closely divided state like Wisconsin.
How an election to the Wisconsin Supreme Court has become a referendum on Elon Musk—and the most expensive state supreme court race ever.
Guest: John Nichols, associate editor at The Capital Times in Wisconsin, contributor on electoral politics and public policy for The Nation, and author of multiple books on media and politics.
Want more What Next? Join Slate Plus to unlock full, ad-free access to What Next and all your other favorite Slate podcasts. You can subscribe directly from the What Next show page on Apple Podcasts and Spotify. Or, visit slate.com/whatnextplus to get access wherever you listen.
Podcast production by Elena Schwartz, Paige Osburn, Anna Phillips, Madeline Ducharme, Ethan Oberman, and Rob Gunther.