Wisconsin

Placeholder

Highest-power issue: Felony penalties for peaceable firearm possession. Current recommendation: Endorse Ivan Solberg.

1. Felony penalties for peaceable firearm possession · power 50
2. Qualified immunity when officials injure nonviolent people · power 45
3. Licensing barriers to harmless work · power 30
4. Forfeiture of property without a criminal conviction · power 24

Legislature

Placeholder

The legislature drafts the statute, sets the penalty and the mental state, funds the agencies, and can sunset an emergency power. On most of these issues it holds the text.

Felony penalties for peaceable firearm possession

Placeholder scenario, not a claim about current state law. A non-prohibited adult faces a felony for possessing a firearm without a permission slip, or for a paperwork defect that involves no violence. Sample entry for Wisconsin.

Harm: 5
Reach: 2
Office impact: 5
Power: 50

Conduct 5 and penalty severity 4 (Felony imprisonment) blend 60/40 into harm 5. Power 50 = 5 × 2 × 5.

Who can act

The legislature writes the penalty, the mental state, and the budget. On the question of how severely the law punishes peaceful conduct, this is usually the office with the text in its hands. One seat matters only as part of a majority, which is what winnability has to reflect. On a possession felony, the legislature chooses whether peaceable possession is a crime at all, and whether the penalty is a felony. Placeholder analysis, not a description of any current officeholder.

Winnability is Ivan Solberg's chance in this office, 4 of 5. It is a property of the leading score, not of the statute. Ivan Solberg is fictional.

2026 legislative elections

Endorse Ivan Solberg

Placeholder legislature race for the 2026 cycle in Wisconsin. Candidates are fictional. Alignments come from the “clear” profile so the mix of calls is reproducible.

Formula: Endorse Ivan Solberg (The lead clears the toss-up gap.)

Each segment is issue power times alignment. Alignment runs from −1 to +1. Right of zero, the candidate would narrow the penalty. Left of zero, they would keep or expand it. Fictional candidates.

Fictional candidate

Ivan Solberg

Limited-government placeholder · Winnability 4 · Score 57.5

Fictional placeholder. Not a real candidate. Limited-government placeholder.

Fictional candidate

Mae Gable

Enforcement-first placeholder · Winnability 3 · Score -25

Fictional placeholder. Not a real candidate. Enforcement-first placeholder.

Placeholder call for Wisconsin, Legislature. The issue in this office is “Felony penalties for peaceable firearm possession.” Ivan Solberg leads Mae Gable after winnability weighting, with a winnability of 4 out of 5, and the gap clears the toss-up rule. The editorial call matches the formula. Ivan Solberg is not a real candidate.

All calls for this state

Judiciary

Placeholder

Judges rule on warrants, constitutional limits, and how a penalty is applied. They do not rewrite a clear statute, and this scorecard does not ask them to.

Qualified immunity when officials injure nonviolent people

Placeholder. An official uses force or a seizure against a person who was not violent, and immunity ends the civil case before a jury sees it. The severity score treats the lost remedy as a property-level harm, not a prison term. That is an editorial judgment, and it is labeled as one. Sample entry for Wisconsin.

Harm: 3
Reach: 3
Office impact: 5
Power: 45

Conduct 4 and penalty severity 2 (License, property, or forfeiture) blend 60/40 into harm 3. Power 45 = 3 × 3 × 5.

Who can act

Judges apply the text and the constitution. They can refuse an unreasonable search, limit a forfeiture, or strike a penalty that exceeds the charter. They cannot supply a mental state the legislature deleted. Office impact is high when the dispute is constitutional and low when the statute is plain. On qualified immunity, judges are the office that applies and can limit the doctrine. This is one of the few issues where the court holds the pen. Placeholder analysis, not a description of any current officeholder.

Winnability is Pearl Harrow's chance in this office, 4 of 5. It is a property of the leading score, not of the statute. Pearl Harrow is fictional.

2026 judicial elections

Toss-up

Placeholder judiciary race for the 2026 cycle in Wisconsin. Candidates are fictional. Alignments come from the “close” profile so the mix of calls is reproducible.

Formula: Toss-up — The lead sits inside the toss-up gap. Leading score: Pearl Harrow. (The lead sits inside the toss-up gap.)

Each segment is issue power times alignment. Alignment runs from −1 to +1. Right of zero, the candidate would narrow the penalty. Left of zero, they would keep or expand it. Fictional candidates.

Fictional candidate

Kurt Pellham

Cautious-reform placeholder · Winnability 3 · Score 22.5

Fictional placeholder. Not a real candidate. Cautious-reform placeholder.

Fictional candidate

Pearl Harrow

Incumbent-leaning placeholder · Winnability 4 · Score 25.9

Fictional placeholder. Not a real candidate. Incumbent-leaning placeholder.

Placeholder call for Wisconsin, Judiciary. The issue in this office is “Qualified immunity when officials injure nonviolent people.” Editors mark a toss-up because the score gap between Pearl Harrow and Kurt Pellham sits inside the toss-up threshold. The lead sits inside the toss-up gap. Pearl Harrow and Kurt Pellham are fictional.

All calls for this state

Attorney general

Placeholder

The attorney general decides appeals, civil enforcement, and often whether the state will defend a statute. Charging power over ordinary crimes may sit with county attorneys. The entry says so when that split matters.

Licensing barriers to harmless work

Placeholder. A person who braids hair, gives ordinary advice, or runs a one-chair trade has to buy a license designed for a different occupation, or face fines and a shutdown. Sample entry for Wisconsin.

Harm: 3
Reach: 5
Office impact: 2
Power: 30

Conduct 3 and penalty severity 2 (License, property, or forfeiture) blend 60/40 into harm 3. Power 30 = 3 × 5 × 2.

Who can act

An attorney general rarely rewrites a statute. The office decides which cases to bring, which appeals to pursue, which settlements to accept, and, in many states, whether to defend a statute at all. That is power over how a penalty is used, not over the fact that it exists. On licensing, the attorney general is usually a lawyer for the board, not the author of the rule. Impact stays low unless the office drives an enforcement campaign. Placeholder analysis, not a description of any current officeholder.

Winnability is June Marlow's chance in this office, 4 of 5. It is a property of the leading score, not of the statute. June Marlow is fictional.

2026 attorney general election

Endorse June Marlow

Placeholder attorney general race for the 2026 cycle in Wisconsin. Candidates are fictional. Alignments come from the “clear” profile so the mix of calls is reproducible.

Formula: Endorse June Marlow (The lead clears the toss-up gap.)

Each segment is issue power times alignment. Alignment runs from −1 to +1. Right of zero, the candidate would narrow the penalty. Left of zero, they would keep or expand it. Fictional candidates.

Fictional candidate

June Marlow

Limited-government placeholder · Winnability 4 · Score 34.5

Fictional placeholder. Not a real candidate. Limited-government placeholder.

Fictional candidate

Otto Fisk

Enforcement-first placeholder · Winnability 3 · Score -15

Fictional placeholder. Not a real candidate. Enforcement-first placeholder.

Placeholder call for Wisconsin, Attorney general. The issue in this office is “Licensing barriers to harmless work.” June Marlow leads Otto Fisk after winnability weighting, with a winnability of 4 out of 5, and the gap clears the toss-up rule. The editorial call matches the formula. June Marlow is not a real candidate.

All calls for this state

Governor

Placeholder

The governor signs or vetoes statutes, issues and withdraws executive orders, appoints agency heads, and proposes the budget. The office does not write a criminal penalty on its own.

Forfeiture of property without a criminal conviction

Placeholder. The state takes a car, a bank account, or a small business on the claim that the property was involved in a crime, without a conviction of the owner. Peaceful people lose the property that is the case. Sample entry for Wisconsin.

Harm: 4
Reach: 2
Office impact: 3
Power: 24

Conduct 5 and penalty severity 2 (License, property, or forfeiture) blend 60/40 into harm 4. Power 24 = 4 × 2 × 3.

Who can act

A governor does not write the statute. The office can veto a penalty, refuse to expand it, appoint the people who enforce it, and propose the budget that feeds it. Where the harm lives in an order or an agency rule, the governor's pen is the direct instrument. On forfeiture, the governor can veto a wider statute and appoint the officials who file the petitions. The governor cannot, alone, require a conviction. Placeholder analysis, not a description of any current officeholder.

Winnability is Hattie Quinn's chance in this office, 4 of 5. It is a property of the leading score, not of the statute. Hattie Quinn is fictional.

2026 gubernatorial election

Endorse Hattie Quinn

Placeholder governor race for the 2026 cycle in Wisconsin. Candidates are fictional. Alignments come from the “clear” profile so the mix of calls is reproducible.

Formula: Endorse Hattie Quinn (The lead clears the toss-up gap.)

Each segment is issue power times alignment. Alignment runs from −1 to +1. Right of zero, the candidate would narrow the penalty. Left of zero, they would keep or expand it. Fictional candidates.

Fictional candidate

Hattie Quinn

Limited-government placeholder · Winnability 4 · Score 27.6

Fictional placeholder. Not a real candidate. Limited-government placeholder.

Fictional candidate

Karl Oliphant

Enforcement-first placeholder · Winnability 3 · Score -12

Fictional placeholder. Not a real candidate. Enforcement-first placeholder.

Placeholder call for Wisconsin, Governor. The issue in this office is “Forfeiture of property without a criminal conviction.” Hattie Quinn leads Karl Oliphant after winnability weighting, with a winnability of 4 out of 5, and the gap clears the toss-up rule. The editorial call matches the formula. Hattie Quinn is not a real candidate.

All calls for this state