A National Partnership Working for Fair and Impartial Courts
Contact Us Home May 26, 2018
"In too many states, judicial elections are becoming political prizefights where partisans and special interests seek to install judges who will answer to them instead of the law and the Constitution."
--Justice Sandra Day O'Connor

Spending in Wisconsin Supreme Court Races Totals More Than $4.3 Million

April 6, 2016

 Spending in Wisconsin Supreme Court Races Totals More Than $4.3 Million

 Outside groups dominated ad spending


Justice at Stake Contact: Laurie Kinney | lkinney@justiceatstake.org | 202-588-9454 | cell 571-882-3615
Brennan Center for Justice Contact: Rebecca Autrey | 
rebecca.autrey@nyu.edu | 646-292-8316 

WASHINGTON, DC, April 6, 2016 – A post-Election Day tally of documented spending in Wisconsin’s 2016 Supreme Court race shows total spending rose to at least $4,369,787 in the race for a single seat, according to an analysis of state disclosures and television advertising by Justice at Stake and the Brennan Center for Justice. 

Incumbent Rebecca Bradley defeated State Court of Appeals Judge JoAnne Kloppenburg on Tuesday.  Bradley’s campaign received a boost from the Wisconsin Alliance for Reform, an outside group that has spent an estimated $1,851,710 on television ads, according to Kantar Media/CMAG. Justice Bradley’s campaign also benefited from $114,049 in other advertising by the Republican State Leadership Committee, the biggest multi-state spender in supreme court races in the 2013-14 cycle. An outside group supporting Judge Kloppenburg, the Greater Wisconsin Committee, spent $381,360 on television ads according to Kantar Media/CMAG. The Greater Wisconsin Committee also spent $107,323 on other advertising.

The ads can be viewed on the Brennan Center’s “Buying Time” website. Spending estimates are current through Tuesday, April 5, 2016.

“Once again, we’ve seen a state Supreme Court race in which outside spenders pouring cash into TV ad campaigns have possibly made a significant difference in the outcome,” said Susan Liss, Executive Director of Justice at Stake, a nonpartisan nonprofit organization that tracks spending in judicial races and advocates for fair and impartial courts. “So far 2016 is off to a very rough start, as we’ve seen outside groups spend heavily and succeed in defeating two Supreme Court candidates in Arkansas, with the same thing happening in Wisconsin just weeks later. This doesn’t bode well for the judicial elections ahead this year.”       

“Wisconsin is a perfect example of the politicized, high-cost judicial elections we’ve been seeing around the country,” said Alicia Bannon, Senior Counsel in the Brennan Center’s Democracy Program and a co-author of Bankrolling the Bench, a comprehensive report on spending in the 2013-14 judicial elections by Justice at Stake, the Brennan Center for Justice, and the National Institute on Money in State Politics. “The candidates were backed by groups that don’t have to disclose their donors, raising concerns about conflicts of interest and leaving the public in the dark about who is seeking to shape Wisconsin’s courts.  In Wisconsin and around the country, campaign finance and judicial recusal rules have not kept pace with how these races are increasingly run.”

According to Bankrolling the Bench, outside spending by special interest groups was 29 percent of total spending in the 2013-14 cycle, a record high. In this year’s Wisconsin race, outside spending was 56 percent of total spending.

Reported fundraising by the two general election candidates totaled a combined $1,610,115 according to state disclosures. Including the primary election, total reported candidate fundraising reached $1,915,346, as follows:

Bradley: $861,424

Kloppenburg: $748,690

Donald (primary only): $305,231

Spending estimates from Kantar Media/CMAG are based on captured satellite data in the nation’s largest media markets. CMAG’s calculations do not reflect ad agency commissions or the costs of producing advertisements, nor do they reflect the cost of ad buys on local cable channels. CMAG’s data editing process may take several months to complete, and as a result, estimated spending totals may change once the process is finished.

The positions and policies of Justice at Stake publications and campaign partners are their own, and do not necessarily reflect those of other campaign partners or board members.
Website Design in Iowa by Global Reach