Is a Republican who voted against state budget in one of Wisconsin's most flippable seats?
Democrats are already looking ahead to the fall 2026 elections, when they'll have more chances to pick up seats in the state Legislature, and perhaps flip control of the state Senate.
The State Senate Democratic Committee is already eyeing one competitive seat, held by Republican state Sen. Rob Hutton of Brookfield.'Senator Hutton is in the most flippable Senate seat in Wisconsin,' the SSDC, which works to get Democrats elected to the chamber, posted on X on June 27, 2025.
This is all in the context of the state's two-year budget and speculation at the time that Hutton might vote against it.
Hutton ultimately voted 'no' on the budget, joining three Republicans and 10 Democrats in the Senate who rejected the full plan because it either spent too much or didn't invest enough in areas like K-12 education.
In a statement after his vote, Hutton said the budget would create a deficit, 'putting Wisconsin families in a worse spot for the future.'
'In a time of economic uncertainty, when our spending decisions warrant further restraint and discernment, we need a budget that creates proper spending priorities and puts taxpayers first,' Hutton said.
Wisconsin voters are likely to hear lots about toss-up legislative seats and how incumbents voted on policies in the budget.
Let's determine whether Hutton's district, which includes communities west of Milwaukee like Brookfield, Wauwatosa, Pewaukee and West Allis, is truly the most competitive.
We contacted the SSDC, which said it ran the math based on voting results from the 2024 presidential and Senate elections.
Democrats see two other seats as competitive, those held by Sen. Howard Marklein of Spring Green and Sen. Van Wanggaard of Racine. Both Republicans voted for the budget.
The question for us is whether Hutton's seat is more competitive than the other two.
Based on the committee's math, former Vice President Kamala Harris and U.S. Sen. Tammy Baldwin carried Hutton's district by a higher percentage than they carried the other two districts.
In Hutton's district, about 6,500 more voters cast ballots for Harris than President Donald Trump, compared to around 1,000 in the two other districts.
And around 5,400 more voters in Hutton's district voted for Baldwin over Republican candidate Eric Hovde, significantly more than in the other two competitive districts.
The SSDC didn't provide a breakdown of the district's voting pattern in the state Supreme Court race, but said liberal Justice Susan Crawford's performance in Hutton's district added to its conclusion.
John Johnson, a research fellow at Marquette University, did a similar analysis. His findings confirmed that Harris and Baldwin performed better in Hutton's district than in three other battleground districts.
Meanwhile, Johnson found Crawford carried Hutton's district by double digits – Crawford actually had a higher margin in Marklein's district.
We're getting way into the details, but all this supports Democrats' claim that Hutton's district is at least one of the two most flippable in Wisconsin.
Of course, races for the state Legislature are different than those for president, Senate and state Supreme Court.
We can't look at how much Hutton won by in 2024 in his new seat, because he wasn't on the ballot last year. In 2022, when his district lines were different, he won by about seven percentage points.
Democratic candidate Sarah Harrison is running against Hutton this time around. She ran for state Assembly in 2024, losing to Republican Rep. Adam Neylon from Pewaukee by about 18 points.
PolitiFact Wisconsin asked Hutton for further comment but didn't hear back.
The State Senate Democratic Committee said Hutton 'is in the most flippable Senate seat in Wisconsin.'
Hutton was one of 53 lawmakers, including Republicans and Democrats, who voted against the state budget.
Calculations from the SSDC and an independent researcher confirm Harris and Baldwin carried Hutton's district by a higher percentage than two other competitive districts held by Republicans.
And while Crawford performed slightly better in one of those other battlegrounds, she still carried Hutton's district by a significant margin.
None of this confirms Hutton's seat will turn blue next year, but it is likely the Senate's most competitive seat. We rate the claim True.
Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, After an intense election season, the political focus shifts to state races in Wisconsin, Nov. 11, 2024.
X, Wisconsin Senate Democrats, June 27, 2025.
MacIver Institute, Budget Delay Is an Opportunity for Reform, Sen. Rob Hutton, June 27, 2025.
Wisconsin State Legislature, 2025 Senate Vote 81, July 2, 2025.
Wisconsin State Senator Rob Hutton, Statement on Budget, July 2, 2025.
Wisconsin State Legislature, Senate District 5.
Email exchange, Will Karcz, State Senate Democratic Committee communications director, July 1, 2025.
Marquette University Law School Faculty Blog, John Johnson, What the Supreme Court Election tells us about Wisconsin's Legislative Districts, June 4, 2025.
Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, 2022 Wisconsin State Senate - District 5 Election Results.
WisPolitics, Harrison campaign: Announces bid for Wisconsin State Senate district 5, June 13, 2025.
Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, 2024 Wisconsin General Elections Results - State Assembly District 15.
Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, Legislature passes and Evers signs budget after sprint to get ahead of Trump big bill, July 3, 2025.
This article originally appeared on Milwaukee Journal Sentinel: Does GOP state budget holdout have most competitive seat in Wisconsin?
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
16 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Trump, Carney to speak soon, Canadian official says
WASHINGTON (Reuters) -President Donald Trump and Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney will likely talk "over the next number of days" after the U.S. imposed a 35% tariff on goods not covered by the U.S.-Mexico-Canada trade agreement, a Canadian official said on Sunday. Dominic LeBlanc, the federal cabinet minister in charge of U.S.-Canada trade, told CBS News' "Face the Nation" that he believes there is an option of striking a deal that will bring down tariffs. Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
Yahoo
16 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Women call the shots across the supply chain at tequila brand 1953
Listen and subscribe to The Big Idea on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, or wherever you find your favorite podcasts. When Shivam Mallick Shah and Lindsey Davis Stover founded the tequila brand 1953, they wanted to make moves in an industry that was becoming increasingly popular among their own demographic while also opening doors for other women. As the brand proudly states on its website, 1953 is "Founded, Farmed, Distilled, and Led by Women." On Yahoo Finance's The Big Idea podcast, the two entrepreneurs shared how they managed to pull off such a feat in a historically male-dominated industry. (Watch the full episode above; listen-only below.) "I just kind of got down this rabbit hole of where the women in tequila are, unfortunately, really hard to find. So that kind of led us to this idea," Davis Stover, a Texas native, said on the podcast. "We were drinking tequila. Every woman we knew is drinking tequila," she continued. "So we wanted to create a company that was founded, farmed, distilled, and led by women at every single level. Even our name, 1953, is the year women earned the right to vote in Mexico. I think that is just the essence of our company and providing opportunities for women." This embedded content is not available in your region. "People didn't think it was necessary to have a female-led supply chain," Shah said. "They didn't think that it would make a difference in the quality of the product, and they didn't think that, frankly, we could do it. They had a lot of strong opinions on what we could do, and it was different than what we wanted to do." Shah and Davis Stover tackled their mission by completing their search in an "organic way," talking with people who worked at distilleries and farms in Mexico. Eventually, they found Carmen and Adriana, who ran the family-owned distillery that 1953 would eventually use. "Their family has owned this distillery for over a hundred years, and they have trained a female master distiller, Rocio Rodriguez, who signs every bottle," Shah explained. "She had this incredible story of having come to this distillery when she was pregnant. She was trained as a chemical engineer, but she was worried about losing her job. Carmen and Adriana's families decided to build a nursery so she could come to work and bring her whole self, which has, of course, changed her life, but it changed so many people's lives." Though their journey to creating a brand with a strong female focus had its roadblocks, the biggest hurdle was finding a woman-owned agave farm. Traditionally, agave farms in Mexico are passed down from father to son, but Carmen and Adriana helped the entrepreneurs find the farm they partner with today. "We could not find an agave farm owned by women," Shah said. "Carmen and Adriana helped us find a gentleman who only had four daughters. We met with them, and we talked about what we were trying to build. We asked him if he would consider passing his farm down to his daughters if we guaranteed purchase of agave from their farms for 1953." After a family meeting in which the four women discussed the proposition with their husbands and father, they ultimately agreed, deciding to take on the responsibility and risk to help complete 1953's women-led supply chain. "They had grown up on this farm, and they knew it like the back of their hand, but they never saw themselves as CEOs. They never saw themselves as the people in charge of running the farm," Shah explained. "What made them think differently was the high school down the street and all the girls who were in that high school, just like they used to be, and wanting to let those girls know that there was nothing they couldn't do. ... It was a motivation we all shared, and we knew we had an alignment of our values, which told us we were in the right place. And that really completed our supply chain." Every Thursday, Elizabeth Gore discusses real-life stories and smart strategies for launching a small business on The Big Idea podcast. You can find more episodes on our video hub or watch on your preferred streaming service. Sign up for the Mind Your Money newsletter Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
Yahoo
16 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Rail customers urge regulators to block Union Pacific-Norfolk Southern deal, FT reports
(Reuters) -U.S. railroad customer groups have demanded regulators block or put onerous conditions on the proposed merger of Union Pacific and Norfolk Southern, the Financial Times reported on Sunday. Seven associations of shippers have expressed concern the planned deal would significantly increase the power of the merged railroad to raise prices or reduce service standards, the report said. Last month, Union Pacific said it would buy smaller rival Norfolk Southern in an $85 billion deal to create the first U.S. coast-to-coast freight rail operator and reshape the movement of goods from grains to autos across the country. The two railroads are expected to have a combined enterprise value of $250 billion and would unlock about $2.75 billion in annualized synergies, the companies said. Reuters could not immediately verify the FT report. Norfolk Southern and Union Pacific did not immediately respond to Reuters' requests for comment. Previously, the transportation division of SMART, the International Association of Sheet Metal, Air, Rail and Transportation Workers, said it plans to oppose the merger when it comes before the Surface Transportation Board for review. Major railroad unions have long opposed consolidation, arguing such mergers threaten jobs and risk disrupting rail service. Senate Democratic leader Chuck Schumer also criticized the merger saying the deal would push "us even further down the road of dangerous consolidation and monopoly power ... This is a hostile takeover of America's infrastructure."
