By the Students, For the Students

This post, by the Assistant Director of Student Affairs, is the fourth in a series of weekly blog posts this semester concerning the work of the Office of Student Affairs. The first, by Dean Kearney, can be found here, and the second and third, by Assistant Dean of Students Anna Fodor, are available here and here.

FGP's 2023 First-Gen Mixer Photo
First Generation Professionals’ fall 2023 First-Gen Mixer at Third Street Market Hall. Photo courtesy of Emily Kehl, president of FGP.

Student organizations are a staple at educational institutions, including Marquette University Law School. These organizations offer students opportunities to form their own smaller communities within a larger institution. Here at Marquette Law School—whether driven by a particular practice area, an aspect of students’ personal identity, or a legal philosophy—student-run organizations offer a way for future Marquette lawyers to build connections with their peers and beyond. It might even surprise some to learn how much these “outside of the classroom” interactions shape a student’s development, contribute to identity formation, and can affect student retention and performance.[1]

Registered student organizations[2] are the one aspect of the law school experience run by students, for students. They are completely voluntary and extracurricular, with no academic prescriptions or curricular incentives for holding or attending events (on the other hand, free food, no mean incentive, is widely available); the interests and activities of students entirely drive these communities. Through them, students help create the “culture” at a particular school. How active (or inactive) an organization is, what it chooses to do, which speakers it brings to campus, how inviting and inclusive its programs are—all of these affect a law school’s culture and the student experience.

Let me give a quick highlight of our Marquette Law School student organizations and some representative engagement opportunities:

  • 35+ active organizations
  • 80+ meetings, speakers, panels, socials, and networking events during the Fall 2023 Semester
  • 150+ student leadership positions

Forum “tabling” events are quick and small ways by which students can engage with each other, with a fun “swing by for a few minutes” vibe; a few examples:

  • The Organization for Student Wellbeing’s Savor the Sips social tabling
  • Hispanic Latino Law Students Association’s monthly Taco Tuesday fundraiser
  • Student Bar Association’s Welcome Back donuts

For organizations that host a guest speaker or panel of speakers, each event brings in practicing attorneys, judges, or experts in their field to discuss legal issues. Recent examples include:

  • Labor and Employment Law Society’s AI and the Workforce panel
  • The Federalist Society’s speaker event with the Hon. Michael Brennan discussing Biden v. Nebraska and federal student loan debt
  • Out and Allies speaker event to discuss LGBTQ+ Issues in Education

Social and networking events allow our students to build lasting friendships, meet practitioners, and gather outside of Eckstein Hall. At one point or another, almost all of our organizations host networking events with their professional chapter equivalents or local bar associations. A sampling of RSOs’ recent social and networking events:

  • Sports Law Society’s annual Brewers tailgate and game
  • Real Estate Law Society’s monthly happy hour
  • First Generation Professionals’ annual first-gen mixer
  • Asian Law Students Association’s fall boba tea gathering

And a few signature events get the entirety of the student body, often along with faculty and staff, involved, engaged, and feeling like part of our greater community. These include:

  • Canned Immunity, the collaborative week-long donation drive spearheaded by our Association for Women Lawyers to collect canned goods and food for local community food banks. Interested professors grant “on call” immunity during the week for students to bring in a donation.
  • The Period Products Initiative, led by the Ruth Bader Ginsburg Society and the Office of Student Affairs, provides free period products in the women’s bathrooms throughout the building. The students ensure that the boxes are filled while the Office of Student Affairs purchases and maintains the inventory.
  • Barristers’ Ball is the Student Bar Association’s annual signature formal event. It recognizes all the work put into the year by the students and provides a highlight to celebrate the end of another great year.

So, if all this is “by the students and for the students,” what do I even do around here?

Well, I work to make it all happen. At the beginning of each academic year, I provide training to the more than 150 student leaders, going over policies and procedures to help them think about and plan these events. Working with law school colleagues, I organize the students (or the events) so that we avoid major scheduling conflicts, reserve spaces for their meetings, coordinate complimentary parking for their guests, help track their budgets, and process reimbursements and payments, among other things. In my experience, you never get to know people better than by working on a project with them, and it’s one of my favorite things to get to see a new idea blossom into a successful community event (looking at you, SBA Chili Cook-off!)

Our student-run organizations foster connections and enrich our Law School, and we, in turn, do our best to support their efforts to reach their own goals. We do this because, ultimately, national research and local experience show that the more that our students engage with each other, the more they feel they belong to our law school culture—and, by extension, in the legal profession as a whole.

[1] Give Chickering’s seven vectors or Astin’s theory of involvement a good Google. They help form the foundation of student development theory.

[2] Registered student organizations (RSOs) are groups that are completely voluntary and where students do not receive any sort of academic credit for their work. So law journals, moot court, and client skills work typically fall outside this category. The Public Interest Law Society, by contrast to both these co-curricular organizations and RSOs, falls into what might be called a department-sponsored organization category.

Continue ReadingBy the Students, For the Students

A Closer Look at the Partisan Implications of Gov. Evers’ Proposed Maps

When the Wisconsin Supreme Court tossed the state’s legislative district maps in December 2023, they invited the legislature and governor to once more seek an agreement on state legislative maps. The Court also simultaneously solicited proposed remedial maps from the parties to the original court case—one of whom was Gov. Evers himself.

The Court ultimately accepted submissions from six parties, 4 liberal or Democratic and 2 conservative or Republican. Having had the chance to review all the proposals and fearing what the Court’s new liberal majority might do, Republican legislators suddenly found themselves in the unexpected position of supporting Evers’ own proposal. On February 13, both houses of the legislature passed Evers’ map submission, with near uniform Republican support and only one vote in each chamber from Democrats.

Republicans explained their sudden support for Evers map as simply picking the worst of several bad options. In Senator Van Wanggaard’s words, “Republicans were not stuck between a rock and hard place. It was a matter of choosing to be stabbed, shot, poisoned or led to the guillotine. We chose to be stabbed, so we can live to fight another day.”

As I write this, Gov. Evers has not yet signed these maps; although, he has indicated he likely will.

The differences between the partisan lean of Evers’ plan and the three other Democratic-aligned proposals are small but measurable. The Court’s consultants calculated separate partisan bias scores and mean-minus-median-gaps for each plan in their report. For each measure, Evers map is not the best (of the four) for Republicans in either house, but it does have the most favorable Republican score when averaged across both houses.

The consultants also calculate each plan’s “majoritarian concordance,” or the reliability with which it converts an electoral majority into a legislative majority. Considering both houses across 13 statewide races since 2016, the Evers map fails the majority concordance standard 6 times—all in instances where a losing GOP candidate would’ve still won a majority of legislative seats.[1] No other plan fairs quite so well for Republicans.

Another benefit to Republicans is a small reduction in paired incumbents, relative to the other Democratic-aligned plans. The governor’s plan places 25 Republican Assembly incumbents into a district with another incumbent, compared to between 27 and 31 in the other plans. In the Senate, the Evers plan pairs 1 more Republican incumbent than the Senate Democrat’s proposed map, but fewer than either the Law Forward or Wright proposals.[2]

These partisan differences between the Democratic-aligned plans appear, if anything, smaller in the 2022 elections, when the Evers map would’ve performed very similarly to the Law Forward plan. The graphic below compares the partisan lean of the tipping point seat in each house under three different election scenarios.

partisan lean of the tipping point seat in the wisconsin legislature under various scenarios

The rightmost graph shows the share of the vote won by Tony Evers in his reelection campaign. Evers won the state by 3.4 percentage points, enough to give him a majority of the seats in both houses under all four of the Democratic-aligned proposals. (Note: These statistics cover all 33 state senate districts).

The middle graph shows the share of the vote won by Ron Johnson in his reelection campaign. Johnson won the state by one percentage point. That narrow victory would’ve won a majority of the seats in both houses under the Evers and Law Forward plans. Johnson still would’ve narrowly lost both houses under the plan submitted by the Wright Petitioners. Under the Senate Democrats map, Johnson would’ve won a majority of seats in the Assembly and lost a majority in the state senate.

Of course, state legislative races are decided by their own candidates—not top of the ticket races. We can’t simply add up state legislative votes in new districts, because many of the old races were not contested by both parties. Instead, I employ a statistical model using top-of-the-ticket races to estimate state legislative results, had both parties run candidates. The results of that model are shown in the leftmost graph. In general, state legislative Republicans did about 1 point better than Ron Johnson.

Indeed, under my modeled estimate of 2022 state legislative races, Republicans would’ve likely held a majority in every house of every plan, except for the state senate in the Senate Democrats proposal. (Again, this considers all 33 seats, not just the 17 odd-numbered districts being elected in 2022).

The 2022 result is not a prediction of 2024. The larger presidential electorate, heightened attention, greater fundraising, and variable incumbency effects may change the contours of those legislative races in consequential ways.

Still, these three election scenarios give a reasonable sense of the range of outcomes in recent Wisconsin elections. With that in mind, here are graphs showing the lean of each legislative seat under the Evers proposal compared with the previous map.

comparison of assembly seat margins

In these graphs, each tick mark shows the partisan lean of one seat. The larger, red tick mark shows the tipping point seat—the one that determines majority control. This is another way of visualizing the statistics I discussed above. In both houses, the tipping point seat was won by both Gov. Evers and Senator Ron Johnson in their 2022 reelection campaigns. State legislative Republicans did slightly better than Johnson, but even in that scenario, the tipping point seat is far more competitive than in any scenario under the old maps.

comparison of senate seat margins

Here is a greatly simplified version of the above graph. In these graphs, I have simply counted the number of seats leaning to each party by double and single digit margins, under each scenario. The first row shows the Evers map, the second row shows the previous maps.

assembly simple seat lean totals

Under the old maps, Ron Johnson won a double-digit victory in 55/99 Assembly districts and 19/33 Senate districts. That falls to 46 and 15, respectively, under the Evers proposal—short of a majority.

Under all three scenarios and in both houses, the Evers map creates a situation where majority control will be decided by a set of more competitive districts.

assembly simple seat lean totals

Click the image below to open an interactive map where you can view the Evers map and the previous district boundaries, with the districts shaded by my modeled 2022 legislative margin. For simplicity’s sake, the rest of this discussion will reference only that election scenario.

The Evers map creates 42 Assembly districts with a double-digit Democratic lean and 4 districts with a single-digit lean. Here are where those changes take place.

  • The south central region now includes 16 D-leaning seats, up from 12 previously. None of these are particularly competitive.
  • Racine/Kenosha now include 4 D-leaning seats, up from 3.
  • The Milwaukee metro includes 14 double-digit D-leaning seats, up from 13. The area retains 1 district with a single-digit Democratic lean.
  • The City of Sheboygan is unified, becoming a district with a single-digit Democratic lean.
  • Oshkosh/Neenah/Appleton are drawn to include 3 D-leaning seats, rather than 2.
  • The Eau Claire area is drawn to include 2 D-leaning seats, rather than 1.
  • Northwestern Wisconsin is redrawn to include one D-leaning seat, stretching along the coast from Superior to Ashland.
  • The La Crosse area is drawn to include 2 D-leaning seats, rather than 1.

To win a majority in November 2024 under the Evers map, Democrats could win all of the seats which lean toward them, plus four of the 7 districts with a single-digit Republican lean. The most likely targets include districts 61 (SW Milwaukee suburbs), 88 and 89 (both in the Green Bay area), and either 85 (Wausau) or 30 (Hudson).

Similarly, to win a majority in the state senate, Democrats would need to win the 10 seats with a double-digit Democratic lean, all 6 seats with a single digit lean in their favor, and one of the two seats with a single-digit Republican lean. Both of those seats are in the Milwaukee suburbs. District 21 stretches from Racine, through Oak Creek and Franklin, up to the southwestern part of the city. District 8 includes much of Milwaukee County’s north shore, as well as southern Ozaukee County.

Because only even-numbered districts will hold election in 2024, I see essentially no chance of Democrats winning a majority this November. However, Democrats have three likely pickup opportunities in 2024 with the Evers senate map—districts 14 (NW of Madison), 18 (Fox Valley), and 30 (Green Bay). Any one of these pickups would end the GOP supermajority in the upper chamber. Winning all of them will put the senate majority very much in play during the 2026 cycle.


[1] These races are Secretary of State 2022 and President 2020 among Assembly seats as well as AG 2018 and Governor 2018 among both Senate and Assembly seats.

[2] Incumbent pairing statistics are from page 13 of the Legislature’s response brief.

Continue ReadingA Closer Look at the Partisan Implications of Gov. Evers’ Proposed Maps

Lubar Center Programs Put the Positives—and Some of the Needs—of Milwaukee in the Spotlight

Good and positive things about Milwaukee, making those things better, and, in some cases, keeping them from getting worse. That sums up three recent programs of the Lubar Center for Public Policy Research and Civic Education at Marquette Law School. Let’s catch up by offering brief summaries of each of the programs, each of which was moderated by Derek Mosley, director of the Lubar Center. 

Get to Know: Cecelia Gore, executive director of the Brewers Community Foundation, February 13, 2024

Cecelia Gore is a well-known figure in Milwaukee’s philanthropic community. She was program director of the Jane Bradley Pettit Foundation from 2001 to 2009. Since 2009, she has been executive director of the Brewers Community Foundation, the charitable arm of Milwaukee’s major league baseball team. In that role, she has overseen the raising and distribution of millions of dollars to support efforts such as education programs, home construction for low-income people, and sports programs for youths.

Each baseball season, she talks to every player on the Brewers about donating part of his salary to the Brewers Foundation—and, she told Mosley during the program in Marquette Law School’s Lubar Center, 100% of the players take part (which is not true of all major league teams). She also instituted the “50-50 raffle” at Brewers home games, which allows fans to buy tickets. Half of the proceeds go to the holder of the winning ticket at each game and half go to the foundation. Since 2010, the raffles have raised more than $50 million—so more than $25 million has gone to Milwaukee nonprofit causes.

Gore has also been involved in many other local philanthropic efforts. She was co-chair of the Greater Milwaukee Foundation’s “Greater Together Initiative,” which recently announced it has raised $700 million to be used to increase opportunity and equity on multiple fronts for low-income people in the Milwaukee area.

Gore is an optimist about the future of Milwaukee. Solving problems will take a lot of hard work. But, she said, “The community is filled with people who want to make a difference. . . . We all have the opportunity to do as much as we can.”

In all her time working for the Brewers at American Family Field, Mosley asked, has Gore ever gone down the slide Bernie Brewer uses when a Brewers player hits a home run? “I’ve done it once, and I’ll probably never do it again,” she said.   

Watch the conversation with Gore by clicking here.

##

Get to Know: Peggy Williams-Smith, president/CEO of VISIT Milwaukee, January 30, 2024

Peggy Williams-Smith has had a lifelong education in what’s good about Milwaukee, and she’s a positive, eager saleswoman for telling as much of the world about Milwaukee as she and her organization can reach. A Milwaukee-area native whose path has included a lot of jobs, from Walgreen’s when she was young to 13 years working for Marcus Corporation hotels and resorts. She has headed VISIT Milwaukee, the tourism and economic development organization, since 2019.

Williams-Smith’s conversation with Mosley covered a literal and figurative waterfront of developments in Milwaukee tourism, almost all of them positive. The literal waterfront involves the rapid growth of Milwaukee in recent years as a stopping point for cruise ships on the Great Lakes. The figurative waterfront includes successful promotion campaigns, praise of Milwaukee as a tourist destination from several national publications, the coming Republican National Convention in Milwaukee, and the major expansion of the Baird Center, Milwaukee’s convention center. VISIT Milwaukee was involved in bringing more than 500 events to Milwaukee, involving more than $800 million in business.  

“There’s no better place to be in the world than the summer in Milwaukee,” Williams-Smith said. One thing that means is she and her staff of about 40 are doing more to promote Milwaukee tourism the rest of the year, including in the winter.

The conversation with Williams-Smith may be viewed by clicking here.

##

On the Issues: Museums and Arts Funding in Wisconsin, January 19, 2024

Wisconsin’s ranking in state funding of arts and culture programs? Fiftieth and last, said Rob Henken, president of the Wisconsin Policy Forum, a nonprofit research organization. Wisconsin’s support of arts and culture efforts from the private sector, including individuals and businesses? No exact ranking, but it’s been pretty strong, speakers at a forum on the subject at Marquette Law School’s Lubar Center said. Put the two together and you have an important part of life in Wisconsin that is doing OK, but facing many serious issues.

In addition to Henken, six leaders of museums and arts organizations spoke at the program. “Museums shape communities,” said Ellen Censky, president/CEO of the Milwaukee Public Museum. But the museum, with 550,000 visitors a year, is a big and vivid example of both the positives and negatives of the museum scene. The public museum is making progress with building a replacement building, on the north side of downtown, that will launch it into a new and, supporters believe, exciting future. But the process of getting there has faced numerous challenges. And Censky told Mosley that one thing that she worries about is whether a major crisis will occur involving the current deteriorating building before the new building is ready.

Laurie Winters, executive director/CEO of the Museum of Wisconsin Art in West Bend, described how that museum went from 2,900 visitors in 2012 to 225,000 in 2023, thanks to a beautiful new facility and expanded programming. But everything that is improving the museum and arts picture for Milwaukee and Wisconsin “is happening in spite of” and not because of governmental help, she said.

Adam Braatz, executive director of the nonprofit Imagine MKE, said, “The reality is the entire sector is on the precipice of a cliff.” Things could get worse without more support, he said.

Also taking part in the discussion were Clayborn Benson, executive director of Wisconsin Black Historical Society; Polly Morris, executive director of the Lynden Sculpture Garden; and Marcela Garcia, executive director of the Walker’s Point Center for the Arts.

The discussion may be watched by clicking here.       


Continue ReadingLubar Center Programs Put the Positives—and Some of the Needs—of Milwaukee in the Spotlight