Voices: Wisconsin's schizo politics a study in polarization

Owen Ullmann | USATODAY

MADISON, Wis. — Ever since I lived in this idyllic city between two lakes as a graduate student in the 1970s, I have been fascinated — and perplexed — by Wisconsin's schizophrenic political personality.

How is it possible for the same state to be the home of Robert "Fighting Bob" La Follette, the iconic populist senator and Progressive Party presidential candidate in 1924, and Joe McCarthy, the hard-core conservative senator behind the Communist witch hunts of the 1950s?

Such broad political disparity didn't stop there. In 1973, civil rights and anti-Vietnam War activist Paul Soglin, a bona fide "radical" at the time, was elected mayor of Madison. He succeeded William Dyke, an ultra-conservative who was segregationist Lester Maddox's running-mate on the American Independent Party's presidential ticket in 1976. Soglin, incidentally, is mayor again today.

Then there are the current U.S. senators: conservative Republican Ron Johnson and liberal Democrat Tammy Baldwin. They represent the widest ideological gulf of any state's senators, according to a 2013 National Journal ranking of voting records. Baldwin, the Senate's first openly gay member, was listed as the 5th most liberal; Johnson the 9th most conservative.

"Wisconsin defies political trends. It doesn't swing, it pivots," observes Rutgers University political science professor Ross Baker. "Any state can spring an occasional political surprise, but Wisconsin makes a habit of it."

Trying to figure out why is instructive as another native son, Gov. Scott Walker, makes a run for the Republican presidential nomination next year, casting himself as Ronald Reagan's natural heir.

Indeed, part of Walker's compelling story line is his ability to win two elections as governor and survive a recall election in a swing state with such a strong liberal tradition. Don't forget, Wisconsinites repeatedly elected to the U.S. Senate William Proxmire, a liberal and early anti-Vietnam war opponent who replaced McCarthy following the Red-baiting senator's death. And they elected Democrat Russ Feingold, the champion of campaign finance changes until he got knocked off by Johnson in 2010.

Michael Wagner, a political science and journalism professor at the University of Wisconsin-Madison, agrees that the state's politics "look pretty schizophrenic to people on the outside — and the inside, too."

His explanation is that the political polarization that increasingly is gripping Washington existed long before in Wisconsin, although it has become more exacerbated in the last decade. Not only are voters sharply polarized, but they are pretty equally split as Wagner notes, so a very small swing vote can decide whether a conservative Republican or liberal Democrat wins.

Like most states, midterm elections favor Republicans because their loyal voters, namely whites, turn out in higher proportions than Democratic voters, mainly minorities who are more likely to show up in presidential years. Wagner notes that Walker and Johnson won their races in midterm election cycles, while Baldwin won in 2012, when President Obama topped the ticket.

Wisconsin is one of the least diverse states in the nation; whites account for 88% of the population. Yet when the electorate is so narrowly divided, that small minority vote — or its absence — can swing an election.

Political scientist Wagner notes that both sides have gotten very good at winning elections. The loser: consensus politics that serve the greater good. "Compromise is not possible with such polarization," he says.

Such a bitter divide means politicians elected to statewide office wind up representing the interests of those that got 'em there, the greater good of the state be damned.

That's the chilling takeaway for Washington, and it explains why so little has been accomplished in recent years in the nation's capital. Compromise is a dirty word. It's all about winning, now.

USA TODAY World editor Ullmann continues to follow Wisconsin politics from McLean, Va.