Molly Beck and Patrick Marley

Milwaukee Journal Sentinel

MADISON - A high-powered Democratic attorney promised Saturday to bring a legal challenge if Wisconsin Republicans adopt a proposed limit on early voting that they could take up Tuesday in a lame-duck legislative session.

Republican lawmakers plan to vote Tuesday on a sweeping plan that aims to weaken incoming Democratic Gov. Tony Evers and incoming Democratic Attorney General Josh Kaul.

Part of that plan also would put a two-week limit on early voting, which would likely decrease voter turnout. The plan also would move the 2020 presidential primary election to help a conservative state Supreme Court justice win his election.

Marc Elias, who once served as the general counsel for Hillary Clinton's 2016 presidential campaign, said Saturday Republican lawmakers won't pass a limit on early voting "without a fight."

"We sued Wisconsin over their ID law in 2016. We sued again when Wisconsin failed to hold special elections. If the GOP thinks they can disenfranchise voters by cutting early voting without a fight, they are wrong," Elias tweeted.

Responded liberal advocacy group One Wisconsin Now: "We're ready, counselor."

Elias represented an affiliate of One Wisconsin Now in the case that resulted in the 2016 decision striking down previous limits to early voting.

RELATED:GOP seeks to limit Wisconsin early voting, strip powers from Tony Evers and Josh Kaul in lame-duck session

RELATED:Clerks give thumbs down to Republican plan to move 2020 presidential primary

Aides to Senate Majority Leader Scott Fitzgerald and Assembly Speaker Robin Vos declined to comment Saturday on the threat of a lawsuit over the proposal.

In his 2016 decision, U.S. District Judge James Peterson found that the limits on early voting were part of a Republican effort of “stifling votes for partisan gain.” He dismissed claims by Republicans that they wanted uniform rules for rural communities that tend to vote for Republicans and large cities that tend to vote for Democrats.

“Wisconsin’s approach in this instance was backward: rather than expanding in-person absentee voting in smaller municipalities, the state limited in-person absentee voting in larger municipalities,” Peterson wrote. “By doing so, the state has imposed moderate burdens on the residents of those larger municipalities.”

In response to Peterson's ruling, Milwaukee, Madison and other municipalities expanded their voting hours and allowed people to vote at multiple locations.

The case is pending before an appeals court. If Republicans adopt the new limits, Elias could raise the issue before Peterson or the appeals court as part of the existing lawsuit or bring a new case.

"While controlling state government, Wisconsin Republicans time and again tried to rig the rules on voting to give themselves an unfair partisan advantage," said Scot Ross, executive director of One Wisconsin Now. "Now, even after losing every statewide office on the ballot, they’re at it again."

Ross said the group will consult with its lawyers before deciding whether to bring a legal challenge to what is ultimately passed by lawmakers.

The new limits are slightly different than the earlier ones. The previous restrictions limited early voting to two weeks and barred weekend voting. The new restrictions would limit early voting to two weeks but allow Saturday voting.

RELATED:Eric Holder's group sues Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker over not calling special elections

Elias was also on the legal team that brought a successful lawsuit against GOP Gov. Scott Walker over not calling special elections to fill vacant legislative seats earlier this year.

Elias tweeted his statement as Democratic anger over the wide-ranging GOP plan — released late Friday — began to grow.

Legislature gains power under plan

Another part of the plan would give Republicans more say — if not outright control — of the Wisconsin Economic Development Corp. That entity oversees job creation and Evers has pledged to dissolve it and re-establish the former state Commerce Department to do that work.

RELATED:Tony Evers plans to dissolve Scott Walker's WEDC, backs off idea of having no state jobs agency

Under one plan, Republicans and Democrats would each have six members on WEDC’s board. Under a competing plan Republicans are considering, Republicans would get 10 appointees and Democrats would get eight. The board — not the governor, as is the case now — would get to pick WEDC’s director.

In addition, lawmakers would gain more control of WEDC’s enterprise zone program, which provides tax breaks to businesses. The Legislature’s budget committee would get to decide who gets those tax breaks, and limits on the number of zones that could be created would be eliminated.

Another provision would require the state to channel much of the federal road money it gets into a small number of projects. That would mean more projects would be funded with state money only and could get out of having to comply with federal environmental regulations and standards that require construction crews to make union-level wages.

But the arrangement could mean the state would miss out on qualifying for some federal aid that it would otherwise qualify for, according to a report by the nonpartisan Legislative Fiscal Bureau.

Another measure would allow local governments to avoid having to follow state standards for some road projects, even when they use state funds.

The GOP plan would also greatly limit Kaul's power before he replaces GOP Attorney General Brad Schimel, whom he narrowly defeated three weeks ago.

Kaul said late Friday that the effort ignores the will of voters in the Nov. 6 election.

The Legislature — not the attorney general — would have control of how to spend money from court settlements. The recently created office of the solicitor general, which oversees high-profile litigation, would be eliminated.

Legislators would gain the power to intervene in any litigation when a state law is challenged, and they would have the ability to appoint their own private attorneys — at taxpayer expense — to handle the case instead of the attorney general.

Primary move considered

Also being considered is moving the 2020 presidential primary election to March instead of it taking place the same day as the state spring election in April.

Fitzgerald said the move would benefit conservative Supreme Court Justice Daniel Kelly in his election bid that year. Kelly was appointed to the court in 2016 by Walker.

Republicans fear Kelly could lose his court seat because he’s up for election the same day as the presidential primary, which lawmakers expect will draw significant voter turnout that would benefit Democratic or liberal-leaning candidates.

Democrats could see a surge of turnout as they decide who will challenge President Donald Trump, and that could sink Kelly’s chances of winning a full 10-year term on the court, according to this theory.

Moving the presidential primary to March is expected to cost taxpayers about $7 million because it will require an election in addition to the February and April elections that are already scheduled.

Kelly won't say whether he backs the idea or has encouraged lawmakers to pass the measure.

Lawmakers are holding a hearing on their plan at 12:30 p.m. Monday in the state Capitol and plan to vote on it Tuesday. That would get it to Walker in time for him to sign it before he turns over his office to Evers on Jan. 7.

The state Elections Commission also will meet Monday at 9 a.m. to discuss the proposal to move the 2020 presidential primary election and change in-person absentee voting and overseas absentee voting.

RELATED:Justice Daniel Kelly won't say if he wants Republicans to reschedule elections to help him keep his job

Aides to Walker did not immediately say Saturday whether the governor would support or veto any of the measures. He has said he is open to some of them, such as moving the presidential primary, but has not spoken publicly about many of them.

Many of the measures being considered provide more oversight and power to the Legislature — especially to the already-powerful Joint Committee on Finance, which writes the state budget lawmakers in both houses vote to approve.

For example, the Department of Children and Families secretary would have to seek approval from the Legislature's finance committee before reallocating federal funds within agency programs relying on them.

And the Department of Administration under Evers also would no longer be able to lease or acquire space for legislative offices or agencies providing services to the Legislature. Under the plan, lawmakers would take that job over.

DPI would be exempt from law requiring governor-approved regulations

In another proposal that has some conservatives scratching their heads, Republicans would appear to abandon their years-long effort to require rules written by the leader of the Department of Public Instruction to be approved by the governor.

Evers, who has been DPI's state superintendent since 2009, has been at odds with Republicans over his authority as the head of the state's education agency to craft rules and regulations related to school policy and curriculum.

The conservative legal firm Wisconsin Institute for Law and Liberty is suing Evers over failing to submit his rules to the governor as a new state law requires. However, Evers has argued that as a constitutional officer, the state superintendent is exempt from such a law.

RELATED:Supreme Court gives win to Tony Evers over Gov. Scott Walker in case challenging authority

The state Supreme Court sided with that theory in 2016, before WILL filed the new lawsuit, and will hear arguments in the new case.

Under the measure being considered by lawmakers next week, DPI would be officially exempt from a state requirement forcing state agencies to submit rules and regulations to the governor.

"Trying to reign in the power of bureaucrats was one of the greatest achievements of Governor Walker and Republican leadership. So it is very disappointing to see that someone is proposing to exempt the Department of Public Instruction from parts of the rule-making process," C.J. Szafir, executive vice president of WILL, said Saturday.

Not being considered Tuesday is the reason lawmakers said they would meet before January: an incentive package for Fox Valley paper-maker Kimberly-Clark, which has threatened to shutter one plant if lawmakers don't pass tax incentives to keep it open.

The package was passed by the Assembly in February but struggled to gain support in the Senate, despite Walker urging lawmakers to pass it.

Other provisions under consideration would: