Nov 3, 2026 general election · Governor, U.S. House and 3 other statewide races
Showing your ballot: Wisconsin law bars a voter from showing “his or her marked ballot to any person” (Wis. Stat. § 12.13(1)(f)). The Print my ballot sheet and the picks saved on your phone are your own notes, not your official ballot; this law concerns the official ballot you mark. Ask your election office if unsure. Source: Wis. Stat. § 12.13 (Wisconsin Legislature) (accessed Oct 20, 2026)
Election results for Nov 3, 2026: official state sources →
General election: Tuesday, Nov 3, 2026. Dates below are for that election, from official state election sources; rules can change, so confirm with the linked source.
Bryan Steil (R) vs. Mitchell Berman (D). See where each candidate stands, in their own words with sources, plus voting records where they exist.
CompareMark Pocan (D). See where each candidate stands, in their own words with sources, plus voting records where they exist.
CompareDerrick Van Orden (R) vs. Rebecca Cooke (D) + 2 other candidates. See where each candidate stands, in their own words with sources, plus voting records where they exist.
CompareGwen Moore (D) vs. Tim Rogers (R) + 1 other candidate. See where each candidate stands, in their own words with sources, plus voting records where they exist.
CompareScott Fitzgerald (R) vs. Andrew Beck (D). See where each candidate stands, in their own words with sources, plus voting records where they exist.
CompareGlenn Grothman (R) vs. Brad Smith (D) + 3 other candidates. See where each candidate stands, in their own words with sources, plus voting records where they exist.
CompareMichael Alfonso (R) vs. Fred Clark (D). See where each candidate stands, in their own words with sources, plus voting records where they exist.
CompareTony Wied (R) vs. Rick Crosson (D). See where each candidate stands, in their own words with sources, plus voting records where they exist.
CompareDavid Crowley (D) vs. Tom Tiffany (R). See where each candidate stands, in their own words with sources, plus voting records where they exist.
CompareJosh Kaul (D) vs. Eric Toney (R). See where each candidate stands, in their own words with sources, plus voting records where they exist.
CompareJay Schroeder (R) vs. JoCasta Zamarripa (D) + 1 other candidate. See where each candidate stands, in their own words with sources, plus voting records where they exist.
CompareJohn S. Leiber (R) vs. Yee Leng Xiong (D). See where each candidate stands, in their own words with sources, plus voting records where they exist.
CompareAll 116 Wisconsin legislative races on the Nov 3 ballot, from the official candidate list.
See the racesEvery candidate we list for Wisconsin's statewide races, with background, positions and votes.
Local and district races: every Wisconsin county.
Ballot wording is from the Wisconsin Elections Commission’s Type A referendum notice. Yes/No text is quoted from the official explanatory statements in its Type C notice. Plain-English summary (Vote Book, from the official Yes/No wording): If approved, a “yes” vote on Question 1 would vote to amend Wis. A Yes vote means: A “yes” vote on Question 1 would vote to amend Wis. Const. art. V, § 10(1)(c) to prohibit the Governor from partially vetoing a spending bill in a way that would create or increase or authorize the creation or increase of any tax or fee. A No vote means: A “no” vote on Question 1 would vote not to amend Wis. Const. art. V § 10(1)(c) of the Wisconsin Constitution. Supporters say: Supporters, including State Sen. Chris Kapenga (R-33), argue: “Wisconsin Governors currently enjoy one of the most powerful partial-veto pens in the country...” Opponents say: Opponents, including State Sen. Chris Larson (D-07), argue: “So what would this amendment actually do? It would make it harder for any future governor to right the wrongs of any legislature that fails to provide sufficient revenues to meet our shared priorities – education-related or otherwise.” Arguments: Ballotpedia (secondary source). Listed in equal length; Vote Book does not endorse either side. Plain-English summary (Vote Book, from the official Yes/No wording): If approved, a “yes” vote on Question 2 would vote to amend Wis. A Yes vote means: A “yes” vote on Question 2 would vote to amend Wis. Const. art. I, § 18. The amendment would prohibit the state and local governments from closing or prohibiting gatherings in places of worship during a state of emergency. A No vote means: A “no” vote on Question 2 would vote not to amend Wis. Const. art. I, § 18 of the Wisconsin Constitution. Supporters say: Supporters, including Daniel Degner, President of Wisconsin Family Action, argue: “Sadly, in 2020, we saw the government use emergency powers to abridge the people's right to assemble in places of worship. Religious liberty is not granted by government; it is given by God and protected by our Constitution.” Opponents say: Opponents, including State Sen. Chris Larson (D-07), argue: “None of us want to be in a position to prevent large, meaningful gatherings of our neighbors from taking place, and thanks to virtual meeting technology, we don’t have to.” Arguments: Ballotpedia (secondary source). Listed in equal length; Vote Book does not endorse either side. Plain-English summary (Vote Book, from the official Yes/No wording): If approved, a “yes” vote on Question 3 would vote to create a new provision of the Wisconsin Constitution—Wis. A Yes vote means: A “yes” vote on Question 3 would vote to create a new provision of the Wisconsin Constitution—Wis. Const. art. I, § 18, which would prohibit any governmental entity from discriminating or granting preferential treatment based on race, sex, color, ethnicity, or national origin in public employment, public education, public contracting, or public administration. A No vote means: A “no” vote on Question 3 would vote not to add Wis. Const. art. I § 18 to the Wisconsin Constitution. Supporters say: Supporters, including State Sen. Stephen Nass (R-11), argue: “Preferential treatment to any individual or group is wrong, no matter who it targets or what the reason. Past discrimination, however wrong, cannot be corrected with more discrimination.” Opponents say: Opponents, including State Sen. Chris Larson (D-07), argue: “Either we accept that some groups are just going to have worse life outcomes because of their race, gender, or ethnicity, or we need to be able to take steps to study and address these disparities.” Arguments: Ballotpedia (secondary source). Listed in equal length; Vote Book does not endorse either side.Question 1: Partial veto
If approved, a “yes” vote on Question 1 would vote to amend Wis.Official ballot wording
Partial veto. Shall section 10 (1) (c) of article V of the constitution be amended to prohibit the governor, in exercising his or her partial veto authority, from creating or increasing or authorizing the creation or increase of any tax or fee?
Question 2: Places of worship during an emergency
If approved, a “yes” vote on Question 2 would vote to amend Wis.Official ballot wording
Freedom to gather in places of worship during an emergency. Shall section 18 of article I of the constitution, which deals with religious liberty, be amended to prohibit the state or a political subdivision of the state from ordering the closure of, or forbidding gatherings in, places of worship in response to a state of emergency, including a public health emergency?
Question 3: Governmental discrimination and preferential treatment
If approved, a “yes” vote on Question 3 would vote to create a new provision of the Wisconsin Constitution—Wis.Official ballot wording
Governmental entity discrimination prohibited. Shall section 27 of article I of the constitution be created to prohibit governmental entities in the state from discriminating against, or granting preferential treatment to, any individual or group on the basis of race, sex, color, ethnicity, or national origin in public employment, public education, public contracting, or public administration?
Know someone voting? Send them this page.