The leader of a partisan probe into Wisconsin's November 2020 election says lawmakers should consider decertifying the state's presidential election results.

Former Wisconsin Supreme Court Justice Michael Gableman issued an interim report Tuesday, and said he intends to continue the investigation, which has twice had its deadline extended.

The review has been criticized by some Republicans, Democrats and voting-rights groups, who have argued it undermines the state's electoral process. Speaking before a legislative committee, Gableman said the probe is an effort to ensure the election was conducted fairly.

"When I started this process, when I started this whole procedure, I had no other goal in mind than to find the truth," he said, "and while we don't have it entirely yet, we're getting there."

Despite Gableman's testimony, his report noted that its purpose "is not to challenge certification of the presidential election," although it outlines how that might be done. According to Associated Press reports, nonpartisan legislative attorneys have said overturning those results is illegal, and Republican legislative leaders are against the move.

Among other things, the investigation alleges private election grants given to Wisconsin's largest cities were illegal, that the state mishandled voting in nursing homes and that absentee-ballot drop-boxes violate state law. Gableman also called for dissolving the bipartisan Wisconsin Elections Commission, which has been a major policy item for some Republican lawmakers in recent months.

"The Wisconsin Elections Commission - unfortunately, at best - is hopelessly incompetent," he said.

Several bills closely mirroring the report's recommendations passed in the Legislature last month, but Gov. Tony Evers is all but certain to veto them. Evers' GOP challengers in this year's gubernatorial race have made election administration a cornerstone of their platforms, and would likely be more receptive to the proposals should they be reintroduced.

Support for this reporting was provided by The Carnegie Corporation of New York.

Today is the deadline for Missouri residents to make sure they are registered to vote if they want to cast a ballot in the August primary.

Eligible voters can register or update their voter registration by filling out an application and submitting it online, by mail or in person. Forms being submitted by mail need to be postmarked by today, the fourth Wednesday before the election.

Marilyn McLeod, president of the League of Women Voters of Missouri, said a bill was signed into law this session tightening the requirements for acceptable voter IDs, but it doesn't go into effect in time for the August election.

"The August election will use the rules that you have a variety of possible IDs to use when you vote," she said. "They could be a driver's license, a state ID, the card that you get from your election authority, student IDs."

However, by the time the November election comes around, there will be more limitations on voter IDs. McLeod added that while any voter could cast a mail-in ballot in 2020 because of the pandemic, that won't be the case this year; only voters who have reasons listed in certain categories of so-called "excuses" can vote by mail.

Since this is the first election cycle since the 2020 census, McLeod said it's also important to check your local election authority to see if your district has changed. Every 10 years, new voting district maps are drawn to reflect changes in the population.

"Your Missouri House District, your Missouri Senate District and your congressional district might have changed," she said, "so you do need to research that to find out where you are."

Turnout often is lower for primary elections than for general elections, but McLeod said the primary is an important step to select the candidates that make it onto the ballot in November. She urged voters to educate themselves about the candidates and issues that matter most to them.

Coming off a string of controversial opinions, the U.S. Supreme Court has agreed to hear arguments in a case tied to oversight of federal elections. That has pro-democracy groups worried.

The case stems from North Carolina, where Republicans want a ruling from that state's high court tossed out. It had to do with a map of political boundaries drawn by the GOP that opponents say was gerrymandered.

Annastacia Belladonna-Carrera - executive director of the non-partisan Common Cause Minnesota - said even though that case involves redistricting, there are broader implications as these Republicans seek to diminish the role of state constitutions in elections.

"Mail-in ballot deadlines can be impacted," said Belladonna-Carrera. "Election schedules and processes are impacted by this."

She said while Minnesota has enjoyed strong voter-access policies, along with high turnout in elections, there are some conservative lawmakers here who have pushed for restrictive laws.

The current balance of power in state government has prevented such proposals from advancing.

Meanwhile, the plaintiffs say the Constitution's elections clause bolsters their argument.

Belladonna-Carrera said Minnesota might not align with other states where "bad-actors" have tried to influence election procedures. But she said she feels a ruling in favor of the plaintiffs would produce more chatter here and elsewhere about testing the so-called "independent state legislature" theory.

"I think that what we're seeing is part of a broader attack on an inclusive democracy, right?" said Belladonna-Carrera. "It's part of that power grab that has devastating consequences."

To counteract that, she said Minnesota has an extensive non-partisan movement to spur voter engagement and showcase fair elections. Arguments in the Supreme Court case are expected in October.

Support for this reporting was provided by the Carnegie Corporation of New York.

It's July 4th, a celebration of the United States' independence. It's also an opportunity to take a look at the state of the country's democracy.

This is a midterm election year, but many are still focused on the 2020 election, which some have claimed - without evidence - was "stolen."

Alicia Abbott, a program outreach coordinator with the Idaho 97 Project, said one unfortunate side effect of rampant misinformation is that some voters have tuned out.

"We've let misinformation about election results and public health run amok," said Abbott. "And now, we are living in an era where people are very apathetic; they are overwhelmed with how much contention there is in the scorched-earth politics."

The Idaho 97 Project formed in 2020 in response to contentious public health meetings about COVID-19 in order to combat disinformation about the pandemic.

According to a recent Yahoo survey, nearly 60% of Americans think the U.S. is becoming a less democratic country.

Abbott said Idaho is no stranger to extremism. She said it's a bellwether for some of the extreme tactics, especially at local government meetings, that have spread across the country.

So, she said she's also convinced it can serve as model for how to push back against these anti-democratic forces.

"So, we all need to be very vigilant about recognizing dog whistles and conspiracy theories," said Abbott. "And really holding our elected officials accountable when they're repeating and forwarding disinformation."

As the congressional hearing on the January 6 insurrection continues, Abbott said she's been struck by the way election officials in some states were treated in 2020.

She said one thing Idahoans can do to help defend democracy is support these officials.

"Stand up for those public servants who are coming forward and ensuring that our political process is safe and secure," said Abbott. "We cannot continue to allow our public servants to be attacked the way they have been."

Support for this reporting was provided by the Carnegie Corporation of New York.