| | | No. It was an inartfully worded example.
The point is the law determines how elections must be run. Not some "elections commission". And the commission can't just decide to do something different.
Make up your mind. First you say it's not in the law. Then you say that it's the law that determines how elections are run, not the state executive. Well, if the law doesn't cover something and the executive is tasked with performing that something, then it's obviously up to the executive to figure out a way to do it. In the absence of law governing that something, how can anything the executive does be "different?"
Generally, laws governing administrative matters state the function to be done, any parameters, and who is responsible for developing the program to do the thing consistent with the law and good practice. That's what the executive departments do at the federal level, they develop rules and regulations to flesh out the laws. States do the same thing. It's really the only sensible way to operate.
So, then, please tell us how what the Wisconsin elections folk did was "different" from what was in the law. |
|
