REPUBLICAN LEGISLATURE'S MOVE TO
OVERTURN THE MASK MANDATE?
WELL, IT'S A LITTLE MESSY.
THE STATE SENATE THIS WEEK VOTED
TO END THE MASK ORDER BUT
DISCOVERED THAT WOULD RESULT IN
WISCONSIN LOSING NEARLY $50
MILLION A MILLION IN FOODSHARE
BENEFITS COMING FROM THE FEDS
FOR STATES THAT ENACT EMERGENCY
SAFETY ORDERS.
SO THEY TACKED AN AMENDMENT ON
THE RELIEF BILL THAT WOULD ALLOW
THE GOVERNOR TO DECLARE AN
EMERGENCY JUST FOR THE PURPOSE
OF GETTING THE FUNDING.
WHEN THE ASSEMBLY WAS SET TO
TAKE THIS UP, SPEAKER ROBIN VOS
PULLED BACK ON A VOTE SEEKING
TIME TO STUDY THE MATTER.
HE JOINS US NOW TO UNTANGLE ALL
OF THIS AND THANKS VERY MUCH FOR
BEING HERE.
>> GOOD EVENING.
>> SO WHY NOT VOTE ON THE
RESOLUTION IF THE SENATE
AMENDMENT FIXES THE FEDERAL
FUNDING PROBLEM?
>> WE SURE HOPE IT FIXES IT BUT
WE'RE NOT CERTAIN IT DOES AND
WHEN SOMETHING LIKE THAT HAPPENS
RIGHT BEFORE WE'RE GOING TO VOTE
ON A BILL, I DON'T WANT TO RUSH
SOMETHING AND DO SOMETHING THAT
WOULD BE A MISTAKE.
WE HAVE THE SUPPORT TO BE ABLE
TO SAY THAT THE GOVERNOR DOES
NOT HAVE UNILATERAL POWER.
HE SHOULD HAVE BEEN WORKING WITH
US FOR MONTHS TO COME UP WITH
OTHER SOLUTIONS THAT COULD WORK.
WE KNOW AT THE END OF THE DAY
LOCAL PUBLIC HEALTH DEPARTMENTS
HAVE THE ABILITY TO DO WHAT THEY
I WILL.
THIS IS NOT ABOUT MASKS.
IT IS ABOUT WHETHER OR NOT THE
GOVERNOR GETS TO FOLLOW THE LAW.
IT IS CRYSTAL CLEAR IN THE
STATUTES THAT YOU ONLY GET THE
CHANCE TO HAVE ONE EMERGENCY AND
THEN AFTER THAT IT HAS TO BE
REVIEWED BY THE LEGISLATURE.
SO I THINK THAT WE DON'T WANT TO
SACRIFICE THE $50 MILLION A
MONTH IN FAD -- FOODSHARE.
ASSUMING THAT'S THE ONLY
RAMIFICATION AND WE CAN FIX IT,
WE'LL MOVE AHEAD.
>> EIGHT A AT A TIME WHEN WE'RE BEING
TOLD TO DOUBLE MASK AND
BUSINESSES OBJECT TO ENDING THE
MASK ORDER, PEOPLE WANT TO
UNDERSTAND WHY YOU WANT TO GET
RID OF IT AT THIS TIME.
YOU SAY IT'S NOT ABOUT MASKS,
BUT IT IS ABOUT MASKS.
>> NOT FOR ME.
WHEN I LOOK AT WHAT HAS BEEN
HAPPENING IN OUR STATE, WHEN I
GO TO MASS, HARDWARE STORE OR
RESTAURANT, THE VAST MAJORITY OF
PEOPLE ARE WEARING A MASK.
IT'S NOT BECAUSE THE GOVERNOR
ORDERED IT BECAUSE THERE'S BEEN
NO ENFORCEMENT WHATSOEVER.
IT'S PEOPLE KNOW IT'S THE RIGHT
THING TO DO.
IT'S WHY I DID THAT COMMERCIAL
WITH MARK POCAN THAT SOME HAVE
GIVEN ME DERYFTION DERISION FOR BECAUSE I
DO SUPPORT WEARING MASKS.
THAT'S WHY IN THE ASSEMBLY WE'RE
EXEMPTED FROM WEARING A MASK.
YOU'LL SEE I THINK OF THE
MEMBERS ALL BUT A COUPLE WEAR A
MASK BECAUSE IT'S THE RIGHT
THING TO DO IN A LARGE GROUP.
SO I THINK THIS IS MUCH ADO
ABOUT DEMOCRATS TRYING TO MAKE
IT ABOUT MASKS, BUT THE REALITY
IS THIS IS ABOUT GOVERNOR EVERS
ISSUING AN ILLEGAL ORDER THAT
SHOULD HAVE BEEN STRUCK DOWN BY
THE COURTS.
THEY HAVEN'T ACTED YET.
>> LET'S LOOK AT THAT PSA THAT
YOU CUT WITH DEMOCRATIC
CONGRESSMAN MARK POCAN TELLING
PEOPLE TO WEAR A MASK.
HE SAYS IF YOUR OBJECTION IS
OVERREACH FROM THE GOVERNOR,
THEN THE LEGISLATURE SHOULD PASS
ITS ON MASK MANDATE.
WHY NOT PASS YOUR OWN?
>> BECAUSE, AGAIN, THERE'S NO
ENFORCEMENT MECHANISM.
>> SO POCAN ALSO SAYS IF THIS IS
SIMPLY ABOUT APPEALING TO
SCIENCE DENIERS FOR POLITICAL
PURPOSES, WE CANNOT AFFORD THIS
KIND OF RAW PARTISANSHIP.
HOW DO YOU RESPOND TO THAT?
>> WELL, IT'S NOT ABOUT THAT
BECAUSE AGAIN IT'S NOT ABOUT
MASKS.
YOU WILL SEE THAT ONCE WE PASS
THE REPEAL OF THE GOVERNOR'S
EMERGENCY AUTHORITY, PEOPLE
AROUND WISCONSIN ARE STILL GOING
TO WEAR MASKS BECAUSE THEY WANT
TO PROTECT THEIR KIDS OR THEIR
GRANDPARENTS.
THAT'S EXACTLY WHY I WEAR ONE.
SO I THINK THE DEMOCRATS AGAIN
TRYING TO OBFUSCATE AND DIRECT
AWAY FROM THE REAL ISSUE, THAT
GOVERNOR EVERS HAS AN INABILITY
TO WORK WITH OTHERS TO BE ABLE
TO GET THIS DONE.
IT'S ALL KIND OF A ONE SIZE FITS
ALL WRITTEN WHEN HE'S AT THE
MANSION BY HIMSELF INSTEAD OF
WORKING WITH THE LEGISLATURE TO
GET A DEAL DONE.
AT THE END OF THE DAY WE ARE
BEYOND THAT.
PUBLIC PRESSURE IS WHY PEOPLE
ARE WEARING A MASK.
>> THE LATEST VERSION OF THE
COVID RELIEF BILL GIVES THE
BUDGET COMMITTEE REVIEW OVER
FEDERAL DOLLARS TO FIGHT
CORONAVIRUS.
IS IT BECAUSE YOU DON'T LIKE HOW
GOVERNOR EVERS HAS MANAGED THAT
MONEY?
>> SOMEWHAT.
I THINK THAT'S TRUE.
BUT IT'S REALLY JUST SOMETHING
THAT'S NOT ALL THAT ABNORMAL.
WHEN JIM DOYLE WAS IN OFFICE AND
MARK POCAN WAS IN OFFICE.
THEY GOT A BUNCH OF MONEY UNDER
THE AMERICAN RECOVERY AND REVIN RECOVERY AND
REINVESTMENT ACT.
THEY SIGNED LEGISLATION SAYING
THEY WOULD HAVE LEGISLATIVE
OVERSIGHT.
IT SHOULD MEAN THAT THE
LEGISLATURE, THE ONES WHO ARE
SUPPOSED TO APPROPRIATE MONEY,
HAVE THE ABILITY TO OVERSEE IT
JUST LIKE WE DO WITH EVERY OTHER
DOLLAR THAT COMES INTO THE
TREASURY.
>> THAT MIGHT BE ONE OF THOSE
SO-CALLED POISON PILLS THAT
COULD RESULT IN AN EVERS' VETO
OF THIS COVID RELIEF PACKAGE.
THEN WHAT?
>> I SURE HOPE IT DIDN'T.
IF JIM DOYLE AND MARK POCAN CAN
STRIKE A DEAL WHEN DEMOCRATS ARE
IN CHARGE, I DON'T KNOW WHY YOU
WOULDN'T WANT IT WHEN YOU HAVE
DIVIDED GOVERNMENT.
IT'S A GOOD BILL.
IT'S GOT LOTS OF IDEAS, MONEY
FOR THE PANDEMIC, ABILITY FOR US
TO HAVE AN ESSENTIAL VISITOR
PROGRAM.
WE WORK ON VACCINATIONS.
THERE'S A LOT OF GOOD THINGS IN
THERE.
SO IT WOULD BE A REAL
DISAPPOINTMENT IF GOVERNOR EVERS
CHOSE TO PLAY POLITICS.
>> WELL HE