The following program is a PBS Wisconsin original production.
>> Madam Chief Justice, and may it please the court. The
question is whether 900,004 sub one is enforceable. So as to ban
all abortion in Wisconsin except those necessary to save the
pregnant woman's life. >> Abortion comes before the
liberal leaning state Supreme Court and the U.S. Senate
candidate who lost the election refuses to concede. I'm
Frederica Freyberg tonight on "Here& Now", abortion comes
before the Wisconsin Supreme Court. But that won't end. It's
politics going forward. Record setting public school
referendums and a whopper K-12 budget proposal. What the
president elect's policies could mean for Wisconsin Hispanics,
and what history can teach us about Trump's promises. It's
"Here& Now" for November 15th. >> Funding for Here and Now is
provided by the Focus Fund for journalism and Friends of PBS
Wisconsin. >> This week, the Wisconsin
Supreme Court heard oral arguments on whether the state's
1849 abortion ban is the law of the land. The law went into
effect when the United States Supreme Court overturned Roe v
Wade in 2022. Abortions halted in Wisconsin until September of
2023, when a Dane County judge ruled the law actually referred
to Feticide. Here and now, senior political reporter Zach
Schultz was at the hearing and tells us no matter what the
court decides, abortion as a political issue is not going
away. >> When the U.S. Supreme Court
issued the Dobbs decision, Republicans said the court was
simply returning the issue to the states.
>> I mean, we're trying to get it right. I hope not just get an
outcome here. more complicated than it sounds.
>> We're trying to figure out if medical providers here are going
to be able to save women's lives. So yeah, we better get
this right. arguments Monday, the members of
the Wisconsin Supreme Court heard arguments along several
lines about which of Wisconsin's many laws regulating abortion
should apply. >> The state of Wisconsin cannot
have two laws on the same subject, with the same scope,
that provide directly conflicting answers as to when
conduct is and is not a felony. >> The heart of the issue is
this in 1849, Wisconsin passed a law outlawing abortion referred
to in arguments by its statutory number. Nine 4004 in 1973, the
U.S. Supreme Court issued Roe versus Wade, which created a
constitutional right to abortion health care. The old law was
unenforceable. In the years that followed, Wisconsin passed
several laws regulating abortion, most recently a law in
2015 that created a cutoff of 20 weeks with an exception for the
life of the mother, but no exceptions for rape and incest.
So, with Dobbs overruling Roe, which law should apply? Lawyers
representing Democratic Attorney General Josh Kaul and doctors
intervening in the case argue the 1849 law was impliedly
repealed when the laws were updated after Roe was in effect,
the legislature has spoken and they've laid out a myriad of
statutes that govern when abortion can be provided, when
women in this state can obtain lawful abortions. Justice Brian
Hagedorn says the court can't ignore those later laws. We're
trying to comply with Roe and never actually repealed the
original ban. >> Meagan. We all know what
happened. So unless there's some conflict, the laws were not
reversed off the books. I don't know why. As a matter of
straight, just reasonable statutory interpretation, the
law is still there. It's still there. The judiciary doesn't get
to edit laws. The judiciary doesn't get to rewrite them. We
didn't delete it. We prevented its enforcement. Now it's still
there. How can we just say, oh, we can't enforce it anymore
simply because the legislature was doing other things when it
was unenforceable. >> All of that body of law, all
of those statutes regarding abortion, just go to the dust
pile. saying at all, is what you're
saying, because you're saying that if they were passed after
Roe and if they were passed with Roe in mind, then they mean
something different today than they meant before.
liberals on the court hold A43 majority, and if they rule, the
1849 abortion ban was impliedly repealed, it would mean that,
ironically, it was a law passed by Republican Governor Scott
Walker in 2015 that saved abortion in Wisconsin.
>> Our legislature decided fairly recently, at least in the
scheme of these these these regulations, that an abortion
may not be performed after 20 weeks unless the mother is
undergoing a medical emergency. That's not based on Roe. That is
the legislative policy that was chosen by this state's
legislature. rules, the issue of abortion is
not settled law, a point made clear by Chief Justice Annette
Ziegler the issue before this court relates to.
>> Nine 4004 whether Black rule, whether it's impliedly repealed,
whether it's still on the books, it won't answer every question
for everyone today. People need to be before the legislature and
ask them to do their job. >> After all, the balance of the
court could change in the Supreme Court election next
April or a different governor and legislature could write a
new law, a point made by Attorney General Kaul after the
hearings. >> Whatever happens in this
case, the issue, I don't think is going to be permanently
resolved in Wisconsin. Certainly, this will provide
important clarity, and I think we'll at least for a time perio,
address at least what current Wisconsin law says.
>> Reporting from Madison. I'm Zach Schultz for "Here& Now"
Wisconsin's Republican U.S. Senate candidate has not yet
conceded his loss to Democrat incumbent Tammy Baldwin and when
results are certified, could pay for a recount if she won by 1%
or less. a video raising the specter of
fraud in the election process. >> Many people have been
wondering why I have remained quiet since election night. I
believe it's better not to comment until I have the facts.
>> But in the four minute video, Hovde called the election
results improbable and made a slew of false statements
alluding to election fraud. He went on to say he was shocked by
late results out of Milwaukee, when a final batch of absentee
ballots were officially tabulated. This 4 a.m. Update
bumped his opponent, Tim Baldwin, above him to clinch the
race. Absentee ballots always are reported later, resulting in
later returns. Hovde also called out what he called voting
irregularities in Milwaukee. To that, the city's election
commission responded. The Milwaukee Election Commission
unequivocally refutes Eric Hovde baseless claims regarding the
integrity of our election process. Every aspect of the
commission's operations was conducted with transparency and
in strict adherence to established laws and procedures.
It is both expected and routine that absentee ballots over
100,000 in this case, are counted and reported in the late
hours of election night. Due to Wisconsin's high voter turnout
and the rigorous verification standards, the Milwaukee
Election Commission upholds. In education news, it was a year
that saw Wisconsin voters approve a record number of
referenda to boost spending in local school districts to the
tune of $4.4 billion. At the same time, the state
Superintendent of Public state K-12 funding by a total of
new proposed spending of more than $4 billion. Meanwhile, in
Washington, moves to eliminate the U.S. Department of
Education. Lots afoot. We check in with Christopher Saldana,
professor of K-12 educational leadership and policy analysis.
And thanks for being here. >> Thanks for having me.
>> So in terms of Dpi's $4 billion budget request, it calls
for funding 90% of special education costs. What's your
reaction to that? >> I think it's a great
proposal. I think schools are federally mandated to provide
education for students with disabilities and for the last at
least since for the last 20 years, school districts have had
to fund the majority of that. So I think currently the state
reimburses about 30% of spending on public education, and school
districts have to supply 70% of those costs, and that those
funds come from their general funds. So those are supposed to
be dollars that are supposed to support all students in general
education classrooms. >> But is this request on the
part of the Department of Public Instruction kind of more
aspirational than than real, at least politically?
>> I think that's a question for the legislature. I think that's
a question for what our values are in the state of Wisconsin. I
think special education is something that we want to ensure
that's provided to every single student, regardless of their
disability or need. And I think currently, because of the
different financial capacity that school districts have,
there's a huge amount of variation in what school
districts can afford. So having the state step up and play a
bigger role in funding special education creates greater,
greater equality of opportunity for students who have
disabilities, whether they're in a small rural district or in a
large urban district like Milwaukee.
>> Why have we allowed it to be so underfunded for so long in
the state of Wisconsin? >> That's a great question, too.
I think one of the things that folks are very familiar with, in
particular because of the recent referenda that have been
requested on the parts of districts, is that funding for
any public service, any public good, requires tax dollars. And
I think from the state's perspective, there is this
question about raising revenue for providing adequate public
education for students and for far too long, the answer to that
question has been to just not fund public education, because
it's easier. You don't raise taxes on people. You don't face
the repercussions of that kind of political action.
>> So the Wisconsin Policy Forum reports that this past year was
a record year for the passage of these referenda, as we said,
$4.4 billion. But they have also noted a decline in the passage
of these over the years. Do you think there is kind of referenda
fatigue? come to someone who is doing
their best in their life to try to pay their bills, and you say,
we have this need for public schools. I think generally folks
across the state of Wisconsin, folks across the country support
public education. But when you're asking them to pay 100,
200, 300, $400 more in property taxes per year, that starts to
hit people's wallet. And I think it becomes a question of, can I
afford this? I think this is very closely tied to Doctor
Underly budget proposal at DPI, because I think what she's
proposing is to say, let's provide additional state
alleviate some of these referenda questions and are
going to provide some relief for local taxpayers by providing
state funding. >> And yet, school districts
over the years have really not had a choice but to go to the
local voters. Right? That's right.
>> As years go by, costs rise. You have to pay teachers more
health care costs rise, you have to repair your buildings. All of
those things cost more and more money. I think people are now
very intimately familiar with inflation. Those things exist
within school buildings, too, and within school districts. And
so if the state provides the same amount of funding over time
with no inflationary no other option but to ask their
communities to foot the bill. >> Meanwhile, in Washington,
there is a move to eliminate the U.S. Department of Education.
What are the implications of that?
>> I, I don't think it's entirely clear yet. I think
there's this argument that we should eliminate aspects of
government. One of the proposals being eliminating the Department
of Education. I think there is an argument that then the
control over education should go back to states. I think there's
a there's this myth that states and local communities don't
already control their education. State's constitutionally do
decide what happens in schools. They determine curriculums. They
determine standards. Local school districts do folks elect
their school boards? A lot of that that decision making power
is local control. But what would happen? I think, is unclear
because of the programs that the department of Education has.
They administer funding for students in poverty. They
administer funding for students with disabilities. They ensure
that those students aren't discriminated against, and then
they provide a ton of research for education, which is really
the innovation wing of our country's educational system.
But it's very unclear what abolishing the Department of
Education means. Does it mean no more funding for students in
poverty? No more oversight of discrimination? Or is it really
a reallocation of those responsibilities in the
different agencies? >> I guess we will find out.
That's right. All right. Professor Christopher Saldana,
thanks very much. Thank you. The Wisconsin DNR has approved a
wetland and waterway permit to Enbridge for its controversial
oil pipeline through and around the bad River Band of Lake
Superior Chippewa Reservation. The permit allows Enbridge to
conduct construction, meeting more than 200 conditions for
wetlands and waterways standards. Enbridge is proposing
to replace 20 miles of existing pipeline, including portions
within the reservation and 41 miles of new pipeline routed
around it. The company still needs additional federal
permitting. Tribal officials devastate area wetlands and
streams and endanger wild rice beds. Quote I'm angry that the
DNR has signed off on a half baked plan that spells disaster
for our homeland and our way of life. Band River Band Chairman
Robert Blanchard said in a statement. We will continue
sounding the alarm to prevent yet another Enbridge pipeline
from endangering our watershed. A tribal lawsuit to remove the
pipeline from its land altogether awaits a decision in
federal court. A growth in Hispanic voters who cast their
ballots for Donald Trump helped him win Wisconsin and
nationally. This even after Trump promised mass deportations
and said immigrants poison the blood of our country. What were
the drivers for Latinos to vote for the now president elect? And
what will Trump's policies mean for them? We turn to George
Franco, CEO of the Hispanic Chamber of Commerce of
Wisconsin. And nice to see you again, Federico.
>> Thanks for having me. Wonderful to be with you again.
>> So we spoke with you ahead of the election. Were you surprised
the part Hispanic voters played >> I actually was not. There was
a lot of rumblings already. You know, big concern for Hispanic
voters. Certainly was the economy, the inflation that was
in some cases just staggering. And I think that having lived
that for numerous years, I think just drove many people to
support former President Trump, now president elect Trump and,
and of course, his numbers showed in all segments, not just
the Hispanic vote. So it was in particular those of us who work
in the low income community and community development. The pain
factor is pretty high. And I think people are looking for a
new day and that's, you know, the outcomes spoke for
themselves. Trump presidency will help
reduce the cost of living, even though he talks about tariffs
and other things? >> You know, and I will say that
in my limited understanding, the inflation and the complexity of
the factors that go into that, I'm not holding my breath on
that particular note, to be candid with you. What I'm more
focused on is how do we increase the income levels of those in
our low and moderate income communities, not just here in
Wisconsin, but across the country? And my work in
Washington actually takes me down that path. So, you know,
already the Federal Reserve mandates to control inflation
and to optimize employment are like this. They're they're
contrary to each other in many ways. And that leaves them in a
conflicted situation. And frankly, focusing on the
opportunities as a result of the job growth in America is going
to be much more fertile and productive than what may or may
not happen to the prices that we're all being impacted by.
>> So now that we've seen the change agents that Trump wants
to appoint to his cabinet and elsewhere, do you take seriously
his call for mass deportations? >> Well, I do and I don't. And I
want to explain. So certainly the folks that, you know, he's
entitled, he won the election, certainly a resounding win for
him. And so any president is entitled to bring their staff in
and bring their select and pick and choose who they want to come
in and work with them, subject to the advice and consent of the
Senate and all that. We'll see how that all plays out. But
having said that, the question in my mind is will the people,
many of them returning, some of them already there before during
his first presidency, will they be open to objective analysis
and input that helps us all appreciate what's important to
GDP for Americans, because that in great part drives revenue to
the government, enabling to pay its bills. And certainly, you
know, the, the, the, the debt, the, the US debt is, you know,
has got to be dealt with. No doubt. You can't just let that
continue to roll out of control. But there are numerous factors
and the question in my mind is, will individuals be open to
receiving that input? And frankly, in the community, the
economic stakeholders like the farmers in Wisconsin, dairy
agriculture, I mean, we've got to get ourselves organized so we
have an effective message to share in an appropriate way and
at the appropriate time, and sooner the better.
>> Now really, because does the need for workers in the US and
Wisconsin make these kinds of mass deportations untenable?
>> The Wisconsin economy is so dependent on tens of thousands
of immigrants working in agriculture and dairy, and in
farming communities, and you take all that away, and the
Wisconsin economy will tank. What does that mean for the
American economy? If any one state's economy goes goes in the
tank is a whole nother analysis and discussion to have. But it's
a complexity of issues and you know, we have a history of
working with everyone and anyone in what we do. And that's just
the mandate I have from the people who are, you know, the
board of directors of the Hispanic Chamber and our members
are my task is to go work with anyone and everyone and do the
best. We can to help those issues come to light. So the
best decisions are made in the interest of the economy.
>> Great Jorge Franco, thanks very much. Thanks for your time.
>> You're very welcome. Federico. Nice to be with you.
>> How does president elect Donald Trump make America great
again? There are certainly signposts, beginning with his
promises of mass deportations, tariffs and America First policy
like not wanting the U.S. To fund Ukraine. And how does this
MAGA movement align with days of yore? We turn to an expert on
the 1940s and 50s UW-Madison professor of journalism, Kathryn
McGuire. And thanks very much for being here.
>> Thank you for having me. >> So what are the historical
kind of parallels to current political issues in your mind
loss of civil liberties? >> There are two points for
concern, I think. The first is loss of free speech rights and
free press. And so we have a long history of passing sedition
laws in this country, starting with 1798. The alien and
sedition Act, when John Adams wanted to silence his political
opponents in the Democratic-Republican party.
That one lapsed. But then again, World War One, the Woodrow
Wilson administration gets another Sedition Act passed, and
it's really a draconian measure to punish anyone who speaks, not
just against the government, but even questioned the war effort,
the draft, anything at all, and was upheld by the Supreme Court.
The second area is loss of civil liberties by minority groups.
And so one of the most significant in the 20th century
would be the internment of Japanese Americans in World War
two. And Franklin Roosevelt accomplished that entirely
through executive order. So we need to remember that the
president does have a lot of power and that some of this
happens through Congress, and some of it happens through
executive order. >> So the America First Movement
has been a populist political theory through history. And in
fact, it became Donald Trump's kind of foreign policy doctrine
as president. What does America first hold?
of the 1930s and was a movement to keep the United States out of
war in Europe, and this was coming off the heels of World
War One, when the United States had participated in World War
One and an effort to prevent participation in World War Two.
There established an America First Committee in 1940. It
ended up disbanding after Pearl Harbor, but the sentiment never
went away, and it was sort of revived as a political party
here and again. And it's really about putting American security
first in foreign policy. But the so many of the spokespeople at
the time and over the years have been pro-fascist and
been major cornerstones of the America First movement.
>> Small a small f. America First has been pretty much the
policy of every president who puts American security first.
The capital a America first because that other part of it is
already settled that the president will put first in
foreign policy. It really does seem to be more about putting a
certain type of America first. And it's a white Christian
nationalist America. >> There's been a lot of talk
about Donald Trump seeking revenge against his political
enemies and his words. The enemy within. When a historian like
yourself hears those words, what kind of parallels do you see?
>> It sounds so much like the 1940s and 1950s. The second Red
scare and the Lavender Scare that came along with it. So the
Red scare is most of your viewers will know is the effort
to root out communists in the federal government, but it
really spread to other institutions and businesses
of people lost their jobs for having just been associated with
communism. And then the Lavender Scare, which was eliminating any
homosexuals from the federal government and again, spread to
other institutions. And so it's really about any kind of
subversion, political subversion, or at the time, what
was considered sexual subversion. Now, Donald Trump
has specifically mentioned Marxists and communists. He
talks about that a lot. He talks about journalists as enemies of
the state. And while I don't think there would be a repeat of
the lavender Scare, he certainly considers trans people to be
enemies of the state. And so I think we often see these
parallels between sort of political subversion and
traditional gender roles. >> What lessons from history can
we learn as we go forward? >> I try to always remind my
students of two things. One is that history is not inevitable,
and we don't know what's going to happen. We can't predict it.
Another is that it's not linearly progressive, so we like
to think of America as always progressing, people getting more
rights, but rights expand and contract all the time. And the
culture expands and contracts all the time. So we saw this
most recently with reproductive rights contracting. We're also
now seeing voting rights contracting again. So keeping in
mind that we're not necessarily on a one way path right?
>> Kathryn MAGA, thanks very much.
>> For more on this and other issues facing Wisconsin, visit
our website at PBS Wisconsin. Org and then click on the news
tab. That's our program for tonight I'm Frederica Freyberg.
Have a good weekend. >> Funding for "Here& Now" is
provided by the Focus Fund for Journalism and Friends of PBS
Wisconsin.