PBS Wisconsin original production.
>> Is online sports betting coming to Wisconsin and do
fans want it? Plus, a look at prospects for deer
hunters with the start of the season. I'm Frederica
Freyberg tonight I'm here. And now we hear about how
state lawmakers propose, then quickly pulled back on
legislation to legalize online sports betting in
Wisconsin. Then what's the real cost
of marketplace plans? A Wisconsin pollster explores
voter temperament ahead of next year's midterm
elections, and the annual deer hunting season kicks
off this weekend. We check in on what's in store. It's
"Here& Now" for November 21st.
[MUSIC] >> Funding for Here and Now
is provided by the Focus Fund for Journalism and
Friends of PBS Wisconsin. >> At the state Capitol, a
bipartisan legislative bill to allow online sports
betting in Wisconsin that was on the fast track for a
vote was pulled from this week's calendar. Its future
is uncertain, but the legislation would have
allowed the online betting if it originated from
servers in tribal casinos in the state because under
the Wisconsin Constitution, most gambling is only legal
on tribal property. The idea was for the state to
regulate and cash in on the revenue generated from the
explosion of online sports betting, as other states
have done. Researcher at the Wisconsin Policy Forum,
Mark Sommerhauser, did a deep dive into online
sports betting, and he joins us now. And thanks
very much for being here. >> It's good to be with you.
>> So how surprised were you that this otherwise
fast tracked bill just got pulled?
>> Yeah. So it was an interesting development. It
was also interesting to see how the legislation had
been fast tracked fairly quickly in, in the weeks
leading up to this last week. And so, you know,
perhaps, you know, the speed with which the bill
had come forward. There may have been a desire among
some lawmakers and some stakeholders to kind of
take a step back and, you know, consider some of
these issues more fully. >> So what kind of revenue
could the state realize if it legalized and regulated
>> So that's a great question. I have actually
not seen any projections as of yet, probably in part
because the legislation would just be the first in
sort of a two step process here in Wisconsin. So even
if this even if this legislation were to pass be
governor, there would still be an additional step where
the state would need to renegotiate its compacts
with the tribal nations here in Wisconsin. So that
would kind of actually be the final threshold to
cross before you could have legal online sports betting.
What we know from our research is that we have
looked at some other states that have legalized online
sports betting. As you alluded, there's been
dozens and dozens of states that have done that just in
the last few years. And they have in some cases
seen quite large, you know, infusions of revenue. Of
course, a lot of it depends on how the extent to which
it's taxed. And we see from state to state, there are
huge variations in that, you know, from 5% to 50%
taxes. So so the rate differs hugely in states
that have a high tax rate. And in larger states it can
be on the order of hundreds of millions of dollars in
tax revenue a year. Again, that's on the very high end,
and that's with a very high tax rate. So that's not
necessarily something that could be extrapolated to
Wisconsin, but it does give you a sense of what what
some states can. >> As we described right
now, people in Wisconsin can only place bets online
legally while physically on site at a at a tribal
casino. How unusual is this across the country, that
kind of restriction? >> It's fairly unusual. I
think there's only 1 or 2 other states presently that
have a set up quite like that, in part because so
many states have that have some form of legal gambling,
have taken the step already of legalizing the online
sports betting. And so Wisconsin is fairly unusual
in that we permit it legally, but only in this
in-person setting right now at the tribal casinos.
>> So stepping back to your larger research, describe
kind of the explosion of online betting that we've
seen. >> Yeah. So the really big
trigger point for that was the supreme US Supreme
Court ruling in 2018. And what that did is it
essentially paved the way for states to it struck
down a law that previously had barred most states
outside of Nevada from legalizing sports gambling.
And what we saw was a very, you know, swift reaction to
that Supreme Court ruling. And we are now, at last
count, I believe, at 39 states that have some form
of of legalized sports betting. Nearly all of them
permit online sports betting. And so that has
brought about a really rapid shift in this whole
landscape just since 2018. >> And what are the numbers
look like, you know, from maybe five years ago or ten
years ago or something to today in terms of the
amount of money being spent on these pets.
>> Right. >> So yeah, we've seen
hundreds of millions of dollars in revenue
increases in terms of the total amount being gambled.
And, you know, again, you know, prior to the Supreme
Court ruling, Nevada was really the only state at a
statewide level that was permitting this. Now we're
up to almost 40 states that are permitting it. And
there are more, as in here in Wisconsin, that are
considering it. So it's pretty staggering the scale
of how quickly that's happening.
are betting not just kind of on the outcome of the
games, but on like individual plays within the
games. And so it's it's super popular and there's
always something to kind of bet on. But what are the
downsides to this according to your research.
>> Yeah. So it's interesting because outside
of Nevada, it's only recently that, you know,
we've had legal sports betting. And so it's only
in these 49 other states, only fairly recent
development, that researchers have been able
to study at a large scale. So we're actually seeing a
lot of really interesting research coming in just
over the past couple of years where they started
studying this maybe three or 4 or 5 years ago, and
are just starting to get to the point where they can
draw some conclusions. And those conclusions are mixed,
but I would say definitely contain, you know, some
areas of concern. We have seen higher rates of
bankruptcy, of delinquency in, in car loans and other
forms of loans and debt, and in states that have
legalized sports betting relative to states that
have not. And interestingly, at least one paper that we
read that I think came out last year was even able to
take that a step further and find a higher rates of
some of these financial sort of stressors within
households, within states that have legalized online
sports betting. So that's just one study again. But
there's more of this research coming in kind of
by the month here. And it does raise some areas of
concern in terms of the impact to households and
household finances, that sort of large scale legal
sports betting can potentially be associated.
>> With. >> And not even speaking of
kind of the gambling potentially trigger in some.
Do you expect this move to legalize it in Wisconsin
will die or be revived somehow, possibly through
the courts? >> I would expect that the
discussion. >> Is far from finished. I
would expect that there's going to be a lot more
discussion, both among the stakeholders, the tribes,
and some of the other stakeholders, because
everybody kind of sees where the national
landscape is going. But, you know, I would not dare
to make a prediction as to how it's going to turn out.
But what we see is that our our neighboring states have
legalized this in some form, so many other states across
the country. And so I think it's just going to continue
to be a really hot topic going forward.
Sommerhauser, thanks very much.
>> The whole government shutdown was over extending
enhanced tax credits for Affordable Care Act
policies, with Democrats warning of big increases in
people's monthly premiums come January if they're not
kept in place. Aside from those extra subsidies going
away, why are marketplace plans proving more
expensive? And what of Republican calls to do away
with the ACA altogether? In response, we asked
Wisconsin School of and Insurance Justin Sydnor.
And thanks very much for being here.
>> Thanks for having me. >> So is it in dispute that
ACA premiums could more than double without the
extension of the enhanced tax credits?
>> No. uncertainty about that. You
know, it's basically pretty straightforward, simple
math. The way the tax credits work is that
they're tied to a share of the percent of your income.
And the enhanced tax credits increased or
decreased the share you would have to pay an
increase the income range for people who are eligible.
So they'll definitely go up. The share that you're
up. If those subsidies expire. How much? Depends a
lot on your income level. And in particular, we could
maybe think about a nice example here. So take a 50
year old couple so married couple in Wisconsin, 50
years old, no children. They're facing a total
premium of about $18,000 for a middle middle plan
this year in the ACA marketplace in Wisconsin.
If they had the enhanced tax credits and they made
$85,000 or more a year, that's 400% of the federal
poverty line. They'd get about $11,000 subsidy, and
they'd have to pay about $7,000 themselves. So if
those subsidies expire, they're on the hook for
that whole 18,000. So that's an $11,000 increase
now for people who have lower incomes, the
subsidies protect them more, even if the enhanced
subsidies expire. So let's take that same family and
move them way down the income spectrum. Make them
at 25,000. Now they're just above the poverty line in
the enhanced subsidies. They don't pay anything for
that middle tier plan. They're paying zero. But
without them they're paying about $500 a year. So about
a $500 increase. So that range, you know, in the
ballpark some it's 500 a year, some people it's
$10,000 or more a year. >> You know, there's so
much political consternation around not
just the tax credits but the ACA altogether is the
Affordable Care Act in a freefall?
>> No, I don't think there's any reason to think
of it as being in a freefall. It's actually
been quite stable. So if you look at the cost of
plans for ACA marketplace plans, both in Wisconsin
but also nationally over the last five years or so,
those premiums have actually been very stable.
And in fact, they haven't risen in the same way that
the employer sponsored premiums that we've seen
for, you know, that most people get through their
employers have those premiums have been up about
25% over the last five years. ACA premiums are
pretty stable. >> What's driving that 25%
increase? overall in the US our
healthcare costs are just high. So we pay about
$15,000 a person per year in health care costs across
the entire country. You know. And those costs
reflect a lot of things. They reflect our market
based system. So our costs are about twice what they
are in, say, Europe or Canada. And, you know,
that's partly a trade off. We have a market based
system. So we have a lot of innovation. We have good
access, we have the best technology. So if you get
very sick, you probably want to be here. On the
other hand, it means that our prices are set by
competitive forces and the down prices that well
through those competitive about why are they
increasing, why are they steady rise over time. You
know there's a confluence of factors. So we have an
aging population. So we have sort of more demand
for health care and the expansion of health care
services. How many nurses you can bring on, how many
doctors you train. Hospital systems doesn't always keep
up with that rising demand. Well, we've also seen a big
explosion of newer pharmaceutical drugs. You
know, innovations in genetics have allowed us to
treat rare diseases. Those Now, of course, they're
also highly beneficial. If you have a rare disease,
you're really happy that there's a new drug for it.
But that's been a big part of the cost. And then
there's also just overall inflation. So there's been
inflation in all parts of the economy. And that also
hits the health care prices. >> So I wanted to ask you I
know that President Trump and members of the GOP talk
about giving people direct payments like $2,000 or
something to to pay for their health care and a
health savings account or something like that. What
do you think of that? >> Well.
>> So, you know, it's hard to react too much. So, you
know, the details and specifics really matter in
health care. And so far the proposals haven't been very
detailed. But if you instead gave people direct
money that could be spent on anything health care
premiums or out-of-pocket costs, you expose them to
some more risk. If those subsidies don't keep up
with the rising costs of health care, well, they're
going to see that. On the other hand, you create more
competitive pressure and good economic tradeoffs
there that are worth thanks very much.
>> Great. Thank you. >> What kind of bellwether
were elections earlier this month in other states that
saw Republican candidates on the losing end? And how
do recent partisan fights over affordability of
everything from health care to groceries play into
outcomes in midterm elections? Next year, we
turn to Marquette University Law School poll
director Charles Franklin, out this week with his
latest national poll. And Charles, nice to see you.
>> Good to be here. >> So in terms of that
first question, what do you think of whether November
4th outcomes in other states are more than just
kind of a cyclical swing? >> I think they show us
where the country is right now, or at least where
those states were. It's true that it's not a
surprise that Democrats won those two states for the
governorship. But remember, Virginia elected a
Republican governor four years ago and is now
elected a Democrat by a large margin. Maybe more
important for here in Wisconsin, Democrats picked
up 13 seats in the Virginia House of delegates, going
from 51 seats to 64 seats. That was a remarkable shift.
And the problems we saw there on inflation, on the
economy are the same things we're seeing in national
polling. >> So going into your
national polling in 2026 congressional elections,
you found that among likely voters, 53% of respondents
would vote for Democrats, with 44% voting for
Republicans. Does that result surprise you?
>> It's a large result. That's a nine point gap.
That's very substantial. Interestingly, with
five point gap, a little bit smaller. The difference
between those is Democrats now are more likely to say
they're certain they're going to vote in the fall
by about seven points more likely in this national
poll. So you've got both the preference for
Democrats and the motivation to turn out. And
those two things, together with the likely vote
numbers, drives up that Democratic margin quite a
bit. >> So one result that was
the reason for the government shutdown. In
this poll, you found 70% of respondents favor extending
the ACA tax credits. How big of a driver do you
think that issue will be in the midterms?
>> I think it could grow. I think the fact that people
have just begun to see what they're insurance costs
will be under the ACA for next year. If they're
buying insurance on the marketplace. Also, for the
folks that are affected by those tax credits going
away, some of their increases are quite large.
We shouldn't exaggerate how many people are affected,
but it's a significant number that are.
Republicans are really going to have to deal with
this in the Congress, with or without Democratic
agreement. But what are they doing for their party?
And does this issue build over the fall into the
election, or does it kind of Peter out? We don't know
that yet. rating in your poll, in
this national poll, he sits at 14 points underwater
with 43% approving of his job performance, in 57%
disapproving. But the wow number really here is that
he's 50 points underwater with independents with 25%
approval and 75% disapproval. What do you
make of that? >> Well, that's a huge,
huge problem politically and it's politically
problem for the president, but also for Republicans
going into the midterms because you can't just win
on your own party base. You need to pick up at least a
good share of those 14 or 15% of independents in the
country. And these are historically pretty abysmal
numbers for any president with independents at this
point. Maybe it'll turn around. He's still strong
with Republicans, 85% approval with them and 5%
with Democrats. But independents are an
important swing vote. And I think every member of
Congress or legislator that sits in a district that's a
close competitive district, especially, has to know
that the independent vote in those districts could
shift their margin 3 or 4 points one way or the other.
That could be the difference between winning
and losing. >> So as to that,
transposing these national poll results to Wisconsin
elections, what kind of warning signs do you see
for Republicans in upcoming races, for Congress,
legislature? >> Yeah, I think that what
we saw in Virginia to come back to a real election,
not just a poll, is that we saw Republican incumbents
lose seats in Virginia that Trump had won by six points
last time. So our competitive states here,
sorry, districts, legislative districts here
are within that kind of margin. Now I'm not for a
minute saying that we will see the same swing here
that we saw in Virginia. But Virginia, certainly a
test case to show that that 4 or 5 six point swing,
even in an incumbent district held by a
Republican is at risk this year.
Franklin, we'll leave it there. Thank you very much.
>> Thank you. >> The annual gun deer
hunting season in Wisconsin begins tomorrow. The long
tradition of a regulated hunt in the state dates
back to 1851. The modern season brings with it new
challenges and opportunities for the
thousands of hunters descending into the
outdoors with high hopes for the harvest. Jeff
Pritzl is longtime deer program specialist with the
Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, and he
joins us now. And Jeff, thanks a lot for being here.
>> Happy to be here. It's the day of anticipation.
>> Correct. So with the gun deer season starting
tomorrow, how many licenses have been sold as a measure
of interest this year? And how does that compare
historically? >> Yeah, well, we're right
on about the same pace as we've been the past couple
of years. Within a half a percent. So we'll be
somewhere just shy of 600,000 deer hunters out on
Saturday morning. Historically, Wisconsin
peaked at 700,000 at the turn of the century 25
years ago. So we've seen a decline that's really
driven just by the demographics of our of our
hunting population. But it's it's kind of
stabilized the last couple of years, which is a good
thing. don't sound bad. The
estimate is that there are 2 million deer walking
around out there. What do conditions this year look
like for hunters to be able to harvest them?
>> Well, the things that are in Hunter's favor this
year are we're going to have relatively cool and
calm conditions. We know we're not going to have
that, at least at the beginning of the season.
Agricultural harvest, especially corn harvest, is
at or ahead of schedule. And so that's good in the
farmland. And we're coming off of two mild winters. So
that means the deer population in the northern
forest is trending up a little bit. The things that
are stacked against us are that it's relatively late
opener on the calendar. So the later we get into
November with the opener, we do see a little
reduction in daytime deer movement. And so that that
could work against us this weekend. But that's just
part of the nature of hunting.
Wisconsin that look more favorable for hunters?
>> Well. >> I always think that's in
the eye of the beholder, because not all hunters are
looking for the same thing. For the best chance to see
deer and harvest deer. You know, the counties in the
state that perennially have the highest harvest
densities are counties like Waupaca and Marquette,
green Lake, that east central part of the state.
We saw 13 counties in mostly in east central
Wisconsin have a record buck kill last year, and
they're probably going to be in that same area this
year. But if hunters that are looking for a different
kind of experience, maybe a little more solitude and a
lot of country to explore, you know, the northern
forest, you know, offers that in spades with big,
big chunks of state and federal properties. That's
where I'll be this weekend. Looking forward to that
kind of an experience. I may not see as many deer,
but that's not everyone's primary objective.
>> So how do recent harvests of between 3 and
350,000 across all deer seasons compare?
>> We've actually been in a pretty stable pattern
really over the past decade in that, yeah, like you
said, 300 350,000. And it kind of undulates up and
down, driven mostly by antlerless deer harvest on
the buck harvest has been pretty stable. And
seeing a slight decline in hunter numbers, that that
stability of of harvest means that that more
hunters are being successful. But it's
certainly hunters that remember 20 years ago where
we were in kind of a bubble of really high deer numbers
and high hunter numbers? Remember those harvests
where we were getting between 400,000 deer and
then that peak, we got as many as 600,000 deer, but
that was driven by really high antlerless harvests,
which we're not seeing these days. And so it's
we've we've had quite a bit of actual pretty stable
conditions. Other than that, minor fluctuations with
weather and stuff in recent years.
>> You speak about hunters considering being a hunter
for the community, not just for themselves or
individually. What do you mean by that?
>> Back to what we were just talking about in that
those hunters that find themselves fortunate in the
positions where they have access to deer, the
challenge that we have is once a Wisconsin deer
hunter gets a deer, has it in the freezer. Their
incentive to take another deer goes way down. So even
though we provide that opportunity, they're not
necessarily incentivized to harvest an adequate number
of deer in the places where we really have the
those hunters hopefully would be able to say, I can
take an extra deer and there's that can be put to
use through our formal deer donation program. But
there's a lot of other side benefits to managing the
deer population, both ecologically and within the
tolerances of human social tolerances, relates to car
accidents and crop damage and all those types of
things. And so this, you know, hunters for eons,
actually were a subset of the population that hunted
for their community as a whole. We've kind of moved
culturally towards a hunt thing being wolves. And
it's it's, I think, behooves us to recapture
that, that notion that we're we're hunters for the
community so that the greater community sees us
as an asset to them. >> What do you want hunters
to be on the lookout for in terms of chronic wasting
disease? >> Well, it's important for
us to keep a good tab on how that disease is
evolving in the state, both in terms of its rate of on
the landscape and the prevalence within the areas.
It's we're gathering really good information that not
only helps us make better decisions in the future
within Wisconsin, but other states are really learning
from what we're capturing here in Wisconsin because
the disease is not going away. But we can there are
steps we can take to mitigate its spread and and
work within having it on the landscape. So really
our focus is on that leading edge where the
disease is spreading in the state, really kind of
across the middle of the state. We we encourage
hunters statewide to, you know, get their deer
sampled. And we've developed a good cohort of
what I would call citizen science hunters that that
do participate every year and contribute to that,
that database better decision making.
>> We'll leave it there. Jeff Pritzl, thanks very
much for joining us. >> You bet. Good luck to
all the hunters. >> 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.