1 00:00:01,802 --> 00:00:04,004 Democrats are getting more aggressive about jumping 2 00:00:04,071 --> 00:00:06,440 into primaries. We look at a few examples from 3 00:00:06,507 --> 00:00:09,743 Congress to the state legislature, plus two legal 4 00:00:09,810 --> 00:00:12,212 decisions that could affect Wisconsin's political maps 5 00:00:12,279 --> 00:00:17,284 for years to come. This is inside Wisconsin politics. 6 00:00:19,186 --> 00:00:20,420 I'm Shawn Johnson here with my colleague Zac Schultz 7 00:00:20,487 --> 00:00:23,390 my colleague Zac Schultz Anya van Wagtendonk and 8 00:00:23,457 --> 00:00:25,025 Rich Kremer in Eau Claire. Hey, everyone. 9 00:00:25,092 --> 00:00:27,461 >> Hello. >> Hey, Shawn. 10 00:00:27,528 --> 00:00:30,297 >> So before we get started with some specific examples 11 00:00:30,364 --> 00:00:33,901 here, I want to start with why this kind of caught our 12 00:00:33,967 --> 00:00:37,004 attention. And for me, it's because in the very recent 13 00:00:37,070 --> 00:00:41,408 past, you had Democrats and liberals very wary about 14 00:00:41,475 --> 00:00:43,810 jumping into primaries. What's changed Zac? 15 00:00:43,877 --> 00:00:46,280 >> I think the biggest thing that's changed is 16 00:00:46,346 --> 00:00:48,882 Democrats see more opportunity to win some of 17 00:00:48,949 --> 00:00:51,952 these over the past 16 years. Basically, the Scott 18 00:00:52,019 --> 00:00:54,821 Walker era. On when the maps didn't favor Wisconsin 19 00:00:54,888 --> 00:00:57,090 and perhaps the political climate didn't favor 20 00:00:57,157 --> 00:00:59,359 candidates statewide. There was a concern that a 21 00:00:59,426 --> 00:01:01,962 primary just took up too many resources that were 22 00:01:02,029 --> 00:01:05,332 limited, mainly money and time, and the threat that 23 00:01:05,399 --> 00:01:07,000 if they went negative against each other, it 24 00:01:07,067 --> 00:01:09,403 really hurt their opportunity to win 25 00:01:09,469 --> 00:01:11,972 statewide. Since Democrats have gotten on a roll in 1 26 00:01:12,039 --> 00:01:15,075 a lot of these races for governor, AG, state Supreme 27 00:01:15,142 --> 00:01:18,078 Court, and they've got better maps, they see more 28 00:01:18,145 --> 00:01:20,781 opportunity. And so there's more options for people to 29 00:01:20,848 --> 00:01:22,649 get in, because the primary doesn't look quite as 30 00:01:22,716 --> 00:01:26,153 devastating. was thinking about this, I 31 00:01:26,220 --> 00:01:28,689 almost feel like it's directly related to 32 00:01:28,755 --> 00:01:31,391 whatever the national political situation is at 33 00:01:31,458 --> 00:01:36,029 the time. So we are right now in the Trump midterm. 34 00:01:37,531 --> 00:01:40,033 Where were we? A few years ago in the Biden midterm, 35 00:01:40,100 --> 00:01:42,803 you had Democrats jumping out of a primary for Senate, 36 00:01:42,870 --> 00:01:45,339 clearing the way for Mandela Barnes. Where were 37 00:01:45,405 --> 00:01:48,308 we in the first Trump midterm in 2018? You had 38 00:01:48,375 --> 00:01:51,111 about a dozen Democrats running for governor that 39 00:01:51,178 --> 00:01:54,515 year. And on and on and on. I think it's kind of a 40 00:01:54,581 --> 00:01:58,352 really simple flow chart. Is it a midterm? Yes. Is 41 00:01:58,418 --> 00:02:01,889 your president in the white House? No. Well, in that 42 00:02:01,955 --> 00:02:03,924 case, you're probably going to want to jump into a 43 00:02:03,991 --> 00:02:07,227 primary and and give a chance for your party. 44 00:02:07,294 --> 00:02:09,930 Let's jump into one of these specific examples 45 00:02:09,997 --> 00:02:13,233 this week. And, you know, I want to characterize this 46 00:02:13,300 --> 00:02:16,637 as the opportunity knocks kind of a Democratic 47 00:02:16,703 --> 00:02:19,106 primary in the first congressional District, 48 00:02:19,173 --> 00:02:21,675 where we have Representative Bryan Steil, 49 00:02:21,742 --> 00:02:26,046 a Republican, is seen as a pretty strong candidate. 50 00:02:26,113 --> 00:02:29,983 The district leans Republican. And yet this 51 00:02:30,050 --> 00:02:33,420 week we had a Democratic candidate say, hey, it's 52 00:02:33,487 --> 00:02:36,223 not too late for me to jump in. Tell us about what 53 00:02:36,290 --> 00:02:39,393 happened. been several Democrats that 54 00:02:39,459 --> 00:02:41,562 have been running for quite a while, but none of them 55 00:02:41,628 --> 00:02:44,398 have really been a clear front runner. None of them 56 00:02:44,464 --> 00:02:46,400 have raised a significant amount of money. Bryan 57 00:02:46,466 --> 00:02:48,602 Steil, by contrast, is a very good campaigner and a 58 00:02:48,669 --> 00:02:51,438 very good fundraiser. He has quite a lot in his war 59 00:02:51,505 --> 00:02:53,640 chest. And so there had been some rumblings that 60 00:02:53,707 --> 00:02:56,276 this older person from Milwaukee was going to jump 61 00:02:56,343 --> 00:02:58,478 in. And he did. Peter Burgess, he is currently a 62 00:02:58,545 --> 00:03:00,514 sitting member of the Milwaukee Council. He does 63 00:03:00,581 --> 00:03:03,450 not live in the district. And so him coming out, it's 64 00:03:03,517 --> 00:03:05,352 really interesting because he's essentially saying, I 65 00:03:05,419 --> 00:03:07,487 am the person who can get the national money that is 66 00:03:07,554 --> 00:03:09,556 required to flip this district. He's trying to 67 00:03:09,623 --> 00:03:12,326 make the argument that it is more flippable than 68 00:03:12,392 --> 00:03:14,161 Democrats think. It is considered a of Wisconsin's 69 00:03:14,228 --> 00:03:17,664 kind of two ish congressional districts, 70 00:03:17,731 --> 00:03:20,200 the safer one for Republicans. But he's 71 00:03:20,267 --> 00:03:23,303 saying, if we can get money, we can get in the game. 72 00:03:23,370 --> 00:03:25,072 >> Rich, you've been following this district for 73 00:03:25,138 --> 00:03:27,941 a while now. Why would Peter Berg Ellis look at 74 00:03:28,008 --> 00:03:32,012 the field here and say, you know, why not me? 75 00:03:32,679 --> 00:03:36,884 >> Well, exactly what Anna said. So, Steil, here's an 76 00:03:36,950 --> 00:03:40,187 example of how good of a fundraiser he is. He's 77 00:03:40,254 --> 00:03:44,458 currently sitting on more than $5.5 million in his 78 00:03:44,525 --> 00:03:46,894 campaign war chest. And during the first three 79 00:03:46,960 --> 00:03:51,298 months of the year, he raised more money than any 80 00:03:51,365 --> 00:03:54,234 I mean, excuse me, he spent more money than any 81 00:03:54,301 --> 00:03:59,106 Democrat even raised. So maybe jealous is thinking 82 00:04:00,407 --> 00:04:03,644 I'll get that Democratic money, etc. But to the 83 00:04:03,710 --> 00:04:06,513 point that this is this is an interesting district 84 00:04:06,580 --> 00:04:10,184 because on paper it it is competitive. But Steil has 85 00:04:10,250 --> 00:04:14,421 just been a powerhouse and he's easily defeated every 86 00:04:14,488 --> 00:04:17,658 Democrat that has come up against him. So I don't 87 00:04:17,724 --> 00:04:20,494 know if this is enough of a Democratic wave year, 88 00:04:20,561 --> 00:04:23,363 potentially, that it could make it a little closer. 89 00:04:23,430 --> 00:04:27,668 But it seems like Democrats think it's worth a shot. 90 00:04:27,734 --> 00:04:30,637 >> Zac, can somebody come in from outside the 91 00:04:30,704 --> 00:04:32,940 district? And I'm very prominently outside of a 92 00:04:33,006 --> 00:04:35,008 district, too. I mean, he holds elected office 93 00:04:35,075 --> 00:04:37,177 outside the district. Can he come in and say, I want 94 00:04:37,244 --> 00:04:39,379 to be your congressman? >> Well, running outside 95 00:04:39,446 --> 00:04:42,149 the district is not uncommon at all in 96 00:04:42,216 --> 00:04:44,318 Wisconsin. You don't need to live in the district. 97 00:04:44,384 --> 00:04:46,320 You're only supposed to live there by the time you 98 00:04:46,386 --> 00:04:49,289 take office. So he doesn't even have to set up 99 00:04:49,356 --> 00:04:51,358 residence there in order to campaign there. Even if he 100 00:04:51,425 --> 00:04:54,127 does win the nomination, that's not uncommon. It is 101 00:04:54,194 --> 00:04:56,363 a matter of winning a primary if you don't live 102 00:04:56,430 --> 00:04:59,166 there, because he has to convince the voters in that 103 00:04:59,233 --> 00:05:01,335 district that he should be the Democrat to represent 104 00:05:01,401 --> 00:05:04,171 them against Steil in the fall. And that is a little 105 00:05:04,238 --> 00:05:07,107 bit of a tougher ask. That is him saying, I'm the one 106 00:05:07,174 --> 00:05:09,176 that's different from the rest of these that you 107 00:05:09,243 --> 00:05:11,178 haven't really coalesced around in the past. And 108 00:05:11,245 --> 00:05:13,313 this would represent more of trying to bring in 109 00:05:13,380 --> 00:05:15,415 national attention, but it would require a national 110 00:05:15,482 --> 00:05:18,185 wave to upset Steil in this district. When you look at 111 00:05:18,252 --> 00:05:21,154 district congressional national Dems didn't even 112 00:05:21,221 --> 00:05:23,390 invest into the third, which is a much closer 113 00:05:23,457 --> 00:05:25,993 district. In past races, they didn't come close to 114 00:05:26,059 --> 00:05:28,495 investing in the first, and so it would require a 115 00:05:28,562 --> 00:05:30,430 completely different landscape for national 116 00:05:30,497 --> 00:05:32,733 money to really come in from the Democratic Party 117 00:05:32,799 --> 00:05:35,068 to say we see the first as in play. 118 00:05:35,135 --> 00:05:37,738 >> It could be a case of they just want Bryan Steil 119 00:05:37,804 --> 00:05:40,374 to spend his money and not have that sitting around 120 00:05:40,440 --> 00:05:42,309 for a future election, too. >> That makes a big 121 00:05:42,376 --> 00:05:45,145 difference. >> Let's move on to another 122 00:05:45,212 --> 00:05:47,047 primary. And since I'm naming stuff today, I'm 123 00:05:47,114 --> 00:05:49,883 going to call this one the Opportunity Knocks. No, we 124 00:05:49,950 --> 00:05:51,985 we did the Opportunity knocks primary. I need to 125 00:05:52,052 --> 00:05:55,022 get my name straight. If I'm going to do this. This 126 00:05:55,088 --> 00:05:57,824 is the don't tell me what to do primary. An important 127 00:05:57,891 --> 00:06:00,627 distinction in Democratic primaries. We've got a 128 00:06:00,694 --> 00:06:03,230 couple of examples here today. Let's start with one 129 00:06:03,297 --> 00:06:06,733 in the third Congressional District. Rich, I've heard 130 00:06:06,800 --> 00:06:08,936 a lot about this district because it's our most 131 00:06:09,002 --> 00:06:11,572 competitive congressional district. Derrick Van Orden 132 00:06:11,638 --> 00:06:14,842 is the Republican incumbent. I've heard a lot about 133 00:06:14,908 --> 00:06:16,543 Rebecca Cooke, the Democratic challenger who 134 00:06:16,610 --> 00:06:19,112 has outraised him recently and seems to be getting a 135 00:06:19,179 --> 00:06:22,583 lot of attention. There is a primary there who's 136 00:06:22,649 --> 00:06:25,319 running. >> So the primary is 137 00:06:26,720 --> 00:06:29,756 between Cooke, who's an Eau Claire Democrat raised on a 138 00:06:29,823 --> 00:06:34,161 dairy farm in the county and, you know, has done 139 00:06:34,895 --> 00:06:38,131 some political consulting work, fundraising work for 140 00:06:38,198 --> 00:06:40,734 Democrats in years past. But now she's back. She's 141 00:06:40,801 --> 00:06:44,204 really portraying herself as kind of of the district, 142 00:06:44,271 --> 00:06:47,107 you know, born and bred Wisconsin, etc. Republicans 143 00:06:47,174 --> 00:06:51,745 are trying to, you know, focus the attention on her 144 00:06:51,812 --> 00:06:55,449 consulting work, etc. The other Democrat is longtime 145 00:06:55,516 --> 00:06:58,118 Eau Claire City Council member, former council 146 00:06:58,185 --> 00:07:01,054 president, until just recently, Emily Berg of Eau 147 00:07:01,121 --> 00:07:06,026 Claire. And she she's portraying herself as the 148 00:07:06,093 --> 00:07:10,464 grassroots choice in this race. And national 149 00:07:10,531 --> 00:07:13,567 Democrats came in and started sending resources, 150 00:07:13,634 --> 00:07:17,304 staff, etc. back in February to Cooke's 151 00:07:17,371 --> 00:07:20,641 campaign. And Berg said, well, that's pretty dirty. 152 00:07:20,707 --> 00:07:24,811 You know, she essentially said D.C. shouldn't be 153 00:07:24,878 --> 00:07:27,748 deciding who is the Democrat to face Van Orden. 154 00:07:27,814 --> 00:07:30,584 It should be the people of Eau Claire. And just 155 00:07:30,651 --> 00:07:33,153 anecdotally, when I'm walking through the city, I 156 00:07:33,220 --> 00:07:35,889 don't see a lot of Cooke signs. In fact, I don't 157 00:07:35,956 --> 00:07:39,326 remember seeing any. But I see a whole bunch of Berg 158 00:07:39,393 --> 00:07:43,230 signs. So this being one of the more, if not the most 159 00:07:43,297 --> 00:07:45,999 populous areas in the third district, maybe that makes 160 00:07:46,066 --> 00:07:50,137 a difference. But in terms of resources, Cooke is way, 161 00:07:50,204 --> 00:07:52,739 way, way ahead of Berg. In all the fundraising reports 162 00:07:52,806 --> 00:07:55,742 that I've seen. >> Zac, do you get the 163 00:07:55,809 --> 00:07:58,712 sense that this is, you know, a competitive primary 164 00:07:58,779 --> 00:08:01,348 here? >> It could be it really 165 00:08:01,415 --> 00:08:04,484 depends on how much the primary voters pay 166 00:08:04,551 --> 00:08:06,620 attention. And that's always the issue in some of 167 00:08:06,687 --> 00:08:08,622 these primaries is name recognition makes a big 168 00:08:08,689 --> 00:08:11,458 deal. That's why the National Party comes in and 169 00:08:11,525 --> 00:08:14,261 puts resources behind Cooke. It's not necessarily that 170 00:08:14,328 --> 00:08:16,463 they like her more. It's they think she has the 171 00:08:16,530 --> 00:08:19,433 better chance to win in the fall and get her moving. 172 00:08:19,499 --> 00:08:22,202 Now. It's the old mentality we talked about at the 173 00:08:22,269 --> 00:08:24,371 beginning of the show of why didn't Democrats do 174 00:08:24,438 --> 00:08:26,540 primaries in the past? It takes resources, it can get 175 00:08:26,607 --> 00:08:29,409 ugly, it can get negative. It could hurt the candidate. 176 00:08:29,476 --> 00:08:32,946 Going into the fall. I ran into Berg when she was 177 00:08:33,013 --> 00:08:35,549 campaigning with Francesca Hong for governor in La 178 00:08:35,616 --> 00:08:38,352 Crosse. They were doing an event at the same bookstore. 179 00:08:38,418 --> 00:08:40,654 And it's not a coincidence that while we were talking 180 00:08:40,721 --> 00:08:43,457 to them, they were talking about going and seeing them 181 00:08:43,524 --> 00:08:46,393 at the next stop. And there there is a kind of thematic 182 00:08:46,460 --> 00:08:48,829 fit with that campaign of more grassroots, more from 183 00:08:48,896 --> 00:08:51,932 the bottom up and running against party types who 184 00:08:51,999 --> 00:08:56,003 tell us who our candidates should be. Parties like to 185 00:08:56,069 --> 00:08:58,372 dictate sometimes who the candidate can be so they 186 00:08:58,438 --> 00:09:00,574 can focus resources. Sometimes that does run up 187 00:09:00,641 --> 00:09:02,876 against a wall, which is why your title for this 188 00:09:02,943 --> 00:09:05,712 Don't Tell Me What to Do, does fit, because there are 189 00:09:05,779 --> 00:09:08,448 candidates who are going to say no. Let the people 190 00:09:08,515 --> 00:09:11,652 decide. People have to pay attention though. 191 00:09:11,718 --> 00:09:13,720 another. Don't tell me what to do. Primary Ana. This is 192 00:09:13,787 --> 00:09:16,523 in one of the state Senate districts that we're 193 00:09:16,590 --> 00:09:19,760 watching that could Wisconsin state Senate this 194 00:09:19,826 --> 00:09:23,697 year. The 17th state Senate district. Howard Marklein 195 00:09:23,764 --> 00:09:26,900 is the Republican incumbent, and the Democratic Party 196 00:09:26,967 --> 00:09:29,069 had been sending strong signals that they knew who 197 00:09:29,136 --> 00:09:32,406 they wanted to run for a while now. And yet there's 198 00:09:32,472 --> 00:09:35,142 a candidate who says, I want to run to tell us 199 00:09:35,209 --> 00:09:37,477 about it. >> Yeah. So Jenna Jacobson, 200 00:09:37,544 --> 00:09:40,080 who currently serves in the Assembly, has been sort of 201 00:09:40,147 --> 00:09:43,483 the anointed Democratic Howard Marklein for this 202 00:09:43,550 --> 00:09:45,819 district, which also has been redrawn in a way that 203 00:09:45,886 --> 00:09:48,388 could be more favorable for Democrats. So Marklein sort 204 00:09:48,455 --> 00:09:51,458 of on his heels in that way. But then yesterday we got 205 00:09:51,525 --> 00:09:53,627 the announcement that Corrin Hendrickson, who if 206 00:09:53,694 --> 00:09:56,563 you have written an article or read an article about 207 00:09:56,630 --> 00:09:59,466 child care advocacy in the last three years, you have 208 00:09:59,533 --> 00:10:01,735 heard that name. She has been at the Capitol. She 209 00:10:01,802 --> 00:10:04,505 was a small business owner, a daycare owner in New 210 00:10:04,571 --> 00:10:06,740 Glarus. That was very much her issue. And now she's 211 00:10:06,807 --> 00:10:09,710 running for office. So a political newcomer, 212 00:10:09,776 --> 00:10:13,514 somebody with this kind of particular set of policy 213 00:10:13,580 --> 00:10:15,849 expectations and preferences challenging a 214 00:10:15,916 --> 00:10:18,452 fellow Democrat. And so that is a caught our 215 00:10:18,519 --> 00:10:20,487 attention for that reason, that it's a competitive 216 00:10:20,554 --> 00:10:23,090 district. It's not safe for Democrats. So here's 217 00:10:23,156 --> 00:10:25,459 somebody coming in and saying, I want to throw my 218 00:10:25,526 --> 00:10:28,128 hat in, and I want to advocate for my specific 219 00:10:28,195 --> 00:10:31,365 approach to politics. >> And, you know, I do feel 220 00:10:31,431 --> 00:10:34,201 like we have this debate about primaries pretty much 221 00:10:34,268 --> 00:10:36,537 every single primary about whether it's going to help 222 00:10:36,603 --> 00:10:39,873 or hurt the candidates. I think they are making a bet 223 00:10:39,940 --> 00:10:42,876 this year that they can afford to have those 224 00:10:42,943 --> 00:10:45,245 debates. And the argument for it helping them is that 225 00:10:45,312 --> 00:10:48,582 they are going to kind of dominate the news cycle for 226 00:10:48,649 --> 00:10:51,485 a little while in August and get more attention than 227 00:10:51,552 --> 00:10:54,087 candidates that don't have a primary. Okay. One 228 00:10:54,154 --> 00:10:56,823 primary that is really big this year in our world, the 229 00:10:56,890 --> 00:10:58,592 Democratic primary for governor, we're not going 230 00:10:58,659 --> 00:11:02,429 to talk about today, but if you had to name that one, 231 00:11:02,496 --> 00:11:07,434 anybody got any takers here? >> The why not primary? I 232 00:11:07,501 --> 00:11:09,403 think everyone and their mother is running for 233 00:11:09,469 --> 00:11:12,139 governor in the state. >> So we've got at least 234 00:11:12,206 --> 00:11:15,209 seven candidates running any labels for it? 235 00:11:15,275 --> 00:11:19,179 >> Ana stole mine. >> I want to add. I want to 236 00:11:20,047 --> 00:11:23,584 a small amendment to yours. The why not me? You know, 237 00:11:23,650 --> 00:11:25,586 primaries, actually, what I had thought about. So maybe 238 00:11:25,652 --> 00:11:28,589 you stole both of ours. It is kind of one of those 239 00:11:28,655 --> 00:11:31,525 years where you see a race that's kind of there for 240 00:11:31,592 --> 00:11:34,027 the taking. Why not jump in? >> So Shawn, let's flip 241 00:11:34,094 --> 00:11:36,830 this on its head for you, because part of the idea 242 00:11:36,897 --> 00:11:39,533 behind having primaries in the past or not having them 243 00:11:39,600 --> 00:11:41,602 was fear of wasting resources. But the other 244 00:11:41,668 --> 00:11:44,171 end of it was you can battle, test, and whoever 245 00:11:44,238 --> 00:11:46,974 comes through a primary is a better candidate for the 246 00:11:47,040 --> 00:11:49,843 general election. So what's your take on a wide open 247 00:11:49,910 --> 00:11:52,112 primary like this? How can it help Democrats if there 248 00:11:52,179 --> 00:11:54,848 are battling this many people there? 249 00:11:54,915 --> 00:11:57,351 >> I think that, you know, there are plenty of 250 00:11:57,417 --> 00:12:00,621 examples in the recent past, particularly among 251 00:12:00,687 --> 00:12:03,557 Republicans, where you come out of a battle tested 252 00:12:03,624 --> 00:12:06,193 primary and you are wounded. And it did not help them 253 00:12:06,260 --> 00:12:10,430 very much in the general election. I think in 2018, 254 00:12:10,497 --> 00:12:12,633 Tony Evers came out of a battle tested primary and 255 00:12:12,699 --> 00:12:15,636 was a little bit out of money. So there is a risk 256 00:12:15,702 --> 00:12:19,139 to it, but it does also get attention, I guess is the 257 00:12:19,206 --> 00:12:21,875 thing that it does for sure. >> I think another piece of 258 00:12:21,942 --> 00:12:24,845 this too, is that it's very easy to kind of present a 259 00:12:24,912 --> 00:12:27,648 unified front as a party when you're in the minority, 260 00:12:27,714 --> 00:12:29,683 because it doesn't really matter, right? You don't 261 00:12:29,750 --> 00:12:31,952 have power. And so we might know that kind of behind 262 00:12:32,019 --> 00:12:34,655 the scenes, the further left Democrats and the more 263 00:12:34,721 --> 00:12:37,691 centrist Democrats don't then they all come forward 264 00:12:37,758 --> 00:12:39,826 and kind of vote in alignment. And so now what 265 00:12:39,893 --> 00:12:41,862 we're seeing, because there's a little bit more 266 00:12:41,929 --> 00:12:44,565 of a sense that perhaps they could actually win 267 00:12:44,631 --> 00:12:46,667 things and gain power. There's also, I think, a 268 00:12:46,733 --> 00:12:48,969 little bit of a fight for what will the Democratic 269 00:12:49,036 --> 00:12:51,638 Party in Wisconsin look like, vote like, will they 270 00:12:51,705 --> 00:12:54,675 be further left? Will it be more of a Hong kind of 271 00:12:54,741 --> 00:12:56,677 situation? Will they be more moderate, more kind of 272 00:12:56,743 --> 00:12:58,779 aligned with national Democrats? And so I think 273 00:12:58,846 --> 00:13:00,681 we're seeing that fight kind of play out or tension 274 00:13:00,747 --> 00:13:04,084 play out in a lot of these primaries. 275 00:13:04,785 --> 00:13:07,654 news to get to here today, including another 276 00:13:07,721 --> 00:13:09,556 technically not a Democratic primary, but you 277 00:13:09,623 --> 00:13:11,692 have a couple candidates running for the 2027 278 00:13:11,758 --> 00:13:14,127 Supreme Court race already. Anya, how did this happen? 279 00:13:14,194 --> 00:13:17,130 We just had a court race. >> We sure did. So two 280 00:13:17,197 --> 00:13:20,234 weeks after, I think the the court race was resolved, 281 00:13:20,300 --> 00:13:24,271 Lindsay Brunet threw in her hat. And she is a former 282 00:13:24,338 --> 00:13:26,406 prosecutor, much like three of the current sitting 283 00:13:26,473 --> 00:13:28,976 liberals. And then a couple days ago, Pedro Colon, who 284 00:13:29,042 --> 00:13:31,778 is a Milwaukee area judge, threw his hat. And he is 285 00:13:31,845 --> 00:13:34,815 also a liberal judge, but he comes from a law making 286 00:13:34,882 --> 00:13:37,784 background. And so we're seeing two types of 287 00:13:37,851 --> 00:13:40,921 judicial candidates, one who more closely mirrors 288 00:13:40,988 --> 00:13:43,690 the Susan Crawford, Janet Protasiewicz kind of model 289 00:13:43,757 --> 00:13:46,927 of the last couple of years, a Democrat, but with a law 290 00:13:46,994 --> 00:13:49,029 and order background, and then one who more closely 291 00:13:49,096 --> 00:13:51,632 mirrors Chris Taylor with the lawmaker advocacy 292 00:13:51,698 --> 00:13:53,534 background, which again, I think shows that there's a 293 00:13:53,600 --> 00:13:56,503 little bit of this wanting to push pull for what kind 294 00:13:56,570 --> 00:13:59,173 of liberal judge do we want? Because liberals have the 295 00:13:59,239 --> 00:14:01,375 court, no matter what they think, that they probably 296 00:14:01,441 --> 00:14:03,877 have the election in the bag. And so, again, in what 297 00:14:03,944 --> 00:14:07,748 direction will the liberal justice land? 298 00:14:07,814 --> 00:14:09,950 >> What what do we call this one? The we? We're 299 00:14:10,017 --> 00:14:12,786 going to win this one anyway. Let's do what we 300 00:14:12,853 --> 00:14:15,789 want. No, maybe I should let this one go. If we 301 00:14:15,856 --> 00:14:18,825 don't have a good name, it's got to be on a bumper 302 00:14:18,892 --> 00:14:20,827 sticker. Rich, you talked to Pedro Colon about why he 303 00:14:20,894 --> 00:14:23,163 was getting into the race. And, you know, these 304 00:14:23,230 --> 00:14:25,199 introductory interviews are usually pretty boring. They 305 00:14:25,265 --> 00:14:27,634 don't say too much. I feel like Pedro Colon told you 306 00:14:27,701 --> 00:14:31,038 some stuff. >> Yeah. He did. I asked, 307 00:14:32,105 --> 00:14:34,341 you know, what differentiates you from 308 00:14:34,408 --> 00:14:37,778 Judge Brunet? And he said, unfortunately, it's 309 00:14:37,845 --> 00:14:41,281 experience. She doesn't have the substance 310 00:14:41,348 --> 00:14:44,818 substantive experience that he does, which includes the 311 00:14:44,885 --> 00:14:48,522 decade or so in the legislature and his years 312 00:14:48,589 --> 00:14:51,725 on the bench and the state appeals court in Milwaukee. 313 00:14:51,792 --> 00:14:55,229 So that surprised me. I was not expecting him right out 314 00:14:55,295 --> 00:14:58,365 of the gate to take a little swipe at his 315 00:14:58,432 --> 00:15:02,135 competitor. And the Brunet campaign sent me a 316 00:15:02,202 --> 00:15:05,939 statement saying, as much as well. They said, look, a 317 00:15:06,006 --> 00:15:08,909 number of justices have had the same amount of 318 00:15:08,976 --> 00:15:11,979 experience as Judge Brunet and have been elected to 319 00:15:12,045 --> 00:15:14,948 the state's highest court. So there's that. And they 320 00:15:15,015 --> 00:15:19,152 also said it's interesting that on his during his 321 00:15:19,219 --> 00:15:21,522 announcement, he attacked Judge Brunet. 322 00:15:21,588 --> 00:15:24,057 >> So already a. >> Little. 323 00:15:24,491 --> 00:15:28,061 And and endorsements too, as you reported on you, 324 00:15:28,128 --> 00:15:32,032 justice elect Chris Taylor has endorsed Pedro Colon. 325 00:15:32,099 --> 00:15:34,468 >> Immediately, immediately. >> And then we also have an 326 00:15:34,535 --> 00:15:37,504 endorsement from Congressman Mark Pocan 327 00:15:37,571 --> 00:15:41,875 endorsing Pedro Colon. Mark Pocan and Pedro Colon were 328 00:15:41,942 --> 00:15:44,878 like budget buddies on the Joint Finance Committee in 329 00:15:44,945 --> 00:15:48,115 2005. I can tell you that they spent a lot of time 330 00:15:48,182 --> 00:15:50,384 together writing, you know, arguing against that 331 00:15:50,450 --> 00:15:52,886 Republican budget that year. So you get to know each 332 00:15:52,953 --> 00:15:55,656 other in politics, relationships can be a big 333 00:15:55,722 --> 00:15:58,425 deal sometimes. >> Well, what's interesting 334 00:15:58,492 --> 00:16:01,628 about this race is we've got two on the Liberal side 335 00:16:01,695 --> 00:16:04,331 that are in. I heard both those names on election 336 00:16:04,398 --> 00:16:07,167 night. I had someone in a campaign tell me, Judge 337 00:16:07,234 --> 00:16:09,469 Brunette's going to announce, just watch your 338 00:16:09,536 --> 00:16:11,305 inbox. That'll be coming out. That was on election 339 00:16:11,371 --> 00:16:14,441 night. Judge Cologne was at the election party. I 340 00:16:14,508 --> 00:16:16,710 interviewed him and talked to him and he was doing the 341 00:16:16,777 --> 00:16:19,713 oh, we'll have to wait and see. But his name had been 342 00:16:19,780 --> 00:16:21,882 floated for prior campaigns. So if we're looking for 343 00:16:21,949 --> 00:16:25,385 labels, this is. It used to be a wait your turn one at 344 00:16:25,452 --> 00:16:27,554 a time. I think there are liberal candidates 345 00:16:27,621 --> 00:16:30,224 realizing I might have to wait a long time to wait my 346 00:16:30,290 --> 00:16:32,159 turn. Why wait? Just get in there. 347 00:16:32,226 --> 00:16:34,995 >> Seven justices, ten year terms. If you want to do it, 348 00:16:35,062 --> 00:16:38,298 better get in. Zac. We had a couple decisions this 349 00:16:38,365 --> 00:16:41,802 week. Court decisions on redistricting, one in state 350 00:16:41,869 --> 00:16:44,605 court, which I'll summarize a little bit too quickly 351 00:16:44,671 --> 00:16:48,041 here to say that three judge panel basically said 352 00:16:48,108 --> 00:16:50,377 we are not going to deal with the congressional map 353 00:16:50,444 --> 00:16:53,480 this year. Another big decision by the U.S. 354 00:16:53,547 --> 00:16:55,916 Supreme Court, which, you know, court watchers have 355 00:16:55,983 --> 00:16:58,385 said is going to gut the Voting Rights Act. What 356 00:16:58,452 --> 00:17:00,888 could that mean for Wisconsin? 357 00:17:00,954 --> 00:17:03,156 >> Well, they're kind of tailed together a little 358 00:17:03,223 --> 00:17:05,893 bit. This is the second three judge panel that has 359 00:17:05,959 --> 00:17:08,795 thrown out challenges to our congressional lines. 360 00:17:08,862 --> 00:17:11,265 The Wisconsin Supreme Court has repeatedly said, we 361 00:17:11,331 --> 00:17:13,734 don't want to handle this right now. The United 362 00:17:13,800 --> 00:17:15,369 States Supreme Court decision that went after 363 00:17:15,435 --> 00:17:17,905 the Voting Rights Act has to do with minority 364 00:17:17,971 --> 00:17:19,907 majority districts, of which the fourth 365 00:17:19,973 --> 00:17:21,909 Congressional Gwen Moore district in Wisconsin is 366 00:17:21,975 --> 00:17:24,678 one of those. So if lines are going to get redrawn, 367 00:17:24,745 --> 00:17:27,447 if the courts are going to look at this, that could 368 00:17:27,514 --> 00:17:29,516 mean some of those lines getting shifted in the 369 00:17:29,583 --> 00:17:31,585 future and the way that they're drawn, without 370 00:17:31,652 --> 00:17:33,720 having to protect as much of that minority and 371 00:17:33,787 --> 00:17:35,889 majority district in Milwaukee. So there's a lot 372 00:17:35,956 --> 00:17:38,725 of implications, one of which is will this new 373 00:17:38,792 --> 00:17:40,861 makeup of the Wisconsin Supreme Court. Now take a 374 00:17:40,928 --> 00:17:43,263 look at these lines again, especially with new 375 00:17:43,330 --> 00:17:45,933 judgment from the United States Supreme Court. 376 00:17:45,999 --> 00:17:48,836 >> Yeah. And it seems like nationally, I've seen a lot 377 00:17:48,902 --> 00:17:52,072 about how this could be a benefit to Republicans in 378 00:17:52,139 --> 00:17:55,108 southern states. I think in Wisconsin, it's an open 379 00:17:55,175 --> 00:17:58,345 question about which party would benefit. Does feel 380 00:17:58,412 --> 00:18:01,248 like it is potentially detrimental, though, to 381 00:18:01,315 --> 00:18:05,752 minority representation nationwide. That's all the 382 00:18:05,819 --> 00:18:08,922 time we have for today. Thanks for joining us. This 383 00:18:08,989 --> 00:18:11,892 has been inside Wisconsin politics. Be sure to follow 384 00:18:11,959 --> 00:18:15,762 us on PBS Wisconsin. Org WPR.org, YouTube, or 385 00:18:15,829 --> 00:18:18,866 wherever you get your podcasts.