1 00:00:01,001 --> 00:00:03,103 Wisconsin's Democratic governor and Republican 2 00:00:03,170 --> 00:00:05,873 legislative leaders negotiate a big deal on tax 3 00:00:05,939 --> 00:00:09,710 cuts and school funding, and it blows up in the 4 00:00:09,776 --> 00:00:11,879 Wisconsin Senate. What just happened? Let's talk about 5 00:00:11,945 --> 00:00:15,782 it. This is inside Wisconsin politics. 6 00:00:17,784 --> 00:00:18,919 I'm Shawn Johnson here with my 7 00:00:18,986 --> 00:00:21,255 here with my colleague Zac Schultz and 8 00:00:21,321 --> 00:00:22,956 Rich Kremer in Eau Claire. Hey, guys. 9 00:00:23,023 --> 00:00:24,825 >> Hello. >> Hello. 10 00:00:24,892 --> 00:00:27,794 >> Hey, Shawn. >> So we are going to have 11 00:00:27,861 --> 00:00:30,030 plenty of time here to unpack the motives of all 12 00:00:30,097 --> 00:00:33,066 the players in this drama that unfolded at the 13 00:00:33,133 --> 00:00:36,537 Capitol. But first, let's start with kind of what led 14 00:00:36,603 --> 00:00:38,505 to this. For people who haven't paid attention to 15 00:00:38,572 --> 00:00:41,408 every twist and turn of this big deal, we've been 16 00:00:41,475 --> 00:00:44,811 calling it at the Capitol. Zac, what was in this thing 17 00:00:44,878 --> 00:00:47,247 that was negotiated by Democratic Governor Tony 18 00:00:47,314 --> 00:00:49,416 Evers and the Republican legislative leaders? 19 00:00:49,483 --> 00:00:52,085 >> Well, the top line picture is it's $1.8 20 00:00:52,152 --> 00:00:54,521 billion in spending, most of it one time, only 21 00:00:54,588 --> 00:00:57,057 looking at the projected surplus that would be 22 00:00:57,124 --> 00:01:01,061 available for next year. Of that $300 million for 23 00:01:01,128 --> 00:01:03,330 special education funding for public schools, that's 24 00:01:03,397 --> 00:01:07,634 been a Democratic priority for a long time. $350 25 00:01:07,701 --> 00:01:11,205 million in rebates or tax buy downs for property 26 00:01:11,271 --> 00:01:13,774 taxes. That would go money going to the schools, but 27 00:01:13,841 --> 00:01:16,143 that they would only use to reduce property taxes, not 28 00:01:16,210 --> 00:01:19,046 new spending. And then there were going to be 29 00:01:19,112 --> 00:01:22,416 individual rebates for tax filers, 300 per person, or 30 00:01:22,482 --> 00:01:25,853 600 for a married couple. And then we see a match to 31 00:01:25,919 --> 00:01:29,690 the federal plan for no taxes on tips and overtime. 32 00:01:29,756 --> 00:01:32,359 And Shawn, a month ago, we asked, what's the 33 00:01:32,426 --> 00:01:34,328 possibility that this could actually happen? And my 34 00:01:34,394 --> 00:01:36,363 answer at the time was, well, we this is the only 35 00:01:36,430 --> 00:01:38,465 time it could happen because we have three 36 00:01:38,532 --> 00:01:40,534 leaders that are all leaving the stage. It's 37 00:01:40,601 --> 00:01:43,504 legacy time. Well, we didn't account for is 38 00:01:43,570 --> 00:01:46,073 everyone else who's still running for reelection or 39 00:01:46,139 --> 00:01:49,309 election in Wisconsin sinking this deal? Three 40 00:01:49,376 --> 00:01:51,445 legacy leaders getting the compromise wasn't enough. 41 00:01:51,512 --> 00:01:54,147 And to me, this is a political Rorschach test. 42 00:01:54,214 --> 00:01:57,050 How you view this particular deal kind of 43 00:01:57,117 --> 00:01:59,253 matches your view on politics for some people 44 00:01:59,319 --> 00:02:01,855 and for a lot of ordinary people around the state, 45 00:02:01,922 --> 00:02:03,957 this was the epitome of a compromise. You get a 46 00:02:04,024 --> 00:02:06,860 little bit for one side, you get a little bit for 47 00:02:06,927 --> 00:02:09,062 the other side. Everyone can come away, maybe a 48 00:02:09,129 --> 00:02:11,098 little dissatisfied, maybe a little happy. And money 49 00:02:11,164 --> 00:02:13,967 goes back to taxpayers. At a time when you're seeing 50 00:02:14,034 --> 00:02:16,770 the price of gas go through the roof just to fill your, 51 00:02:16,837 --> 00:02:19,239 your tank up. And as they're about to run for 52 00:02:19,306 --> 00:02:20,941 reelection, those are things that normally you'd 53 00:02:21,008 --> 00:02:23,010 want to see politicians pass. The other side of 54 00:02:23,076 --> 00:02:26,113 that test is political purity. And there are a lot 55 00:02:26,180 --> 00:02:28,282 of people looking at this deal saying, this isn't as 56 00:02:28,348 --> 00:02:31,919 good as I would like it to be, and I think we can do 57 00:02:31,985 --> 00:02:34,054 better when we have more power next year. 58 00:02:34,121 --> 00:02:37,824 >> So it started out the day, though, looked like 59 00:02:37,891 --> 00:02:40,060 your average special session day, like a bill 60 00:02:40,127 --> 00:02:43,297 that might pass. You have this big agreement by the 61 00:02:43,363 --> 00:02:46,366 leaders, by Governor Tony Evers, the the big Democrat 62 00:02:46,433 --> 00:02:49,736 and the big Republicans. You had speeches to start 63 00:02:49,803 --> 00:02:53,574 the day, including by Assembly Speaker Robin Vos. 64 00:02:53,640 --> 00:02:56,109 we listen and that we ares. 65 00:02:56,743 --> 00:03:00,314 willing to act. And most importantly, that 66 00:03:00,380 --> 00:03:03,817 compromise in Wisconsin is not a dead word. Compromise 67 00:03:03,884 --> 00:03:07,821 is defined as getting something that you want by 68 00:03:07,888 --> 00:03:09,957 giving up something that your partner or your 69 00:03:10,023 --> 00:03:12,459 opponent wants. That is really what we did here. We 70 00:03:12,526 --> 00:03:14,728 said. >> So that's when the 71 00:03:14,795 --> 00:03:17,598 waiting game kind of began. Rich. We were both watching 72 00:03:17,664 --> 00:03:22,569 the Senate for a long time on Wednesday. What was it 73 00:03:22,636 --> 00:03:25,772 like as the day sort of played out? 74 00:03:27,407 --> 00:03:31,245 >> It was a lot of hurry up and wait. So it's not 75 00:03:31,311 --> 00:03:34,448 unusual for the Senate to set a start time for their 76 00:03:34,515 --> 00:03:37,384 floor sessions, whether it be in a special session or 77 00:03:37,451 --> 00:03:41,021 a regular session, and then blow past that, that's kind 78 00:03:41,088 --> 00:03:45,893 of unsurprising. But this time we kept getting these 79 00:03:45,959 --> 00:03:48,762 notices that, oh, it's going to be at 3:00. Well, 80 00:03:48,829 --> 00:03:53,233 it's actually five, five, 45. And then we just went 81 00:03:53,300 --> 00:03:56,937 with half hour increments, you know, six, 637, eight, 82 00:03:57,004 --> 00:04:00,340 eight, you know, and on and on and on it. They were, I 83 00:04:00,407 --> 00:04:05,145 want to, I want to say it was four hours that they, 84 00:04:05,212 --> 00:04:07,881 it took for them to go from the first notice, you know, 85 00:04:07,948 --> 00:04:10,851 when the plan was to meet at 3 p.m. and when they 86 00:04:10,918 --> 00:04:14,888 actually met. And then once they got on the floor, you 87 00:04:14,955 --> 00:04:17,057 heard some of the same complaints from Democrats 88 00:04:17,124 --> 00:04:20,227 and Republicans about this bill that you heard in the 89 00:04:20,294 --> 00:04:23,197 Assembly. The opponents said that they didn't like 90 00:04:23,263 --> 00:04:26,333 the process of how it was, you know, thrown together. 91 00:04:26,400 --> 00:04:29,603 Senate Democrats were out of the picture, etc. and 92 00:04:29,670 --> 00:04:32,506 then there were concerns about costs and this being 93 00:04:32,573 --> 00:04:35,676 a projected budget surplus, etc. and how this could 94 00:04:35,742 --> 00:04:39,012 plunge us into a deficit in the coming budget cycle. 95 00:04:39,079 --> 00:04:41,849 >> Yeah. So that night, the we had a very unusual scene 96 00:04:41,915 --> 00:04:44,251 kind of play out. The assembly met after waiting 97 00:04:44,318 --> 00:04:47,087 all day to see what the Senate was going to do. 98 00:04:47,154 --> 00:04:50,123 They passed this bill in short order. The Senate is 99 00:04:50,190 --> 00:04:53,060 meeting at the same time, and it's clear that things 100 00:04:53,126 --> 00:04:55,429 are not going well there. You hear a speech from 101 00:04:55,495 --> 00:04:57,965 Senate Democratic Minority Leader Diane Hesselbein, 102 00:04:58,031 --> 00:05:02,302 who made it clear she was not happy with this bill. 103 00:05:02,369 --> 00:05:05,839 >> This is a completely reckless proposal stitched 104 00:05:05,906 --> 00:05:09,142 together in a backroom deal by three people who will 105 00:05:09,209 --> 00:05:12,746 not be running around and won't be here when the 106 00:05:12,813 --> 00:05:14,948 consequences of a multibillion dollar deficit 107 00:05:15,015 --> 00:05:19,386 comes home to roost. It's simply something I can't 108 00:05:19,453 --> 00:05:22,890 support. >> In. This bill actually 109 00:05:22,956 --> 00:05:27,494 fails on a vote of 15 to 18, and I know people probably 110 00:05:27,561 --> 00:05:30,764 think big deal things pass, things fail. Bills don't 111 00:05:30,831 --> 00:05:34,334 actually get to the point of failure hardly ever in 112 00:05:34,401 --> 00:05:36,637 the state legislature. If it doesn't have the votes, 113 00:05:36,703 --> 00:05:39,373 it does not come to the floor, especially something 114 00:05:39,439 --> 00:05:43,243 as big and dramatic as this. And for the governor to 115 00:05:43,310 --> 00:05:46,113 negotiate this and his Senate Democrats stand 116 00:05:46,180 --> 00:05:49,516 unified against it to help kill it with a few 117 00:05:49,583 --> 00:05:53,720 Republicans is something we do not see every day. Zac, 118 00:05:53,787 --> 00:05:55,722 what do you think was motivating Senate Democrats 119 00:05:55,789 --> 00:05:58,091 here? >> There's two factors. I 120 00:05:58,158 --> 00:06:00,494 think. First is they were insulted. They were left 121 00:06:00,561 --> 00:06:03,130 out of the loop. >> That is huge. Actually. 122 00:06:03,197 --> 00:06:06,433 >> Every single time over the past few years that 123 00:06:06,500 --> 00:06:09,102 they've needed to pass a big budget bill, especially 124 00:06:09,169 --> 00:06:11,505 with Republicans having a smaller majority in the 125 00:06:11,572 --> 00:06:14,074 state Senate. They've had two members that have voted 126 00:06:14,141 --> 00:06:17,311 against every bill that Senator Soros and Kapenga. 127 00:06:17,377 --> 00:06:19,780 They've consistently said, we can't support this extra 128 00:06:19,847 --> 00:06:22,983 spending. We're voting no. That means in practice, 129 00:06:23,050 --> 00:06:25,085 Republicans don't have a working majority when it 130 00:06:25,152 --> 00:06:27,621 comes to passing that kind of legislation. They need 131 00:06:27,688 --> 00:06:30,490 Democratic votes. Governor Evers knows that Senate 132 00:06:30,557 --> 00:06:31,992 majority LeMahieu knows that. Everyone knows they 133 00:06:32,059 --> 00:06:34,394 need at least a couple Democratic votes, and 134 00:06:34,461 --> 00:06:37,431 probably more so. The fact that they were not 135 00:06:37,497 --> 00:06:39,633 consulted did not have any input on this bill and made 136 00:06:39,700 --> 00:06:42,603 it clear from the very first time it was announced 137 00:06:42,669 --> 00:06:45,305 that they were unhappy with it showed. And I think that 138 00:06:45,372 --> 00:06:47,674 showed up in that long pause in the Assembly. The 139 00:06:47,741 --> 00:06:50,410 Assembly had the votes. It was they were going to wait 140 00:06:50,477 --> 00:06:53,280 and see if they had the votes in the Senate. And 141 00:06:53,347 --> 00:06:55,382 the second part of why Senate Democrats were not 142 00:06:55,449 --> 00:06:58,051 in line with this comes next fall. And that's what 143 00:06:58,118 --> 00:07:01,955 the reelection there. They are not quite certain, but 144 00:07:02,022 --> 00:07:03,991 very confident that they're going to flip the majority 145 00:07:04,057 --> 00:07:06,894 in that chamber and that when they come to power in 146 00:07:06,960 --> 00:07:09,696 the next session, they will not only have a say, they 147 00:07:09,763 --> 00:07:11,899 will be the deciding factors and how any bills 148 00:07:11,965 --> 00:07:14,768 are passed and how budgets are passed. And so they can 149 00:07:14,835 --> 00:07:16,970 direct where that money goes. And if they think 150 00:07:17,037 --> 00:07:19,106 they get lucky. And there's a Democratic governor and a 151 00:07:19,173 --> 00:07:20,874 Democratic assembly, then they're going to say all 152 00:07:20,941 --> 00:07:23,677 this money will be available for us to spend 153 00:07:23,744 --> 00:07:25,846 in ways that we prefer instead of having to 154 00:07:25,913 --> 00:07:28,048 compromise, which is what has sunk every possibility 155 00:07:28,115 --> 00:07:30,217 of all these budget surplus deals since Tony Evers has 156 00:07:30,284 --> 00:07:32,252 been governor. The fact that the next election 157 00:07:32,319 --> 00:07:34,655 might bring better outlook for each of the sides. And 158 00:07:34,721 --> 00:07:36,657 so they've decided not to compromise. 159 00:07:36,723 --> 00:07:40,294 >> And I think this was a clear cut case where 160 00:07:40,360 --> 00:07:44,398 circumstances matter completely. You know, if if 161 00:07:44,464 --> 00:07:47,201 Tony Evers were running for election in November and he 162 00:07:47,267 --> 00:07:50,137 said, this is my big bill, Democrats, this is what I 163 00:07:50,204 --> 00:07:53,307 want to run on. I mean, they would have voted. They 164 00:07:53,373 --> 00:07:55,542 would have voted yes. No. Republicans probably 165 00:07:55,609 --> 00:07:57,711 wouldn't have brought it up in that case. So, you know, 166 00:07:57,778 --> 00:08:00,547 it's a it's a theoretical exercise. But but Senate 167 00:08:00,614 --> 00:08:02,649 Democrats, I'm confident, would have been with him. 168 00:08:02,716 --> 00:08:05,953 He is not on the ballot, though, this November, as 169 00:08:06,019 --> 00:08:10,457 Diane Hesselbein noted, and Senate Democrats are poised 170 00:08:10,524 --> 00:08:13,794 to. They think, take that majority. She has 171 00:08:13,861 --> 00:08:15,829 essentially been a co majority leader on some of 172 00:08:15,896 --> 00:08:17,998 the big bills that have come through the Senate 173 00:08:18,065 --> 00:08:20,834 this year, from the budget to gambling. And so to 174 00:08:20,901 --> 00:08:24,137 freeze them out of talks like this, which is the way 175 00:08:24,204 --> 00:08:26,840 they viewed it, certainly. And to end up with a bill 176 00:08:26,907 --> 00:08:29,710 that was pretty Republican in nature, was about a 177 00:08:29,776 --> 00:08:33,280 billion and a half in tax cuts, was not something 178 00:08:33,347 --> 00:08:36,650 that they enjoyed, you know. >> Well, and don't forget, 179 00:08:36,717 --> 00:08:38,752 there is another factor when it comes to everyone 180 00:08:38,819 --> 00:08:41,622 looking at the next budget the next year. And that is 181 00:08:41,688 --> 00:08:44,591 there's a lot of people who think we may be looking 182 00:08:44,658 --> 00:08:47,427 into a recession. Yeah. So most of this surplus is a 183 00:08:47,494 --> 00:08:49,396 projection of what the economy is going to bring 184 00:08:49,463 --> 00:08:51,431 in for tax revenues. If there's an economic 185 00:08:51,498 --> 00:08:53,500 downturn in the next six months, that money 186 00:08:53,567 --> 00:08:55,536 disappears all by itself without having been sent 187 00:08:55,602 --> 00:08:58,572 out. So you send it out. Even though most of this is 188 00:08:58,639 --> 00:09:01,808 one time spending, it may not be there next year. Now, 189 00:09:01,875 --> 00:09:04,144 they say even in the worst of circumstances, at least 190 00:09:04,211 --> 00:09:06,880 the state will have a little bit money to start 191 00:09:06,947 --> 00:09:09,049 the next year with. So that is a legitimate concern 192 00:09:09,116 --> 00:09:10,984 considering where gas prices and grocery prices 193 00:09:11,051 --> 00:09:13,921 are right now. And with no end to a war in Iran, that 194 00:09:13,987 --> 00:09:16,390 the economy could shift and go down and these tax 195 00:09:16,456 --> 00:09:18,992 revenues may not materialize. 196 00:09:19,059 --> 00:09:21,762 >> Rich Senate Democrats don't have this power. If 197 00:09:21,828 --> 00:09:24,464 Republicans just stick together and all their 198 00:09:24,531 --> 00:09:27,568 members vote for the bill negotiated by their leader, 199 00:09:27,634 --> 00:09:30,103 Devin LeMahieu and Assembly Speaker Robin Vos. In fact, 200 00:09:30,170 --> 00:09:32,606 in the Assembly, all the Republicans did stick 201 00:09:32,673 --> 00:09:35,309 together, and they voted for that bill. So what's 202 00:09:35,375 --> 00:09:38,445 gone on in the Senate with a few Republicans there who 203 00:09:38,512 --> 00:09:42,616 decided, yeah, we're just not going to do this. 204 00:09:42,683 --> 00:09:45,652 >> Well, what was surprising is that two of 205 00:09:45,719 --> 00:09:48,355 the three Republicans that voted against this proposal, 206 00:09:48,422 --> 00:09:50,591 they're not running for reelection. So maybe that 207 00:09:50,657 --> 00:09:53,627 made them feel freer to speak their mind. But as 208 00:09:53,694 --> 00:09:56,997 Zac mentioned, you've also got Senator Steve Nosse as 209 00:09:57,064 --> 00:10:00,033 one of them, and he's pretty well known for 210 00:10:00,100 --> 00:10:03,136 voting against especially spending, you know, large 211 00:10:03,203 --> 00:10:08,008 spending packages. So it seems like Devin LeMahieu 212 00:10:08,642 --> 00:10:11,178 didn't have the sort of control over his caucus 213 00:10:11,245 --> 00:10:14,381 that Robin Vos did in the Assembly. That's been 214 00:10:14,448 --> 00:10:17,217 pretty obvious, given the past bills, where you need 215 00:10:17,284 --> 00:10:21,555 a Democratic support to get them over the finish line. 216 00:10:21,622 --> 00:10:25,559 But what's also been really interesting is seeing 217 00:10:25,626 --> 00:10:29,129 Republicans attacking Republicans after the fact. 218 00:10:29,196 --> 00:10:33,500 So in particular, Senator Van Wanggaard, who is 219 00:10:33,567 --> 00:10:37,204 retiring, he went on social media afterwards after the 220 00:10:37,271 --> 00:10:40,274 bill failed and said it was a good deal for Wisconsin. 221 00:10:40,340 --> 00:10:45,045 But, you know, every dem and nose and Kapenga and 222 00:10:45,112 --> 00:10:48,148 Rob Hutton wanted to spend more and keep more of your 223 00:10:48,215 --> 00:10:50,784 money. So you've got a Republican saying that 224 00:10:50,851 --> 00:10:53,887 Steve Nosse wants to keep your tax dollars from from 225 00:10:53,954 --> 00:10:57,391 you, which is pretty interesting in the grand 226 00:10:57,457 --> 00:11:02,696 scheme of things. But you also had Democrats kind of 227 00:11:02,763 --> 00:11:06,033 saying good riddance, Tony Evers. I mean, it's just 228 00:11:06,099 --> 00:11:10,270 really fascinating to see this breakdown. It's it's 229 00:11:10,337 --> 00:11:13,173 just unlike anything I've ever seen. And I wanted to 230 00:11:13,240 --> 00:11:16,877 ask both of you, Shawn, how many times in your careers 231 00:11:16,944 --> 00:11:20,480 have you seen a bill pass? You know, this kind of bill 232 00:11:20,547 --> 00:11:23,483 with this kind of build up where you would expect the 233 00:11:23,550 --> 00:11:26,486 the votes have to be there before it gets to the floor 234 00:11:26,553 --> 00:11:29,156 to avoid embarrassment. How many times have you seen it 235 00:11:29,223 --> 00:11:31,391 clear one chamber and then die in the Senate? 236 00:11:31,458 --> 00:11:34,361 >> It is pretty rare. I thought of a couple. One, 237 00:11:34,428 --> 00:11:39,099 the vote on state employee contracts ahead of when 238 00:11:39,800 --> 00:11:41,835 Scott Walker took office. >> Another one that 239 00:11:41,902 --> 00:11:45,005 featured lame ducks. weird stuff happens at the 240 00:11:45,072 --> 00:11:48,308 end here when everybody's position has changed. 241 00:11:48,375 --> 00:11:52,446 Circumstances matter. But you had the Assembly 242 00:11:52,513 --> 00:11:55,148 Democrats passed new contracts for state 243 00:11:55,215 --> 00:11:57,317 employees. The thought was that that would protect 244 00:11:57,384 --> 00:12:00,587 them. When Scott Walker took office and Senate 245 00:12:00,654 --> 00:12:03,924 Democrats, led by Russ Decker and Senator Jeff 246 00:12:03,991 --> 00:12:06,793 Haley at the time, voted no, and they failed. So it has 247 00:12:06,860 --> 00:12:08,862 happened. Another one on ethanol mandate way back in 248 00:12:08,929 --> 00:12:13,500 like 2006, I think. But it is pretty sparse the way 249 00:12:14,601 --> 00:12:17,271 this stuff happens. >> But it does point out 250 00:12:17,337 --> 00:12:20,374 exactly what we're talking about. Once a politician is 251 00:12:20,440 --> 00:12:22,910 no longer running for reelection, they become a 252 00:12:22,976 --> 00:12:25,512 lame duck. They lose a lot of control. What's most 253 00:12:25,579 --> 00:12:27,481 impressive about all of this is Robin Vos holding 254 00:12:27,548 --> 00:12:30,851 his entire caucus together, even though he's going to 255 00:12:30,918 --> 00:12:34,054 be exiting stage right, he still has enough to keep 256 00:12:34,121 --> 00:12:37,224 his chamber together. Senate Senator LeMahieu 257 00:12:37,291 --> 00:12:39,493 really never had firm control over Republicans in 258 00:12:39,560 --> 00:12:41,528 the Senate. That's always been called herding cats 259 00:12:41,595 --> 00:12:43,897 over there. So that's not terribly surprised. Kapenga 260 00:12:43,964 --> 00:12:46,733 and Soros have made it quite clear. But all of 261 00:12:46,800 --> 00:12:49,703 these people leaving office really gives people a lot 262 00:12:49,770 --> 00:12:52,472 of freedom to think about their own interests next 263 00:12:52,539 --> 00:12:55,275 year, completely aside from what you would expect in 264 00:12:55,342 --> 00:12:58,445 the typical bill process. >> Yeah. Steve Nash, I mean, 265 00:12:58,512 --> 00:13:01,281 has been a thorn in the side to leadership for his 266 00:13:01,348 --> 00:13:03,951 entire career, basically, or at least. 267 00:13:04,017 --> 00:13:08,021 Unapologetically the part And can you imagine him on 268 00:13:08,088 --> 00:13:10,991 his last vote ever in the legislature saying, you 269 00:13:11,058 --> 00:13:13,560 know, I'll take one on the I'll take one for the team 270 00:13:13,627 --> 00:13:16,163 for Robin Vos. I mean, I think it's pretty 271 00:13:16,230 --> 00:13:18,732 predictable that he was going to be a no vote. But 272 00:13:18,799 --> 00:13:20,801 let's kind of unpack where Assembly Republicans were 273 00:13:20,868 --> 00:13:23,570 on this and why they decided we're going to take 274 00:13:23,637 --> 00:13:27,774 this vote, because I think by the time that they both 275 00:13:27,841 --> 00:13:30,677 chambers got to voting at night, I bet you Assembly 276 00:13:30,744 --> 00:13:33,046 Republicans knew darn well that this thing was going 277 00:13:33,113 --> 00:13:35,282 to fail in the state Senate, and they wanted to take 278 00:13:35,349 --> 00:13:38,552 this vote anyway. Why? >> Because they're all up 279 00:13:38,619 --> 00:13:41,755 for reelection this fall. Everyone that's not 280 00:13:41,822 --> 00:13:44,725 retiring has an absolute desire to go back to their 281 00:13:44,791 --> 00:13:47,928 constituents and say, I was willing to put $300 in your 282 00:13:47,995 --> 00:13:50,564 pocket. I was willing to give more to the schools. I 283 00:13:50,631 --> 00:13:53,233 was willing to lower your property taxes. It's not my 284 00:13:53,300 --> 00:13:55,302 fault this failed. That does bring us around to 285 00:13:55,369 --> 00:13:57,371 some of the interesting calculations that we're 286 00:13:57,437 --> 00:13:59,773 looking at, especially on the Democratic side. So one 287 00:13:59,840 --> 00:14:01,808 of the people I was watching is Jeff Smith, 288 00:14:01,875 --> 00:14:03,977 who's a Democratic senator. He's the assistant majority 289 00:14:04,044 --> 00:14:06,547 leader. So he's pretty high ranking in his caucus. He's 290 00:14:06,613 --> 00:14:09,149 going to move up if they control the chamber. He 291 00:14:09,216 --> 00:14:11,552 voted no on this. His staffers tell me he was no 292 00:14:11,618 --> 00:14:14,121 the entire time, mainly for the structural deficit 293 00:14:14,188 --> 00:14:17,357 concerns. But within his district, one of the 294 00:14:17,424 --> 00:14:19,960 Assembly Democrats, Jodi Emerson, voted yes. You go 295 00:14:20,027 --> 00:14:22,896 south from there into La Crosse. Brad Pfaff in the 296 00:14:22,963 --> 00:14:25,732 Senate voted no within his district, Joe Billings and 297 00:14:25,799 --> 00:14:27,868 Steve Doyle, two Assembly Democrats in competitive 298 00:14:27,935 --> 00:14:30,704 districts, both both voted yes in the Assembly. They 299 00:14:30,771 --> 00:14:32,739 understand what it's like to go back to the voters 300 00:14:32,806 --> 00:14:35,676 and have to say, oh, no, I voted against this because 301 00:14:35,742 --> 00:14:37,678 we'll spend it better next year when people are 302 00:14:37,744 --> 00:14:40,614 feeling the pinch. Right now, there's a lot of 303 00:14:40,681 --> 00:14:42,683 political calculations that go into some of these moves, 304 00:14:42,749 --> 00:14:45,519 and looking unified as a team does help. We also saw 305 00:14:45,586 --> 00:14:47,588 another state Senate race. Howard Marklein voted yes. 306 00:14:47,654 --> 00:14:49,990 He's in a competitive district. Jenna Jacobson, 307 00:14:50,057 --> 00:14:52,426 the Assembly dem who's running against him, also 308 00:14:52,492 --> 00:14:54,862 voted yes. It would put her in a terrible position. 309 00:14:54,928 --> 00:14:57,497 Easy marketing for Marklein if she voted no on this 310 00:14:57,564 --> 00:15:01,068 deal. So some of this has to be political maneuvering. 311 00:15:01,134 --> 00:15:04,238 >> And, you know, I think you could look at this bill 312 00:15:04,304 --> 00:15:06,907 and say potentially it's a little gimmicky, right? 313 00:15:06,974 --> 00:15:10,744 You're going to spend almost $900 million just on 314 00:15:10,811 --> 00:15:13,313 these $300 checks, and it's going to be gone. You and 315 00:15:13,380 --> 00:15:16,550 you have lawmakers on the record from both parties 316 00:15:16,617 --> 00:15:19,052 for bills like this in the past saying, oh, that's a 317 00:15:19,119 --> 00:15:22,789 gimmick. We can't do that. But do you want to be which 318 00:15:22,856 --> 00:15:25,425 side of that gimmick do you want to be on when you're 319 00:15:25,492 --> 00:15:27,594 doing doors in November? And people are struggling 320 00:15:27,661 --> 00:15:31,231 with costs? It's a popular kind of bill, giving people 321 00:15:31,298 --> 00:15:33,433 money and saying that you work together with the 322 00:15:33,500 --> 00:15:36,737 other side. the outside players in this 323 00:15:36,803 --> 00:15:38,839 because Tom Tiffany was a big factor in this. I've 324 00:15:38,906 --> 00:15:41,742 seen some Republicans online saying he would have 325 00:15:41,808 --> 00:15:43,844 been better off being quiet, given how it played out. 326 00:15:43,911 --> 00:15:46,613 Instead, he did come out against this bill, and he 327 00:15:46,680 --> 00:15:49,283 was on the record talking to at least one state 328 00:15:49,349 --> 00:15:52,219 senator who did vote for it, but weighing in on his 329 00:15:52,286 --> 00:15:54,688 concerns about this bill. What do you make of that? 330 00:15:54,755 --> 00:15:58,158 >> Yeah, from a practical perspective, I get it from 331 00:15:58,225 --> 00:16:01,128 a political perspective, I do not I don't understand 332 00:16:01,195 --> 00:16:04,031 what he was doing. What I mean is, from a practical 333 00:16:04,097 --> 00:16:05,832 perspective, if Tom Tiffany thinks he's going to be 334 00:16:05,899 --> 00:16:09,436 governor, then I bet he wants to either have that 335 00:16:09,503 --> 00:16:12,172 money in there so that he doesn't take office with 336 00:16:12,239 --> 00:16:15,075 the deficit, or if the economy does, okay, maybe 337 00:16:15,142 --> 00:16:18,445 he wants to come in as governor and throw a 338 00:16:18,512 --> 00:16:22,716 special session for a Tom Tiffany tax cut, not a Tony 339 00:16:22,783 --> 00:16:24,885 Evers tax cut. You know, get things started off 340 00:16:24,952 --> 00:16:28,021 right. From a political perspective, I don't know 341 00:16:28,088 --> 00:16:31,158 why you come out against this. I just don't it's 342 00:16:31,225 --> 00:16:35,729 like a theoretical exercise because you're not in there 343 00:16:35,796 --> 00:16:39,366 voting, but like, why come out in against a big tax 344 00:16:39,433 --> 00:16:43,670 cut and why why attack Tony Evers like he's not on the 345 00:16:43,737 --> 00:16:45,672 ballot. All these Democrats who are also against this 346 00:16:45,739 --> 00:16:49,743 bill might be running against you in November. So 347 00:16:49,810 --> 00:16:52,679 how do you differentiate differentiate yourself here 348 00:16:52,746 --> 00:16:56,583 by agreeing with them. I'm not sure. Now, Rich, one 349 00:16:56,650 --> 00:16:59,086 question I had for you that we kind of traded notes on 350 00:16:59,152 --> 00:17:01,455 throughout the night was, will voters actually 351 00:17:01,522 --> 00:17:04,892 remember this? Like, will anybody be rewarded or 352 00:17:04,958 --> 00:17:08,428 punished? >> You know, that's that's 353 00:17:08,962 --> 00:17:13,567 a huge question. You all of what you're saying makes 354 00:17:13,634 --> 00:17:17,004 sense to me, someone who's been really following this. 355 00:17:17,070 --> 00:17:20,641 But, you know, I also remember being at a Supreme 356 00:17:20,707 --> 00:17:23,410 Court election night event and a fellow at the hotel 357 00:17:23,477 --> 00:17:25,546 not knowing there was an election that day. So 358 00:17:25,612 --> 00:17:27,981 there's a part of me I'm always skeptical that this 359 00:17:28,048 --> 00:17:30,851 sort of thing will stick in voters mind. It's different, 360 00:17:30,918 --> 00:17:33,687 I guess, if you're getting your door knocked 361 00:17:33,754 --> 00:17:36,056 consistently and people are reminding you of that, or 362 00:17:36,123 --> 00:17:38,225 if you see a lot of commercials. But, you know, 363 00:17:38,292 --> 00:17:42,296 in the grand scheme of things, a $300, $600 check, 364 00:17:42,362 --> 00:17:45,232 that's a big deal. But you know, all the political 365 00:17:45,299 --> 00:17:46,900 infighting and everything like that. I just I'm not 366 00:17:46,967 --> 00:17:49,937 sure if people will carry that all the way to 367 00:17:50,003 --> 00:17:53,006 November. going out there right now 368 00:17:53,073 --> 00:17:56,743 in in national and world politics, that's for sure. 369 00:17:56,810 --> 00:17:58,946 That's all the time we have for today. Thanks for 370 00:17:59,012 --> 00:18:03,951 joining us. This has been inside Wisconsin politics. 371 00:18:04,017 --> 00:18:06,086 Wagtendonk will be back next week. Be sure to 372 00:18:06,153 --> 00:18:10,357 follow us on wpri.org, PBS, wisconsin.org, YouTube, or 373 00:18:10,424 --> 00:18:13,427 wherever you get your podcasts.