So
that big budget
deal that got
voted down in the
Wisconsin legislature. Turns
out it's
really popular.
What can we makeof
that finding? In the
latest poll by
Marquette University?
And Tom,
Tiffany has the
Republican field
largely to
himself ashe
runs for governor.
We talk about his
approach. This
is inside Wisconsinpolitics.
I'm Shawn
Johnson here with
my colleagues,
Zac Schultz Anya vanWagtendonk and
Rich Kremer
in Eau Claire. Hey,
everyone. >> Hello,
Shawn. >> Hey,
Shawn. >> So
we have used
the word rare to
describe this
budget surplus
deal morethan
once in the last
few weeks. I mean, it's rare tosee
a Democratic governor and Republican leaders cometogether
to negotiate something like this in anelection
year. Rare to see this kind of bipartisan
opposition kind of
backstabbing after
the vote.
Rich, I'd say
it's rare
to see
this kind of a
poll from
Marquette University,where you have
such lopsided
support in favor
of any
issue. What did
Marquette find?
>> So they found
that among
the 454
Wisconsin residents that they
surveyed, 80%
said that the
legislature should have passed
the surplus
spending deal.
And what's
really striking, to
your point,
is that
when you break that
down by partisanship, the
numbers don't
vary that
much. Among
Republicans, it was
77% who said
that it should
have passed. Independents
81%. Democrats
80%. So
that is
a I mean,
that's a strong
majority of
people cutting
across all partisan
demographics who
wanted to see
this thing
get passed.
And the
poll also
asked questions
about, you know,
are you going to remember
this in the
fall? ET cetera.ET
cetera. And
some people
said they will.
And it'sjust really
fascinating. I talked to
Charles Franklin,who's
Marquette's pollster,
and he said
he wanted
to do this
poll, which is
different than others,
because it was
really interesting
to him to
see the
bipartisan birth
of this legislation and the
bipartisan death of
it. So
he wanted to see
where the public stood.
>> When you saw
those numbers come out,
Zac Ana,
what stood out
to you?
I mean,
to me, I
think the obvious top line
number 4or 5
is, is sort of
eye popping. I would
not have
imagined that level ofsupport for any
bill that comes out of
Wisconsin legislature.l, I
would thinkthere are two
things that jumped out at me. The first
is we talked about it fromthe very
beginning. This was the definition of abipartisan
bill that the public has repeatedly
said they want their
lawmakers to do.
And two,
this is why
we do
not legislate by
referendum. The
public will always
support something
that gives
them money, no
matter the fiscal
complications down the road.
And they hate
nuance. Most
people in the state
just want things
done in a
sane fashion. They
don't like toget into the
details of what will it mean for the
structural deficit in two years that they're worried
about their gas tank today?So it's not.
If anything, it's surprising thereweren't more people
that wanted this deal
done closer to
90% because it
looked like
a win win for
everybody. But it
is those
little nitty
details that the
Democrats and some
Republicans jumped on to
say why this
didn't get passed.
>> Ana how about
you? I mean, to me,
this finding
sort of
puts the way
that people
reacted to this
bill in
kind of a new light. You
know, I remember asking youlast week,
why would
some Democrats
not want to
come out against
this when
other Democrats
are. Well,
maybe we have
a pretty good
answer here.
>> Well, yeah, I think, youknow,
we've talked about it as a messaging tool
as well. And there is to Zach'spoint,
there's like the nuanced messaging and theunnuanced
messaging. And one of
those, excuse me,one
of those is
Moore is
easier to resonate with
voters. And so you can kind
of say,
do you want money
in your pocket or not? Doyou want
money for your schools or not? And most
people, I think, are goingto say, yes,
I would like money in my pocket. I
would like money in my schoolshaving the
more complicated messaging. You know, theopponents of
the deal are, are the ones who are
going to really have their workcut out
for them because they have to kind of
prove a negative and say, well,but if
we had done this, there would have been
this deficit. We would have hadto live
under, you know, austerity measures goingforward. That's
a much more complicated thing than, doyou
want 300 bucks in yourbank account or
not? >> Yeah, I will say thatwhen
I saw this poll, myimmediate thought was,
well, you didn't tell them aboutthe other
side of this, that if you do this
thing, you're going to blow a $2.9billion
hole in the budget. Actually, the Marquette did
ask about that, rich. Theythey said in
so many words, you
know, that this could create budget issues down
the road. And, you
know, do you really want to do this
now? And the public said.
>> They said, we
don't care.I
mean, they might care,
but they said
that we
still think
that it would bebetter to get
this money to
schools and
to ourselves in
the form
of property tax
relief and
rebate checks,
$300 for
single adults
and tax
filers and
600 for married
couples. So theysaid
it'd be better now
than next
year, even considering
the potential
for a nearly
a $3 billion
budget deficit
going into
the next
state budget.
And I also wanted
to mention that
it has been
really interesting seeing
the opposition.
Almost every
major candidate
in the racefor
governor was against
it. Tom Tiffany
on the Republican
side and
on the Democratic
side, the only
Democrat who
came out andsaid
we should besupporting
this is
former Wisconsin Economic
t Corporation
director, CEO
Missy Hughes. And
so after
the vote
failed and especially
after this
poll came
out, she said,
see, you
know, thisis
why, you
know, I want toget things done.
People want
to get things
done. Soit's
going to be interesting
to see what,
if any,
ads, campaign
attack ads
come from this
because essentially, you know,
Tiffany would have to
say they
didn't pass the
thing that
I didn't
support or
vice versa,
you know? So
it'll be really
interesting to see if it if it
plays into
the campaigns
much. >> I
also wonder if thiswas just
another window into
an issue that we
already know is, is
big and
that is the
cost of
living. People
feel that cost
of living. And
when you ask
them, would
you like a little
help might sound
like a
little in terms
of the state budget and 300
bucks, you know, you cansay
that's not going to solve all their problems,
but the answer
is a
resounding yes
when you
ask that question.
>> Well, it's the numberone issue that
people have been talking about for morethan
a year now. Affordability
has been an issue. It was an issue
in the 24 presidentialcampaign. So in some
ways, it's surprising that
all these
major candidates
dropped the ball.
And, Shawn, I'll turn around
the point that
Rick brought and
brought back to you, which
is it seems like a lot ofthese
major candidates other than Missy Hugheshave flubbed
their chance to have themselves a reallynice
issue to campaign on in the fall.
If there'sanyone
that would take
back their
opposition, do you think there's
1 or 2 candidates that would
be better off if
they'd been
supportive? >> Maybe.
Maybe. I thinkfor
Democrats, they have to
focus on winning that
primary. And
so in the
moments after
this thing
was made public,
they had to
decide what is
the left position
and how close
do I want to
get to that? And
they made those
calculations. You
know, I think
in hindsight, seeingan
80% issue,
maybe youwould want
to be on the side of the 80%,
especially when Democrats
and independents basically
feel the same way
about that
stuff. I
think it's an open question, though,
about whether
or not
when we've talked about this before,but whether
or not they'll pay the price for this
in November, I
should say,
you know, voters were
asked about
that Rich
and whetheror not they'll be
thinking about
this as
they vote in November.
How important isit
to them?
Would they say
they're. >> So
73% of the respondents
said that
this you know,
where candidates
stood on
this . Them
opposing this
legislation will be
either somewhat or
very important
to them
come November. And
I asked
Charles Franklin about
this, you
know, because
in in our
world in
November, might as
well be three
years away in
terms of how
fast thingscan
change on the
campaign trail.
And he
said, well,
people might not
remember individual
votes on this
specific bill,
but to
Zach's point,
Franklin said
that cost of
living affordability, property
taxes, school
funding have
been and
will likely
continue to be top of mindfor them.
>> Yeah, I'm tempted
to say I
don't believe
you voters.You
know, something else is
going to come along betweennow and
November. But
still, that is
a pretty
overwhelming finding
from people right
now saying,
yeah, I'm going to
remember this.
How about the
candidates for governor
specifically, though? Because
that was one where
I thought the
findings were
a little
squishier more.
This is more the
Wisconsin I know
when people are
presented with this
idea of
whether or
not they thought
it was wrong for
Tom Tiffany to take a
stand against this,
or for otherDemocratic
candidates to take a stand
against this
as more as closer
to 50/50.
Right. You
had it seems
like Democrats
and Republicans may be
willing to
give their candidate
the benefit of
the doubt.
If you hear
the right messaging
between now
and November on you.
>> Yeah. You know,
one of the sort of
upsetting truths
for those of
us who really
care about facts
and details in
the public,
you know, media
world is
that voters
don't really care
about those
things, right? They care
about sort of feeling
heard and feeling
considered. And
so one of
the things that
candidates need to
do right
now is
present, that they
take people's
concerns seriously.
They take the
affordability concerns
seriously, they take the school funding
concerns seriously.
And the kind of
details of it
are a
lot less
important to
your everyday
voter. And so how
do you kind of message thatin a
way that makes people feel heard and understood
enough to want to checkthat box at
the ballot box, rather than kind of getting
into some of this infighting around the
mechanisms at the capital
by which it
could have or could have
not occurred.
>> I think you've
brought up
a really
important element,
and that is
that feeds into the
cynicism of some people out
there. And the question for every
midterm is
turnout. Presidential
elections will always
have high turnout
just because there's so
much attention.
Midterms, the candidate
success risesand
falls with who
shows up
and which party
can gettheir
people out.
So if there
are voters,
independents, or
moderates on either
side who
feel like they're
not beingheard
by their politicians
because both
sides, all the
candidates in front
of them,
said, no,
I'd rather do it
my way later
on. You don'tneed anything right
now. You can just wait.
That mayfeed
into them saying,
well, forget it, I'm
just goingto tune out.
None of you deserve my vote. And that
could impact turnout. Whowere
those voters
more likely to be
persuadable? By which
side could they
have gone to if they
vote at
all? That is a bigfactor. When
you see the potential of this
midterm with wave
elections and
people feeling
upset and angry, some
of them justtune out and
they are votes that are not even counted
at all because they nevershow up.
So let's talk about oneof the candidates
for governor in a little moredetail here.
Tom Tiffany had
a forum
in Madison
on the day
that this poll came
out. So it was
a few hours after the the poll
had beenout there. Essentially,
he'd seen the answers
to the test by
then, and he knew
where the public
stood on this
issue. Tom
Tiffany was
asked Ana at
this forum,
you know, do you
stand by
your comments
earlier that you
oppose this
deal? What did he have to
say? >> He
stands by
those. But
again, you know,
like needing to
thread that
needle of.
But yes, I
want to fund
schools. Yes, I
think that people need
more money in their
pockets. I just don't
think that this was
the right deal for
that. And so
again, he got kindof
squishy on details. So
he talked about he
believes basically
every penny ofthe
surplus needs to go
back into people's
pockets. This would
have obviously
split the
surplus
between school
funding andsome of
those rebates. Andthen
things like no tax
on tips. He
then didn't
really have a
proposal for
how he would
return that money to
the taxpayers, and he
didn't really have
details on
how he
would then
boost school funding, because, of
course, that is the other kind of half of
the deal. But he
said he really cares about that.
And, you
know, stay tuned
for his first
budget as
governor. So it was
a way of, I think,trying to thread
that needle of I didn't supportit because
it didn't do enough for you, the
voter vote for me
and I'll
make it happen.
I will find a way to balance the
budget and find a way to put money
in your pockets. What did he describe
the projected surplus as atthis forum?
I believe he said it wasMadison math
to try to to if there was going
to be a deficit because of how you
spend money, that that isMadison math. And
he's going to do sort of familycheckbook
math, which is how you balance a budget.
So again, a lot of sort oftalking
points, not a lot of specifics.
I would say in terms of the Madison
math versus the family math, itis, it
is basically like assuming your family is not
going to get a raise in thenext
couple of years. And this is what would
happen if you didn't, you wouldrun out
of money at this forum hosted by WisPolitics
in Madison, Tom Tiffany
was also
given an open
invitation to show
where he
disagrees with
President Donald
Trump. One of
those questions
was about
whether he'd
support this
$1.8 billion pot
of money that
Trump's administration hasdubbed
the Anti
Weaponization Fund.
That's the one the
Democrats worry
could be used to
compensate people like
the January 6th
defendants. Here's
what Tom Tiffany had to
say. >> So
I'm still studyingthe
details in regards
to that. I haven't
I'm asking
the administration to
give us more
as far as
how exactly
they expect
to implement
this. I'd say
one of the
just one thought
that I have in
regards to it is
that, you
know, maybe some
people are due
compensation. >> So,
Zac, this is
a 5050
state. And Tom
Tiffany hasthe
luxury of not
running in
a big
competitive Republican
primary right now.
One could
argue thatthis
would be a chance forhim
to say, this is where Idiffer from
the president. Why didn't
we hear that from
him? >> Because he
really hasn'tdiffered
from the president
on most
issues since the
president has
come into power.
And since Tom
Tiffany's been
in Congress,
they've been
very closely
associated. And that's
not just Tom
Tiffany's personal
belief. That's him
representing his
congressional district. The
seventh is the
most Maga
red of all
the Republican
districts throughout the
state. So,
yes, there's a
political logic that
comes with, well, he doesn't have
a Republican primary to worry about. So he
already has Trump's endorsement,the party's
endorsement, so he can
afford to split from
Trump. It's not the same as
some of these primaries we've seen around the
country, where everyone's
desperately clinging to try
and get Trump to
give him
their blessing so they canwin
a primary. He's
already got
that. So I think
this clearly
shows and
his prior
statements in a lot of
these similar issues about
the 2020 election and
election fraud and
conspiracies clearly
shows this is who
he is, and
this has
been who he
is allalong
in Congress. This
really isn't
any different from the
Tom Tiffany we've
been covering for all these
years. I think there
may be some Republicans
who wish it was different, becausenow
he's in a more
widespread political
spotlight and the
little higher
stakes with the gubernatorial
election. Butit's
not really a
change from who he's
always been
rich. >> We've
had the
benefit ofa few
days since that
forum, but
he was he
covered a
lot there in
this forum by
WisPolitics. What
were some
people in his own
party saying about
how that went
for him, and kind of how he
maneuvered around these
questions. >> So
through my
trolling of
social media
trolling. Its
research, trolling
is something
else. That'sright.
Research. I,
I saw
a few
conservatives, Republicans,
and even one
conservative website
say this
was an unforced
error. He doesn't
he shouldn't be
talking about
2020. He
needs to talk about thefuture and
what he's going to do,
and also
to the
surplus bill
and his opposition to
that, they
said. A lot of people saidthat was
another unforced
error. And,
you know,
there's this
race on to
for every candidate
to definethemselves before they're
defined by the other
party. So
some Republicans
think that
Tiffany needs to do
a better job of that.
>> Ana one
thing that stood
out to you, I
remember when we were talking about whatwent
on at this forum isyou said
he basically
covered a lot
of ground and said
very little about
the details.
Would that be an
accurate summation of
what you saw?>>
I think that's right. And, you know, to
be clear, it's not unusual for a
politician in
an electionyear
to kind of go
broad strokes, big
picture andnot
necessarily settle on
the details. But
I think, again, it speaks
to thisthing that we've
been talking about, this wholeshow about how
do you kind of land a message without
getting caught up in thesedetails? And I
wonder to what extent, because hedoesn't have
to distinguish himself in
a primary theway
that the Democratic
candidates do,
whether he
just kind of
wants to
appeal to
people who just
want a more
conservative person in
office, people
who, you know,
for whom
his sort of Northwoods
background is more
appealing and,
and is maybe
relying on
some level of
infighting from the Democrats.
And therefore, he
doesn't really need to
make a case in
that traditional sense. Hedoesn't need to
explain ingreat
detail how he would
balance that
budget. He can
kind of
go a little bit
on on vibes and
hope that that'll carry him
through November.
a forum in Madison,
he has that luxury. I did check before
we recorded today, and
he has a couple campaign ads on
YouTube. Zac,
7 million views
and 4 million
views where
he talks about
basically being a
Wisconsin guy and a damn tender. Itseems
like that may reach more
people. >> And
that is his background.
He started out running
a small business. He's
tended the
dam andthat's
what he's going torun on. Is
that folksy, Northwoods attitudewidespread the
inside Wisconsin politics? That's
the Madison math he's notworried about.
>> Well, that's all the
time we have for today.Thanks for joining
us. Thishas
been inside Wisconsinpolitics. Be
sure to follow us on PBS
wisconsin.org. WPR.org,
YouTube, or
wherever you get
your podcasts.