Feel free to tell them there's no
prompter rolling.
Yep. We need prompter, Ian.
Do you know which one you're looking
at?
Is Sean in two or three?
Ahem.
You can you can raise it up a little
bit Right there.
Yeah, just kind of hold the base and
pull it up and it came up for me I
mean just pull the arm up
You're much stronger than us,
apparently.
Actually, I also could hear that are
Willie's I want to write these down
put your hand in there and pull that
arm up
Like so
Also, will I be like turning to talk
to you during...
Yeah, you will.
You just kind of got to remember
where that is. And when you turn and
talk to Zach, just kind like keep
your just that's like a magnet
that's drawing you in a little bit.
Okay, that
seems like a potential learning
curve.
Essentially, other than the open and
close, we're never really addressing
camera.
Well, you are, Rich, but...
I'm gonna not
address the camera.
Reminds me of a story.
This is my classic
pose.
Rich, when we go to you, I think you
should have your back to us, and
then you just slowly spin in your
chair.
And you should have like a mustache
that you wear sometimes, but not
always.
Yeah.
Every time you spend.
I'm going to do that spin move.
With three and get ready to read
copy. All right.
I can give you a cue as well.
I think if you kick your feet out,
they can see your shoes too.
You can see all the clay on them.
Do you have any red heels or
anything?
That would be cool.
Maria Lazar had like mottled
blue. It was really interesting.
She was a little disappointed that I
couldn't see her shoes in the shot.
Yeah, I only ever wear black
from head to toe.
Stand by, we'll keep you open.
Today on Wisconsin Politics Weekly,
Wisconsin leaders react to the
shooting in Minneapolis, a
presidential endorsement shakes up
the governor's race, and top leaders
in Wisconsin state government hint
that they're open to some kind of
deal on lowering property taxes,
maybe.
I'm WPR Capital Bureau Chief Shawn
Johnson, joining me today to talk
about these issues are PBS Wisconsin
political reporter Zach Schultz,
WPR capital reporter Anya Van
Wagtendonk, and WPR political
reporter Rich Kramer.
Hey everyone.
So let's start the conversation with
the news that has just been front
and center everywhere this week in
Wisconsin and nationally,
the shooting of Alex Preddy in
Minneapolis.
We've heard everyone from the
president to protesters
react to this.
Anya, I wanna hear what our
local leaders and candidates are
saying in Wisconsin.
What have we heard them say about
what happened in Minneapolis and
where we go from here?
Yeah, the one sort of unifying word
that's been used is tragedy.
Both sides are describing the event
as tragic, but Republicans have
really, by and large, been placing
the blame at the feet of Democratic
leaders in Minnesota and
Minneapolis.
And so Ron Johnson, for example, he
appeared on Wisconsin Today earlier
this week, and he really kept saying
that the issues were created
by Democratic presidents,
immigration issues were created by
them, exacerbated by Democratic
leaders. By contrast, Tammy Baldwin,
our other U.S.
Took to the floor of the Senate to
read comments about Alex Preti's
life. He was, of course, a Wisconsin
native and really condemned
this action.
And then on the on the gubernatorial
trail, all seven Democratic
candidates have in some way
denounced ICE. Several of them have
called for the disbanding of the
agency.
Then at the other end of that you
have Tom Tiffany, who is at this
point, as of just a couple days ago,
the only Republican left in the race
for governor.
And he spoke at an event here in
Madison on Monday.
And I asked him, have you seen the
video of this event?
And he was caught kind of off guard
and sort of hedged it a little bit.
Another reporter followed up.
Well, did you watch it or no?
And he said, no, I did not.
So what are we to make of
that? I mean, that's the
response that got everybody's
attention was kind of his lack of a
response.
You know, I think that he has to
really kind of thread this needle,
right? He comes from, he's currently
a sitting US Congress person in
a conservative district up north,
but he is running for governor in a
purple state.
And so that means that he is to
appeal to a kind of wider
audience. And so I think we saw him
try to thread the needle and
maybe not quite know how to do that
in that moment.
Rich, we also heard from
the president in reaction to
this shooting in no
uncertain terms that you can't
bring guns to protest, he said.
You heard similar comments from
members of his administration.
You talked to a number of Second
Amendment advocates here in
Wisconsin, gun rights advocates in
a state where guns are a big deal.
What were they telling you?
I'd say the overall theme that I
heard from them is that those
comments that a person can't
bring a firearm to a protest
are just not true.
That the Constitution
guarantees a person's
right to bear arms, that's the
Second Amendment, and
that they
just shouldn't be saying that,
but that's essentially where the
unity ended. And there were
some different interpretations that
I heard about.
Maybe what the administration was
trying to say, that maybe that they
were focusing on
safety and taking into account
that each state has its own laws
with regard to guns,
so they were kind of doing a
blanket statement.
Others were just outright
opposed to what they were
saying and said it's just not
tethered to law or the Constitution
or anything like that.
I also talked with a
gentleman named Dan Marcon.
He owns a gun range near Eau Claire.
He's been an instructor for
concealed carry classes for 10 years
and he gave me a
scenario where he lives
in the neighborhood, let's say, and
he's walking down the street.
There's a protest.
He said he carries his pistol all
the time. He's licensed and he
said, I'm not supposed to have it
if there's a protest.
He used some colorful language
to describe that
idea to me.
There's a lot of candor there in
terms of their critiques
of the president that you don't
normally hear.
Have you heard that same kind of
commentary from
anybody who's elected in Wisconsin?
The Republican Party has
really aligned itself with the
gun rights over the years and the
NRA.
Have you ever heard anybody
who is elected saying similar
things here?
I certainly haven't,
and maybe the others on the panel
had different experiences.
Well, we heard radio silence from
social media, from all the
Republicans, so that's a
big statement all by itself.
If they're not commenting and, you
know, going back to what you're
talking about Tom Tiffany, threading
that needle, we've seen that from
Republicans in Washington for a
decade now with Donald Trump, where
anything that they don't want to
have to respond to, they haven't
seen.
You can take him at his word or not
at his words, whether he actually
did not see or did see the video,
but he certainly is aware of the
protest because Tom Tiffany's
tweeting and commenting about it
repeatedly.
As for elected officials, I
interviewed Maria Lazar, who is a
Supreme Court candidate.
She is an appellate court judge.
And I asked her about Cash Patel,
the FBI director, who made the first
set of statements on air about you
can't bring a loaded firearm to
a protest.
And she kind of hedged a little bit,
saying, well, I'm not really an
expert in Minnesota law, but since
they have concealed carry, she said,
I kind of doubt that under the
second amendment, which surprised
me, because to me, it seems pretty
clear. We don't need to go beyond
our own eyes when it comes to
all the video we've seen of protests
over the years. Think back to COVID,
think back to January 6,
2021 at the US Capitol.
I mean, there have been guns at
protests for years and years and
people have been asserting and
claiming this right.
And this is the first time that
anyone at that, especially from the
Republicans have said that you don't
have that right.
And if that's the case, then it
really is incongruous with what
their supporters have been acting on
for a long, long time.
So one thing we did hear Congressman
Tiffany and other Republicans
talk about this week was
President Trump's endorsements
in Wisconsin's governor's race.
And we say this, you know,
every election cycle, like there's
nothing more powerful in today's
Republican politics than an
endorsement from President Donald
Trump. I think there'd been kind of
an open question about whether he
would jump in this time.
He did, he endorsed Tom Tiffany.
Talk about a quick.
Reaction to what happened, Zach.
I mean, what unfolded after that?
Well, his only primary candidate
opponent, Josh Showman, the
Washington County exec, dropped out
immediately, pretty much.
And what's interesting is I
interviewed both Tiffany and Showman
back in December. And I asked them
about what impact Donald Trump
would have on their primary.
And Showman at that time said,
well, of course, I would love his
endorsement. But otherwise, I hope
he doesn't endorse.
His goal was to take this primary
as far as he could to show that
he was a legitimate challenger.
In the eyes of Republican voters
against Tom Tiffany, who has more
money, more name,
recognition, closer relationship
with President Trump, having been a
member of Congress and supported him
at that level with his votes
for a long, long time.
So, clearly, Showman knew that an
early Trump endorsement was pretty
much going to end his campaign, and
he made that clear when he dropped
out the next day.
So Rich, I know one thing you were
kind of keeping an eye on was
whether it would be another
Republican jump into the race.
You know, somebody like Tim
Michaels, who we know Donald Trump
likes, and who can self-fund,
you know, whether they would jump
in.
This kind of says, no, that's
not going to happen, right?
Yeah, it certainly seems like we're
down to one for the Republican
primary, essentially, and that
gives Republicans an
advantage in some ways, they
don't have to pay a lot of
money in a messy primary, they won't
have carry that baggage into a
general election.
But at the same time, Democrats now
have their target.
They kind of were acting like that
Tiffany was the target anyway,
but now it's,
that's So I
guess anything could happen, but at
this point it seems like we've
got our Republican candidate for the
gubernatorial campaign.
And now we get to have that debate.
We have every election cycle too.
Do you wanna have a big primary or
don't you? And I think this time
Republicans are gonna be the ones
saying, no, we're glad we
don't have a primary to deal with,
because those have kind of bitten
them in recent years.
You just look back at 2022 and
the primary between Tim Michaels and
Rebecca Clayfish was very bruising.
Tim Michaels did not win that
general election.
You have a bit primary among
Democrats, about
seven candidates, give or take.
I imagine though, they are saying,
hey, that's actually good for us.
We're going to dominate this news
cycle. But what are you hearing from
them in terms of how they
view the race now?
Has it changed anything really?
So there's nobody in the Democratic
field who has that level of name
recognition as Tom Tiffany.
There's not, for example, another
congressperson or somebody with that
level.
And so a lot of Democratic
candidates are still just trying to
register outside of whatever their
current lane is, whether it's that
they're currently a state representative,
they need to register more broadly
across the state, or they are a
former lieutenant governor who's
trying to kind of build back up his
profile, or a current lieutenant
governor is trying to build her
profile. So there is nobody who
really kind of has that momentum
behind them, such as it is.
And so I think we're going to see
just a very different type of
primary race among Democrats,
because it's not just about being
able to sell yourself to voters,
it's also about being to stand out
in what is basically
a field
that has pretty shared values.
There's people further to the left
and further to center, but they
really are Wisconsin Democrats and
there's a lot of shared values
there. So how do you kind of emerge
and make enough of a splash to
carry you through to know about.
And it'll be interesting to see if
this has similarities to
the Senate, Democratic Senate
primary for Senate when Mandela
Barnes came out ahead because
his opponents at that time in the
democratic lane all dropped out
essentially before the primary
saying that our only option at
that point was to go negative.
And so I think what will be
interesting to watch among these
Democrats is which ones are holding
themselves above the fray and
focusing exclusively on Tom Tiffany
as someone like Mandela Barnes has
from the start.
Or someone who's maybe, like you
said, trying to gain a little more
name recognition outside of
their lane, do they start taking
shots at their own field or do
they focus all of their fire
collectively at Tom Tiffany?
And that will determine whether a
primary is helpful or unhelpful.
If they come out of it bruised
because it turned negative because
someone was trying to win with 23%
of the vote in the Democratic
primary, then it
will leave a bruised candidate on
the other side. But if they all
focus on Tom Tiffany, and may the
best candidate win, and some of them
graciously drop out as we saw
before, then yes, they could
have a more cohesive democratic
party with a stronger, more
battle-tested candidate coming out
in August.
So I do think that we'll see the
field narrow, but I wonder if some
of them would look at that example
from the Senate race and say,
yeah, they took one for the team and
look where it got them.
Imagine if you're Sarah Godlewski
thinking, hey, I could have been
Senator if it was me on that ballot.
You would assume that everyone who
runs for office that level thinks
they can win the general election.
That could be a factor in whether or
not they decide to sort of bow out
this time. And you could have
potentially a race
going up to August.
Especially in this cycle, you know,
we've got a democratic cycle
potentially.
I think every Democrat feels like
they want to be the one standing
when that's over.
Are they going to have money is a
question after every primary?
Are they gonna have enough money to
deal with Tom Tiffany, who doesn't
have to worry about running
ads to build up his conservative
base?
Yeah, right now, the democratic sort
of donor field is divided
among seven people, and we've seen
in past election cycles where people
run out of money leading up to the
primary election. I think even Tony
Evers started to run out money
before successfully winning his
first gubernatorial campaign.
And so to the extent that they
can, if people start moving out,
that will also coalesce the donor
base both inside the state and
outside, because also, I mean,
national attention is on this
governor's race.
And we do have, while
this race is going, and it does feel
like all of our attention is on
November at this point in some ways,
but we have a state legislature
that is still meeting here in
Wisconsin.
They could still potentially get
things done.
You know, the assemblies, whenever
they're meeting, they got like 100
bills on the calendar and they rip
through them, as you all know.
There are some big outstanding
issues there
that I guess they're question marks
on whether they could cut one more.
Bipartisan deal with
the Democratic governor.
One thing I wanted to ask you about
was property taxes.
Is that one where there
could be some kind of deal at this
session, because we're hearing both
Tony Evers and Republican
leaders, at least Speaker Robin Voss
say, hey, you know, we're
open to something on property
taxes, who here
thinks they could get it done?
I mean, it sounds like there have
been talks in private caucus and
you've even heard sort of lower
level Republicans alluding to this,
you know, maybe speaking a little
bit out of turn in so doing.
And so that gives us a little bit of
a sense that there are conversations
happening between at least Robin
Voss and Tony Evers.
I'm not sure where things kind of
stand on the on the Senate side of
things. But it's also interesting to
hear Republicans talking about using
the state surplus for that's because
what they have always said.
Is that the surplus is only for
tax returns, essentially.
And so if you say, okay, property
tax relief is kind of in that
field of things that Republicans
would approve of using that money
for, and Tony Evers can use
that fund because he's been saying,
let's spend on the surplus on all
these other priorities that I have.
Maybe that is a place that they say,
okay, we have two and a half billion
dollars or whatever to play with.
He wants 1.3.
What is the horse trading that's
going to kind of get them both
there?
I don't know. Zach, what do you
think? Is this something that can
happen this year?
Well, we've seen this game before.
As you said, there's been a surplus,
pretty much Governor Evers' entire
time, because they can't agree.
Evers wants spending on education.
Republicans want tax cuts.
This time it almost feels like it's
a marriage of the two concepts
because Evers is framing this and
Republicans are framing it in relief
of Evers so-called 400-year
property tax veto in which he
allows school districts to spend
extra per pupil and conveniently
both sides decline to fund that
in the last budget. That was
bi-partisan solution.
To not fund that additional thing,
which raised property taxes at the
local level, because districts need
that money, and they took it, which
saw the property tax bills go up.
Everyone saw the sticker shock in
December, and they're feeling it.
So this is a solution there.
What's caused this problem not
to be solved in the past is that
there's always another election, and
someone always has the mindset that
if I allow you to
get a win, that hurts me.
There's a zero-sum mentality in
politics when it comes to elections,
and there's has always been a fear
that it will, if we.
Give you this, then you'll come out
looking better than we will in the
end process. Now, the difference
here is Evers is not running for
reelection. So he's not the one that
would stand to be able to run on
this in the fall.
So that gives you an idea why
Republicans might consider this.
If they can pass it, claim they
helped solve the property tax issue.
But then that leaves open the
question, is there
someone in the Senate or is there
someone that would want to spike
this bill?
Because they don't want anyone else
to get credit for it.
Conversely do they want to spike
this bill because they want that
surplus there thinking that maybe
Tom Tiffany's the winner and
Republicans control legislature next
year and they can come into office
and have all this money to do in the
way Spend in the they want spend
rather than having to compromise and
those are always the questions to
look at when it comes to Motivations
it's not just about what makes
sense now. It's what makes in the
fall
Rich, you know, this is a problem
for both of them, arguably.
I mean, you could you could argue
that the 400 year veto
caused the property tax increase.
You could argue the the underfunding
of schools by Republicans caused it.
Does that make them want to come to
the table here before Tony Evers
leaves office?
Well i don't know if the blame game
makes them want to come back
to the table or come to the table
together we've seen those
arguments you just laid out
all over the place uh...
Republicans of course saying evers
you cause this shame on
you and and then democrats
are saying that schools
have been underfunded you know this
is a decade long problem at the
hands of the republicans but
I keep thinking about some of the
bipartisan.
Uh... Examples we've seen
there was the state
budget uh...
Where republicans in the senate were
all on board with uh...
Proposal and democratic
votes to get around some of those
republican members there's
all kinds of examples even the uh...
The press conference with assembly
speaker robin voss and gretta
newbauer regarding
funding for Wisconsin Eye, the
public affairs network down in
Madison.
So just, there's been a few examples
of surprises to me having
remembered the
earlier years of say the Walker
administration and
the legislature had total control,
Republicans had control of the
legislature and they just
weren't really open to compromise it
much at all back then.
I guess we will find out very soon
whether compromise is still in
the air with now a lame duck
governor and these particular
legislators or whether it
is onto November for everybody
at this point and that one just gets
kicked to 2027.
That'll do it for today.
Thanks for joining us.
Make sure to follow the
show at wpr.org,
pbswisconsin.org on
YouTube or wherever you get your
podcasts.
Because that way, too, like, if
I'm talking to you, then I'm
turned away, you know?
And so.
I do.
It doesn't feel like I'm able to
include I can almost guarantee it's
not
I just look weird when I'm
in the right on these
stages sometimes. Can you guys hear
me? Yeah, we can hear you.
Can you hear us?
Yes, can you hear?
I gotta, I need to
stop moving my hands.
I talked with my hands, I was
taught. I don't know.
They told me that the hands get
bright if I put them up in the skin.
When I was a kid we went to Disney
World.
We went to Disney World and we saw
Michael Jackson's Captain EO
in 3D and the scariest thing was
the fingers coming at us and that's
what I kept being reminded of every
time your hands went up to the
screen.
I warned him about that yesterday.
I am also a hand talker, so I like
put my hands down on the table, like
physically.
Yeah, I did too,
but I just caught myself talking
with my hands again.
Yeah, just and then I also caught
myself
So, my apologies
for not having your rack ready to
go.
Oh, it's okay, I mean...
We like we just kind of add living
is like, yeah, we're winging it.
Would you like to run through
your other leads?
Sure, I mean if you want, yeah.
If you think it'd be useful, that's
kinda what I did it for, just to see
if short or.
Yeah, and then do
you want to try prompted and
unprompted?
Um, so unprompted would
be kind of winging it.
Yeah, just go prompt.
Once you've done this 50 times,
then...
Like we can trample.
I don't, yeah.
Also, I am sorry my phone was
buzzing to start.
That is my
news call alarm that goes off,
or like editor's call, and I'm
so sorry about that.
Apparently I couldn't.
I was saying that...
It was awesome.
But you always say that sometimes
say something negative so we believe
you when you say something positive
i never say nice things okay
i will believe you
Don't laugh too much guys, I'm not
You guys are totally professional.
Oh, just like that.
I mean, yeah, I think we expected to
maybe have like stops and starts and
stuff, but you guys just went
straight into it.
And so.
So that's a really good
sign. How did that time feel?
You hit it like.
Oh, yeah.
I mean, we just went through the
first part faster than I was
thinking. And so we spent more
time on the governor's
race, which is fine.
And we spent time on
like the property taxes.
Did the script get changed?
I made my notes earlier today,
or my bullet points, and it
felt different than, because I
didn't mean to start talking
about, it seems like I
kind of stumbled over something that
you were gonna read in terms of
the next question, Sean.
I don't know you have to tell me
like I'll watch it and see
but yeah notice it at the time.
I wasn't listening to you man.
I'm kidding
I'm just so used to the way we
were doing it.
Oh, he just he was wondering if the
He was wondering that if like script
change changed up the the script or
the order like that maybe
because you have more time for
something.
Um.
Topics in your back pocket.
I liked, see, I feel like
the topics were,
like... We had more to say on each
one. We hit about 10, I
mean, when I heard the 10, I was
thinking like, oh, they just forgot
to give the time cues.
And then 10 minutes happened and I
thought, oh, you know?
But I really think it was okay to
just talk, like not having
a laundry list
of things let us just talk a little
bit about the governor's race, which
is kind of, I think we could just
talk about the governor race every
week.
I felt like
I actually felt better as we got to
that point.
I felt, OK, loose.
We're talking about halfway
through, like, oh, here we go.
We know how to do this.
Mm-hm.
Oh, just that like at the beginning,
I felt like I wanted to not speak
for too long because I didn't
want to like take up too much time
or whatever. And I feel like as,
as I got a sense of like just how
things were progressing, I felt more
comfortable just like saying
everything I wanted to say, it
didn't feel like I was like taking
up too much.
It is, it's part of our weekly
ritual. We have, you know, this four
minute segment, so we know, come on,
hurry it up, hurry up.
So we just have to get on a
different clock.
Every every week on here and now
we end up doing a segment where we
cut stuff out yeah like
with Trent it
is really easy to
figure out how long of
a bite you're to get exactly the
time yeah and so
if it helps to just like not be
so uptight about time
then we can do that i'm not
personally I'm worried about that.
I think we still want it close to
time though.
Close to time, yeah.
But as long as it's
It might even be easier just to time
it out to like 15 seconds longer,
because I felt like you were, like
you got the 15 and then you went
right to the wrap. And if the wrap's
not gonna air on Wisconsin today,
I think there's more of a risk that
we come in five to seven seconds
light than there is if we
consistently time out 15 seconds,
longer, come in seven seconds,
light.
What's your comfort level with like,
let's say you're talking about
something and Zach says something
and you want to jump in and go,
you know, I mean, you guys did that
a little bit, but
We were just talking about that.
I like that.
I think we'll get better at it.
You want to ask your question about
seeding?
Yeah, so I
was thinking that it might make
sense for Sean to be in the middle,
because every time I was answering
him, my back was to Zach,
and so it was harder to feel like
I was including everyone.
Whereas, I think if I were there, I
could be talking to Sean, but then
signaling to Zach to pick
up, or to what you
said, or it feels
easier to gesture. Okay.
Which we can accommodate
for, as we're like bigger
Lever his chair.
But also, for
weeks that you're at the Capitol,
this will be a double box.
Ewingridge will be in here, and then
we'll have a double So
one of the thoughts was, well then,
Sean and Zach are just always in
the same position, roughly.
And Fred was saying, like, that also
might help with comfortability if
you're just like, This is my
spot, you know?
But we can switch it up.
Try ripping on something,
switch it up a little bit.
Like we can, that's
part of the rehearsal
is all about.
We can try something else for a few
minutes.
I'm open to trying anything,
sure.
Do you want to try it, Sean, in the
middle?
My only, we could try it, but I
think my only concern would be if
we're counting him to be a
ringleader, and he's in that
position of turning away,
then it's harder to signal to Sean,
hey, I'll go next.
You don't have to answer.
And I think...
I think you can pretend to look at
Zach a little bit, just like even a
glance, even if you can't quite see
him.
Yeah, if you watch some
of the playback most of the time you
were talking you were it was the two
of you in a two-shot and then
otherwise they would come in over
here in a three-shot so it wasn't
it wasn't as bad as it felt like and
a lot of times what we end up doing
staging-wise we're looking past the
person anyway just because of the
camera lines so my
concern of you being over there and
Sean in the middle is Sean's gonna
do the same thing you do right and
then when you're done if like
Rich or I are signaling if he's but
the audience won't know.
That it feels uncomfortable for for
you in the middle sure that that's
what I would say, but we can
certainly try it Okay, it would just
be more work on his part to make
sure he's doing the swivel
Sure.