1
00:00:00,000 --> 00:00:28,400
schools out and for many parents in Wisconsin, a big concern looms. Funding for a child care

2
00:00:28,400 --> 00:00:34,080
subsidy is about to run out and the political backstories behind a tuition hike at the University

3
00:00:34,080 --> 00:00:45,920
of Wisconsin and a $10 million PFAS settlement. This is Inside Wisconsin Politics. I'm Sean

4
00:00:45,920 --> 00:00:51,040
Johnson here with Anya Van Wachtenank, Zach Schultz and Rich Kramer in Eau Claire. Hey everyone.

5
00:00:51,520 --> 00:00:59,120
So Anya, how do we get to this point with this child care subsidy that is about to run it out

6
00:00:59,120 --> 00:01:06,480
right at a point in an election cycle and a year where costs are already this massive factor on

7
00:01:06,480 --> 00:01:10,240
everybody's minds? Yeah, I mean, this is like a story that we've all been covering incrementally

8
00:01:10,240 --> 00:01:14,880
for years and years. And when I say incrementally, what I mean is people ringing that alarm bell that

9
00:01:14,880 --> 00:01:20,320
we were heading towards this cliff. So go back in time to COVID. There were federal subsidies put

10
00:01:20,320 --> 00:01:24,080
in place for the child care industry while everything else is collapsing. This is one of these

11
00:01:24,080 --> 00:01:29,600
things. And so the child care counts program was initiated, which in Wisconsin looked like about

12
00:01:29,600 --> 00:01:36,320
$300 million going to child care providers for things like paying staff more to retain them,

13
00:01:36,320 --> 00:01:40,720
infrastructure needs, material needs, and also some amount of financial aid for families that

14
00:01:40,720 --> 00:01:47,120
were struggling. And so that was due to expire. And so then for years, we were all covering legislative

15
00:01:47,120 --> 00:01:53,040
fights over what to do about this funding that was going to go away program finally sunset last

16
00:01:53,040 --> 00:01:58,080
summer. And then a bridge program took over. And so now it is the bridge program that is due to

17
00:01:58,080 --> 00:02:04,000
expire. So again, we've sort of been pushing off this cliff for years and years and years. And now

18
00:02:04,000 --> 00:02:08,480
the thing that advocates and providers have been warning about is about to happen. This new report

19
00:02:08,480 --> 00:02:13,280
came out last week saying that potentially up to a quarter of child care providers could close

20
00:02:13,280 --> 00:02:18,560
their doors and almost certainly more than that are going to raise tuition after all of these funds

21
00:02:18,560 --> 00:02:22,800
go away. And Rich, this is an issue where the Democratic governor and Republican legislature

22
00:02:22,800 --> 00:02:29,200
definitely have not seen eye to eye when it comes to subsidizing child care refresh my memory a

23
00:02:29,200 --> 00:02:35,440
little bit on how they did see eye to eye a year ago and how they got this money that is about to run

24
00:02:35,520 --> 00:02:46,160
out now. So it goes back to this fight over $171 million. Governor Evers had access to this money,

25
00:02:46,160 --> 00:02:54,000
which was interest from those federal COVID era stimulus funds. So the interest generated from that

26
00:02:54,880 --> 00:03:01,120
is Wisconsin revenue in a sense. So there was this political battle. Republican said, well,

27
00:03:01,120 --> 00:03:06,080
that should be under our control or we should have a say in how you spend that. The governor

28
00:03:06,080 --> 00:03:12,640
said, no, this is federal money. And I remember watching a hearing on a bill that would have

29
00:03:12,640 --> 00:03:18,880
essentially given the legislature a lot more say over that money. And even an attorney with the

30
00:03:18,880 --> 00:03:25,200
nonpartisan legislative counsel said, well, it's kind of an open question. You know, they didn't

31
00:03:25,200 --> 00:03:31,680
answer it specifically. But that was a political battle. And during that discussion on the bill,

32
00:03:32,560 --> 00:03:38,880
one of the authors, Republican Eric Windburger, you know, toyed with the idea or taught he

33
00:03:38,880 --> 00:03:45,440
mused about impeaching governor Evers over this money. So that bridge fund tapped into that

34
00:03:46,000 --> 00:03:53,760
interest from the COVID stimulus funds. And that's how they were able to at least,

35
00:03:55,200 --> 00:03:59,600
you know, keep this program going to some extent. The providers were saying it's not enough.

36
00:04:00,160 --> 00:04:05,680
Democrats said it's not enough. But here we are. And that's what's been keeping the thing afloat.

37
00:04:05,680 --> 00:04:10,320
So Tony Evers said it's very important to me that we keep this child care subsidy going. And

38
00:04:10,320 --> 00:04:14,800
Republican said, well, it's very important to us that you get this money out of your bank account

39
00:04:14,800 --> 00:04:20,160
governor Evers. And so they found that agreement for a year. But Zach, it feels like now the money

40
00:04:20,160 --> 00:04:25,520
really is going to run out. Are providers going to close? What's going to happen?

41
00:04:26,240 --> 00:04:29,360
Well, you're going to hear a lot of noise about it. And that's for sure. And there's there's a

42
00:04:29,360 --> 00:04:33,840
reality on the ground of what it means for providers and for parents specifically who

43
00:04:33,840 --> 00:04:37,360
have to figure out where their kids are going to go if they can't afford this and still need to go

44
00:04:37,360 --> 00:04:42,160
work. But in a political season like this, this is going to be a top line messaging,

45
00:04:42,160 --> 00:04:46,400
especially for the Democrats running for governor. Republicans in the past and the

46
00:04:46,400 --> 00:04:50,240
legislature and we assume Tom Tiffany is kind of in this category have looked at, you know,

47
00:04:50,240 --> 00:04:54,400
the private sector means of trying to fix this child care issue of like, oh, let's lower

48
00:04:54,400 --> 00:04:58,880
regulations. Let's find some discounts or some savings elsewhere, but instead of directly

49
00:04:58,880 --> 00:05:03,760
funding them, they've never liked that welfare idea as Robin Voss would constantly call it.

50
00:05:03,760 --> 00:05:08,720
And so we don't see Republicans coming back to the table. This wasn't part of the grand bargain

51
00:05:08,720 --> 00:05:13,520
that we talked about for a month straight. So this is a dead issue politically. There's no one coming

52
00:05:13,520 --> 00:05:18,240
back in special session to find money to fix this. They've all known this date is here. The question

53
00:05:18,240 --> 00:05:23,920
is, what will it mean going into the fall? How much damage will we see leading up to September?

54
00:05:23,920 --> 00:05:28,960
And maybe because September means schools back in session, it'll be a little less of a hot button

55
00:05:28,960 --> 00:05:33,120
issue, but there will still be people talking about it and there will be Democrats campaigning

56
00:05:33,520 --> 00:05:38,480
on it, especially since they have a forum coming up that's invited to all the gubernatorial candidates,

57
00:05:38,480 --> 00:05:42,240
but five of the Democrats are going to appear to it. And it's being held by these child care

58
00:05:42,240 --> 00:05:46,080
providers and some of the groups that represent them, where they're just going to try to keep

59
00:05:46,080 --> 00:05:51,760
raising the profile of this heading into the fall. And I mean, it's kind of a subjective question

60
00:05:51,760 --> 00:05:57,520
here, but like, do you feel like this particular cost will resonate with people at the time when

61
00:05:57,520 --> 00:06:03,360
we're paying so much for gas and everything else? Does childcare kind of, I guess, kept people's

62
00:06:03,360 --> 00:06:07,760
attention when they have all this noise? If you have a child in your house that you have to pay

63
00:06:07,760 --> 00:06:12,560
childcare for? Yes, I remember 15, 20 years ago, before long before this was an issue,

64
00:06:12,560 --> 00:06:18,240
I had family friends that said I would actually save money by staying home and quitting my job

65
00:06:18,240 --> 00:06:22,320
and not pay making my truck payment and paying gas and insurance taxes and not having to pay

66
00:06:22,320 --> 00:06:26,880
childcare. That was a long time ago. And it's still the reality, even more so. I mean,

67
00:06:26,880 --> 00:06:31,920
more people than ever need to have two incomes to fund even a modest lifestyle in Wisconsin.

68
00:06:31,920 --> 00:06:36,160
And if you have small children, that means they need to go somewhere. As more and more families

69
00:06:36,160 --> 00:06:41,200
have split apart from the nuclear, larger umbrella of grandma or grandpa or aunts or uncles are around,

70
00:06:41,200 --> 00:06:45,280
you're relying on other people to raise your kids. That is just the reality that people

71
00:06:45,280 --> 00:06:50,320
are in right now. And if it's your reality, it's one of the biggest realities facing you.

72
00:06:50,320 --> 00:06:55,040
And Anya, any sense that this might affect specific races, whether it be the race for a

73
00:06:55,120 --> 00:06:59,120
governor or you name it? I mean, I think one of the interesting things here is that

74
00:06:59,120 --> 00:07:03,600
child care as like a need and as a household expense really spans its span to state,

75
00:07:03,600 --> 00:07:08,240
it spans political backgrounds, where that's not as much reflected is in the capital,

76
00:07:08,240 --> 00:07:12,480
where you have a little bit more of these hard line positions, especially within the Republican

77
00:07:13,120 --> 00:07:18,080
caucus in the assembly. There is a small but significant enough number of lawmakers who do

78
00:07:18,080 --> 00:07:23,280
believe in a more traditional family structure, who don't want to be subsidizing other people

79
00:07:23,280 --> 00:07:28,000
raising your children. And they are really trying to kind of legislate around that. And so it's

80
00:07:28,000 --> 00:07:33,680
not just about those sort of market solutions. And so I think that at that level, at the legislative

81
00:07:33,680 --> 00:07:38,640
level, we might really see this issue come to the fore because people who kind of don't care

82
00:07:38,640 --> 00:07:43,360
about some of those more cultural fights, they just want a little bit more money and a little bit more

83
00:07:43,360 --> 00:07:48,320
ease in their bank accounts. Will those people be motivated by not just this, but this in combination

84
00:07:48,320 --> 00:07:53,760
with gas prices and inflation. And then also, there's at least one district where one of these

85
00:07:53,760 --> 00:07:59,120
child care providers turned advocate is now running for a seat in the legislature. I don't know that

86
00:07:59,120 --> 00:08:02,880
this will be her only issue, but this will be one of her strongest issues. And that'll be really

87
00:08:02,880 --> 00:08:07,600
interesting to watch how resonant this is through the summer. That'd be Corrine Hendrickson, I believe

88
00:08:07,600 --> 00:08:12,240
the Democratic candidate, she's in a primary with Lisa White and Representative Jenna Jacobson

89
00:08:12,240 --> 00:08:16,880
against Howard Markline, the powerful co-chair of the legislature's budget committee. One of the

90
00:08:16,880 --> 00:08:22,080
most hotly washed races anyways. And he has really been clear that he does not support this.

91
00:08:22,080 --> 00:08:28,240
This is not an issue where there's kind of gray between what Democrats support and what

92
00:08:28,240 --> 00:08:33,920
Republicans support with this child care subsidy. There are stark differences. And so if they want

93
00:08:33,920 --> 00:08:39,600
to have that kind of debate out there, it would be certainly a chance for voters to see a difference

94
00:08:39,600 --> 00:08:45,040
in the way that these two parties view this issue in government. And that's why it was probably

95
00:08:45,120 --> 00:08:48,960
really helpful to have Rich's background of how we got to this point because some people may be

96
00:08:48,960 --> 00:08:54,720
confused to think there was a bipartisan solution to provide this funding. From COVID on, it was

97
00:08:54,720 --> 00:08:59,760
all federal money that Governor Evers directed into this program when the federal money ran out

98
00:08:59,760 --> 00:09:04,720
with Republicans fighting it every step of the way, repeatedly passing bills that said we would

99
00:09:04,720 --> 00:09:09,120
like oversight and how this federal money could spend. So you can't make that decision unilaterally

100
00:09:09,120 --> 00:09:12,960
govern Evers veto at every one of those bills. And it was this compromise in the last time,

101
00:09:12,960 --> 00:09:17,040
was not a compromise of, oh, we believe this should happen. It was, how do we spend this

102
00:09:17,040 --> 00:09:21,840
other pot of money that's still sitting here? So the COVID money is gone. This is now on the

103
00:09:21,840 --> 00:09:26,480
state's back or we will see the consequences in households and businesses across the state.

104
00:09:26,480 --> 00:09:31,040
And you alluded to this earlier, but I was looking back through public statements from the leaders

105
00:09:31,040 --> 00:09:36,480
as this big deal was negotiated, the deal that fizzled. And I don't think anybody was ever

106
00:09:36,480 --> 00:09:40,320
talking about putting some money behind child care as much as the governor has said it's a

107
00:09:40,400 --> 00:09:45,600
priority for him. So that kind of gives you the sense of the politics on that one. Rich,

108
00:09:45,600 --> 00:09:51,680
we've got another cost going up here for some Wisconsin residents or out of state residents

109
00:09:51,680 --> 00:09:58,080
who come here to go to school tuition going up at the University of Wisconsin. How much, first of

110
00:09:58,080 --> 00:10:07,120
all, and gives a sense of like, you know, how this came to be. Well, so the tuition increase

111
00:10:07,120 --> 00:10:14,480
specifically for tuition that the Board of Regents has approved is 2%. But there's another 3.5%

112
00:10:14,480 --> 00:10:20,800
increase with regard to what are called segregated fees. You name it, fees for, you know, facilities,

113
00:10:20,800 --> 00:10:28,880
et cetera, et cetera. So we're talking 2%, which is below the rate of inflation, of course.

114
00:10:29,920 --> 00:10:35,440
And, but the argument over tuition, I'm not sure if it ever had a beginning or an end,

115
00:10:35,520 --> 00:10:43,520
but this specifically goes back to 2013 when there was a tuition freeze after Republicans found out

116
00:10:44,080 --> 00:10:49,280
and loudly complained for years and years that the University of Wisconsin system had

117
00:10:50,240 --> 00:10:57,360
something like $500 to $600 million in what are called fund balances, tuition fund balances

118
00:10:57,360 --> 00:11:04,160
essentially reserves. And they had those reserves at a time when tuition had increased by 5.5%

119
00:11:04,720 --> 00:11:09,840
year after year after year. So that created a lot of heartburn among Republicans.

120
00:11:10,720 --> 00:11:17,920
And that in 2013, there was the tuition freeze not long after that Republicans when they had

121
00:11:17,920 --> 00:11:26,240
both houses of the legislature and Governor Walker in the governor's mansion. They cut $250 million

122
00:11:26,240 --> 00:11:32,880
from the UW budget, essentially saying, you've got those reserves, spend them down. So the

123
00:11:32,880 --> 00:11:38,160
universities had these directions to spend down the reserves. And they did. Over the years,

124
00:11:38,160 --> 00:11:45,920
the reserves went down by 60%. Some universities wound up in the red and had to do some,

125
00:11:46,720 --> 00:11:53,200
some pretty, you know, stark things to get their budgets under control. We saw layoffs,

126
00:11:53,200 --> 00:11:59,840
we saw a lot of buyouts, you know, I think of Oshkosh, you know, marathon. I mean, excuse me,

127
00:11:59,840 --> 00:12:06,720
Steven's point, a number of universities did that. So the tuition freeze was lifted officially in

128
00:12:07,360 --> 00:12:15,680
2021. The university system, the Board of Regents, tread carefully at first. They didn't immediately

129
00:12:15,680 --> 00:12:23,120
ask for a tuition increase. But since then, we've seen four consecutive tuition increases from the

130
00:12:23,120 --> 00:12:28,640
Board of Regents. And they haven't been the five and a half percent. They've generally been

131
00:12:30,320 --> 00:12:37,920
close to or below CPI, which, you know, is pretty high. But Republicans don't like it. And even

132
00:12:37,920 --> 00:12:44,880
when they lifted the tuition freeze in 2021, some Republican lawmakers said, be careful. If you,

133
00:12:44,880 --> 00:12:51,200
you know, get out of hand with this, we will freeze it again. So what we're seeing now is some

134
00:12:51,200 --> 00:12:57,680
Republicans, Tom Tiffany, running for governor, saying we need another tuition freeze. That freeze

135
00:12:57,680 --> 00:13:02,720
lasted for eight years. Universities said it was harming, you know, quality of education. But on

136
00:13:02,720 --> 00:13:10,960
the other hand, Republicans said, this is about access. This is about affordability. So, you know,

137
00:13:10,960 --> 00:13:16,000
the tuition increases back to back to back is just not good for Wisconsin families.

138
00:13:16,640 --> 00:13:22,560
But also, the university says our tuition rates are lower than other states. So it's a really

139
00:13:22,560 --> 00:13:28,320
complex issue. And it's just been years and years since they've been complaining and arguing over

140
00:13:28,320 --> 00:13:34,320
this. So certainly not somebody might be forgiven to look at that increase 2% and say, hey, what's

141
00:13:34,320 --> 00:13:40,640
the big deal? But this is something that goes back, boy, 16 years, there are 13 years at this point

142
00:13:40,720 --> 00:13:47,120
now that they've been fighting over this particular round of tuition. So I think it's an open question

143
00:13:47,120 --> 00:13:52,560
on this issue. This issue, like any other, is this going to be something that resonates in the

144
00:13:52,560 --> 00:13:56,480
campaign for governor? Anya, how about you go first? I mean, in some ways, I think that the

145
00:13:56,480 --> 00:14:02,000
arguments that we're seeing from Democrats and Republicans mirrors the property tax and K-12

146
00:14:02,000 --> 00:14:06,000
funding thing, right, which is that you have these kind of levers. And as you pull one,

147
00:14:06,000 --> 00:14:10,240
another one goes up. And so in this case, Democrats are saying, well, the state has been

148
00:14:10,240 --> 00:14:14,320
defunding the UW system. What do you expect? Of course tuition is going to have to go out.

149
00:14:14,320 --> 00:14:18,720
But one of those, you know, they're sort of in balance with one another. I think another point

150
00:14:18,720 --> 00:14:23,760
of tension that's going to be really interesting is the way that this affects Madison and in some

151
00:14:23,760 --> 00:14:29,280
ways Milwaukee compared to all the other schools, because Madison especially has this international

152
00:14:29,280 --> 00:14:34,560
cache, right, and can bring in students from out of state and from across the world who will pay

153
00:14:34,560 --> 00:14:39,520
full freight. And that offsets some of those costs in a way that Stephen's point, Oshkosh,

154
00:14:39,520 --> 00:14:44,160
are much more kind of aimed at local Wisconsin kids. You have Tom Tiffany now coming out and

155
00:14:44,160 --> 00:14:49,200
saying he wants to see fewer international students. He wants to put the UW back in the UW. What will

156
00:14:49,200 --> 00:14:55,120
that do for this kind of other revenue source that UW-Madison has and how that feeds into the system

157
00:14:55,680 --> 00:15:00,640
lots to play with? And to what extent that motivates voters who, again, maybe they face the day care

158
00:15:01,280 --> 00:15:06,480
charges. Now they're facing increased tuition. On the other end, it's expensive to raise a kid

159
00:15:06,480 --> 00:15:11,680
in Wisconsin. It could really be whether or not a residence could just be a matter of whether or not

160
00:15:11,680 --> 00:15:17,440
Tom Tiffany decides to put some resources behind it and put it in front of people and make it his

161
00:15:17,440 --> 00:15:22,960
message or focus on other stuff. There's a lot out there. And one of the things that's interesting

162
00:15:22,960 --> 00:15:28,080
is a report just came out from the Center for a report on the Wisconsin economy, which is Crow,

163
00:15:28,080 --> 00:15:33,200
which is this conservative think tank that was created by Walker in his administration at the UW

164
00:15:33,200 --> 00:15:38,640
with the goal of having a little more conservative-friendly economics ideas being floated out there as

165
00:15:38,640 --> 00:15:44,480
from the UW, giving it that stamp of authenticity. And they came out and said, actually UW's tuition

166
00:15:44,480 --> 00:15:49,840
is too low. It's below its peer institutions. It's actually freezing. It is subsidizing

167
00:15:49,840 --> 00:15:54,560
this private enterprise of kids that go to college and get this degree and then are very successful

168
00:15:54,640 --> 00:15:59,200
making their college tuition cheaper, subsidizes them at the expense of everyone else who's

169
00:15:59,200 --> 00:16:03,280
impacted by these costs. So it's interesting, even some of the conservative groups out there

170
00:16:03,280 --> 00:16:09,360
aren't supporting a freeze or keeping it this low. Zach, I want to turn to another issue with a

171
00:16:09,360 --> 00:16:15,600
long political backstory. There was this settlement this week or last week reached with Tycho, a

172
00:16:15,600 --> 00:16:23,920
PFAS manufacturer for $10 million with the state. This is a big deal. Tell us why and then tell us

173
00:16:24,560 --> 00:16:28,960
kind of the politics that led to this. Well, these lawsuits have been out there about PFAS

174
00:16:28,960 --> 00:16:34,400
contamination throughout. Tycho makes firefighting foam and equipment. And so they've contaminated

175
00:16:34,400 --> 00:16:39,040
the ground around there as we've learned more about what PFAS does and at forever chemical.

176
00:16:39,040 --> 00:16:44,160
But the history of this is fascinating because it we talk a lot about elections having consequences.

177
00:16:44,160 --> 00:16:49,760
This decision is a consequence of Supreme Court elections. So you have to go back and look at that

178
00:16:50,240 --> 00:16:55,120
transition that occurred from Democrats and liberals taking over the court because there were two

179
00:16:55,120 --> 00:17:00,320
major decisions that they issued in 2025 that allowed this to happen. The first is that with

180
00:17:00,320 --> 00:17:06,000
the DOJ lawsuit, they said, you do not actually have to create a new rule for each version of PFAS

181
00:17:06,000 --> 00:17:11,040
chemical or contamination that's out there in order to put into place these kinds of fines or

182
00:17:11,040 --> 00:17:15,360
sue people over the Wisconsin Spills Act about any things that spilled into our ground that can

183
00:17:15,440 --> 00:17:20,160
harm our waterways. So that was a big win that said you don't have to go back each time.

184
00:17:20,160 --> 00:17:25,920
But then another part, another separate lawsuit part of the Evers versus Markline lawsuit said,

185
00:17:25,920 --> 00:17:30,000
well, the state doesn't actually have to go and worry about the joint committee for the review

186
00:17:30,000 --> 00:17:34,960
of administrative rules to promulgate new rules for what the standards for PFAS are.

187
00:17:34,960 --> 00:17:39,680
And so when that happened, the Evers administration was able to push through new standards on PFAS

188
00:17:39,680 --> 00:17:44,240
contamination that matched stricter federal standards. Now, the DOJ doesn't have to worry

189
00:17:44,240 --> 00:17:48,400
about getting sign off from the Republicans for settling these lawsuits, and they can actually

190
00:17:48,400 --> 00:17:52,000
prosecute the Spills Act for anyone that's out there that's contaminated the ground,

191
00:17:52,000 --> 00:17:55,760
which allows settlements like this to happen and creating money to help people that have

192
00:17:55,760 --> 00:17:58,800
been impacted by this pollution. So you're not going to see any of that in the settlement

193
00:17:58,800 --> 00:18:03,120
language, obviously, but that's the legal environment that everybody is operating in now

194
00:18:03,120 --> 00:18:07,520
under this liberal majority on the court, which we know is going to last until at least 2030.

195
00:18:07,520 --> 00:18:12,080
Yeah. And it's not going to change any time soon. And on other issues, perhaps as well,

196
00:18:12,640 --> 00:18:15,920
in subtle ways, but you got it. The court matters. That's why we watch the court.

197
00:18:15,920 --> 00:18:20,480
The court always matters. That is very true. That's all the time we have for today.

198
00:18:20,480 --> 00:18:26,880
Thanks for joining us. This has been Inside Wisconsin Politics. Be sure to follow us on pbswisconsin.org

199
00:18:26,880 --> 00:18:33,840
wpr.org YouTube or wherever you get your podcasts.

200
00:18:41,120 --> 00:18:44,800
How did you feel about two minutes for that instead of three thoughts fine?

201
00:18:44,800 --> 00:18:47,360
All right. They've been more than enough for them to pull off.

202
00:18:47,360 --> 00:18:50,560
I should just pull over to it. No, it's fine.

203
00:18:50,560 --> 00:18:51,840
Then you went again to the whole thing.

204
00:18:51,840 --> 00:18:57,840
Well, I wasn't.