- I'm Frederica Freyberg.
Tonight on "Here and How," a "First Look"
at the problems facing the Wisconsin Election Commission
and confusion surrounding dozens of 17-year-olds
illegally voting in last year's election.
We'll "look ahead" at the ramifications of the proposed
American Health Care Act for older people,
through the lens of the AARP.
After that a "closer look" at the ongoing investigation
surrounding Wisconsin's juvenile detention centers
at Lincoln Hills and Copper Lake.
That's "Here and Now" for March 17.
- Funding for "Here and Now" is provided, in part,
by Friends of Wisconsin Public Television.
- A "first look" this week at illegal voting in Wisconsin.
The Wisconsin Election Commission report released this
week shows that there were more than 60 cases of 17-year-olds
illegally voting in the spring presidential primary.
The confusion centered around
whether 17-year-olds could vote in the primary
if they turned 18 by the November General Election.
In 21 states and the District of Columbia they can,
but not in Wisconsin.
More than 29 counties reported 17-year-olds casting ballots,
a huge surge compared to previous elections.
Those cases have been turned over to county prosecutors.
Some have decided not to file charges.
Some sent letters of reprimand and some counties are still
considering charges.
Joining us this week is Michael Haas, Wisconsin Elections
Commission Administrator.
Thanks for being here. - Nice to be here.
- How did you learn that these 17-year-olds had voted?
- Well, we initially learned on election day.
We started to receive calls.
Questions from either voters about whether or not they could
vote or from clerks about what was going on at the polls.
Eventually our statewide voter registration database
requires clerks to enter voter participation for everybody who
votes, and then their voter registration would indicate
their date of birth and that's how we can use that data
to detect whether or not they're eligible to vote.
- So how unusual is this?
- Well, it's a first for Wisconsin.
As you mentioned, some states allow 17-year-olds to vote
at the presidential primary
and that's why it's a little bit unique.
The thought was or the theory was: If I'm going to be 18
at the time of the November General Election,
I should be able to vote at the primary.
So this is pretty unusual.
- And describe how you think it happened that these 17-year-olds
thought this was okay here.
- Well, I think a couple things happened.
What we were hearing is that there were things
on social media.
Some campaign supporters were pushing this theory, because it
was allowed in some other states, I believe in Iowa,
one of our neighboring states.
And so that just grew through social media.
I think some of the 17-year-olds showed up at the polls then
and were pretty insistent that they could vote.
As you may recall, it was a pretty high turnout
for that presidential primary
and some of the poll workers, I think, felt
a little bit overwhelmed and thought this was plausible
and they allowed them to vote.
- Well, that brings up a couple of questions.
I guess the first, is more education required, both for
voters and for election workers at the polls?
- I think that's a fair point.
When we train, we start with the basics, that one of the voter
qualifications is you need to be 18 to vote.
We haven't really gone to the next vote of you can vote if
you're 17 or 16, it would seem to -- but, as I said, when
you're poll workers and you have a line in front of you and
you're trying to move people through, they don't always have
time to check exactly what the rules are.
And absolutely for the voters, especially for a presidential
primary, it's something we should be emphasizing more.
- With voter ID, is an election worker, will they now be
required to look at that age?
- It's a good point.
Under the photo ID law, -- the age is something that is marked
on the voter registration form when somebody registers to vote
and they sign, they certify that they're qualified to vote,
including being 18.
The photo ID law is very specific.
The poll workers are to look at the photo, the signature, the
name and to ensure that the photo ID is not expired but they
do not look at the birth date at that stage.
- Can 17-year-olds in Wisconsin register to vote if they are
going to be 18 by election day?
- Absolutely.
We encourage them to register as long as they will be 18 at the
time that they vote.
Then they can register while they're 17.
- That does seem a little confusing.
- It could be, yes.
- It also shows the careful work that election officials
have to do and meanwhile I understand the governor's
proposed budget would cut some positions in your commission.
How many and what might that mean?
- Well, the proposal is to reduce our staff by four.
To put it into context, the elections agency in the state of
Wisconsin has used federal funds for the majority of its budget
for over ten years now.
Those federal funds are expiring.
And so the governor's budget proposal does include
transferring most of those positions that are federally
funded to state GPR funds, which is great for the agency.
It's great news because it puts us on a more stable funding
platform going forward.
But the governor's proposal also is to fund 16 of those
federally-funded positions rather than 22.
Our commission met this week and directed our staff
to continue to advocate with the legislature
to try to reinstate six of those positions.
We have 31 total positions in our agency.
So it's a significant reduction for a small size agency.
I would also note that in this current budget our staff was
reduced by four.
So in total that would be ten fewer positions
out of about 35 originally.
- Seems like you have a lot to do and fewer people to do it with.
- Exactly.
Both the Legislature and Congress continue to require
more of elections administrators, both at the
state and local level, and that takes staff and resources to be
able to accomplish those things.
- We need to leave it there. Thank you very much.
- Thank you.
- New information this week on the American Health Care Act.
The house budget committee voted 19-17 to advance the bill.
That vote comes on the heels of the Congressional Budget Office
reporting that 14 million people would lose insurance under the
GOP plan in the first year.
And in ten years that number would rise to 24 million.
Last week, when we interviewed expert Donna Friedsam and asked
her for her winners and losers in the ACA replacement plan, she
said she'd need to wait for the CBO scoring to be definitive.
Well, she got back to us and here is her list of winners and
losers.
In the winners column, people who are younger, healthier,
higher income and those who live in areas with lower insurance
premiums.
Generally our expert says, urban areas.
Also winners?
Higher-income people who will see $16 billion in tax cuts.
The losers in the plan include lower-income and older people
between ages 50 and 64, people with significant health
conditions and those in areas with higher insurance premiums,
generally rural areas.
In the mixed column, expert Donna Friedsam says the
Congressional Budget Office projects insurance premiums will
decline after 2020, but the costs she says appear to decline
because of lower benefit policies that have higher
deductibles and narrower networks.
Also mixed?
CBO scoring projects the proposed plan would cut the
federal deficit by $337 billion over the next decade.
This occurs due to a 25% reduction in federal Medicaid
spending and reductions in tax credits for lower and middle
income people to buy insurance.
Despite the large number of people projected to lose health
insurance under the new GOP plan, House Speaker Paul Ryan
defended the CBO report, which also shows a reduction in the
deficit by $337 billion in ten years.
Ryan says, quote, this report confirms that the American
Health Care Act will lower premiums and improve access to
quality, affordable care.
CBO also finds that legislation will provide massive tax relief,
dramatically reduce the deficit and make the most fundamental
entitlement reform in more than a generation.
- And now a "look ahead" to the hard lobby against the American
Health Care Act from the AARP, which is worried about how the
plan treats the elderly.
Joining us now is Lisa Lamkins, the Federal Advocacy Director
for AARP Wisconsin.
Thanks for being here.
- Glad to be here.
- So how unusual is this hard lobby on the part of AARP?
- A lot of times AARP will express our concerns about
pieces of legislation or we'll hope for tweeks but in this case
we really are vehemently opposed to the American Health Care Act.
It does nothing but increase cost, increase risk, really make
health insurance unaffordable and unattainable for older
Americans.
- So if premiums for older Americans between 50 and 64, but
particularly at the upper range of 64, are allowed to be five
times that of policies for younger people, what does that
mean to a 64-year-old?
- It is huge.
I think this is one of the things when we talk about this.
What it really amounts to is an age tax.
This is something that the federal government is imposing
simply because someone is older.
You take an average 64-year-old making a little over $26,000 a
year.
Right now they would pay about $1700 a year in premiums.
Under this new bill that would be closer to $14,000 in
premiums.
That's huge.
- So do you suspect then that there will be a number of people
who will just forego coverage?
- Absolutely.
You know, the Republicans are talking a lot about access to
coverage.
But access does not make something affordable.
I really like the analogy too of we all have access to luxury
goods right now.
I could go down and buy a super expensive car.
But I can't because I can't afford that.
And unfortunately we're looking at a group of people who really
will not be able to afford such egregious increases in their
health insurance premiums.
- So is the message the AART is trying to send to Washington
being heard, do you know?
- I think it is.
AARP is getting a lot of good press, a lot of attention.
This is a message that really resonates because so many people
are impacted by it.
We are talking about older, low-income Americans, people in
rural areas.
People are worried.
You're looking at 50 to 64-year-olds who are thinking,
'Gosh this is a point in my life when I really need insurance.
What will happen if it's $15,000 a year?"
- At 65 though, that one year older than the age we've been
talking about, people can go on Medicare and the president has
vowed not to touch Medicare.
But you see that this bill leaves the door open to turning
it into a voucher program.
How does it do that?
- Well, one of our concerns is under the American Health Care
Act it actually does away with some funding.
There's been a tax on higher-income Americans, a
little bit extra added tax on wealthier people that has been
funneled to Medicare's hospital insurance trust fund.
So it's actually extended the life of Medicare.
This bill does away with that extra money coming into
Medicare.
So we're concerned that if the solvency of Medicare is
worsening, that just leaves Medicare open to those who
already want to gut and change the program.
- And so it's not something in this particular plan that talks
about that, turning it into a voucher kind of program, but
it's just the concern on AARP's part that it could lead to that.
- Right, and they wouldn't be able to do it under the rules
of this particular bill, but it's very well-known that
Speaker Ryan, HHS Secretary Price would like to turn
Medicare into that voucher program.
And that would frankly be disastrous for
the millions of people in America who rely on Medicare.
- And then what about Medicaid as that affects the elderly
population?
- A lot of people don't think about it, but in looking at this
overhaul to Medicaid, which is a ginormous cut and would wreak
havoc with the program, older people depend on Medicaid for
long term care.
For nursing home care, for home and community based services,
for those things that help older people and people with
disabilities, actually, with things like eating, bathing,
dressing, medication management.
All of that is covered by Medicaid.
If the cuts that happen as part of the American Health Care Act,
then those services just will not be there for the people who
are really and truly depending on it.
- Will Wisconsin be treated differently in all of that
because we did not take the expansion?
- You know, it's going to be really interesting to see how
that actually shakes out.
I think the Medicaid issue is one where we're hearing from
governors, where governors including Governor Walker, are
saying, "Hey, let's move slowly.
Let's take a look at how we make this happen." Right now they're
looking at doling out these block grants based on the number
of people who are enrolled in Medicaid.
Well, Wisconsin's Medicaid population didn't increase
hugely because we didn't take the expansion.
So I think the actual details of what that's going to look like
is going to be one of the biggest parts of this whole
health care debate.
- Thanks for joining us, Lisa Lamkins.
- Thank you.
- In tonight's "closer look," the FBI is investigating
prisoner abuse, child neglect and sexual assault at the
Lincoln Hills and Copper Lake juvenile detention facilities
north of Wausau.
And conditions there are the crux of a class action lawsuit.
But in a newspaper column this week, Wisconsin Secretary of
Corrections says he's made it his mission to fix the problems
from top to bottom.
Jon Litscher joins us now and thanks very much for doing so.
- Well, thank you.
It's good to be here and it's good to talk about the changes
that we have made at Lincoln Hills, Copper Lakes, because I
believe that some of your opening comments are the result
of the past.
And that's dwelled on, the issues of the past.
And we're excited about making the changes to make this
environment a safe and secure environment and an educational
setting that can be respected by the youth.
- And so you say those are conditions of the past, but,
again, that investigation is ongoing.
But describe for me some of the changes that you have made since
you became secretary.
- Well, first of all, even before I became secretary, I
must say this because I think it's important.
At the agency level, Division Administrator Paquin was
appointed as the new Division Administrator of Juvenile
Corrections, along with the Assistant Division Administrator
Shelby McCulley.
Both of them also took as their mission the complete change, the
reorganization and the review of all policies, procedures and
activities at Lincoln Hills/Copper Lakes.
Management was also changed then at Lincoln Hills/Copper Lakes to
bring in an individual that had a fresh set of eyes and a fresh
philosophy in dealing with youth and dealing with the employee
groups that are there.
But some of the more specific issues that we dealt with is,
first of all, is that we -- we're expanding both the mental
health and the medical health services for the youth that are
there.
I emphasize the mental health because many of these young
people are coming from lives that have had challenges, both
challenges physically and mentally, academically, whatever
area you want to say.
And as a result they need assistance and they need help
and we were committed to giving them that additional assistance.
We completely revised our student complaint process, where
that an individual youth that is at Lincoln Hills/Copper Lakes
can feel confident that if he or she has a complaint against a
staff person or some programmatic issue, that their
complaint, number one, will not be reviewed by line staff, but
by administrative staff directly.
Why that is important?
Because it builds confidence from the youth that there would
be no retaliation for any type of complaint that would be made.
Also, other issues that we have done as far as putting body
cameras on our youth counselors.
Why is that important?
Because it deals with the interaction with the youth
themselves such that there's a record, such that there is a --
not only a verbal record, but a video record of what kind of
exchange that took place in there.
And I could expand, but I'll allow you to ask a question
first.
- Well, I do want to ask this.
The ACLU lawyers say that people were fired and new leadership
came in, like what you've described.
But they say solitary confinement, mechanical
restraints and pepper spray continue to be used?
What is your response to that?
- Well, as part of our entire process there, we are working
very diligently to reduce the use of what I would call
restraints, restrictive housing and, well, pepper spray or OC,
as we call it in the institution.
The fact of the matter is that those are still aspects that we
use because part of the problems of the past has been physical
altercation or integration with these young people.
That assists us in diminishing that.
But what's more important than that is the fact of the
retraining of our youth counselors in the aspects of
positive proper use of force, understanding there's a trauma
that's usually associated with these young people, so training
in trauma-informed care and adolescent brain development and
deescalating techniques and motivational interviewing to
deescalate situations.
These are all training mechanisms we implemented.
Why?
Because we want to reduce the outside uses of what would be
seen as, using your terminology, pepper spray, but it's what we
call O2 spray -- or OC spray, I'm sorry, but also the use of
restrictive housing and restraints.
So I will never say we are going to eliminate those because
in some aspects from a pure safety standpoint, they may be
necessary.
And why may they be necessary?
Because it decreases the need for any kind of a physical
interaction between staff and youth and we think that's
problematic.
So we use other types of aspects to help and assist in behavioral
issues.
- Just briefly in the few seconds left, some people are
calling for these institutions to be shut down altogether.
What's your response to that?
- Well, I think that that would be unwise.
You're never going to stop the need for society saying some
youth need to be removed and put in some type of a situation that
betters them educationally, betters them program-wise and
hopefully betters them as an individual and then return to
their communities to be productive individuals.
- All right. We need to leave it there.
Secretary Litscher, thanks very much.
- Thanks very much.
- The ACLU lawsuit calls to end the use of solitary confinement,
restraints and pepper spray on juvenile at the detention
facilities.
Others want to close down Lincoln Hills and Copper Lake
altogether.
Among them, Jeffery Roman, with an organization called Youth
Justice Milwaukee, which is holding a summit on juvenile
justice issues next week.
He joins us from Milwaukee and thanks very much for being here.
- Thanks for having me.
- Wisconsin's Corrections Secretary says he cares deeply
about the young people at these facilities and is working to fix
the problems there.
What is your response to the work that has been done on the
part of the state to address concerns?
- Sure.
While we thank Secretary Litscher for the work he's
putting forward to curb some of the things that are happening at
Lincoln Hills.
Youth Justice Milwaukee believes that those are short-term
solutions and you can't put-- you can't piecemeal solutions
or put band-aids over problems
that need to be fundamentally changed.
So our juvenile justice system needs to fundamentally change
and be changed from the top down.
We believe that it's an outdated, punitive,
discriminatory system for our young people.
And to the extent that we can, we want to make sure that we are
working with the state, Secretary Litscher, our partners
at the county and community to make sure we are putting
together alternatives so we don't have to send young people
to Lincoln Hills.
- In fact, you would like those facilities to be shut down?
- Absolutely.
Yeah.
Our long-term goal of Youth Justice Milwaukee is to close
Lincoln Hills and Copper Lakes because again we believe they
are outdated systems that are punitive versus rehabilitative
for young people.
However, we believe we can't just close them overnight.
We understand that there are things politically, socially
things that are happening that will prevent us from overnight
closing Lincoln Hills and Copper Lakes.
However, we can begin to start having critical conversations
about what needs to be in place instead of sending young people
to being incarcerated.
So we are actively working with our county and partners to begin
to reimagine what a continuous support services and alternative
to incarceration for young people.
- You would like to see community-based solutions,
but where do you sentence the violent repeat offenders?
- Sure.
We understand and we know that there will be some individuals,
some young people who need to have some level of secure
placement for their own safety and for the safety of the
community.
Our stance is not that those places should not exist.
Our stance is for those young people who need to have
additional and advanced level of secure placement for their
safety and safety of the community, that there are better
alternatives to sending them hours away from their families,
from their communities.
Instead of having very large institutionalized institutions
where you have beds for 100 plus young people, we believe that
closer to home alternatives, secure placement options, where
there are no more than eight, maybe ten, maybe 15 at the very
top, and that those institutions are full of wrap-around supports
from community and that they are full of more cognitive
behavioral therapy kind of approaches, trauma-informed
approaches so that we are really working with our young people to
be rehabilitated so that they can be restored to their
communities instead of recidivating back into the
system three, six, nine, twelve months later down the road.
- Meanwhile the facilities are still in place up north and the
FBI continues its investigation.
What do you hope they find?
- Well, we hope that they find or at least bring to light more
that the system that we currently have in place for
young people is outdated and punitive.
And that the priority needs to be on restoring, rehabilitating
our young people.
We also hope that with the investigations that it really
forces our state, our governor, Secretary Litscher and our
county and our judges particularly to really start to
think about what's happening to our young people in those
institutions and what we can do here at home to better
rehabilitate our young people.
- And toward that, you are holding -- or Youth Justice
Milwaukee is holding a summit next week.
What is that about?
- Sure, so Youth Justice of Milwaukee, first we are a
broad-based campaign.
We are a coalition of individuals, young people who
have been either incarcerated or have been in detention, their
families, their parents.
And community and national advocates who are working across
the country and across the community to make sure that
there are alternatives to incarceration for young people.
So the Youth Justice Summit is really about engaging the
community and having an opportunity for these issues to
really come to light and to really organize and mobilize the
community in what the community-based response should
be to those issues.
So you'll see we have a number of national speakers coming who
have demonstrated how communities have been able to
organize and mobilize and change policy
to fundamentally transform their juvenile justice systems
in their communities and really leave us
with some lessons learned in those communities.
That's what the day is about.
We'll have a number of workshops.
I'm particularly excited that we're going to have some young
people who are going to be able to tell their stories, their
experiences and talk about things that they've seen and
they've experienced inside and outside of Lincoln Hills and
Copper Lakes.
That's really what it's about.
It's really a community engagement tool and we're
looking forward to the community really being engaged starting
next Wednesday.
- All right.
Jeffery Roman, thanks very much.
- Thank you.
Thank you so much.
- A quick programming note.
Wisconsin Public Television and Radio in partnership with
Wisconsin Vote will bring you the State DPI Candidate Debate
on Friday, March 31 at 7:00 p.m.
Incumbent State Superintendent Tony Evers will face challenger
Lowell Holtz, the former Whitnall School Superintendent
in the election on April 4.
Again, that debate is Friday, March 31, at 7:00.
And finally tonight a "look ahead" to next week.
We examine Governor Walker's budget and the impact it could
have on education in one rural school district.
And next week the first Marquette University Law School
poll since President Trump took office.
That's next week on "Here and Now." I'm Frederica Freyberg.
Have a great weekend.
- Funding for "Here and Now" is provided, in part, by Friends of
Wisconsin Public Television.