- Good evening.
I'm Zac Schultz sitting in for Frederica Freyberg.
Tonight on "Here and Now" a "First Look" at the end of the
American Health Care Act, which was pulled from the House floor
without a vote today.
After that, a "Closer Look"
at the new Marquette Law School Poll.
Then a look at what proposed school funding changes may mean
for rural districts.
It's "Here & Now" for March 24.
- Funding for "Here & Now" is provided in part by Friends of
Wisconsin Public Television.
- Late this afternoon House Speaker Paul Ryan decided not to
hold a vote on his bill that would have repealed and replaced
most of the Affordable Care Act.
The vote was supposed to have occurred Thursday, on the
seventh anniversary of the bill's signing, but it became
clear Republicans did not have the votes to pass their bill.
Here's what Speaker Ryan had to say.
- We came really close today but we came up short.
I spoke to the president just a little while ago.
I told him the best thing I think to do is to pull this bill
and he agreed with that decision.
I will not sugarcoat this.
This is a disappointing day for us.
Doing big things is hard.
All of us, all of us, myself included, we will need
time to reflect on how we got to this moment,
what we could have done to do it better.
- Even before this vote was canceled, we invited all the
Republican members of Congress from Wisconsin to join us on
this program, including Senator Ron Johnson
and Governor Scott Walker.
All of them declined.
However, Democratic Senator Tammy Baldwin did join us
earlier today to talk about health care.
Senator Baldwin, thanks for joining us today.
- Thank you.
- Recent polling shows support for the American Health Care Act
at 17% nationwide.
Have you ever seen a bill this unpopular get forced
to the floor for a vote when it's unclear it can even pass?
- I haven't seen anything like this before, and it's been a
tumultuous week in Washington D.C., as Republican members of
the House seem to be talking amongst themselves rather than
listening to the people who sent them to represent them.
They seem to be discussing how to make a bad bill even worse in
order to try to find a majority.
It's quite stunning to behold.
- Now, if it does pass the House, which is unclear at this
point, it only needs 51 votes in the Senate.
Do you think it could pass there?
- Certainly not in any form resembling what they are
debating right now in the House of Representatives.
We've already had several of my Republican colleagues for
various reasons say this is a non-starter with them in the
Senate.
But I actually hope the House does what's right when they
vote, we anticipate later today, and turn it back.
This is clearly something that harms Wisconsinites.
It harms Americans in terms of higher costs for less care,
shortening the solvency of the Medicare program, capping and
cutting Medicaid, putting rural clinics and hospitals in
jeopardy of having to shut out the lights.
With big tax giveaways to the wealthiest.
It's just bad news on every front and especially after
reading reports across our state in the last week of how harshly
this impacts both western and northern Wisconsin, and older
Americans and Wisconsinites, 45 and above.
I just hope they find the resolve to listen to
their constituents and vote no.
- If this repeal and replace effort fails, the president said
he's already ready to move on and let Obamacare stand.
Do you believe that or do you think there will be more
attempts in the future to reform, if this fails?
- You know, I think that if this fails, we should start
doing what we should have been doing for the last seven years,
and that is constantly working together to strengthen our
health care system, to lower costs, to increase competitions,
and to stand up to those powerful folks that are sort of
rigging things in their favor.
In particular I would mention the pharmaceutical companies
that we are seeing double, triple, quadruple the price of
lifesaving drugs like the Epi-pen we saw last year,
and seeing in a continuing fashion this year.
There's no reason at all why the Congress of the United States
shouldn't work together to confront the real challenges
that exist in any complex system like health care.
But Republicans have confused, or have refused and have said
repeal, repeal, repeal, for seven years, and now look where
this has put us.
- Your Wisconsin colleague, Republican Senator Ron Johnson,
has said they need to work with Democrats to fix Obamacare.
Are there areas where you think both parties could work to
improve the current law?
- Oh, absolutely.
And this has been my posture all the way along.
Health systems are complex.
And the Affordable Care Act gave people access to health
insurance who hadn't had it before.
And it was wonderful in that respect.
People who had pre-existing health conditions or who had
insurance but had annual or lifetime caps that sent them to
medical bankruptcy.
But even the Affordable Care Act was not the end.
Certainly not perfect.
And as we saw prices go up, we need to vigilantly and
constantly be working together to confront that.
Whether that's working on the issue of the high cost of
prescription medication or whether it's trying to introduce
more competition so that people can have choices and be able to
afford their premiums and deductibles.
But as we've seen this Trumpcare, this Republican
proposal to repeal and replace sets all of those indicators in
the wrong direction.
So again, I hope that today, later today, that the
Republicans reject this proposal and we get back to working
across the party aisle on something that affects everybody
we represent.
- Now, if this repeal and replace plan fails, are you
worried Republicans could undermine Obamacare in other
ways, by changing regulations at the federal administrative level
or not funding premium subsidies in future years?
- You know, I hope that the mischief-making is done.
The idea that we would put America's health and well-being
behind partisan politics, I hope that today, if I had any sway
over the outcome in the House, that we learn a lesson and that
we begin to work together to advance everybody's health and
well-being.
Their access to affordable, quality care.
We always should be working together in that direction, not
trying to score political points and when it was cast in that way
yesterday, I understand that President Trump spoke with some
of the House Republicans and you know, issued his stern warning.
It was--it seemed more about political points than it did the
well-being of Wisconsin citizens who all want to be able to
protect their families and be able to get high quality,
affordable health care for their, themselves
and their families.
- We've got just under a minute left.
But this isn't the only big thing happening in Washington.
The Supreme Court nomination of Neil Gorsuch is moving forward.
You came out in opposition as soon as he was nominated.
Have you heard anything to change your mind?
- I had a chance to study his record when he was on a short
list of folks that President Trump might nominate.
The things that distress me so significantly is the lopsided
number of times he sided with powerful corporations over
workers and retirees, where he sided against disabled students
just trying to get a fair and equitable education in our K-12
system.
When he's decided against women's health.
You know, he decided in the Hobby Lobby case that
corporations are people.
That to me is counterproductive at this critical time when his
nomination and his confirmation, if it goes through, will affect
Americans for generations, not just years, but generations.
And so I believe that Neil Gorsuch should be held to the 60
vote standard that previous Supreme Court nominees have been
held to.
If he can't get 60 bipartisan votes then I don't think Mitch
McConnell should change the rules.
I think Donald Trump should change the nominee.
- Senator Baldwin, thank you for your time today.
- Thank you.
- Again, we invited each of the Wisconsin Republican members of
Congress to join us on this program, as well as Senator
Johnson and Governor Walker.
All of them declined.
So what do Wisconsin voters think about the health care
debate?
Let's find out in our "Closer Look" at results from the latest
Marquette Law School Poll.
And joining us now is the director of the poll, Charles
Franklin.
Thanks for being here.
- Thanks for having me.
- You asked what people wanted Congress to do about Obamacare
or the Affordable Care Act and most don't want it to go away.
- That's right.
If you put it together about 60% would either keep it or keep it
and improve it, and about 36% would either repeal it or repeal
and replace it.
We've seen similar kinds of numbers in the past, though
support for Obamacare in general has moved up a little bit
since the new administration took office.
- And is that--is it possible to know if that's because
there's actually a realistic threat to it now?
- I think the threat is one thing.
We've seen the Affordable Care Act was more unfavorable than
favorable throughout its life until this new year.
What's different?
There's now a realistic threat of repeal.
The other is, as we saw in our data, people are a bit fearful
what a replacement would look like.
They're concerned that it would cover fewer people and that it
would cost more, the opposite of what President Trump talked
about on the campaign of covering more people for much
less money.
- And we've got some numbers on that.
The Congressional Budget Office put out numbers that said it
will lead to 24 million people losing insurance over time.
But less than half of the voters believe that.
Is that lack of trust in government or is that a quiz on
whether the people are paying attention?
- I think it's a little bit of both.
More of a quiz at this point because the bill is uncertain.
It's being changed constantly.
We don't even know what's going to happen with the vote.
Or at least I don't at this point.
So, I think it reflects that uncertainty but it also is worth
looking that close to 2 to 1 margin who think something worse
will happen compared to think something better will happen.
That's a real imbalance.
It reflects the CBO numbers.
It also reflects the political debate around the bill.
- And we do have the first approval ratings for the Trump
era in Wisconsin.
How's he doing?
- 41% approval, 47 disapprove.
A little higher than national average, 11% haven't made up
their minds.
As a result, his 41 approval is maybe a point below the national
average right now, but disapproval numbers are about 3
or 4 points below the national average.
That's because we are not quite as opinionated about him yet as
the national polling looks.
- But when we look at the party breakdown, it's pretty clear.
- Oh, the party breakdown is night and day.
That is like the middle of the Obama administration.
High 80% of Republicans approve of Trump, high 80% of Democrats
disapprove.
Independents are a bit split.
A little bit more disapproval than approval.
Normally a honeymoon takes place and the opposition party at
least holds off on being very negative.
That has not happened now.
The other thing is, Republicans were a bit split in the state in
the fall about how they felt about Trump.
They are now completely unified behind him at nearly 90%.
- Maybe the honeymoon's within the Republican Party which he
had to earn.
- I think the party has come home to him
and rallied around him.
We'll see.
For President Obama, he stayed in the low to mid 80s almost
always with Democrats.
We'll see if that happens with Trump.
- And moving to the state, Governor Walker continues his
slow climb towards almost a positive rating.
- We see his best rating in the last two years, 45 to 48, 45
approve, 48 disapprove.
So, he's still a little underwater by a three point
margin, but that's a three point uptick in his approval, three
points down on his disapproval.
We've watched him of course for his entire term, but especially
since the beginning of 2015 he's been substantially more
disapproval than approval.
This is closing the gap.
He closed some over last summer but now he's closed a little bit
more.
This comes in the wake of a generally positive budget that
he submitted.
- And talking about that budget, one of the big issues is
always going to be public education and funding for it.
He's proposed a big increase.
And it looks like people support that idea.
- People overwhelming do by 80%, support more funding for
K-12 education.
This is the mirror image of two years ago in that budget where
initially cuts to K-12 were proposed, which were enormously
unpopular with the public and also ultimately with
legislators.
- And so it makes sense that at the same time people want more
funding, that shows they do like the local schools.
- Generally we've tracked this all along and a substantial
majority are either very satisfied or satisfied
with their public schools.
It's a very modest minority who are negative about those
schools, though it is fair to recognize more people are in
just the satisfied category by about 2 to 1,
than are in the very satisfied category.
So, it's not like people are saying their schools are
perfect, but on balance, they're quite positive to it, and except
in the Milwaukee area, where it's the biggest negativity,
most of the state is quite positive
to their local public schools.
- And very quickly, seems to be a trend that has been relatively
consistent over time.
- That's right.
We have not seen a shift in the balance of that to any
appreciable degree in the four years, five years that we have
been doing the Marquette poll.
- All right.
Charles Franklin, thanks for your time.
- Thank you.
- In tonight's "Closer Look," Governor Walker's budget
increases K-12 funding by nearly $650 million over the next two
years.
The proposal also separately boosts funding to rural
districts by more than $30 million.
But not every rural school is able to benefit.
Frederica Freyberg reports from Adams-Friendship.
- There can be no doubt.
The Adams-Friendship district in central Wisconsin is rural and
vast, covering 500 square miles.
- If you're done with your model, take this time to answer
those three questions on your lab report.
- As the only district entirely inside the county, there are a
lot of students in its three grade schools, middle and high
school, at 1575.
But given the district's spread, that comes out to only about
three students per square mile.
Remember that math.
Because it factors into how much funding the district receives.
District Administrator Rick Wasky takes to the board to
explain what state budget writers call sparsity aid.
Something the governor's proposed budget increases for
rural schools.
It gives extra money to schools with a sparse number of students
per square mile.
Adams-Friendship qualifies there, but it's disqualified
because of the other part of the equation.
The extra bump in funding only accrues to districts of fewer
than 1,000 students.
- We only have 3.15 students per square mile.
But because we cover 500 square miles and we have 1575 students,
the sparsity aid doesn't help us budget-wise at all.
We're looking at a structural budget deficit between $700,000
and $800,000.
So you know, even $175,000, $200,000 of additional aid
certainly would help us with our budget deficit.
- We are putting $11.5 billion of state support into K-12
education.
Specifically this budget includes a more than half a
billion dollar increase in per-pupil aid for public
education.
- Given the red ink in his district, Wasky is glad the
governor's proposed budget goes outside the usual funding
formula to boost that per-pupil amount as part of the overall
K-12 budget.
Because the usual formula to equalize aid to rich and poor
districts has always hurt his.
- The concept that land and property value equals wealth is
kind of an antiquated concept.
Our school district, we're over 70% free and reduced lunch, yet
we have to pay a penalty on our equalized aid because of our
property valuation, mostly lake properties.
- Adams-Friendship has the ninth highest poverty rate of
the 425 school districts in the state.
But gets dinged because of the value of some lake homes there.
- We call that thirds.
Two thirds.
- In the schools, that poverty rate means the district provides
breakfast, lunch, dinner and snacks to students.
At the same time, there have been staff layoffs and program
cuts.
Administrator Wasky reports that Act 10 did help weather funding
cuts at the time.
Teachers pay more for their own benefits but he says it's hard
to keep them.
- There's kind of a breaking point to how much you can take
away from your employees before they leave.
- So let's break this apart.
- Getting and keeping teachers is a perennial problem in rural
districts.
So, too, is the cost of bussing.
The governor's budget proposes more than $10 million in funding
hikes for high cost transportation aid.
Once again, Adams-Friendship misses outs.
The district administration says it drove costs down by
privatizing transportation and centralizing bus routes.
Because of that, it did not qualify for aid anymore.
And so, even as one rural district tries to contain costs
while looking at the third consecutive year of budget
deficits, proposals to increase funding across the board, and
specifically for rural schools, is welcome news.
- We do feel good that the needs of the rural schools are
being addressed, and I want to make that very clear.
Just because some programs haven't directly benefited
Adams-Friendship does not mean those programs haven't
benefited other districts in significant ways.
But I do think there needs to be some thought given to how some
of the most needy school districts are being completely
missed by some of the rules that are associated with the
distribution of the money.
- The per-pupil funding increase in the governor's
budget would mean an increase of more than$625,000 for the
Adams-Friendship district.
That increase is already accounted for in the
district's$700,000 deficit.
The legislature's Joint Finance Committee holds public hearings
across the state on the budget the week of April 3rd.
For more on the unique challenges facing rural schools,
with new funding methods, we turn to Kim Kaukl, the executive
director of the Wisconsin Rural Schools Alliance.
Thanks for being here.
- Thanks Zac.
Appreciate it.
- Is Adams-Friendship the exception here or are there
other obviously rural districts that don't quite fit that
definition according to the state?
- There are a number of districts in the same boat
Adams-Friendship is.
And with a lot of the governor's funding proposals he's put out
there, it helped a number of rural districts, but districts
like Adams-Friendship and a lot of other districts out there
that are members of our organization and not members,
they're still on the outside looking in
because they don't meet certain criteria.
Like with the sparsity aid piece brought up in the video, because
they made all the right pieces of the formula except the
enrollment.
They are a little over the 1500.
One of the things our organization requested from the
governor's office was to go up to at least 1500 because we felt
that would probably get about 80% of the districts in.
So, still have a large number of districts on the outside looking
in, and the same thing with the high transportation aid.
They made all the sparsity pieces but don't meet that 150%
threshold.
- $30 million for rural schools isn't nothing but compared to
the $21 billion we'll be spending on K-12 over the next
two years, it's pocket change.
What difference can that money make for a rural district?
- As I've said in some of my other interviews,
it's a step in the right direction.
Where the $200 per-pupil comes in,
it gets us back to about 2011 funding.
And I say that because of all the cuts that have been made
since 2011.
Now we are kind of putting money back in, and it really gets us
back to about the 2011 funding level.
And that's why you are going to see this April a number of
referendums, because people are still struggling because we're
so far behind with the finances.
- Now, one of the strings attached to that increase
in funding is so-called compliance with Act 10.
Are there a lot of school districts out there that are
members of yours that may not be in full compliance?
- I don't have an exact number but I know I've heard from some
of them that have used the tools but maybe haven't used,
gotten all the way to the 12%,
but have used the other pieces of the tools.
And especially out in the rural areas, we've got to find a way
to be able to attract people.
And a lot of times it's the benefit package that you can
provide and you may not be able to give the salary, but if you
provide a healthy benefit package, people are more willing
to come out to the rural areas.
And I think that's why a lot of our rural districts really plug
into the health side of it to attract people.
- We've heard about a teacher shortage everywhere.
Is it more stark in rural school districts?
- It's a nationwide phenomena, but yeah, especially out in our
rural areas.
We're having a hard time.
Especially in some of the key areas like math and science, and
technology of attracting people out into the rural areas.
Number one, a lot of young people just don't want to come
out to the rural areas because there's not a lot going on
in their minds.
But I've also found if I can get young people to come out to the
rural areas and keep them there for 4 or 5 years, they realize
it's a pretty good life out here.
It's a little more laid back. A little more peaceful.
The families are committed to their students
and public education.
- Now, the Republicans that control the legislature
represent a lot of rural areas and a lot of these districts
are in their districts.
Do you think you've got a sympathetic ear at the Capitol
to these issues?
- I'm starting to feel that way.
I think our Republican legislators are starting to
listen to their constituents, especially when it comes to
public education.
I believe a lot of our constituents are starting to get
a better understanding the impact that choice schools are
having, even though they don't have choice schools in their
district, it's shrinking the total piece of the pie.
I know the last numbers that just came out, I think there's
300 now choice schools.
And pair that up with the 426 public schools all coming out of
the same budget, the piece of the pie gets smaller and smaller
and smaller.
And I think that's waking up a lot of our rural folks to start
talking with their legislators.
- All right.
Kim Kaukl, thanks for your time today.
- Thanks very much.
- Now for an update away from the state capitol.
Far away, in Madison Square Garden in New York City.
That's where the Wisconsin Badger men's basketball team
will play the University of Florida tonight.
The Badgers advanced into the Sweet 16 after upsetting last
year's national champion Villanova.
Tip-off is one hour from now.
Good luck, Badgers.
And finally tonight, a "Look Ahead" to next week.
That' when "Here & Now" will be pre-empted so that we may bring
you an one hour live debate between the candidates running
for state school superintendent.
Incumbent Tony Evers and challenger Lowell Holtz will
debate the issues from 7:00 to 8:00 p.m.
March 31.
Our debate is co-produced with Wisconsin Public Radio
and will be moderated by Frederica Freyberg and WPR's Shawn Johnson.
That's next Friday night.
Thanks for watching.
Have a great weekend.
- Funding for "Here & Now" is provided in part by Friends of
Wisconsin Public Television.