>> A DISABLED LEGISLATOR DOES
BATTLE WITH SPEAKER ROBIN VOS
OVER ACCOMMODATIONS AT
THE CAPITOL.
IN TONIGHT'S "FIRST LOOK," WE
TALK WITH DEMOCRATIC STATE
REPRESENTATIVE JIMMY
ANDERSON, WHO ALREADY MISSED A
VOTE ON THE LAME-DUCK LAW
BECAUSE HE COULDN'T STAY AT THE
CAPITOL OVERNIGHT.
HE NOW SEEKS TO BE ABLE TO
TELEPHONE IN TO PUBLIC HEARINGS.
VOS SAYS PHONING IN IS
DISRESPECTFUL AND ASSEMBLY RULES
DON'T ALLOW IT.
ANDERSON IS PARALYZED FROM A
CRASH CAUSED BY A DRUNK DRIVER.
WE REACHED OUT TO
SPEAKER VOS FOR CLARITY ON THIS
AND DIDN'T HEAR BACK.
HE DID, HOWEVER, SEND A LETTER
TO REPRESENTATIVE ANDERSON
CALLING WHAT HE'S DOING
"POLITICAL GRANDSTANDING."
WE STARTED BY ASKING THE
REPRESENTATIVE'S REACTION TO
THAT.
>> I'M SIMPLY ASKING FOR
ACCOMMODATIONS THAT ARE OWED TO
ME UNDER THE A.D.A., AND SPEAKER
VOS HAS BEEN AWARE OF MY
ACCOMMODATION REQUESTS ALL THE
WAY BACK IN JANUARY, AND HAS
IGNORED THEM FOR MONTHS, SO I
THINK THAT THE ONLY WAY I'VE
BEEN ABLE TO GET HIM TO PAY
ATTENTION TO THESE ISSUES IS
BEING ABLE TO TALK ABOUT THEM IN
THE MEDIA AND HAVE THE PEOPLE OF
WISCONSIN PUT PRESSURE ON HIM TO
DO THE RIGHT THING.
>> AND YET HE SAID THAT YOU DID
NOT GO DIRECTLY TO HIM OR H.R.
WITH YOUR REQUEST TO BE ABLE TO
PHONE IN TO PUBLIC HEARINGS, BUT
HE HEARD IT THROUGH THE MEDIA,
SAYING THAT CALLS INTO QUESTION
YOUR SERIOUSNESS.
WHAT ABOUT THAT?
>> I TAKE MY DISABILITY VERY
SERIOUSLY, SO I THINK IT'S --
HE'S COMPLETELY MISCONSTRUING
THE PROPER WAY IN WHICH WE'RE
GOING TO ADDRESS THIS PROBLEM.
YOU KNOW, WHENEVER I HAVE A
DISABILITY REQUEST RELATED TO
SOMETHING THAT'S LIKE PHYSICALLY
WITH THE BUILDING, WHETHER IT'S
VOICE RECOGNITION SOFTWARE FOR
MY LAPTOP OR CHANGES BEING MADE
TO MY DESK, FOR INSTANCE, I'VE
GONE TO THE SERGEANT'S OFFICE
AND THOSE ACCOMMODATIONS HAVE
BEEN PROVIDED.
THIS WAS A CHANGE TO THE
ASSEMBLY RULES THAT REQUIRES A
VOTE BY RESOLUTION, AND THE WAY
THAT WE CHANGE THESE RULES HAS
ALWAYS BEEN NEGOTIATIONS BETWEEN
DEMOCRATIC AND REPUBLICAN
LEADERSHIP.
SO WHAT I DID WAS I WENT TO
DEMOCRATIC LEADERSHIP AND SAID,
THESE ARE THE ACCOMMODATIONS I
NEED, THIS IS THE PROPER
PROCESS, AND WE WENT THROUGH THE
PROPER PROCESS AND SPEAKER VOS
SAID NO, I'M NOT GOING TO
PROVIDE THOSE ACCOMMODATIONS.
I DON'T KNOW HOW MUCH MORE CLEAR
HE COULD HAVE BEEN ON THE ISSUE.
>> HE DOES SAY, AND AS YOU
ACKNOWLEDGE THAT SOME
ACCOMMODATIONS WERE MADE,
INCLUDING A SPECIAL MICROPHONE,
SPECIAL VOTING EQUIPMENT AND CAB
FARE WHEN A STAFFER WOULD TAKE
YOU HOME.
DESCRIBE FOR US WHY YOU NEED
THIS ADDITIONAL ACCOMMODATION TO
BE ABLE TO CALL INTO HEARINGS?
>> I THINK PART OF THE PROBLEM
IS THAT SPEAKER VOS, WHEN HE
SAYS PEOPLE ARE DRIVING FOR
HOURS, WHY CAN'T YOU DRIVE IN,
JIMMY?
IT'S A DIFFERENCE BETWEEN HAVING
YOUR AUTONOMETER GET YOU UP IN
THE MORNING AND WHAT ME AS A
QUADRIPLEGIC FACES.
I HAVE TO RELY ON OTHER PEOPLE
TO HELP GET ME IN AND OUT OF BED
OR TO GET ME DRESSED, FOR
INSTANCE, AND YOU KNOW, FOR
INSTANCE, MY MORNING HEALTHCARE
PROVIDER, SHE HAS A KID THAT
NEEDS TO GO TO DAYCARE AND AS
ANYONE WITH CHILDREN KNOWS,
SOMETIMES KIDS DON'T COOPERATE.
SO IF SHE'S 15, 20 MINUTES LATE,
THAT MEANS I'M 15 OR 20 MINUTES
LATE.
AND SO BEING ABLE TO CALL IN TO
THE MORNINGS, I HAVE ACCESS TO A
PHONE 24/7, SO IF SHE'S RUNNING
LATE, I CAN STILL CALL IN TO MY
COMMITTEE HEARINGS AND
PARTICIPATE.
AND YOU KNOW, THAT'S WHAT MY
CONSTITUENTS WANT.
THEY ELECTED ME, WHEELCHAIR AND
ALL, THEY UNDERSTOOD THIS WAS
GOING TO COME WITH CERTAIN
ACCOMMODATIONS BUT IF I'M NOT
ALLOWED TO PARTICIPATE IN THE
PROCESS, I'M BEING
DISENFRANCHISED ESSENTIALLY.
>> AT THIS POINT, THE SPEAKER
SAYS HE WILL HAVE A VIDEOGRAPHER
AT PUBLIC HEARINGS IF YOU GIVE
HIM ADEQUATE NOTICE AND WILL
PROPOSE PAPER BALLOTS FOR VOTING
IN EXECUTIVE SESSION.
HE SAYS HE HOPES YOU FIND THIS
SATISFACTORY.
DO YOU?
>> NOT AT ALL.
A VIDEOGRAPHER IS ESSENTIALLY
SAYING I CAN WATCH THE
PROCEEDINGS BUT I CAN'T
PARTICIPATE, I CAN'T ASK
QUESTIONS, I CAN'T PROVIDE
INSIGHT.
I MEAN, THE VERY POINT OF THESE
COMMITTEE HEARINGS IS SO WE CAN
ALL LEND OUR EXPERTISE AND
EXPERIENCES TO MAKE OUR
LEGISLATION BETTER FOR PEOPLE IN
OUR DISTRICTS IN THE STATE OF
WISCONSIN.
SO THE IDEA THAT I'M STILL NOT
ALLOWED TO PARTICIPATE
COMPLETELY MISSES THE POINT.
AS FOR THE PAPER BALLOTING, I
THINK IT'S A FINE IDEA, IT'S NOT
SOMETHING I SPECIFICALLY ASKED
FOR, BUT IF IT MAKES THE
LEGISLATION OR IT MAKES THE
LEGISLATURE BETTER AND OTHER
MEMBERS WANT IT, I'M FULLY
SUPPORTIVE.
>> NOW AS YOU WELL KNOW, IN
2017, LEGISLATORS COULD APPEAR
BY WEB CAMERA, BUT RULE CHANGES
THAT YEAR ELIMINATED THAT
PROVISION, AND YOU VOTED FOR
THAT CHANGE.
WHY?
>> SO THAT WAS MY VERY FIRST
VOTE ESSENTIALLY OF THE
LEGISLATURE AND I'D NEVER SERVED
IN OFFICE BEFORE.
I DIDN'T KNOW WHAT IT WAS LIKE,
WHAT THE EXPERIENCE WAS GOING TO
BE LIKE, WHAT I WAS GOING TO
NEED AS A DISABLED LEGISLATOR,
SO AS I WENT THROUGH THAT FIRST
YEAR, AFTER THAT TERRIBLE
LAME-DUCK SESSION, I UNDERSTOOD
WHAT THE ACCOMMODATIONS I WAS
GOING TO NEED, SO THAT'S WHY I
MADE THOSE REQUESTS.
KNOWING WHAT I LEARNED AFTER
THAT FIRST YEAR, I NEVER WOULD
HAVE SUPPORTED A SIMILAR RULE IN
THE FUTURE.
>> SPEAKER VOS, AND WE SHOULD
SAY AGAIN THAT HE DID NOT
RESPOND TO OUR REQUESTS FOR AN
INTERVIEW ON THIS OR COMMENT ON
IT, BUT HE DESCRIBES IT AS
DISRESPECTFUL TO HAVE ONE PERSON
APPEAR BY SPEAKERPHONE WHILE
CITIZENS TAKE TIME OUT TO
TESTIFY BEFORE COMMITTEE IN
PERSON.
WHAT ABOUT THAT IDEA OF IT BEING
DISRESPECTFUL?
>> I THINK IT'S DISRESPECTFUL,
WHAT HE'S DOING TO MY
CONSTITUENTS.
THE FACT THAT HE'S NOT ALLOWING
ME TO BE ABLE TO BE AS FULL A
LEGISLATOR AS HUMANLY POSSIBLE.
OUR SENATE ALREADY OPERATES THIS
WAY, THEY HAVE SPEAKERPHONES AND
FOR THE MOST PART, I'VE ALWAYS
BEEN ABLE TO ATTEND IN PERSON AS
LONG AS THINGS HAVE BEEN
REASONABLY SCHEDULED.
I'M HAPPY TO BE HERE, I ENJOY
BEING HERE, I LOVE DOING THIS
JOB, BUT THERE ARE THOSE SMALL
INSTANCES WHERE MY DISABILITY
REQUIRES THESE ACCOMMODATIONS.
SO TO DENY MEE THOSE
ACCOMMODATIONS IS WHAT I THINK
IS DISRESPECTFUL.
>> NOW YOU'VE TAKEN EXCEPTION TO
THE WAY THE LAME-DUCK SESSION
HAPPENED A VOTE AT 4:30 IN THE
MORNING, WHICH YOU MISSED.
WHY COULDN'T YOU BE THERE?
>> SO BEING IN THIS WHEELCHAIR,
I CAN'T BE IN THIS WHEELCHAIR
FOR EXTENDED PERIODS OF TIME.
IT'S DANGEROUS TO MY HEALTH, NOT
ONLY THAT, BUT AGAIN, I'M
RELYING ON OTHER INDIVIDUALS TO
HELP ME DURING THE DAY.
SO IN THAT INSTANCE, AT AROUND,
YOU KNOW, 9:00, 10:00, I STARTED
MESSAGING REPUBLICAN LEADERSHIP
SAYING I NEED TO KNOW WHEN WE'RE
GOING TO BE ON THE FLOOR BECAUSE
I HAVE A HOME HEALTH AIDE I HAVE
TO SCHEDULE.
THEY BASICALLY SAID I DON'T
KNOW.
SO I HAD TO GO HOME BECAUSE IF I
DIDN'T GO HOME AT THAT HOUR, I
WOULDN'T BE ABLE TO GO TO BED, I
COULDN'T GET OUT OF MY CHAIR, IT
COULD HAVE BEEN REALLY DANGEROUS
FOR ME PERSONALLY.
SO THAT'S WHY I MISSED THE VOTE
THAT DAY.
>> AS TO THAT, YOU ASKED THE
ATTORNEY GENERAL, JOSH KAUL, TO
REVIEW THAT VOTE TO SEE IF IT
VIOLATED THE OPEN MEETINGS LAW.
WHAT'S THE STATUS OF THAT REVIEW
TO YOUR KNOWLEDGE?
>> SO WE'RE STILL WAITING.
OPEN MEETING LAWS SAY
SPECIFICALLY THAT IF ANY DULY
ELECTED MEMBER IS EXCLUDED FROM
A MEETING OF THE LEGISLATOR, THE
LAW IS THEY ARE INVALID.
MY ARGUMENT IS THAT SPEAKER VOS
AND THE REPUBLICAN LEADERSHIP
WERE AWARE OF MY DISABILITY,
KNEW THAT I HAD TO GO HOME
BECAUSE OF MY DISABILITY AND YET
CONTINUED TO HOLD THIS VOTE
ANYWAY.
SO WE'RE STILL WAITING TO HEAR
BACK FROM, YOU KNOW, ATTORNEY
GENERAL KAUL.
>> LASTLY, SPEAKER VOS SAYS HE
HAS ALWAYS MADE SURE THE
ASSEMBLY ABIDES BY THE AMERICANS
WITH DISABILITIES ACT.
HAVE YOU SOUGHT OUTSIDE OPINION
ON WHETHER ASSEMBLY RULES DO, IN
FACT, CONFORM TO THE ADA?
>> OTHER THAN WHAT SPEAKER VOS
IS CURRENTLY DOING, ABSOLUTELY
NOT.
THE D.O.J. HAS PUT OUT A PRIMER
EXPLAINING WHAT STATE LAW AND
GOVERNMENTS HAVE TO DO TO MEET
THE ADA AND THEY SPECIFICALLY
TALK ABOUT PROVIDING A
TELECONFERENCE SYSTEM FOR PEOPLE
WITH WHEELCHAIRS OR PEOPLE WHO
NEED THAT BECAUSE OF A
DISABILITY.
THEY'VE ALREADY SPOKEN ON THIS
ISSUE.
HE'S NOT FOLLOWING, HE'S IN FACT
BREAKING THE LAW RIGHT NOW.
>>