PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS OF THE
LAME DUCK LAWS LIMITING THE
AUTHORITY OF THE GOVERNOR AND
THE STATE ATTORNEY GENERAL AS
THEY CAME INTO VIEW THAT WEEK
WHEN JOSH KAUL APPEARED BEFORE
THE JOINT FINANCE COMMITTEE
SEEKING TO GET APPROVAL AS
REQUIRED TO RESOLVE OR REACH
SETTLEMENTS IN STATE LAWSUITS OF
WHICH THERE ARE SOME 15 AWAITING
JFC APPROVAL.
THE PROCESS BROKE DOWN WHEN
LEGISLATORS REFUSED TO SIGN
CONFIDENTIALITY AGREEMENTS.
BY WEEK'S END THE CO-CHAIRS
HIRED A LAWYER TO SIGN THE
SECRECY ORDER ON THE COMMITTEE'S
BEHALF AND SAID THEY STOOD READY
TO APPROVE ANY SETTLEMENTS THAT
ARE IN THE STATE'S INTEREST, ALL
OF THIS UNFOLDING AS KAUL TOLD
LAWMAKERS HE HAD A CASE OF
TREMENDOUS IMPORTANCE TO THE
STATE THAT DEMANDED QUICK
ATTENTION.
ONE POBLGHT POSSIBILITY ON THAT?
PHARMACEUTICAL COMPANIES ARE IN
SETTLEMENT TALKS RELATED TO THE
OPIOID CRISIS.
KAUL'S OFFICE SAID A HURRY-UP
DEADLINE TO ACT WAS NO LONGER IN
PLAY.
HERE'S WHAT REPUBLICAN CO-CHAIRS
SAID ABOUT ALL OF THIS LATE
THURSDAY.
DESPITE THE ATTORNEY GENERAL'S
OBVIOUS EFFORTS TO UNDERMINE
STATE LAW.
THE COMMITTEE ON JOINT FINANCE
HAS AUTHORIZED COUNSEL TO SIGN
THE CONFIDENTIALITY AGREEMENT
PROPOSED BY THE ATTORNEY
GENERAL.
THE ATTORNEY GENERAL'S DEMAND IS
CONTRARY TO HIS PRIOR PRACTICE,
INCLUDING WHEN DISCUSSING
SETTLEMENTS WITH THE GOVERNOR,
AND IS AN OBVIOUS EFFORT TO
UNDERMINE THE LAW BY DELAYING
THE COMMITTEE'S WORK.
ATTORNEY GENERAL KAUL RESPONDED
THAT, QUOTE, WE ARE ASSESSING
THE CO-CHAIRS' PROPOSED
CONFIDENTIALITY AGREEMENT.
WE WILL CONTINUE ATTEMPTING TO
REACH AGREEMENT ON THIS ISSUE AS
WE BEGAN ATTEMPTING TO DO MORE
THAN SIX MONTHS AGO.
OUR INTEREST REMAINS ENSURING
THAT WISCONSINITES ARE
REPRESENTED AS EFFECTIVELY AS
POSSIBLE AND THAT THE
ENFORCEMENT OF OUR
ENVIRONMENTAL, CONSUMER
PROTECTION AND OTHER LAWS IS NOT
IMPEDED BY PARTISAN
GAMESMANSHIP.
WISCONSIN PUBLIC RADIO CAPITOL
REPORTER LAUREL WHITE HAS
COVERED THIS DEVELOPING STORY
AND SHE JOINS US NOW FROM THE
STATE CAPITOL.
>> ABSOLUTELY.
THANKS FOR HAVING ME.
>> SO DOES THIS STRIKE OBSERVERS
AND REPORTERS THAT JOSH KAUL IS
PUSHING THE PARTISAN ENVELOPE TO
HIGHLIGHT HIS DISFAVOR WITH THE
NEW RULES?
>> SO I THINK IT'S DIFFICULT FOR
SOME FOLKS TO FORGET THAT
ATTORNEY GENERAL KAUL HAS BEEN
VERY VOCAL IN HIS OPPOSITION TO
THIS LAW SINCE IT WAS PASSED.
HE'S TALKED ABOUT HOW IT'S
UNCONSTITUTIONAL, HOW IT GIVES
LAWMAKERS TOO MUCH POWER OVER
SOMETHING THE ATTORNEY JOURNAL
IN THE PAST HAS SEEN SORT OF
UNILATERALLY CONTROL OVER.
SO LAWMAKERS AND OTHERS ARE KIND
OF POINTING TO THE ATTORNEY
GENERAL HIGHLIGHTING SOME OF
THESE PRACTICAL ROADBLOCKS AS
THEY MAY BE RELATED TO THAT KIND
OF OVERARCHING AGAINST THE LAW
IN PRINCIPLE.
>> AND YET ON THE OTHER SIDE
COULD IT BE VIEWED AS THE
OPPOSITE, THAT REPUBLICANS ARE
PLAYING THE PARTISAN POWER CARD?
>> REPUBLICANS CERTAINLY HAVE A
LOT OF POWER IN THIS SCENARIO.
THEY PASSED THIS LAW BECAUSE OF
THEIR STRONG MAJORITIES IN BOTH
CHAMBERS OF THE STATE
LEGISLATURE AND IT'S THE LAW OF
THE LAND.
THE ATTORNEY GENERAL DOESN'T
HAVE A CHOICE IN WHETHER HE
FOLLOWS IT UNLESS IT'S APPEALED
OR STRATEGIC DOWN BY A COURT.
>> THIS COULD BE THE PRACTICAL
OUTCOME THAT REQUIRE LEGISLATIVE
APPROVAL TO RESOLVE CASES WHICH
ARE DYNAMIC.
>> WE HEARD ABOUT THE CASE THIS
WEEK.
THE REASON THE COMMITTEE WAS
CALLED IN ON SUCH SHORT NOTICE
WAS A TIGHT DEADLINE IN A
PARTICULAR CASE.
THAT DEADLINE IS GONE NOW.
THAT'S NOT TO SAY THAT ANOTHER
DEADLINE MIGHT EMERGE IN THIS
CASE OR A SIMILAR CASE OR OTHER
CASES DOWN THE ROAD.
SO LAWMAKERS AND THE ATTORNEY
GENERAL CERTAINLY NEED TO COME
UP WITH A PROCESS FOR HANDLING
THESE LAWSUITS BECAUSE THEY
SOMETIMES REQUIRE QUICK ACTION.
>> YEAH.
SO IF IN THIS CASE THE URGENCY
IS OFF, AS THE JUSTICE
DEPARTMENT NOW SAYS, WHAT'S LEFT
IS FOR IT TO BE DETERMINED
WHETHER A REPUBLICAN LAWYER CAN
SIGN A CONFIDENTIALITY AGREEMENT
ON BEHALF OF THE COMMITTEE
MEMBERS.
WHAT DO WE KNOW ABOUT WHETHER
THIS PASSES MUSTER?
>> SO WE KNOW THAT CERTAINLY
REPUBLICAN LAWMAKERS THAT HIRED
THE PRIVATE LAWYER BELIEVE THAT
THIS IS GOING TO BE SUFFICIENT
TO MEET THE ATTORNEY GENERAL'S
CONFIDENTIALITY REQUIREMENTS.
WE ALSO KNOW THAT A MEMO CAME
OUT FROM THE LEGISLATIVE
REFERENCE BUREAU, WHICH IS THE
LEGISLATURE'S NONPARTISAN
RESEARCH OFFICE, THAT KIND OF
CALLS THAT INTO QUESTION.
SO WHAT WE'RE WAITING FOR NOW IS
AN OFFICIAL OPINION FROM THE
ATTORNEY GENERAL, WHO OF COURSE
HAS MORE INFORMATION ABOUT THE
SORT OF BINDING LEGAL AGREEMENT
HE'S ENTERED INTO WITH THE
DIFFERENT PARTIES THAT HE'S
NEGOTIATING SETTLEMENT
AGREEMENTS.
SO WHETHER OR NOT HE FINDS THESE
-- YOU KNOW, THIS NEW PROVISION
FROM REPUBLICAN LAWMAKERS, THIS
HIRING OF A PRIVATE LAWYER,
SUFFICIENT TO MEET HIS NEEDS.
>> YES.
AS YOU SAY, ATTORNEY GENERAL
KAUL SAYS HE'S NOW REVIEWING
THIS SITUATION, BUT IT SOUNDS
LIKE WE'RE GOING TO SEE
EVERYTHING RIGHT BACK IN JOINT
FINANCE, WITH MAYBE SOME OF THE
SAME DISPUTES.
>> ABSOLUTELY.
WE KNOW THAT, AS YOU MENTIONED
SHES JOINT FINANCE IS FACING
MORE THAN A DOZEN OF THESE
CASES.
THERE'S A BACKLOG OF CASES
WAITING APPROVAL FROM LAWMAKERS.
AGAIN ANOTHER URGENT DEADLINE
CAN EMERGE.
THESE CASES ARE DYNAMIC AND
SOMETIMES MOVE VERY QUICKLY.
SO WE COULD BE BACK HAVING THE
SAME CONVERSATION VERY SOON.
>> MEANWHILE, THE LAME DUCK LAWS
THEMSELVES ARE IN THE COURTS.
WHAT'S THE STATUS OF THOSE
CASES?
>> SO THERE ARE FOUR LAME DUCK
LAWSUITS THAT ARE OUT THERE.
ACTUALLY, ONE OF THEM HAS
ALREADY BEEN RESOLVED, A STATE
LEVEL LAWSUIT THAT RECEIVED A
RULING FROM THE WISCONSIN
SUPREME COURT EARLIER THIS
SUMMER.
THEY RULED IN FAVOR OF
REPUBLICAN LAWMAKERS.
THERE'S ANOTHER THAT'S AWAITING
ARGUMENTS IN FRONT OF THE
SUPREME COURT.
THERE ARE TWO FEDERAL CASES THAT
ARE BOTH STAGES OF OPINIONS
BEING ISSUED BY JUDGES ANY DAY.
SO WE COULD HEAR ON THOSE SOON.
>> ALL RIGHT.
LAUREL WHITE, THANK YOU VERY
MUCH AND THANKS FOR YOUR