ACTION BY WAY OF EXECUTIVE
ORDERS.
THE GOVERNOR TONY EVERS, A
SPECIAL SESSION OF THE
LEGISLATURE NEXT WEEK TO TAKE UP
A PACKAGE OF BILLS ON RURAL
ECONOMIES AND FARMING.
AMONG THE EIGHT BILLS, A CALL TO
CREATE THE WISCONSIN INITIATIVE
FOR DAIRY EXPORTS, CREATING A
REGIONAL MENTAL HEALTH PROGRAM
FOR RURAL COMMUNITIES, AN ISSUE
WE WILL ADDRESS LATER, AND A
BILL TO CONNECT FARMERS' FOOD
PRODUCTION TO UNIVERSITIES,
HOSPITALS, AND BUSINESSES.
EVERS ALSO ANNOUNCED HE'LL SIGN
AN EXECUTIVE ORDER CREATING A
NONPARTISAN REDISTRICTING
COMMISSION.
BUT FIRST, WE CHECK IN WITH WPR
CAPITAL BUREAU CHIEF SHAWN
JOHNSON.
THANKS A LOT FOR BEING HERE.
>> THANKS FOR HAVING ME.
>> SO MEANWHILE, SPEAKER ROBIN
VOS SAYS THEY WON'T BE ON THE
FLOOR, BUT THE BILLS CAN GO
THROUGH COMMITTEE.
SOME KIND OF TANTAMOUNT TO
PUTTING THE SKIDS ON THE
GOVERNOR'S CALL FOR A SPECIAL
SESSION N. I THINK THE WAY
REPUBLICANS DEAL WITH THE
GOVERNOR'S CALL FOR SPECIAL
SESSION IS STILL AN OPEN
QUESTION.
JUST BECAUSE THEY'RE NOT ON THE
FLOOR NEXT WEEK DOESN'T MEAN
THAT THEY ARE KILLING THESE
BILLS.
YOU KNOW.
THEY COULD STILL COME AND DO
SPECIAL SESSION.
THEY COULD STILL DEAL WITH THESE
AT A LATER TIME.
THE THING WITH SPECIAL SESSIONS
IS THE GOVERNOR CAN CALL THEM.
THE LEGISLATURE DOESN'T HAVE TO
FOLLOW THEM.
THEY CAN GAVEL IN AND GAVEL OUT.
I MEAN, THAT'S -- THEY'VE DONE
THAT IN A PREVIOUS SESSION.
IT'S HARD TO IMAGINE THEM DOING
THAT QUITE SO QUICKLY WHEN IT
COMES TO DAIRY, YOU KNOW.
SUCH AN IMPORTANT ISSUE IN THIS
YEAR IN PARTICULAR, AND ELECTION
YEAR, AND WHEN IT'S BECOMING AN
ISSUE.
I IMAGINE THAT THEY'RE GOING TO
GIVE IT MORE ATTENTION THAN
THAT.
BUT FOR THE FATE OF THESE BILLS
THAT THE GOVERNOR IS
INTRODUCING, WE DON'T KNOW YET
WHAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN THERE.
>> AS WE LISTEN TO THE
GOVERNOR'S ADDRESS, YOU POINTED
OUT THE EXECUTIVE ORDER IS ONE
WAY THAT THE GOVERNOR CAN EXERT
HIS WILL OR CAN HE, REALLY?
>> HE CAN.
IT'S JUST A MATTER OF LIKE
WHAT -- WHAT COMES OF IT.
AN EXECUTIVE ORDER IS NOT LAW.
SO ANYTHING DONE BY AN EXECUTIVE
ORDER DOES NOT HAVE KIND OF THAT
STAYING POWER THAT PASSING A
BILL AND SIGNING IT INTO LAW
WILL HAVE.
BUT IF YOU LOOK AT SOME OF THE
ISSUES THAT THE GOVERNOR HAS
TRIED TO GET ACCOMPLISHED, HE
TRIED TO INCLUDE THEM IN HIS
BUDGET.
THEY WERE TAKEN OUT BY
REPUBLICANS.
HE HAS SUPPORTED DEMOCRATIC
EFFORTS TO INTRODUCE THEM
STAND-ALONE BILLS.
IT HASN'T GONE SO WELL FOR HIM.
SO HE HAS FOUND SOME ISSUES HERE
WHERE HE IS GOING TO INTRODUCE
AN EXECUTIVE ORDER AND YOU KNOW,
MAYBE CREATE A STUDY COMMISSION
OR SPECIAL COMMITTEE, SOMETHING
LIKE THAT.
IT'S AN ACTION THAT HE CAN TAKE
WITHOUT HAVING TO HAVE THE
LEGISLATORS' OKAY.
JUST NOT A LAW.
>> LET'S TAKE A LISTEN TO WHAT
SPEAKER RONIN VOS SAID -- ROBIN
VOS SAID ABOUT WORKING TOGETHER
WITH THE GOVERNOR.
>> WEBSTER'S DICTIONARY DEFINES
BIPARTISAN AS MARKED BY OR COFL
INVOLVING COOPERATION,
AGREEMENT, AND COMPROMISE
BETWEEN TWO MAJOR POLITICAL
PARTIES.
IT ACTUALLY REQUIRES PEOPLE
SITTING DOWN, COMPROMISING, IN A
GIVE AND TAKE, THAT WE HAVE NOT
SEEN THERE THE EVERS
ADMINISTRATION EVEN WITH THE
PROPOSAL THEY PUT OUT THIS WEEK
ON VAPING WHICH SOMETHING THAT
HAVE I A LAY-UPS.
THEY PUT IT NOW A PARTISAN WAY.
HAVING NO DISCUSSIONS WITH
ANYONE IN THE LEGISLATURE, ONLY
TALKING TO THEMSELVES, PUTTING
IT OUT AND CALLING IT
BIPARTISAN.
THAT'S NOT THE REALITY.
>> THE BLAME GAME OVER
BIPARTISANSHIP, AS WE SAW
EVIDENCE DURING THE STATE OF THE
STATE ADDRESS, WHERE MAJORITY
REPUBLICANS DIDN'T STAND AND
APPLAUD.
THERE WAS THIS KIND OF STANDING
UP AND APPLAUDING AND SITTING
DOWN ON THAT SIDE OF THE AISLE.
EVEN FOR THAT CALL FOR A SPECIAL
SESSION AROUND AGRICULTURE
ISSUES.
>> YEAH.
THE WHOLE STANDING, SITTING
THING WHEN -- DEPENDING ON WHICH
PARTY IS GIVING THE ADDRESS
IS -- VERY PRONOUNCED AT
SPEECHES THIS FOR A WHILE.
THAT'S NOT NEW.
AND MAY BE -- IT MAYBE LOOKS
DIFFERENT DEPENDING ON THE
ISSUE.
I FEEL LIKE YOU KNOW,
REPUBLICANS AND DEMOCRATS KIND
OF FOLLOW THOSE CUES PRETTY
CLOSELY.
>> YES.
>> BUT ON AGRICULTURE, YOU MAY
SEE SOME OF THOSE REPUBLICANS
WHO SAT AND DIDN'T APPLAUD
SUPPORTING THESE BILLS.
YOU HEARD AFTER THE SPEECH, THE
SENATE MAJORITY LEADER SAYING
PRETTY CLEARLY THEY WERE OPEN TO
WHAT THE GOVERNOR WAS PROPOSING
WHEN IT COMES TO AGRICULTURE,
WHEN IT COMES TO DAIRY.
IT IS SORT OF -- SORT OF WEIRD,
I THINK, IF YOU WATCH THESE
SPEECHES ON TAX CUTS, THERE
WAS -- WITH POLITICS REPORTER
THAT POINTED OUT THE GOVERNOR IS
TOUTING THESE TAX CUTS THAT HE
SIGNED IN HIS PASSENGER.
DEMOCRATS ARE APPLAUDING.
THEY DIDN'T VOTE FOR THE BUDGET.
REPUBLICANS A NOT APPLAUDING.
YOU KNOW, THEY PASSED THE
BUDGET.
THEY PASSED THE TAX CUTS.
SO THAT'S SORT OF THE ABSURDITY
OF THE WHOLE APPLAUSE GAME.
>> SPEAKING OF TAXES AND
SENDING, THE SPECIAL SESSION
BILL ON AGRICULTURE AFTER SEEING
PRESIDENTIATIONS OF ABOUT --
PROPPATIONS OF -- APPROPRIATIONS
OF $880 MILLION-DOLLAR.
THEY SAW -- THEY DIDN'T
NECESSARY EXPECT THE TAX
COLLECTIONS.
DO WE EXPECT THIS TO GO THE SAME
ROAD WHEREBY THE REPUBLICANS
WOULD LIKE TO GIVE THAT
$818 MILLION BACK TO TAXPAYERS
AND DEMOCRATS SAY, WELL, LET'S
USE SOME OF IT TO SPEND ON SOME
OF THESE PROGRAMS THAT WE NEED
TO SPEND MONEY ON?
>> IKE LOUVRE WATCHED THIS --
LIKE YOU'VE WATCHED THIS DEBATE
PLAY OUT BEFORE.
WITHIN THE HOUR YOU HAD
COMPETING PROPOSALS ON HOW TO
USE THIS MONEY.
AND THAT WAS THE PATTERN THAT IT
FOLLOWED.
YOU HAD REPUBLICANS CALLING FOR
A TAX CUT, SENATOR FITZGERALD
PROBABLY MOST CLEARLY, LOUDLY,
HE'S ALSO RUNNING FOR CONGRESS.
AND THAT IS ALSO A FACTOR IN
THIS.
YOU HAVE A SURPLUS IN AN
ELECTION YEAR.
WHEN THAT HAPPENS, AND YOU'VE
GOT A FEW MONTHS LEFT TO GO IN
THE SESSION, YOU ARE GOING TO
HEAR THESE FAMILIAR ARTS.
>> LET'S TALK ABOUT --
ARGUMENTS.
>> LET'S TALK ABOUT ANOTHER
EXECUTIVE ORDER TO CREATE A
NONBART PAN ECONOMIES ON
REDISTRICTING.
HOW WOULD THAT BARK IN A
REPUBLICAN LEGISLATE -- WORK IN
A REPUBLICAN LEGISLATURE THAT
DOES NOT APPEAR TO HAVE INTEREST
IN THAT?
>> THIS IS ONE OF THOSE WHERE
THE GOVERNOR WANTED TO CREATE
THIS NONPARTISAN SYSTEM OF
REDISTRICTING LIKE THEY HAVE IN
IOWA.
HE TRIED TO DO THAT.
IT WAS TAKEN OUT.
HADE SUPPORTED A BILL TO DO
THAT.
IT'S NOT GOING NEVADA WHERE.
THIS IS NOT LAW, RIGHT?
WHATEVER THIS COMMISSION COMES
UP WITH IS NOT GOING TO BE THE
REDISTRICTING PROCESS.
BUT IT COULD BE KIND OF A
SYMBOLIC GESTURE, AND IT COULD
BE POTENTIALLY USED IN COURT.
YOU KNOW, IF WE HAVE -- WHEN THE
MAP IS REDRAWN FOR -- YOU KNOW,
AFTER THE NEXT CENSUS, IN THE
NEXT SESSION, IF YOU HAVE A
REPUBLICAN LEGISLATURE AND THE
DEMOCRATIC GOVERNOR, THEY'RE
PROBABLY MOT GOING TO AGREE ON
NEW POLITICAL BOUNDARIES FOR THE
NEXT DECADE.
SO IT HAS TO GO TO COURT IN THAT
SITUATION.
WHAT'S ONE THING A COURT CAN
CONSIDER?
A COURT COULD CONSIDER A MAP
THAT WAS DRAWN BY THIS
COMMISSION DEPENDING ON WHAT IT
LOOKS LIKE AND WHO'S ON THE
COMMISSION.
IT COULD BE A FACTOR, YOU KNOW.
>> INTERESTING POINT.
SHAWN