>> THE FOLLOWING PROGRAM IS A
PBS WISCONSIN ORIGINAL
PRODUCTION.
>> I'M FREDERICA FREYBERG.
TONIGHT ON "HERE AND NOW," THE
LATEST ON THE STATE WOLF HUNT.
WE CHECK IN WITH THE STATE
SENATOR WHO IS LEADING THE NEXT
ELECTION INVESTIGATION.
AND WPR'S SHAWN JOHNSON BREAKS
DOWN THE LATEST ON
REDISTRICTING.
IT'S "HERE AND NOW" FOR
OCTOBER 29.
>> FUNDING FOR "HERE AND NOW" IS
PROVIDED BY THE FOCUS FUND FOR
JOURNALISM AND FRIENDS OF PBS
WISCONSIN.
>> PARTISAN ROILING AROUND THE
2020 ELECTION HIT A FEVER PITCH
LATE THIS WEEK.
THE RACINE COUNTY SHERIFF
ACCUSED THE WISCONSIN ELECTION
COMMISSION OF BREAKING THE LAW
IN THE MIDST OF THE PANDEMIC FOR
ALLOWING NURSING HOME STAFF TO
HELP RESIDENTS VOTE IN PLACE OF
DEPUTIES.
ASSEMBLY SPEAKER ROBIN VOS
QUICKLY PILED ON, CALLING FOR
THE WEC ADMINISTRATOR TO RESIGN
AND OTHER REPUBLICANS CALLED FOR
ALL STATE ELECTION COMMISSIONERS
TO IMMEDIATELY STEP DOWN AND
FACE POSSIBLE PROSECUTION.
IN RESPONSE, MEAGAN WOLFE SAID
DESPITE THE CURRENT POLITICAL
FIRESTORM I WILL CONTINUE TO
APPLY MY FULL FOCUS ON THE
IMPORTANT WORK OF SERVING VOTERS
AND ELECTION FOACIALS.
IT WOULD BE IRRESPONSIBLE TO
SPEND ANY ENERGY ENGAGING A
BLATANTLY PARTISAN AND
COORDINATED ATTEMPT TO
BASELESSLY CHALLENGE THE
INTEGRITY OF DEMOCRACY IN OUR
GREAT STATE.
GOVERNOR EVERS CALLED VOS'S
REACTION UNBECOMING OF HIS
POSITION AND, IMPORTANTLY, THE
RACINE COUNTY DISTRICT ATTORNEY
HAS NOT FILED CHARGES.
IN THE MIDST OF ALL OF THIS,
THERE IS YET ANOTHER WISCONSIN
ELECTION INVESTIGATION IN THE
WORKS.
STATE SENATE LEADERS THIS WEEK
ANNOUNCED THEY TOO WOULD LAUNCH
A PROBE INTO THE 2020 ELECTION
FOLLOWING RESULTS OF THE
LEGISLATIVE AUDIT BUREAU REVIEW,
WHICH DIDN'T FIND ANY WIDESPREAD
FRAUD BUT MADE RECOMMENDATIONS
FOR THE COMMISSION AND
LEGISLATURE TO CONSIDER AROUND
ELECTION PROCEDURES.
NOW THE SENATE ELECTIONS
COMMITTEE WILL CONDUCT THE
LATEST INVESTIGATION.
ITS CHAIR IS REPUBLICAN SENATOR
KATHLEEN BERNIER OF CHIPPEWA
FALLS WHO JOINS US NOW AND
THANKS VERY MUCH FOR DOING SO.
>> IT IS MY PLEASURE.
THANK YOU.
>> SO WAS THIS A COORDINATED
PARTISAN ATTACK ATTEMPTING TO
UNDERMINE OUR ELECTI ELECTIONS?
WHAT THE RACINE COUNTY SHERIFF
ANNOUNCED?
>> NO.
THIS IS NOT A NEW PHENOMENON.
THAT IS WITH NURSING HOME STAFF
WHO MANIPULATE AND TAKE
ADVANTAGE OF THE ELDERLY AND THE
DISABLED.
I SPENT MONTHS WORKING ON
SPECIAL VOTING DEPUTY
LEGISLATION FOR THAT PURPOSE,
BECAUSE IT IS SOMETHING WE KNEW
THAT WAS OCCURRING.
AND SO BECAUSE OF THE PANDEMIC,
A DECISION HAD TO BE MADE, AND I
DON'T KNOW WHAT OTHER DECISION
THEY COULD HAVE MADE, BUT I
BELIEVE THAT THE ENFORCEMENT OF
THE LAW AGAINST THESE
INDIVIDUALS THAT TOOK ADVANTAGE
OF OUR ELDERLY AND DISABLED
SHOULD BE PURSUED.
>> DO YOU ALSO THINK THAT THE
WEC COMMISSIONERS AND ITS
ADMINISTRATORS SHOULD RESIGN?
>> I BELIEVE THE COMMISSION IS
SET UP FOR FAILURE AT THIS POINT
WITH THE PERSONALITIES THAT ARE
INVOLVED.
WITH THREE DEMOCRATS AND THREE
REPUBLICANS EACH VOTING THEIR
SEPARATE PARTISAN WISHES, SO A
3-3 VOTE MEANS THAT THE STAFF DO
NOT GET ANY DIRECTION.
WHEN THEY GO TO THE BOARD AND
ASK FOR DIRECTION, IT ENDS UP IN
A TIE AND THEN A TIE MEANS
NOTHING WILL HAPPEN.
>> WHAT ABOUT MEAGAN WOLFE?
DO YOU THINK SHE SHOULD STEP
DOWN?
>> NO.
NO.
SHE IS DOING WHAT THE ELECTION
COMMISSION TELLS HER TO DO OR
TELLS HER NOT TO DO.
I DON'T BELIEVE IT IS FAIR TO A
STAFF PERSON TO HOLD HER 100%
ACCOUNTABLE FOR WHAT THE
ELECTION COMMISSION HAS DECIDED.
AND I BELIEVE THE AUDIT POINTS
TO THAT DIRECTION.
VERY FEW THINGS -- THERE'S ONE
THING I'VE READ THUS FAR THAT
THE STAFF DID NOT DO CORRECTLY
AND THAT'S INFORM GOVERNING
BODIES THAT THE CLERK DIDN'T DO
THEIR TRAINING.
BUT ASIDE FROM THAT, MOST ALL OF
IT REFERS TO THE WISCONSIN
ELECTION COMMISSION ITSELF.
>> TURNING TO YOUR INVESTIGATION
SPECIFICALLY, WHY ARE YOU
DECIDING TO MOVE FORWARD WITH
YET ANOTHER INVESTIGATION?
>> WELL, I DON'T KNOW ABOUT YET
ANOTHER INVESTIGATION.
WE HAVEN'T REALLY HAD THIS
BEFORE, SO THIS IS -- THE
INVESTIGATION HAS TO DO WITH
ELECTION OFFICIALS WHO MAY NOT
BE ACCOMMODATING THE LEGISLATIVE
AUDIT BUREAU.
I DON'T BELIEVE THAT CAN STAND,
BECAUSE OUR STATE LAW DIRECTS
COUNTIES, MUNICIPALITIES TO
ACCOMMODATE THE AUDIT BUREAU'S
REQUESTS.
SO THAT IS THE FOCUS OF THIS
INVESTIGATION.
AS TO WHY THEY WOULD NOT
ACCOMMODATE THE AUDIT BUREAU.
BECAUSE IN THE FUTURE, WHETHER
IT HAS TO DO WITH ELECTIONS OR
ANYTHING ELSE, THE
MUNICIPALITIES AND THE COUNTIES
AND THE SCHOOL DISTRICTS ARE
REQUIRED BY LAW, 13.94, TO
ACCOMMODATE THE REQUESTS OF THE
LEGISLATIVE AUDIT BUREAU.
AND THAT IS STRICTLY THE FOCUS
OF THIS INVESTIGATION.
>> SO THIS HAS TO DO WITH CLERKS
WHO DECLINED TO ALLOW AUDIT
BUREAU STAFF TO PHYSICALLY
HANDLE ELECTION RECORDS.
BUT I UNDERSTAND THAT IT'S ALSO
BEEN DECIDED BY THE LEGISLATIVE
COUNCIL THAT IT WAS, QUOTE,
ARGUABLY REASONABLE TO PERMIT
ONLY CLERKS' STAFF TO PHYSICALLY
HANDLE THESE DOCUMENTS.
>> SO THERE'S MORE TO THAT
STORY.
WHEN A LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL
OPINION IS GIVEN, IT USUALLY IS
WORDED AND PURSUED BY A SPECIFIC
LEGISLATOR.
AND THAT WAS SENATOR JANET
BEWLEY REQUESTED THAT.
THE DIRECTOR OF THE COUNCIL
REACHED OUT TO ME FOR MORE TO
THE STORY AND ADDITIONAL
INFORMATION.
I HAVEN'T SPOKEN WITH HER YET.
BUT THERE IS MORE TO THE STORY.
SUCH AS THE PRESIDENTIAL RACE IS
NOT THE ONLY RACE ON THAT
BALLOT.
THERE ARE MANY OTHER RACES,
STATE RACES AND COUNTY RACES ON
THOSE BALLOTS.
AND SO THERE'S A LOT MORE TO BE
INVESTIGATED, WHICH WHY I'M
HAVING AN INVESTIGATION.
>> VERY QUICKLY, I JUST WANT TO
SAY THAT MINORITY LEADER JANET
BEWLEY ALSO STATED THAT INSTEAD
OF LAUNCHING AN INVESTIGATION
INTO THE AUDIT BUREAU'S
FINDINGS, THE LEGISLATURE SHOULD
BE FOCUSING ON ITS
ELECTION-RELATED
RECOMMENDATIONS.
WHAT ABOUT THAT IDEA?
WE HAVE ONLY ABOUT A HALF A
MINUTE LEFT.
>> OKAY.
I'VE ALREADY -- WE'RE ALREADY
WORKING ON THAT, DRAFTING
INSTRUCTIONS FOR THE
RECOMMENDATIONS.
THE AUDIT COMMITTEE ALREADY IS
HOLDING A HEARING ON THE RESULTS
OF THE AUDIT.
AND THEN MY INVESTIGATION HAS TO
DO WITH THE COOPERATION OR THE
LACK OF COOPERATION BY ELECTION
OFFICIALS.
>> ALL RIGHT.
GREAT.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
AND THANKS FOR JOINING US TODAY
ON THIS VERY CONTROVERSIAL
ELECTION STUFF THAT'S GOING ON
IN THE STATE OF WISCONSIN.
SENATOR KATHLEEN BERNIER, THANK
YOU.
>> OKAY.
YOU'RE WELCOME.
>> A FEDERAL JUDGE IN MADISON
TODAY HEARD ARGUMENTS ON THE
STATE WOLF HUNT SET TO BEGIN
NEXT SATURDAY.
SIX CHIPPEWA TRIBES IN WISCONSIN
DSUED THE DNR AFTER HUNTERS BLEW
THROUGH THE QUOTA IN THE
FEBRUARY HUNT.
>> I THINK THEY TOOK TOO MANY OF
THEM AT ONE TIME DURING THAT
WINTER -- I GUESS THE
WINTER-SPRING HUNT HERE.
THEY TOOK 218 ANIMALS.
WE HAD CLAIMED HALF OF THEM AS
THE OJIBWA'S TRIBE'S, TO TRY TO
PRESERVE THEM BECAUSE THERE'S
OTHER THINGS IN OUR ECOSYSTEM
THAT NEED TO BE TAKEN CARE OF BY
THAT WOLF HAVING TO DO WITH
CHRONIC WASTING DISEASE IN OUR
AREA.
ESPECIALLY THE ONES WE HUNT AND
TAKE FOOD FROM.
>> A DANE COUNTY JUDGE A WEEK
AGO ISSUED A TEMPORARY
INJUNCTION STOPPING NEXT WEEK'S
HUNT SAYING IT CANNOT HAPPEN
UNTIL THE DNR ENACTS FORMAL
RULEMAKING FOR HUNTING WOLVES.
AS A RESULT, THE DNR ANNOUNCES
IT IS NOT ISSUING ANY LICENSES
FOR THE HUNT AS IT WORKS ON
RULES AND A WOLF MANAGEMENT
PLAN.
TONIGHT, LUKE HILGEMANN JOINS US
FROM HUNTER NATION.
IT WANTS THE DNR TO APPEAL THE
STATE COURT RULING.
THANKS VERY MUCH FOR BEING HERE.
>> THANK YOU FOR HAVING ME ON.
>> IT WOULD APPEAR THAT THIS
YEAR'S FALL WOLF HUNT WHICH WAS
SUPPOSED TO BEGIN IN A LITTLE
MORE THAN A WEEK IS OFF.
WHAT'S YOUR REACTION TO THAT?
>> WELL, WE THINK THERE'S STILL
AN OUTWARD CHANCE IF THE EVERS
ADMINISTRATION AND DEPARTMENT OF
JUSTICE COMES BACK TO THE TABLE
AND CHALLENGES THIS RULING, THAT
HUNTERS' RIGHTS AND THE
CONSTITUTIONALLY-PROTECTED RIGHT
THAT WE ESTABLISHED IN OUR COURT
CASE IN FEBRUARY CAN STILL
HAPPEN.
WE HAVE NOVEMBER UNTIL THE
MONTHS OF FEBRUARY TO HUNT
WOLVES BY STATUTE.
WE BELIEVE THAT THIS ACTIVIST
RULING COMES OUT OF DANE COUNTY
IS A SETBACK FOR SURE, BUT
DEFINITELY NOT ONE THAT IF THE
GOVERNOR AND THE DEPARTMENT OF
JUSTICE CHALLENGE THIS RULING,
WE THINK THAT THEY CAN PREVAIL
AT THE LEVEL.
>> GIVEN THE DNR IS SAYING IT IS
PROMULGATING RULES AND NOT
ISSUING ANY LICENSES, IT WOULD
APPEAR THAT THE AGENCY IS NOT
GOING TO APPEAL THAT DANE COUNTY
JUDGE'S RULING.
>> AND WE THINK THAT'S A
TERRIBLE DECISION.
WE THINK THAT'S ONE THAT THE
EVERS ADMINISTRATION AND HIS
DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES
AND ATTORNEY GENERAL JOSH KAUL
ARE GOING TO BE HELD
ACCOUNTABLE.
THERE IS AN ABSOLUTE NEED TO
APPEAL THIS ACTIVIST RULING AND
WE ARE PUSHING HARD.
WE'RE STILL LOOKING AT OUR
POTENTIAL OPPORTUNITIES TO
APPEAL THIS RULING AS WELL.
>> WHAT KIND OF RESPONSE HAVE
YOU GOTTEN FROM YOUR CALLS TO
THE EVERS ADMINISTRATION AND THE
ATTORNEY GENERAL TO GO AHEAD AND
APPEAL THIS?
>> TOO MUCH SILENCE,
UNFORTUNATELY, FREDERICA.
THOUSANDS, WE KNOW THAT
THOUSANDS OF HUNTERS HAVE PICKED
UP THE PHONE AND DEMANDED THAT
THIS RIDICULOUS RULING BE
CHALLENGED.
WE BELIEVE IT HAS NO BASIS IN
LAW AND HARDLY ANY BASIS IN
LOGIC.
THE WAY THAT HE GOT TO THIS
RULING JEOPARDIZES REGULATIONS
THAT HAVE BEEN HELD IN PLACE IN
WISCONSIN FOR GENERATIONS.
WE BELIEVE THAT HUNTERS HAVE A
STRONG CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT TO
HUNT THAT IS BEING IN FR INFRINY
THIS RULING.
>> HOW DO YOU RESPOND TO TRIBAL
NATION WHO OPPOSE HA HARVESTING
WOLVES AND THAT A MORE SELECTIVE
HUNT COULD BE CONSIDERED, LIKE
ISSUING PERMITS TO IMPACTED
FARMERS TO LET THEM KILL
NUISANCE ANIMALS.
WHAT DO YOU THINK ABOUT THAT?
>> WE RESPECT AND APPRECIATE THE
OPINIONS OF THE NATIVE AMERICANS
TRIBES IN WISCONSIN.
BUT WE ALSO RESPECT AND
APPRECIATE THE REALITY THAT
WOLVES AREN'T JUST SELECTED
KILLERS, RIGHT?
WE'VE HAD THOUSANDS OF ANIMALS,
PETS, LIVESTOCK THAT HAVE BEEN
KILLED BY WOLVES AS THEY EXPAND
THEIR TERRITORY IN WISCONSIN.
HUNTER NATION ISN'T AN
ORGANIZATION THAT WANTS ALL OF
THE WOLVES KILLED.
WE BELIEVE THAT THE WOLF IS AN
IMPORTANT PART OF OUR ECOSYSTEM,
PLAYS A RESPONSIBLE ROLE IF IT'S
MANAGED PROPERLY.
WHAT WE'VE SEEN OVER THE LAST
SEVERAL YEARS AS WISCONSIN'S
WOLF HUNT HAS BEEN SHELVED SINCE
2014 IS THE WOLF HAS EXPA EXPAND
ITS TERRITORY AND MILLIONS OF
DOLLARS IN DEPREDATION PAYMENTS
HAVE BEEN A RESULT.
WE RESPECT THE TRIBE'S OPINION,
BUT WE BELIEVE PEOPLE THAT LIVE
IN THE WOLF TERRITORY HAVE AN
OPPORTUNITY AND PRIVILEGE TO
ALSO FEEL SAFE AND PROTECTED
WHEN THEY GO OUTSIDE.
>> ALL RIGHT.
WE LEAVE IT THERE.
LUKE HILGEMANN, HUNTER NATION,
THANKS VERY MUCH.
>> THANK YOU.
>> THE ONCE-EVERY-DECADE AND
VERY CONTENTIOUS REDISTRICTING
PROCESS IS WELL UNDERWAY IN
WISCONSIN AND LATE THIS WEEK THE
REPUBLICAN-DRAWN MAPS CAME
BEFORE A JOINT COMMITTEE FOR A
PUBLIC HEARING.
>> OUR GOAL FROM THE START WAS
TO FINISH MAPS THAT PRIORITIZE
AND ADJUST FOR CHANGE.
>> THE MAPS WOULD GIVE
REPUBLICANS A SIGNIFICANT
ADVANTAGE IN FUTURE ELECTIONS
ACCORDING TO EXPERTS, BUT
GOVERNOR EVERS IS EXPECTED TO
VETO THE GOP MAPS IN FAVOR OF
HIS OWN, WHICH STILL MAINTAIN A
REPUBLICAN MAJORITY BUT A
SMALLER ONE.
>> NOT ONLY DO WE NOT GET THE
THINGS THAT WE ASKED FOR AS A
PEOPLE.
WE DON'T EVEN GET THE DEBATE,
BECAUSE THE SYSTEM IS RIGGED.
AND AS THE ELECTIONS SHOW, THE
ELECTORATE SHIFTS BACK AND
FORTH, THE ASSEMBLY AND THE
SENATE DO NOT.
>> AND SO WITH THE GOVERNOR'S
VETO OF THE GOP MAPS ALL BUT
CERTAIN, THE MAPS ARE HEADING TO
COURT.
WISCONSIN PUBLIC RADIO'S CAPITAL
BUREAU CHIEF JOHNSO SHAWN JOHNSS
VEL OFVEL OFFDELVED INTO IT.
HEY, SHAWN.
ARE YOU PRETTY MUCH MAPPED OUT?
>> AS YOU KNOW, EVEN IF I WERE
MAPPED OUT, THESE EPISODES ARE
VERY TIGHT AND NOT TOO
EXHAUSTIVE FOR THE LISTENER.
>> THEY'RE GREAT REALLY.
>> THANK YOU.
>> IF THE NEW GOP MAPS LOOK A
LOT LIKE THEIR OLD MAPS, EXPERTS
HAVE DEPICTED THE OLD ONES AS
THE MOST JERRY MAN GERRYMANDERE
COUNTRY.
WHY ARE REPUBLICANS SAYING THEY
ARE GOOD MAPS?
>> THE OVERRIDING REASON IS THAT
THEY MAKE VERY FEW CHANGES TO
THE LAST MAPS, WHICH THEY LIKE.
THEY PASSED A RESOLUTION IN
SEPTEMBER THAT SAID HERE THE
PRINCIPLES THAT WE ARE GOING TO
FOLLOW WHEN WE DRAW THESE NEW
MAPS.
AND CORE RETENTION, THIS IDEA OF
A LEAST CHANGES MAP, WAS ONE OF
THE THINGS THEY LISTED.
THE IDEA OF NOT PAIRING A BUNCH
OF INCUMBENTS, SO YOU HAVE A LOT
OF NEW REPRESENTATIVES.
BASED ON THESE CRITERIA, THESE
MAPS PASS WITH FLYING COLORS AND
THEY HAVE THE ADDED BENEFIT OF
CEMENTING THIS REPUBLICAN MAP
THAT HAS HELPED THEM HOLD THEIR
MAJORITY FOR A DECADE.
>> SO AN EXAMPLE OF THE CURRENT
OR OLD MAPS FROM YOUR PODCAST
THAT WAS SUPER INTERESTING WAS
HOW THE CITY OF DI DEFOREST HAS
THREE ASSEMBLY AND THREE SENATE
DISTRICTS.
IS THAT AN EXAMPLE OF HOW
TORTUOUS THE PROCESS CAN BECOME?
>> I THINK IN THE DEFOREST CASE
IT'S AN EXAMPLE OF HOW A
COMMUNITY OF THAT SIZE, WHICH
WOULD BE EASY TO PUT IN A SINGLE
DISTRICT IF THAT WERE A
PRIORITY, CAN KIND OF GET BUMPED
DOWN THE PRIORITY LIST WHEN YOU
HAVE OTHER GOALS IN MIND.
MAPMAKERS ARE ALWAYS KIND OF
STAGGERING THEIR PRIORITIES,
WHAT THEY REALLY WANT TO DO.
IN 2011 DID HE FOREST CAME UP ON
THE SHORT END OF THAT.
THEY HAVE THREE REPRESENTATIVES,
THREE SENATORS.
NOBODY REALLY CALLS IT HOME.
IN THIS NEW MAP DEFOREST WOULD
BE LESS DIVIDED THAN UNDER THE
OLD ONE, BUT YOU DO HAVE OTHER
COMMUNITIES WHERE THEY'RE STILL
CHOPPED UP DIFFERENTLY THAN THEY
WERE A DECADE OR SO AGO.
>> SO WHAT'S THE OUTCOME OF A
GUARANTEED REPUBLICAN SWEEP IN
THE LEGISLATURE AND THEN CITING
A LINE FROM YOUR REPORTING, YOU
SAY WHEN YOU HAVE A MAJORITY
THAT YOU KNOW YOU WON'T LOSE,
YOU CAN AFFORD TO THINK BIG.
BASICALLY YOU CAN DO WHAT YOU
WANT REGARDLESS OF PUBLIC
OPINION.
AND WHAT'S A PRIMARY EXAMPLE OF
THAT?
>> I LIKE TO THICHG THINK OF ITN
THREE CATEGORIES.
THERE'S STUFF THAT REPUBLICANS
HAVE DONE IN THE PAST THAT GETS
LOCKED IN.
SO THEY PASSED ACT 10, FOR
EXAMPLE, OR VOTER I.D.
THERE WAS NEVER REALLY A BIG
ATTEMPT TO UNDO THOSE POLICIES
BECAUSE THE NEW LEGISLATURE WAS
NEVER GOING TO OVERTURN THOSE
THINGS.
THERE'S STUFF THAT THEY DON'T
HAVE TO DO.
FOR EXAMPLE, MEDICAL MARIJUANA
IS SUPPORTED BY MORE THAN 80% OF
THE PUBLIC, BUT THERE'S NEVER
BEEN A PUSH IN WISCONSIN REALLY
TO ALLOW FOR MEDICAL
MARIJUANAMENT AND TMARIJUANA.ANT
MIGHT HAVE BEEN UNTHINKABLE FOR
REPUBLICANS BEFORE, LIKE A
PRIVATE SECTOR RIGHT TO WORK
LAW, WHERE THEY SAID FOR YEARS
THEY DIDN'T WANT THAT.
BUT AROUND 2015, UNDER THE
CURRENT MAPS, THEY CHANGED THEIR
MIND AND THEY PASSED IT PRETTY
QUICKLY.
SO THERE'S ALL SORTS OF
CATEGORIES OF STUFF WHERE
REPUBLICANS CAN BEHAVE
DIFFERENTLY, DOING SOMETHING OR
NOT DOING SOMETHING, WHEN YOU
HAVE THE MAP AT YOUR BACK.
>> THIS IS EXPECTED TO LAND IN
THE COURTS AFTER THE LEGISLATURE
VOTES ON THEM IN THE COMING DAYS
AND EVERS VETOES THEM, AS IS
EXPECTED.
HOW IS THIS COURT PROCESS GOING
TO GO?
WE HAVE LIKE LESS THAN A MINUTE.
>> YEAH.
I MEAN, THAT'S THE BIG QUESTION
THIS TIME AROUND.
I THINK IT'S PRETTY MUCH A GIVEN
IT'S GOING TO GO TO COURT.
IN THE PAST, THAT HAS GONE TO A
FEDERAL COURT WHERE A
THREE-JUDGE PANEL HAS DECIDED
MAPS.
BUT THE FEDERAL COURT HAS GIVEN
INDICATIONS THAT IT'S GOING TO
GIVE THE STATE SUPREME COURT THE
FIRST SHOT AT IT THIS TIME.
THE STATE SUPREME COURT HASN'T
DRAWN MAPS SINCE 1964.
THIS IS WHERE REPUBLICANS WANT
IT RESOLVED AND THEY'RE ASKING
THE COURT TO AGREE WITH THEIR
IDEA OF MAKING AS FEW CHANGES AS
POSSIBLE TO THE MAPS THAT THEY
PASSED THAT THEY LIKE FROM 2011.
>> ALL RIGHT.
SHAWN JOHNSON, THANKS VERY MUCH.
>> THANKS, FRED.
>> A DECADE AFTER ACT 10 THE
WORD "RECALL" IS BACK IN
WISCONSIN POLITICS, THIS TIME
WITH NATIONAL ATTENTION DRAWN TO
A SCHOOL BOARD RACE IN
SOUTHEASTERN WISCONSIN.
REPORTER WILL KENNEALLY EXPLORES
WHY THE RACE HAS GARNERED SUCH A
SPOTLIGHT.
>> IT STARTED WITH THE PANDEMIC
AND OUR MITIGATION EFFORTS.
>> CHRIS SCHULTZ JOINED THE
MEQUON THIENSVILLE SCHOOL BOARD
IN 2015 AFTER RETIRING AS A
SCIENCE TEACHER.
HER DISTRICT GRAPPLED WITH HOW
TO RUN SCHOOLS AMID THE
PANDEMIC.
>> WE HAD PARENTS ON BOTH SIDES
CONCERNED WITH MANDATORY MASKING
VERSUS OPTIONAL MASKING AND THAT
ISSUE CONTINUED AND DEVELOPED
AND NOT MUCH STRONGER TOWARD THE
END OF THE SCHOOL YEAR.
>> THAT CULMINATED AUGUST 23,
WHEN AMBER SCHROEDER AND OTHER
ORGANIZERS BEGAN THE RECALL
PROCESS FOR FOUR MEMBERS OF THE
SCHOOL BOARD.
>> WE WANT TO SEE A LOT OF
CHANGE, THE FOCUS BROUGHT BACK
TO THE CHILDREN, THE KIDS IN THE
DISTRICT.
WE WANT TO SEE MORE PARENTAL
ENGAGEMENT WITH OUR KIDS.
>> THE GROUP RESTORE MTSD IS
RUNNING AGAINST THE MEMBERS
ELIGIBLE TO BE RECALLED.
SCARLETT JOHNSON IS RUNNING.
>> WE NEED TO CHANGE THE WAY OUR
SCHOOL BOARD GOVERNS.
>> THEY HAVE BEEN WORKING UP TO
THIS FOR ABOUT A YEAR NOW,
PETITIONING THE SCHOOL BOARD FOR
CHANGE.
>> IT'S PERSONAL.
IT MATTERS TO ME.
IT MATTERS TO THE COMMUNITY.
HEY, I'M DOING A NEWS INTERVIEW
RIGHT NOW.
IT'S NOT JUST ABOUT MY KIDS.
IT'S ABOUT MY NEIGHBORS' KIDS,
FRIENDS' KIDS, STRANGERS' KIDS.
WE COULD NOT WAIT ANY LONGER AND
WATCH THE DECLAIN HAPPENING.
>> THAT'S A POINT OF AGREEMENT
FOR ALL SIGNED.
>> I HAVE NO DOUBT THAT THERE
ARE PARENTS THAT ARE
AUTHENTICALLY CONCERNED ABOUT
OUR DISTRICT AND WHAT'S
HAPPENING IN OUR DISTRICT AND
THEY WANT US TO CONTINUE TO BE
IN THE TOP, WANT US TO BE NUMBER
ONE, RIGHT?
AS DO WE ALL.
WE ALL WANT OUR DISTRICT TO BE
THE BEST IT CAN BE.
BUT INTRODUCTION OF POLITICS
INTO THIS CONFLICTED, THOUGH,
HAS FROM MY PERSPECTIVE REALLY
MUDDIED THE WATERS.
>> SCHOOL BOARD RACES HAVE
TURNED INTO A PROXY OVER THINGS
LIKE THE PANDEMIC RESPONSE AND
CRITICAL RACE THEORY.
WISCONSIN IS AMONG THE STATES
WITH THE MOST RECALL EFFORTS
NATIONALLY AND HAS DRAWN
ATTENTION FROM POLITICAL
PARTISANS.
REBECCA KLEEFISCH HAS CLOSE TIES
WITH RECALL ORGANIZERS AND THE
CAMPAIGN HAS RECEIVED THE
BACKING OF RICHARD UIHLEIN.
>> BECAUSE MAYBE OF THE
POLITICAL FLAVOR, IT'S MUCH MORE
CONTROVERSIAL CONVERSATIONS
BEING HAD.
MY HEART IS CRYING OUT.
PLEASE LET'S TAKE CARE OF OUR
KIDS.
>> A U SUCCESSFUL RECALL COULD E
A BLUEPRINT AROUND THE STATE AS
VOTERS HEAD TO THE POLLS NEXT
TUESDAY.
I'M WILL KENNEALLY FOR "HERE AND
NOW."
>> THE MURDER TRIAL FOR KYLE
RITTENHOUSE STARTS NEXT WEEK.
HE'S CHARGED WITH HOMICIDE AND
ATTEMPTED HOMICIDE IN THE
SHOOTING DEATHS OF TWO PEOPLE
AND THE WOUNDING OF ANOTHER
DURING FIERY PROTESTS IN THAT
CITY LAST SUMMER FOLLOWING THE
SHOOTING OF JACOB BLAKE.
A PRETRIAL RULING THIS WEEK
SPARKED CONTROVERSY WHEN A JUDGE
RULED THAT THE ATTORNEYS COULD
NOT REFER TO THE MEN SHOT AS
VICTIMS, BUT AS RIOTERS,
LOOTERS.
WE ASKED LANNY GLINBERG,
CLINICAL PROFESSOR AND DIRECTOR
OF THE UW LAW SCHOOL PROSECUTION
PROJECT.
THANKS VERY MUCH FOR BEING HERE.
>> THANKS FOR HAVING THEE.
>> SO WHY WOULDN'T ATTORNEYS BE
ABLE TO REFER TO PEOPLE WHO ARE
SHOT AND KILLED AS VICTIMS?
>> SO THE RULING IS UNCOMMON BUT
NOT UNPRECEDENTED IN THIS STATE.
I DON'T WANT TO SPEAK FOR THE
JUDGE BUT I EXPECT THE CONCERN
GOES SOMETHING LIKE THAT, THAT
TO IDENTIFY SOMEONE AS A VICTIM
IS TO CONCLUDE THAT A CRIME WAS
COMMITTED AND PERHAPS INDICATE
WHO COMMITTED IT.
AND AT THIS TRIAL THE JUDGE'S
JOB IS TO ENSURE THAT
MR. RITTENHOUSE GETS A FAIR
TRIAL AS WELL AS THE STATE GETS
A FAIR TRIAL AND TO SAY THE WORD
VICTIM MIGHT SUGGEST TO A JURY
IS WHETHER A CRIME WAS
COMMITTED.
PERHAPS THE COURT IS MAKING AN
OPINION ON THAT.
SO THE JUDGE IS ORDERING THAT
THE TERM BE NOT USED, I WOULD
SAY IN THE INTEREST OF
IMPARTIALITY.
NOT UNPRECEDENTED, BUT NOT
COMMON.
>> IF CALLING SOMEONE A VICTIM
BIASES A JURY AGAINST THE
DEFENDANT WHY ISN'T CALLING THEM
LOOTERS, RIOTERS BIASED THE
OTHER WAY?
>> INDEED AND THAT'S THE CONCERN
OVER THE USE OF THOSE TERMS AS
OF THIS REPORT AND AS WAS ARGUED
IN COURT THAT DAY.
IF THE JUDGE'S POSITION IS THAT
YOU SHOULDN'T USE THE TERM
VICTIM, SO THERE'S ALREADY BEEN
PROOF OF A CRIME, WHY WOULD WE
IDENTIFY SOMEONE AS AN ARSONIST
UNLESS THERE'S BEEN PROOF THAT
THEY'VE BURNED DOWN A BUILDING?
SO AT LEAST -- AND I'M NOT
FAMILIAR EXACTLY WITH THE
JUDGE'S REASONING ON THIS, BUT
BY THAT REASONING, THE RULE
WOULD SEEM TO APPLY OR SHOULD
PERHAPS APPLY UNIVERSALLY IN A
GIVEN CASE.
>> YOU KNOW, BACK TO THE VICTIM
THING.
IF SOMEONE IS SHOT DEAD BY
GUNFIRE, I JUST FAIL TO
UNDERSTAND HOW THEY ARE NOT
VICTIMS.
>> WELL, I TEND TO AGREE WITH
YOU BY ANY REGULAR USE OF THE
TERM VICTIM.
EVEN A PERSON SHOT DEAD IN A
JUSTIFIED ACT OF SELF-DEFENSE,
THEY'RE STILL A VICTIM OF A
GUNSHOT WOUND.
I THINK WHAT THE JUDGE MAY BE
DOING IS TAKING EXTRA CARE TO
MAKE SURE THAT THE DEFENDANT'S
PRESUMPTION OF INNOCENCE IS NOT
BIASED BY A TERM LIKE VICTIM,
CONCLUDING OR SUGGESTING THAT
THE COURT HAS CONCLUDED THAT A
CRIME WAS COMMITTED.
AGAIN, THE JUDGE'S JOB IS TO
ENSURE THAT BOTH MR. RITTENHOUSE
GETS A FAIR TRIAL AND THE STATE
GETS A FAIR TRIAL.
>> CLEARLY KYLE RITTENHOUSE IS
CLAIMING SELF-DEFENSE.
HOW HARD WILL IT BE TO CONVINCE
THE JURY IT WASN'T SELF-DEFENSE?
>> THE PROSECUTOR'S JOB IS TO
PROVE THAT MR. RITTENHOUSE'S
ACTIONS WERE UNREASONABLE.
THAT HE FACED GREAT BODILY HARM,
THAT'S THE REQUIREMENT, THE
STATE WILL HAVE TO PROVE THAT IF
HE BELIEVED THAT, THAT THAT
WASN'T REASONABLE OR THAT THE
AMOUNT OF FORCE THAT HE USED WAS
UNREASONABLE IN THAT
CIRCUMSTANCE.
AND THE STATE WILL HAVE TO PROVE
THAT LIKE EVERY OTHER ELEMENT OF
THE OFFENSE, THAT HE CAUSED THE
DEATH OF THOSE THAT HE SHOT.
>> SO THE EYES OF THE NATION ARE
ON THIS CASE.
IS THAT A CONSIDERATION INSIDE
THE COURTROOM?
>> WELL, I THINK REALISTICALLY
EVERYBODY IN THE COURTROOM KNOWS
THAT.
THIS IS A SIGNIFICANT CASE ABOUT
ISSUES THAT ARE HIGHLY CHARGED
AND VERY SIGNIFICANT IN OUR
SOCIETY.
STILL, THOUGH, EVERYBODY IN THE
COURTROOM WILL HAVE TO DO THEIR
JOB AND WILL BE FOCUSED.
THE JUDGE'S JOB IS TO ENSURE A
FAIR TRIAL.
THE STATE'S JOB TO PROVE EACH
ELEMENT OF THE OFFENSE.
AND MR. RITTENHOUSE'S COUNSEL TO
DEFEND HIM FROM THE CHARGES.
>> WE LEAVE IT THERE.
LANNY GLINBERG, THANKS VERY
MUCH.
>> THANK YOU FOR HAVING ME.
>> THAT IS ALL FOR TONIGHT.
FOR MORE COVERAGE, INCLUDING
THIS WEEK'S COVID CONDITIONS,
VISIT OUR WEBSITE AT
pbswisconsin.org.
I'M FREDERICA FREYBERG.
HAVE A GREAT WEEKEND.
>> FUNDING FOR "HERE AND NOW" IS
PROVIDED BY THE FOCUS FUND FOR
JOURNALISM AND FRIENDS OF PBS
WISCONSIN.