>> THE FOLLOWING PROGRAM IS A
PBS WISCONSIN ORIGINAL
PRODUCTION.
>> AN AVALANCHE OF ALMOST 6,000
MONTHLY CALLS TO THE 9-8-8
LIFELINE HIGHLIGHTS THE NEED FOR
MENTAL HEALTH SUPPORT.
P.F.A.S. ARE EVERYWHERE, BUT
PREVENTION CAN START AT HOME.
AND CANDIDATES ANNOUNCING THEIR
NEXT RUN PROVIDES A GLIMPSE INTO
THE NEXT ELECTION CYCLE.
I'M FREDERICA FREYBERG, TONIGHT
ON "HERE AND NOW," WE SPEAK WITH
D.H.S. SECRETARY KILLE KIRSTEN N
ABOUT THE NEED FOR MENTAL HEALTH
HELP.
A WATER QUALITY MANAGER LAYS OUT
P.F.A.S. MITIGATION IN DRINKING
WATER.
ANTHONY CHERGOSKY EXPLAINS A
SUDDEN PUSH FOR THIRD PARTY
CANDIDATES AND A FUTURE WITH
ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE.
IT'S "HERE AND NOW" FOR JULY 21.
>> FUNDING FOR "HERE AND NOW" IS
PROVIDED BY THE FOCUS FUND FOR
JOURNALISM AND FRIENDS OF PBS
WISCONSIN.
>> NEARLY 92,000 CONTACTS
RELATED TO MENTAL HEALTH AND
SUBSTANCE USE SUPPORT CAME
ACROSS THE 9-8-8 WISCONSIN
LIFELINE IN ITS FIRST FULL YEAR
OF OPERATION.
THE DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH
SERVICES SAYS THE LIFELINE
SYSTEM HAS REDUCED PRESSURES ON
OTHER EMERGENCY SYSTEMS AND
REPORTS THAT 98% OF INTERACTIONS
WERE DEEMED RESOLVED.
FOR MORE ON THE STATE'S MENTAL
HEALTH RESOURCES, WE TURN TO
D.H.S. SECRETARY DESIGNEE
KIRSTEN JOHNSON.
THANK YOU FOR BEING WITH US.
>> THANK YOU FOR HAVING ME.
>> WERE YOU SURPRISED BY THE
92,000 NUMBER OF CONTACTS IN THE
FIRST YEAR OF THIS 9-8-8
SERVICE?
>> I DON'T THINK I NECESSARILY
WAS SURPRISED.
I THINK IT REALLY DEMONSTRATES
THE NEED WE HAVE IN WISCONSIN
AND ACROSS THE COUNTRY, FRANKLY,
TO MEET PEOPLE WHERE THEY ARE
IMMEDIATELY IN REAL TIME WHEN
THEY NEED SUPPORT AROUND MENTAL
HEALTH.
>> SO IF SOMEONE CALLS THE 9-8-8
LINE AND THEY ARE IN CRISIS,
MENTAL HEALTH CRISIS, WHAT WILL
THEY GET ON THE OTHER END?
>> SURE.
THEY'LL GET SOMEONE WHO IS
TRAINED TO DEESCALATE A SCENARIO
OR SITUATION, HOW TO FIND
SUPPORT WITHIN THEIR COMMUNITY,
TO CONNECT THEM WITH OTHER
RESOURCES, A PROVIDER IF THEY
NEEDED A BEHAVIORAL HEALTH
PROVIDER, AND IF IT TRULY IS A
SCENARIO WHERE THERE'S A CRISIS
AND AN ACTION HAPPENING, THEY
CAN BE CONNECTED TO EMERGENCY
SERVICES.
>> WHAT DOES IT MEAN TO SAY THAT
98% OF THE CONTACTS ARE
RESOLVED?
>> SURE.
SO THAT'S A REALLY GOOD
QUESTION.
THAT MEANS 98% OF THE CALLS THAT
ARE ANSWERED ARE RESOLVED IN
TERMS OF THE PERSON IS
COMFORTABLE HANGING UP THE
PHONE, THE INDIVIDUAL WHO IS
WORKING AT THE 9-8-8 CALL CENTER
FEELS COMFORTABLE THAT THEY ARE
SAFE, AND DEPENDING ON THE
SCENARIO, THERE MAY BE A
FOLLOW-UP CALL SCHEDULED IF THE
INDIVIDUAL IS COMFORTABLE
SHARING THEIR PERSONAL
INFORMATION, CONTACT
INFORMATION, THERE MAY BE A CASE
MANAGER THAT'S ASSIGNED TO A
FOLLOW-UP, BUT THAT MEANS WHEN
THEY HANG UP THE PHONE, THE
PERSON IN THE CALL CENTER FEELS
COMFORTABLE THAT THAT PERSON IS
SAFE.
>> AND THESE CALLS COULD
PRESUMABLY TAKE SOME TIME.
RIGHT?
I MEAN, HOW LONG DO PEOPLE SPEND
ON THE PHONE WITH PEOPLE WHO
REALLY NEED THAT HELP?
>> SO THE AVERAGE CALL IS ABOUT
20 MINUTES, BUT THAT'S AVERAGE.
SO IT'S INTERESTING.
I JUST ASKED THIS QUESTION
EARLIER OF THE 9-8-8 STAFF, HOW
LONG -- SO A TEXT MESSAGE COULD
TAKE UP TO TWO HOURS.
ON AVERAGE, CALLS ARE ABOUT 20
MINUTES.
>> HOW DO DO THE
REGARDLESSULATIONS, THE CASES,
THE CALLS THAT ARE RESOLVED,
FREE UP OTHER SERVICES THAT
MIGHT OTHERWISE BE CALLED UPON?
>> THAT'S ALSO AN EXCELLENT
QUESTION.
ABOUT TWO-THIRDS OF CALLERS ARE
ACTUALLY REPEAT CALLERS, SO
THEY'RE PEOPLE WHO NOW RECOGNIZE
THAT THIS IS A RESOURCE THAT
THEY CAN ACCESS.
IT HAS ALLEVIATED SOME OF THE
DEMANDS ON OUR CRISIS CALL
CENTERS IN OUR COUNTIES, BUT
ALSO ALLEVIATES SOME OF THE
9-1-1 CALLS, SO PEOPLE WHO NEED
THE IMMEDIATE TOUCH POINT, THEY
NEED SOMEBODY TO TALK TO,
ACTUALLY HAVE AN OUTLET WHERE
THEY HAVE A WARM BODY TO TALK
THEM THROUGH THE SCENARIO
THEY'RE IN.
>> OUTSIDE OF THIS LIFELINE,
WHAT DOES ACCESS TO
NON-EMERGENCY MENTAL HEALTH
SERVICE LOOK LIKE ACROSS THE
STATE RIGHT NOW?
>> CERTAINLY, WE HAVE CHALLENGES
IN TERMS OF ACCESS TO CARE.
THROUGHOUT THE PANDEMIC, I THINK
WE HAD CHALLENGES AROUND MENTAL
HEALTH AND ACCESS TO MENTAL
HEALTH SERVICES BEFORE THE
PANDEMIC.
THEY WERE CERTAINLY EXACERBATED
OVER THE COURSE OF THE LAST
3-1/2 YEARS, SO THERE ARE LONG
WAIT TIMES TO GET INTO
BEHAVIORAL HEALTH PROVIDERS.
THIS IS A TOUCH POINT FOR
PEOPLE.
I'VE ALSO LEARNED FROM THE STAFF
THAT THE PEOPLE THAT CALL BACK
MAY HAVE AN APPOINTMENT SIX
MONTHS OUT, NINE MONTHS OUTED,
BUT BECAUSE THEY HAVE A CONTACT
THAT THEY KNOW THEY CAN CALL
WEEKLY, OR EVERY FEW WEEKS,
SOMEBODY THAT THEY TRUST, THAT
THEY MAY NOT NEED THAT CRISIS
LEVEL IN SIX OR EIGHT MONTHS,
THAT THEY MAY TALK ABOUT THE
ISSUES THAT THEY'RE EXPERIENCING
IN REAL TIME AND HAVE THEM
RESOLVED.
>> BECAUSE I WAS THINKING THAT
IF SOMEONE -- ONE OF THE CALL
TAKERS ON THE LINE OFFERS
RESOURCES TO PEOPLE WHO CALL,
THEY MIGHT BE KIND OF THIN.
RIGHT?
OR THEY CALL AND IT'S LIKE,
YEAH, LIKE YOU SAY, SIX MONTHS
OUT, THAT KIND OF THING, SO I
CAN SEE THAT REPEAT KIND OF
CALL-BACK.
ARE THE PRESSURES OF DAILY LIFE
AND THE OVERALL NEED FOR HELP
GREATER RIGHT NOW?
>> YOU KNOW, I THINK THAT THERE
WAS CERTAINLY AN INCREASED NEED
FOR BEHAVIORAL HEALTH SERVICES
BEFORE THE PANDEMIC, LIKE I
MENTIONED.
I DO THINK THEY'VE INCREASED
POST-PANDEMIC.
WE REALLY WENT THROUGH THREE
YEARS OF UPHEAVAL IN TERMS OF,
YOU KNOW, INCOME AND, YOU KNOW,
ACCESS TO CHILDCARE AND HAVING
TO WORK FROM HOME AND CHILDREN
AT HOME AND KIDS AT HOME AND
REMOTE WORK AND REMOTE SCHOOL I
THINK THERE'S ABOUT A LOT OF
CHANGE IN OUR SOCIETY OVER THE
COURSE OF THE LAST 3-1/2 YEARS,
AND I THINK PEOPLE ARE REALLY
STRUGGLING.
>> DO YOU FEEL AS THOUGH THIS
9-8-8 SERVICE AND KIND OF THE
DISCUSSION AROUND IT AND THE
PROMOTION OF IT HELPS COMBAT THE
STIGMA OF MENTAL HEALTH ISSUES?
>> I THINK IT HAS.
I DO THINK IT HAS.
AND I DO THINK THAT HAS, OVER
THE COURSE OF THE LAST FIVE
YEARS, PRE-PANDEMIC, PEOPLE ARE
TALKING MORE ABOUT THE PERSONAL
CHALLENGES AND STRUGGLES.
I THINK ANOTHER OUTLET FOR
PEOPLE HAS BEEN SOCIAL MEDIA,
WHICH HAS BEEN BOTH A BLESSING
AND A CURSE IN TERMS OF PEOPLE
ARE MORE FORTHCOMING ABOUT WHAT
THEY'RE EXPERIENCING IN THEIR
LIVES.
THE FLIP SIDE OF THAT IS THERE'S
A TENDENCY TO PORTRAY
PERFECTIONISM, WHICH I THINK IS
CHALLENGING FOR KIDS TO TRY TO
FEEL THAT THEY'RE NOT GOOD
ENOUGH, THEY'RE NOT -- THEY'RE
NOT GOOD ENOUGH WHEN THEY
COMPARE THEMSELVES TO OTHERS ON
SOCIAL MEDIA.
BUT AGAIN, I DO THINK THERE HAS
BEEN AN INCREASED NEED OVER THE
COURSE OF TIME AND I THINK THAT
PEOPLE ARE MORE WILLING TO REACH
OUT AND ASK FOR HELP.
>> IN SUM, WHAT MESSAGE TO
PEOPLE WHO MIGHT NEED HELP DO
YOU HAVE?
>> THAT THERE IS HELP.
THAT THERE IS HOPE.
THAT THERE ARE OUTLETS.
THEY CAN CALL 9-8-8.
THE OTHER VALUABLE TOOL THAT WE
HAVE IS CONNECTED TO 2-1-1,
WHICH IS A ROBUST SYSTEM OF
RESOURCES, SO THOSE 9-8-8 -- THE
PEOPLE ANSWERING THE PHONE ARE
ABLE TO GIVE LOCAL RESOURCES TO
PEOPLE WHO CALL, AND I THINK
IT'S A TREMENDOUS VALUE TO
WISCONSINITES.
>> ALL RIGHT.
KIRSTEN JOHNSON, THANKS VERY
MUCH.
>> THANK YOU FOR HAVING ME.
>> TURNING TO THE ENVIRONMENT,
AT LEAST 45% OF TAP WATER
CONTAINS THE CANCER-CAUSING
FOREVER CHEMICALS KNOWN AS
P.F.A.S., ACCORDING TO A
RECENTLY NATIONWIDE STUDY FROM
THE U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY,
VARYING GREATLY DEPENDING ON
WHERE YOU LIVE.
AS RESEARCH INTO P.F.A.S.
EXPANDS, SO DOES THE REACH OF
WHERE IT IT IS FOUND IN EVERYDAY
LIVES.
FOR MORE ON HOW TO MITIGATE
EXPOSURE TO THESE CHEMICALS IN
YOUR OWN HOME, WE TURN TO JOE
GRANDE, WATER QUALITY MANAGER
FOR THE MADISON WATER UTILITY.
THANK YOU FOR BEING WITH US.
>> GLAD TO BE HERE.
>> SO WISCONSIN CLEARLY HAS
P.F.A.S. IN ALL CORNERS AND IN
SOME PLACE, THERE ARE DEFINITE
P.F.A.S. HOT SPOTS, BUT HOW DOES
SOMEONE KNOW IF THEY HAVE
EXPOSURE TO P.F.A.S. IN THEIR
DRINKING WATER AND WHETHER IT'S
ENOUGH TO WORRY ABOUT?
>> SURE.
SO REALLY DEPENDS ON WHAT THE
SOURCE IS OF THEIR DRINKING
WATER, WHETHER THEY ARE SERVED
BY A PUBLIC UTILITY OR WHETHER
THEY HAVE A PRIVATE WELL AND
IT'S THEIR OWN INDIVIDUAL
RESPONSIBILITY.
SO IF THEY'RE ON A PUBLIC WATER
SYSTEM OR A PUBLIC UTILITY, THEY
SHOULD REACH OUT TO THEIR
UTILITY.
MAYBE THEY RECEIVE INFORMATION
FROM THEIR CONSUMER CONFIDENCE
REPORT OR THEIR ANNUAL WATER
QUALITY REPORT AND IT REPORTS ON
THAT.
SO THE LARGEST UTILITIES IN THE
STATE WOULD HAVE DONE THEIR
INITIAL TESTING LATE IN 2022, SO
THAT SHOULD BE REPORTED ON THEIR
CURRENT CONSUMER CONFIDENCE
REPORT.
SOME OF THE SMALLER UTILITIES
ACROSS THE STATE ARE CURRENTLY
DOING THAT TESTING, SO THEY
MIGHT NOT HAVE THOSE RESULTS
ALREADY REPORTED, BUT THAT'S ONE
WAY THAT THEY CAN FIND OUT,
CHECKING THE WEBSITES FOR THEIR
INDIVIDUAL UTILITY OR JUST
CALLING THE UTILITY AND ASKING,
HAVE YOU TESTED FOR P.F.A.S.
IF YOU HAVE, HAVE YOU FOUND
ANYTHING AND WHAT HAVE YOU
FOUND?
>> AND SO IF PEOPLE DO SEE IN
THOSE REPORTS OR THROUGH PRIVATE
WELL TESTING THAT THEY HAVE HIGH
LEVELS OF P.F.A.S., WHAT SHOULD
THEY DO ABOUT IT?
HOW DO YOU MITIGATE THAT IN YOUR
DRINKING WATER?
>> THERE ARE TREATMENT
ALTERNATIVES.
I'M NOT HERE TO ADVOCATE ONE WAY
OR THE OTHER, BUT THERE ARE
TREATMENT ALTERNATIVES THAT CAN
REDUCE P.F.A.S. CONCENTRATIONS
IN DRINKING WATER.
THOSE INCLUDE ACTIVATED CARBON,
LIKE A CHARCOAL FILTER, IT MIGHT
BE IN A PITCHER FILTER OR
SOMETHING THAT'S ATTACHED TO
YOUR KITCHEN SINK.
THERE'S ALSO IN-LINE EXCHANGE,
WHICH IS LESS COMMONLY USED.
THAT'S MORE FOR LARGE USERS LIKE
UTILITIES THAT ARE TREATING IT
BEFORE IT'S SENT OUT TO
CONSUMERS, AND THEN THERE'S
REVERSE OSMOSIS, AND THAT'S
ANOTHER WAY THAT YOU CAN REMOVE.
SO THOSE ARE THE THREE GENERAL
TECHNOLOGIES THAT ARE AVAILABLE.
>> AND SO APART FROM KIND OF THE
PICTURES THAT YOU USE BY FILLING
IT WITH TAP WATER IN YOUR
KITCHEN, PITCHERS, CAN PEOPLE
ININSTALL THOSE OTHER KINDS OF
FILTERS THAT FILTER THE WATER AT
ITS SOURCE?
>> THEY COULD BE ATTACHED UNDER
THE KITCHEN SINK, FOR EXAMPLE.
YOU MIGHT HAVE A SEPARATE FAUCET
THAT'S DELIVERING THAT FILTERED
WATER, AND THAT MIGHT BE, LIKE I
SAID, IT MIGHT BE CARBON-BASED
SYSTEM OR IT MIGHT BE A REVERSE
OSMOSIS SYSTEM, AND SO THOSE
SYSTEMS ARE AVAILABLE.
>> CAN YOU DO THOSE SYSTEMS
YOURSELF, OR DO YOU HAVE TO HAVE
A PLUMBER?
>> DEPENDS ON HOW HANDY YOU ARE.
SOME PEOPLE MIGHT BE ABLE TO DO
THAT ON YOUR OWN, BUT IN MOST
CASES, IT'S PROBABLY A PLUMBER
THAT NEEDS TO COME IN AND DO
THAT.
>> WE GOT AN EMAIL FROM A VIEWER
WHO TALKED ABOUT THE DISPOSAL OF
USED FILTERS FOR P.F.A.S. AND
THAT THEY ARE THEN CONTAMINATED.
RIGHT?
AND HOW SHOULD THOSE BE DISPOSED
OF, THOSE FILTERS?
>> THERE REALLY ISN'T AN
INFRASTRUCTURE SET UP FOR
HANDLING THOSE.
QUITE FRANKLY, THE
CONCENTRATIONS OR THE AMOUNT OF
P.F.A.S. THAT MIGHT BE ON THOSE
FILTERS IS REALLY SMALL
QUANTITIES, AND SO THERE REALLY
ISN'T ANY REGULATION IN TERMS OF
SPECIAL IS DISPOSAL
RECOMMENDATIONS FOR THAT.
TYPICALLY, YOU JUST PUT IT IN
THE TRASH AND IT ENDS UP IN THE
LANDFILL.
THE PROBLEM WITH P.F.A.S. IS
THAT THEY ARE THESE -- EXCUSE
ME, FOREVER CHEMICALS, AND SO
THEY DON'T BREAK DOWN.
WE'RE IS NOT DESTROYING THEM
WITH OUR TREATMENT PROCESSES.
ALL WE'RE DOING IS CONCENTRATING
THEM AND MOVING THEM SOMEWHERE
ELSE, AND WE HAVE TO FIND SOME
WAY, TECHNOLOGY HAS TO ADVANCE
TO BREAK THESE DOWN AND TO BREAK
THAT CYCLE.
>> SO P.F.A.S. IN GROUNDWATER
AND DRINKING WATER SEEMS TO GET
KIND OF THE BULK OF THE
ATTENTION, BUT WE'RE EXPOSED TO
THESE CHEMICALS IN A LOT OF
OTHER WAYS IN OUR DAILY LIVES.
HOW MUCH SHOULD WE FOCUS ON
WATER VERSUS THE OTHER AREAS OF
EXPOSURE?
>> YEAH.
I THINK WE SHOULD FOCUS ON ALL
OF THEM.
FOOD IN PARTICULAR, IN SOME
LOCAL BODIES OF WATER, THERE ARE
FISH ADVISORIES, SO THAT'S ONE
PIECE.
THERE'S THE DRINKING WATER, BUT
THERE'S ALSO CONSUMER GOODS.
WE'RE SURROUNDED BY P.F.A.S.
IT'S IN UP UPHOLSTERY, IT'S IN
OUR CLOTHING, IT'S IN OUR
CARPETING.
IT'S IN A LOT OF PAPER
PACKAGING.
SO IN ORDER TO MITIGATE OR
REDUCE OR EXPOSURES, WE NEED TO
BE LOOKING FOR P.F.A.S.-FREE
ALTERNATIVES, AND SOME OF THOSE
DO EXIST AND THERE'S A GROWING
LIST OF COMPANIES THAT ARE NOW
MAKING P.F.A.S.-FREE
ALTERNATIVES, BUT IF YOU SEE THE
WORDS "STAIN RESISTANT, STAIN
REPELLANT, GREASE REASSISTANT,
WATER REPEL MILITANT, ALL OF
THESE TYPICALLY MEAN THAT
THERE'S P.F.A.S. IN THEM."
LIKE YOUR ANTI-STICK COOK WARE,
THOSE KIND OF THINGS.
IN THE PAST CERTAINLY HAVE HAD
P.F.A.S. AND THERE ARE NOW
ALTERNATIVES THAT ARE TRYING TO
REMOVE THOSE FROM THE CONSUMER
SUPPLY CHAIN.
>> THAT'S GOOD, BECAUSE IT'S
EVERYWHERE.
JOE GRANDE, THANKS VERY MUCH.
>> THANK YOU.
>> IN POLITICAL NEWS, THE IDEA
OF LAUNCHING THIRD-PARTY
CANDIDATES IN THE 2024
PRESIDENTIAL RACE IS GAINING
STEAM.
IN ADDITION TO CORNELL WEST
PLANNING ON A GREEN PARTY
TICKET, THE CENTRIST GROUP, NO
LABELS, WHICH IS LOOKING FOR A
IS CALLED UNITY CANDIDATE, IS
EYEING SPECIALS LIKE WEST
VIRGINIA SENATOR JOE MANCHIN.
WHERE DOES THIS PUT THE MAJOR
PARTY CANDIDATES, DONALD TRUMP
AND JOE BIDEN AND HOW WOULD
WISCONSIN SWING WITH A THIRD
PARTY ENTRANT?
FOR THIS AND MORE WE TURN TO
LACROSSE POLITICAL SCIENCE
PROFESSOR, ANTHONY CHERGOSKY.
THANK YOU FOR BEING WITH US.
>> THANK YOU, FREDERICA.
>> GIVEN THE MAJOR PARTY
CANDIDATES, IS THIS UPCOMING
ELECTION RIPE FOR THIRD-PARTY
CANDIDATES?
>> YOU KNOW, I THOUGHT THAT WAS
TRUE OF THE 2016 PRESIDENTIAL
ELECTION.
I LOOKED BACK AT THE POPULAR
VOTE FROM THAT YEAR AND FOUND
THAT NEARLY 95% OF THE POPULAR
VOTE WENT TO EITHER HILLARY
CLINTON OR DONALD TRUMP.
SO COUNT ME AS A THIRD-PARTY
SKEPTIC.
THERE TENDS TO BE A LOT OF TALK
ABOUT THIRD-PARTY ENTRANTS
POTENTIALLY COMING INTO THE
PRESIDENTIAL RACE, AND IT ENDS
UP BEING A LOT OF HYPE AND NOT A
LOT OF VOTES FOR THAT
THIRD-PARTY CANDIDATE.
I'M INTERESTED TO SEE HOW THE
CAMPAIGN UNFOLDS, OBVIOUSLY,
BEFORE MAKING A FINAL JUDGMENT,
BUT THE AMERICAN POLITICAL
SYSTEM MAKES IT EXTRAORDINARILY
DIFFICULT FOR A THIRD-PARTY
TICKET TO SUCCEED.
I EXPECT THAT WILL BE TRUE THIS
TIME AROUND.
OF COURSE WE'LL HAVE TO WAIT AND
SEE EXACTLY HOW THE CAMPAIGN
UNFOLDS.
>> LET'S SAY WE DO HAVE A
THIRD-PARTY ENTRANT.
WHO HE IS VOTES WOULD IT CUT
INTO MORE?
BIDEN'S OR TRUMP'S?
>> I'M SEEING INCONSISTENT DATA
ON WHETHER THE THIRD-PARTY
CANDIDATE WOULD BE A IS CALLED
SAMISPOILER FOR EITHER SIDE, AND
THAT IS WHAT THE PARTIES ARE
FOCUSED ON, IF THE THIRD PARTY
IS GOING TO TAKE AWAY VOTES.
WE DON'T THINK OF THEM AS HAVING
A SERIOUS CHANCE OF WINNING.
WE THINK ABOUT THEM PLAYING THAT
SPOILER ROLE WHERE THEY COULD
THROW THE ELECTION ONE WAY OR
THE OTHER.
TO THE POINT ABOUT WISCONSIN,
THE THIRD-PARTY CANDIDATE BE
COULD BE HIGHLY RELEVANT IN
WISCONSIN, EVEN IF THE
THIRD-PARTY CANDIDATE WIDELY NOT
WIN THE STATE BECAUSE OUR
ELECTIONS HERE ARE SO CLOSE.
IN WISCONSIN, A THIRD-PARTY
CANDIDATE COULD MAKE A BIG
DIFFERENCE, EVEN IF THEY ONLY
TAKE A SMALL PERCENTAGE OF THE
VOTE.
>> LOOKING BACK IN PRESIDENTIAL
ELECTORAL HISTORY, WHAT'S AN
EXAMPLE OF A THIRD-PARTY
CANDIDATE THAT DID, IN EFFECT,
SPOIL CANDIDATES' CHANCES OF
TAKING THE SEAT?
I MEAN, RALPH NADER COMES TO
MIND, ROSS PEROT.
>> RALPH NADER COMES TO MIND
BECAUSE HE RAN AS A LEFT WING
CANDIDATE.
THUS, HE WOULD TAKE AWAY VOTES
FROM AL GORE, THE DEMOCRAT.
THERE, IT WAS QUITE CLEAR WHO
THE THIRD-PARTY CANDIDATE WAS
TAKING AWAY VOTES FROM, AND IN
THE CASE OF RALPH NADER,
FREDERICA, THE BIG DEAL THERE
WAS FLORIDA, WHERE FLORIDA WAS
DECIDED BY SUCH A SMALL MARGIN,
THAT NADER GOT ENOUGH OF THE
PERCENTAGE TO POTENTIALLY SWING
THE ELECTION IN FAVOR OF GEORGE
W. BUSH, AND THAT'S WHAT WE
WOULD BE LOOKING FOR IF A
THIRD-PARTY CANDIDATE MAKES THE
BALLOT IN WISCONSIN IN 2024.
>> RIGHT SO THE TREPIDATION ON
THE PART OF THE MAJOR PARTY
CANDIDATES IN WISCONSIN IS REAL
AROUND A THIRD-PARTY POTENTIAL.
>> IT IS, BECAUSE ONLY A SMALL
NUMBER OF STATES ACTUALLY MATTER
IN THE ELECTORAL COLLEGE, AND SO
THE BIG QUESTION IS, IF A
THIRD-PARTY CANDIDATE WOULD BE
ON THE BALLOT IN THAT SMALL
NUMBER OF PIVOTAL STATES AND
WHICH SIDE THAT THIRD-PARTY
CANDIDATE MAY TAKE VOTES FROM.
>> SO A IN THE THIRD
CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICT, WHERE
YOU ARE, DEMOCRATS ARE KIND OF
LINING UP TO RUN AGAINST
INCUMBENT DERRICK VAN ORDEN
THERE.
REBECCA COOKE WHO LOST TO BRAD
PFAFF IS OFFICIALLY IN.
SO THEY MUST THINK THAT THE
FIRST-TERM REPUBLICAN IS
BEATABLE?
>> I THINK SO, FREDERICA.
A LOT IS GOING TO DPOAND O DEPED
ON THE NATIONAL POLITICAL
CONTEXT IN 2024.
WE ZONE KNOW IF 2024 IS GOING TO
BE A REPUBLICAN FRIENDLY YEAR OR
A DEMOCRATIC PARTY FRIENDLY
YEAR.
THAT REMAINS TO BE SEEN AND
THAT'S GOING TO HAVE A HUGE
EFFECTS ON THE OUTCOME IN THIS
DISTRICT, BUT IN ANTICIPATION OF
POTENTIALLY A FAVORABLE
POLITICAL CLIMATE, A LOT OF
DEMOCRATS ARE LOOKING AT RUNNING
AGAINST FIRST-TERM REPUBLICAN
CONGRESSMAN DERRICK VAN ORDEN,
VIEWING HIM AS POTENTIALLY
VULNERABLE BECAUSE HE WON HIS
PREVIOUS ELECTION BY LESS THAN 4
PERCENTAGE POINTS.
>> HE HAS MODERATED, IT SEEMS TO
ME, IN POLITICAL MESSAGING SINCE
THAT TIME.
>> I WOULD AGREE WITH THAT,
FREDERICA.
HE HAS FOCUSED A LOT ON LIKE
RAILROAD SAFETY, HE'S FOCUSED ON
MENTAL HEALTH, TRYING TO FIND
THAT COMMON GROUND WITH
DEMOCRATS, TRYING TO HAVE SOME
BIPARTISAN POSITIONS.
CONGRESSMAN VAN ORDEN ALSO TAKES
SOME POSITIONS THAT ARE VERY
MUCH IN LINE WITH HIS POLITICAL
PARTY WHEN YOU LOOK AT HIS
POSITION ON IMMIGRATION OR HIS
POSITION ON GUNS.
SO I WOULD DESCRIBE CONGRESSMAN
VAN ORDEN AS TRYING TO GENERATE
SOME PUBLICITY AND GENERATE SOME
MOMENTUM BEHIND BIPARTISAN
EFFORTS WHILE ALSO STICKING WITH
HIS PARTY ON OTHER ISSUES.
>> SO BRAD PFAFF SAYS HE'S
CONSIDERING RUNNING AGAIN BUT
AWAITS NEW DISTRICT MAPS.
HOW WOULD THAT HELP HIM OR OTHER
DEMOCRATS?
>> THERE IS A VERY REAL
POSSIBILITY THAT THE WISCONSIN
STATE SUPREME COURT COULD ENTER
THE PICTURE AND REDRAW THE
CONGRESSIONAL MAPS.
MOST LINCOLN RILEY, LINCO LIKELT
IN THE DISTRICT BECOMING MORE
FAVORABLE TO THE DEMOCRATIC
PARTY.
THERE ARE SEVERAL WAYS THAT THE
DISTRICT MAPS COULD BE REDRAWN,
BUT A LOT OF DEMOCRATS ARE VERY
MUCH AWARE OF THE POSSIBILITY
THAT THIS DISTRICT COULD BE
REDRAWN TO MAKE IT MORE
FAVORABLE TERRAIN FOR THEIR
PARTY.
>> ALL RIGHT.
PROFESSOR ANTHONY CHERGOSKY OUT
OF UW LACROSSE, THANKS VERY MUCH
FOR YOUR EXPERTISE.
>> THANK YOU.
>> THE EXPLOSION OF MAINSTREAM
USE OF ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE
TOOLS HAS LED TO THE VERY
DEVELOPERS OF THIS TECHNOLOGY
WARNING OF ITS DANGERS,
INCLUDING EXTINCTION, BUT THEIR
EXTENSIVE EVERYDAY USE IS HERE
TO STAY.
WE TURN TO LOIS BROOKS, CHIEF
INFORMATION OFFICER AND VICE
PROVOST FOR INFORMATION
TECHNOLOGY AT UW MADISON, AND
THANK YOU FOR BEING WITH US.
>> THANK YOU FOR INVITING ME.
>> SO IT'S NOT ONLY A.I., BUT
GENERATIVE A.I., WHICH CAN
GENERATE TEXT OR IMAGES THAT HAS
REALLY EXPLODED INTO THE
MAINSTREAM.
WHAT IS IT ABOUT THE MASS USE OF
THIS GENERATIVE A.I. THAT'S BEEN
A GAME-CHANGER?
>> SO A.I. HAS BEEN PRESENT FOR
QUITE A LONG TIME, AND YOU'VE
PROBABLY INTERACTING WITH IT
THROUGH THINGS LIKE CHAT BOX OR
FINDINGS THE BEST TRAVEL FARES.
WHAT HAPPENED WITH GENERATIVE
A.I. IS TOOLS LIKE CHAT GPT MADE
IT ACCESSIBLE TO ANYONE TO BEGIN
TO GENERATE CONTENT, SO YOU CAN
GO GENERATE A REPORT OR THE
DRAFT OF AN EMAIL OR AN IMAGE OR
VIDEO YOURSELF, AND SO WE'VE
SEEN THIS EXPLOSION IN
CREATIVITY WITH PEOPLE CREATING
SONGS AND POETRY AND MOVIES AND
ALL SORTS OF THINGS WITH A.I.,
BUT AT THE SAME TIME, THE
QUALITY OF SOME OF IT IS SO GOOD
THAT IT'S HARD TO TELL WHETHER
IT WAS GENERATED BY MACHINE OR
NOT, SO WE HAVE SIMULTANEOUSLY
AN EXPLOSION OF NEW CONTENT AND
A CONCERN THAT YOU MAY NOT KNOW
IF WHAT YOU'RE LOOKING AT WAS
CREATED BY AN A.I. ENGINE OR THE
HUMAN WHO IT'S ATTRIBUTED TO.
>> WHY IS THAT DANGEROUS, IF AT
ALL?
>> IF YOU'RE LOOKING, FOR
EXAMPLE, AT A VIDEO OF SAYING
SOMETHING ON SOCIAL MEDIA, YOU
DON'T KNOW IF THAT PERSON
ACTUALLY SAID THAT OR IF SOMEONE
USED A.I. TO GENERATE IT.
SIMILARLY, IF YOU'RE READING A
REPORT, AN ANALYSIS OF
SOMETHING, YOU DON'T KNOW
WHETHER THAT WAS WRITTEN BY AN
EXPERT WHO COULD BE CREDIBLE OR
AN ENGINE THAT MAY BE PUTTING
OUT FALSE INFORMATION.
AND AGAIN, BECAUSE THE QUALITY
IS GOOD ENOUGH, SOMETIMES IT'S
QUITE HARD TO TELL.
>> IF THE ACCURACY GETTING
BETTER AND BETTER?
>> IT'S HARD TO SAY.
THERE IS MORE AND MORE DATA
BEING AMASSED WITHIN THE ENGINES
THAT CAN BE USED TO CREATE MORE
OUTPUT, BUT THE ACCURACY WOULD
COME FROM TWO THINGS, ONE, FROM
THE DATA ITSELF BEING ACCURATE
THAT WENT INTO IT AND THEN FROM
THE ALGORITHMS USED TO CREATE
GIVING YOU ACCURATE INFORMATION,
SO I COULDN'T SAY IF IT'S
BECOMING MORE ACCURATE, BUT I
WILL SAY THE QUESTIONS ABOUT ITS
ACCURACY ARE BECOMING MORE
PRESENT AND SHARPER.
>> WHICH IS IMPORTANT AS WELL.
SO SPEAKING OF DATA, THE
UNIVERSITY RECENTLY PUT OUT A
STATEMENT RESTRICTING THE USE OF
INSTITUTIONAL DATA THAT IS NOT
CONSIDERED PUBLIC FROM BEING
ENTERED INTO ANY GENERATIVE A.I.
TOOL.
WHY THAT RESTRICTION?
>> WELL, WE ALREADY HAVE
RESTRICTIONS IN PLACE.
WE HAVE A LOT OF DATA THAT'S
LEGALLY PROTECTED, LIKE STUDENT
DATA OR MEDICAL INFORMATION.
WE DO USE SOFTWARE APPLICATIONS
TO MANAGE THAT DATA, BUT WE VERY
CAREFULLY CHECK IT FOR
CYBERSECURITY AND ENTER INTO
CONTRACTS TO HELP WITH
CORRECTION.
THESE A.I. TOOLS HAVEN'T BEEN
SCRUTINIZED.
THE WAY THEY WORK MAY OR MAY NOT
BE APPROPRIATE FOR CERTAIN KINDS
OF DATA AND WE'RE NOT IN A
CONTRACTUALLY PROTECTED
ENVIRONMENT.
SO THERE WAS NOTHING -- A.I.
ITSELF ISN'T BAD AND THERE'S
NOTHING NEW ABOUT THIS.
IT WAS REALLY A REMINDER TO OUR
COMMUNITY OF THE STANDARDS WE
ALREADY HAVE IN PLACE FOR
WORKING WITH SENSITIVE DATA.
>> SO MACHINE LEARNING HAS BEEN
AROUND FOR A WHILE AND IN
ACADEMIC USE.
WHAT'S AN EXAMPLE OF IT, ITS USE
AT THE UNIVERSITY?
>> WELL, WE'VE BEEN DOING A.I.
RESEARCH FOR MORE THAN A DECADE
AT THE UNIVERSITY AND OUR
RESEARCHERS ARE CONTRIBUTING TO
THE DEVELOPMENT, TO THE POWER
AND THE POSSIBILITY OF A.I. TO
RESEARCH INTO ETHICS AND BIAS.
WE'RE ALSO USING IT IN RESEARCH.
SO JUST A FEW EXAMPLES, IF
YOU'RE WORKING WITH A CHEMICAL
THERAPY, PERHAPS MEDICINE, AND
YOU NEED TO UNDERSTAND THE
CHEMICAL AND PHYSICAL
INTERACTIONS, YOU CAN TRAIN A.I.
ALGORITHMS TO DO THAT WORK FOR
YOU, BUT IT CAN DO IT ON A MASS
SCALE THAT YOU COULDN'T ACHIEVE
BEFORE.
ANOTHER EXAMPLE, ONE OF OUR
RESEARCHERS IS WORKING WITH
AGRICULTURAL ANIMALS AND
TRACKING DATA ON THE ANIMALS
AROUND THEIR WELL-BEING, THEIR
NUTRITION AND SO ON, BUT AGAIN,
THE DIFFERENCE IS HE CAN DO THIS
WORK ON A MASSIVE SCALE THAT HE
WASN'T ABLE TO ACCOMPLISH IN THE
PAST, AND SO WE'RE SEEING IT
COME IN IN TRANSPORTATION,
SPACE, SCIENCE, MEDICINE AND IN
MANY AREAS.
>> AS TO STUDENTS' USE OF A.I.,
GENERATIVE A.I. TO COMPLETE
ASSIGNMENTS, EVEN MAJOR ONES
LIKE TERM PAPERS, WHAT IS THE
UNIVERSITY'S POSITION ON THIS?
>> WELL, THERE ARE TWO WAYS TO
TAKE THAT QUESTION.
ARE THEY USING A.I. IN A WAY
THAT'S BEEN ASSIGNED OR THAT'S
NOT BEEN ASSIGNED?
SO WE TEACH A.I., WE TEACH IT IN
COMPUTER SCIENCE, WE TEACH IT IN
COMPUTERS THAT USE A.I., SO
HELPING OUR STUDENTS LEARN HOW
TO USE IT APPROPRIATELY.
THERE IS ALSO AN ACTIVE
CONSIDERATION AROUND THE USE OF
S.I. TO GENERATE A PAPER THAT
THE STUDENT WAS EXPECTED TO
WRITE.
THERE'S AN ACTIVE CONVERSATION
IN A COUPLE OF WAYS.
FIRST, THE STANDARDS HAVEN'T
CHANGED.
CHEATING HAS ALWAYS BEEN
DISALLOWED.
THIS IS JUST A NEW WAY TO
POTENTIALLY DO IT.
BUT WE'RE ALSO HAVING ACTIVE
CONVERSATION WITH OUR PROFESSORS
AROUND ARE THERE WAYS TO ASSESS
PERFORMERS THAT STEP AROUND
THIS, ACTIVE LEARNING,
PROJECT-BASED LEARNING, THAT
WOULD NOT INTRODUCE THE
POSSIBILITIES OF A MACHINE
GENERATED RESPONSE.
>> ARE WE MOVING TOO FAST FOR
THESE TOOLS WITHOUT ADEQUATE
SAFEGUARDS IN PLACE?
>> THERE'S AN INTERESTING
QUESTION NOW AROUND REGULATORY
COMPLIANCE AND A.I. AND A
STATEMENT FROM THE WHITE HOUSE
AROUND THE USE OF WATER MARKING
IN IMAGES.
I THINK IT'S MOVING VERY, VERY
QUICKLY, DISMT CONCERN I HAVE IS
WHETHER THE CONVERSATION AROUND
REGULATORY COMPLIANCE IS
STRICTLY BETWEEN THE GOVERNMENT,
THE CONGRESS AND LEGISLATURE,
AND BIG TECH COMPANIES.
AND I THINK TO DO THIS
CORRECTLY, THERE NEEDS TO BE A
WAY FOR EXPERTS, FOR EMPHASIS,
FOR CITIZENS TO WEIGH INTO
CONVERSATION AS WELL.
SO WE ARE MOVING QUICKLY.
WILL WE MOVE SO QUICKLY THAT WE
AS CITIZENS CAN'T WEIGH IN ON
THE CONVERSATION IS A CONCERN
FOR ME.
>> INTERESTING.
LOIS BROOKS, THANKS VERY MUCH.
>> THANK YOU.
>> FOR MORE ON THIS AND OTHER
ISSUES FACING WISCONSIN, VISIT
OR WEBSITE AT PBS WISCONSIN
DOT-ORG AND THEN CLICK ON THE
NEWS TAB.
THAT'S OUR PROGRAM FOR TONIGHT,
I'M FREDERICA FREYBERG.
HAVE A GOOD WEEKEND.
(CLOSED CAPTIONING PROVIDED BY
RIVERSIDE CAPTIONING COMPANY)
>> FUNDING FOR "HERE AND NOW" IS
PROVIDED BY THE FOCUS FUND FOR
JOURNALISM AND FRIENDS OF PBS
WISCONSIN.