>> WISCONSIN IS ON COURSE TO HAVE NEW VOTING MAPS IN SHORT
ORDER. LATE THIS WEEK, CONSULTANTS
HIRED BY THE STATE SUPREME COURT REJECTED TWO OF THE MAP
SUBMISSIONS AS BEING PARTISAN GERRYMANDERS AND SAID THE REST
COULDN'T MEET MUSTER WITH THE HIGH COURT.
FOR DETAILS ON THIS, WE TURN TO ZAC SCHULTZ AT THE CAPITOL.
SO WHICH TWO MAPS REPRESENT PARTISAN GERRYMANDER, ACCORDING
TO THESE CONSULTANTS? >> THE FEST ONE SHOULDN'T COME
AS ANY SURPRISE AND THAT IS THE REPUBLICAN MAP, THE REPUBLICAN
LEGISLATORS' MAP, WHICH IS THE MOST CLOSELY RELATED TO THE
CURRENT MAPS THAT ARE IN PLACE THAT THE SUPREME COURT ALREADY
SAID WERE GERRYMANDERED. THE OTHER MAPS ARE FROM WHAT'S
CALLED THE JOHNSON INTERVENORS, WHICH ARE MAPS DRAWN BY THE
WISCONSIN INSTITUTE FOR LAW AND LIBERTY, OR W.I.L., A
CONSERVATIVE LAW FIRM. THEE HEDGED THEIR BEATS BETWEEN
SOME OF THE MAPS DRAWN BY THE MORE LIBERAL OR DEMOCRATIC
GROUPS IN THIS CASE AND THEIR LEGISLATORS' MAPS, BUT STILL
PRETTY MUCH MADE FOR A SLAM DUNK MAJORITY FOR THEIR MAPS IF
ADOPTED. >> IT'S SOMETHING CONSULTANTS
CALLED STEALTH GERRYMANDERING, I THINK, IN THEIR REPORT?
>> YEAH. AND THAT'S BECAUSE THE W.I.L.
MAPS MET ALL OF THE CRITERIA THAT ARE DETERMINED BY THE STATE
CONSTITUTION. THEY'RE CONTIGUOUS, THEY KEPT
MOST OF THE MUNICIPAL COMMUNITIES OF INTEREST
TOGETHER, THE POPULATION, ALL THOSE THINGS WERE THERE, BUT
THEY STILL WERE DRAWN IN A WAY THAT WERE PRETTY MUCH GUARANTEED
REPUBLICAN MAJORITIES AND, IN SOME CASES, SUPER MAJORITIES.
>> AND SO THE CONSULTANT'S VIEW ON THIS IS NOT SETTING WELL WITH
REPUBLICAN LAWMAKERS, SAYING THEIR MAPS WERE REJECTED BECAUSE
THEY DIDN'T PRODUCE DEMOCRATIC OUTCOMES THAT THIS COURT WANTS.
>> WELL, I THINK THEY'RE SPEAKING TO THEIR AUDIENCE,
THEIR BASE, THEIR DONORS AND POSSIBLY HOPING TO SPEAK TO THE
U.S. SUPREME COURT WHERE THEY'RE HOPING THIS APPEAL WILL BE HEARD
AND THEN ONE OF THEIR TWO PREFERRED MAPS WOULD ULTIMATELY
BE CHOSEN BY THE HIGH COURT IN THE LAND.
BUT THE HONEST REALITY IS THAT EVERY INDEPENDENT ANALYST, EVERY
EXPERT, MOST PEOPLE THAT UNDERSTAND THIS ISSUE HAVE
LOOKED AT THESE MAPS FOR THE LAST DECADES PLUS IS THEY FAVOR
REPUBLICANS. QUESTION.
WAS THE TWO-THIRDS SUPERMAJORITY IN THE SENATE ENTIRELY A
GERRYMANDER? PROBABLY NOT, WHAT THE EXPERTS
SAY IS THAT BUT A SOLID PORTION OF THAT IS BECAUSE OF THE
GERRYMANDER THAT WAS DRAWN INTO FAVOR REPUBLICANS IN DISTRICTS
THAT WERE GUARANTEED TO ELECT THEM.
>> SO AS TO THE OTHER FOUR MAPS FROM DEMOCRATS AND OTHERS, THE
EXPERTS DEEMED THEM NOT PARTISAN GERRYMANDERS BUT IS NOT
NECESSARILY PERFECT, EITHER. >> Reporter: THAT'S RIGHT.
THERE WERE DIFFERENCES BETWEEN ALL FOUR MAPS.
THE EXPERTS, MOST OF THEIR 25-PAGE REVIEW WAS ACTUALLY
SCORING IN THEIR ANALYSIS OF ALL THE DIFFERENT MAPS ACCORDING TO
A NUMBER OF RHETORIC RUBRICS, MOSTLY LOOK AT PARTISAN
FAIRNESS, WHICH IS KIND OF THE NEW STANDARD THAT THIS COURT HAS
INTRODUCED FOR THIS PROCESS TO SAY IN A 50/50 TOP OF THE BALLOT
STATE, WHICH IS WHAT WISCONSIN IS, WHAT WOULD BE THE MOST FAIR
OUTCOME AND HOW WOULD THAT BE REPRESENTED BY HOW THE DISTRICTS
LOOKED AND THEY SAID THAT ACCORDING TO SOME ANALYSIS OPTED
ONE, LOOKING AT ALL THE OLD ELECTIONS FOR THE PAST SEVEN
YEARS, THIS MAP WAS BETTER, THAT MAP WAS A LITTLE BETTER OVER
HERE, SO DIFFERENT SCORES FOR DIFFERENT AREAS BUT OTHERWISE
ROUGHLY THE SAME, NONE OF THEM STOOD OUT WELL AND ABOVE TO THE
OTHERS, SO THEY SAID THE SUPREME COURT CAN PICK FROM THEM IF THEY
WANT. >> SO THE CONSULTANTS ALSO
REJECTED REPUBLICAN CLAIMS THAT MAJORITIES IN THE LEGISLATURE
ARE DUE TO DEMOCRATIC SUPPORT BEING CONCENTRATED IN CITIES
WHILE THE G.O.P. HAS THIS BROADER SUPPORT OUT-STATE.
THE CONSULTANT SAT SAID GEOGRAPS NOT DESTINY.
UNPACK THIS FOR US. >> THIS IS SOMETHING WE'VE HEARD
OVER AND OVER, AND WE'VE REPORTED ON FOR YEARS.
THERE IS A GEOGRAPHIC BIAS FOR REPUBLICANS IN WISCONSIN.
THE QUESTION IS, HOW MUCH. IN A NEUTRAL, FAIR MAP, WE'VE
HAD EXPERTS FROM THE UW SAY THAT REPUBLICANS WOULD WIN SOMEWHERE
BETWEEN 50 AND 55 SEATS IN AN AVERAGE YEAR IF THE MAPS WERE
ALL DRAWN FAIRLY, AND IN THIS CASE, THE EXPERT SAID THAT THAT
WAS SOMETHING THAT THEY SHOULD BE LOOKING AT BUT YOU CAN MAKE
FAIR MAPS WITHOUT HAVING EVERYTHING TILTED ONE WAY, SO IT
SHOULDN'T GIVE THE REPUBLICANS 66 SEATS IN T IN THE ASSEMBLY, T
MAYBE 50, WHICH IS JOE BIDEN AS IT HAPPENS IN THIS BODY.
>> SO WHAT HAPPENS NOW? >> THERE IS ONE WEEK FOR THE
PLAINTIFFS TO FILE THEIR RESPONSES TO THE EXPERTS.
THAT'S DUE NEXT THURSDAY. AFTER THAT, THE COURT COULD ASK
THE EXPERTS TO DRAW OR ADJUST. THE EXPERTS DID NOT SUBMIT THEIR
OWN VERSION SAYING THAT THE FOUR MAPS THAT THEY PROPOSED THAT
WERE IN THERE WERE GOOD ENOUGH BUT THEY CAN MAKE ADJUSTMENTS IF
THE COURT WANTS. THE COURT COULD NARROW IT DOWN,
IT COULD MAKE A DECISION. WE DON'T KNOW WHAT HAPPENS AFTER
THAT. >> THE CONSULTANTS SAID THEY
COULD TAKE A CRACK AT MAKING THESE MAPS IN SHORT ORDER.
>> THAT'S RIGHT. >> ALL RIGHT.