>>> WELCOME TO "NOON
WEDNESDAY," I'M MARISA WOJCIK,
MULTIMEDIA JOURNALIST FOR "HERE
& NOW" ON PBS WISCONSIN.
TODAY IS NOVEMBER 10.
THIS WEEK, THE STATE LEGISLATURE
IS VOTING ON MAP PROPOSALS THAT
CHANGE THE BOUNDARIES OF THE
STATE ASSEMBLY IN THE SENATE AS
WELL AS CONGRESS DISTRICTS FOR
THE NEXT TEN YEARS.
THE REDISTRICTING PROCESS IS
CONFUSING AND SOMETIMES EVEN
CONTRADICTORY, HOWEVER, A TOOL
CALLED THE VOTER PARTISAN INDEX
IT CAN HELP US UNDERSTAND HOW A
DISTRICT IS SKEWED.
JACK KELLY FROM "THE CAP TIMES"
WHO COMPILED THE DATA FOR THE
INDEX IS JOINING ME NOW, AND,
JACK, THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR
BEING HERE.
>> HEY, HAPPY TO BE HERE, THANKS
FOR HAVING ME.
>> SO JUST TO START KIND OF FROM
THE 30,000 FOOT VIEW, WHAT
INFORMATION DOES SOMETHING LIKE
A PARTISAN VOTER INDEX PROVIDE
TO THE AVERAGE VOTER?
IT SOUNDS A LITTLE INTIMIDATING.
>> SURE.
SURE.
SO THE PVI IS MEANT TO SHOW THE
PARTISAN SKEW BASED ON VOTING
TRENDS OF A LEGISLATIVE DISTRICT
IN WISCONSIN.
WE HAVE 132 LEGISLATIVE
DISTRICTS, 99 IN THE ASSEMBLY,
AND 33 IN THE STATE SENATE.
WHAT THE PVI SHOWS IS HOW MANY
PERCENTAGE POINTS ON AVERAGE
DOES A LEGISLATIVE VOTE MORE
DEMOCRATIC OR REPUBLICAN BASED
ON VOTING TRENDS, AND VOTING
TRENDS FOR THE DATA BASE ARE THE
ELECTION RESULTS FROM THE 2020
PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION AND THEN
THE 2016 PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION.
>> AND SO TELL US HOW THE
PARTISAN VOTING INDEX WORKS IN
GENERAL.
>> SURE.
SO THERE IS TWO MAPS, AND,
BASICALLY, THEY ARE INTERACTIVE,
AND YOU ARE ABLE TO LOOK AT ALL
OF THE LEGISLATIVE DISTRICTS IN
THE STATE, AND EACH DISTRICT
GETS A PVI SCORE.
THOSE PVI SCORES COULD BE R PLUS
10 OR D PLUS 4 OR TOSSUP.
WHAT'S THAT MEAN?
R PLUS 10 MEANS THAT DISTRICT
VOTES TEN PERCENTAGE POINTS MORE
REPUBLICAN THAN THE STATE AS A
WHOLE.
THAT MEANS THE SAME THING FOR
DEMOCRATS, AN THEN TOSS YOU
RATINGS MEAN DISTRICTS ARE WHAT
THEY SOUND LIKE, TOSSUPS.
THAT MEANS THEY ARE LESS THAN
1.5 PERCENTAGE POINTS SKEWED IN
EITHER DIRECTION.
THE TOSSUP METRIC IS A LITTLE
ARBITRARY, BUT 1.5 PERCENTAGE
POINTS WE THOUGHT FAIR GIVEN
TURNOUT IS KEY IN THE ASSEMBLY
DISTRICTS AND TO SHIFT 1.5
PERCENTAGE POINTS IS NOT MUCH IN
A GENERAL ELECTION LIKE A
PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION WHERE YOU
HAVE A HIGHER TURNOUT, AND SO IT
IS THREE METRICS SHOWING THE
PARTISAN SKEW AND TOWARDS
REPUBLICANS, DEMOCRATS, OR VERY
A FEW OCCASIONS IN WISCONSIN, A
TRUE TOSSUP.
>> SO YOU ARE TAKING THE VOTING
TRENDS OF HOW PEOPLE IN
WISCONSIN HAVE VOTED FOR
PRESIDENTS OVER THE LAST TWO
ELECTIONS, SO 2016 TO 2020, AND
THE AVERAGE OF THAT IS THE
BASELINE, AND THEN IF A
PARTICULAR DISTRICT VOTED A
CERTAIN PERCENTAGE POINT ABOVE
THAT BASELINE, THEN THEY ARE
GOING TO HAVE R-PLUS-10, FOR
EXAMPLE, AND SO IT REALLY KIND
OF SHOWS YOU, REALLY, HOW STRONG
CERTAIN POLITICAL LEANINGS ARE
IN CERTAIN DISTRICTS, IS THAT
RIGHT?
>> YEAH.
THAT'S EXACTLY RIGHT.
IT IS IMPORTANT TO KNOW, LIKE
YOU SAID, THE MAPS, THEMSELVES,
REPRESENT VOTING TRENDS.
THEY DO NOT NECESSARILY
REPRESENT THE PARTY OF THE
LAWMAKER WHO HOLDS THAT
DISTRICT.
THERE ARE A FEW EXCEPTIONS IN
THE MAP WHERE, LET'S SAY A
DEMOCRAT HOLDS A DISTRICT THAT
HAS A REPUBLICAN RATING, AND A
REPUBLICAN HOLDS A DISTRICT WITH
A DEMOCRATIC RATING.
YEAH.
THAT'S EXACTLY RIGHT.
>> AND SO ZOOMING IN A LITTLE
BIT ON THE MAPS, ARE ANY
DISTRICTS WHAT YOU CHARACTERIZE
AS EQUAL, MEANING THEY ARE VERY
COMPETITIVE, OR EVEN TEETERING
TOWARDS EQUAL, SO THAT MEANS,
YOU KNOW, A DEMOCRAT OR
REPUBLICAN CANDIDATE COULD HAVE
KIND OF AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY TO
CAMPAIGN AND POTENTIALLY WIN
THAT SEAT?
>> YEAH.
SO THIS IS A GREAT QUESTION AS
WELL.
THERE ARE VERY A FEW OF THEM
BASED ON THE DATA BASE THAT
WE'VE BUILT.
THERE ARE FOUR DISTRICTS OF THE
99 IN THE ASSEMBLY THAT GET A
TOSSUP RATING.
TWO OF THEM ARE IN THE GREATER
MILWAUKEE AREA IN THE SUBURBS
WHERE WE SAW A HARSH BACKLASH TO
FORMER PRESIDENT TRUMP IN 2020,
AND ONE OF THEM IS IN NORTHWEST
WISCONSIN ALONG THE MINNESOTA
BORDER, AND THE FOURTH IS THE
GREATER LACROSSE AREA OUTSIDE
THE CITY LIMITS.
THOSE ARE THE FOUR DISTRICTS
THAT GET TRIED AND TRUE TOSSUP
RATINGS.
THERE ARE SOME OTHER DISTRICTS
THAT FIND THEMSELVES IN THAT
PLUS 1.5, 1.6, PLUS 2 KIND OF
RATING THAT MIGHT BE WOULD BE A
LITTLE MORE COMPETITIVE.
WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE STATE
SENATE, NONE OF THE DISTRICTS
GET A TOSSUP RATING BY OUR
METRICS, BUT THAT BEING SAID,
THERE ARE TWO, AT LEAST TWO
DISTRICTS, WHERE IT GETS A
DEMOCRATIC RATING, AND A
REPUBLICAN HOLDS THE SEAT, BUT
THERE'S ANOTHER ONE WHERE A
REPUBLICAN GETS THE RATING, BUT
A DEMOCRAT HOLDS THE SEAT.
DOES BECAUSE IT IS A TOSSUP, IT
DOESN'T MEAN THAT ONE PARTY
CAN'T NECESSARILY WIN THE SEAT
EVEN IF IT GOES AGAINST IT.
IT GETS SUBSTANTIALLY HARDER,
RIGHT, IF YOU'RE A DEMOCRAT
RUNNING IN AN R-PLUS-1.9
DISTRICT, THAT'S EASIER TO WIN
THAN A DEMOCRAT RUNNING IN AN
R-PLUS-12 DISTRICT, AND SAME
COULD BE SAID VICE VERSA, RIGHT?
THERE'S MANY DISTRICTS SKEWED
VERY HEAVILY TOWARDS DEMOCRATS
AND WOULD BE ALMOST IMPOSSIBLE
FOR A REPUBLICAN TO WIN OUT.
>> SO THOSE DISTRICTS WHERE IT
WAS FAVORING, SAY, REPUBLICAN,
YET A DEMOCRAT WON THAT SEAT,
THEY ARE REALLY BEATING THE ODDS
OF JUST KIND OF THE GENERAL
POLITICAL PERSUASION OF THE
AREA, AND ESPECIALLY BASED ON
PRESIDENTIAL ELECTIONS AND A
GREATER TREND TOWARDS STRAIGHT
TICKET VOTING MEANING IF SOMEONE
VOTES FOR A DEMOCRATIC
PRESIDENT, THEY ARE LIKELY TO
VOTE DEMOCRAT ALL THE WAY DOWN.
IT IS LESS COMMON FOR PEOPLE TO
VOTE BOTH DEMOCRAT AND
REPUBLICAN FOR LOCAL VERSUS
FEDERAL RACES SO THE TREND OF
LEANING IN HARDER TO A POLITICAL
PARTY IS STRONGER THESE DAYS.
WHAT ABOUT THE OTHER SIDE?
WHICH DISTRICTS ARE REALLY
HEAVILY WEIGHED TOWARDS
REPUBLICANS OR DEMOCRATS?
>> SO THIS IS ALSO A REALLY GOOD
QUESTION.
I THINK THIS IS ACTUALLY ONE OF
THE MORE POWERFUL THINGS THE
INDEX HIGHLIGHTS.
IT SHOWS WHAT THEY VOTED FOR
UNDER THE LAST DECADE IN THE
CURRENT MAPS, AND I THINK YOU
REALLY SEE IT KIND OF IN TWO
FORMS, RIGHT?
IN AND AROUND THE MADISON AREA,
THERE'S, I THINK, EIGHT
DISTRICTS THAT VOTE, ON AVERAGE,
MORE THAN 15% MORE DEMOCRATIC
THAN THE STATE AS A WHOLE,
WHEREAS WHEN YOU FLIP IT AND
CONVERSELY LOOK AT DISTRICTS
FAVORING REPUBLICANS, VAST
MAJORITY OF THOSE DISTRICTS ARE
IN THE R-PLUS-2 TO R-PLUS-10 TO
12 AREA, AND YOU SEE THIS
PACKING OF DEMOCRATIC VOTERS IN
THE MADISON AND MILWAUKEE AREA
TO JAM THEM IN A FEW DISTRICTS
AS POSSIBLE.
NOW, THERE IS SOME CRACKING,
KIND OF OTHER ACCEPTED FORM OF
GERRYMANDERING THAT PEOPLE TALK
ABOUT.
WE SEE THAT IN PLACES LIKE
SOUTHEAST WISCONSIN.
WE SEE THAT WITH THE DISTRICT
LIKE ASSEMBLY SPEAKER ROBIN
VOS'S.
IT RUNS UP TO THE CITY OF RACI
IN, E, WHICH DOES NOT ENCOMPASS
IT AT ALL DELUDING THE
DEMOCRATIC VOTER IN THE CITY OF
RACINE BY STRETCHING MILES INTO
WESTERN RACINE.
SPEAKER VOS IS A SAFE SEAT WITH
A RATING OF R-PLUS-9.
THEY DO A GOOD JOB OF
HIGHLIGHTING PACK PACKING
DEMOCRATIC VOTERS, IN SOME
CASES, CRACKING, AND OTHERS
SHOWING THAT, YOU KNOW,
REPUBLICANS DON'T REALLY HAVE A
HUGE SKEW IN A LOT OF DISTRICTS
IF THEY HAVE A CONSISTENT SKEW
THAT IS JUST BIG ENOUGH TO MAKE
IT HARD FOR DEMOCRATIC CANDIDATE
TO OVERCOME AGAINST THEM WHEN
THEY ARE RUNNING.
>> AND SO JUST A REMINDER, TO BE
CLEAR, THIS INDEX FOR MAPS ARE
FOR THE CURRENT LEGISLATIVE
DISTRICTS AS THEY EXIST TODAY,
NOT THE REDISTRICTING MAPS THAT
ARE BEING PROPOSED RIGHT NOW.
ON MONDAY, THE SENATE PASSED
ALONG PARTY LINES THE REPUBLICAN
DRAWN MAPS PROPOSAL, AND THE
ASSEMBLY IS EXPECTED TO DO THE
SAME TOMORROW.
BOTH ARE VERY HEAVY REPUBLICAN
MAJORITIES.
CAN WE INFER ABOUT HOW MUCH THIS
PARTISAN VOTER INDEX WITH
TODAY'S CURRENT MAPS COULD ALIGN
WITH PROPOSED MAPS AND HOW THOSE
NEW DISTRICT PROPOSALS COULD BE
SKEWED?
>> YES.
SO IT IS NOT PERFECT BECAUSE THE
MAPS ARE NOT IDENTICAL, BUT WITH
THAT BEING SAID, SPEAKER VOS AND
SENATE MAJORITY LEADER TOLD US
MANY TIMES IN PUBLIC HEARINGS
AND, YOU KNOW, JOINT RESOLUTIONS
THAT THE LEGISLATURE PASSED, THE
MAPS THAT WE'VE -- AS WISCONSIN
VOTED UNDER IN THE LAST TEN
YEARS, THOSE WERE VERY MUCH THE
FOUNDATION FOR THE MAPS THAT
THAT LAWMAKER USED TO DRAW THE
CURRENT PROPOSAL, BUT THEY WILL
FINISH VOTING ON THAT TOMORROW
IN THE LEGISLATURE.
SOME THINGS DO SHIFT.
THERE ARE INSTANCES IN INCUMBENT
PAIRING OR WHERE THERE'S A NEW
DISTRICT THAT MIGHT NOT HAVE AN
INCUMBENT SO THERE'S SOME
SHIFTS, BUT, YEAH, IT IS USEFUL
IN SEEING THAT, YOU KNOW, IF
THESE DISTRICTS ARE SO SKEWED
NOW, AND THEY ARE THE FOUNDATION
FOR THE PROPOSED NEW DISTRICTS,
IT IS A FAIRLY SAFE ASSUMPTION
NEW DISTRICTS WOULD NOT BE VERY
COMPETITIVE.
NOW, THERE'S BEEN MANY OTHER
ANALYSIS THAT HAVE SHOWN THIS.
THE PRINCETON GERRYMANDERING
PROJECT, FOR EXAMPLE, DID
INTERESTING WORK ABOUT THIS.
THEY HAVE GIVEN THE MAPS PUT
FORTH BY REPUBLICANS AN F-GRADE
OVERALL, AND I THINK THEY GET A
C IN COMPETITIVENESS, AND,
BASICALLY, THEY HAVE COME TO THE
CONCLUSION THAT PROPOSED MA'AMS
ARE SOME -- PROPOSED MAPS ARE
MOST EXTREME GERRYMANDERING
POSSIBLE IF THEY WERE TO BE
ENACTED.
>> SO WHAT ABOUT THE MAPS THAT
WERE DRAWN BY THE PEOPLE'S MAPS
COMMISSION, WHICH IS A BODY
CREATED BY DEMOCRATIC GOVERNOR,
TONY EVERS.
ARE THEY ANY MORE COMPETITIVE?
ARE THEY ANY MORE KIND OF
FULFILLING WHAT THEY SAY AS
BEING MORE FAIR MAPS?
>> YES.
SO THAT'S A GREAT QUESTION TOO.
THE PEOPLE MAPS COMMISSIONS
PROPOSAL IS -- IT IS
INTERESTING.
THERE HAVE BEEN SOME ISSUES WITH
IT.
IT'S BEEN CRITICIZED FOR MAYBE
NOT ABIDING BY THE VOTING RIGHTS
ACT BECAUSE THERE'S NOT ENOUGH
MINORITY/MAJORITY DISTRICTS.
IT IS ALSO INTERESTING,
SOMETHING LIKE THE PRINCETON
GERRYMANDERING PROJECT I WAS
LOOKING AT BEFORE WE CAME ON,
GIVES THE PEOPLE'S MAPS
COMMISSION, LETTER GRADE OF A C
FOR COMPETITIVENESS, BUT IT IS
IMPORTANT TO KEEP IN MIND THAT
THE MAPS WOULD ALMOST CERTAINLY
RESULT IN DEMOCRATS WINNING MORE
SEATS IN THE LEGISLATURE.
THE COMPETITIVENESS METRIC THEY
USE, BY MY UNDERSTANDING OF IT,
IS HOW COMPETITIVE WOULD EACH
INDIVIDUAL RACE BE?
IT GETS THE SAME GRADE AS THE
REPUBLICAN PROPOSAL BECAUSE THE
DISTRICTS, THE WAY THE PEOPLE'S
MAPS COMMISSION HAS DRAWN THEM
BEARS MORE DEMOCRATIC SEATS, BUT
THE DEMOCRATIC SEAT WOULD NOT
NECESSARILY BE COMPETITIVE
RACES.
IT'S NOT LIKE EVERY SINGLE
DISTRICT IN WISCONSIN WOULD BE
COIN TOSSED.
THEY ALMOST CERTAINLY WOULD BE
MORE COMPETITIVE IN THE SENSE
THAT DEMOCRATS WOULD WIN MORE
SEATS IN THE LEGISLATURE THAN
THEY HAVE RIGHT NOW, BUT IT DOES
NOT NECESSARILY MEAN EVERY RACE
IN EVERY DISTRICT IS MORE
COMPETITIVE THAN WHAT WE HAVE
RIGHT NOW.
>> JUST REALLY QUICK, WHY IS
COMPETITIVENESS A GOOD THING?
WHY IS THAT A DESIRABLE QUALITY
FOR FOLKS, SAY, AT THE PRINCETON
GERRYMANDERING PROJECT?
>> SURE.
THAT'S A GREAT QUESTION AS WELL.
I THINK DEPENDING ON WHO YOU
ASK, YOU WILL PROBABLY GET A
DIFFERENT ANSWER.
YOU KNOW, BASICALLY, RIGHT NOW,
AND WE HAD TALKED ABOUT THIS
BRIEFLY AS WELL, YOU KNOW,
WISCONSIN IS A SWING STATE, AND
SO THE LEGISLATURE IS VERY NOT
REFLECTIVE OF THAT.
ACCORDINGLY, YOU CAN SEE
LAWMAKERS LEAN MORE AND MORE
INTO THEIR BASE RATHER THAN
HAVING TO KIND OF WALK THIS LINE
AND TRY TO WORK BIPARTISANLY TO
WIN RE-ELECTION IN
COMPETITIVENESS.
COMPETITIVENESS, IN THEORY,
BREEDS MORE BIPARTISANSHIP.
IF YOU'RE A LAWMAKER THAT CAN DO
AND SAY WHATEVER YOU WANT,
INTRODUCE WHATEVER LEGISLATION
YOU WANT WITHOUT FEAR OF LOSING
RE-ELECTION, YOU KNOW, THERE'S
LITTLE ACCOUNTABILITY THERE.
COMPETITIVE CAN BE GOOD BECAUSE
IT, YOU KNOW, HOLDS PEOPLE
ACCOUNTABLE MORE OFTEN.
LAWMAKERS HAVE TO THINK MORE
BEFORE THEY ACT IN ORDER TO WIN
MORE VOTES, AND SO
COMPETITIVENESS, FROM THAT
MEASURE, IS INTERESTING.
FOR THE PRINCETON GERRYMANDERING
PROJECT, I THINK THAT, YOU KNOW,
THEY --
IT IS HEAVILY BASED IN
STATISTICS.
IN THEIR WORLD, THEY WANT TO SEE
DISTRICTS AS CLOSE TO A 50/50
TOSSUP AS THEY COULD.
COMPETITIVENESS IS INTERESTING
AND DEPENDS ON WHO YOU ASK AND
YOU'LL GET A LOT OF DIFFERENT
ANSWERS ABOUT IT.
>> SO IN THAT SENSE, HOW EXACTLY
IS WISCONSIN A SWING STATE, IF
THERE ARE SO MANY REPUBLICAN
SEATS THAT OUTNUMBER DEMOCRATS?
WHY IS WISCONSIN ALWAYS SEEN AS
A SWING STATE WHEN IT COMES TO
PRESIDENTIAL ELECTIONS,
STATEWIDE ELECTIONS?
>> YEAH.
SO THAT'S A GREAT QUESTION AS
WELL.
WISCONSIN'S A SWING STATE
BECAUSE, LET'S BE HONEST, IT
SWINGS AND HAS, YOU KNOW, 2016
WAS A SHOCK TO A LOT OF PEOPLE
WHEN PRESIDENT TRUMP CARRIED THE
STATE.
PRIOR TO THAT, YOU KNOW, A
REPUBLICAN HAD NOT WON WISCONSIN
SINCE THE '80s, BUT WE'VE SEEN
A VERY FIERCE BATTLE BETWEEN
REPUBLICANS AND DEMOCRATS FOR
STATEWIDE OFFICE.
DEMOCRATS HAVE HAD SUCCESS IN
RECENT STATEWIDE ELECTIONS, AND
THOUGH THAT COULD EASILY SWING
BACK AS WE SAW IN EARLY 2010,
REPUBLICANS DOMINATED THINGS,
AND SO THAT'S INTERESTING.
HOW IS WISCONSIN A SWING STATE?
I THINK THAT GERRYMANDER
ACTUALLY HIGHLIGHTS HOW MUCH OF
A SWING STATE WISCONSIN IS.
DEMOCRATIC VOTERS, NO SECRET,
ARE PACKED INTO URBAN CENTERS IN
DANE COUNTY, MADISON, MILWAUKEE,
AND WE SEE THEM OTHER PLACES
TOO, AND THERE'S LITTLE POCKETS,
LACROSSE, YOU KNOW, THE CITY OF
GREEN BAY.
IT IS INTERESTING.
THE STATE AS A WHOLE, THE
LEGISLATURE INHERENTLY, EXPERTS
SAY, FAVOR REPUBLICANS BY TWO OR
THREE PERCENTAGE POINTS IN
REDISTRICTING, DRAWING THE MAPS,
AND WISCONSIN IS A BIG RURAL
SPACE, AND DEMOCRATIC VOTERS ARE
FAIRLY CONCENTRATED, AND SO
WISCONSIN IS A SWING STATE
BECAUSE FROM A TOTAL STATEWIDE
VOTE, WE SEE A VERY CLOSE 50/50
SPLIT.
THE LEGISLATURE, EVEN IF THE
DISTRICTS WERE A TOSSUP IN EVERY
DISTRICT, YOU'D PROBABLY STILL
SEE SLIGHT SKEW FAVORABLE FOR
REPUBLICANS JUST BASED ON THAT
KIND OF RURAL GEOGRAPHY OF
WISCONSIN.
>> SO THE COOK POLITICAL REPORT
SAYS THAT, YOU KNOW, WHILE A LOT
OF PEOPLE BLAME GERRYMANDERING
FOR THE CAUSE OF HOW POLARIZED
POLITICS HAVE BECOME, THEY SAY
THEY'VE FOUND THAT VOTERS ARE
ACTUALLY SELF-SORTING
POLITICALLY, MEANING THAT WHERE
THEY ARE KIND OF TENDS TO ALIGN
WITH HOW THEY VOTE, AND IT IS
NOT GERRYMANDERING.
THAT'S THE PROBLEM, BUT IT IS
NATURALLY HAPPENING.
IS THAT A FAIR CHARACTERIZATION
OF WHAT'S HAPPENING IN
WISCONSIN?
>> THAT'S A GREAT QUESTION.
IT IS REALLY INTERESTING.
I THINK THE COOK POLITICAL
REPORT CERTAINLY MAKES A IS A
LEAN -- SALINE POINT.
LIKE MINDED PEOPLE LIKE TO LIVE
AMONG LIKE MINDED PEOPLE.
A NUMBER OF PSYCHOLOGISTS WOULD
TELL YOU THAT.
GERRYMANDERING COULD CONTRIBUTE
TO THIS HYPERPARTISAN POLITICAL
LANDSCAPE WE'VE SEEN, YOU KNOW,
WHAT WE DISCUSSED EARLIER,
RIGHT?
IF I'M AN INCUMBENT THAT NEVER
FACES A SERIOUS CHALLENGE FROM
SOMEBODY OF THE OPPOSITE PARTY,
YOU KNOW, I CAN REALLY LEAN INTO
THE BASE.
IN WISCONSIN, IT IS THAT
CONSERVATIVE BASE, AND WE'VE
SEEN THINGS THEY LEGISLATE ON
RECENTLY THAT LEANS INTO THE
CONSERVATIVE BASE AND THE KIND
OF GROWING ELEMENT OF WHAT, YOU
KNOW, PEOPLE CALL THE CULTURE
WARS IN AND AROUND WISCONSIN SO
I THINK THAT GERRYMANDERING CAN
LEAD TO HYPERPARTISANSHIP
BECAUSE IT, YOU KNOW, IT ALMOST
CREATES AN ELEMENT OF LACK OF
ACCOUNTABILITY FOR LAWMAKERS,
AND THIS IS BOTH SIDES.
DEMOCRATS IN MADISON ARE NOT
GOING TO LOSE THEIR SEATS SO
DEMOCRATS IN MADISON CAN GO TO
THE LEGISLATURE, DO AND SAY WHAT
THEY WANT LIKE A REPUBLICAN IN
AN R-PLUS 15 RURAL DISTRICT IN
NORTH CENTRAL WISCONSIN IS NOT
GOING TO LOSE THEIR SEAT.
THEY CAN DO THE SAME THING IN
THE LEGISLATURE.
THERE'S PARTISANSHIP BECAUSE OF
THE LACK OF ACCOUNTABILITY
BECAUSE YOU DON'T HAVE TO FEAR
LOSING REELECTION, AND SO I
THINK THE COOK MILLIE REPORT
MAKES A GOOD POINT.
YES, I MEAN, LIKE-MINDED PEOPLE
LIKE TO LIVE ALONGSIDE
LIKE-MINDED PEOPLE, HANG OUT
WITH THEM, AND DO THOSE KINDS OF
THINGS, BUT I THINK IT IS TOO
MUCH AN OVERSIMPLIFICATION.
>> NOW, GOVERNOR TONY EVERS IS
EXPECTED TO VETO THE G.O.P.
PROPOSAL AND HAS SAID THAT THE
CURRENT MAPS SHOULD JUST BE
THROWN OUT.
DOES STARTING FROM SCRATCH MAKE
DRAWING COMPETITIVE MAPS EVEN
POSSIBLE GIVEN WISCONSIN'S
DEMOGRAPHICS AND GEOGRAPHICS.
HAVE PEOPLE, FOR EXAMPLE, FROM
THE PRINCETON GERRYMANDERING
PROJECT BEEN ABLE TO GIVE
EXAMPLES OF HOW IT COULD WORK?
>> YEAH.
I MEAN, I THINK THAT WE CAN JUST
LOOK BACK AT WISCONSIN'S HISTORY
TO SEE HOW IT WOULD WORK.
YOU KNOW, GOVERNOR EVERS WILL
VETO THE BILL.
HE SAID THAT SEVERAL TIMES.
I TALKED TO HIM ABOUT IT.
HE IS ADAMANT THE MOMENT THEY
ARE PASSED AND ON HIS DESK,
HE'LL USE THE VETO PEN TO STRIKE
IT DOWN.
THAT SETS UP THE STANDARD
APPROACH OF REDISTRICTING IN
WISCONSIN, WHICH IS A LAWSUIT
AND COURT SETTLEMENT.
NORMALLY, IT'S A FEDERAL COURT.
THAT'S HOW IT WAS IN THE '80s
AND '90s AND THE '00s, AND
THEY TWEAKED MAPS IMPLEMENTED
FOR THE PAST DECADE.
THE STATE SUPREME COURT HANDLED
THIS IN THE '60s AND MIGHT
VERY WELL DO IT THIS TIME, BUT
IT IS INTERESTING.
GOING BACK TO THE POINT OF, YOU
KNOW, CAN YOU DRAW FROM SCRATCH
AND CREATE A COMPETITIVE
ENVIRONMENT?
I LOOK AT THE 2000s.
A FEDERAL COURT DREW THE
DISTRICTS THAT WISCONSIN VOTERS
VOTED UNDER DURING THE 2000s,
AND WE SAW A NUMBER OF MAJORITY
CHANGES IN EITHER ONE OR BOTH
CHAMBERS OF THE LEGISLATURE,
RIGHT?
I MEAN, WE SAW IT RIGHT BEFORE
REPUBLICANS BECAME THE MAJORITY,
KIND OF ON THE BACK OF THE TEA
PARTY MOVEMENT AND BACKLASH TO
THE FORMER PRESIDENT OBAMA AND
PASSING THE AFFORDABLE CARE ACT.
THOSE MAPS, DEMOCRATS WERE THE
MAJORITY.
MAJORITY IN THE SENATE.
MAJORITY IN THE ASSEMBLY.
THERE WAS A DEMOCRATIC GOVERNOR.
IN THE NEXT ELECTION UNDER THE
MORE COMPETITIVE MAPS,
REPUBLICANS SWEPT THEM AWAY
WINNING A HUGE MAJORITY IN THE
SENATE AND ASSEMBLY.
IT CAN BE DONE YOU CAN DRAW MORE
COMPETITIVE MAPS.
THE COURTS HAVE DONE IT BEFORE.
I'M NOT AN EXPERT ON MAP
DRAWING, BUT HISTORY SHOWS IT IS
POSSIBLE TO DRAW IT UP FROM
SCRATCH WHILE ALSO POSSIBLE
TAKING INTO CONSIDERATION THINGS
SUBMITTED TO THE COURT.
THAT'S WHY THE GOVERNOR IS
ADAMANT ABOUT PEOPLE'S MAPS
COMMISSION ANTICIPATING THIS
GOES TO A LAWSUIT AND HAS
SOMETHING TO PRESENT TO THE
COURT TO WORK FROM.
THE SAME THING WITH THE
REPUBLICAN PLANS THAT WE SEE
PASSED BY THE LEGISLATURE THIS
WEEK.
>> AND WE LEARNED -- WELL,
AGAIN, FROM CHARLES FRANKLIN'S
MARQUETTE LAW SCHOOL LAST WEEK,
MAJORITY OF PEOPLE FAVOR
NONPARTISAN BODY TO DRAW THE
MAPS.
REDISTRICTING OFFICIALS HAVE TO
FOLLOW CERTAIN CRITERIA IN THE
LAW.
HOWEVER, THERE'S A LOT OF LEEWAY
IN THE PARAMETERS, AND IT IS UP
TO PERSON'S INTERPRETATION OF
THE CRITERIA.
OFTEN, AS WE SAID BEFORE, CAN
SOMETIMES BE CONTRADICTORY.
ARE THERE ANY CRITERIA SAYING
THAT DISTRICTS SHOULD STRIVE TO
BE COMPETITIVE, AND THAT THAT IS
A DESIRABLE GOAL?
>> RIGHT.
SO COMPETITIVENESS, IN AND OF
ITSELF, IS NOT A CRITERIA FOR
DRAWING MAPS.
SPEAKER VOS POINTED THIS OUT IN
THE HEARING WHEN HE AND THE
MAJORITY SPEAKER TESTIFIED YOU
CAN CONSIDER THIS IN DRAWING
MAPS.
THEY CONSIDERED PARTISANSHIP
DRAWING THE MAPS THAT ARE BEFORE
THE LEGISLATURE RIGHT NOW.
IMPORTANT TO KEEP IN MIND,
COMPETITIVENESS IS NOT A
CRITERIA NECESSARILY THAT CAN BE
USED OR DETERMINED TO USE TO
DETERMINE WHAT BOUNDARIES SHOULD
LOOK LIKE.
YOU KNOW, THERE'S THE OBVIOUS
ONES LAID OUT IN THE STATE
CONSTITUTION, AND DISTRICTS NEED
TO BE CONTINUOUS, AND AS MUCH AS
POSSIBLE, KEEP COMMUNITIES'
INTERESTS IN TACT, AND ALSO,
THERE'S A CONCEPT FOLLOWING A
FEDERAL COURT RULINGS GOING BACK
TO THE '60s OF ONE PERSON, ONE
VOTE.
WHAT A COURT LOOKS LIKE AT
DISTRICTS WHEN WE GET INTO A
LAWSUIT, LIKE WE ARE GOING TO
SEE IN THE COMING MONTHS, IS ARE
THERE AN EQUAL NUMBER OF PEOPLE
IN EACH DISTRICT?
YOU KNOW, THERE COULD BE SMALL
VARIATIONS IN THAT NUMBER.
WHAT IF THE VARIATION IS TOO
GREAT?
THE FEDERAL COURT WILL ACTUALLY
STEP IN AND TWEAK WHAT THE
DISTRICTS LOOK LIKE TO ADJUST
SOME OF THAT NUMBER.
COMPETITIVENESS, NOT SOMETHING
THAT COURTS WILL CONSIDER.
IT IS KIND OF ONE PERSON, ONE
VOTE MOMENT IS MUCH MORE -- IS
WHAT FEDERAL JUDGES WILL FIND
MUCH MORE INTRIGUING.
NOW, THERE ARE WAYS TO DO IT,
YOU KNOW, DEMOCRATIC VOTERS MADE
A CLAIM IN THE THREE JUDGE PANEL
RULED THE CURRENT MAPS
UNCONSTITUTIONAL BEFORE THAT
LAWSUIT WAS THROWN OUT ON A
TECHNICALITY BY THE U.S. SUPREME
COURT.
THAT LAWSUIT, VOTERS ARGUED
THAT, SURE, THERE'S EQUAL NUMBER
OF PEOPLE IN EACH DISTRICT, BUT
OUR VOTES ARE BEING WASTED.
IT IS THAT -- IT IS THAT WE ARE
NOT REPRESENTED IN THE WAY THAT
WE WANT.
THERE ARE INTERESTING LEGAL
ARGUMENTS TO BE MADE, AND WE'LL
SEE HOW IT PLAYS OUT AND WHETHER
THE STATE SUPREME COURT DECIDES
TO TAKE THIS ON, AND WHETHER
THEY PUNT IT AND LET A FEDERAL
COURT SETTLE IT.
THE NEXT A FEW MONTHS ARE GOING
TO BE EQUALLY CHAOTIC WITH A LOT
GOING ON BEHIND THE SCENES IN
TERMS OF HOW WE GET TO THE FINAL
LEGISLATIVE MAPS.
>> ALL RIGHT.
WE LEAVE IT THERE, JACK KELLY,
FROM "THE CAP TIMES," THANK YOU
VERY MUCH.
>> THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR HAVING
ME.
>> FOR MORE FROM "HERE & NOW"
AND PBS WISCONSIN, VISIT
PBSWISCONSIN.ORG, AND THANK YOU
SO MUCH FOR JOINING US ON "NOON
WEDNESDAY."