Wisconsin's Democratic
governor and
Republican legislative
leaders negotiate
a big deal
on tax
cuts and school
funding, and
it blows up
in the
Wisconsin Senate. What just
happened? Let's talk
about it.
This is Wisconsin politics.
I'm Shawn
Johnson here with
my colleague
Zac Schultz and
Rich Kremer
in Eau Hey,ire.
guys. >> Hello.
>> Hey, Shawn.
>> So we are
going to have plenty of
time here to unpack the
motives of thel
players in this
drama that
unfolded at the Capitol.
But first,
let's start
with kind of
what led to this.
For people who every attention to
twist and turn
of this
big deal, we've
been it atg
the Capitol.
Zac, what was
in this that was
negotiated by
Democratic Governor Tony Evers and the
Republican legislative
leaders? >> Well, the top
line billion in it's
spending, of it one
time, only
looking at the
projected surplus that would be
available for
next year.
Of that
$300 million for special
education fornding
public schools,
that's Democratic
priority for a
long time.
$350 inlion
rebates or
tax buy downs
for property
taxes . That would
go going to the
schools, but that they
would only use to reduce property
taxes, not
new spending.
And there were going
to be individual
rebates for tax
filers, 300 per
person, or
600 for a
married couple.
And then
we see a match
to planederal
for no
taxes on tips
and overtime.
And Shawn, a
month ago,
we asked, what's
the possibility that
this could actually happen?
And my
answer at the time
was, well, we
this timethe only
it could happen leaderse three
that are all the stage. It's
legacy time.
Well, we didn't account for
is everyone else
who's still
running for
reelection or
election in sinking this
deal? Three
legacy leaders
getting the compromise
wasn't And toh.
me, this is a political Rorschach
test. How you
view this
particular deal
kind of matches
your view on
politics for
some people and for
a lot of ordinary people around the state,
this was the epitome compromise. You
get a your one side,
get a little bit the other side.
Everyone little dissatisfied,
maybe goes backyappy.
to taxpayers. At time when
you're seeing
the price of gas the roofugh
just to fill your, your tank up.
And as
they're about to run for
reelection, those things that normally
you'd pass. Theans
other that test
is political purity.
And there are a of people looking
at this goods isn't as
as I would like be, and
I think we can better when we
have more >> So.next
it started
out the day,
though, looked
like average
special session
day, like a that might
pass. You
have big
agreement by the
leaders, by Governor Tony
Evers, the
the big and the big
Republicans. You
had speeches
to start the
day, including
by Assembly
Speaker Robin
Vos. >> We can
show weeople that
listen and that we are
willing to act. And
most importantly,
that compromise in
Wisconsin is not a
dead isord. Compromise
defined as
getting something that you
want by
giving up something that your
partner or your
opponent wants.
That is really
what we did here.
We said.
>> So that's when
the kindng game
of began.
Rich. We
were both
watching the
Senate for a
long onime
Wednesday. What was
it like
as the day sort
of out?d
>> It was a
lot of hurry and wait.
So it's
not unusual
for the Senate
to set a
start time for
their floor
sessions, whether it
be in a special
session a regular
session, and
then blow
past that, that's
kind unsurprising.
But this
time we kept
getting these notices
that, oh, it's
going to be
at it's0. Well,
actually five, five,
45. And
then we just
went with half
hour increments,
you know,
six, 637, eight,
eight, you
know, and on and
on and on it.
They were, I
want to,
I want to wasy it
four hours that
they, it took
for them to go
from notice,t
you know,
when the plan
was to meet
at 3 p.m.
and when they
actually met.
And then
once on thet
floor, heard
some of complaints from
Democrats Republicans
about this bill that
you heard in the
Assembly. The
opponents said
that they didn't
like process
of how it you know,
thrown together.
Senate Democrats were out
of the picture,
etc. then
there were abouterns
costs and
this being a
projected budget
surplus, etc. and how this
could plunge
us into a
deficit the
coming budget
cycle. >> Yeah. So
that night, the
we had a very
unusual kind of
play assembly met
after waiting all
day to see what the
Senate was going to They passed this
bill in order.
The Senate is
meeting at the same
time, and
it's clear that
things You hearere.g
a speech from
Senate Democratic
Minority Leader
Diane Hesselbein,
who made it clear
she was not
happy with this
bill. >> This
is a recklessely
proposal stitched
together in a backroom
deal by three
people who will running
around and
won't be here when the
consequences of a multibillion dollar
deficit comes
home to roost.
It's simply
something I
can't support.
>> In. This
bill actually
fails on a vote
of 15 to 18,
and I know
people probably
think big deal
things pass,
things fail.
Bills don't
actually get to the
point of
failure hardly
ever in the state
legislature. If itave the votes,
does not come to floor, especially something
as big and dramatic as this.
And for the
governor to negotiate
this and his
Senate Democrats
stand unified
against it
to help kill
it with a few Republicans
is doomething we
not see every
day. Zac,
what do you think
was motivating Senate
Democrats here?
>> There's two
factors. think.
First is they
were insulted. They were left
out of the loop.
>> That is huge.
Actually. >> Every
single time over
the past few
years that
they've needed to bigss a
budget bill, withecially
Republicans having
a majority in the
state Senate. They've had
two members that have
voted against every
bill that
Senator Soros
and Kapenga.
They've consistently
said, can't
support this
extra spending.
We're voting
no. That
means in practice,
Republicans don't have a working
majority when it
comes to passing that
kind legislation. They
need Democratic
votes. Governor
Evers knows
that Senate
majority LeMahieu knows
that. Everyone
knows they atd
least a couple Democratic
votes, and probably
more so.
The fact that they
were not consulted did
not have input on
this itill and made
clear from the very first time it was
announced it showed.ithe
And I think that showed up in that
long Assembly hadhe
the votes. It they were going to
wait votes had the
in the Senate. And the second part of
why in line withrats were
this comes fall.
And that's theat
reelection there. They
are not
quite certain,
but going to f that they're
lip in thatjority
chamber and that they come to power
in not onlyllession,
have a say, they will be the deciding
factors and how any are passed and
how budgets passed.
And so they can
direct where that money goes. And if they
think a Democraticky.
governor and a they're goingen
to say all availablell be
for us to spend in ways that we
prefer compromise, which is
what of all thesery
budget surplus Tony since
Evers has been
governor. The thatt
the next mighttion
bring better outlook
for each
of the sides.
And decidedve
not to compromise.
>> And I think this
was a case cut
where circumstances
matter completely. You know,
if if
Tony Evers were
running for
election in
November and he
said, this is my big
bill, Democrats,
this is what
I tot
run on.
I mean, they would have voted.
They yes. No.e voted
Republicans probably wouldn't have
brought it in that case.
So, you know, a it's a theoretical
exercise. But but Senate
Democrats, I'm
confident, have been
with him.
He is not
on the ballot,
though, this
November, as
Diane Hesselbein
noted, and
Senate Democrats are
poised to.
They think,
take that majority.
She has essentially been
a co majority leader on
some the big bills
that have this year,eh
from the budget gambling.
And so to
freeze them
out of
talks this, which
is the way they viewed it, certainly.
And to end up
with a bill was pretty
Republican nature, was about
a in tax and a half
cuts, was
not something
that they
enjoyed, you >> Well, and
don't forget, when itr factor
comes to everyone at the next budget
the next year. And there's a
lot of people who think we may be
looking most ofSocession.
this surplus is a projection of what the
economy is going to in for tax
revenues. If downturn in the
next six disappears all by
itself having been
sent you So
send it Even.
though most of this
is spending,
it may not
be there
next year.
Now, say even
in the oforst
circumstances, at least the
state will have a little bit money to
start isith. So that
a legitimate concern prices andg
grocery prices now. And with no
end to a war the Iran, that
economy could shift and
go down and these revenues may not
materialize. >> Rich
Senate Democrats
don't have this
power. If Republicans
just stick together and
all their members
vote for the
bill negotiated by
their Deviner,
LeMahieu and
Assembly Speaker
Robin Vos. In
fact, Assembly,
all the Republicans
did stick
together, and they
voted for
that bill.
So gonet's
on in the Senate
with few
Republicans there who
decided, yeah, we're
just going to do this.
>> Well, what was
surprising is that
two of
the three Republicans that voted
against this
proposal, runningnot
for reelection. So
maybe that
made them feel
freer to
speak their mind.
But Zac
mentioned, you've
also Senator
Steve Nosse one
of them, and he's pretty well
known for
voting against
especially spending,
you know, large
spending packages.
So it
seems like
Devin LeMahieu
didn't have the sort
of control over his
caucus that
Robin Vos
did in the Assembly.
That's been
pretty obvious,
given past
bills, where you
need a
Democratic support
to get
them over the finish line.
But what's
also been really
interesting is
seeing Republicans
attacking Republicans
after the fact.
So in
particular, Vannator
Wanggaard, who is
retiring, he
went on social
media billerwards after the
failed and
said it
was forod deal
Wisconsin. But,
you know,
every dem
and nose
and Kapenga
and Rob
Hutton wanted to
spend more
and keep more of
your you'veSo
got a Republican
saying that
Steve Nosse wants
to yourp
tax dollars
from from you,
which is
pretty interesting in
the scheme of
things. But
you had
Democrats kind of
saying good
riddance, Tony
Evers. I mean,
it's just
really fascinating
to see
this breakdown.
It's it's
just unlike
anything evere
seen. And I
wanted to ask both
of you, Shawn,
how many
times in your
careers you
seen a
bill Youss?
know, this withd of bill
this kind of build where you would
expect the have to be there
before it gets to to avoidor
embarrassment. How have you seen it
clear one chamber and die in the
Senate? thought rare. I
of a couple. One,
the vote
on state
employee contracts
ahead of
when Scott Walker took
office. >> Another one that
featured lame ducks. It did. I mean,
this end hereuff happens
when everybody's hastion
changed. Circumstances
matter. But
you had
the Assembly
Democrats passed
new contracts for
state employees.
The thought was
that that would protect
them. When
Scott Walker office
and Senate
Democrats, led
by Russ
Decker and
Senator Jeff
Haley at the time,
voted no, and
they failed. So it
has Another one
on ethanol
mandate way likek in
2006, I
think. But
it is
pretty sparse
the way
this stuff happens.
>> But it does
point out
exactly what we're
talking about.
Once a politician is
no longer running for
reelection, they become a lame duck. They lose
a lot control.
What's most impressive about
all of this is
Robin Vos hislding
entire caucus
together, even though
he's going beo
exiting stage
right, he
still has enough
to keep
his chamber
together. Senate
Senator really never
had firm control over
Republicans in the Senate.
That's always
been called herding
cats there. So
that's terribly
surprised. andpenga
Soros have quite it
clear. But
all of these
people leaving
office really
gives people a
lot freedom to
think about interests next
year, completely
aside from what
you would expect in
the typical bill
process. >> Yeah.
Steve Nash, I mean,
has been a thorn
in the side to
leadership for his
entire career,
basically, Unapologetically the part
at I've
observed Andyway.
can you imagine him
on his
last vote
ever in the legislature
saying, you know, I'll
take one on the
I'll take one for for Robin
Vos. I mean,
I think it's
pretty predictable
that he was to be a no
vote. But Assemblyck where
Republicans were and why they
decided we're going to take
this vote, because I think
by the
time that
they both
chambers got to
voting at night, I
bet you Assembly
Republicans knew darn
well this thing was going
to fail in the
state andnate,
they thisted to take
vote anyway.
Why? >> Because
they're all for
reelection this fall.
Everyone that's not
retiring has
an absolute
desire to go
back to their constituents
and say,
I willing to put
$300 in your
pocket. I
was willing to
give more to the was willing
to lower your taxes. It's
not my fault this
failed. That
does bring us around
to interesting
calculations that we're
looking at, especially on
the Democratic side.
So of the
people I was who'seff Smith,
a Democratic senator. leader.sistant majority
So he's pretty high ranking in his caucus.
He's controltheyve
the chamber. He
voted no on this.
His staffers tell me he
was no time, mainly for
the structural deficit
concerns. But
within his
district, one of the
Assembly Democrats,
Jodi Emerson,
voted yes.
You go south from
there into Crosse.
Brad Pfaff in
the Senate
voted no
within his district,
Joe Billings
and Steve Doyle,
two Assembly
Democrats in
competitive districts,
both both voted
yes in the
Assembly. They
understand what it's to go back
to the voters have to say, oh,
no, I we'll spendse
it better next feelingeople are
the pinch. Right there's a lot of
political calculations that go into some of these
moves, team doesng unified
help. We also saw another state Senate race.
Howard Marklein voted yes.
He's in a competitive
district. Jenna
Jacobson, demAssembly
who's running
against him,
also voted
yes. It would
put her a terrible
position. Easy
marketing for if she voted
no on deal.
So some
of tohis has
be political maneuvering.
>> And, you
know, I think could look at this
bill potentially
it's a little
gimmicky, You're?
going to spend
almost $900 million
just on these
$300 checks, and
it's gone.to be
You youd
have lawmakers
on the record
from both parties
for bills like
this in past saying,
oh, gimmick. We
can't do that.
But do you
want to
be sidech
of that gimmick do want to be
on when you're Andors in November?
people are struggling costs?
It's a popular
kind of bill,
giving people
money and
saying that you
work together with the
other side. Shawn, let's look at
the outside players in because Tom
Tiffany was a seenthis. I've
some Republicans
online saying he would
have been better off being
quiet, Instead, he.
did come out against
this bill , and
he was on the
record to at least
one state senator who
did vote for it, but
weighing in on his
concerns about this
bill. you do
make of that? >>
Yeah, from a
practical perspective, I
get it from a
political perspective,
I not I
don't understand
what he was
doing. What I
mean is, from a
practical perspective, if
Tom thinks he's going
to be thennor,
I bet he
wants to either
have that money
in there
so that he
doesn't take office with
the deficit,
or if the
economy does, okay,
maybe wants
to come in
as governor
and throw
a special
session for
a Tom
Tiffany tax
cut, not a
Tony cut. tax
You know, right.ed off
From a
political perspective, I
don't know
why you come out
against this.
I just
don't likes
a theoretical
exercise because you're not in
there voting,
but like, why
come in
against a big
tax cut
and why
attack
Tony like
he's not on
the ballot. All
these who areats
also against this
bill might
be against you
in November.
So how do you
differentiate differentiate
yourself byere
agreeing with
them. I'm not
sure. Now,
Rich, one question
I had for you
that throughouttes on
the night was,
will voters
actually remember
this? Like,
will anybody
be rewarded or
punished? >> You
know, that's
question.
You all of
what you're saying
makes sense
to me,
someone been's
really following
this. But,
you know, I
also remember being
at a
Supreme Court
election and at event
fellow at the hotel
not knowing there was election that day.
So always I'mpart
skeptical that this sort
of thing will stick voters
mind. It's
different, guess, if
you're getting your door
knocked consistently
and people are
reminding you of
that, or if you see a
lot of in thenow,s. But,
grand scheme of things,
a $300,
$600 check,
that's a big deal.
But you
know, all the political
infighting and like that. I
just I'm not
sure if people
will carry
that all the way to
November. There is a lot
else right nowthere
in in
national and world
politics, that's for
sure. That's all the time
we have for today.
Thanks for us.ing
This has
been inside Wisconsin politics.
r colleague
Anya van nextendonk will be back
week. Be sure to
follow us on
wpri.org, PBS,
wisconsin.org, YouTube,
or wherever you
get your podcasts.