>> THE FOLLOWING PROGRAM IS A
PBS WISCONSIN ORIGINALLE
PRODUCTION.
>> I'M FREDERICA FREYBERG.
TONIGHT ON "HERE AND NOW," WE
GET THE LATEST ON THE STATE'S
CONTRACT WITH FOXCONN FROM
SECRETARY OF ADMINISTRATION JOEL
BRENNAN.
AFTER THAT, THE HEAD OF THE
WISCONSIN ELECTIONS COMMISSION
RESPONDS TO THE COURT ORDER TO
PURGE MORE THAN 200,000 VOTERS
FROM THE STATE ROLLS.
AND AN INSIDE LOOK AT THE
HISTORIC IMPEACHMENT WEEK IN
WASHINGTON.
IT'S "HERE AND NOW" FOR
DECEMBER 20.
>> FUNDING FOR "HERE AND NOW" IS
PROVIDED, IN PART, BY FRIENDS OF
WISCONSIN PUBLIC TELEVISION.
>> BLOCK BLOCKBUSTER REPORTING ON
FOXCONN SHOWS HOW STATE
OFFICIALS ARE SAYING THEY ARE
INELIGIBLE FOR HEFTY TAX CREDITS
BECAUSE THE SCOPE OF THE PROJECT
HAS CHANGED.
THE REPORTING WAS BASED ON
LETTERS WRITTEN BACK AND FORTH
BETWEEN THE COMPANY AND THE
EVERS' ADMINISTRATION.
"HERE AND NOW'S" MARISA WOJCIK
ALSO OBTAINED THE CORRESPONDENCE
AND HAS THIS REPORT.
>> NEWLY-RELEASED CORRESPONDENCE
DATING BACK TO APRIL BETWEEN
FOXCONN, EVERS AND WEDC SHOWS
GROWING CONFLICT OVER THEIR
ABILITY TO COLLECT TAX
SUBSIDIES.
EVERS' ADMINISTRATION IS ARGUING
THEY ARE INELIGIBLE UNDER
WISCONSIN LAW BECAUSE NEW PLANS
FOR ITS WISCONSIN LCD
MANUFACTURING FACILITY NO LONGER
FIT THE TERMS OF THE ORIGINAL
CONTRACT.
THE STATE IS CALLING ON FOXCONN
TO RENEGOTIATE THE CONTRACT TO
FIT THE CHANGES, A DEMAND WHICH
FOXCONN SAYS COMES WITH GREAT
SURPRISE DISAPPOINTMENT N.
JANUARY, FOXCONN'S LOUIS WOO
TOLD REUTERS THAT THE MOUNT
PLEASANT FACILITY WAS NO LONGER
GOING TO BE A MANUFACTURING AS
ORIGINALLY PLANNED.
INSTEAD, FOXCONN WOULD BUILD A
SMALLER GEN 6 PLANT.
MELISSA HUGHES, THE NEW CEO OF
WEDC, TOLD FOXCONN THE PROJECT
WORK AND PLANS DO NOT ALIGN WITH
THE PROJECT AGREED TO BY THE
PARTIES.
THE DEPARTMENT OF ADMINISTRATION
SAYS THE AGREEMENT WAS ONLY FOR
THE GEN 10.5 PROJECT.
THEY SAID THE CHANGES WERE
NECESSARY DUE TO MARKET AND
SUPPLIER CONDITIONS.
BUT THE MATERIAL TERMS OF OUR
CONTRACT WITH THE WEE WEDC ARE JOBS
AND INVESTMENT.
THE ORIGINAL CONTRACT SIGNED BY
FOXCONN UNDER GOVERNOR SCOTT
WALKER SAYS THE STATE WOULD PAY
UP TO $4 BILLION IN TAX CREDITS
TO FOXCONN IF INVESTED $10
BILLION FOR A PRODUCTION PLANT
TO CREATE UP TO 13,000 JOBS.
WALKER AND THE WEDC REASSURED
SKEPTICS THAT CLAWBACKS AND
PROVISIONS IN THE CONTRACT WOULD
ENSURE PROPER USE OF THE
TAXPAYERS' INVESTMENT.
A NEW REPORT FROM THE AUDIT
BUREAU SAYS THEY'RE CONCERNED
WITH THE NUMBERS FOXCONN IS
REPORTING ON JOB CREATION AND
CAPITAL INVESTMENTS.
THROUGHOUT THE EIGHT MONTHS OF
LETTERS BETWEEN EVERS AND
FOXCONN, THEY ENSURE ONE ANOTHER
BOTH ARE COMMITTED TO THE
PROJECT.
BUT IN THE LATEST LETTERS, DOA
SECRETARY JOEL BRENNAN SAYS
FOXCONN WAS OPAQUE ABOUT ITS
PROJECT PLANS.
FOXCONN SAID DISTRACTIONS LIKE
THIS LEAVE JOB SEEKERS WONDERING
IF DOING BUSINESS IS WELCOMED BY
GOVERNOR EVERS' ADMINISTRATION.
THEIR LAST WORDS SAY FOXCONN
WILL CONTINUE TO PLAY AN
IMPORTANT AND CONSTRUCTIVE ROLE
IN THE STATE OF WISCONSIN.
HOWEVER, AT THIS POINT, WE SHALL
BE EVALUATING ALL AVAILABLE
OPTIONS RELATING TO THE WEDC
CONTRACT.
>> FOR THE LATEST ON THE STATUS
OF THE FOXCONN CONTRACT WITH
WISCONSIN, WE TURN TO SECRETARY
OF THE WISCONSIN DEPARTMENT OF
ADMINISTRATION, JOEL BRENNAN,
AND THANKS VERY MUCH FOR BEING
HERE.
>> THANKS FOR HAVING ME.
>> WELL, SO WHAT SPECIFICALLY
DOES THE STATE OF WISCONSIN WANT
FROM FOXCONN RIGHT NOW?
>> WELL, I THINK FUNDAMENTALLY
WE WANT FOXCONN TO BE
SUCCESSFUL.
WE WANT THE LOCAL UNITS OF
GOVERNMENT TO BE PROTECTED.
WE WANT THE PEOPLE IN
SOUTHEASTERN WISCONSIN AND
THROUGHOUT THE STATE TO BENEFIT
FROM THIS PROJECT.
BUT WE ALSO WANT TO ENSURE THAT
EVERYBODY UNDERSTANDS THAT
NOBODY GETS A BLANK CHECK IN
THESE THINGS AND THAT
FUNDAMENTALLY THIS PROJECT HAS
CHANGED FROM WHERE IT WAS TWO
YEARS AGO.
THOSE THINGS ARE OKAY, BUT IT
ALSO REQUIRES US THEN TO REVISIT
SOME OF THE FUNDAMENTALS ABOUT
THE TBREAMENT.
>> AND SO YOU'D LIKE TO AMEND
THE CONTRACT.
>> I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT TO
NOTE THAT THE FIRST DISCUSSION
OF AMENDMENT OF THE CONTRACT
ACTUALLY CAME FROM FOXCONN.
THERE HAS BEEN THIS SERIES OF
COMMUNICATIONS THAT HAVE COME
OUT OVER THE LAST FEW WEEKS AND
REALLY GOING BACK TO MARCH OF
THIS YEAR, FOXCONN EXPRESSED
THEIR DISENGS INTENTION TO PROCEED WITH
THE AMENDMENT PROCESS.
WE HE PROCEEDEDWE PROCEEDED UNDER THE
ASSUMPTION THEY WERE GOING TO DO
THAT FOR A LONG PERIOD OF TIME.
>> ARE THEY NOW PROVIDING YOU
THINGS YOU NEED TO MAKE THESE
DECISIONS?
>> THAT'S ONE OF THE THINGS
THAT'S FUNDAMENTAL TO THIS.
JUST A LITTLE BIT ABOUT WHAT THE
JUSTIFICATION OF THIS WAS TWO
YEARS AGO.
SO AT THAT TIME, ERNST & YOUNG
DID DEEP ANALYSIS AND THE
SUBSIDY WAS BASED ON SOME OF THE
EVALUATION THEY HAD DONE.
IN THAT EVALUATION, THEY NOTED
THAT THE PAYOFF FOR THE STATE
WAS BASED ON GETTING TO A POINT
WHERE THEY WERE PRODUCING SIX
MILLION LCD TELEVISIONS IN
RACINE COUNTY.
FOXCONN HAS SAID THEY'RE NO
LONGER DOING TELEVISIONS.
WHAT WE DON'T KNOW IS WHAT IS
THE MARKET FOR WHAT THEY ARE
GOING TO BE DOING.
I THINK FOXCONN MAY NOT KNOW
THAT EITHER, WHICH IS OKAY,
EXCEPT THAT WE HAVE A CONTRACT
THAT WAS FOR THE LCD SCREENS
FROM TWO YEARS AGO.
SO WE NEED TO MAKE SURE THE
PROJECT IS MARRIED UP WITH WHAT
THE CONTRACT TERMS ARE.
>> DO YOU HAVE ANY IDEA WHAT
EXACTLY FOXCONN PLANS TO BUILD?
>> WE HAVE A GOOD IDEA OF WHAT
THEY'RE DOING THROUGHOUT -- UP
UNTIL ABOUT THE END OF 2020.
THERE ARE THREE BUILDINGS ON THE
SITE, ABOUT 1.4 MILLION SQUARE
FEET OF SPACE AND THERE ARE SOME
EXCITING THINGS HAPPENING THERE.
ONE COMPANY IN PARTICULAR,
FOXCONN INDUSTRIAL INTERNET, IS
DOING TWO OF THOSE THREE
BUILDINGS, SEPARATE FROM THE
TERMS THAT WERE DISCUSSED TWO
YEARS AGO.
THOSE ARE THINGS THAT HAVE
EVOLVED AND CHANGED WITH THIS
PROJECT.
AGAIN, THOSE THINGS ARE GOOD.
THEY'RE EXCITING.
THEY'RE GOING TO EMPLOY PEOPLE.
HOWEVER, THAT'S NOT WHAT THE
CONTRACT WAS SIGNED FOR.
AND THAT'S WHY WE HAVE TO GO
BACK AND REVISIT THOSE THINGS
WITH FOXCONN.
>> AS TO THIS, SPEAKER ROBIN VOS
DESCRIBES THAT CONTRACT AS
IRONCLAD AND HE SAYS HE DOESN'T
WANT TO MATERIALLY CHANGE IT,
SAYING IF YOU WANT TO REDUCE
INCENTIVES, IT COULD RESULT IN
LESS HIRING.
WHAT ABOUT THAT?
>> WELL, I THINK THAT FOR ANYONE
TO ARGUE THAT THERE HAVEN'T BEEN
MATERIAL CHANGES IN WHAT FOXCONN
SAID THEY WERE GOING TO DO AND
CONTRACTED FOR TWO YEARS AGO
VERSUS NOW, THEY HAVEN'T BEEN
FOLLOWING FOXCONN'S OWN
COMMUNICATIONS.
SO IT JUST KIND OF GOES TO THE
FUNDAMENTALS OF THIS.
THE STATE HAD THE OPTION IN 2017
TO CHOOSE PROJECT A OR PROJECT
B, WHAT THEY CALL THE AGAIN
RATION 10.5 OR GENERATION 6.
THERE WAS A LIST OF THINGS THAT
CAME ALONG WITH THAT.
SO THAT'S WHAT WAS EVALUATED,
APPLIED FOR AND CONTRACTED FOR
IN 2017.
THERE ARE THINGS THAT ARE FUND
FUNDAMENTALLY DIFFERENT WITH
THIS OTHER PLAN.
I'VE HEARD THE SPEAKER SAY YOU
WOULDN'T TELL SOMEBODY ELSE TO
PRODUCE SCREWDRIVERS INSTEAD OF
HAMMERS FOR A DIFFERENT THING.
WELL, FRANKLY, IF YOU'RE GOING
TO PRODUCE SIX MILLION TVs AND
THAT'S WHAT ALL OF THE
EVALUATION WAS, IF THEY ARE
GOING TO PRODUCE SOMETHING
ADDITIONAL, THERE'S NOTHING
WRONG WITH THAT, BUT ARE THEY
GOING TO PRODUCE 60 OR 6,000?
THOSE ARE THE QUESTIONS WE STILL
HAVE AND WHICH TAXPAYERS
PROBABLY WANT US TO BE ABLE TO
ANSWER, TOO, BEFORE WE SAY
THAT HORSE IS A HORSE IS A
HORSE OR ALL THESE THINGS ARE
THE SAME THINGS.
>> AS IT STANDS, YOUR POSITION
IS THE COMPANY IS NOT ELIGIBLE
FOR SUBSIDIES AT ALL?
>> THE PROJECT THAT THEY'RE
DOING NOW IS NOT WITHIN THE
BOUNDS OF THE CONTRACT THAT WAS
SIGNED IN 2017.
WE MADE THAT PRETTY CLEAR FOR
THEM OVER THE LAST SEVERAL
MONTHS.
AND I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT TO
NOTE, THEY'VE CONTINUED TO DO
WORK AWARE OF THAT.
WE'VE CONTINUED TO HAVE
DISCUSSIONS ABOUT THOSE THINGS.
AND I ANTICIPATE WE WILL OVER
THE COMING WEEKS.
>> WHAT IS YOUR RESPONSE TO
FOXCONN SAYING THAT YOUR
POSITION LEAVES JOB CREATORS
WONDERING IF DOING BUSINESS IN
WISCONSIN IS WELCOME BY THE
EVERS ADMINISTRATION?
>> WELL, I THINK OVER THE FIRST
SEVERAL MONTHS OF THE EVERS
ADMINISTRATION THERE HAVE BEEN
SEVERAL OCCASIONS, HIGH-PROFILE
ANNOUNCEMENTS WITH MILWAUKEE
TOOL OF THE STATE PROVIDING AND
FRANKLY BEING NIMBLE IN BEING
ABLE TO PROVIDE RESOURCES SO
COMPANIES LIKE THAT COULD GROW
HERE AND I THINK THAT
FUNDAMENTALLY THE CONVERSATIONS
WE'VE HAD, THE INVESTMENTS WE'VE
MADE HAVE BEEN IN COMPANIES THAT
ARE HERE, THAT WANT TO GROW
HERE, THAT WANT TO CONTINUE TO
WORK WITH US ON THE ENTIRE
FABRIC OF THE ECONOMY.
SO ALL EVIDENCE IS TO THE
CONTRARY.
EVERY CONVERSATION WITH FOXCONN
IS WE WANT THEM TO BE AS
SUCCESSFUL AS THEY POSSIBLY CAN
BE HERE IN WISCONSIN.
THAT'S WHY IT'S TO THEIR BENEFIT
AND IN THEIR BEST INTEREST TO
MAKE SURE THAT WE MARRY WHATEVER
THE CONTRACT TERMS ARE WITH THE
PROJECT THAT THEY ARE DOING NOW.
AND THAT WILL CONTINUE TO EVOLVE
FOR THEM.
I THINK THEY DON'T KNOW HE --
AND THAT'S PART OF HOW THE
PROJECT HAS EVOLVED OVER THE
LAST TWO YEARS IN THAT THINGS
ARE FUNDAMENTALLY DIFFERENT IN
THE WORLD MARKETPLACE THAN THEY
WERE TWO YEARS AGO.
THERE'S NOTHING WRONG WITH THAT.
THEY NEED TO BE ABLE TO EVOLVE
WITH THAT.
BUT YOU CAN'T HAVE A CONTRACT
THAT PUTS THE STATE IN PLAY AND
NOT ALLOW US TO EVALUATE THESE
THINGS MOVING FORWARD.
THAT'S WHAT RATIONAL PEOPLE
WOULD DO AS WE WANT TO MOVE
FORWARD ON THIS.
>> GIVEN THE FRICTION AS
EVIDENCED BY THE CORRESPONDENCE
BETWEEN YOU AND OTHERS IN THE
ADMINISTRATION AND FOXCONN, DOES
THE STATE RUN THE RISK OF
FOXCONN ON SCWUS BAILING ON JUST BAILING ON THIS
PROJECT ALTOGETHER?
>> I THINK THE DECISION, AS HAS
BEEN THE CASE OVER THE PAST TWO
YEARS, FOXCONN IS GOING TO MAKE
BUSINESS DECISIONS, THEY'RE NOT
GOING TO MAKE THOSE DECISIONS
SIMPLY BASED ON TAX CREDITS.
THEY'RE GOING TO MAKE THOSE
BASED ON THE FUNDAMENTALS OF
THEIR BUSINESS, BASED ON THE
WORLD ECONOMIC REALITIES.
SO ANYBODY TRYING TO SAY THAT
THE STATE DOING THIS OR THAT IS
GOING TO DRIVE THEM AWAY,
FOXCONN HAS CONTINUED TO EVOLVE
THEIR BUSINESS DECISION-MAKING
OVER THE LAST TWO YEARS WITH THE
CONTRACT THAT THEY HAD, WITH
CHANGES IN ADMINISTRATION, WITH
CHANGES AT FOXCONN.
SO THOSE DECISIONS ARE GOING TO
BE MADE BASED ON FOXCONN'S
BUSINESS, NOT BASED ON ANYTHING
THAT THE STATE IS DOING.
>> WHAT DO YOU EXPECT ANY KIND
OF RESOLUTION TO THE QUESTIONS
THAT YOU HAVE?
>> I THINK THERE'S URGENCY TO IT
IN THAT THERE ARE REPORTS THAT
FOXCONN HAS TO FILE EARLY IN
2020.
WE WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE
ABLE TO DO -- IN OUR BEST WAY,
TO INCENTIVIZE THEM SO THAT THE
WORK THAT THEY ARE DOING CAN BE
REWARDED AND THE WORK THEY'RE
GOING TO BE DOING IN THE FUTURE
IS REWARDED.
WE WANT TO MAKE SURE WE MAKE
THOSE CHANGES WITH ALL THE
APPROPRIATE AMOUNT OF SPEED, BUT
ALSO THE APPROPRIATE AMOUNT OF
EVALUATION AND JUSTIFICATION.
BECAUSE THAT'S REALLY WHAT
PEOPLE NEED OUT OF THIS.
>> ARE YOU IN CURRENT
COMMUNICATION WITH THEM TODAY?
>> I HAVEN'T SPOKE WITH THEM
TODAY, BUT WE HAVE HAD
CONVERSATIONS WITH THEM THIS
WEEK.
WE HAVE CONVERSATIONS ONGOING ON
FOXCONN ON A COUPLE DIFFERENT
LEVELS ABOUT WHAT'S GOING ON THE
GROUND AND HOW CAN THE STATE BE
HELPFUL IN MAKING SURE WE'RE
DOING THAT.
THERE ARE ALSO ON GLENN GROTHMAN
DISCUSSIONS -- ONGOING
DISCUSSIONS ABOUT WHAT FOXCONN
IS DOING ON THE GROUND.
THOSE TWO THINGS CAN MOVE
FORWARD TOGETHER TO MAKE US BOTH
AS SUCCESSFUL AS POSSIBLE.
>> JOEL BRENNAN, THANKS VERY
MUCH.
>> THANKS FOR HAVING ME.
>> A COUNTER SUIT AND AN APPEAL
CAME QUICKLY FOLLOWING LAST
WEEK'S RULING BY AN OZAUKEE
COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT THAT MORE
THAN 200,000 REJLE REGISTERED VOTERS
SHOULD BE DEACTIVATED.
THE RULING CAME IN RESPONSE TO A
LAWSUIT FILED BY A CONSERVATIVE
GROUP THAT CHALLENGED THE
WISCONSIN ELECTIONS COMMISSION
DECISION TO ALLOW THOSE WHO MAY
HAVE MOVED TO BE ABLE TO STAY ON
THE ACTIVE ROLLS THROUGH APRIL,
2021.
THAT SUIT CITED A STATE STATUTE
THAT REQUIRES DEACTIVATION 30
DAYS AFTER SUCH VOTERS GET A
MAILED NOTICE SHOW SAYING RECORDS SAY
THEY MAY HAVE MOVED.
REPUBLICANS WORRY ABOUT VOTER
FRAUD.
BUT WHERE DOES ALL THIS STAND
TONIGHT ON THE CUSP OF A
PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION, WHERE
WISCONSIN IS PIVOTAL?
WE TURN TO THE ADMINISTRATOR OF
THE ELECTIONS COMMISSION, WEG MEAGAN
WOLFE.
IS THE COURT'S RULING IN LIMBO
NOW BECAUSE OF THE APPEAL TO THE
HIGHER COURT?
>> CURRENTLY THERE IS AN APPEAL
AND WE'RE WAITING TO SEE WHAT
THE JUDGE DECIDES IN TERMS OF A
STAY OF THE CURRENT ORDER BEFORE
THE COMMISSION DECIDES ON
FURTHER ACTION.
>> AND SO RIGHT NOW, TONIGHT,
THOSE VOTERS REMAIN ON THE
ACTIVE LIST.
>> THAT'S CORRECT.
>> HOW FRACTIOUS IS THIS
SITUATION GIVEN THAT THE
ELECTIONS COMMISSION IS
DEADLOCKED ON PARTY LINES ABOUT
HOW TO PROCEED AFTER THE RULING?
>> SO THE OVERSIGHT BOARD IS
THAT SIX-MEMBER, BIPARTISAN
COMMISSION THAT PROVIDES
GUIDANCE AND DECISION-MAKING FOR
THE COMMISSION.
SO THERE'S BOUND TO BE SOME
DIFFERENCES FROM TIME TO TIME.
BUT I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT TO
NOTE THAT THE DECISIONS FOR THE
MOVERS LIST, THE PROCESS THAT
WAS IMPLEMENTED, THOSE VOTES
WERE LARGELY UNANIMOUS AND ANY
CHANGES AND SORT OF
HAVE REALLY BEEN RESULTS TO THE
DIRECTION OF LITIGATION
RECENTLY.
>> SO WHY DID THE COMMISSION
ORIGINALLY WANT TO GIVE THESE
VOTERS WHO CHANGED ADDRESS UNTIL
2021 BEFORE THEY WERE
DEACTIVATED?
>> THE PURPOSE OF ERIC IS REALLY
TO DETERMINE IF SOMEONE IS
PROPERLY REGISTERED AT THE
CORRECT ADDRESS OR IF THEY'RE
ELIGIBLE TO BE REGISTERED BUT
THEY'RE NOT YET TO GIVE THEM
THAT INFORMATION.
SO THE DECISION WAS MADE TO MAKE
SURE THAT VOTERS AGAIN HAD THAT
OPPORTUNITY TO GET REGISTERED AT
THE CORRECT ADDRESS.
WHEN WE'RE LOOKING AT ERIC DATA
SETS, WHAT ERIC DOES IS IT MAKES
A REPORT THAT DETERMINES
DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THE STATE
VOTER ROLLS AND DATABASES LIKE
DMV'S OR THE POSTAL SERVICE AND
THEN IT'S OUR JOB TO DETERMINE
HOW TO EDUCATE VOTERS ABOUT HOW
IF THEY MAY HAVE MOVED, THEY
NEED TO UPDATE THEIR ADDRESS.
>> WHAT DOES ERIC STAND FOR?
>> THE ELECTRONIC REGISTRATION
INFORMATION CENTER.
>> THAT'S WHERE THIS INFORMATION
COMES FROM THAT TELLS THE
COMMISSION THAT THESE VOTERS
MIGHT HAVE MOVED.
>> CORRECT.
IT COMPARES VOTER LISTS WITHIN
OUR STATE AS WELL AS ACROSS THE
COUNTRY TO AGAIN DETERMINE IF
THERE ARE VOTERS THAT ARE
ELIGIBLE TO BE REGISTERED TO
VOTE BUT CURRENTLY AREN'T SO WE
CAN EDUCATE THEM OR VOTERS THAT
MAY HAVE MOVED AND NEED TO
REGISTER AT A NEW ADDRESS.
>> WHAT ABOUT THAT STATUTE, THAT
STATE STATUTE THAT SAYS THAT
SUCH MOVERS MUST BE PURGED
WITHIN 30 DAYS OF THIS WRITTEN
NOTICE?
>> SO THE CURRENT LAW SAYS THAT
THE STATE OF WISCONSIN MUST JOIN
THE ERIC ORGANIZATION AND MUST
ABIDE BY THE ERIC AGREEMENT, BUT
IT IS NOT SPECIFIC IN TERMS OF
WHAT HAPPENS WITH THAT DATA SET.
WE'RE JUST REQUIRED BY THE ERIC
AGREEMENT TO MAKE CONTACT WITH
AT LEAST 95% OF THE VOTERS THAT
ARE ON THE LIST FOR THE MOVERS,
BUT IT'S NOT SPECIFIC.
THERE ARE PLACES IN
STATUTE THAT TALK ABOUT THIS
MAINTENANCE.
FOUR-YEAR MAINTENANCE, FOR
EXAMPLE.
SO VOTERS WHO HAVE NOT
PARTICIPATED IN AN ELECTION FOR
FOUR YEARS, THE STATUTE DOES
REQUIRE FOR THOSE THAT WE
SEND THEM A NOTICE LETTING THEM
KNOW THEY HAVEN'T PARTICIPATED
IN FOUR YEARS.
AND THEN IF WE DON'T HEAR FROM
THEM WITHIN 30 DAYS, THEIR
RECORD IS DEACTIVATED.
BUT THAT'S A SEPARATE SET OF
LAWS.
>> DO YOU THINK DEACTIVATING
THESE VOTERS IF THAT HAPPENS
WILL SUPPRESS VOTES?
>> HERE IN THE STATE OF
WISCONSIN WE HAVE SAME-DAY VOTER
REGISTRATION.
SO I THINK REGARDLESS OF WHERE
THE DECISION HEADS THAT THE MOST
IMPORTANT THING FOR VOTERS TO
KNOW, THE BIGGEST TAKE-AWAY OR
ACTION ITEM FOR THEM, IS TO KNOW
YOUR REGISTRATION STATUS AND
MAKE SURE YOU'RE REGISTERED TO
VOTE AT THE CORRECT PLACE.
SO ANY VOTER THAT'S WONDERING
WHERE THEY'RE REGISTERED TO VOTE
OR WHAT THEIR STATUS IS CAN GO
TO MYVOTE.WI.GOV.
THEY'LL HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO
REGISTER ON LINE.
YOU CAN ALSO REJLE SISTER REGISTER AT THE
POLLS ON ELECTION DAY.
JUST MAKE SURE YOU HAVE PROOF OF
RESIDENCE DOCUMENT, SO SOMETHING
LIKE A UTILITY BILL, MAYBE YOUR
DRIVER'S LICENSE THAT HAS YOUR
CRUR
CURRENT NAME AND ADDRESS ON IT.
>> ARE MORE PEOPLE ON THE CHANGE
OF ADDRESS LIST DEMOCRATIC
VOTERS?
>> DON'T TRACK PARTY HERE IN
THE STATE OF WISCONSIN, SO YOU
DON'T REGISTER AS A PARTY, SO WE
HAVE NO WAY OF KNOWING WHO THOSE
VOTERS ARE.
>> AND YET MORE OF THOSE VOTERS
COME FROM LARGER CITIES, IS THAT
ACCURATE?
>> LARGEST PLACES ARE GOING TO
HAVE MORE VOTERS ON THE LIST.
ALSO PLACES THAT HAVE A MORE
TRANSIENT POPULATION MIGHT BE ON
THAT LIST MORE FREQUENTLY.
>> DO YOU FEEL AS LEAVING THEM
ACTIVE ENCOURAGES FRAUD?
>> SO WE ALSO HAVE A PHOTO I.D.
LAW HERE IN THE STATE OF
WISCONSIN, WHICH MEANS THAT ANY
VOTER THAT SHOWS UP TO VOTE ON
ELECTION DAY HAS TO PROVE WHO
THEY ARE.
WHEN YOU'RE REGISTERING TO VOTE,
YOU'RE PROVING WHERE YOU LIVE.
WHEN YOU SHOW UP TO CAST YOUR
BALLOT, YOU STATE YOUR NAME AND
YOUR ADDRESS PUBLICLY AND SHOW
THAT PHOTO I.D. TO PROVE WHO YOU
ARE BEFORE YOU CAN CAST A
BALLOT.
SO EVEN THOSE VOTERS IF THEY
HAVE MOVED AND IF THEY'RE STILL
ON THE POLL LIST, THEY ARE HE
'STILL GOING TO BE ASKED TO
AFFIRM IF THEY STILL LIVE AT
THAT ADDRESS.
IF THEY HAVE MOVED, THEY WILL
REREGISTER AT THEIR PRESENT
ADDRESS.
>> MEAGAN WOLFE, THANKS VERY
MUCH.
>> THANK YOU.
>> NOW, AN INSIDE LOOK AT THIS
WEEK'S HISTORIC IMPEACHMENT OF
PRESIDENT DONALD TRUMP.
THE HOUSE VOTE ON WEDNESDAY
MAKES HIM THE THIRD PRESIDENT TO
BE IMPEACHED IN U.S. HISTORY.
THE VOTE WENT LARGELY ALONG
PARTY LINES.
HERE'S WHAT WISCONSIN 5TH
REPUBLICAN JAMES SENSENBRENNER
SAID ON THE FLOOR DURING THE
VOTE, FOLLOWED BY HOUSE SPEAKER
NANCY PELOSI'S COMMENTS AFTER
THE VOTE WAS TALLIED.
>> THERE ARE NO ALLEGATIONS THAT
THE PRESIDENT HAS COMMITTED A
CRIME.
WE HAVE HAD ALMOST THREE YEARS
OF NONSTOP INVESTIGATIONS.
WE'VE HAD THE MUELLER REPORT,
THE SCHIFF INVESTIGATION, THE
NADLER INVESTIGATION AND THERE'S
NO EVIDENCE THAT INDICATES THAT
DONALD J. TRUMP VIOLATED ANY
CRIMINAL STATUTE OF THE UNITED
STATES.
>> SEEMS LIKE PEOPLE HAVE A
SPRING IN THEIR STEP BECAUSE THE
PRESIDENT WAS HELD ACCOUNTABLE
FOR HIS RECK LINGS BEHAVIOR.
NO ONE IS ABOVE THE LAW AND THE
CONSTITUTION IS THE SUPREME LAW
OF THE LAND.
>> WHEN WE ASKED U.S.
REPRESENTATIVE RON KIND ON THIS
PROGRAM LAST WEEK HOW HE WOULD
VOTE, HE WOULD NOT DEFINITIVELY
SAY.
HOWEVER, HE STOOD WITH OTHER
WISCONSIN DEMOCRATS DEMOCRATS WEDNESDAY,
VOTING IN FAVOR.
THE REPUBLICAN DELEGATION VOTED
AGAINST IMPEACHMENT OF THE
PRESIDENT.
THAT PROCESS COINCIDES WITH
ELECTORAL POLITICS, INCLUDING
THURSDAY NIGHT'S DEMOCRATIC
CANDIDATE DEBATE.
WE CHECK IN WITH AN EXPERT,
UW-MADISON PROFESSOR OF
JOURNALISM MIKE WAGNER.
THANKS A LOT FOR BEING HERE.
>> IT'S MY PLEASURE.
>> FIRST ON THE IMPEACHMENT OF
PRESIDENT TRUMP.
AFTER SO MANY, MANY HOURS OF
TESTIMONY AND DEBATE, REALLY
ALONG STRICT PARTISAN LINES, IT
ALMOST SEEMED ANTI-CLIMATIC, YET
IT IS HISTORIC.
>> IT IS.
WE'VE ONLY HAD THIS HAPPEN THREE
TIMES, ALTHOUGH TWICE IN THE
LAST 20 YEARS.
BUT THIS IS A RARE THING THAT
HAPPENS IN OUR COUNTRY.
AND WHILE THE DEBATES THAT
HAPPENED ON THE FLOOR OF THE
HOUSE PROBABLY WON'T BE USED IN
TEXTBOOKS FOR EXAMPLES OF
HIGH-QUALITY DEBATE IN FUTURE
TIMES, THIS IS A REALLY
IMPORTANT MOMENT THAT LAYS DOWN
WHAT IT IS OUR LAWMAKERS THINK
PRESIDENTS ARE ALLOWED TO DO.
ARE THEY ALLOWED TO HELP
THEMSELVES POLITICALLY BY
DEALING WITH FOREIGN NATIONS OR
NOT, WHICH IS KIND OF THE
CENTRAL QUESTION.
AND THE SECONDARY QUESTION, CAN
THEY REFUSE TO TREAT CONGRESS AS
A COEQUAL BRANCH OF GOVERNMENT,
THE OTHER ARTICLE OF
IMPEACHMENT.
>> IT SEEMS THAT THE IMPEACHMENT
PROCESS HAS SERVED TO SOLIDIFY
THE PRESIDENT'S BASE AND
SUPPORT.
HOW IS THAT?
>> SOME OF IT I THINK YOU SAW
FROM THE COMMENTS FROM
CONGRESSMAN SENSENBRENNER, THE
PRESIDENT HAS NOT BEEN SHOWN TO
COMMIT A CRIME.
THAT'S NOT THE STANDARD FOR
IMPEACHMENT.
SO IT'S NOT RELEVANT.
WHAT'S RELEVANT IS WHETHER THE
PRESIDENT VIOLATED HIS OATH AND
HAS ENGAGED IN HIGH CRIMES AND
MISDEMEANORS, WHICH ISING
SOMETHING THE HOUSE GETS TO
DEFINE.
OTHER REPUBLICANS HAVE JUST SAID
DEMOCRATS HAVE HAD IT IN FOR
PRESIDENT TRUMP SINCE DAY ONE.
THEY SAY IF THAT'S TRUE, WHY
DIDN'T WE IMPEACH HIM ON DAY
ONE?
WE WAITED UNTIL HE VIOLATED THE
OATH OF OFFICE.
THOSE ARE THE MAIN ARGUMENTS.
IT'S PARTISAN, AK ACRIMONIOUS, AND
THE PUBLIC IS INTERESTED BUT NOT
CHANGING THEIR MINDS IN ANY KIND
OF SYSTEMIC WAY.
I THINK WE'RE SEEING ANOTHER
ISSUE THAT POLARIZES US.
>> WHAT DO YOU MAKE OF NANCY
PELOSI SLOW-WALKING SENDING THE
ARTICLES OF IMPEACHMENT TO THE
SENATE?
>> I THINK SHE'S TRYING TO
ASSERT A STRONG PREFERENCE FOR
THE TRIAL IN THE SENATE BEING
SOMETHING THAT'S TAKEN
SERIOUSLY.
I THINK SPEAKER PELOSI WANTS TO
AVOID SOMETHING THAT WE MIGHT
THINK IS AKIN TO WHAT HAPPENED
IN WISCONSIN WITH THE SPECIAL
SESSION ON GUNS WHERE THERE WAS
A GAVEL IN AND OUT AND IT WAS
OVER IMMEDIATELY.
SPEAKER PELOSI WANTS THERE TO BE
IN A TRIAL IN THE SENATE, WHERE
THE PRESIDENT HAS TO MAKE A
DEFENSE TO THESE CHARGES AGAINST
HIM.
AND SHE WANTS IT TO TAKE TIME.
AND SHE WANTS THE PRESIDENT TO
HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO LAY OUT
HIS CASE AND THE HOUSE MANAGERS
TO LAY OUT THEIRS.
>> IT ALSO ALLOWS HER AND THE
HOUSE DEMOCRATS TO ALLOW THIS
IDEA OF HISTORIC IMPEACHMENT OF
DONALD TRUMP TO REALLY SINK IN.
>> IT ALLOWS IT TO THINK IN,
PERHAPS.
AND IT ALSO IS POLITICAL IN THAT
THE LONGER THIS DRAGS ON, THE
MORE THE PRESIDENT MIGHT BE EM
BATTLED, THE OTHER THINGS
WORKING THEIR WAY THROUGH THE
COURTS ABOUT WHO WORKS FOR THE
PRESIDENT MIGHT HAVE TO TESTIFY,
MIGHT EVENTUALLY BE DECIDED.
SO IT'S CERTAINLY POLITICAL AS
WELL AS DUTIFUL.
>> DO YOU EXPECT THE IMPEACHMENT
TO HELP OR HURT DEMOCRATS?
>> THAT'S A GREAT QUESTION AND I
THINK THE HONEST ANSWER IS I'M
NOT SURE.
WHEN PRESIDENT CLINTON WAS IN
OFFICE, HE WAS REALLY POPULAR
DURING IMPEACHMENT.
PRESIDENT TRUMP HAS NOT GAINED
IN POPULARITY.
HE'S UNDER WATER IN TERMS OF
PUBLIC APPROVAL EVEN THOUGH THE
ECONOMY HE IS PRETTY STRONG.
HE HASN'T HAD THE SAME BENEFIT.
SO I THINK PREDICT A SYSTEMIC
ADVANTAGE ONE WAY OR ANOTHER IS
NOT SOMETHING WE HAVE DATA TO
KNOW.
IT'S AN OPEN QUESTION.
>> AS FOR DEMOCRATS, ANY SENSE
ON YOUR PART WHO WON LAST
NIGHT'S DEBATE?
>> WELL, I THINK AMY KLOBUCHAR
HAD A GOOD NIGHT.
ONCE THE STAGE WAS SMALLER, IT
BECAME CLEARER THAT THERE WERE
TWO LANES, THE MORE PROGRESSIVE
LANE THAT ELIZABETH WARREN AND
BERNIE SANDERS ARE ON, AND
KLOBUCHAR IS KIND OF VYING WITH
BIDEN AND PETE BUTTIGIEG FOR
THAT CENTRIST LANE.
KLOBUCHAR DID HERSELF A LOT OF
FAVORS LAST NIGHT.
PEOPLE DIDN'T HAVE THEIR EYES
TRAINED ON HER BECAUSE OF HER
POSITION IN THE POLLS.
KLOBUCHAR LOOKED LIKE THE
PRAYING MA
PRAYING
PRAGMATIST.
>> WHAT'S YOUR PREDICTION AS TO
WHICH CANDIDATE TAKES THE
NOMINATION?
>> IT'S EARLY STILL.
JOE BIDEN HAS PROBABLY THE BEST
CHANCE.
I THINK ELIZABETH WARREN HAS THE
NEXT BEST CHANCE.
I THINK IT WILL BE HARDER FOR
BERNIE SANDERS TO SUSTAIN THE
KIND OF POPULARITY HE WOULD NEED
TO GET TO THE NOMINATION,
ALTHOUGH HE CAME CLOSE LAST
TIME.
IT'S JOE BIDEN'S TO LOSE, BUT
HE'S TRIED THIS BEFORE AND LOST
EACH TIME.
AND SO -- AND HE'S MUCH OLDER
NOW AND IS NOT QUITE -- DOESN'T
HAVE HIS FINGER ON THE PULSE OF
THE TIMES IN THE WAY HE MIGHT
HAVE WHEN HE RAN THE FIRST TIME,
WHICH LEAVES THE DOOR OPEN FOR
OTHER CANDIDATES.
THAT GIVES PETE BUTTIGIEG AND
AMY KLOBUCHAR A CHANCE AND
SENATOR WARREN A CHANCE.
>> THANKS VERY MUCH.
>> MY PLEASURE.
>> THAT IS OUR PROGRAM FOR
TONIGHT.
NEXT WEEK "HERE AND NOW" WILL BE
PREEMPTED.
WE WILL RETURN ON JANUARY 3 WHEN
GOVERNOR TONY EVERS JOINS US FOR
A LOOK BACK AT 2019 AND A LOOK
AHEAD TO 2020.
IT ALSO KICKSTARTS OUR "HERE AND
NOW" 2020 ELECTION COVERAGE.
WE WILL BEGIN OUR SERIES OF
ONE-ON-ONE INTERVIEWS WITH THE
CANDIDATES RUNNING FOR STATE
SUPREME COURT.
INCUMBENT JUSTICE DANIEL KELLY
WILL BE HERE JANUARY 3.
I'M FREDERICA FREYBERG.
HAVE A GREAT WEEKEND.
>> FUNDING FOR "HERE AND NOW" IS
PROVIDED, IN PART, BY FRIENDS OF
WISCONSIN PUBLIC TELEVISION.