Shawn Johnson:
Wisconsin Republicans convene a special session on gerrymandering and nothing really happens. But what does it mean that they kept the session open? Plus, another key GOP senator retires and the race for governor picks up steam. This is Inside Wisconsin Politics.

I'm Shawn Johnson, here with my colleagues Anya van Wagtendonk, Zac Schultz and Rich Kremer in Eau Claire. Hey, everyone.

Anya van Wagtendonk:
Hello, Shawn.

Zac Schultz:
Hey.

Shawn Johnson:
So, Anya, I think there's actually a lot to kind of pick apart in terms of why Republicans did what they did with this session and what this issue means to the parties this year. But first, for people who have not experienced the drama of a special session, I think maybe they hear that word "special" and assume it is kind of a big deal. What's it actually like in the room where this happens?

Anya van Wagtendonk:
Regular sessions, I think something that not a lot of people know is that there are very few surprises during a regular session. Right? If something is coming to the floor, that means the majority wants it there. Generally speaking, going to happen with a special session, and especially this time around, where Republicans hadn't signaled in advance that they hated the idea, there was really an open question of exactly what was going to happen on that day. So going into it, I kind of needed to be in two places at once. I needed to be in both the Assembly and the Senate. And then thankfully, Assembly leadership sent out a message saying, we're going to keep this open, but that's so that we can have negotiations. So OK, so that signals that like, maybe I don't need to be in the Assembly. So we go over to the Senate. That's where all of the reporters are waiting to see what exactly is going to happen in the Senate. And then there was just a lot of waiting around. Only Democrats were showing up. Finally, Democrats hold a press conference to kind of criticize their colleagues across the aisle saying they're not doing anything. Republican leaders show up and say, we too are leaving the session open. And so the end result is that it was a whole lot of waiting around for nothing, but the nothing could become sort of negotiations with the governor and then reconvene at some point in the future.

Shawn Johnson:
And I can tell you, because we did team coverage on this one, in the Assembly it was a whole lot of milling about would be the way I'd describe it. I don't think they even had gavels this time, which feels like it's really kind of pretty, pretty chill in there. So OK, the special session was not all that dramatic, but the important thing is this thing is technically open. So, Zac, I guess my question is, why is that? Maybe it's just muscle memory, but I just am used to this Republican Legislature being pretty comfortable telling this governor, don't tell us what to do.

Zac Schultz:
Well, there's only one of two reasons why to keep it open. One, because maybe they actually want to do something and be good to their word and negotiate and try and pass this constitutional amendment. Or keeping it open is important to their base and their voters, because redistricting and gerrymandering — especially this time around, it's Republican voters who understand, oh, this is why we're potentially losing the Senate, and we lost a bunch of races in the seat. It doesn't feel good to be on this end of it. And so maybe since both sides have felt the effects of when it's not in your favor, that perhaps there's an idea of, hey, let's come to a compromise and try and resolve this.

Shawn Johnson:
Rich, what do you think? Is this a real session here? Could something actually happen?

Rich Kremer:
I suppose it could. There's been a lot of surprises in this session and the end of the last session for me. I started working at WPR in 2011. And I'm used to seeing gavel in, gavel out, essentially saying thanks but no thanks from the Republicans, saying that to Gov. Tony Evers. But we've got these new state legislative maps. Control of the Senate is a big question mark after the November election. So they're just acting differently. What it means, I don't know what happens. I really don't know.

Shawn Johnson:
Coming back to the optics that you mentioned there, I feel like that is probably a big factor. Whatever ends up being decided here, just thinking back to 2024, which was the first year that we had elections under these new, more competitive legislative maps. And I got to edit a bunch of stories from reporters around the state. And I swear, the number one thing I heard in every story from these candidates in these contested districts, these 50/50 districts, was voters want candidates who will work across the aisle and not get into these fights in Madison, Wisconsin. So if you're trying to do what's best for those candidates right now, why not keep it open? Why not keep that an option for them to at least talk about? Anya, did you get the sense that the governor kind of saw that too, with the statement that he put out after this session? It was pretty like, get going, get yourselves in gear here.

Anya van Wagtendonk:
The statement that said there is actually nothing to negotiate. While we are wondering whether he and Republicans are in the middle of negotiations around this language, yeah, it does kind of raise the question of what those negotiations will look like and to what extent this is about sort of a messaging war going into this election year. One of the things that he also said in that statement was, lawmakers will have to go on the record about their feeling about gerrymandering. And so if they don't, if they don't hold this session, if they don't go to the floor, that is a statement. And so really trying to, again, kind of put the onus on Republicans who are, especially in the Senate, quite vulnerable right now to make the point to their voters where they stand on this issue.

Shawn Johnson:
Let me play the skeptic here for one more minute as to why they might not want to do this. This is a Republican Legislature. We've been talking about how the Supreme Court has this liberal majority that could be there for years. The resolution that the governor is proposing just says, basically, districts shall not provide a disproportionate advantage. Partisan gerrymandering is prohibited. It's pretty thin. Who's going to interpret that if they passed it?

Zac Schultz:
Well, there's only two ways to interpret it. One is they actually negotiate state law that gives a definition for what that means. That could be the negotiations happening as a parallel bill, if that was actually going to be resolved through the Legislature and the governor. Or it's going to be the Supreme Court. And ultimately, no matter what gets passed, it'll be the Supreme Court, because these would be added to the Wisconsin Constitution. This would be a constitutional amendment, big language that does not have definitions so far in state law. And that really would be a liberal Supreme Court, more than likely coming back to say, well, this is what we determined to be partisan gerrymandering or this is what we think is an advantage for partisans.

Shawn Johnson:
Rich, what happens when you invite a court to start talking about statistics and mathematics?

Rich Kremer:
Oh, like a three-year court trial. I'm exaggerating. But what also happens is the courts have generally not wanted to touch this, this partisan gerrymandering claim, from the U.S. Supreme Court to the Wisconsin Supreme Court. They've just wanted to avoid it. And if we look back to when the legislative maps passed by Republicans in 2011 were struck down, they didn't take up the partisan gerrymandering claim. They got around that by looking at contiguity of districts. Whether or not one district has a piece in another. So that was, in a way, a technicality. They did get to the same place that the plaintiffs wanted, which was new maps, but it took a bit of a roundabout way to get there.

Shawn Johnson:
OK, before we move on from this, can we just kind of explore the possibility that maybe there would be a scenario where Republicans really would look at the situation and say, hey, let's pass this. Let's make a deal with the governor. Let's say it's November after the election. How might that play out?

Zac Schultz:
I think the biggest variable is who wins in November. Because remember, constitutional amendments need two consecutive sessions, so this Legislature can pass it all the way through December 31st. But then the next Legislature, which will be made up in November elections, will determine whether it gets passed again. And so that's the key element there. Is there a scenario where the winners in the fall indicate we would like to actually pass this? And so there's incentive to do it in a lame duck, possibly.

Shawn Johnson:
If they don't have the majority, maybe they say this is their best outcome.

Zac Schultz:
Possibly.

Shawn Johnson:
OK, well, we've already seen the current map kind of having an effect on the upcoming races here, especially in the state Senate, where we know majority control is going to hinge on who wins for state Senate seats. Rich, you're sitting in one of those districts right now, I believe. And there was some news there this week. What happened?

Rich Kremer:
Well, first let me take you on a tour of the 31st Senate District. So what happened was the Republican in the race for the 31st Senate District announced that he's dropping out. He's not going to run against Democrat Jeff Smith. So this was Sen. Jesse James, and he was in a different district. But because of the map redrawing, he was going to have to face Smith. So two incumbents. But now you've got one incumbent. You've got the Democrat in the race who's already represented the district, even though it's changed a little bit. So big picture, when the maps were redrawn, there's four Senate districts that are deemed competitive, that it's really kind of a coin flip or just about. And we've seen retirements from three of the Republicans in four of those districts. And that in and of itself is a big signal for how people are feeling about the fall election. So I guess in a way, it complicates Republicans' chances of holding the Senate majority and definitely gives some fuel to Democrats who are getting pretty excited about November.

Shawn Johnson:
So we have elections that are going to have to take place before we get the answers to these questions. But, Anya, I would suspect that Senate Republicans would have preferred to run these races in these three of these four key seats with Sen. Hutton, with Sen. James, with Sen. Wanggaard. What position are they in now?

Anya van Wagtendonk:
I mean, it's interesting, like there's a mix of reasons why these lawmakers have said that they are stepping down. Again, as Rich just alluded to, Democrats are trying to spin this as, they're kind of running scared. But it does raise sort of the question of who will then run in their spots. So Jesse James is a really interesting example. He has worked quite a bit across the aisle. He's been a real leader on criminal justice issues. One of my favorite sort of fun facts is that he and Madison Democrat Sheila Stubbs are like best friends, and they do a lot of work together. He's done a lot on mental health, and so he is a really different kind of Republican than you might see in, let's say, suburban Milwaukee or something like this. And so the question — I think Zac has made this point before — that when you're in the minority and when you are kind of pushing up against a less likely scenario, more sort of fringe candidates or people further to the left or the right tend to be the ones who come forward. And so there will be a really interesting question to see who is entering these races in November and what that does for who's wanting to vote in November.

Zac Schultz:
We already have our first answer in this particular race. The first Republican to announce they're going to run — her middle name is MAGA Dance, and she put that on all of her campaign signs two years ago when she ran and lost in an Assembly race. And you cannot connect yourself literally more closely by putting your name and making it close to Trump's MAGA movement. And that is who is running in that Republican district, which is now drawn to be Democrat, has a Democrat incumbent. And as we've talked about over and over on this show, you don't have to look any more past what the candidates do. And when they are not running, that tells you they know the environment they're up against. Every one of them will have their own individual story, but the larger picture gives us a pretty clear roadmap of what Republicans think of their odds in the Senate specifically. But to go back to Robin Vos holding the Assembly for all those years, we saw a number of elections in '18 and in '22 where top of the ballot, Tammy Baldwin or Tony Evers would win some of those Republican Assembly seats and Republicans down ballot won them. And in part was because incumbents — name recognition, fundraising ability. And when you have people drop out, you lose all of that. You don't have the name. You don't have the person that knows how to knock the doors, that has the community connections, and they don't raise as much money. That really does put them in a big hole.

Shawn Johnson:
Against that backdrop, you have these signals being sent by Republicans dropping out of these races. You have the Supreme Court blowout of a couple a week ago. I guess now it's not at this moment looking great for them. So why would Republican Congressman Tom Tiffany, the candidate for governor, pick now to come out with a seven-figure ad buy in the governor's race?

Zac Schultz:
He's trying to reset the landscape. Absolutely. This is the perfect time to reframe it coming out of that Supreme Court race and say, we've got four months until the August primary and then a few months after that and into November. And he is the lone Republican out there. So it's a positive ad. If you watch the ad, it's not hitting on anyone. It's talking about where his values and where he grew up and on a dairy farm and what he's done for his experience and how much he loves the state. Those are all things that play really well statewide. And when he has to boost his name recognition, if you look at the polling, it's still 65% of Republicans weren't sure. And he was really the only major candidate left. So he has to win his base. And there's room for moderates and independents who, especially looking at that national landscape, may say, well, if there's going to be Democrats in one chamber, well, who's going to run the state? He has an opportunity to reset his agenda, give himself a little distance from Trump, whose name right now is not very popular in Wisconsin among independents, young people and a lot of other groups. So this is a time for him to own the stage by himself while the Democrats don't have money to go on the air in a seven-way primary.

Shawn Johnson:
A rare window to run positive ads. We know he likes Old Fashioneds and the Packers and all this cliche Wisconsin stuff he says about himself. Rich, there was another message in there in the Tom Tiffany ad that caught your eye.

Rich Kremer:
Yeah. He basically was saying that he'd fight against Wall Street buying up residential homes and push back against big tech bulldozing farmland for data centers. Those are talking points that are more akin to something you'd hear out of Democrats in recent years. So that is really interesting. And to pivot off of what Zac was saying, Tiffany's trying to define himself before one of the Democrats define him — as they have already. But until the whole connection with President Trump sticks more, so he's getting out ahead of it. And also, I've seen a lot of conservatives on social media say this ad won him the election. Well, that's an exaggeration. But we've seen people tend to like kind of boring folks in general elections. Gov. Evers is an example. So maybe Tiffany's trying to make that happen and build that reputation for himself.

Zac Schultz:
Shawn, I want to ask you about this because I got the sense that he was trying to rebrand himself as a folksy guy. Now, if you look back at the history of candidates winning elections, you look at Evers and Tommy Thompson. I mean, what's your impression of what attributes do they share in common when it comes to being the everyman in Wisconsin, that folksy nature?

Shawn Johnson:
It's something right now in Wisconsin politics — Rich said the word boring, but I think these candidates kind of embrace that, though. Tony Evers gives off this "aw shucks" vibe that is his brand. Scott Walker once described himself as aggressively normal when he was running for president. And I think people in other states thought, what? But we know here — yeah, that's what won the election. Even Jim Doyle, Harvard Law educated, he would kind of drop his R's when he was out on the campaign trail because he knows what he was going for with that vibe. And so it is something that Tom Tiffany seems to have going for him — that guy that you could see at a bar talking about sports or you name it. There was one development in the Democratic primary that I'd like to touch on if we can. There's still a big primary. There's seven candidates who've been — forms that you all have covered. One of them got a fairly big endorsement in Democratic politics. Anya, can you tell us about that?

Anya van Wagtendonk:
Yeah. And then I actually also want to turn it back to you. So Kelda Roys got this major endorsement from WEAC, this big education teachers union, and the sort of open question that I have and that you and I have discussed is, how significant is that now? So in the past, that would have been sort of almost like a kingmaking move. She is certainly really kind of trying to promote it, in part because her polling numbers have been pretty low throughout. So this could be a last chance, a last ditch effort. But I'm curious what you think compared to, again, like eight years ago, what this endorsement could mean.

Shawn Johnson:
Well, I mean, I think — Zac, you know — when before, WEAC had lost a lot of its power with Act 10, it was a huge endorsement. I think in a Democratic primary, it's something they certainly have to take note of, though. You can't ignore the largest teachers union. To me, it just signals that this primary that we sort of are expecting to get smaller organically at some point — Kelda Roys is not going to go anywhere when she has the teachers union on her side. So that is one that seems like it's going to take a little more time to sort out here. So that's all the time we have for today. Thanks for joining us. This has been Inside Wisconsin Politics. Be sure to follow us on pbswisconsin.org, on YouTube or wherever you get your podcasts.