Podcasts

Announcer:

The following program is a PBS Wisconsin original production.

Joe Biden:

I’m here today to talk about something that doesn’t get enough attention. I’m here to celebrate the progress we’re making in support of Black small businesses here and around the country.

Frederica Freyberg:

A Milwaukee visit from Democratic President Joe Biden foreshadows the political landscape to come in 2024 as Wisconsin Republicans make plans to maintain control of both chambers.

I’m Frederica Freyberg. Tonight on “Here & Now,” big breaking news from the Wisconsin Supreme Court on redistricting maps. Speaker Vos says Republicans are going to win in 2024 because of better candidates. Then, details on a new tribal tuition promise at UW-Madison, and the head of the state economic development agency says big tech is coming to Wisconsin. It’s “Here & Now” for December 22.

Announcer:

Funding for “Here & Now” is provided by the Focus Fund for Journalism and Friends of PBS Wisconsin.

Frederica Freyberg:

The Wisconsin Supreme Court released its ruling this afternoon overturning Wisconsin’s voting maps. The vote was 4-3 with conservative justices dissenting. The liberal majority ordered new maps based on the contiguity of districts. Justice Jill Karofsky saying, “In Wisconsin, the number of state legislative districts containing territory completely disconnected from the rest of the district is striking. At least 50 of the 99 Assembly districts and at least 20 of the 33 Senate districts include separate detached territory.” In dissent, Chief Justice Annette Ziegler said, “This deal was sealed on election night. Four justices remap Wisconsin, even though this constitutional responsibility is to occur every ten years after a census by the other two branches of government.” Contentious, to be sure. Senior political reporter Zac Schultz joins us with details. Zac, thanks very much for being here.

Zac Schultz:

My pleasure.

Frederica Freyberg:

So the court ruled detached territory or the contiguity of the maps violates the state constitution. Describe why.

Zac Schultz:

There are a number of districts where part of an old township when a city incorporates and grabs a subdivision, it would leave a little island that belonged to an old township, and under the maps, and for the past few decades, they’ve left those with the other township, and if those happened on the dividing lines of an Assembly district, part of that little island goes with the other district. Past courts, including just a couple of years ago, have ruled that that is okay. This court said precedent going back to the 1800s and the Supreme Court decided the constitution said contiguity means contiguity.

Frederica Freyberg:

What else stood out?

Zac Schultz:

Well, for me, it was absolutely the timeline of this and the fact that they’re getting away from ‘least change.’ That was the criteria that the last court invented for which they would consider these maps, saying that they wanted to change them as little as possible. This court said ‘least change’ is not a factor. We don’t think it should be used at all, it will be thrown out. They are also going to look at partisan fairness as a metric. So this court has decided that they’re going to give the Legislature a chance to draw maps and see if they can come to a deal with the governor. Whether that happens is unlikely.

Frederica Freyberg:

I was going to ask who draws these maps?

Zac Schultz:

There are the two routes. The Legislature has the option of coming back and passing them if they can work out a deal with the governor. Those will supersede anything and they’ll go into place. Since we know that’s probably not going to happen given the political reality we’re in, the court has said that they will hire consultants to help look and appraise different maps that are brought to them and presented to them.

Frederica Freyberg:

Do all 132 legislators have to stand for election under new maps?

Zac Schultz:

No. What they also ruled is that senators elected under the old maps just two years ago will not have to go up again until ’26.

Frederica Freyberg:

So meanwhile, the court also set a January 12, January 12 deadline to submit these new maps. Talk about fast-tracked.

Zac Schultz:

This has been fast-tracked from the beginning. From this lawsuit being filed the day that Justice Protasiewicz was sworn in, all the way to oral arguments in November. This unprecedented decision coming out in January. Candidates can file in these new districts in April, so they have to move on a fast timeline, which is why we’re seeing the court say we’re going to do this at the same time the Legislature can because we don’t trust them to get it done on time.

Frederica Freyberg:

So again, they’re hiring these consultants to help them do this, and knowing what we know about how this state works right now, I can’t imagine that all of these pieces can come together in time for the next year’s elections.

Zac Schultz:

Well, they have to, and that’s what happens every ten years everywhere else. It will get done. It’s just people will be saying that they’re just as biased in a different way than the last maps were biased in a different way.

Frederica Freyberg:

We leave it there. Zac Schultz, thanks very much.

Zac Schultz:

Thank you.

Frederica Freyberg:

Republican Assembly Speaker Robin Vos says he expects this case to head to the U.S. Supreme Court. Zac spoke with the speaker prior to the maps ruling this week on a variety of issues, looking back at the last year and what’s to come in 2024.

Zac Schultz:

Wrap up 2023 for me. How do you feel the year went for the Legislature?

Robin Vos:

I think by and large, there were an awful lot of successes. If you go all the way back, we have seen some things where it’s obvious because we had a lot of coverage where we had a good deal on shared revenue. The first major increase in a generation. We had a lot of money go into trying to create more housing in Wisconsin. We, of course, had the state budget which invested in everything from schools to local governments, and in addition to that, had good increases for our workers who work at the state, like prison guards. We had some separate bills that didn’t get as much coverage. One that I’m really proud of, increase the amount of funding for literacy, because we know that if young people don’t read at grade level, they’re significantly less likely to graduate from high school and go on to college. We had a bill that actually worked its way through the process that dealt with criminal justice. So we had a lot of good things that happened throughout Wisconsin. We had some things that were disappointing that we didn’t get across the finish line. There were still some things waiting. So I voted — we strongly supported a bill to make birth control available over the counter so we don’t have a need for as many abortions in Wisconsin. Stalled in the Senate, but hopefully that will get across the finish line. We had a bill that dealt with processing ballots on Monday so we done have late night ballot dumps. That happened in the Assembly. Hopefully it’ll pass in the state Senate.

Zac Schultz:

You mentioned one of the successes just a little bit ago in the budget, the raises, and it took until just this week for the UW portion of those raises to come through. They were obviously negotiated the first time. Do you feel like you had leverage to negotiate over those a second time and is that part of the lawsuit that Governor Evers has filed to try and stop some of the oversight that the Legislature has?

Robin Vos:

Well, again, this is where people try to rewrite history. It’s been very common that the legislative committee does not approve the final product until sometime in the fall, so we’re in the normal timeline. That is a bogus argument. It also is true that the Legislature has the ability to go through the comp plan, it’s called, where they give us a whole bunch of changes as to the way they want to pay employees, what insurance looks like, what happens with different rules for regulating the workplace, all those things happen, and it’s very common for us to do it.

Zac Schultz:

But you did separate out the raises, the state worker raises from the UW raises and then you said I’m not approving —

Robin Vos:

Yeah.

Zac Schultz:

— those until I get more changes.

Robin Vos:

Yeah.

Zac Schultz:

Isn’t that a second set of negotiations?

Robin Vos:

No. That’s the way that we normally have done things. Again, there were a lot of things that worked their way through the process. They wanted an engineering building. They wanted more money for programs. Those were all things that were part of the process, too, and that’s a normal way we negotiate. Look, we try to find a consensus. I give credit to President Rothman and the chancellors from around the university. They negotiated in good faith. They didn’t give me anywhere near as much as I wanted and we gave them a lot of things that they thought was important. That’s what the world, I think, needs more of, is consensus and compromise, not “if I don’t get it my way exactly, I’m going to sue,” or “if I don’t find a way to get to an answer that only I can support, we do nothing.”

Zac Schultz:

Speaking of the UW Board of Regents, how do you interpret those two votes? What changed between from the first to the second?

Robin Vos:

You’d have to ask them. I have no idea. Look, we negotiated for months. I know that the chancellors and President Rothman were in constant communication with the regents. I can’t imagine they would have come to us and said, “We have a deal,” if they hadn’t run them by, in an informal way, the regents. Now, my understanding through the rumor mill is that Governor Evers and his staff were actively trying to kill the deal multiple times. They didn’t want consensus. I don’t know why, but they didn’t want consensus. Ultimately, even the governor’s own regents ignored his wishes and did the right thing, so I don’t know why it happened, but the right thing happened at the end.

Zac Schultz:

Regarding DEI in the UW system, what will actually change with this deal and are you certain that this will actually root out DEI as you’ve requested, or are they just giving it a new name?

Robin Vos:

No, no, no. It’s a start. Let’s just take one example, Zac, that’s gotten an awful lot of — not enough coverage, okay? In the 1940s and ’50s, we had a problem where there was pervasive racism for applications into the university system, right? If you didn’t have the right skin color or perhaps the right gender, you didn’t have a chance to get into the university. Well, smart people at the time decided that we were going to do a test, the SAT and the ACT over time so that the best qualified people get to the university and are admitted based on their God-given ability. That’s the norm for our society. It actually is required that every student take the ACT test. All of a sudden COVID comes and they couldn’t gather together for the test and the university decides we’re no longer going to use standardized testing. We’re going to let people write an essay. Well, that’s exactly what they did in the 1940s and ’50s when they had institutional racism and now we’re doing the opposite where we’re saying you can be the smartest kid, but if you don’t do a good essay or do the right DEI code words, you’re not admitted to Madison or you’re not admitted to one of the other universities. That’s awful. So we wanted to put the ACT test back in. They said absolutely not. So we compromised and said we’re going to take the top 5% of students in the university admittance from any school in Wisconsin, top 10% for anybody but Madison. I think that’s a good compromise that wins for every parent so that you know if you have smart kids, they don’t have to go to another state to be accepted. Why is that a loss? That’s a win. So I think a lot of the things we did were good common sense, middle ground, finding ways to get to an answer that show that DEI isn’t about diversifying the campus. That’s what we believe in. We actually want more diversity. I want people coming to the campus no matter what color or race you are. What they want is people giving special privileges based on certain categories that they like. Well, that’s not the way the world should be. So diversity is what we support, but division, exclusion and indoctrination, which is what it’s become, is what we’re opposed to.

Zac Schultz:

So how do you win the PR battle when it comes to people who see headlines and see Republicans are opposed to things that will help even out the playing field for Black people who have been marginalized or discriminated against in the past, when those are the headlines —

Robin Vos:

But it doesn’t even out the playing field. What it does is it actually gives people a special advantage, that if it was 1950s Alabama we would call it racism, right? It’s 19 — it’s the 2020s in Wisconsin. We don’t want racism here either. We want to make sure that if you are the smartest, best, most capable person, man, woman, Black, white, Hispanic, Asian, who cares? You should get the job. You should get that position. You should be advanced. That’s what I think everybody in Wisconsin wants. The idea that we’re somehow going to now use a new filter of race as a way to off-set the old filter of race is wrong. Redlining has been illegal for over 50 years. It should be. It was horrific, right? All these things that were part of our history should never be forgotten but never repeated and a lot of the things they’re talking about is repeating the problems of the past to try to fix what they think are still the problems of today. So I think we have a way to generate a consensus. We have a way to be able to move forward on people’s talent and ability. You and I know that most of the reason people don’t succeed is poverty. It’s not race in America anymore; it’s because they’re poor. Let’s focus on lifting up people who are in poverty no matter what their skin color is and not focus on obsessing on people who are wealthy and perhaps a minority versus somebody who is not wealthy and not a minority. So hopefully we can find that consensus.

Zac Schultz:

Moving on to the other big issue of the year, the Supreme Court is taking up a redistricting case. They have had oral arguments. What are your thoughts on the possibility of new maps?

Robin Vos:

It’s not the possibility. You and I know they’ve already predetermined the case. Everybody in Wisconsin knows that this is a farce. They have already decided they are going to draw new maps because Janet Protasiewicz, for the first time in the history of the country, predetermined cases when she was running for an election. That’s wrong but we already know what’s happening. So it’s not some kind of a big mystery that we don’t know that we’re going to get maps. Let’s remember that Republicans have had this majority in the chamber for 30 years with two years exception and that was under maps run by a court, maps run by the Legislature, maps run by a federal court. We’re going to win again in 2024 because we have better candidates and a better message. One of the most important stats that people never want to talk about – in 2018, we had a Democrat sweep year, right? Democrats won pretty much everything, including the U.S. Senate. We saw also Tammy Baldwin carry 14 districts that were won by Assembly Republicans. If she had just had the same people who voted for her for the federal office and the Democrat for the Assembly, they’d be in the majority right now. But we have better candidates and a better message. They are too focused on being divisive. So we’re going to have the same dynamic in 2024. As long as they don’t have some kind of an Illinois-style gerrymander where they pizza pie everybody into Dane County, I think we’ll have competitive maps like we do now. Republicans will win the majority like we did last time and we’ll continue to have divided government in Wisconsin.

Zac Schultz:

Alright. Speaker Vos, thanks for your time.

Robin Vos:

Thanks Zac. Good to see you.

Frederica Freyberg:

This week, UW-Madison announced the Wisconsin Tribal Education Promise program. Starting in fall 2024, members of 11 federally recognized tribes in the state will be able to attend the flagship campus all expenses paid for undergraduates and full tuition for law and medical students. We’re joined now by UW-Madison director of tribal relations, Carla Vigue. Thanks very much for being here.

Carla Vigue:

Thank you for having me.

Frederica Freyberg:

So what is the reaction to this Tribal Education Promise program from tribal nation members across Wisconsin?

Carla Vigue:

I think everyone is really excited. UW-Madison, like you said, is one of the state’s — or is actually one of the country’s premier universities, and we’ve been working with tribes for the better part of a year on this proposal and we finally brought it to fruition. Essentially what happens is if you are, like you said, a resident of Wisconsin, a member of one of our 11 federally recognized tribes and you get admitted to UW-Madison, we’ll take care of the full cost of admission, which is not just tuition, but room, board, books, fees, and a few other little things, too.

Frederica Freyberg:

What is it like for you to be able to roll this out, even as Speaker Vos, whom we just heard from, works to dismantle diversity, inclusion and equity programs?

Carla Vigue:

Yeah. I mean, it’s — there’s other things happening in the state Capitol, but really for us, we sat down with tribal leaders many months ago and we said we have this idea. Other states do it. Other universities do it, and so we talked to them and said this is an idea we have and how can we move forward with it. We’ve been very fortunate all 11 of the tribes came to the table and sat with the chancellor and I and talked it through and we shared stories. One of the tribal leaders talked about sleeping in his car while he was an undergrad and others talked about food insecurity and other things, and as we sat around the table and talked about things, this is what we came up with, and I think it’s a really good proposal. There are other things happening in the world, but this is something we worked really hard on together.

Frederica Freyberg:

As you mentioned, other states do this, but are other states offering such robust kind of packages to include all of the living expenses?

Carla Vigue:

Most don’t. I think, like I said, we weren’t the first out of the gate with this sort of plan but I think we’re the best. Maybe that’s just me talking, but, yeah, I think, you know, like I said, we sat down and we talked through all the scenarios and how many semesters and what it should include and all of those things, and I think we came to an agreement with the tribes that this is really how we should do it in order to support native students.

Frederica Freyberg:

Is it unusual as well to pay tuition for law or medical school?

Carla Vigue:

Yeah. So that was where we gave a little surprise to the tribes at one point. We said we spoke to the law school and the medical school and they both agreed to tuition and they are a different kind of student, right? They’re a little bit older, so we didn’t include some of those other things, but tuition for law school and med school, that’s a very big deal.

Frederica Freyberg:

It’s a big expense. So there are no income restrictions with this because I understand it’s about promoting a UW-Madison education to native students. Why is that important?

Carla Vigue:

Well, I think one of the things — so when I first sat down with the chancellor when I first took my position, she and I talked about this, and for us, it’s both about giving back to the community but also acknowledging that this university that we work for is built on land that was forcibly removed from the Ho-Chunk Nation, and so both of those things in combination of just wanting to do the right thing for native students.

Frederica Freyberg:

Describe for us what you say is at the heart of the native community as it relates to this program.

Carla Vigue:

Yeah. I think when we talked about it, like I said, it’s really about taking care of our community. I’m Native American. I grew up on the Oneida Indian reservation. I have two little boys, Hunter and Otto. The way we always think about community is how do we give back and how do we take care of the next seven generations, and so it’s not just about decisions that are good for me or my little boys or even their kids, but seven generations down the road, how are we taking care of those seven generations.

Frederica Freyberg:

Do you have any understanding of how many students might participate?

Carla Vigue:

We do — not really. Kind of. That’s a bad answer, but so we have some numbers, but right now, people self-report. So anyone who claims native ancestry can report that they’re native. They don’t have to. But with this program, you’ll have to now, you know, show your — prove you’re enrolled in one of Wisconsin’s 11 tribes. We’ll get better data as we go along.

Frederica Freyberg:

And presumably as you said about offering this program, there was a certain amount of money set aside. Do you have an expectation as to what that will be?

Carla Vigue:

We’re rolling this out in December and the application deadline is February, so we’re not expecting this first year to be a huge number. I think we’ll see what this first year looks like and then be able to build from there. This is really the first iteration of this program, hopefully. Maybe we can grow it or maybe this is going to be satisfactory and enough. But I think we’ll have more data after this first year.

Frederica Freyberg:

Have you gotten calls from students saying tell me about this?

Carla Vigue:

Oh, I’ve gotten a lot of calls. My priority admissions department is, like, probably overwhelmed by people I’m sending their way, but it’s really fun because family and friends are reaching out, too, and I’m getting to say, yes, they’ll qualify. I will say I also got to call one of the students who is already here on campus. She’s a student from Lac Courte Oreilles. Her name is Calista. She joined us this week while we were announcing the program. As I was describing the program to her, she just got silent and then very excited and I was even a little bit overwhelmed by it all because I just got to tell someone we were going to take care of them.

Frederica Freyberg:

That’s awesome. Carla Vigue, thanks very much.

Carla Vigue:

Thank you.

Frederica Freyberg:

In other news, Microsoft has finalized the purchase of more than 100,000 acres of land in Racine County, with 600 acres purchased from the village of Mount Pleasant this week. The tech giant says it plans to spend billions of dollars to construct new data centers. This as the neighboring Foxconn Technology Group is set to receive $6.3 million in business tax credits for hiring 1,000 fulltime workers and investments made in 2022. The group has received roughly $44 million from the state since 2020, a significantly scaled back sum from the original negotiated tax incentives after Foxconn’s promise of 13,000 jobs and an LCD screen factory never came to fruition. Still, the company says it is committed to Wisconsin. For more on all of this, we turn to the CEO and secretary of the Wisconsin Economic Development Corporation, Missy Hughes. Secretary Hughes, thanks very much for being here.

Missy Hughes:

So glad to be here.

Frederica Freyberg:

So Foxconn has now qualified for a third round of state tax credits, bringing the total amount that it has received from the state to nearly $44 million. Do you understand the long-range prospects for Foxconn after not living up to its original promise?

Missy Hughes:

Well, Foxconn has really become like one of the great companies that we have in Wisconsin: Milwaukee Took, Kwik Trip. All of these companies that are locating here and really settling in. So with over a thousand employees and almost $600 million in investment, we expect that Foxconn is here for the long term and will continue to produce and employ folks down in southeast Wisconsin in a really productive way.

Frederica Freyberg:

What lessons learned from Foxconn is WEDC employing with other companies when it comes to tax credits?

Missy Hughes:

Well, it’s really important to work with the company to understand their long-term goals, to set them up for success. So our tax credit programs are based on performance. Companies don’t receive a tax credit until they perform, create the jobs, spend the capex. And so as we work with Foxconn the same way we work with other companies, we want them to be successful, and within the parameters of what they expect for their strategy.

Frederica Freyberg:

Now, WEDC this month had to respond to a state audit in which four of the recommendations involved closer tracking of tax credits that have been awarded or need to have been revoked. Should we have confidence in WEDC in the disbursement of taxpayers’ money toward attracting businesses?

Missy Hughes:

We have really, over the years, tightened up how we verify companies and their performance around tax credits. It’s critically important that the companies provide us their payroll information and their information about capex. We continue to work with the Legislative Audit Bureau to find ways to improve and none of the findings of the LAB were around mismanagement. They were just really about how can we continue to do things better?

Frederica Freyberg:

So meanwhile, big news with Microsoft’s purchase of 1,100 acres of land that was originally designed for Foxconn, with Microsoft planning to build at least four data centers and expansion of its previously announced project investing a billion dollars into a single data center. How big of a boost is this Microsoft deal?

Missy Hughes:

Well, having a company like Microsoft, a blue chip, a true-blue chip American company decide to create such an opportunity in Wisconsin is incredibly important and really exciting. It brings in high tech, artificial intelligence. All of these things that we see in the economy of the future and so Microsoft choosing Wisconsin is really a testament to what we’ve done to create the workforce that they need, to create the infrastructure that they need, and we’re so excited to have them here.

Frederica Freyberg:

I understand that their data centers are expected to employ hundreds of tech people, but potentially thousands of construction workers. What do you know about whether or not those are expected to be Wisconsin workers?

Missy Hughes:

Well, what we’ve already seen is Microsoft has started their work on a $500 million data center. They are working with a number of Wisconsin companies, and, of course, down there on the border of Illinois, we will see some Illinois companies experiencing opportunities with Microsoft, but we know that Microsoft wants Wisconsin to succeed. Brad Smith talked about this long-term relationship that we are creating and so it’s important to Microsoft. They’ve already started working with UW-Milwaukee, with Gateway Tech, so we know that they’re committed to Wisconsin.

Frederica Freyberg:

I don’t have to tell you that Wisconsin has seen a lot of attention in the world of economic development this year, including being awarded as a regional technology hub with the ability to apply for up to $70 million in federal funding. What will this mean for the state?

Missy Hughes:

This is one of the most exciting things that’s happened this year. This is a designation by the federal government. There are 31 around the country, but what’s exciting about Wisconsin’s is it is really based on biohealth, and we see between Milwaukee and Madison real opportunities for companies to work together and create this amazing corridor around personalized medicine. Really determining how you can help someone with the exact treatment they need at the exact time that they need it, and we see opportunities around advanced manufacturing with that, research, and entrepreneurism. So all of these things will come together as part of this regional tech hub. We’ll see benefits extending up to Green Bay and Eau Claire, so it’s really an all-Wisconsin effort.

Frederica Freyberg:

All right. Secretary Missy Hughes, thanks very much.

Missy Hughes:

Thank you.

Frederica Freyberg:

For more on this and other issues facing Wisconsin, visit our website at PBSwisconsin.org and then click on the news tab. That’s our program for tonight. I’m Frederica Freyberg. Have a good weekend.

Announcer:

Funding for “Here & Now” is provided by the Focus Fund for Journalism and Friends of PBS Wisconsin.