Podcasts

Announcer:
The following program is a PBS Wisconsin original production. You’re watching “Here & Now,” 2024 election coverage.

Frederica Freyberg:
Early voting gets underway in Wisconsin’s spring election, giving the first official glimpse into how voters are feeling about the presidential candidates.
I’m Frederica Freyberg. Tonight on “Here & Now,” ballots will also have questions on amending the state constitution. We break down what you need to know. Then, it’s officially lights out for two hospitals in the Chippewa Valley. Senator Jeff Smith speaks to what happens now, and tribal nations are spending millions buying back land they’ve lost over centuries. Oneida Chairman Tehassi Hill says it’s imperative for survival. Finally, a transitional housing program could be a lifeline for young adults recently aged out of foster care. It’s “Here & Now” for March 22.

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

Frederica Freyberg:
Early voting is underway for the spring election in Wisconsin. Locally, ballots will include races like school board, county board and circuit court judges. The statewide ballot has voters weighing in on their preference for presidential candidates. It also has two questions asking voters if they want to amend the state constitution. The first question relates to the use of private funds in election administration. Shall a section of the constitution be created to provide that private donations and grants may not be applied for, accepted, expended or used in connection with the conduct of any primary election or referendum? The second question relates to election officials. Shall a section of the constitution be created to provide that only election officials designated by law may perform tasks in the conduct of primaries, elections and referendums? Both questions began as GOP legislation but were vetoed by the governor. Republicans then passed them as statewide ballot referenda, asking voters to decide directly. To help us understand these questions, we turn to UW Law School Professor Robert Yablon. Thanks very much for being here.

Robert Yablon:
Good to be with you.

Frederica Freyberg:
The first question hearkens back to the use of so-called “Zuckerbucks,” funding from the owner of Facebook that went to more than 200 cities and counties in Wisconsin to run elections during the pandemic. A “yes” vote would prohibit that. Was that private funding found to be illegal or politically biased?

Robert Yablon:
So the short answer is no. There were some legal challenges raised back in 2022 that funding and they were rejected by both the Wisconsin Elections Commission and by courts. It was found that those funds did not violate state law. There were allegations made of partisan bias with respect to how those funds were distributed, and the bulk of those funds did go to the state’s largest cities, which are democratic strongholds. People who defend those funds will respond and say, well, it’s natural that those would be the places that got the most funding. They have the most people and they had the greatest need in 2020 and over 200 municipalities throughout the state did get some of that money. There have been no studies that have indicated that any of these funds tilted the results of the election in Wisconsin.

Frederica Freyberg:
Are Wisconsin elections underfunded to the extent that private funding is needed?

Robert Yablon:
Chronic underfunding of elections has been an issue throughout the country. There are election officials, both Republican and Democrat around the country who have been asking for more funds for things like new equipment, more security measures and so on. So that’s a constant issue. 2020 was particularly distinctive because of the pandemic. And election officials in Wisconsin and elsewhere really found themselves with unique demands that they faced and they were often short on the funds and personnel that they needed to fulfill their responsibilities. And that’s where you had the private interventions in 2020. That’s not something that we’ve had a lot of in the past but private organizations saw that there really was this shortfall and folks stepped up.

Frederica Freyberg:
So question number two on the ballot is asking whether to prohibit anyone other than an election official designated by law from election administration. This has to do, it’s my understanding, with a consultant in Green Bay who advised officials on how to make their election run more smoothly, again, in 2020 during the pandemic. Apart from outside consultants, what kind of election officials not designated by law, however, help run elections?

Robert Yablon:
Yeah, I mean, that’s a great question. And there is some ambiguity about the scope of this provision and exactly what it would prohibit. There’s some question about whether it would even prohibit what some of the proponents seem to want to stop, which is the use of this sort of election consultants that generated controversy in Green Bay in 2020. But there are often people that are not election officials that do work that is in some way connected to helping facilitate an election. There are folks who are not election officials who will help the poll workers set up the polling place in the morning and questions may arise whether they can do that. Sometimes a machine might break down and questions might now arise if this passes about whether the election official can call that outside vendor and ask for troubleshooting assistance. Could they call upon an expert in ballot design to make sure that they’re fitting everything on the page in a sensible way. So those are the worries that opponents of this will bring up, that it creates uncertainty, possibly unintended consequences, and if it is interpreted broadly, could make the job of election officials more difficult.

Frederica Freyberg:
Meanwhile, would amendment number two change existing law?

Robert Yablon:
That’s also a question. Wisconsin has a statute right now that says only election officials may conduct an election. And in 2020, that provision was interpreted actually not to prevent the use of expert outside consultants. So it may be that the amendment does very little, right? A narrow interpretation of the amendment would say it’s just tracking the law that we have but because of the fact that you have arguably ambiguous terms here. What is a task? What is conduct of an election? That opens the door, at least, to some arguments that it needs to have a broader interpretation.

Frederica Freyberg:
What do legal experts think of seeking to enact constitutional amendments as opposed to passing legislative bills into statute?

Robert Yablon:
Right. Well, so there are a lot of states since 2020 that have restricted private election funding. It’s been a bit of a political issue throughout the country. For the most part, that has happened through statutes, not through constitutional change. And so some of the critics of this amendment say this just doesn’t rise to the level of a matter that needs to — that you need a constitutional amendment for. The constitution is the state’s fundamental law. It sets the framework for our government. It protects our fundamental rights. Is this really the sort of thing that we need to enshrine into the constitution rather than try to work out through the political process, ideally through something like a bipartisan compromise?

Frederica Freyberg:
Robert Yablon, thanks very much.

Robert Yablon:
Good to be with you.

Frederica Freyberg:
Next week on our program, reporter Zac Schultz looks at one more item you may see on your spring ballot, whether to raise your property tax levy to help your local school district pay for operating expenses.
Turning to health news, two hospitals of the Hospitals Sisters Health System in the Eau Claire area have officially shut their doors as of today. One whole month ahead of the already abrupt timeline originally announced in January. An additional 19 Prevea health clinics will close in April. An honor walk was held yesterday in front of Sacred Heart Hospital to commemorate those in the community losing their jobs. We turn to Democratic State Senator Jeff Smith of Brunswick for what happens now. And senator, thanks very much for being here.

Jeff Smith:
I appreciate the opportunity.

Frederica Freyberg:
So, first, the shock of the announcement, then the anxious anticipation of the hospital closures, now the reality. What’s this reality like in the community?

Jeff Smith:
It has been shocking. When that occurred, people were really taken by surprise. That’s one of the things that we’re really concerned about that a hospital system could close without warning or any — any seeming — any opportunities to try to help prevent that from happening, and it came as quite a shock.

Frederica Freyberg:
So from your understanding, how big of a job was it to transfer patients elsewhere and have EMS or ambulances diverted and all that pertains to patient care?

Jeff Smith:
Well, you know, in only two months’ time, 1,600 employees are out of a job. Over 40,000 patients have had their healthcare upended. Healthcare workers are up to 13% of Eau Claire’s entire employment so this is really a big deal. We have a Mayo system that’s also in Eau Claire, but they can’t quite cover all that and neither can Marshfield, which is also here. We’ve been in conversations with all of them to try to understand and figure out what they can do to expand some services, but we still haven’t come up with that long-term solution of where everyone’s going to be absorbed.

Frederica Freyberg:
What have you heard from your constituents about their experiences with all of this?

Jeff Smith:
It’s interesting, Frederica. We have, from the very beginning, gotten pleas from people, why can’t you stop this? There’s simply a misunderstanding that hospitals are under some sort of responsibility of the state or some sort of regulations that can prevent this from happening, and that’s the thing that I think really, really hurt people, that this couldn’t be stopped. It is a corporate decision and they have to make their decisions based on the losses that they’ve been taking.

Frederica Freyberg:
How have provisions for doctors and staff, for example, in terms of severance or job placement, been going to your understanding?

Jeff Smith:
From my understanding, one of the reasons for instance when they — I’ll start with when they first made the announcement, they made the announcement giving everybody the impression that it would be 90 days meaning from January 22 to April 21 that we would expect them to close. But they’ve already closed as of today, March 22nd, and partly because during that course of time, doctors and nurses have already been finding other positions in other areas and that’s really a big concern, that we may be losing that talent and skill outside of the area. So they’ve already been finding their places. I think that there’s been, of course, as we all know, a great calling for more doctors and nurses in — throughout this country. So it’s probably not that difficult for them to find their position, but we sure don’t want to lose them from western Wisconsin.

Frederica Freyberg:
Has there been anything specifically done at the state level to help in this situation as some of your people have been asking?

Jeff Smith:
Yeah, there certainly has been. First of all, I’ve had conversation with all of the health providers over the course of time, trying behind the scenes to figure out what we can do as a state to help them to absorb the losses, but also the obvious public thing that everyone is aware of is that there were $15 million set aside a few years ago for this hospital. They never did get into that money, so we have made the right decision, very bipartisan decision to move that money back to the general fund and let — hopefully let the Department of Health actually secure that money so that they can grant that money to help make this happen, but unfortunately, the Republican majority has been dragging their feet. We’ve had a month now since we passed that legislation in the Senate and the Assembly and signed by the governor and yet we still are waiting to see if they will release that money at all. It’s unfortunate that we’re still waiting for that.

Frederica Freyberg:
What would that $15 million go toward?

Jeff Smith:
Well, originally the Republicans had only suggested, and this is where we come into the political problem we have, they suggested it should only go towards emergency capital improvements, but the — as I said, I’ve spoken to all of our providers and they’ve been asking for money to, for instance, expand urgent care, to expand obstetrics, because there was 900 — expected 900 births going to happen at Sacred Heart Hospital this next year. So other places need to expand that service. But also, more importantly, as we have already touched on, being able to secure the staff and to hire the staff needed. The money as indicated by the Republicans would not have been able to be used by that and that’s why the governor had to veto that part of the bill and open up the possibilities for our providers to be able to use that money as they see the needs that are presented to us.

Frederica Freyberg:
All right. We leave it there. Senator Jeff Smith, thanks very much.

Jeff Smith:
Well, thank you.

Frederica Freyberg:
A lawsuit against the federal government over 500 acres of land pits the Village of Hobart near Green Bay against the Oneida Nation. Hobart is within the Oneida reservation and the tribe purchased 500 acres there, moving it to trust status and to sovereign land not subject to local taxes. The Oneida buyback is part of the nation’s push to recover its original acreage, nearly all of it lost when non-tribal people were allowed to purchase reservation land. The Oneida have now recovered nearly two-thirds of its 65,000 acres of reservation land near Green Bay. The Village of Hobart is suing over the loss of its property tax revenue. Its administrator declined to join us. Oneida Nation chairman Tehassi Hill is here. Thanks so much for being here.

Tehassi Hill:
Thank you, Frederica.

Frederica Freyberg:
So the U.S. Department of Interior is on your side in this, but how long and difficult has this dispute with the Village of Hobart been?

Tehassi Hill:
Yeah, it’s been going on for more than a decade, as we acquire our reservation land back in fee status and go through the process under the Bureau of Indian Affairs to have land put into trust. The process calls for input from local governments as well and so they go through that process and Hobart has elected several times, elected to appeal the process of putting land in trust and we believe that their arguments have no merit.

Frederica Freyberg:
How has the Oneida Nation been able to buy back its land in other places without such kind of longstanding and litigious difficulty?

Tehassi Hill:
We’ve been doing this for a long time and so we’ve been able to work with other municipalities in the area to come to agreement about the — how payment, I guess, for services rendered to tribal trust land and fee land is to come about, so if there is ambulance care, police service and other services that the municipality or the counties provide to tribal land in the agreement, we work out the balancing act of what we provide and what they provide and come to a meaningful understanding and a payment for that particular services rendered.

Frederica Freyberg:
The Oneida at one point lost nearly all of its treaty-granted lands. How was the tribe able to reverse that?

Tehassi Hill:
Well, it really stems back to the Indian Reorganization Act. So in — under that, we were able to establish a governance system that the federal government recognized more readily and then also, other federal regulations during the 1970s, and so being able to acquire land back on our reservation and be able to have the ability to put land to trust stems back to the 1970s in that reversal of federal Indian policy.

Frederica Freyberg:
Describe why it is important to preserve your sovereign lands.

Tehassi Hill:
This is all that we have left. So Indian tribes across this country have ceded millions of acres of land to the birth of the United States, and in doing so, reserved what we have left. And so many of the tribes across the country are, like us, have a relatively small land base left from our original holdings and so it is all that much more important to us, because this is our homeland. This is where we raise our families, where we do business, where we grow our food and so every inch is important to us being able to maintain that control over what is left of our lands.

Frederica Freyberg:
How much has it cost to have to buy back your lands?

Tehassi Hill:
Oh, easily hundreds of millions of dollars. Easily. Twenty years ago, you might have been able to buy an acre of land for $5,000. And with the land prices now in this area, anywhere from $15,000 up to $40,000 an acre. So as time goes on, obviously the price continues to rise.

Frederica Freyberg:
And yet, it’s a cost that you must make.

Tehassi Hill:
That is — that is correct. Our people have really dedicated resources annually in our tribal budget to face this land demand need for our community. Not only does it provide economic development, but it provides lands that are suitable for housing as well and educational programs and services, all this program and services that we provide, a lot of it depends on the land.

Frederica Freyberg:
What is your message to potentially non-tribal people who might think it’s unfair to move your reacquired land to federal trust status and not have it be subject to local taxes?

Tehassi Hill:
Well, I guess I would look at it as kind of the opposite. That this reservation was established by treaty with the United States and treaties are supreme law of the land. And so essentially, our reservation here was on loan or rented to non-tribal people for decades now and so they were able to use its resources, whether they’re natural resources or to build a home for their families and the such, to use this land for a period of time, and nobody’s forcing them to sell their land to us as properties become available and someone is — has reached the end of their life that they want to spend in this particular neck of the woods, then they decide to sell their land. And as it becomes available, Oneida chooses to purchase it most of the time. And so that’s one thing. We’re not forcing anyone out. We’re just acquiring land as it becomes available again.

Frederica Freyberg:
All right. We need to leave it there. Chairman Hill, thanks very much for your time on this.

Tehassi Hill:
You’re welcome.

Frederica Freyberg:
In other news, a new transitional living space on Madison’s north side would house young adults that have aged out of foster care, a population at high risk for homelessness. The program is part of the Urban Triage Unhoused Youth Initiative and is the first of its kind in Wisconsin. CEO of Urban Triage Brandi Grayson joins us now. Thanks very much for being here.

Brandi Grayson:
You’re so welcome. Thank you for inviting me. It’s a long time seeing you. Well, being on your show, that is.

Frederica Freyberg:
So this would be for 18 to 21-year-olds. What are the needs of these young adults who have aged out of the foster system?

Brandi Grayson:
Well, you know, when we have youth aging out of systems, they’re usually without parents, families, or supports. So the needs are a lot. A lot of them still need support with developing the readiness skills to be on their own, whether it’s financial planning, learning how to negotiate a lease, what it means to be a tenant, tenant rights, how to budget, how to enroll in school, how to navigate systems, and really how to deal with the trauma of being in a system, feeling abandoned, and not having supports and services. I would say that’s the biggest one, is actually the trauma in supporting youth with just learning the tools and the skills to navigate the emotional impact of being alone in the world.

Frederica Freyberg:
So given that this would be the first of its kind in Wisconsin for this kind of living space, are those needs that you just described currently being met in the state?

Brandi Grayson:
I don’t know about the state. I haven’t done much research, but I would say no. There are programs that have resources for folks who are aging out of foster care, but not enough. So it’s kind of like let us give you a tote full of dishes and essentials, but there’s no peer support or navigation support, there’s no rental assistance, there’s no case management, there’s no mental health services attached to that. Youth, like everyone else in our community, really are forced to piece together supports by going to different organizations, which then leads to trauma, which then leads to hopelessness, which leads to homelessness and leads to all kind of desperate acts on the side of youth.

Frederica Freyberg:
So we were talking about that, that it — high risk for homelessness. What are the outcomes for young adults, if they’re not having these kinds of needs met as you describe? How do they go from, you know, being in a foster care situation to homelessness?

Brandi Grayson:
I mean, you — I mean, most 18-year-olds today aren’t ready to be on their own, right? I have young adults, children, and they lived with me until they were 20-something or they went off to college and they still required support, financial, emotional and mental support. So we have young folks aging out with none of that, right? So I guess — I don’t know how to answer that, really, because it’s so — it’s so traumatic for them. So it’s like so many layers, and if you don’t have your basic needs being met, you automatically become subject to sex trafficking, drug use, gambling, having sex with people just to have a home or, you know, putting yourself in situations that are dangerous because you’re just trying to survive. Desperate times require desperate measures, and that’s really what youth respond to, right? Criminal activities and such that they’re forced to do because they have no resources, they have no home, they have no food, those kind of things.

Frederica Freyberg:
So this is described, again, as a transitional living space. What can people who come to live there expect in terms of what they’ll see there?

Brandi Grayson:
Yeah. A lot of support, right? So we’ll have overnight support. That person will act as a mentor to the youth that’s in the home. We will have peer support specialists come in during the day. We’ll have navigation support specialists, housing folks come this during the day, so it will be fully staffed during the day, and then we’ll do what we call our supporting healthy families work group, which is the trauma recovery. Supporting folks in developing the personal leadership and personal development skills to navigate systems, helping them build the analysis of systems and really help them detach from the feelings of inferiority or feeling like they’re to blame for their situation as a young person and then we’ll connect them to job placement readiness programs and we’ll place them in permanent housing with rental assistance once they’re ready to move on on their own. So they can expect holistic support.

Frederica Freyberg:
How many people do you expect to move in and when does it open?

Brandi Grayson:
Well, the house is like 12 bedrooms. We found that there’s some issues on the third floor that has to be mitigated so we’re limited now to bedrooms, I think we’re going to start with five youth. And hopefully a third floor will be able to open up soon. Our contract is effective with Dane County April 1st, so that’s when we actually begin to do the work. We’ll start the first 30 days with designing the house, renovating it. And then the next 30 days, recruiting for staff and then hopefully by the third or fourth month, 120 days into the contract, we can start enrolling youth into the program.

Frederica Freyberg:
That is great news. Brandi Grayson, thanks very much and thanks for your work.

Brandi Grayson:
You’re so welcome. 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.