Here & Now

>> THE FOLLOWING PROGRAM IS PART OF OUR 2018 WISCONSIN VOTE ELECTION COVERAGE. >> IT'S THE 2018 STATE ATTORNEY GENERAL CANDIDATE DEBATE. >> BROUGHT TO YOU LIVE FROM THE STUDIOS OF WISCONSIN PUBLIC TELEVISION. WELCOME. I'M SHAWN JOHNSON OF WISCONSIN PUBLIC RADIO. >> I'M FREDERICA FREYBERG OF WISCONSIN PUBLIC TELEVISION. WE'RE GOING TO QUIEZ QUIZ THE FRONT RUNNING CANDIDATES. >> WE'RE JOINED BY STUDENTS FROM MADISON MEMORIAL HIGH SCHOOL AND UW LAW SCHOOL STUDENTS WHO BROUGHT QUESTIONS OF THEIR OWN. >> THE ATTORNEY GENERAL IS THE LEAD ATTORNEY FOR THE STATE. THE JUSTICE DEPARTMENT AND ITS 672 EMPLOYEES INCLUDES PROSECUTORS IN THE AREAS OF CRIMINAL, CIVIL, ENVIRONMENTAL AND CONSUMER PROTECTION. IT ALSO INCLUDES CRIMINAL INVESTIGATION UNITS AND THE CRIME LAB. >> THERE RB WILL BE ONE-MINUTE OPENING AND CLOSING STATEMENTS. CANDIDATES WILL HAVE # 0 90 SECONDS FOR RESPONSES. >> CANDIDATES HAVE COME PREPARED TO ASK A QUESTION OF THEIR OPPONENT. >> A FLIP OF THE COIN DETERMINES OPENING STATEMENTS. MR. KAUL WILL GIVE THE FIRST ONE-MINUTE OPEN REMARK. LET'S WELCOME THE CANDIDATES.

APPLAUSE

>> INCUMBENT BRAD SCHIMEL WAS ELECTED AS WISCONSIN ATTORNEY GENERAL IN 2014. PRIOR TO THAT HE SERVED AS THE WAUKESHA DISTRICT ATTORNEY, FIRST ELECTED TO THAT POSITION IN 2006. >> JOSH KAUL IS A LAWYER IN PRIVATE PRACTICE IN MADISON. PRIOR TO THAT, HE WAS AN ASSISTANT SOWVMENT U.S. ATTORNEY IN BALTIMORE. MY HUSBAND WORKED AS A PROSECUTOR FOR THE WISCONSIN DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE FOR 16 YEARS, RETIRING LAST YEAR. >> A TOSS OF THE COIN HAS DETERMINED ORDER OF OPENING AND CLOSING STATEMENTS. MR. KAUL WILL START US OPEN WITH HIS OPENING REMARKS. >> FIRST OF ALL, THANK FOR HOSTING TONIGHT'S DEBATE. I'M JOSH KAUL. I GREW UP IN OSHKOSH AND FON FOND DU LAC IN A FAMILY DEEPLY INVOLVED IN PUBLIC SERVICE. MY MOM WAS A PROSECUTOR. MY STEPDAD WAS A PROSECUTOR. I SPENT PART OF MY CAREER IN PUBLIC SERVICE AS WELL. I WAS A FEDERAL PROSECUTOR IN ONE OF THE MOST VIOLENT CITIES IN THE COUNTRY. I'M ALSO A DAD. I'M A HUSBAND. AND I WANT MY FAMILY AND FAMILIES ACROSS THE STATE TO LIVE IN A WISCONSIN THAT IS SAFER AND STRONGER THAN WE'RE ON TRACK FOR RIGHT NOW. THERE'S A LOT THAT AN EFFECTIVE ATTORNEY GENERAL CAN DO TO HELP US MOVE IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION ON A NUMBER OF ISSUES. UNFORTUNATELY, WE HAVEN'T HAD EFFECTIVE LEADERSHIP IN OUR AG'S OFFICE. WE'VE SEEN FAILURES ON ISSUES RELATED TO PUBLIC SAFETY, WASTE OF TAXPAYER DOLLARS AND FAR TOO OFTEN THE INTEREST OF SPECIAL INTERESTS PUT AHEAD OF THE INTERESTS OF WISCONSINITES. I THINK WE NEED AN ATTORNEY GENERAL WHO'S GOING TO FIGHT TO PROTECT WISCONSIN FAMILIES AND STAND UP FOR HARD-WORKING WISCONSINITES. >> MR. KAUL, THANK YOU. MR. SCHIMEL, YOU NOW HAVE ONE MINUTE. >> THANK YOU TO WISCONSIN PUBLIC TELEVISION, WISCONSIN PUBLIC RADIO FOR HOSTING THIS. I'M BRAD SCHIMEL. I'VE LIVED MY WHOLE LIFE HERE IN THE STATE OF WISCONSIN. SO HAS MY WIFE OF 22 YEARS. I WENT TO COLLEGE HERE. I WENT TO LAW SCHOOL HERE. IN 1989, I LANDED MY DREAM JOB AS A PROSECUTOR WORKING FOR THE PEOPLE OF WISCONSIN. I'M NOW IN MY 29TH YEAR OF THAT WORK. AS THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY OF WAUKESHA COUNTY, I LED BY INNOVATION AND BY COLLABORATION. THAT'S WHY WHEN I RAN FOR ATTORNEY GENERAL FOUR YEARS AGO, I HAD THE SUPPORT OF 90 ELECTED SHERIFFS AND DISTRICT ATTORNEYS ACROSS WISCONSIN, INCLUDING MANY WHO RAN AS DEMOCRATS. AT THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, I BROUGHT MY EXPERIENCE AS A PROSECUTOR TO THE DOJ AND WE'VE CONTINUED TO INNOVATE AND LEAD BY COLLABORATION. AND BECAUSE OF THAT, I NOW THIS TIME HAVE 112 ELECTED DISTRICT ATTORNEYS AND SHERIFFS WHO ARE PUBLICLY ENDORSE ME AGAIN, INCLUDING MANY DEMOCRATS. THEY'VE SEEN THE RESULTS OF MY WORK AT THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE. THEY KNOW MY EXPERIENCE. THEY KNOW THERE'S MUCH MORE WORK TO BE DONE. I'M PROUD TO BE LAW ENFORCEMENT'S CHOICE TO CONTINUE TO MAKE WISCONSIN SAFER AND STRONGER AS YOUR ATTORNEY GENERAL. >> THANK YOU BOTH FOR YOUR OPENING STATEMENTS. WE MOVE NOW INTO THE PART OF THE DEBATE WHERE WE ASK QUESTIONS. SO WE WILL BEGIN WITH THAT. WHEN WE ASKED PEOPLE WHAT THEY THOUGHT WAS IMPORTANT FOR THE WISCONSIN ATTORNEY GENERAL, HERE'S WHAT ONE MADISON MAN SAID. >> I WOULD SAY TO TRY TO REDUCE THE BACKLOG IN RAPE KITS AND OTHER TESTING. I THINK THAT'S REALLY IMPORTANT. IF YOU CAN'T PROSECUTE GOOD CASES THAT ARE THERE BECAUSE YOU CAN'T ALLOCATE THE RESOURCES TO HELP BRING EVIDENCE FORTH, I THINK THAT'S CRAZY. THAT'S THEIR REAL JOB. IF YOU CAN'T PROSECUTE CASES BECAUSE YOU DON'T HAVE THE RESOURCES, YOU BETTER GET THEM. >> THAT WAS MATTHEW DOBBINS OF MADISON. HE'S REFERRING TO 6,000 UNTESTED RAPE KITS STATEWIDE FOUND IN 2014. IN 2017 THE OFFICE HIRED OUTSIDE LABS TO TEST THEM AND THE DEPARTMENT NOW SAYS THAT BACKLOG HAS BEEN ERASED. FIRST TO YOU, BRAD SCHIMEL. HOW DID THIS HAPPEN AND WHAT DO YOU SAY TO THE VICTIMS WHO WERE WAITING? >> OVER THE COURSE OF 25 YEARS, LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCIES AND HOSPITAL STOREROOMS WERE ACCUMULATING KITS THEY DIDN'T SUBMIT FOR TESTING. I'M PROUD OF OUR WORK THE A THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE BECAUSE WE GOT IT DONE. A 12 YEAR PROBLEM HAS BEEN SOLVED. EVERY KIT IS TESTED. SOME STATES LIKE WASHINGTON JUST COMPLETED THE COUNTING OF THEIR KITS. IN WISCONSIN THIS MISSION IS ACCOMPLISHED. NOW, IN MY TIME IN THE DA'S OFFICE, THE LARGEST PART OF MY CAREER I STARTED ALMOST 20 YEARS AGO IN SENSITIVE CRIMES. I KNEW THE VALUE OF GETTING THESE KITS TESTED BECAUSE I HANDLED CASES WHERE WE USED THEM TO SOLVE CASES. IN FACT, THERE'S ONE CASE WHERE WE SOUGHT A SERIAL INTERSTATE RAPIST THROUGH THE SEXUAL ASSAULT KIT TEST. I HELPED DEVELOP THE SEXUAL ASSAULT NURSE EXAMINER PROGRAM THAT IS A BIG SUCCESS THERE STILL. AT THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE I'VE CONTINUED TO WORK ON THAT ISSUE WHERE WE'VE NOW MADE HIRING A SANE COORDINATOR FOR THE STATE. WE NOW HAVE THE MOST COMPREHENSIVE SEXUAL ASSAULT NURSE EXAMINER PROGRAM IN THE MIDWEST RIGHT HERE IN WISCONSIN. ON TOP OF ALL THE WORK WE'VE DONE TO SOLVE THE TESTING PROBLEM, WE'VE ALSO PUT IN PLAN A PROCEDURE THAT'S GOING TO MAKE SURE THIS NEVER HAPPENS AGAIN. IN FACT, PRESIDENT PRESIDENT OBAMA'S DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE PRAISED THE WORK WE ARE DOING AND OUR PLAN, HAS RECOMMENDED IT TO OTHER STATES, THAT THEY FOLLOW THE SAME PLAN, BECAUSE WE'RE GOING TO MAKE SURE THIS NEVER HAPPENS IN WISCONSIN AGAIN. >> JOSH KAUL TO YOU. WHAT IS YOUR RESPONSE ON THE RAPE KITS? >> WELL, OUR CURRENT ATTORNEY GENERAL HAS MISHANDLED THIS BACKLOG. IN HIS FIRST YEAR WISCONSIN RECEIVED MILLIONS OF DOLLARS TO ADDRESS THAT BACKLOG. AFTER HE SERVED FOR TWO YEARS AS ATTORNEY GENERAL, ONLY NINE OF THE KITS IN THE BACKLOG HAD BEEN TESTED. HE CLAIMED THERE WAS NO BACKLOG WHICH WAS FALSE. HE CLAIMED HUN HUNDREDS OF KITS HAD BEEN TESTED WHEN THE NUMBER WAS ACTUALLY NINE. WHILE PROGRESS HAS FINALLY BEEN MADE, THE RESULT OF THAT DAY DELAY IS THERE'S BEEN A DELAY IN JUSTICE AND THAT DANGEROUS CRIMINALS HAVE REMAINED ON THE STREETS. MR. SCHIMEL SAID MISSION ACCOMPLISHED. THE GOAL HERE IS NOT SIMPLY TO TEST THESE KITS. IT'S TO GET JUSTICE FOR SURVIVORS OF SEXUAL ASSAULT. AND THERE IS A LOT OF WORK LEFT TO BE DONE TO GET JUSTICE. AS ATTORNEY GENERAL I'M GOING TO MAKE THAT A PRIORITY. >> I WANT TO ASK YOU BOTH ABOUT SOMETHING THAT YOU'VE BEEN TALKING ABOUT IN THE CAMPAIGN, MR. KAUL, INCLUDING A DIGITAL AD RECENTLY. YOU SAID THAT ATTORNEY GENERAL SCHIMEL, YOU'VE HIGHLIGHTED THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE SPENDING ROUGHLY $10,000 ON GOLD-PLATED COMMEMORATIVE COINS, SAYING THAT THAT WAS A MISPLACED CASE OF PRIORITIES AND THAT THAT WAS SOMEHOW I GUESS YOU'RE TYING IT TO THE LACK OF FUNDING THAT HAS GONE TO THE RAPE KIT TESTING. I WANT TO GIVE YOU BOTH A CHANCE TO CHIME IN ON THIS. FIRST TO YOU ATTORNEY GENERAL SCHIMEL. WHY WAS THAT A GOOD USE OF FUNDS? >> I'VE BEEN WORKING WITH LAW ENFORCEMENT IN WISCONSIN FOR 29 YEARS. I'VE HAD A BEHIND-THE-SCENES TOUR WITH THEM DURING THAT TIME. ILL KNOWI KNOW THE GREAT WORK THEY DO. AND EVERY LAW ENFORCEMENT OUT THERE EARNS THOSE CHALLENGE COINS OVER TIME. WE DON'T HAVE THE ABILITY TO GIVE THEM MORE MONEY, TO DO OTHER THINGS TO PRAISE THEM. THEY FACE DIFFICULT CHALLENGES. THEY APPRECIATE THESE COINS. I'LL GIVE YOU SOME EXAMPLES OF SOME OF THEM I'VE GIVEN TO OFFICERS. A WEST ALLIS POLICE OFFICER WHO THROUGH SHEER WILL AND ADRENALINE LIFTED A CAR OFF OF A HUMAN BEING THAT WAS PINNED UNDERNEATH IT. A WOOD COUNTY SHERIFF'S DEPUTY WHO JUMPED INTO A FREEZING COLD RIVER TO RESCUE SOMEONE WHO ATTEMPTED TO COMMIT SUICIDE. A WAUKESHA POLICE OFFICER WHO RESPONDED TO A DISORDERLY SUBJECT AT A RETAIL STORE AND RECOGNIZED THAT THIS WAS A WOMAN WHO WAS ON THE AUTISM SCALE. AND INSTEAD OF USING HANDCUFFS, HE SETTLED HER DOWN, GOT THE PROBLEM RESOLVED, EVEN GOT OUT HIS OWN WALLET AND BOUGHT THE ITEM THAT HER CAREGIVER WASN'T ABLE TO BUY FOR HER THAT DAY. THOSE PEOPLE ALL EARNED THESE CHALLENGE COINS. JUST YESTERDAY I WAS WITH OUR WISCONSIN STATE PATROL FOR THEIR ANNUAL AWARDS CEREMONY. I GOT TO BE A SPEAKER AT THAT. AND SOME CHALLENGE COIN EARNERS THERE INCLUDED A STATE TROOPER AND A PORTAGE CITY OFFICER WHO JUMPED INTO A RIVER, RISKING THEIR OWN LIFE TO RESCUE SOMEONE WHO WAS CAUGHT IN THE RUSHING WATERS. LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS AND OUR MILITARY DON'T CONSIDER THESE FAKE COINS. THESE ARE A BIG DEAL TO THEM AND IT'S IMPORTANT THAT WE SUPPORT THEM IN THESE DIFFICULT TIMES. >> JOSH KAUL, WHY IS THIS SOMETHING THAT YOU HAVE BEEN HIGHLIGHTING AS YOU CAMPAIGN? >> WELL, THERE'S NO QUESTION, FIRST OF ALL, THAT OUR LAW ENFORCEMENT DO SOME AMAZING WORK. AS I MENTIONED IN THE OPENING, I'M PROUD THAT MY STEPDAD BILL WAS A POLICE OFFICER IN NEENAH. BUT OUR ATTORNEY GENERAL HAS SPENT ABOUT $83,000 OF TAXPAYER MONEY ON PROMOTIONAL MATERIALS. THAT INCLUDES THESE FAKE COLD -- GOLD-PLATED COINS WITH HIS NAME ON THEM. WHILE THAT MAY BE APPROPRIATE TO USE YOUR CAMPAIGN FUNDS ON, HE USED TAXPAYER DOLLARS AND PUT HIS NAMES ON THE COIN AS WELL AS HIS MOTTO. MONEY HAS ALSO BEEN SPENT AN EMOTIONAL STRESS BALLS, CUSTOM-MADE FORTUNE COOKIES, WHICH YOIN WAS A THING THAT EXISTED UNTIL THIS CAMPAIGN. IN THE MEANTIME WHILE THAT MONEY WAS SPENT, ONLY NINE OF THE KITS IN OUR BACKLOG OF UNTESTED RAPE KITS WERE TESTED IN MR. SCHIMEL'S FIRST TWO YEARS IN OFFICE. TO ME, THAT IS THE DEFINITION OF MISPLACED PRIORITIES. >> THE TWO THINGS ARE COMPLETELY UNRELATED. WE GOT THE LARGEST GRANTS IN AMERICA FOR THE SEXUAL ASSAULT KIT TESTING BECAUSE OF THE PLAN WE PUT TOGETHER THAT THE U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE BELIEVED WAS THE BEST THERE WAS. THE OTHER PROMOTIONAL MATERIALS, FRANKLY, WHEN I GOT TO DOJ AND THOSE THINGS WERE BEING PURCHASED, I DON'T MONITOR EVERY PURCHASE THAT HAPPENED. WE DISCOVERED THIS WAS HAPPENING. WE CLAMPED DOWN ON IT AND REDUCED THE THRESHOLD AND IT'S NOT HAPPENING ANYMORE. BUT THE CHALLENGE COINS, THAT'S A SEPARATE ISSUE FROM THE OTHER PROMOTIONAL ITEMS. >> WE'LL MOVE ALONG TO OUR NEXT QUESTION. >> YOU'RE BOTH ON OPPOSITE SIDES OF A LAWSUIT INVOLVING VOTING LAWS IN WISCONSIN. JOSH KAUL, YOU LITERALLY ARGUED THIS CASE IN COURT AGAINST ATTORNEYS FROM THE WISCONSIN DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE. THIS CASE REINSTATED SEVERAL WEEKS OF EARLY VOTING OR IN-PERSON ABSENTEE VOTING IN WISCONSIN. IT'S STILL ON APPEAL. WE'D LIKE FOR BOTH OF YOU TO MAKE YOUR CASES HERE. WHY DID YOU BRING THIS LAWSUIT, JOSH KAUL. AND BRAD SCHIMEL, WHY IS IT A CASE YOU'RE FIGHTING? FIRST TO YOU, JOSH KAUL. >> THERE HAVE BEEN SEVERAL RESTRICTIONS ON VOTING THAT HAVE BEEN ENACTED IN WISCONSIN. THERE WERE OVER A DOZEN ENACTED IN SCOTT WALKER'S FIRST YEAR IN OFFICE. IT LIMITED EARLY VOTING TO ONE LOCATION PER MUNICIPALITY NO MATTER HOW BIG THE MAW NIS MUNICIPALITY WAS. THAT PLAYED OUT DIFFERENT IN MILWAUKEE COMPARED TO FOND DU LAC. WE WENT TO COURT. WE HAD A TRIAL IN FRONT OF A FEDERAL JUDGE THAT LASTED NEARLY TWO WEEKS. MY TEAM WENT UP AGAINST A TEAM FROM THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE LED BY MR. SCHIMEL. AND I'M PROUD THAT WE WON A SIGNIFICANT VICTORY IN THAT CASE. SEVERAL RESTRICTIONS ON VOTING WERE STRUCK DOWN AS A RESULT. THAT INCLUDED SOME RESTRICTIONS ON VOTER REGISTRATION THAT WERE STRUCK DOWN. AND IT ALSO INCLUDED RESTRICTIONS ON EARLY VOTING THAT WERE STRUCK DOWN. SARMTAS A RESULT OF THAT CASE, EARLY VOTING HAS BEGUN IN PARTS OF WISCONSIN RIGHT NOW. I'M GLAD THAT PEOPLE ARE ABLE TO VOTE EARLY RIGHT NOW AND I'M PROUD OF THAT CASE. >> BRAD SCHIMEL, WHY IS THIS A CASE THAT YOU'RE FIGHTING? >> BECAUSE IT'S MY JOB. AS ATTORNEY GENERAL I DON'T PICK AND CHOOSE WHICH LAW I DEFEND OR NOT. MY OPPONENT TALKS ABOUT HE LIKES THIS LAW, HE WOULD DEFEND THIS, THIS OTHER LAW HE DOESN'T LIKE AND HE'S MORE RELUCTANT TO DEFEND THAT. THAT'S NOT WHAT YOU DO. I'VE DEFENDED LAWS I DON'T LIKE. WE TOOK ONE LAW I'M NOT A FAN OF ALL THE WAY TO THE UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT AND WON. THE LEGISLATURE HAS SINCE CHANGED THAT LAW AND FIXED A PROBLEM WITH WISCONSIN LAW. BUT THAT'S NOT MY JOB TO DECIDE THAT. THE LEGISLATURE PASSES THE LAW. AS THE ATTORNEY GENERAL, IF WE'RE GOING TO HAVE A STABLE AND PREDICTABLE LEGAL AND REGULATORY ENVIRONMENT IN OUR STATE, WE HAVE TO HAVE AN ATTORNEY GENERAL WHO WON'T BE AN ACTIVIST, WHO WON'T PICK AND CHOOSE WHICH LAWS TO DEFEND. NOW, WE HAVE TWO ROLES. ONE IS WE ADVISE OUR CLIENT AND THAT'S THE STATE OF WISCONSIN. IT COULD BE THE GOVERNOR. IT COULD BE THE LEGISLATURE OR REGULATORY AGENCIES. WE ADVISE THEM AND THEN WE ALSO DEFEND THEM IN COURT. WE ALSO PROVIDED ADVICE TO THE GOVERNOR'S OFFICE AS THEY PUT ADMINISTRATIVE RULES IN PLACE TO MAKE SURE VOTER I.D. WAS HANDLED IN A WAY THAT WAS CONSTITUTIONAL. AND THEY PUT IN PLACE METHODS THAT MADE THIS VERY SIMILAR TO WHAT INDIANA DID AND THAT'S ALREADY BEEN APPROVED BY THE UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT. >> I WANTED TO FOLLOW UP ON THAT ELEMENT OF LAWSUIT REAL QUICK, TOO. THE VOTER I.D. ELEMENT OF THIS, THAT LAWSUIT, SOUGHT TO STRIKE THAT DOWN. A COURT OF OF APPEALS PUT THAT PART OF THE RULING ON HOLD. WHY SHOULDN'T WISCONSIN VOTERS HAVE TO SHOW A PHOTO I.D. WHEN THEY VOTE? AGAIN FIRST TO YOU, JOSH KAUL. >> THERE ARE A COUPLE PROBLEMS WITH THIS LAW. WE WERE ABLE TO SHOW IN THAT CASE THAT APPROXIMATELY 100 PEOPLE HAD GONE THROUGH THE PROCESS OF TRYING TO GET A FREE I.D. AND WERE NOT ABLE TO GET AN I.D. SO IN EARLY 2016 SOME PEOPLE WERE DISENFRANCHISED. MR. SCHIMEL ARGUED THAT ISSUE SHOULD HAVE BEEN PUSHED DOWN THE ROAD, BUT FORTUNATELY IT MOVED FAST AND THERE'S NOW A PROCESS IN PLACE THAT HELPS PEOPLE VOTE. WE ALSO WERE ABLE TO SHOW THAT AT THE FINAL REPUBLICAN CAUCUS MEETING BEFORE VOTER I.D. WAS ENACTED THERE WERE STATEMENTS INDICATING THAT THE LAW WAS BEING ENACTED BECAUSE OF ITS EFFECT ON COLLEGE CAMPUSES AND IN COMMUNITIES IN MILWAUKEE. >> ALL RIGHT. BRAD SCHIMEL, SAME QUESTION. WHEN IT COMES TO VOTER I.D., WHY IS THIS SOMETHING THAT YOU'RE DEFENDING? >> SOME OF THE ADVICE WE PROVIDED TO OUR CLIENT MADE SURE THAT WHEN PEOPLE WENT TO DEPARTMENT OF MOTOR VEHICLES, IF WE COULDN'T PROVE THEY WERE NOT ENTITLED TO AN I.D. TO VOTE, THEY GOT THE I.D. SO THERE'S A TIME LIMIT THAT THE DEPARTMENT OF MOTOR VEHICLES HAS TO PROVE YOU SHOULDN'T GET THE I.D. IF THEY CAN'T DO IT, YOU GET AN I.D. THAT PERMITS YOU TO VOTE. THAT'S GOOD FOR WISCONSIN. IT'S GOOD FOR VOTER INTEGRITY. AND IT MAKES SURE THAT NO ONE LOSES THEIR PRECIOUS RIGHT TO VOTE. >> WE MOVE ON TO OUR NEXT QUESTION. THE U.S. SUPREME COURT, AS YOU KNOW, HAS A NEW ASSOCIATE JUSTICE ON THE BENCH. DESCRIBE HOW THE CONTENTIOUS PROCESS TO CONFIRM BRETT KAVANAUGH THAT SAW ACCUSATIONS AND DENIALS AFFECT VICTIM RIGHTS IN YOUR MIND. HOW DID IT AFFECT VICTIMS? FIRST TO YOU, BRAD SCHIMEL? >> MY OPPONENT'S NEVER WORKED WITH A SEXUAL ASSAULT SURVIVOR. I WORKED WITH HUNDREDS OF THEM. I VOLUNTEERED TO JOIN THE SENSITIVE CRIMES UNIT, A ROLE VERY FEW PROSECUTORS WILL TAKE ON, BECAUSE IT'S CHALLENGING, EMOTIONALLY AND LEGALLY. I DID THAT WORK FOR OVER A DECADE. AND BEYOND THAT, ONCE I HAD STARTED DOING THAT WORK FOR A FEW YEARS, I BEGAN TO BE RECOGNIZED AS AN EXPERT. AND I BECAME INVOLVED IN PROVIDING TRAINING ON TRAUMA-INFORMED INVESTIGATIONS TO THOUSANDS OF LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS, PROSECUTORS AND VICTIM ADVOCATES AROUND THE STATE OF WISCONSIN. AND WE BEGAN MAKING OUR CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM A MORE WELCOMING PLACE FOR SURVIVORS OF SEXUAL ASSAULT. I'M PROUD OF THAT WORK. AND I CONTINUE AT THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE TO DO THAT, WITH PLACING FIVE VIOLENCE AGAINST WOMEN PROSECUTORS AROUND THE STATE OF WISCONSIN AS RESOURCE PROSECUTORS TO THE DAs AND LAW ENFORCEMENT BY AMPING UP THE SANE NURSE PROGRAM I TALKED ABOUT, THE SEXUAL ASSAULT NURSE EXAMINER PROGRAM THAT'S NOW MAKING IT EASIER FOR SEXUAL ASSAULT VICTIMS TO COME FORWARD. WE'RE DOING ALL THOSE THINGS. IF THE CRITICISMS THAT SOME HAVE LEVEED ABOUT MY WORK AT THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE WERE TRUE, I WOULDN'T HAVE THE VAST MAJORITY, 90% OF THE ELECTED SHERIFFS IN WISCONSIN, ENDORSING ME. THEY'RE ENDORSING ME BECAUSE THEY KNOW I'VE GOT THE EXPERIENCE. THEY'VE SEEN THE RESULTS. AND THAT'S WHY I'M LAW ENFORCEMENT'S CHOICE. >> THE QUESTION TO YOU, JOSH KAUL. HOW DID THAT PROCESS OF CONFIRMATION FOR BRETT KAVANAUGH AFFECT VICTIMS, IN YOUR MIND? >> EL WITH, I THINK WELL, I THINK THE PROCESS WAS NOT A GOOD ONE. I THINK DR. FORD IS BRAVE FOR COMING FORWARD. I HAVE A DIFFERENT VIEW ON THIS PROCESS FROM MR. SCHIMEL. HE SUGGESTED HE DIDN'T KNOW WHETHER SOMETHING THAT HAPPENED 36 YEARS AGO SHOULD PREVENT SOMEBODY FROM EVER SERVING ON THE SUPREME COURT. I THINK THAT OUR CHIEF LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICER NEEDS TO KNOW THAT IF A SEXUAL ASSAULT HAPPENED 36 YEARS AGO, THE PERSON INVOLVED IS DISQUALIFIED FROM SERVING ON THE UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT. HE ALSO SUGGESTED THAT THIS PROCESS WOULD PREVENT SURVIVORS FROM COMING FORWARD. BUT ACTUALLY THE OPPOSITE HAS HAPPENED. THE NUMBER OF PEOPLE COMING FORWARD HAS INCREASED. I THINK WE NEED AN AG WHO'S GOING TO MAKE CLEAR THAT HE IS ON THE SIDE OF SURVIVORS WHO ARE COMING FORWARD. UNFORTUNATELY FOR MR. SCHIMEL, WE'VE SEEN A PATTERN OF THIS SORT OF THING. I TOUCHED ON BEHALF THE BACKLOG OF UNTESTED RAPE KITS. WHERE ONLY NINE KITS WERE TESTED IN HIS FIRST YEAR IN OFFICE. BUT ALSO WHEN MR. SCHIMEL WAS A PROSECUTOR IN WAUKESHA COUNTY, IN ONE CASE I BELIEVE SOMEBODY CONVICTED OF CHILD IMPORTANT PORNOGRAPHY GOT A TWO-YEAR SENTENCE. IN ANOTHER CASE HE TALKED IN SENTENCING ABOUT THE BAD JUDGMENT OF A SURVIVOR. I THINK WE NEED SOMEBODY WHO'S GOING TO SPEAK OUT ON BEHALF OF SURVIVORS. >> BRAD SCHIMEL, WOULD YOU LIKE A REBUTTAL ON THAT? >> I WOULD. AND WHEN I TALKED ABOUT THE BAD JUDGMENT OF THE SURVIVOR, I WAS EXPLAINING TO THE JUDGE WHY THE SURVIVOR WAS RELUCTANT TO GO FORWARD, WHY SHE DIDN'T WANT TO HAVE A TRIAL. SHE FELT THAT SHE ENGAGED IN BAD JUDGMENT. I WAS SUPPORTIVE OF HER. I'VE BEEN THE CHAMPION FOR HUN DREZHUNDREDS AND HUNDREDS OF SEXUAL ASSAULT SURVIVORS WHO WERE COURAGEOUS ENOUGH TO COME FORWARD. THE DECISION ABOUT WHAT SHOULD HAPPEN WITH THE CONFIRMATION OF JUSTICE KAVANAUGH WAS UP TO THE UNITED STATES SENATE, NOT ME, AND I'M NOT GOING TO GET INVOLVED IN SUBSTITUTING MY JUDGMENT ON THINGS THAT I DON'T KNOW. I DIDN'T READ ALL THE REPORTS THEY HAD. I DON'T KNOW ALL THE THINGS THEY KNOW. >> JOSH KAUL, 30 SECONDS. >> WELL, I THINK THAT THIS IS A NOMINATION THAT I WAS OPPOSED TO, FOR A FEW REASONS, BUT THE FUNDAMENTAL ONE IS IS IS THAT I THINK THAT JUSTICE KAVANAUGH IS GOING TO SHIFT THE SUPREME COURT DECIDEDLY TO THE RIGHT AND I THINK THE RESULT OF THAT IS GOING TO BE THAT RIGHTS AND PROTECTIONS FOR WISCONSINITES ARE GOING TO BE ROLLED BACK. THAT'S WHY I OPPOSED THAT NOMINATION. >> NEXT QUESTION. THERE'S A CHANCE THAT THE U.S. SUPREME COURT COULD OVERTURN ROE V. WADE, WHICH COULD REINSTATE STATE LAWS LIKE ONE IN WISCONSIN BANNING ABORTION. IF THAT HAPPENS, SHOULD THE LEGISLATURE REPEAL THE LAW, OR SHOULD IT BE DEFENDED? JOSH KAUL, FIRST TO YOU. >> SO I THINK WHAT WE NEED TO DO IF THAT HAPPENS IS DO AN ANALYSIS TO LOOK AT WHETHER THE LAW IS LEGALLY DEFENSIBLE. MY OPPONENT EARLIER SAID MY APPROACH -- HE CHARACTERIZED MY APPROACH AND IT WAS NOT ACCURATE. I THINK WE ACTUALLY WOULD SAY THAT WE HAVE BASICALLY THE SAME POSITION, WHICH IS THAT THE AG'S JOB IS TO DEFEND STATE LAW OR STATE AGENCY ACTIONS IF THERE'S A REASONABLY DEFENSIBLE BASIS FOR DOING SO. I THINK MY OPPONENT HAS DEFENDED, FOR EXAMPLE, SCOTT WALKER'S FAILURE TO CALL SPECIAL ELECTIONS WHEN THERE WAS NO LEGALLY DEFENSIBLE BASIS TO DO SO. BUT WITH RESPECT TO THE STATUTES THAT'S ON THE BOOKS RIGHT NOW, ONE THING THAT WE WOULD NEED TO DO IS SEE WHAT THE SUPREME COURT SAID, BECAUSE WHAT THE SUPREME COURT SAYS IF IT WERE TO OVERTURN ROE V. WADE WOULD IMPACT WHETHER THE LAW WISCONSIN HAS ON THE BOOKS WOULD POTENTIALLY BE CONSTITUTIONAL. BUT THERE'S A SECOND POTENTIAL ISSUE WITH WISCONSIN LAW, IS THAT THE LAW ALLOWS FOR ABORTIONS IN ONLY VERY LIMITED CIRCUMSTANCES. ONE IS BY A DOCTOR TO SAVE THE LIFE OF THE MOTHER. AND THEN THE LAW EXEMPTS THE MOTHER FROM PROSECUTION, WHICH MEANS THAT IF THAT LAW GOES INTO EFFECT, OTHER THAN ABORTIONS TO SAVE THE LIFE OF THE MOTHER, THE ONLY ABORTIONS THAT WOULD BE LEGAL IN WISCONSIN ARE SELF-ADMINISTERED ABORTIONS. THAT'S INCREDIBLY DANGEROUS. SO I THINK OUR AG NEEDS TO DO AN ANALYSIS IF ROE V. WADE IS OVERTURNED TO DETERMINE IF THAT'S EVEN LEGALLY DEFENSIBLE. IN THE MEANTIME, I THINK THAT THE STATE LEGISLATURE SHOULD REPEAL THAT LAW. >> ATTORNEY GENERAL SCHIMEL, SHOULD WISCONSIN REPEAL THE LAW BANNING AILBANNING ABORTIONS OR SHOULD IT BE DEFENDED? >> THAT IS A LEGISLATIVE DETERMINATION TO MAKE. THE JOB OF AN ATTORNEY GENERAL, DEFEND THE LAW PASSED BY THE LEGISLATURE AND SIGNED INTO LAW BY THE GOVERNOR. NOW, WHEN HE TALKS ABOUT MAKING DECISION TO NOT REPRESENT THE GOVERNOR OR A STATE AGENCY OR DEFEND A LAW, MAKE NO MISTAKE. THOSE LAWS OR THAT AGENCY OR OFFICIAL WILL BE DEFENDED IN COURT. IT WILL JUST MEAN THAT MONEY WILL BE SPENT TO HIRE AN OUTSIDE LAW FIRM TO CONDUCT THAT. THE STATE'S LAWYER SHOULD DO THAT, SHOULD MAKE THAT DEFENSE IN COURT. THE STATE'S LAWYER, MY OFFICE, THAT'S ALREADY BEING PAID TO REPRESENT THE STATE, SHOULD TAKE CARE OF THAT. IT'S NOT MY BUSINESS TO DECIDE WHETHER ROE V. WADE SHOULD BE OVERTURNED. IF THE SUPREME COURT DOES THAT, THEN WE DO HAVE A CHECK -- THEN WE DO HAVE A CHALLENGE WITH WISCONSIN'S LAW. I EXPECT THERE WOULD BE LAWSUITS TO DETERMINE WHETHER IT COULD BE ENFORCED. WISCONSIN'S LAW IS AN INFANTICIDE LAW THAT COVERS A LOT MORE THAN JUST ABORTION. IT DOES HAVE THE EXCEPTIONS MY OPPONENT TALKED ABOUT. I'M A PRO-LIFE PERSON. I DON'T MAKE ANY APOLOGIES FOR THAT. MY TWO DAUGHTERS ARE ADOPTED. TWO 18-YEAR-OLD WOMEN IN WISCONSIN CHOSE TO GIVE MY WIFE AND I THE OPPORTUNITY TO HAVE A FAMILY. BUT I DON'T IMPOSE MY VALUES ON OTHERS. I DON'T HAVE A VOTE IN THE LEGISLATURE. I DEFEND THE LAWS THAT THEY PASS. AND I WILL DO THAT VIGOROUSLY. AND YOU WON'T KNOW WHETHER I AGREED WITH THE LAW OR NOT WHEN WE PUT OUR DEFENSE FORWARD. >> WE TRANSITION NOW TO THE ATTORNEY GENERAL SUING THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT AND ITS LAWS. ONE VOTER WE SPOKE WITH, ELIZABETH BOXWELL FROM WATERTOWN, MENTIONS WISCONSIN'S CHALLENGE TO THE AFFORDABLE CARE ACT. >> I THINK OVERALL THE AFFORDABLE CARE ACT WAS A REALLY POSITIVE ACT FOR OUR NATION AND OUR NATION'S POPULATION IN GENERAL. SO FOR EACH STATE ATTORNEY GENERAL TO SPEND THEIR TIME AND THEIR FOCUS ON SOMETHING THAT I REALLY THINK WAS ALREADY DECIDED AND WAS GREAT AND IN IS PLA, PLACE, ESPECIALLY AT THE NATIONAL LEVEL, IS A WALES WASTE OF RESOURCES AND TIME. >> SHE'S ASKING ABOUT THE LAW TO REPEAL THE AFFORDABLE CARE ACT. YOU ARE TAKING A LEAVE IN THAT LAWSUIT. WHY? >> BECAUSE THE LAW IS UNCONSTITUTIONAL. I SWORE AN OATH TO DEFEND THE CONSTITUTION AND PROTECT IT. AND THAT INCLUDES PROTECTING IT FROM UNCONSTITUTIONAL LAWS. IN 2012, THE U.S. SUPREME COURT FOUND THAT OBAMACARE WAS BARELY CONSTITUTIONAL, BY FINDING THAT LAW, THE INDIVIDUAL MANDATE THAT REQUIRES THE PURCHASE OF INSURANCE IS NOT CONSTITUTIONAL, THE TAX PENALTY WHEN COMPACTED WITH THAT MADE IT CONSTITUTIONAL BECAUSE IT'S ESSENTIALLY THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT RAISING REVENUE, WHICH WE KNOW IT IS ALLOWED TO DO. WHAT'S HAPPENED SINCE IS THAT THE UNITED STATES CONGRESS HAS NOW REMOVED THE TAX PENALTY. THEREFORE, THE INDIVIDUAL MANDATE THAT THE SUPREME COURT ALREADY SET SAID IS UNCONSTITUTIONAL STANDS BY ITSELF. OBAMACARE HAS BEEN A STRING OF BROKEN PROMISES. RATES WENT UP BY 42% ON AVERAGE IN WISCONSIN. OPTIONS AVAILABLE TO CONSUMERS WERE SUPPOSED TO IMPROVE. THEY DIDN'T. THEY GOT WORSE. MORE OPTIONS WERE RESTRICTED. IN FACT, IN 2013, POLITIFACT SAID THAT THE POLITICAL LIE OF THE YEAR WAS WHEN PRESIDENT OBAMA SAID IF YOU LIKE YOUR DOCTOR, YOU CAN KEEP THEM. IF YOU LIKE YOUR HEALTH PLAN, YOU CAN KEEP IT. THIS IS GOING TO DIE UNDER ITS OWN WEIGHT AS IT IS. IT MAKES MORE SENSE TO GET THIS DONE NOW AND LET WISCONSIN PUT BACK IN PLACE THE PROCESSES WE HAD BACK BEFORE OBAMACARE DESTROYED OUR STATE SYSTEM. >> MR. KAUL, WHAT'S YOUR POSITION ON WISCONSIN SUING TO INVALIDATE THE ACA? >> THIS LAWSUIT IS FIRST OF ALL EXTREMELY WEAK ON THE LAW. AND THE CONSEQUENCES THAT IT WOULD HAVE WOULD BE SIGNIFICANT AND HARMFUL TO WISCONSINITES. IF THIS LAWSUIT IS SUCCESSFUL, PROTECTIONS FOR PEOPLE WITH PREEXISTING CONDITIONS WOULD BE ELIMINATED. HEALTH INSURANCE COMPANIES WOULD ONCE AGAIN BE ABLE TO DENY COVERAGE TO PEOPLE ON THE BASIS OF A PREEXISTING CONDITION. YOUNG ADULTS WOULD LOSE THE GUARANTEE THAT THEY CAN REMAIN ON THEIR PARENTS' COVERAGE UNTIL THEY TURN 26 YEARS OLD. THE CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET OFFICE ESTIMATES IF IT'S STRUCK DOWN, OVER 30 MILLION AMERICANS WILL BECOME UNINSURED. THAT'S WHAT OUR ATTORNEY GENERAL IS USING OUR TAX DOLLARS TO FIGHT FOR RIGHT NOW. WE TOUCHED ON IT BEFORE, MISPLACED PRIORITIES. THERE ARE LIMITED RESOURCES AT THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE. WE'RE FACING AN OPIOID EPIDEMIC THAT CONTINUES TO GET WORSE. WE HAD NEARLY 900 OIP OID-RELATED OVERDOSES LAST YEAR. WE HAVE A METH PROBLEM THAT'S GROWING. WE HAVE A SHORTAGE OF PROSECUTORS HERE IN WISCONSIN. OUR ATTORNEY GENERAL IS USING OUR TAX DOLLARS TO FIGHT TO ELIMINATE PROTECTIONS FOR PEOPLE WITH PREEXISTING CONDITIONS. THAT'S LONG. AS ATTORNEY GENERAL, I'M GOING TO SEEK TO WITHDRAW THE STATE OF WISCONSIN FROM THAT LAWSUIT. >> WE MOVE ALONG NOW. SHAWN AND I TAKE A BREAK FROM ASKING YOU QUESTIONS IN ORDER TO ALLOW THE CANDIDATES TO ASK A QUESTION OF ONE ANOTHER. WE ASKED EACH CANDIDATE TO COME PREPARED TO ASK A QUESTION OF HIS OPPONENT. WE WILL CONTINUE WITH THE CLOCK OF 90-SECOND RESPONSES AND 30 SECONDS TO ANSWER A FOLLOW-UP QUESTION IF THE CANDIDATE HAS ONE. MR. KAUL WILL ASK HIS QUESTION NOW OF MR. SCHIMEL. >> MR. SCHIMEL, HERE'S MY QUESTION. DETROIT HAD A BACKLOG OF UNTESTED RAPE KITS AND IN DETROIT AFTER THOSE KITS WERE TESTED, OVER 140 PEOPLE WERE CONVICTED OF A CRIME. MORE THAN 50 PEOPLE WERE IDENTIFIED AS POTENTIALLY BEING INVOLVED IN TEN OR MORE SEXUAL ASSAULTS. IN WISCONSIN, DO YOU KNOW HOW MANY PEOPLE AS A RESULT OF OUR TESTING HAVE BEEN CHARGED WITH A CRIME OR CONVICTED OF A CRIME? >> THIS DEMONSTRATES HOW YOU DON'T UNDERSTAND THE NATURE OF THE ISSUE, BECAUSE YOU HAVEN'T BEEN A PROSECUTOR DOING SENSITIVE CRIMES CASES. IN WISCONSIN, WE DID NOT HAVE THE WHOLESALE FAILURE THAT THE CITY OF DETROIT DID. IN DETROIT, AS THE VICTIMS WHO CAME FORWARD AND CRITICIZED THIS THERE DEMONSTRATED, THEY TOOK KITS WHOLESALE AND PUT THEM IN STORAGE. THEY WEREN'T TESTING THEM. THEY DIDN'T USE ANY DISCRETION. IN WISCONSIN, MISTAKES WERE MADE. BUT WE USED DISCRETION HERE AND WE WON'T HAVE NEARLY THAT KIND OF A PROBLEM. THE ISSUE WITH THE SEXUAL ASSAULT KITS WAS THAT LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCIES LOOKED AT THEM IN WISCONSIN AND SAID, WE DON'T NEED THEM TO PROVE THIS CASE BECAUSE THE DEFENDANT CONFESSED OR THE DEFENDANT PLED GUILTY OR THERE WAS OTHER EVIDENCE TO SUPPORT IT. AND THEN THEY DIDN'T TEST THE KIT BECAUSE THEY DIDN'T UNDERSTAND THAT THAT MIGHT HELP PROVE OTHER SEXUAL ASSAULT CASES. WE DIDN'T DO THE WHOLESALE WAREHOUSING OF KITS LIKE THEY DID IN DETROIT. SO WE DIDN'T HAVE NEARLY AS MANY KITS. THE CITY OF DETROIT HAD 17,000 KITS TO TEST ALONE. JUST ONE CITY. HERE IN WISCONSIN, OUR WHOLE STATE, WE HAD 4200 KITS. I CAN TELL YOU IN WAUKESHA COUNTY WHERE I WAS IN THE SENSITIVE CRIMES UNIT AND HELPED DEVELOP OUR SANE TEAM, WE HAD ONLY 39 KITS THAT HAD TO BE TESTED BECAUSE WE WERE GETTING IT RIGHT UNDER MY LEADERSHIP. AND WHEN I CAME TO THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, I RECOGNIZED THAT WE NEEDED TO DO IT BETTER AT THE STATE AND WE GOT THIS MISSION ACCOMPLISHED. >> AND NOW MR. SCHIMEL'S QUESTION FOR MR. KAUL. >> MR. KAUL, YOU INTRODUCED YOURSELF AS A FEDERAL PROSECUTOR. TRUTH BE TOLD, YOU SPENT LESS THAN FOUR YEARS IN THE U.S. ATTORNEY'S OFFICE. WE'VE SCOURED THE FEDERAL COURT RECORDS, AND WE CAN FIND IT APPEARS YOU HANDLED ABOUT 25 CASES DURING YOUR TIME THERE THAT WERE ASSIGNED TO YOU. AND IT APPEARS YOU HAD THREE CASES GO TO JURY. WE CAN'T TELL FOR SURE. IS IT DOESN'T LOOK LIKE YOU'VE EVER MADE A CLOSING ARGUMENT TO A JURY. HOW MANY TIMES HAVE YOU MADE A CLOSING ARGUMENT TO A JURY IN A CRIMINAL CASE? >> WELL, FIRST OF ALL, YOUR FACTS ARE WRONG. I'M NOT SURE WHERE THE 25 NUMBER COMES FROM OR THE THREE NUMBER. BUT LET ME TELL YOU ABOUT WHAT I DID IN BALTIMORE. I WAS A FEDERAL PROSECUTOR IN ONE OF THE MOST VIOLENT CITIES IN THE COUNTRY. I PROSECUTED DRUG TRAFFICKERS, GANG MEMBERS AND MURDERERS AND WORKED TO MAKE THE COMMUNITY SAFER. AND LET ME TELL YOU ABOUT ONE OF THE CASES I PROSECUTED. THE DEFENDANT WAS A PERSON NAMED TYRONE JONICAN. HE WAS CONVICTED OF CONSPIRACY TO COMMIT MURDER AND RACKETEERING. HE'S GOING TO BE SPENDING THE REST OF HIS LIFE IN PRISON. I AM PROUD OF THE WORK THAT I'VE DONE AS A FEDERAL PROSECUTOR AND I AM HAPPY TO COMPARE THAT RECORD TO YOUR RECORD AS ATTORNEY GENERAL, WHERE ON ISSUE AFTER ISSUE WE HAVE SEEN FAILURE WHEN IT COMES TO PUBLIC SAFETY. THE OPIOID EPIDEMIC HAS GOTTEN WORSE. THE METH PROBLEM HAS EXPLODED. WE HAVEN'T ADDRESSED OUR SHORTAGE OF PROSECUTORS IN THE STATE. ON SCHOOL SAFETY, YOU'VE SUGGESTED THAT WE CONSIDER ARMING TEACHERS. THAT'S THE SOLUTION ON SCHOOL SAFETY THAT YOU OFFERED SHORTLY AFTER THE PARKLAND SHOOTING. I THINK WHAT WE NEED ARE COMMON SENSE GUN SAFETY MEASURES LIKE UNIVERSAL BACKGROUND CHECKS. >> DO YOU RECALL THE QUESTION? HOW MANY CLOSING ARGUMENTS HAVE YOU MADE TO A CRIMINAL JURY? >> IT'S MORE THAN THREE. DO YOU RECALL MY QUESTION ABOUT HOW MANY PEOPLE HAVE BEEN CICT REQUESTEDCONVICTED OF A CRIME? DO YOU RECALL HOW MANY PEOPLE HAVE BEEN CONVICTED OF A CRIME AS A RESULT OF THE TESTING OF BACKLOGGED RAPE KITS IN WISCONSIN? THE ANSWER IS ZERO. >> WE'RE GOING TO LEAVE IT THERE. WE'RE GOING TO MOVE BACK TO TALKING ABOUT WHEN YOU WOULD SUE THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT. WE TALKED ABOUT THE AFFORDABLE CARE ACT, BUT MORE BROADLY, YOU BOTH SAID YOU HAVE THE SAME TWO-STEP PROCESS OF DECIDING WHEN TO SUE IN FEDERAL COURT. YOU ASK, DOES THE LAW VIOLATE THE CONSTITUTION? DOES THE LAW HARM WISCONSIN RESIDENTS? AND YET USING THESE CRITERIA YOU DISAGREE ON WHICH LAWSUITS WISCONSIN SHOULD BRING AGAINST THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT. SO THE QUESTION IS WHEN SHOULD THE STATE SUE THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT? AND WHAT ARE SOME SPECIFIC EXAMPLES YOU COULD GIVE PEOPLE ON WHEN THE STATE SHOULD SUE THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT? THIS IS FIRST TO JOSH KAUL. >> SO I THINK FIRST OF ALL WE NEED TO LOOK AT WHETHER OR NOT A LAW IS HARMING WISCONSINITES. IF IT IS HARMING WISCONSINITES, THEN THE QUESTION IS IS THE LAW UNCONSTITUTIONAL OR OTHERWISE ILLEGAL. IS THERE A STRONG LEGAL CASE TO BE BROUGHT. IF THE ANSWER IS YES, THEN I THINK THE STATE OF WISCONSIN SHOULD GET INVOLVED IN A CHALLENGE. I'LL GIVE YOU A COUPLE EXAMPLES WHERE THE STATE SHOULD HAVE GOTTEN INVOLVED. WHEN NET NEUTRALITY WAS ELIMINATED, A NUMBER OF AGs BROUGHT SUIT, MORE THAN 20. MORE THAN 200 FRAUDULENT COMMENTS WERE SUBMITTED TO THE SCC BEFORE THAT CHANGE WAS MADE. I CALLED ON OUR ATTORNEY GENERAL TO JOIN THAT SUIT. HIS RESPONSE WAS IT WAS FRIVOLOUS. PROTECTIONS FOR STUDENTS WHO WERE PREYED UPON A NUMBER OF AGs STEPPED UP AND TOOK ACTION. OUR AG WAS NOWHERE TUNE TO BE FOUND. HE HAS GOT THE STATE INVOLVED IN SUITS THAT HARM THE INTERESTS OF WISCONSINITES. HE'S CHALLENGED ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTIONS. AS YOU TOUCHED ON BEFORE, HE IS CHALLENGING THE AFFORDABLE CARE ACT AND FIGHTING TO ELIMINATE PROTECTIONS FOR PEOPLE WITH PREEXISTING CONDITIONS. AND HE GOT THE STATE INVOLVED IN A LAWSUIT THAT CHALLENGED A RULE THAT GUARANTEED OVERTIME PAY FOR PEOPLE POOH WHO PUT IN THE HOURS AND MAKE BETWEEN $23,000 AND $47,000 A YEAR. HE HAS FOUGHT AGAINST OVERTIME PAY FOR MIDDLE CLASS FAMILIES IN WISCONSIN. I THINK WE NEED BETTER LEADERSHIP ON THESE ISSUES FROM OUR AG. >> MR. SCHIMEL, SAME QUESTION. WOULD SHOULD THE STATE SUE THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT? AND CAN YOU GIVE SOME SPECIFIC EXAMPLES? >> I WAS ELECTED BASED IN PART ON MY PROMISE THAT I WOULD SUE THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT WHEN IT INTERFERED WITH WISCONSIN'S RIGHT TO MAKE ITS OWN POLICY CHOICES. I AGREE THAT THE CRITERIA IS WHETHER THE LAW IS UNCONSTITUTIONAL OR THE REGULATORY RULE IS UNCONSTITUTIONAL OR OTHERWISE ILLEGAL AND WHETHER IT HARMS WISCONSIN. WITH NET NEUTRALITY, THERE WAS NOTHING ABOUT THAT THAT WAS ILLEGAL IN THE WAY THAT IT WAS PUT IN PLACE. THE REGULATORY AGENCY HAS THE AUTHORITY TO MAKE THAT DETERMINATION. THEY FOLLOWED THE ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES ACT WHEN THEY DID IT AND IT FALLS WITHIN THE AUTHORITY THE LEGISLATURE, THE CONGRESS, GAVE THEM. THERE'S NO BASIS TO SUE THERE. AND IN TERMS OF HARM TO THE CITIZENS OF WISCONSIN, THERE'S NONE THAT'S OCCURRED YET. SO IT'S ALL HYPOTHETICAL IN NATURE. NOW, CONTRARY TO MY OPPONENT'S CHECKLIST OF PEOPLE THAT HE WANTS TO GO AFTER, WE HAD IDENTIFIED THINGS AS WELL, BUT WITH THE CLEAN POWER PLANT, FOR INSTANCE, THAT WAS PASSED WITHOUT FOLLOWING THE RULES AND THE ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES ACT AND IT ALSO EXCEEDED THE AUTHORITY GRANTED TO THE EPA BY THE CONGRESS. AND IN FACT, THE UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT FOUND OUR ARGUMENT SO COMPELLING THAT THEY DID SOMETHING THEY'VE NEVER DONE IN THE HISTORY OF THE UNITED STATES. THEY IMPOSED AN INJUNCTION OR STOPPED A REGULATORY RULE FROM GOING FORWARD BEFORE THERE WAS EVER A TRIAL IN THE LOWER COURT. AND NOW THE CLEAN POWER PLANT HAS BEEN WITHDRAWN. IT WOULD HAVE KILLED TENS OF THOUSANDS OF MANUFACTURING JOBS IN WISCONSIN. >> WE'RE GOING TO MOVE TO THE ISSUE OF OPIOIDS. >> YEAH. AND WE'RE GOING TO HEAR NOW FROM WATERTOWN RESIDENT TODD MORRIS. TODD MORRIS WORKS AS A VOLUNTEER AT A YOUTH REC CENTER. HERE'S TODD MORRIS. >> THERE IS TWO OR THREE KIDS THAT ARE BEING RAISED BY THEIR AUNTS OR THEIR GRANDPARENTS BECAUSE OF OPIOID ADDICTIONS AND TWO OF THEM -- TWO LOST THEIR FATHER AND THEIR MOTHER. AND IT'S REALLY SAD. AND I WANT SOMETHING DONE ABOUT IT, BUT I DON'T HAVE A SOLUTION. I WISH I DID. >> MR. KAUL, DO YOU HAVE A SOLUTION? AND, IF SO, WHAT IS IT? >> SO THIS EPIDEMIC HAS BEEN DEVASTATING FOR FAMILIES ACROSS THE STATE. AND THE PROBLEM CONTINUES TO GET WORSE. LAST YEAR WE HAD NEARLY 900 OPIOID-RELATED OVERDOSE DEATHS IN WISCONSIN. THAT'S AN INCREASE OF MORE THAN 40% FROM JUST 2015. THE NUMBER OF KIDS WHO HAVE BEEN SEPARATED FROM A DRUG-ADDICTED PARENT CONTINUES TO CLIMB. AND I THINK WE NEED TO START RESPONDING TO THIS EPIDEMIC LIKE THE CRISIS IT IS. FIRST, I THINK WE NEED TO ENSURE THAT OUR ENFORCEMENT EFFORTS ARE TARGETING LARGE-SCALE TRAFFICKERS WHO ARE SENDING DRUGS LIKE HEROIN AND METH ACROSS COUNTY AND STATE LINES. I AM PROUD TO HAVE WORKED TO DISMANTLE DRUG TRAFFICKING CONSPIRACIES AS A FEDERAL PROSECUTOR. AND I THINK WE NEED TO DO MORE OF THAT, HAVE OUR AG'S OFFICE PLAY A BIGGER ROLE IN THOSE TYPES OF CASES. BUT WE ALSO NEED TO EXPAND ACCESS TO TREATMENT FAR MORE SERIOUSLY THAN WE HAVE SO FAR SO THAT PEOPLE WHO FALL INTO THE TRAP OF ADDICTION ARE ABLE TO GET THE HELP THEY NEED TO GET BACK ON THEIR FEET. AND THEN I THINK WE NEED AN AG WHO'S GOING TO BE SERIOUS FINALLY ABOUT HOLDING THE PHARMACEUTICAL COMPANIES ACCOUNTABLE FOR THE ROLE THEY HAVE PLAYED IN THIS EPIDEMIC. >> MR. SCHIMEL. >> IN MY WORK IN THE WAUKESHA DA'S OFFICE I MET HUNDREDS OF PEOPLE WHO BURIED THEIR LOVED ONES TO OPIOID OVERDOSE DEATHS. AND I'VE MET MANY MORE AS ATTORNEY GENERAL. BECAUSE OF THAT, I MADE THIS MY NUMBER ONE PRIORITY AS ATTORNEY GENERAL AND WE WE ARE LEADING THE NATION IN THE WORK WE'RE DOING. WISCONSIN IS RECOGNIZED AS A NATIONAL LEADER. I PUT ON THE ENFORCEMENT SIDE I PUT MANY MORE AGENTS IN THE FIELD WORKING DRUG CASES. I PUT REGIONAL PROSECUTORS THROUGHOUT WISCONSIN TO WORK ON THIS. WE HAVE INCREASED THE AVAILABILITY OF SAFETY EQUIPMENT FOR LAW ENFORCEMENT AND INCREASED THEIR TRAINING TO BE ABLE TO DO THIS EFFECTIVELY. WE WROTE AND OBTAINED THE LARGEST METHAMPHETAMINE MONEY RIGHT HERE IN WISCONSIN. THAT'S MONEY WE'RE TURNING OVER TO LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCIES TO DO EFFECTIVE WORK. I KNOW FROM MY EXPERIENCE THAT WE WON'T ARREST OUR WAY OUT OF THIS. WE NEED A COMPREHENSIVE APPROACH. ON THE TREATMENT SIDE, WE HAVE INCREASED THE NUMBER OF TREATMENT COURTS IN WISCONSIN. THERE ARE NOW 51 COUNTIES THAT WE OVERSEE AT DOJ UTILIZING TREATMENT AND DIVERSION PROGRAMS SUCCESSFULLY, $6.5 MILLION A YEAR THAT WE ADMINISTER TO DO THAT. OUR AWARD-WINNING DOSE OF REALITY PREVENTION CAMPAIGN IS NOW BEING USED IN SIX STATES AND IT HAS REDUCED PRESCRIBING OF OPIOIDS IN WISCONSIN BY 20% AND WE HAVE -- I CREATED A DRUG TAKE-BACK PROGRAM IN WISCONSIN THAT HAS COLLECTED OVER 400,000 POUNDS OF UNUSED MEDICATIONS SINCE I BECAME ATTORNEY GENERAL. >> I WANT TO ASK YOU ABOUT A LAWSUIT RIGHT NOW. COUNTIES THROUGHOUT WISCONSIN AND STATES THROUGHOUT THE U.S. HAVE BANDED TOGETHER TO SUE OPIOID MANUFACTURERS. WHY ARE YOU NOT JOINING THEM? >> WE ARE INVOLVED IN A LAWSUIT. WE'RE INVOLVED IN A 22-STATE, MULTIJURISDICTIONAL, BIPARTISAN INVESTIGATION. AND WHAT WE HAVE DONE WITH THIS IS WE HAVE GOTTEN AGREEMENTS TO TOLL THE STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS. SO A CLOCK ISN'T TICKING ON US. BUT WE'RE ALSO NOW, BECAUSE OF CIVIL INVESTIGATORY DEMANDS, WE ARE LOOKING AT EVIDENCE. ALL OF THOSE LAWSUITS THAT ARE FILED, THEY'RE STILL TIED UP IN COURT WAITING TO EVEN GET THEIR FIRST LOOK AT ANY OF THE EVIDENCE FROM THE DRUG COMPANIES. FOR INSTANCE, THE CITY OF CHICAGO SUED IN 2014. THEY STILL DON'T HAVE ANY EVIDENCE. IF THE CRITICISMS MY OPPONENT MAKES ARE TRUE, THEN I WOULDN'T HAVE 64 OF OUR 72 ELECTED SHERIFFS PUBLICLY ENDORSING ME. >> MR. KAUL, WHEN IT COMES TO THIS LAWSUIT WITH COUNTIES AND STATES, WOULD YOU JOIN THAT? >> SO, FIRST OF ALL, IT'S JUST FALSE THAT WISCONSIN IS INVOLVED IN A LAWSUIT. IT'S INVOLVED IN AN INVESTIGATION. MR. SCHIMEL HAS INDICATED THAT HE'S HESITANT TO GET INVOLVED IN A LAWSUIT. BUT HE DIDN'T HESITATE TO GET THE STATE INVOLVED IN A LAWSUIT THAT IS SEEKING TO ELIMINATE PROTECTIONS FOR PEOPLE WITH PREEXISTING CONDITIONS. HE DIDN'T HESITATE TO GET THE STATE INVOLVED IN A LAWSUIT THAT FOUGHT AGAINST OVERTIME PAY FOR MIDDLE CLASS FAMILIES IN WISCONSIN. AND IT SIMPLY IS NOT CORRECT THAT WISCONSIN IS LEADING THE NATION IN FIGHTING THE OPIOID EPIDEMIC. OVERDOSE DEATHS WENT UP OVER 40%. WE'VE GOTTEN WORSE EVEN COMPARED TO OTHER STATES IN TERMS OF OUR OVERDOSE RATE. WE NEED NEW LEADERSHIP. >> I WANT TO ASK YOU BOTH, IN 30 SECONDS, ATTORNEY GENERAL SCHIMEL HAS REFERENCED YOUR WORK AS A FEDERAL PROSECUTOR IN BALTIMORE AND HAS BEEN CRITICAL OF PLEA DEALS YOU MADE IN DRUG CASES, SAYING THEY RESULTED IN PRISON SENTENCES TOO FAR BELOW THE MAXIMUM. WHAT'S YOUR RESPONSE TO THAT? >> EL WITH, WELL, MR. SCHIMEL HAS NEVER WORKED AS A FEDERAL PROSECUTOR. I DON'T KNOW IF HE'S INTENTIONALLY DISTORTING MY RECORD OR DOESN'T UNDERSTAND HOW THE PROCESS WORKS. BUT I WORKED IN THE NARCOTICS SECTION IN AN AREA WITH VERY SIGNIFICANT DRUG TRAFFICKING PROBLEMS TO DISMANTLE DRUG TRAFFICKING CONSPIRACIES. ONE OF THE PEOPLE I'VE BEEN ATTACKED FOR WAS SENTENCED TO 19 YEARS IN PRISON. I THINK WE NEED AN AG WHO HAS THAT SORT OF EXPERIENCE TAKING ON DRUG TRAFFICKING CONSPIRACIES AND IS IS GOING TO MAKE SURE THAT MAKING ENFORCEMENT EFFORTS OF TRAFFICKERS IS PRIORITY AS PART OF OUR SOLUTION TO THE EPIDEMIC. >> MR. SCHIMEL, AREN'T DEALS LIKE THAT PART OF THE JOB AS A PROSECUTOR? >> YES, THEY ARE, BUT THEY HAVE TO BE MADE REASONABLY. MY OPPONENT'S RECORD IS VERY SHORT. IT'S EASY TO SCOUR IT. WE COULD ONLY FIND 25 CASES SPECIFICALLY ASSIGNED TO HIM. IF YOU GO THROUGH THE WISCONSIN CIRCUIT COURT AUTOMATION PROGRAM RECORDS, YOU'LL FIND 16,000 CRIMINAL CASES THAT I HANDLED. I HAVE PUT MANY PEOPLE IN PRISON FOR THE REST OF THEIR LIVES. BUT I'VE ALSO DONE GREAT WORK TO HELP DIVERT PEOPLE WHO HAVE BEHAVIORAL HEALTH ISSUES THAT CAN BE -- THAT CAN BE RESOLVED. I HAVE THE EXPERIENCE. WE'VE DELIVERED THE RESULTS. THAT'S WHY I'M LAW ENFORCEMENT'S CHOICE TO BE ELECTED AS ATTORNEY GENERAL. >> WE'RE MOVING ON TO ANOTHER QUESTION DEALING WITH A DIFFERENT CONTROLLED SUBSTANCE IN WISCONSIN. HERE'S WHAT HADIYA JOHNSON OF MILWAUKEE SAYS. >> MY BIGGEST THING I WOULD SAY IS PROBABLY THE LEGALIZING OF MARIJUANA AND THE DECRIMINALIZING OF IT. >> BRAD SCHIMEL, IN YOUR CAPACITY AS THE STATE'S TOP LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICER, WHAT IS YOUR POSITION ON THE LEGALIZATION OF MARIJUANA? AND I WILL TELL YOU AT THIS TIME DURING THE DEBATE YOU'LL SEE THE CLOCK THAT'S SHIFTED TO 60 SECONDS, NOT 90. WHAT IS YOUR POSITION ON THE LEGALIZATION OF MARIJUANA? >> THERE'S TWO SEPARATE ISSUES. MEDICAL MARIJUANA. FOR THAT WE SHOULD FOLLOW THE SCIENCE, NOT PUBLIC OPINION POLLS. WHEN IT COMES TO RECREATIONAL MARIJUANA, WE HAVE ENOUGH TROUBLE WITH INTOXICATED DRIVERS ON OUR ROADWAYS. WE DON'T NEED TO ADD SANCTIONING OF MARIJUANA TO MAKE THAT WORSE. COLORADO SAW A 200% INCREASE IN FATAL CAR CRASHES WHERE MARIJUANA WAS PART OF THE PROBLEM. WE NEED TO MAKE -- THEY PROMISE WHEN THEY DO THIS IN OTHER STATES THAT IT WOULDN'T AFFECT CHILDREN. IN COLORADO THEY ARE NOW NUMBER ONE IN THE NATION FOR HIGH SCHOOL STUDENTS WHO CHRONICALLY SMOKE MARIJUANA. WE ALSO -- THERE IS ALSO SOME WHO SUGGEST THAT IF WE LEGALIZE MARIJUANA WE'LL SEE A REDUCTION IN THE NUMBER OF OVERDOSE DEATHS. IN COLORADO THEY SAW OVERDOSE DEATHS FROM HEROIN AND OPEN OPEN AND OPIATES GO UP. LAW ENFORCEMENT RECOMMENDS I BE REELECTED. >> JOSH KAUL, SAME QUESTION. WHALES YOURWHAT IS YOUR POSITION ON THE LEGALIZATION OF MARIJUANA? >> MY OPPONENT OPPOSES LEGALIZATION OF MEDICAL MARIJUANA. I THINK IT IS TIME TO LEGALIZE MEDICAL MARIJUANA HERE IN WISCONSIN FOR A FEW DIFFERENT REASONS. FIRST OF ALL, THERE ARE PEOPLE WHO FACE SERIOUS ISSUES WITH CHRONIC PAIN. IF THEY CAN GET RELIEF FROM MEDICAL MARIJUANA, THEY SHOULD HAVE THAT OPTION. THIS IS ALSO POTENTIALLY A VERY GOOD SOURCE OF REVENUE FOR WISCONSIN. AND THE DATA SHOWS THAT STATES THAT HAVE LEGALIZED MEDICAL MARIJUANA HAVE HAD BETTER RESULTS WITH RESPECT TO THE OPIOID EPIDEMIC WITH RESPECT TO OVERDOSE DEATHS THAN OTHER STATES HAVE. IF THERE IS A SITUATION WHERE SOMEBODY IS FACING CHRONIC PAIN AND THE DOCTOR HAS THE OPTION OF PRESCRIBING A PERSON AN OPIOID OR MEDICAL MARIJUANA, I WOULD MUCH RATHER HAVE THAT PERSON PRESCRIBED MEDICAL MARIJUANA. >> LET ME ASK JUST BRIEFLY, BRAD SCHIMEL, YOU ARE OPPOSED TO MEDICAL MARIJUANA? >> NO. I SAID WE SHOULD FOLLOW THE SCIENCE. WE SHOULD LET SCIENCE DICTATE WHETHER MARIJUANA SHOULD BE PRESCRIBED TO PEOPLE. AND RIGHT NOW THE FDA AND THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION DO NOT SUPPORT THAT. SO IT'S NOT LEGAL TO PRESCRIBE MARIJUANA RIGHT NOW. WE SHOULD LET THE SCIENCE DETERMINE THAT. >> ALL RIGHT. THERE ARE ONGOING DISPUTES IN WISCONSIN BETWEEN FARMERS WHO USE HIGH-CAPACITY WELLS AND OTHER RESIDENTS WHO HAVE SEEN LAKE LEVELS GO WAY DOWN, SOMETIMES DRAMATICALLY. ATTORNEY GENERAL SCHIMEL, YOU ISSUED AN OPINION SAYING THE DNR WAS LIMITED IN ITS POWER TO REGULATE THESE WELLS. WHY DID YOU DO THIS? >> BECAUSE IT'S THE LAW. MY JOB ISN'T TO DECIDE WHICH LAWS ARE BEST. MY JOB IS TO INTERPRET THE LAW AND ISSUE A LEGAL OPINION WHEN ASKED. AND IN THAT CASE THE LEGISLATURE DID ASK US FOR A LEGAL OPINION. IN 2011, THE LEGISLATURE PASSED ACT 21. DIDN'T GET AS MUCH ATTENTION AS ACT 10. BUT ACT 21 WAS A REGULATORY REFORM STATUTE. IT PROVIDED THAT A REGULATORY AGENCY MAY NOT PUT ANY RULE IN PLACE THAT EXCEEDS LIMITS THAT THE LEGISLATURE PUT ON THAT REGULATORY AGENCY. IN THIS CASE, THE DNR WAS IMPOSING REQUIREMENTS ON WELL PERMITS THAT WERE NOT LEGAL UNDER WHAT THE LEGISLATURE PROVIDED. THEREFORE, IT WAS -- THE ONLY OPINION WE COULD COME TO WAS THAT THE DNR HAD TO STAY WITHIN THE LAW. >> JOSH KAUL, WAS THE ATTORNEY GENERAL RIGHT OR WRONG ON THIS HIGH-CAPACITY WELLS OPINION? AND HOW WOULD YOU HANDLE IT? >> THIS IS A CASE WHERE OUR ATTORNEY GENERAL MISINTERPRETED THE LAW AND SIDED WITH CORPORATE POLLUTERS INSTEAD OF SIDING WITH THE BEST INTERESTS OF OUR NATURAL RESOURCES. THIS IS AN OPINION THAT WAS VERY WEAK LEGALLY. IT HAS BEEN CHALLENGED IN COURT. AND THE JUDGE WHO REVIEWED THIS CASE FOUND THAT MR. SCHIMEL'S OPINION WAS INCORRECT. IT CITED TO A 2011 STATE SUPREME COURT OPINION. MR. SCHIMEL'S ANALYSIS IGNORED THAT OUR STATE HAS A PUBLIC TRUST DOCTRINE, THAT OUR STATE WATERS NEED TO BE KEPT IN PUBLIC TRUST. AND THE RESULT OF THIS IS THAT THE DNR -- THE RESULT OF HIS OPINION WAS THAT THE DNR WAS NO LONGER PERMITTED TO CONSIDER THE IMPACT HIGH-CAPACITY WELLS HAD ON LAKES, RIVERS AND STREAMS. WE NEED A AG WHO IS GOING TO BE SERIOUS ABOUT PROTECTING OUR ENVIRONMENT. OUR NATURAL RESOURCES ARE CRITICAL TO OUR HEALTH, ECONOMY AND QUALITY OF LIFE HERE IN WISCONSIN. >> WE'RE MOVING ALONG TO ANOTHER ISSUE, AS MUCH AS WE'D LIKE TO SPEND MORE TIME ON ALL OF THESE, AND IT HAS TO DO WITH SCHOOL SAFETY. FOR OUR NEXT QUESTION, WE HEAR AGAIN FROM MADISON RESIDENT ANDREW DOBBINS, THIS TIME, AGAIN, ABOUT SCHOOL SAFETY. >> I DON'T THINK THAT WE SHOULD ARM TEACHERS, BUT AT THE SAME TIME I THINK THAT PROTECTING GUN OWNERSHIP IS A FUNDAMENTAL AMERICAN RIGHT, SOMETHING WE'VE HAD FOR A LONG TIME. SO I DON'T THINK THAT THOSE LAWS SHOULD CHANGE. >> MR. SCHIMEL, YOU HAVE SAID THAT YOU WOULD BE OPEN TO ARMING TEACHERS AND WOULD TRAIN THEM IF LAWMAKERS APPROVED IT. WHY SHOULD THAT BE PART OF SCHOOL SAFETY PLANS? >> WHAT I SAID IS THAT IF -- THAT THIS SHOULD BE A LOCAL SCHOOL DISTRICT DECISION. AND IF A LOCAL SCHOOL DISTRICT DECIDES TO EXERCISE THAT OPTION AND ANY TEACHER CHOOSES TO GO FORWARD WITH THAT RIGHT AND BE ARMED IN THE SCHOOL, IF THEY DO THAT, I WILL MAKE SURE THEY'RE TRAINED FOR FREE AT THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE SO THAT THEY HAVE THE BEST TRAINING TO DO THIS MOST SAFELY. BUT ULTIMATELY THAT'S NOT MY DECISION TO MAKE. WHAT WE DID DO AT THE OFFICE OF SCHOOL SAFETY IN WISCONSIN IS WE PUT TOGETHER A PLAN THAT IN THE MIDST OF ALL THE ARGUING ABOUT GUN LAWS WE CONVINCED A BIPARTISAN LEGISLATURE IN A MATTER OF A COUPLE OF WEEKS TO PUT $100 MILLION INTO FUNDING TO MAKE OUR SCHOOL MORE SAFE FROM A PHYSICAL PERSPECTIVE, ALSO ENGAGING IN MORE MENTAL HEALTH TRAINING IN THOSE SCHOOLS THAT ARE MAKING OUR SCHOOLS SAFER, RIGHT NOW AND IN THE LONG TIME WE'LL PREVENT MORE ACTS OF VIOLENCE IN OUR SCHOOLS. I HAVE THE EXPERIENCE TO PUT A PLAN LIKE THAT TOGETHER. WE GOT RESULTS. OUR SCHOOLS ARE THE SAFEST IN THE NATION. AND THAT'S WHY I'M THE CHOICE OF LAW ENFORCEMENT. >> MR. KAUL, WHAT IS YOUR REACTION TO THE IDEA OF ARMING SCHOOL TEACHERS? >> I THINK IT IS AN ALARMING IDEA. IF WE ARM TEACHERS, OUR SCHOOLS WILL HAVE A DANGER THAT ISN'T PRESENT RIGHT NOW AND IT WILL BE -- THEY WILL BE LESS SAFE. AS ATTORNEY GENERAL I WILL FIGHT AGAINST ANY EFFORT TO ARM TEACHERS IN WISCONSIN. WE NEEDED TO DO A LOT MORE TO ADDRESS SCHOOL SAFETY THAN WE'RE DOING RIGHT NOW. OUR ATTORNEY GENERAL WAS SUPPOSED TO HAVE AWARDED GRANTS BEFORE THE START OF THE SCHOOL YEAR. HE FAILED TO MEET THAT DEADLINE. BUT THE BIGGER ISSUE IS WE NEED TO MAKE CHANGES FOR THE LONG TERM. I THINK WE NEED LONG-TERM FUNDING FOR MENTAL HEALTH PROGRAMS IN SCHOOLS SO THAT SCHOOLS CAN HIRE MENTAL HEALTH PROFESSIONALS, COUNSELORS. AND WE ALSO NEED SOME COMMON SENSE GUN SAFETY MEASURES. IN ADDITION TO SUGGESTING THAT WE CONSIDER ARMING TEACHERS, MR. SCHIMEL HAS CRITICIZED GUN-FREE SCHOOL ZONES. I THINK WE NEED TO KEEP OUR GUN-FREE SCHOOL ZONES AND I THINK WE NEED SOME COMMON SENSE GUN SAFETY MEASURES LIKE UNIVERSAL BACKGROUND CHECKS. >> BRAD SCHIMEL, WHAT IS YOUR POSITION ON RESTRICTIONS ON GUNS OR EXPANDED BACKGROUND CHECKS? >> THE ANSWER TO GUN CRIME IS TO GO AFTER CRIMINALS WHO USE GUNS. THAT'S WHY I PLACED TWO PROSECUTORS IN THE MILWAUKEE DA'S OFFICE WHO IN THE COURSE OF TWO YEARS GOT CONVICTIONS ON 150 GUN FELONS IN MILWAUKEE COUNTY, GOT AN AVERAGE SENTENCE OF MORE THAN TEN YEARS ON EACH OF THEM. THOSE ARE CASES THE MILWAUKEE DA'S OFFICE NEVER WOULD HAVE BEEN ABLE TO GET TO. THAT'S YOUR ANSWER. THINGS LIKE GUN-FREE SCHOOL ZONES, THEY ONLY AFFECT LAW LAW-ABIDING GUN OWNERS. A CRIMINAL DOESN'T CARE THAT THERE'S A STICKER ON THE DOOR. >> MAY I RESPOND TO THAT? >> YES. >> WITH GUN-FREE SCHOOL ZONES, IF A LAW ENFORCEMENT SEES SOMEBODY NEAR A SCHOOL WITH A FIREARM, THE LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICER CAN TAKE ACTION BECAUSE IT'S ILLEGAL TO HAVE A GUN NEAR A SCHOOL. UNDER MR. SCHIMEL'S SUGGESTION, HIS CRITICISM OF GUN-FREE SCHOOL ZONES, IF A LAW ENFORCEMENT SEES SOMEBODY WITH A FIREARM NEAR A SCHOOL, THE LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICER WOULDN'T HAVE A BASIS FOR TAKING ACTION. I THINK THAT LAW ENFORCEMENT SHOULD BE ABLE TO ACT IN THAT SITUATION TO KEEP OUR KIDS SAFE. >> WE LEAVE IT THERE. AND IT IS TIME NOW FOR CLOSING STATEMENTS. A COIN TOSS DETERMINED THE ORDER. MR. SCHIMEL WILL LEAD OFF WITH HIS ONE-MINUTE CLOSING REMARKS. >> THANK YOU. I'VE LIVED MY WHOLE LIFE RIGHT HERE IN WISCONSIN. MY OPPONENT HAS ONLY SPENT FOUR YEARS OF HIS ADULT LIFE HERE. I'VE LED THE WISCONSIN LAW ENFORCEMENT COMMUNITY FOR 29 YEARS. I'VE WORKED WITH VICTIMS OF CRIME RIGHT HERE IN WISCONSIN FOR 29 YEARS. MY OPPONENT HAS NEVER WORKED WITH A SINGLE CRIME VICTIM IN WISCONSIN. FOUR YEARS AGO, I DETAILED A BOLD AND DEFINED PLAN TO MAKE WISCONSIN SAFER AND STRONGER. AND WE'VE HAD GREAT SUCCESS ON EVERY ONE OF THE PROMISES I MADE. MY OPPONENT HAS OFFERED NO PLAN. HE TALKS IN VAGUE POLITICAL TALKING POINTS. I LISTEN TO WISCONSINITES IN ALL 72 OF OUR COUNTIES. I BROUGHT COUNTLESS PARTNERS TO THE TABLE. THAT'S WHY OVER 80% OF THE ELECTED DISTRICT ATTORNEYS AND SHERIFFS IN WISCONSIN ARE PUBLICLY ENDORSING ME. THAT INCLUDES MORE DEMOCRATS ENDORSING ME THAN ARE ENDORSING MY OPPONENT. THEY KNOW MY EXPERIENCE. THEY'VE SEEN THE RESULTS. I'M PROUD TO BE LAW ENFORCEMENT'S CHOICE AND I HOPE I'LL BE YOUR CHOICE ON NOVEMBER 6 FOR ATTORNEY GENERAL. >> MR. KAUL NOW HAS HIS CLOSING REMARKS. >> WE NEED NEW LEADERSHIP IN OUR ATTORNEY GENERAL'S OFFICE. I'M PROUD TO HAVE BEEN ENDORSED BY 62 FORMER ASSISTANT AGs. 45 OF THEM WHO COLLECTIVELY SERVED IN THE AG'S OFFICE FOR OVER 900 YEARS, SIGNED A LETTER THAT SAID THE AS'S OFFICEG'S OFFICE IS A MESS. WE NEED NEW LEADERSHIP WHEN IT COMES TO FIGHTING CRIME AND GETTING JUSTICE FOR WISCONSINITES. OUR RAPE KIT BACKLOG WAS MISHANDLED. WE NEED A MORE EFFECTIVE RESPONSE TO OUR OPIOID EPIDEMIC. WE NEED A RESPONSE ON SCHOOL SAFETY ISSUES THAT DOESN'T SUGGEST WE CONSIDER ARMING TEACHERS, BUT SUGGESTS COMMON SENSE MEASURES LIKE UNIVERSAL BACKGROUND CHECKS. WE NEED TO BE SERIOUS ABOUT PROTECTING THE LAWS THAT PROTECT OUR ENVIRONMENT AND CONSUMERS IN WISCONSIN. WE HAVEN'T HAD THAT APPROACH WITH OUR CURRENT AG. OUR AG SHOULD BE INDEPENDENT AND A WATCHDOG, AN AG WHO'S WILLING TO STAND UP AGAINST PUBLIC CORRUPTION, WHO'S GOING TO ENSURE THAT FOXCONN LIVES UP TO THE TERMS OF THE DEAL IT STRUCK AND WHO'S GOING TO STAND UP FOR THE RIGHTS AND PROTECTIONS OF WISCONSINITES. I'D APPRECIATE YOUR SUPPORT IN THIS YEAR'S ELECTION. >> THAT'S ALL FOR TONIGHT'S DEBATE. YOU CAN FIND THE DEBATE POSTED AT wisconsinvote.org. REPORTS ON THIS RACE AS WELL AS INTERVIEWS WITH CANDIDATES IN OTHER RACES ARE THERE AS WELL. I'M SHAWN JOHNSON OF WISCONSIN PUBLIC RADIO. I'M FREDERICA FREYBERG. LOOK FOR FULL COVERAGE NEXT FRIDAY NIGHT ON "HERE AND NOW." THANKS FOR WATCHING. AND HAVE A GREAT WEEKEND. >> FOR MORE 2018 ELECTION