Here & Now

Here & Now for May 10, 2019

Frederica Freyberg:
I’m Frederica Freyberg. Tonight on “Here & Now,” we’ll look at Republican abortion bills on the fast track at the capitol. We’ll have an inside look at one of Wisconsin’s greatest pleasures and most chronic problem: alcohol. A closer look at what’s been called a child welfare crisis in Wisconsin. And a preview of a new WPT documentary on trauma-informed care, “Not Enough Apologies.” It’s “Here & Now” for May 10.

Announcer:
Funding for “Here & Now” is provided, in part, by Friends of Wisconsin Public Television.

Frederica Freyberg:
A raft of Republican antiabortion bills are headed to votes on the floor of the Assembly. Bills include a proposed law that would end Medicaid funding for Planned Parenthood, ban abortions based on the sex, race or physical defect of the fetus, and require medical staff to tell women that drug-induced abortions could be reversed and require care for babies born alive during an abortion procedure. Representative Barbara Dittrich is the co-author of the bill that would cut Medicaid funding for Planned Parenthood. She also cosponsored the proposal on abortions related to sex and race. I sat down with the Oconomowoc Republican at the capitol. We started by asking her about a bill prohibiting so-called born alive abortions, reminding her how President Trump described born alive abortion. The baby is born wrapped and then the doctor and mother decide whether they will execute the baby. Is that how you perceive what happens in late term abortions?

Barbara Dittrich:
Actually, yes, I do. He was quoting, the president was quoting the Governor of Virginia describing that on a radio interview. So that’s where that verbiage comes from. I think most of the public is generally against late term abortion. And really this bill is not so much about actively taking the child’s life, but failing to render aid. And people would see the end result as pretty much the same thing. Very disturbing.

Frederica Freyberg:
I do have to just point out that Politifact Wisconsin said this about what the president said. They said Trump grossly oversimplified one of the hardest choices parents face. We rate this claim false. So I mean Politifact decided that what he said was false. Recent statistics in Wisconsin show fewer than 1% of abortions occur after 20 weeks and according to physicians, they involve problems incompatible with life. Why is this bill needed, in your mind?

Barbara Dittrich:
Well, I would say that that’s a falsehood. That it’s needed because a child’s condition is incompatible with life. I have a son with a severe genetic disorder. People would take his life. Most cases where the baby has some difficulties, you would do a caesarean section, not an abortion and kill the child. I think if parents had more information and knew, like we heard in testimony this week, the hope there is and the joy there is in every life, that they would be less inclined to take that life. There’s a lot of pressure on these parents to do things like that. And I think we need to show compassion by preserving that life.

Frederica Freyberg:
Governor Evers vows to veto this bill, as you know, saying doctors are not killing babies and current law covers homicide. If a veto is a foregone conclusion, what’s the point?

Barbara Dittrich:
Well, just as Governor Evers was elected, so was our Assembly and Senate. And our constituents expect us to stand for life. I have heard overwhelmingly from constituents two to one that are in favor of really taking a stand on this. And especially since the laws that we’re seeing moving across this nation involving like Virginia and New York, that’s disturbing to people. Even though Governor Evers doesn’t think this is important, we had a nurse testify at the health care committee just over the state line in Illinois that things like this are happening. And we want to be proactive rather than reactive in a situation like this.

Frederica Freyberg:
You sponsored one of the bills that would prohibit abortions based solely on the race, sex or disability of the fetus. How frequent is that practiced?

Barbara Dittrich:
Well, sadly, we don’t keep statistics in this state. And I find that tremendously disturbing. But, again, there is tremendous pressure, I hear, having worked 16 years in the special needs community, from parents who had prenatal diagnoses where they were pressured by the medical community to end their child’s life in utero. If we wouldn’t discriminate against a human being after they’re born, we surely can’t do it before they’re born. It’s just not right.

Frederica Freyberg:
One of the questions I had was how would the state know if that was a mother’s reason for an abortion?

Barbara Dittrich:
That is a great question. And I actually was hoping it would come up in testimony. It did not. However, we know now people have genetic ultrasounds done. People have genetic testing done. Amniocentesis. You can test cord blood, all these sort of things. There is a medical trail on these sort of things. And, again, the pressure from the medical community can really make this quite apparent.

Frederica Freyberg:
Another of your bills would disallow Medicaid funds to private health care providers who perform abortions. Is that aimed at Planned Parenthood in Wisconsin?

Barbara Dittrich:
Not just at Planned Parenthood. I think that taxpayers feel, okay, you have your right to an abortion, but we don’t want to have to pay for it.

Frederica Freyberg:
I spoke with Representative Dittrich earlier. Mel Barnes is the legal and policy director of Planned Parenthood of Wisconsin. She joins us now. Thanks very much for being here.

Mel Barnes:
Thank you for having me.

Frederica Freyberg:
So as to the born alive bill, Representative Dittrich just told us that she agreed with how President Trump described why it’s needed by saying a doctor and mother decide whether they will execute the baby when it is born alive following a late term abortion. What is your response to that description?

Mel Barnes:
I would say the president’s statements are simply not true and they’re deeply offensive. These bills are being introduced by people for one reason and it is to spread misinformation intentionally about abortion care, women’s health and the doctors who provide that care.

Frederica Freyberg:
How often is it that babies are born alive after an abortion?

Mel Barnes:
This is not happening. Let me be clear. Infanticide is illegal in the state of Wisconsin. We already ban abortion after 20 weeks in pregnancy. This is simply not happening in our state.

Frederica Freyberg:
Who are candidates for such late term abortions?

Mel Barnes:
Women who seek abortion later in pregnancy are often faced with tragic circumstances. Unfortunately, we know that not every pregnancy turns out the way that a family would have hoped. Women who are facing complex medical complications may seek abortion later in pregnancy. But again that care is banned in our state. Women in tragic circumstances often have to travel outside of Wisconsin to get the health care that they need.

Frederica Freyberg:
Governor Evers says that he will veto this bill. Why do you think the majority has it and other antiabortion measures on the fast track like this?

Mel Barnes:
The people who are introducing these bills have one goal and it is to make abortion criminal in every circumstance. These bills are politically motivated. And if the authors of these bills wanted to promote women’s health and children’s health in our state, they would be supporting the governor’s budget which has a comprehensive proposal for addressing women’s health and reducing infant mortality in our state.

Frederica Freyberg:
Other bills include prohibiting abortion based solely on race, sex or disability of the fetus. In your experience, what is the number one reason for someone who aborts a fetus?

Mel Barnes:
Women have abortions for all sorts of personal reasons but we know that this is not what’s happening in our state. These bills are about restricting access to abortion and not being asked for by groups who have historically faced discrimination. The only groups asking for these bills are people who want to ban all abortion and even access to birth control and sex education in Wisconsin.

Frederica Freyberg:
As for the bill that would effectively cut off Medicaid payments to Planned Parenthood, what is your response to that?

Mel Barnes:
Again, this is not about abortion. The services impacted by this bill are lifesaving, critical preventative care like birth control, annual exams and cancer screenings. The people proposing these bills say that they’re about harming Planned Parenthood and taking funds away from Planned Parenthood, but we know that who’s hurt by these bills are patients who rely on Planned Parenthood to access care that they need.

Frederica Freyberg:
And yet it should be noted clearly that Planned Parenthood does perform abortions in Wisconsin.

Mel Barnes
That’s true. We also bill Medicaid just like every other medical provider and that’s for services rendered for a patient sitting in front of us. We are not billing for abortion care in Wisconsin. We’re using Medicaid funds to see patients for critical, preventive care like annual exams and cancer screenings, not abortion care.

Frederica Freyberg:
Representative Dittrich says that that bill is not aimed just at Planned Parenthood but other private providers who perform abortions across Wisconsin. So what would that do for women who might seek that kind of care?

Mel Barnes:
What I can say is that in communities where Planned Parenthood is a provider, we’re often the only place that women have to turn for these services and often one of the only providers that’s willing to accept Medicaid patients without a waiting list. We never turn anyone away because of their inability to pay. And that’s critical for people getting the health care that they need.

Frederica Freyberg:
But again you’re saying that Medicaid itself, those funds, do not pay for abortions?

Mel Barnes:
That’s correct. We’re talking about birth control, cancer screenings, STD testing and treatment.

Frederica Freyberg:
All right. We leave it there. Mel Barnes, thanks very much.

Mel Barnes:
Thank you.

Frederica Freyberg:
Republicans on the Legislature’s Joint Finance Committee took some big knives to Governor Evers’ budget this week, carving out 131 items. Among the cuts, Evers’ proposal to raise taxes on manufacturers and high-income earners. Also eliminated, the governor’s plan to use federal dollars to expand Medicaid coverage to over 80,000 Wisconsinites. Governor Evers responded to that cut by saying, “Folks voted for a change in November. They want us to bring Wisconsin’s federal tax dollars back into our state to invest in health care for all Wisconsinites and they want to see Democrats and Republicans work together to get it done.”
Next Friday night, Zac Schultz will have a special report on the battle over whether or not to expand Medicaid in Wisconsin.
The meth and opioid epidemic is stretching county budgets beyond the breaking point in Wisconsin. That’s what the Wisconsin Counties Association says when it talks in particular about caring for children. Counties call it a child welfare crisis. In tonight’s closer look, we hear from the Director of Human Services in La Crosse County. Jason Witt is here. Thanks very much for being here.

Jason Witt:
Glad to be here.

Frederica Freyberg:
Why do you describe Wisconsin as being in the midst of a child welfare crisis?

Jason Witt:
Well, when you look across the state, county child welfare systems are literally overwhelmed. Overwhelmed because in recent years we’ve seen just a surge of children enter our foster care system. To such an extent that we are struggling to find enough foster homes to keep children local and even at sometimes within the state. Also, now for the workloads for our front line child protective services workers have grown to a point of really being unmanageable. So they’re not able to spend the time with children and their families. So those children are able to be either reunified or adopted in a timely fashion. And all of this, we’ve seen exploding costs where county budgets aren’t able to sustain these type of costs, aren’t able to make the investments to fix these issues.

Frederica Freyberg:
What are some examples of kinds of the numbers, either an uptick of cases or budgets?

Jason Witt:
Yeah. Well, as of 2018 in Wisconsin, we have over 5500 children in foster care or other out-of-home care placements. I should say that number does not even include Milwaukee County because Milwaukee County’s child welfare system is directly run by the State of Wisconsin. So that 5500, that’s a 40% increase over where we were at in 2012. That has really shot up. But even that 40% increase, that’s a large increase. That’s an average across the state. We’ve seen individual counties and communities that have experienced much more than that. I’ll give an example. In Chippewa County just a few years ago, they had 22 children in care. That rose to over 200 children in care in a short amount of time. And they’re primarily driven by the meth issue. So you’ve had counties with 80%, 100% in Chippewa’s case, 800% increase. So it really has been a flood and this really is a crisis.

Frederica Freyberg:
What are you seeking budget-wise from the state to help with this?

Jason Witt:
We’re seeking a $30 million increase in the Children and Families Allocation, which is the funding that helps fund child welfare services in the state of Wisconsin. When we look at that amount, that’s both to help counties address these out-of-home care costs but also make some progress towards getting workloads manageable so we can have a fully functioning system.

Frederica Freyberg:
How likely do you think that ask of the state is?

Jason Witt:
Well, we’re feeling pretty hopeful. And when we look at what could be justified, we could be justifying a $60 million request. But at least this is meaningful enough to stabilize the system, to have a start to talk about long-term solutions. And we appreciate Governor Evers put in his budget a $15 million increase. So far in our discussion with legislators and what we’re hearing out of the Finance Committee are positive things.

Frederica Freyberg:
In regard to child welfare funding, how does Wisconsin compare to other states?

Jason Witt:
Well, Wisconsin is not unique in the fact that these issues with opioids and meth are being experienced all over the country. But unfortunately where Wisconsin is unique is those other states have made investments, recognizing the impacts that this is having on child protective services. So just across the river from us in Minnesota, they made a significant increase in their child welfare system. Colorado is on their third phase of funding to increase the number of child welfare workers. North Carolina has invested funding as well. Other states also have caseload standards for their workers, where Wisconsin does not. So we have to long ways to catch up to get on top of this issue.

Frederica Freyberg:
Meanwhile, where does this crisis leave the children in the system?

Jason Witt:
Well, unfortunately, these children who are the victims of the opioid and meth issues are victims again in coming into a system that overwhelmed. And this means longer time in care for those children. The length of time and care has nearly doubled in recent years. A lot of this we think is because workers overwhelmed, not being able to spend that time. That has a real impact for these kids. Research shows that the longer children spend in care, it has impacts on their development. And it has impacts on their future. We need to get these kids home and forever homes.

Frederica Freyberg:
We need to leave it there. Jason Witt, thank you very much.

Jason Witt:
Thank you.

Frederica Freyberg:
Speaking of children in the child welfare system, tonight an excerpt from a Wisconsin Public Television documentary titled “Not Enough Apologies.” It will air Monday night at 8:00 p.m. It looks at children in the juvenile justice system and the child welfare system and at the trauma in their lives that lands them there. This clip is from a chapter in that program that focuses on children removed from their homes.

Tina Czappa:
Most foster parents are really good and they’re really loving and they want to open their home and their family. But you have those moments where it’s hard for you to receive that kind of love and support because you think, ok, your entire life is mostly filled with the abandonment and the rejection.

Alisha Haase:
I often ask people think about how you would feel as an adult if I walked into your home and said you have to come with me. I can’t tell you very much about where we’re going. I don’t know when you’re going to see your mom and dad again. You’re going to leave your school. You’re going to leave your friends. You’re going to leave your family and I don’t know when you’re going to see them again.

Tina Czappa:
At age one, I was removed from my mom and her significant other. Trauma’s so prevalent and it’s so highly prevalent in foster youth because that’s usually why they enter into foster care.

Tim Grove:
One of the hard parts about being in foster care is often kids move two, three, four, five times.

Pat Schneider:
These kids already are going through probably neglect and abuse at home. So there’s a couple of ACEs of traumas. Now suddenly they’re removed from the home they know and then put into another home. We’re finding that the trauma builds up and continues.

Frederica Freyberg:
State Representative Pat Schneider worked on 11 legislative foster care bills signed into law in 2018, including provisions increasing incentive funding to retain foster homes and encourage permanent homes. He says the need is high for more placements. UW-Whitewater Social Worker Tina Zappa, formerly advocates for such bills in her leadership role in a statewide youth advisory council, made up of current and former foster care children. She says after entering foster care at age one, she moved repeatedly between her biological family and foster homes, including emergency placements due to abuse and neglect.

Tina Czappa:
They didn’t really have places that they knew they were going to put me. In their eyes, there’s a really struggle with shortage of foster home placements.

Frederica Freyberg:
The full documentary can be seen Monday night at 8:00 p.m. on Wisconsin Public Television. You can also visit the web page at wpt.org/trauma.
Now an early look at more original reporting. No one has to tell us that beer has a special cultural and social hold in Wisconsin. Tonight this preview from Wisconsin Public Radio as they embark Monday on two weeks of reporting about alcohol in Wisconsin. The series is titled “High Tolerance” and will be paired with talk programming. We sat down with WPR Capitol Bureau Chief Shawn Johnson, who unraveled the arcane world of Wisconsin rules and regulations around alcohol manufacturing, distribution and sales. Shawn, thanks for doing this.

Shawn Johnson:
Thanks for having me.

Frederica Freyberg:
So fun assignment?

Shawn Johnson:
Oh, yeah. It’s fun. I mean, it is really interesting. However, I would say a lot of the interviews that I did on this took between an hour and three hours to kind of sift through all the nuance. So we should have a good time getting through this in four, five minutes here.

Frederica Freyberg:
You’ve told me that every state has its own laws and regulations around alcohol and they’re pretty complex. But what is the origin of these laws?

Shawn Johnson:
You can trace pretty much all of them back in some form or another to 1933, which is the year that the 21st Amendment to the U.S. Constitution was passed and prohibition ended. Alcohol was legal again in America. The 21st Amendment left it to states to come up with how to regulate alcohol. And kind of the guiding principle of those early regulations were that they didn’t want to go back to what it was like before prohibition, when you had this deregulated alcohol industry that led to saloons and violence and bribery. They didn’t want to return to that so they wanted a heavily-regulated alcohol industry.

Frederica Freyberg:
And so in Wisconsin it’s three tiers. There’s the manufacturer, the brewer, the distributor like the beer trucks and then the retailer like taverns and stores.

Shawn Johnson:
Yeah. In theory, they’re all doing their own things. A brewer is brewing. A distributor is distributing. A retailer is selling. In practice, there are so many exceptions to the law that you get a lot of cross-over. Brewers selling food. Brewers distributing in some cases. In some cases, not. And then there’s a lot of protections written in the law that prohibit them from doing things that they were able to do even just 20 years ago.

Frederica Freyberg:
You kind of looked closely at distributors because there are a lot of these kind of carve-outs and exceptions and laws specific to distributors. Describe that.

Shawn Johnson:
Yeah. I mean, if you look at the changes that Wisconsin has passed in the past couple decades to alcohol laws, distributors have been behind a lot of them. So distributors now have exclusive territories. What that basically means is that for every beer brand in every region, which is a county or a group of counties, there’s one distributor for that beer brand. So you know that particular type of beer rolled off one kind of truck and no other. There’s also something called Wisconsin’s Brand Compensation Law. And that makes it harder for a brewer to leave a distributor without paying them a lot of money. Basically a brewer who decides they want to go to a different distributor would either have to get that distributor to pay their old distributor what’s called fair market value or the brewer would have to pay it themselves, even though they make that beer, they have to buy their brand back.

Frederica Freyberg:
Well, distributors must pretty much like these rules.

Shawn Johnson:
I mean they say there’s a reason for all of them. You talk about brand compensation, for example. They say there’s a value to what they do. So if you see a beer truck rolling down the street with a beer logo painted on the side, chances are pretty good that’s not actually owned by the brewer. It’s owned by the distributor. That logo is a billboard that they pay for to advertise the beer. So brand compensation, they say, is a way to put a value on that.

Frederica Freyberg:
So with craft beers kind of exploding in Wisconsin and elsewhere, where do the carve-outs if you will, for distributors and the protections for distributors leave those smaller manufacturers?

Shawn Johnson:
I mean, I think the entire system of alcohol regulations probably leaves smaller manufacturers in need of a lawyer in some cases. They have to decide what it is they’re going to do and how they’re going to do it legally. There’s a lot of debate over what the law says at any given time. So that’s step one. I think step two is just figuring out how to carve out a niche in that market. There’s a lot of craft brews now compared to just ten years ago. The market has kind exploded. So finding a place for even an excellent beer, you know, in a market that’s full of beer is tricky now for craft brewers.

Frederica Freyberg:
We always think of the Tavern League as being kind of the big Capitol lobby around alcohol in Wisconsin. But the distributors, you say, are actually kind of bigger money players.

Shawn Johnson:
Yeah. I mean the Tavern League is a powerhouse at the Capitol because of grassroots lobbying effort. They do give money to political candidates for sure. but the Tavern League has 5,000 members. That’s about half of all the liquor licenses in Wisconsin. Distributors spend a lot more on political donations. Wisconsin Democracy Campaign tracked donations going back 20 years. Found that $3.3 million had come from distributors. And they give to members of both parties. The top recipients of donations from distributors were Republican Governor Scott Walker and Democratic Governor Jim Doyle.

Frederica Freyberg:
Also in this series, two-week series, you’ll be touching on all kinds of things, not just laws and rules.

Shawn Johnson:
Yeah. I mean it’s a very broad look at alcohol in Wisconsin. And so some of the stories we’ll look at, why is it we like it? Why it’s so popular in Wisconsin? What are some iconic places where it’s consumed? But it will also look at the social costs of alcohol. Drinking and driving in Wisconsin and why there haven’t been tougher drinking and driving laws passed.

Frederica Freyberg:
Shawn, thanks very much.

Shawn Johnson:
Thanks for having me.

Frederica Freyberg:
Now to agriculture news and a seasonal setback. State farmers have had to delay spring planting due to the wet spring. Corn was supposed to be planted this week and agronomists say late planting could diminish yields. According to a USDA survey, 7% of the state’s crops are currently planted, which is eight days behind the state’s recent average.
Next week, Zac Schultz reports on the effort to expand Medicaid eligibility in Wisconsin.
That’s all for tonight’s program. I’m Frederica Freyberg. Have a great weekend.

Announcer:
Funding for “Here & Now” is provided, in part, by Friends of Wisconsin Public Television.