Frederica Freyberg:
I’m Frederica Freyberg. Tonight on “Here & Now,” efforts to reduce the state’s homeless population. The need for more sign language interpreters in Wisconsin, and our political panelists, McCoshen and Ross are back, just as the candidates for president swarm into the state. It’s “Here & Now” for April 26.

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

Frederica Freyberg:
The problem of homelessness in Wisconsin is getting sharp attention at the state level. Eight new legislative bills calling for nearly $4 million in new spending to combat the issue are in progress. And the governor himself announced he will chair the Interagency Council on Homelessness, created two years ago. Tony Evers also included the same provisions in funding in his proposed two year budget. Tonight ahead of a legislative discussion on the topic, we revisit a clip from a short film aired here first, “No Place Like Home” features the story of a once homeless teen. Jivonte Davis tells how quickly the security of housing can vanish.

Jivonte Davis:
One night, it was like, I had a basketball tournament in Minnesota. So I went to Minnesota for three days. You know, my phone was off so I couldn’t contact my mom or anything. And then, um, I came back from the trip exhausted, you know, wanted to go home. Get ready for school and everything. And then, it was, like, I used my key to open the door and the door wouldn’t open. I’d kind of seen the, like, the “for sale” sign up in the lawn. But, like, I never paid attention to it. And then, our neighbor from across the street came outside and was like, “Son, are you looking for your mom?” I was like, “Yeah.” She’s like, “Son, I just seen a moving truck leave here yesterday.” I called my mom and she told me that she end up losing the house while I was gone and by me and my phone being off, she couldn’t contact me and tell me. She started crying and she’s like, “We’re in Sun Prairie.” And she told me, “You can stay here or you can do what you got to do.” And I told her, “I can’t be in Sun Prairie. We don’t have transportation.” And I go, “I still have to finish school.” So I just stayed on in Madison on my own. I was staying at friends’ houses. What they call it nowadays, they call it couch surfing, where you sleep from couch to couch, from house to house. And that’s what I was doing. The transition was hard because I was so used to like, I was used to taking advantage of everything that, like, we did have when I was home. We did have, like you know, electricity, fresh water, you know, heat. I took it for granted pretty much and you never, you don’t know that until you get on your own and then it’s like, man, how am I going to pay for tonight. Or like, what am I gonna eat? Or how can I charge my phone? Like, I told myself, “One day it’s there. The next day, it could be gone.”

Frederica Freyberg:
That film by Mitch Deitz and accompanying program won first place at the prestigious Eric Sevareid awards this month.
Continuing this discussion now in tonight’s closer look, we sit down with the state Assembly majority leader to run through the spending proposals for homelessness in Wisconsin. According to a state report nearly 22,000 people experienced homelessness in Wisconsin in 2017. And nearly 3,500 of those people slept in places not meant for human habitation during winter months. The report also showed 56% of people who experienced being homeless were from outside Milwaukee, Dane and Racine Counties. With that in mind, eight legislative measures proposed the $3.75 million spending that includes increased funding toward preventing homelessness by providing short term assistance, transitional housing, affordable housing, and job skills training. The very same measures are in the government’s budget proposal. We sat down with Assembly Majority Leader Representative Jim Steineke and started by asking him to describe the measures.

Jim Steineke:
Really the focus is trying to make an impact on the homelessness problem from beginning to end of the spectrum, right. So on the front end of things, trying to keep people from experiencing homelessness to begin with by providing, in some cases, short term grants or small or low interest loans in order to get them through you a rough time so they don’t experience homelessness to begin with. To the point where they’re homeless and we’re providing more resources for shelters throughout the state, more resources for workforce training. Everything along the way to try to get people into a place where they’re more secure.

Frederica Freyberg:
You sponsored legislation that created the State Council on Homelessness. And its recommendations out of that council mirrored these legislative proposals. It’s not as though your Kaukauna district is kind of the epicenter of homelessness in Wisconsin. Why did you take the lead on it?

Jim Steineke:
Yeah, so really I guess it boils down to a couple of things. The main thing was after having spent six or eight years coming down here to Madison to work every week, and noticing the homelessness problem. Especially in my first term, how bad it was and just how visible it was in comparison to what it is in northeastern Wisconsin, it really had a pretty dramatic effect on me. But then over the course of the next few years, you just kind of become numb to it. And the homeless unfortunately become kind of part of the scenery in Madison. And once I realized that that’s what was happening in my own mind, that’s when I really started to get concerned and I really wanted to start digging in further to see what we could do to help.

Frederica Freyberg:
Governor Evers this spring announced that he will chair this council. What does that say to you about his commitment on this issue?

Jim Steineke:
I think that’s significant. I mean, obviously our past chair was Lieutenant Governor Rebecca Kleefisch who did a wonderful job leading the Interagency Council over the first year and was really responsible for developing this package of legislation. I’m encouraged by the fact that he wants to lead it. We’re a little disappointed there hasn’t been a meeting called yet. And there hasn’t been an executive director hired. So that’s a little concerning. We really want to keep the momentum building on this. And that’s one of the reasons we wanted to introduce this package of legislation separately to keep this top of mind for not only legislators but people throughout the state.

Frederica Freyberg:
And yet going through the governor’s executive budget, each of the provisions in each of the bills is mirrored in that budget as well, and so what does that say to you about his commitment?

Jim Steineke:
I think that’s a significant tell as well, is that he is committed to what he is taking. He did take those recommendations and make it part of his budget. Really what we want to do by pulling those out and having hearings separately is continue that conversation, because in the absence of the Interagency Council on Homelessness meeting, there’s kind of a void in news making on the issue. So as we continue to hold hearings on these bills and media continues to cover the issue, we continue to spread awareness about the problem.

Frederica Freyberg:
Do you have some suspicion that these bills or even the provisions in the budget won’t be supported in a bipartisan way?

Jim Steineke:
No, I certainly hope not. I haven’t heard from anybody that is in direct opposition to any particular bill. So as it has been in the past, I think it will continue to be a bipartisan issue.

Frederica Freyberg:
Now advocates for homeless have said that Wisconsin had no plan on this issue for many years, unlike most other states. How far will these spending measures go to catching up toward as you say prevention in the first place and then helping those who are already without homes?

Jim Steineke:
I think it’s significant. I mean, I think the first step was the initial creation of that Interagency Council. The work that they’ve done over the course of the last year working with, a year and a half really, working with advocates to come up with these proposals was phenomenal. And now we’re going to see the results of these as we go forward. But I just remember back when we first started this initiative, where we talked to somebody from the Continuum of Care and she said that in her 10, 11 or 12 years working with the Continuum of Care, this is the first time anybody from the state has ever reached out to her to work on this issue. Which really kind of took me aback because that covers a span of both Republicans and Democrats in control, and nobody was really paying attention. It was kind of telling.

Frederica Freyberg:
How would you like to build on this effort?

Jim Steineke:
Just continue to keep the awareness amongst the public because I think all too often, people see homelessness as a Milwaukee problem or a Madison problem. They don’t realize that homelessness is in virtually every community throughout the state. It affects rural areas as well as urban areas. And there’s just not a lot of awareness about how significant the problem is, even in people’s own backyards.

Frederica Freyberg:
All right. Representative Jim Steineke, thanks very much.

Jim Steineke:
Thanks for having me.

Frederica Freyberg:
And this note on the description of a bill concerning rape kit testing we reported last week. Under a proposed bill to codify procedures, we should have explained that if victims choose to report their assault to law enforcement, medical professionals will have 24 hours to report to police that they have gathered a sexual assault kit. Law enforcement will then have 72 hours to collect the kit, and 14 days to send it to the State Crime Lab for analysis.
Remember when then State Rep Tom Nelson slept at his desk in the state Assembly chambers in protest over the state budget impasse? In tonight’s inside look, we’ve got another state representative trying to draw attention to stalled legislation. Milwaukee Democrat Jonathan Brostoff has vowed not to cut his hair until a specific bill is passed. Representative Brostoff, thanks very much for joining us.

Jonathan Brostoff:
Yeah, thanks for having me.

Frederica Freyberg:
So we can see the difference. We had a before shot and now you here today but why don’t you tell us what you’re doing in protest.

Jonathan Brostoff:
I wouldn’t actually classify it as a protest per se. I think it’s more so just a commitment I’ve made to a number of the members of the deaf community leaders who I’ve been working with across the state on passing their legislation. And basically, especially for the deaf community, it’s a visual indicator, saying I’m with you and we’re not going to stop until we get this done. So it’s more so kind of like a working arrangement between me and them. And just letting them know I’m with them. I’m their ally and every time they see me, they’re going to know I’m going to continue my work on it. But it kind of got covered by a local media source and kind of blew up like that, but it’s more so just a kind of personal commitment between me and some of the stakeholders who I’ve been working with.

Frederica Freyberg:
So tell me what your commitment is. What are you seeking to do?

Jonathan Brostoff:
Sure. So we’ve been working for years now on a bill for the deaf community. Basically updating the sign language interpreting laws in Wisconsin. And it’s a fairly technical bill but in essence, it would create more access for the deaf community, more accountability for the deaf community and it would get a lot more sign language interpreters back to work in Wisconsin, which would help with the scarcity issue we currently have.

Frederica Freyberg:
So the legislation would create a new licensing board for sign language interpreters. What is the holdup on this?

Jonathan Brostoff:
Well, we enjoyed broad bipartisan support in the Assembly. In fact we had basically unanimous support in Assembly, so all 99 members. It went through committee, no problem. It passed the executive session, in committee unanimously. And when it got to the Senate, it stalled last time around, which isn’t terribly uncommon, but it was a big blow to the deaf community because of how important this legislation is. And folks are really torn up, understandably so, afterwards. So I basically said, you know, this is going to be a number one priority and we’re not going to stop until we get it done. And I’ve been thankful to have colleagues like Representative Skowronski, former Representative Kleefisch and Senator Testin and other Republicans and Democrats who are going to continue to work on this and who also understand how imperative it is that we advance deaf rights in Wisconsin and get this bill passed.

Frederica Freyberg:
Describe for me what this legislation would do again. I know it creates a licensing board but then it sets up kind of tiers of different experience and education that these interpreters would need to have. Describe that.

Jonathan Brostoff:
Yeah, exactly. So basically in a nutshell, it’s matching interpreters at the education and skill level they’re at with the jobs that are appropriate for them. And this is especially relevant for a situation such as medical, mental health, and legal, where the nature of the work is a little more technical. And it’s also a little more high stakes, given what folks are working on. So this would more clearly define the scope of practice as well.

Frederica Freyberg:
So you would have to have an advanced level interpreter to do things like medical kinds of signing or legal or perhaps if a hearing impaired person is having an interaction with law enforcement, for example, and why is that important?

Jonathan Brostoff:
Well, I can actually explain it by a quick example of a young Wisconsin woman who came to testify at one of the first deaf legislative days, Theresa. She was seeking medical attention in a rural Wisconsin hospital, and although before she got there, she informed them that she needed a live interpreter who was up to par, she was not provided that. And long story short, she basically ended up getting the wrong surgery performed on her. This was very critical to her health. And so she’s kind of made this her life’s work now. And I think she’s going to end up being a civil rights lawyer so she can protect others in the situation, but we want to make sure in sensitive situations like that, people are getting the exact appropriate care and when you’re relying on someone to communicate that information properly, you need to make sure that the skill level and appropriate amount of information is being transmitted in a critical time. So you want to have that scope of practice well defined as our bill does.

Frederica Freyberg:
Now a licensing board would also be able to investigate violations and make findings. Why is that important?

Jonathan Brostoff:
Correct. So one of the issues we heard, and I toured all over the state and I met with folks from rural areas and from urban areas and from different scopes of life. And among the deaf community that I met with, one thing was very consistent which was, they wanted a mechanism for accountability in the bill that doesn’t currently exist. So right now there’s no real effective way to go after someone who’s practicing illegally. And that’s something that a lot of people were very concerned with. Although it’s not necessarily a widespread issue and we don’t have tons of illegal interpreters, you know, trying to harm people. For the people whose lives it affects, it was something that they made sure to let me know was a priority. So we had to include that, absolutely, in the bill. So it offers that level of accountability that doesn’t currently exist.

Frederica Freyberg:
All right. Well, Representative Brostoff, thank you very much for joining us and describing what you’re doing.

Jonathan Brostoff:
Thank you, and thanks for your work.

Frederica Freyberg:
We all know Wisconsin is ground zero for the 2020 presidential race. Look no further than the number of Democratic candidates who have already made swings through this battleground state. With President Donald Trump arriving this weekend in Green Bay. It’s no secret why the Democratic Party is hosting its convention in Milwaukee next summer. Everyone needs to win over Wisconsin, but what kind of message and whose will resonate? For this, we turn to our political panelists, Capital Consultants Bill McCoshen and the return of Democratic strategist Scot Ross who rejoins us after a brief job-related departure and some convincing on our part. So thanks to both of you for being back here again.

Scot Ross:
You need to twist my arm.

Frederica Freyberg:
We want our departing gift T-shirt back. No, I’m just kidding. You can keep it. But as to all of these folks: Klobuchar, Sanders, Booker, Beto, Donald Trump tomorrow. Joe Biden, when is he going to appear?

Bill McCoshen:
You want to take it first?

Scot Ross:
You know, I mean, I have to think that the circle is going to — the cycle is going to continue. I mean Wisconsin is a great state. It’s a state that we have to win. It’s a state that we can win. And you know, it certainly has that appeal. You know, there’s urban areas. There’s rural areas. There’s universities. There’s manufacturing. It has all the hallmarks of a great state that you need to win if you want to be a Democrat who wins the presidency. That is for sure.

Frederica Freyberg:
So he says Democrats can win. What do you think? Wisconsin.

Bill McCoshen:
Well, yeah, they’re 8 and 2 in the last ten presidential cycles here in Wisconsin. Trump won here three years ago. I think he’s in a good position to be re-elected here. But the record since 1980 is 8 and 2. So there’s no question that they have an advantage.

Frederica Freyberg:
So what is the message that Wisconsin voters want to hear?

Bill McCoshen:
Well, I think as it relates to the trips, this will be Trump’s 18th trip to Wisconsin since he came down the escalator in June of 2015. That’s extraordinary. And it’s a formula we used with Tommy Thompson all the time which is presence equals popularity. He knows where he has to be and he goes there. And he competes for those votes. I think the results speak for themselves. The fact that he was able to win the state when a George W. Bush or H.W. Bush, you know, wasn’t able to win the state. People want to be courted and they were courted here by Donald Trump.

Frederica Freyberg:
Is it as simple as that, though, just if you show up, you win?

Scot Ross:
I think no. I think that there is an absence — to re-litigate 2016 for just five seconds — there was an utter and complete absence of television presence by the Democratic candidate for president at that point in time. So places like Eau Claire, Wausau, La Crosse, where there are good solid pockets of large Democratic voters. They weren’t given any reason necessarily to go out, be inspired and go to the polls and vote. Meanwhile the Republicans, they had a guy who was on TV for 16 years, who is out saying the things that apparently will make them go and vote. It’s about turnout.

Frederica Freyberg:
Speaking of saying things and the message, what is the message, do you think, that is going to resonate with Wisconsin voters?

Bill McCoshen:
For Trump, I think it’s the economy. Today the new GDP numbers were out. It was 3.2 for the quarter, which was spectacular. Well above the expectations and it’s been averaging about 3% or better in every quarter that he’s been president. So we were told in the Obama White House that, you know, 1% or 1 1/2 was the new normal. It’s not even close to the new normal. It’s the economy.

Scot Ross:
I think that you should talk GDP all you want and my side will talk about how people’s taxes went up despite the fact that millionaires and billionaires had their taxes go down. I just read a thing today. It’s sort of buzzing on the news. Gold star families have been socked with tax breaks. These are people who their family died in the line of service of this nation. They get a $15,000 death benefit. Woman reported that she paid $1,100 in taxes on it last time. This time she’s paying $5,500. That is not something that you can win re-election on when, again, if you’ve raised our taxes, you’re going to have a real problem with it. You know, Republicans have been running on that for years, whether Democrats raised them or not.

Frederica Freyberg:
Did the Mueller Report break President Trump’s stride at all?

Bill McCoshen:
I thought it helped him, no question about it. It put this issue to bed. Democrats, some Democrats, not all, Nancy Pelosi being a great exception here. She wants to move on from that. She doesn’t believe it’s helpful to the Democratic Party. I can’t believe I’m saying it. I agree with Nancy Pelosi. It’s not helpful for Democrats. It is helpful for Trump for Democrats to continue to beat that dead horse because it’s not going anywhere.

Frederica Freyberg:
Is that a dead horse?

Scot Ross:
I disagree completely because I will say this. You know, there’s the political thing to do and then there’s what’s right to do. It’s very clear that Donald Trump committed a series of impeachable offenses. Not just one, not just two but several of them. Obstructing justice. You know, inciting — calling for the inciting of violence. The conspiracy to commit, to commit, to commit crimes. That’s where Stormy Daniels payment was funded.

Bill McCoshen:
He said there was no basis.

Scot Ross:
He did not say that. He said I cannot, I cannot rule it out. Oh, the attorney general. Sorry, oh no, the attorney general definitely did.

Bill McCoshen:
Right.

Scot Ross:
But the attorney general is a hack. The fact is —

Bill McCoshen:
Eric Holder wasn’t, right?

Scot Ross:
The Democrats are going to have to proceed on some sort of exploration about what happened because Democratic voters, particularly angry Democratic base voters, see their neighbors and friends being incarcerated for crimes and Donald Trump just simply going away, being able to buy himself out or buy time out of it.

Bill McCoshen:
Bring it on. I love it. It makes Nancy Pelosi weaker. It makes Democrats weaker. It makes Trump stronger. Keep it up.

Scot Ross:
I would remind, after the 1998 — in 1998 when the impeachment was going on with Clinton, it started in December. 1998 was defined by impeachment. Tommy Thompson won with 60%. The House Democrats picked up five seats. The Senate was a wash: 3 to 3. And they picked up — and Democrats picked up one governor. It did not hurt the Republicans in any way, shape or form to proceed down that nonsense of impeachment. Let alone this actual real tangible reason that needs to be explored.

Bill McCoshen:
Let’s be clear about something. There’s about 30 or 35 new Democrats in seats that Trump won just two years ago. There’s no chance they’re voting for an impeachment. Nancy Pelosi doesn’t have the votes. That’s why she’s not — she says she wants to move on.

Frederica Freyberg:
All right. Let’s move along to state side stuff. The lame duck legislation that is now at the high court, Wisconsin Supreme Court. What is up with that with the liberals wanting to take to the high court and get it out of the appeals court?

Scot Ross:
Well, like I say, when we talk about legal strategy, I’m not a lawyer. So I don’t quite understand the legal rationale for that. But I think they probably, you know, it’s going to inevitably end up there anyhow, so why not take it there now and see whether or not you can convince Dan Kelly, who’s the swing vote because he’s up for election in 2020, when Democrats are going to be voting in hoards, what is he going to end up doing on this.

Bill McCoshen:
I think both sides want some finality to this. So the Supreme Court is the only place they’re going to get that. Messing around in appellate court doesn’t make any sense. It’s just going to drag this out even longer. So I think going to the Supreme Court on both sides was the right answer. And let’s get some finality to this once and for all.

Frederica Freyberg:
All this talk that we’ve heard ever since Tony Evers came into office about working across the aisle and finding things, you know, that we can work on in a bipartisan way, is there anything to be had in your minds in the state budget or otherwise where?

Bill McCoshen:
In the first hundred days, zero. There’s nothing he can point to where he’s worked across the aisle. Whether it’s pre-existing condition, where Robin Vos did try and cut a deal with him. Vos ultimately passed the bill that he thought he had a deal with with the governor. Or it’s the middle class tax cuts which Tony Evers ran on and efficiently vetoed. I would say that’s their biggest misstep in the first hundred days is they do not have a bipartisan accomplishment.

Scot Ross:
I mean after what happened with the lame duck and the way that they’ve negotiated. I mean, you know basically it’s like you dump a bucket of water on somebody and yell at them for being wet. I mean it’s ridiculous. And I think that, you know, the still de facto leader of the party here, Scott Walker, is a great example of the sort of tenor of what Republicans are doing right now. Tony Evers, Governor Evers has gone out of his way to reach across the aisle, to meet with Republicans, to hold budget listening sessions all over the state so people can share ideas, actually, not craft the budget in secret which has happened the last eight years, but real ideas. And he is getting nothing.

Bill McCoshen:
What one issue has he tried to work with them on?

Scot Ross:
Criminal reform. I think that’s one place where we’re talking about.

Bill McCoshen:
I think there will be some bipartisan support for that.

Scot Ross:
I think we can get something done on transportation because we have to.

Bill McCoshen:
That wasn’t something he ran on. I think you’d agree on that. That wasn’t one of his big items.

Frederica Freyberg:
What about this idea, though, of pouring cold water with this lame duck stuff right out of the chute.

Bill McCoshen:
I worked for a governor for 10 years. You’ve got to be above that. You have to know — you gotta focus on your agenda, stay disciplined on your message. You do have to work behind the scenes in some cases with the legislative leadership to try and accomplish your agenda. At the end of the day, he’s going to get judged on his results and so far, they’re pretty sparse.

Frederica Freyberg:
All right. You guys, we have to leave it there. Bill McCoshen, Scot Ross, thank you very much. Welcome back. Great to have you back together again. Thanks.
Now for an update out of Washington, where federal authorities will look into allegations of sexual assault within the Wisconsin National Guard. Governor Tony Evers and U.S. Senator Tammy Baldwin announced Wednesday that investigators will spend the next several months in Wisconsin. They will review the guard’s policies and practices on sexual assault and investigate existing allegations. This probe stems from allegations of sexual assault occurring at the Madison Air National Guard base from 2002 to 2016. Baldwin called for an investigation in November and says this review will help create an environment free of sexual harassment.
Next week a conversation with Preston Cole, the secretary of the Department of Natural Resources. That’s our program for tonight. I’m Frederica Freyberg. Have a great weekend.

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