Here & Now

Here & Now for Jan. 18, 2019

Frederica Freyberg:
I’m Frederica Freyberg. Tonight on “Here & Now,” Governor Tony Evers and lawmakers spar over Medicaid dollars. A closer look at a victims rights bill at the state Capital. An update on the Lincoln Hills correctional facility and prison payrolls on hold due to the partial government shutdown. It’s “Here & Now” for January 18.

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

Frederica Freyberg:
Newly-elected Governor Tony Evers met with Republican leaders this week to move on one of his biggest campaign promises, expanding Medicaid. Zac Schultz reports.

Zac Schultz:
The bipartisan pledge to be more bipartisan had its first test this week. When Governor Tony Evers was invited to a joint Senate and Assembly Republican caucus meeting. The Republicans met the Democratic governor with applause and then questions about the budget, specifically whether he planned to ask for the federal money available for the expansion of Medicaid.

Robin Vos:
Expanding government-run healthcare is a non-starter too.

Zac Schultz:
Assembly Speaker Robin Vos says they would prefer Governor Evers not even put expansion in his budget.

Robin Vos:
Don’t pick things that you know have no chance of passing just to score political points.

Zac Schultz:
But Evers campaigned on expanding Medicaid and says taking the federal money will free up state money to pay for other things.

Tony Evers:
Were not going to burn the Capitol down here. We’re going to disagree.

Zac Schultz:
An analysis by the non-partisan Legislative Fiscal Bureau estimated if the state had taken the expansion in 2016, that through 2021 it would have brought in $3 billion in federal dollars for healthcare, and freed up $1 billion in state money. Instead, Governor Walker opted to expand BadgerCare and reject the federal dollars. Governor Evers says that hurts small town healthcare providers the most, areas largely represented by Republicans.

Tony Evers:
If Republican legislators who come from small town Wisconsin that understand that the success of those small town hospitals and clinics depend upon having access to greater resources, they may change their mind. So we’re going to take this directly to the people of Wisconsin in a respectful way.

Zac Schultz:
But Vos says expansion would hurt the private insurance market.

Robin Vos:
Every person that’s on BadgerCare is subsidized by somebody who’s in the private insurance market. So the more people that we take from the private insurance market to put into the public market, the higher the rates are going to go for those people who have private sector insurance. So granted, there might be a short one-time savings for the state, but that is more than offset by the cost in the private sector for what they have to pay to subsidize those people who are already on BadgerCare.

Frederica Freyberg:
That was Zac Schultz reporting. Tension between the governor and the Republican majority was sparked even before the Evers inauguration during the so-called lame duck session. That’s when Republicans passed measures that included a bill that put new limits on early voting in Wisconsin. On Thursday, U.S. District Judge James Peterson struck down those limitations in a ruling on a lawsuit brought by One Wisconsin Now. He said the voting restrictions mirrored limits that he declared unconstitutional in 2016. Governor Evers will present his State of the State address next Tuesday, January 22. Tune in to live coverage of the speech on Wisconsin Public Television and Radio starting at 7:00 p.m.
In tonight’s closer look, a proposal that would give crime victims additional rights moves through the Wisconsin legislature on its way, supporters hope, to becoming an amendment to the state constitution. A joint resolution known as Marsy’s Law would add new victims’ rights to those already protected under law, including new rights that are controversial. In a few minutes, we will hear from an opponent of the law who believes it would interfere with rights of the accused because one measure in the resolution allows victims to, “refuse an interview, deposition or other discovery request made by the accused or any person acting on behalf of the accused.” Still, supporters say the resolution would make rights of the victims and the accused equal under law. The proposal was in the midst of its second consideration but late this week, Assembly leadership decided to potentially delay sending the measure to voters until 2020, seeking more time for study. Ariel Ludlum had testified before lawmakers this month in favor of Marsy’s Law, hoping for it to go to voters this April. Ms. Ludlum joins us now. Thanks very much for being here.

Ariel Ludlum:
Thank you for having me.

Frederica Freyberg:
So what is your reaction to the potential delay of this going to voters?

Ariel Ludlum:
So we do have hope that it will continue to go forward. However, if it is delayed, it’s just another year that victims are going to go without those rights that they truly do deserve.

Frederica Freyberg:
Now you testified, as we said, before legislators as a victim. What was your story, what happened to you?

Ariel Ludlum:
So about two years ago, I worked for a company in Sheboygan County, and I got paid pretty well, fairly well. I made about $18 an hour, and I was able to support my family and my little one that I had. I didn’t realize that kind of being friendly with people would open it up for a man to take advantage of that. He took advantage of that and I didn’t recognize it at the time but it was sexual abuse in the workplace. I did eventually confront him about it and say this isn’t okay, you can’t be doing this, you can’t do these things to me, say these things to me, and when I would do that, because he was a maintenance man, he was able to keep my machine down, which then in turn would cause me to take $5, $6 less in pay.

Frederica Freyberg:
And so as a victim of this, were you treated badly?

Ariel Ludlum:
Throughout the legal process after I quit, he was promoted, and I realize what happened to me wasn’t right. I needed to file a complaint about it, about everything that happened, and as the legal process went on, I hired an attorney. I acquired debt from it as the company continued to throw more money behind their attorney, and the company did admit that I was sexually abused. However, they claimed it was due to my naivety and my young age. And they also then threatened that if we could continue on through the court process in fighting for the justice I deserved, that defamation of character was imminent as they were going to pull things up from my past.

Frederica Freyberg:
Wow. So what about opponents, many of them defense lawyers, who say that Marsy’s Law would conflict with U.S. Constitutional protections of the accused, if you could refuse interviews with those lawyers?

Ariel Ludlum:
So Marsy’s Law, what it comes down to is, I can say no. I don’t have to give you everything right away. I don’t have to say, you know, here’s my whole past, please pull it apart. But they can, if they can prove that it is detrimental to the case if they don’t have that, then a judge can require that I meet with them or that I provide the evidence that’s needed. And it does state in the proposal that it is not intended to and may not be interpreted to supersede a defendant’s federal constitutional rights. Our goal isn’t to counter the defendant’s rights. It’s not to take them away. Our goal is simply to even the playing field and provide constitutional rights for the victim as well.

Frederica Freyberg:
We keep talking about Marsy’s Law. It originated in California. How did it start?

Ariel Ludlum:
So Marsy’s Law started when a woman named Marsy was stalked and murdered by her ex-boyfriend. Marsy’s brother, who is a doctor and her mom went to visit her grave, and then went grocery shopping afterwards. And as they were checking out at the grocery store, her murderer was there. He was there, out, just wandering around grocery shopping too and they had no idea that he was out. They didn’t know anything was going on with the case. And that made the doctor realize, I don’t have — we don’t have these rights for — we don’t have these rights to know these things, and we do really deserve them.

Frederica Freyberg:
So were there specific oversights in your mind regarding your case that would have been fixed with this law?

Ariel Ludlum:
Absolutely. So I did not continue to push forward with the court process, solely because of the lack of privacy. They could have pulled things that had nothing to do with my case but used it, as they said, as a defamation of character. And that, for me, was enough to say, you know, I will lose out on my justice so that I don’t have to drag myself or my family through that.

Frederica Freyberg:
How angry did that make you?

Ariel Ludlum:
Very, very angry, and it still makes me angry to this day.

Frederica Freyberg:
Ariel Ludlum, thanks very much.

Ariel Ludlum:
Thank you.

Frederica Freyberg:
Among those opposed to Marsy’s Law, Matt Rothschild. He’s executive director of the Wisconsin Democracy Campaign and he joins us now. Thanks very much for being here.

Matt Rothschild:
Thanks for inviting me.

Frederica Freyberg:
So what’s your reaction to the fact that apparently this resolution is going to see a delay in a floor vote?

Matt Rothschild:
Well, I was really happy to see that the Assembly seems to be slowing this thing down. There’s no reason to railroad it through and it was happening super-fast. Not everybody had a chance to get noticed when the hearing was and not everyone got to testify who wanted to testify. And so Im really happy that it’s slowing down. Amending the state Constitution is a serious thing and it shouldn’t be railroaded through.

Frederica Freyberg:
So what’s your primary concern about the law as proposed in Wisconsin?

Matt Rothschild:
The fundamental problem with Marsy’s Law as an amendment to the state Constitution is that it runs head on into the 6th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. The 6th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution defends the right of the accused to have a fair trial and to get depositions and to face his or her accuser. Marsy’s Law, at least one provision in it, would prevent the accused from having those rights. If you’re a victim, you could say I don’t want to talk to this guy’s lawyer. Im a victim here. Leave me alone. While you can sympathize with the victim in the circumstance, it deprives anyone who’s accused of a crime of getting a decent fair trial.

Frederica Freyberg:
I understood though that a judge could compel this kind of information from the victim or their advocates?

Matt Rothschild:
Well thats what proponents say but the “could” is the problem. Would they, number one? And if it’s in the state Constitution, if Im a victim, Im going to say Ive got a constitutional right here, guaranteed by the state Constitution, I don’t need to talk to anybody. Leave me alone. And that’s not how our system should work. You should be able, if you’re accused, to face the person who’s accusing you. And your attorney should be able to get a deposition. You should be able to get a fair trial.

Frederica Freyberg:
Wisconsin already has some pretty strong laws for victims.

Matt Rothschild:
Yeah, this is another problem with Marsy’s Law. It’s not really necessary. There’s a whole statute. It’s called Chapter 950 that lays out, almost word for word, some of the same protections in Marsy’s Law. So why do we need it as an amendment to the state Constitution if we have these good protections in the statute? If that statute isn’t being enforced, if victims are not getting their rights enforced here in Wisconsin, it’s up to the judges. It’s up to the prosecutors. It’s up to the DAs to make sure that their rights are being enforced and that they’re being respected. Victims should be respected in this state but there are a lot of protections for that respect and for their process already on the statutes.

Frederica Freyberg:
If those protections were already there, what do you think the motivation is behind trying to move this through into a constitutional amendment in Wisconsin?

Matt Rothschild:
Well, at the Wisconsin Democracy Campaign, we always look at the money behind bills and laws and policies. There is one person in the United States, a billionaire in California, who’s been pushing this around the country. He’s spent millions of dollars in other states. He may be spending here in Wisconsin. We haven’t been able to track it down, but the proponents of this Marsy’s Law in Wisconsin, LLC has already spent $865,000 in lobbying. And that’s a chunk of change.

Frederica Freyberg:
And yet how difficult is it to almost really come out against victims?

Matt Rothschild:
Well, I understand the dilemma that an elected official is in here. No elected official wants to face a commercial next time he or she is running for office to say, wow, he or she opposed victims rights. What’s wrong with this person? But there were a lot of questions raised at the hearing that I attended on this by representatives on both sides. Wondering specifically about this question of the 6th Amendment right of the accused and also some other problems that people were raising about Marsy’s Law as it’s currently written. So slow things down. Let’s look at that. Let’s get more testimony, and let’s try to fix the problems in this.

Frederica Freyberg:
It does have some bipartisan support, though, in the Wisconsin legislature, and even Josh Kaul.

Matt Rothschild:
Yes, I saw that. I was disappointed, of course, but from a prosecutor’s standpoint, I understand, you know, the pressure on them to back the sheriffs who’ve back it too. But I think we need to look at what kind of country do we want and understand that people who are accused can lose their life and liberty if they’re not allowed to defend themselves. And that’s a really important tenant of our democracy in this country. Are we going to just let that go by the wayside? I should hope not.

Frederica Freyberg:
Matt Rothschild, thanks very much.

Matt Rothschild:
Thanks.

Frederica Freyberg:
Attorney General Josh Kaul told us this about the proposed constitutional amendment. “We must do all we can to protect victims of crime. I’m in favor of Marsy’s Law,” he says, “and I believe we need to do more to assist law enforcement and victim advocates with the critical work they do to support victims.” The first report from a court-ordered monitor show conditions at Wisconsins juvenile prison continue to be a problem for inmates and staff. In tonight’s look ahead, the state will close Lincoln Hills and Copper Lake in coming years, following inmate abuse and resulting lawsuits. The state agreed to pay nearly $20 million in the case of a girl left permanently disabled when staff there failed to respond to her suicide attempt. A separate class action lawsuit on behalf of several inmates over their treatment, including the use of pepper spray, restraints and segregation, resulted in the court-ordered monitoring at the institution. For reaction to the report, we are joined by Larry Dupuis, legal director at ACLU Wisconsin, which filed that class action lawsuit. Thanks very much for being here.

Larry Dupuis:
Thank you for having me, Frederica.

Frederica Freyberg:
So the report noted only partial compliance on the use of things like pepper spray and mechanical restraints and segregation. Having filed that lawsuit over the use of those measures, what is your reaction to that?

Larry Dupuis:
Well, obviously we would like to see full compliance, substantial compliance, but that was understood that it was going to take some time. In fact, with regard to pepper spray, there was a timeline over which they were supposed to eliminate it completely so we didn’t expect elimination. The real problem here is the use of — continued use of pepper spray in situations where it’s not necessary to protect youth from physical harm or guards from physical harm. So there’s still continued uses of pepper spray for kids doing things like just hanging their arms outside their cells, which is completely inappropriate.

Frederica Freyberg:
So in terms of other kinds of conditions that were occurring at Lincoln Hills and Copper Lake, including abuse, do you continue to hear of that?

Larry Dupuis:
Not so much the sorts of physical abuse that were occurring a few years ago. There are — we consider use of pepper spray in inappropriate circumstances to be abusive and excessive use of restraints. And the restraint use seems to have completely subsided, not entirely gone but mostly gone. That was particularly troubling. It had just really dehumanized the kids. They felt like animals. And that’s been eliminated with no apparent ill effects. One of the interesting things about the monitor’s report is that it indicates that in spite of declines in the use of these extreme measures, there have been no additional assaults or, in fact, there’s been a reduction in assaults. So that is an indication of what we’ve said all along, and what experts in the field have said all along, is that you don’t need to use these sorts of abusive approaches to try to control behavior. There are other ways to do it.

Frederica Freyberg:
The level of staffing at the institution also stood out in the monitor’s report with roughly a third of positions at the time they were looking at it unfilled. The report calling this “serious, chronic and dangerous.” How concerning are the levels of staffing to you?

Larry Dupuis:
Very concerning. In fact, that has been one of the major problems from the time we filed the lawsuit. I mean, there was an exodus of staff even before then. But there had been a lot of turnover, and now what we’re seeing is, in order to fill the positions, just sort of minimally filling those positions, they’ve had to ask people — not just ask people but essentially compel people to come in and do double shifts. And that just leaves people frazzled. It’s a very difficult job to begin with, and to then have to do double shifts, involuntarily, it makes it that much harder. So there’s just a lot of tension at the facility. Especially, you know, it varies, there’s some — you know, there’s some staff who are amazing and amazingly willing and able to sort of manage the stress, but there are many who are having trouble with that. And it affects the kids as well.

Frederica Freyberg:
What did you think of Governor Tony Evers visiting the prison a week ago? Is it kind of a sign of new attention?

Larry Dupuis:
I certainly hope so. It’s definitely an improvement that at least somebody cares enough at that level to visit the facility and visit the kids. Obviously there are complications that are going to come from trying to get this place closed but that really is what needs to happen, I think. I think these chronic staffing shortages aren’t going to end. I think they really need to — I mean, one of the more encouraging things in the report is actually the reduction in the number of youth at the facility. And that itself may lead to an easier time finding a way to place these kids in smaller facilities when they need to and really looking more seriously at non-incarcerated approaches to dealing with youthful offenders.

Frederica Freyberg:
We need to leave it there, Larry Dupuis, ACLU. Thank you very much.

Larry Dupuis:
Thank you.

Frederica Freyberg:
The U.S. government has been on a partial shutdown for coming up on a month. The longest in history. Some workers have been pulled off unpaid furlough and returned to jobs, still up paid. Some 3,000 workers in Wisconsin are affected, including federal correctional officers who have been on the job and unpaid since the start of the shutdown. One of them is Tim Viegut. He’s union president at the Oxford Federal Correctional Institution. He joins us now from Baraboo, and thanks very much for doing so.

Tim Viegut:
Thanks for having me. Great to be here.

Frederica Freyberg:
So what is the lay of the land at Oxford prison? How many officers and others are affected by the shut down and $0 paychecks?

Tim Viegut:
We have about 235 staff working at Oxford that are going without a paycheck right now.

Frederica Freyberg:
And so what’s morale like?

Tim Viegut:
You know, it’s rough. We’ve been dealing with other issues: understaffing, lot of mandatory overtime, augmentation. And now to ask people to keep coming in to work in this kind of job and not getting paid, the morale — it’s hard to stay positive sometimes.

Frederica Freyberg:
Is the prison experiencing people not showing for work as we’ve seen with TSA agents?

Tim Viegut:
No, we’re not having that issue. We are told to come to work. We have a lot of very good, dedicated staff that work at Oxford, and they are all showing up. We’re not having that issue. It’s just the added stress of going home at night wondering how we’re going to pay bills.

Frederica Freyberg:
You will get paid eventually. Does that soften the blow?

Tim Viegut:
To those that can get by missing a check or two or even more, yeah, it does, but a lot of people just like in the — anywhere in this country, a lot of people live paycheck to paycheck. A lot of people can’t go a month or two without having a check.

Frederica Freyberg:
So what are you hearing specifically from officers in terms of how badly this affects them in that way, missing checks?

Tim Viegut:
You know, we missed a check a few days ago, and you know, there’s been people that stopped by and talked to me, wondering what they can do. Just little things that people don’t think about like medications for their family, for their children, daycare, things like that. There are some that are being hit very hard right now.

Frederica Freyberg:
And so anything being done about that in the community or on the part of the, you know, prison management or anything like that?

Tim Viegut:
We’re all trying to take care of each other, but there are some people that are talking to their creditors. Some understand and some are willing to wait for their payments until we get paid. Others are not. So there’s a lot of staff that work there that don’t have family in the area, don’t have help. There’s a few couples that both people work at the prison, and without income coming in, now they don’t have daycare. So we’re trying to help each other as much as with can but the real thing people need is that paycheck. And a lot of times, that’s hard to help with.

Frederica Freyberg:
Exactly. What’s your reaction to some who believe that it’s good to reduce the size of the federal government or continue this shutdown?

Tim Viegut:
Me personally, the reason this shutdown is going on, I don’t care one way or the other. I just want the people that go to work every day to be able to get what they deserve and that’s their paycheck.

Frederica Freyberg:
When would the shutdown have to end to not miss another paycheck?

Tim Viegut:
Id say probably in the next couple days. And today being Friday, it would have to be over Monday or Tuesday because of the holiday or I think we’re going to miss another check.

Frederica Freyberg:
So what are your union members telling you? Are people getting — you know, really very almost panicked at this point?

Tim Viegut:
There are some and I think the longer this shutdown goes, the more there will be. It’s going to become a point where people are going to wonder how they’re going to pay for gas, you know, in their car to get to work. And like I said before, we don’t have the option of not coming to work. So it’s just a little thing of how we get to work, gas, that’s going to become an issue.

Frederica Freyberg:
All right. Well, we need to leave it there, Tim Viegut, from the Oxford Federal Correctional Institution. Thanks very much for joining us, and good luck.

Tim Viegut:
Thank you for having me.

Frederica Freyberg:
Finally tonight, an excerpt from an interview this week with the new State Treasurer, Sarah Godlewski. While the duties of the office have been reduced over the years, the treasurer serves as the state’s chief banker, signing the state’s checks, helping to manage state trust funds and investments and maintain inspections of the state’s books. Marisa Wojcik sat down with Treasurer Godlewski for a “Here & Now” “Noon Wednesday” live web interview.

Marisa Wojcik:
At the end of your first term, what do you hope the takeaway from Wisconsinites would be?

Sarah Godlewski:
So I think it really gets into three things. One is how have we developed a new standard for being that kind of fiscal watchdog for Wisconsinites. I think the second thing is how have we started the conversation and started to change our investment strategies that are win-win? So right now we know, for example, in Wisconsin like there’s a Wisconsin Venture Fund that we have, but less than 23% of that is actually invested in Wisconsin, which — that’s $300 million. So this is money that is going outside of the state, but it’s teachers. It’s public employees, that they want to bring this economic development back to the state, not outside of the state. So it’s looking at kind of these win-win investment strategies and how we can be better about that. And then I think the third thing is looking at how we can change — how we can an environment for economic security. And so one of the things Ive been talking about is financial literacy. And how can we look at financial exploitation of seniors? And so it’s issues that are affecting all of us across the state and addressing that.

Frederica Freyberg:
An excerpt from this week’s “Noon Wednesday,” a weekly online feature produced by Marisa Wojcik. Join us Tuesday night at 7:00 for the governor’s State of the State address and the Republican response. 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.