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

Frederica Freyberg:
Wisconsin hits near record turnout in the primary election.

Anthony Chergosky:
The vote against the constitutional amendments was the decisive winner in that election.

Frederica Freyberg:
And voters reject a GOP proposal to shift spending power away from the governor.
I’m Frederica Freyberg. Tonight on “Here & Now,” we break down the primary results with political scientist Anthony Chergosky. Plus, a preview of the Democratic National Convention next week and why Wisconsin is so critical in November. The UW system is struggling. We speak with a former regent looking to the future. And finally, how one community is replicating a state program for themselves. It’s “Here & Now” for August 16.

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

Frederica Freyberg:
Wisconsin just came through its fall primary election this week, and there were some pretty surprising results, including two constitutional amendment ballot measures that voters rejected 57% to 42%. Those questions would have required legislative approval before a governor could spend federal money coming into the state and would have barred future legislatures from giving that power away. “Here & Now” reporter Nathan Denzin checked in with UW-La Crosse political science professor Anthony Chergosky for his take on the primary results and started by asking him who stood out as winners.

Anthony Chergosky:
Governor Evers and the Democratic Party because the vote against the constitutional amendments was the decisive winner in that election. So when we look at that election, the ballot measures were worded in a very odd, confusing, lawyerly way. And so voters, when they looked at the text on the ballot for the amendments, they didn’t have much to work with. That meant that Evers and the Democrats could make a big influence on voters through their campaign messaging. And Evers and the Democrats did indeed make a strong push against those amendments. They were able to engage and mobilize their base, and that led to the amendments getting defeated.

Nathan Denzin:
So those amendments were defeated by a pretty large margin. Was that surprising at all to you?

Anthony Chergosky:
It was in the sense that a low turnout election is always hard to predict. We don’t know how voters are going to go because we don’t know who’s going to show up at the polls. But turnout was quite high by the standards of August primaries. And that speaks to the ability of Evers and the Democrats to mobilize their base.

Nathan Denzin:
In the 8th, Tony Wied, the MAGA candidate, the Trump-supported candidate won, what does that say about the influence of MAGA when you had two other candidates, Roger Roth and Andr Jacque, who were endorsed by more traditional, conservative Republican voices?

Anthony Chergosky:
It shows that the Trump endorsement can matter in competitive Republican primaries and we say that just two years ago with Tim Michels defeating Rebecca Kleefisch in the Republican campaign for the gubernatorial nomination. Trump endorsed Michels and that, I think, put him over the top against Kleefisch. And this time around in the 8th Congressional District, I think it’s fair to say that Donald Trump’s endorsement of Tony Wied helped put him over the top. On top of that, Donald Trump spoke out against Roger Roth, the former state senator who came in second in the race for the nomination against Wied. Roger Roth was called a RINO or Republican In Name Only by Donald Trump. So the campaign and Trump’s factor, Trump’s influence in the campaign, I think, made a big effect on the outcome.

Nathan Denzin:
So in the 3rd, there was a Democratic primary contested between three people. Rebecca Cooke came out on top. It was a pretty contentious last few weeks of the campaign, what kind of takeaways can you take from that race, and how is Cooke going to face up against Derrick Van Orden in the general election?

Anthony Chergosky:
Yeah, Rebecca Cooke is a very strong fundraiser, and the Democrats are going to need plenty of financial resources if they hope to unseat Derrick Van Orden, because although this district here in western Wisconsin is competitive, it does lean a little bit in the Republican Party’s favor. So Rebecca Cooke will have a bit of an uphill battle ahead of her. That means that she’ll need plenty of financial resources to launch a negative campaign against Derrick Van Orden, and to develop her own political brand. Core to her political brand is the idea that she’s an outsider, which interestingly, is the political brand that Derrick Van Orden developed when he first ran for Congress. So it’s interesting to see those parallels between the candidates, though the parallels basically start and end right there.

Nathan Denzin:
In some state elections, Tim Ramthun and Janel Brandtjen both lost their primary elections. Is that surprising at all? Does that show that kind of this trend of election deniers winning office is kind of dying out?

Anthony Chergosky:
I think it shows that the influence of candidates denying the 2020 election result and the Trump endorsement factor is a little all over the place. It’s hard to draw any consistent conclusions about how much it matters for a candidate to be skeptical or to deny the outcome of the previous presidential election, and how much it matters for Trump to endorse them. But clearly, with Tim Michaels last cycle and with Tony Wied this cycle, we see that the Trump endorsement still matters quite a bit in certain circumstances in Republican primaries.

Nathan Denzin:
The presidential and vice-presidential candidates, they are going to be in Wisconsin a lot. They’ve already been in Wisconsin a lot. How do Harris and Walz play here, especially in western Wisconsin? And how do Trump and JD Vance play here?

Anthony Chergosky:
Well, the western Wisconsin region has been tilting a little more Republican in recent election cycles, but I don’t see it as being overwhelmingly Republican by any stretch of the imagination. There are certain regions that Democrats can bank on for a lot of votes. There are certain regions that Republicans can bank on for a lot of votes. But western Wisconsin is hard for either party to bank on. And that means that there will be a highly competitive campaign ahead of us here.

Nathan Denzin:
Do you think that Tim Walz has any additional sway here because of the proximity to Minnesota?

Anthony Chergosky:
He might. And it could be because people in this area are familiar with his record. People here might have developed somewhat positive or negative impressions of how he has performed as governor of Minnesota. And his political style may resonate with voters in this area because he has that folksy, Midwestern way about him. Too early to tell in general, running mates don’t have much of an effect at all on presidential election outcomes, but it will still be worth watching to see how western Wisconsin voters respond to the Walz running mate candidacy.

Nathan Denzin:
Are there any big winners or losers from these state level primaries?

Anthony Chergosky:
Well, I would have to mention Dane County turnout. I mean, Dane County’s turnout was astronomical compared to the state as a whole. And that is yet another example of how Dane County is a powerhouse in the Democratic Party coalition. I think Democrats are looking at the near 50% turnout in the Madison area and licking their chops as they think ahead to what that might, what that might foreshadow for the Wisconsin — for the general election ahead of us.

Frederica Freyberg:
Wisconsin’s place in national politics is described as a battleground, a tipping point, a swing state. But how did Wisconsin get to be so key nationally? “Here & Now” reporter Steven Potter explores the history of Wisconsin politics to understand how we got to this point and what kind of attention we can expect as we narrow in on the November election.

Donald Trump:
And I promise we will make Wisconsin great again. We’re going to make it so.

Kamala Harris:
The path to the White House goes through Wisconsin.

Steven Potter:
No one can deny Wisconsin’s significance when it comes to national politics, and especially this year’s race for president.

Jonathan Kasparek:
Wisconsin is incredibly important, as it has been for the last few election cycles. It is a swing state in the sense that it could go either Republican or it could go Democrat. And our electorate is about evenly divided.

Steven Potter:
Jonathan Kasparek is a professor of history at UW-Milwaukee’s Waukesha campus, where he’s been a political expert for 20 years. He says one thing keeping Wisconsin in the national spotlight is that it’s a microcosm and a mirror of American voting trends.

Jonathan Kasparek:
And like the national picture, Wisconsin is pretty evenly divided. A lot of the rural areas are red. So if you look at a map broken down by counties, there’s a lot of red, but not a lot of voters. Whereas there’s a little bit about of blue and a lot of voters, but it sort of equals out.

Steven Potter:
But this evenly matched electorate of Democrats and Republicans also means that Wisconsin has bounced back and forth between the two parties in statewide races over the years. In 2008, Wisconsin voted for Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama. But then in 2010, the state elected Republican Scott Walker as governor and Republican Ron Johnson as U.S. Senator. In 2012, Wisconsin went for Obama again, while also electing Democratic U.S. Senator Tammy Baldwin. In 2014, Scott Walker won again as governor. Then in 2016, Wisconsin chose Republican Donald Trump as president, only to turn around and elect Democratic Governor Tony Evers in 2018. And in 2020, Wisconsin helped Democrat Joe Biden win the White House. But then in 2022, the state split the ticket, electing both Democratic Governor Tony Evers and Republican Senator Ron Johnson again in the same statewide election. All of this has led Wisconsin to be known not only as unpredictable, but also very, very purple.

Jonathan Kasparek:
It is confusing. We have the oddest pair of senators, I think, in the country. Our behavior is absolutely baffling to national pundits. They’re never quite sure what to make of us because of things like electing Tammy Baldwin and Ron Johnson.

Steven Potter:
Kasparek says this back and forth means that voters here prioritize issues more than political parties.

Jonathan Kasparek:
Wisconsin voters it’s often very basic bread and butter issues, and they are concerned about the economy. They are concerned about education. They are concerned about health care. So there are things that I don’t think either party really has a lock on.

Steven Potter:
Ultimately, that means it’s up to the campaigns to prove their candidates are worth the trip to the polls on Election Day.

Jonathan Kasparek:
That’s really the strategy is, is we have to turn out more of our voters than they do of theirs. I think it’s going to continue to be close. We’ve been close since 2000. I think we’re going to remain close. It really is going to, I think, continue to come down to attractive candidates who can generate a lot of enthusiasm and really get voters excited to vote. I think we’re going to see an awful lot of Kamala Harris and Donald Trump over the next few weeks. They’re going to be here a lot.

Frederica Freyberg:
Steven Potter joins us now from Chicago, where he’ll be part of the “Here & Now” political team covering the Democratic National Convention next week. Hi Steve.

Steven Potter:
Hi, Frederica.

Frederica Freyberg:
So how will Wisconsin play a part there at the DNC?

Steven Potter:
So convention officials are still being pretty tight lipped as to who will take the stage at the DNC next week. Of Wisconsin elected officials, it could perhaps be Wisconsin Governor Tony Evers, or maybe U.S. House of Representative member Gwen Moore. Most likely, however, it would be U.S. Senator Tammy Baldwin.

Frederica Freyberg:
So hearkening back to your story that we just aired, this is going to be kind of a hold on to your hats campaign moving toward November, given how very, very purple we are. And I would imagine that at the convention, people will be paying a lot of attention to Wisconsin. But even in the midst of the convention next week, Kamala Harris is reprising her swing state blitz.

Steven Potter:
Yeah, absolutely. After campaigning this weekend in another battleground state of Pennsylvania, Kamala Harris, vice president Kamala Harris and Governor Tim Walz will be traveling to Milwaukee for a rally on Tuesday at the Fiserv Forum, which is exactly where the Republican National Convention was held just last month. This is another example of how significant Wisconsin is to have the Democratic presidential nominee traveling to Wisconsin during the Democratic National Convention.

Frederica Freyberg:
Yeah, I’ve never, ever heard of that. We should mention that GOP VP nominee JD Vance spoke in Milwaukee today. So as you say, Wisconsin is super important here. We will be looking for your reporting next week from the DNC. Thank you, Steve.

Steven Potter:
Thank you.

Frederica Freyberg:
Starting Monday, look for “Here & Now” 2024 election coverage from the Democratic National Convention in Chicago. At 2:00 pm live each day, senior political reporter Zac Schultz with panelists McCoshen and Ross. Then each night at 8:30 pm, a Wisconsin update. And on Friday, full coverage in a “Here & Now” one hour special starting at 7:00 pm.

As a sign of the times, 35 tenured faculty from two-year Waukesha and Washington County campuses that had merged with UW-Milwaukee are expecting layoff notices. It’s just the latest round of job loss and campus closures across the state as the Universities of Wisconsin administration acts to cut costs even as it tries to boost enrollment. A legislative study committee on the future of the UW system is grappling with just that. A member of that committee, former UW Regent Robert Atwell, has some firm ideas about how to move forward. We should note PBS Wisconsin is part of UW-Madison. Mr. Atwell joins us now. And thanks very much for being here.

Bob Atwell:
My pleasure. Thank you, Frederica.

Frederica Freyberg:
So I just want to ask what kind of a freefall is the UW system, apart from Madison, in right now?

Bob Atwell:
I mean, I think the system is facing very serious challenges and I think the leg council is becoming an important forum for really communicating with each other and with the people of Wisconsin about it. You know, at the heart of it is the decline in enrollment. The Legislative Fiscal Bureau showed us data. Enrollment overall in the system, I believe since 2010, has declined from 156,000 full time equivalent students to 136,000 while Madison has grown by about 10,000 in that period. So, you know, you’re looking at really a 25% to 30% decline in FTE attendance, if I’m reading the data right at the campuses outside of Madison.

Frederica Freyberg:
So you were a regent when the decision was made to close UW-Richland, but five more branch campuses have taken the axe since then. What is your reaction to this manner of cost cutting?

Bob Atwell:
In my opinion, we’re not acting aggressively enough, and in particular, we’re not creating the right public understanding and we’re taking incremental actions which, which it’s not clear to me, are actually addressing the fundamental problems. So I’m, I mean, I am of the opinion we need to freeze, to stop closing campuses until we’re ready to have the real conversation about how we’re going to configure this system to meet the reality of the demography we have. And how we’re going to do that better, which I think many institutions, whether it’s hospitals, grocery stores, banks, K-12, are grappling with these same issues and we’re not immune to them at the university. I’m not averse to the idea of kind of reconfiguring things. In fact, I’m pretty sure it’s necessary to figure out the role of tech schools, former two-year campuses and four-year campuses. But I don’t think you’re getting to the heart of our cost structure by just closing Fond du Lac or Richland Center. I mean, enrollment is what the enrollment is, but you know, I would prefer frankly, it’s a — I live in rural areas, have most of my time in the state. I think we need to preserve access locations to the maximum extent possible. But more importantly, we’ve got to have the real data and the real discussion about what’s happening.

Frederica Freyberg:
But aren’t these closures just economic reality that has to be acted on right now, given the structural deficits across the system?

Bob Atwell:
Yeah. Well, when you are facing long term trends and these are long term trends and you ignore them long enough, you get yourself backed into a corner where you have decisions between bad and worse. And I’d say that’s what we’re doing is we’re reacting incrementally to facts as they exist in the moment instead of looking at it and saying, “Okay, how can we first of all pay our people because I’m tired of hearing about our pay gap and not doing anything about it.” If we employ people, let’s pay them at an appropriate level. It’s going to make our financial situation look worse in the near term, but it also sets us up to make, to make the right decisions and the good decisions. And there’s a legitimate discussion about should we just shove more money into the system overall, or should we step back, make the hard decisions and then reinvest? I am definitely in the second camp, I think, except for paying our people at the median level, especially our instructional and frontline. And, you know, the lowest income people in the system. I don’t advocate more funding until we really have the conversation and formulate the hard decisions. And, and these demographic problems are not new. You know, the declining fertility rate, the decline in young people, the aging of the population. This is stuff that’s been obvious for 10 or 15 years.

Frederica Freyberg:
I did want to ask you about putting money into the system. I know that Governor Evers has said that he would recommend $800 million in the next biennial budget to go to the UW system, but that just seems like that’s not something that would happen.

Bob Atwell:
Yeah, I, I don’t support his position. I respect Governor Evers. We served on the Board of Regents together before he was governor. He’s a good man. He has his philosophy. He’s an educator. I think spreading more peanut butter over the current system is really going to — what we’re really going to do is fund more internal competition. That’s what we’re going to do. And I don’t think that — and we’ll pay to further delay the hard decisions the people of Wisconsin need us to make. Why do people not pursue higher education here to the same degree they do in other states, even surrounding us? Why is that? But I’m not sure we’re listening enough to our non-customers like, what is it they don’t see about what we do as having value for them and their lives?

Frederica Freyberg:
Well, in fact, I heard on that committee, I heard a lot of skepticism about the value of a college degree. Do you think that skepticism is misplaced?

Bob Atwell:
Well, let me say I’m a big believer in education. I believe in the value of higher ed, but I also know it’s not for everybody, and I don’t think that President Rothman and I have had this exchange. I, I don’t think saying that if you go to college and we give you a degree, you’re going to make $900,000 more over the course of your lifetime. I think that’s misleading because it basically appropriates to the university all of the differences that go into someone who chooses to attend college and achieves that outcome. So I think we add value. Are we really as valuable as we think we are or are we just telling ourselves what we want to think about ourselves?

Frederica Freyberg:
Former UW Regent Bob Atwell, thanks very much.

Bob Atwell:
All right. Thank you. See ya.

Frederica Freyberg:
“Child Care Counts,” that’s the name of a COVID era state funding program for child care providers that expires next year. It’s also the adage of advocates that want the state to invest permanently in the increasing cost of child care. In a collaboration with Wisconsin Public Radio’s “America Amplified” project, “Here & Now’s” Aditi Debnath is reporting on questions voters are asking this election. This is the second story in that series.

Heather Murray:
Where are your parents while you’re here? Lilia? They’re at work.

Aditi Debnath:
Arthouse Preschool owner Heather Murray explains to her students why they’re observing “A Day without Child Care.”

Heather Murray:
Now a lot of kids in Wisconsin and across the country do not have a place to play or to learn, so we’re here to talk about that today.

Aditi Debnath:
Waunakee Village Board member Robert McPherson joins Murray.

Robert McPherson:
We created the Waunakee Child Care Providers Assistance Program.

Aditi Debnath:
The program invests $85,000 into the local child care industry.

Robert McPherson:
And really what it means is it helps us at the village be able to help the child care providers within the village to help pay for provider services.

Aditi Debnath:
Murray got the idea for Arthouse Preschool more than 18 years ago.

Heather Murray:
I started out as an elementary school teacher and then started this center when my youngest was about 14 months old, wanting quality child care for my own kids.

Aditi Debnath:
Since the pandemic, she’s been advocating for increased state support for child care.

Ruth Schmidt:
The state of Wisconsin received close to $800 million in COVID relief money that was to be directed to child care. That is what allowed us to keep our industry going.

Aditi Debnath:
Ruth Schmidt runs WECA, the Wisconsin Early Childhood Association. That pandemic relief money came through a program called “Child Care Counts.” The Waunakee Child Care Providers Assistance Program aims to mirror “Child Care Counts” on a local level.

Ruth Schmidt:
For me, it does two things. It’s a step in the right direction and an acknowledgment that this industry needs financial support.

Amy Kloppenburg:
Both my husband and I work full time, and both of us have careers that are important to us, and neither of us were really interested or at a point where we thought it made sense for our family to stop.

Aditi Debnath:
Amy Kloppenburg has two sons that attend Arthouse. She makes the 12-mile drive to Waunakee from nearby Madison twice a day for her kids. It hasn’t been easy.

Amy Kloppenburg:
I contacted, and I’m not exaggerating, I contacted 35 daycares, both on Madison’s east and west side, and then I finally started reaching out farther than Madison.

Aditi Debnath:
Finding child care is stressful and at times complex for parents like Amy. Is there child care in your area? If there is, is there availability in the classroom? If there is, can you afford it?

Heather Murray:
Personally, when I raised tuition, I had two families that decided it was better if they stayed at home financially. So we’re essentially pricing some families out of child care.

Alex Joers:
That means that working hard to make sure that you all have enough toys, enough books, enough teachers.

Aditi Debnath:
Representative Alex Joers represents Waunakee in the state Assembly. He attends the Arthouse event with his newborn daughter, Emme.

Alex Joers:
I put forward legislation to continue the “Child Care Counts” program at an amount of $350 million, and that’s just a drop in the bucket compared to the five or excuse me, $3 billion surplus that we have in this state.

Aditi Debnath:
During the last session, Republicans rejected proposals by Joers and Governor Evers to invest state money into child care. Instead, Assembly Republicans passed a package to address the profitability of child care centers. Part of the plan calls for a loan program to help child care centers to pay for renovations and changing the minimum age for entry level positions from 18 to 16. Governor Evers vetoed all but one bill in that package, which expands a tax credit program for child care expenses. The political standoff means government support is ending.

Alex Joers:
We’ve seen the “Child Care Counts” money be greatly reduced over the years, and we will see it expire next year. So the money that’s being used at a state level is just enough to keep the doors open.

Aditi Debnath:
Heather Murray says state funding is actually less than what providers like herself need to keep centers open. Overwhelmingly, Murray says she needs more money to pay her employees a fair wage.

Heather Murray:
We need investments from the state to be able to maintain the staff we have now and the salaries that they’re getting.

Aditi Debnath:
McPherson says Waunakee’s investment is a stopgap measure, not a permanent subsidy.

Robert McPherson:
We, as a village, we’re helping just out for a couple of months. We think is how much money that we’re going to have, but we’re hoping that the state and federal resources will come together and continue to provide child care providers, because this is really something that we need.

Aditi Debnath:
Surprisingly, the families getting priced out are not the low-income ones.

Ruth Schmidt:
We’re losing that middle section, right? We still have supports for low-income families, and we still have high income families that can afford care.

Aditi Debnath:
Waunakee has many families that fall into that middle section.

Robert McPherson:
When my child was born, we couldn’t find child care for the first 6 to 8 months of her life, and it meant that I couldn’t go back to work.

Amy Kloppenburg:
It shouldn’t just be for people who have a partner that both people work. People should be able to live and work and have child care.

Aditi Debnath:
Reporting from Waunakee, I’m Aditi Debnath for “Here & Now.”

Frederica Freyberg:
For more on this and other issues facing Wisconsin, visit our web site at PBSwisconsin.org and then click on the news tab. To see all of our election coverage, visit WisconsinVote.org. That’s our program for tonight. I’m Frederica Freyberg. Have a good weekend.

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