Here & Now for February 21, 2025

Announcer:
The following program is a PBS Wisconsin original production.

Frederica Freyberg:
A low turnout spring primary advances two finalists vying to be the state’s top educator and Evers’ budget release begins the months long process of appropriations and priorities.
I’m Frederica Freyberg. Tonight on “Here & Now,” the governor released a massive executive budget. What will stand and what will fall? The spring primary election is out of the way. State superintendent and Supreme Court races pick up speed and new maps and a new session underway brings new blood and energy to both chambers. It’s “Here & Now” for February 21.

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

Frederica Freyberg:
Governor Tony Evers went on a statewide swing after presenting his 2025-27 executive budget this week, emphasizing increased education, spending and tax relief.

Tony Evers:
Wisconsinites wouldn’t have to raise their own property taxes to keep school lights on and doors open if this legislature invested in K-12 education from the get-go. In the budget I’m announcing tonight proves we can both make the investments in our kids that we need to and hold the line on preventing property taxes from going up. My plan will provide nearly $2 billion in tax relief through efforts to lower property taxes, eliminate the sales tax on several everyday expenses, and cut income taxes for middle class Wisconsinites, including homeowners, renters, veterans and seniors.

Frederica Freyberg:
Top lines of the governor’s proposal. It’s a $119 billion, two-year budget that would increase spending by more than 20%. It calls for $3.15 billion for K-12 education, $856 million for the University of Wisconsin, and $60 million for technical colleges. It also calls for nearly $2 billion in tax relief and for raising taxes on high income earners. Republicans once again consider all of it a nonstarter.

Mark Born:
We confirmed what we suspected last night of — it was kind of the same thing with reckless spending and tax increases. And, you know, a liberal wish list that was going to be in there, but we were a little bit surprised that it’s actually that on steroids. It’s even bigger than last time. The numbers were a little shocking budget when you seem to take a budget that starts a little bit below $100 billion over the two years and push that to almost $119 billion. It’s pretty serious escalating. You’re looking at 1300 new GPR positions, just the growth of government. Again, we knew he would grow government but when you actually see the level of the numbers, it’s kind of stunning.

Frederica Freyberg:
Wisconsin comes into the budget season with a $4.3 billion surplus. But as expected, the Republican-majority Legislature calls the Evers’ plan dead on arrival. Republican budget writers say they will start from scratch. We’re joined by Jason Stein of the Wisconsin Policy Forum for his take. And thanks for being here, Jason.

Jason Stein:
My pleasure, thank you.

Frederica Freyberg:
So it sure seems like a lot of work and a lot of number crunching on the part of the governor and his administration to end up with a budget that’s DOA but is it more like a potential reelection vision statement on the governor’s part?

Jason Stein:
Potentially, yes. I mean, it’s certainly a vision statement, right? And you do feel a little bit for the analysts and budget writers who work, you know, painstakingly to put all this stuff together. And then it’s right into the trash heap in some sense. But there may be some areas where they can work together. I mean, the governor had an increase in tax credits for buying down local property taxes. He had a tips — taking off income taxes for tips. So there are some areas where Republicans have worked in those same vein in the past. So there may be some areas where they can have a meeting of the minds. But clearly on many things in this budget, there will not be.

Frederica Freyberg:
In fact, I was going to just ask of all of the spending in it, could the only agreement really come with tax cuts?

Jason Stein:
Well, that’s where the real rub is going to be or the back and forth with the governor. I mean, the governor’s proposal would decrease some taxes, but raise a number of others, and on net, would increase taxes by more than $2 billion. Now, obviously, given that the state has a $4 billion surplus, that’s a nonstarter for Republicans. They will be looking at large income tax cuts, which last time the governor vetoed. I think the thing that will probably keep both sides working with one another is with no budget passing, there would be upward pressure on property taxes around the state, particularly school property taxes, because of provisions that are in current law. So I think both sides are going to really feel some pressure to get a deal, because they don’t really want to see that happen.

Frederica Freyberg:
With K-12 test scores, really, sadly sagging, I trust pouring more than $3 billion into that part of the education budget and freezing school choice slots is not the majority’s idea of an answer.

Jason Stein:
I mean, clearly they’re very far apart from one another on the issue of both income taxes and education. You know, the one being the Republican priority, the other being the governor’s priority. I think, again, where you have some impetus to get that increase is in the governor in his veto last year, put “for 400 years,” he stuck in with his partial veto. This steady increase in the limits, the state limits that govern how much school districts can spend. And so they’re going to get like a two and a half or 3% bump in that spending limit, revenue limit every year. And so if there’s no budget, there’s no state aid to kind of take up the slack there and keep property taxes from going up. And I think that’s something that Republicans have in the back of their heads and will be a reason for them not to walk away from the negotiating table.

Frederica Freyberg:
Where else might the sides potentially come together? What about Evers’ prison plan that would eventually close Green Bay Correctional? Do Republicans take parts of that and kind of call it their own and rework it?

Jason Stein:
Great question. I mean, I think there’s something fundamentally there that must be dealt with. I mean, we have two prisons that go back to the 19th century: Waupun and Green Bay Correctional. The governor wants to close Green Bay Correctional. He has a very creative way to do that. I mean, it’s kind of like a flea flicker play in football where you’re passing the ball from one player to another and they’re throwing down field. It’s a touchdown if you get that and you connect on that play. But it also has a lot of ways it can break down. I suspect the Republicans will probably not take that plan in its entirety, but some elements of it, they may do.

Frederica Freyberg:
Also, Evers proposes what’s described as an historic investment in the university: $856 million over two years. Given what’s happening around the state with closures and layoffs and that kind of thing at the colleges, does that resonate?

Jason Stein:
It’s a great question. I mean, the issue of higher education has become very politicized, much more than it was, let’s say, two decades ago. And so, you see, actually, at the federal level, some dispute, right, over whether to decrease the amount of research grant funding that goes out to universities like UW-Madison or the Medical College of Wisconsin, or even UW-Milwaukee. Whether or not there may be some increase on the possibility, because in many cases, the UW campuses that would be hurt the most would be in more Republican areas, or at least in purple areas of the state. So that one, I think, is TBD.

Frederica Freyberg:
It seemed of note to me that Evers was using his budget to try to guard against impacts from President Trump’s actions out of Washington, saving out what was it, nearly $500 million of kind of in case money?

Jason Stein:
Right, I mean, the governor’s leaving enough reserves to cover about 10% of state spending. I mean, that’s historically a pretty good number. At the same time, it would not be enough in the event of a really severe recession. So I think there will be some back and forth with the legislature. Again, the governor would pull down roughly $3.5 billion of the surplus. But, you know, Republicans did the same thing two years ago with their income tax proposal. And the governor just partially vetoed it. So I think part of the question is, do the two sides working at cross-purposes get us to a sustainable budget, which is what has happened in recent cycles, or an unsustainable budget, which is more what happened in the 2000 when you and I were starting at the state Capitol.

Frederica Freyberg:
Jason Stein, thanks very much. Thanks for joining us and your expertise.

Jason Stein:
Thank you.

Frederica Freyberg:
This year’s election for a seat on the Wisconsin Supreme Court is shaping up to be one of the most expensive ever. Fundraising totals released by the campaigns of liberal candidate Susan Crawford and conservative candidate Brad Schimel show they are on pace to exceed the $50 million price tag from 2023, which was the most expensive state Supreme Court race in American history. “Here & Now” senior political reporter Zac Schultz has more on how all this money will impact the cases the winner will hear once they are on the court.

TV announcer:
And with Susan Crawford on the bench, your street could be next.

Different TV announcer:
Brad Schimel is too extreme for the Supreme Court.

Zac Schultz:
Just five weeks from Election Day, the Schimel and Crawford campaigns are filling the airwaves and social media with millions of dollars in campaign ads. In 2023, the race between Janet Protasiewicz and Daniel Kelly was the most expensive state Supreme Court race in U.S. history, with candidates and third-party groups spending more than $50 million. It was for an open seat, and the winner would determine the ideological control of the court. It’s the same setup in 2025, so it should come as no surprise we’re on pace to break spending records.

Brad Schimel:
It’s like inflation. It never goes down. It always only seems to go up and I suspect this race is going to have even more money spent than in 2023. You know, you can only run so many TV ads before you’ve made your point. But this is what you’ve got to do. I’ve got to be competitive. The other side has got to be competitive. We’re both working to have the resources we need to get our message out.

Zac Schultz:
The maximum an individual can donate to a campaign is $20,000. But years ago, Republicans rewrote campaign laws so individuals could give an unlimited amount to state parties, which can in turn give unlimited amounts to campaigns. In the latest fundraising totals, billionaire donors gave millions to the Republican and Democratic Parties. The Republican Party of Wisconsin transferred $1.7 million to Schimel’s campaign, while the Democratic Party of Wisconsin transferred $3 million to Crawford’s campaign. In 2023, Janet Protasiewicz received a lot of direct transfers from the Democratic Party of Wisconsin to help fund her campaign, and in turn, she said that she would recuse herself from any cases that involved the Democratic Party of Wisconsin as a party. Would you do the same if you receive a large, direct contributions from the Democratic Party of Wisconsin?

Susan Crawford:
You know, I — what I would do is if a case came before the Supreme Court in which the Democratic Party was a party is to look at what the facts were in that case, who the other parties were and what the legal issues were that at stake, and then make a decision about recusal based on the specific instances of that case. I think, you know, I’m a pretty cautious person as a judge. And I, I don’t prejudge matters like that and would wait to see what that case brought and whether I could be fair and impartial. And if, if it was a situation where I believed I could not be fair and impartial due to past political support, financing support from the Democratic Party, I would certainly recuse.

Zac Schultz:
How will you approach recusal when it comes to those who have supported you, donated to you, endorsed you?

Brad Schimel:
Well, it’s awfully hard for Justice Protasiewicz to say she’ll recuse on anything that the Democratic Party is involved in. But then she stayed on the legislative redistricting maps, and she claimed, well, they’re not directly a party. Come on, they were the clear beneficiary of that decision. I think she was putting form over substance very much there. But for a judicial official at any level, your responsibility is if you have a personal stake, you or some family member has a personal stake in the outcome of this case, you must recuse. That’s unethical not to do so. Otherwise, just like a juror, when they’re asked questions in the jury box, can you — to find out whether they can be on this case and be fair and impartial? That judge needs to search their soul and determine, can you decide this case without having any political baggage, without having your personal history or biases interfere with your ability to be fair and impartial? If you cannot do that, then you should recuse.

Zac Schultz:
One of the biggest cases the winner could see is a challenge to Act 10, the Scott Walker era law that eliminated most collective bargaining rights for most public employees. Just recently, Justice Protasiewicz announced she would not recuse herself from the Act 10 challenge, currently heading to the appellate courts, saying her opposition to the law as a private citizen would not impact her ability to rule as a justice. However, conservative Justice Brian Hagedorn announced he would recuse himself from hearing that case because while serving as then Governor Walker’s chief legal counsel, Hagedorn helped write that law and later defended it in court. Crawford served in that exact same position for Governor Jim Doyle, so she understands Hagedorn’s role.

Susan Crawford:
So for him, having taken a position already on that exact provision and trying to defend it in court, I think he made the right decision to recuse himself. And, you know, if I had been in exactly that situation as Justice Hagedorn is, I think I would have made the same decision.

Zac Schultz:
Brad Schimel was the attorney general from 2015 to 2019.

Brad Schimel:
Act 10 was resolved in the U.S. Supreme Court and the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals even before I was attorney general. I was still in the DA’s office when those issues were decided by those courts. So I’ve never had any direct role in anything involving Act 10. What I do ask voters is to ask themselves whether they think that if my opponent wins, can this court truly be objective? When two justices sitting on the court, both Justice Protasiewicz and Justice Dallet, were both caught on video promising if elected they would strike down Act 10 and then my opponent represented the Madison Teachers Association in the lawsuit to strike down Act 10, and she argued that it should be found unconstitutional. Can she be objective when she had a former client that had her do that work for her? And can those other two be objective based on those promises? I can ask those questions. I’m not going to tell anybody how I’m going to rule, because like I do in every case, I will read the briefs. I will assess the facts. I will look at the relevant law. I’ll read all the cases, and then I’ll assess what the right answer is based on the law.

Zac Schultz:
In private practice, you also were a part of an Act 10 lawsuit.

Susan Crawford:
Yes.

Zac Schultz:
Would that prevent you from sitting on any cases regarding Act 10 in the future?

Susan Crawford:
You know, if a case came up, whether it’s on Act 10 or anything else that — any other topic that I had some role in, in, in challenging while I was a lawyer, I would give it a very close look to see what the facts were that were presented in that new case, who the parties were, and what kind of legal issues are being raised, and make a determination about whether I could be fair and impartial sitting on that case. That’s what the law requires us to do, and that’s what I do in every case.

Zac Schultz:
Reporting from Madison, I’m Zac Schultz for “Here & Now.”

Frederica Freyberg:
In the spring primary race, the only statewide race and in some districts, the only race was between three candidates for state superintendent of schools. Incumbent Jill Underly faced off with challengers Jeff Wright, a liberal candidate and district superintendent in Sauk Prairie, and Brittany Kinser, a conservative candidate and education consultant who does not hold a teaching license. Kinser and Underly edged out opponent Wright by roughly 33 and 49,000 votes, respectively, and will advance to April’s general election.
Back at the Capitol, Assembly Republicans passed a package of education bills. The legislation would realign statewide testing standards back to national levels, ban the use of cell phones by students during class time, require cursive instruction and a specific civics instruction. Instructional materials must be made available for inspection by district residents, and 70% of operating expenses must go toward direct classroom costs and teacher salaries, and limit pay increases for school administrators. Republicans say the bills are necessary to improve achievement levels.

Robin Vos:
Since 2011, 2012, we have actually seen with demographic changes, about a 6.5% decline in the total number of students attending school in Wisconsin. But we have actually seen a 39% increase in spending during that same time. So the challenge that we have is we now know that just simply increasing education funding doesn’t necessarily mean we have higher standards. It doesn’t mean that we have better outcomes. Our test results and our test scores clearly show that. So what we want to make sure is that at a time when only 31% of the students who are taking the fourth-grade test are reading at grade level, we want to make sure that that actually gets better than where it is now. In fact, right now, that test score is the lowest that it’s been since 1992, where before many kids, actually many people, were even born. So the results that we have are disappointing. They are really frustrating, but they are also a wakeup call for Wisconsin.

Frederica Freyberg:
Newly elected legislators are finding their way at the state Capitol. More than a quarter of the members in the Assembly and Senate are freshmen after legislative districts were redrawn last year. There are 23 new Democratic lawmakers in the Assembly and eight new Republicans. “Here & Now” reporter Aditi Debnath met with two new state reps now a month into the legislative session.

Angelina Cruz:
I, full disclosure, am completely overwhelmed.

Lindee Brill:
We sat down and I said, “Let’s do this” and we went 100 miles an hour from there.

Aditi Debnath:
Representatives Lindee Brill and Angelina Cruz are newbies in the Wisconsin Assembly.

Lindee Brill:
It’s a new job. It’s a new environment. It’s a big building. So even getting my directions down has been a challenge. But I’m excited for the challenge.

Aditi Debnath:
They spent the first few days after inauguration getting their bearings in the Capitol ahead of the first session.

Angelina Cruz:
I keep describing it as, like, speed dating with different governmental departments. Like, you get, like, the quick overview and then they’re like, “Here’s our card. You can reach out at any time,” and then you move on to the next one.

Aditi Debnath:
As they begin budget season, Brill and Cruz represent the changing face of Wisconsin politics, bringing fresh perspectives to the state legislature. Representative Brill is one of eight Republican rookies in the Assembly, representing the 27th district.

Lindee Brill:
The easiest way to describe it would be if you take Sheboygan, so town of Wilson, city of Sheboygan, then Town of Sheboygan. I’m pretty much everything around it, all the way west to Fond du Lac and down. So Taycheedah would be the edge of my district, all the way down to, like, Cascade and then over to I-43.

Aditi Debnath:
On the other side of the aisle, Representative Angelina Cruz is one of 23 new Democrats in the Assembly representing district 62.

Angelina Cruz:
The vast bulk of it is the city of Racine. It stretches to the north, it’s Racine and North Bay, and it stretches up to Wind Point. And then it covers a sliver of Caledonia and a sliver of Mount Pleasant.

Aditi Debnath:
While both Brill and Cruz are first time lawmakers, they represent opposite ends of the partisan spectrum, each seeking to make their mark on Wisconsin politics. Representative Brill made headlines in her first week after sitting out the vote where Assembly Speaker Robin Vos won a record seventh term in that office.

Lindee Brill:
I just felt we needed to head in a more conservative direction. I think there’s sometimes some things that went a little more moderate than I would have voted for, but I respect the way the vote went and I look forward to working with leadership and knowing that — trusting that they’ll lead us where we need to go.

Aditi Debnath:
In contrast to Brill, Cruz brings a progressive perspective to Madison as the first Latina to represent Racine and a member of the LGBTQ community. She ran unopposed in the newly drawn district 62.

Angelina Cruz:
We had been the most gerrymandered state in the country, and that these more fair maps presented an opportunity to actually be in the State House and be an advocate in a way that potentially could be more effective.

Aditi Debnath:
Cruz is the president of her local teachers union and first got involved in politics when the state legislature passed Act 10 in 2011, which made it harder for teachers to unionize.

Man:
I’ll open it up for debate.

Angelina Cruz:
I feel like everybody wants to talk about money, right? It’s budget season.

Aditi Debnath:
Her top priority going into this budget session is funding for public schools.

Angelina Cruz:
People just want a hand up and in terms of meeting basic needs. That’s mostly what I heard on the doors, the opportunity to purchase a home. The opportunity to send their kids to school. Just to have, like, just their basic needs meet.

Aditi Debnath:
On Monday, she met with union teachers at Schulte Elementary in her district. They shared concerns about an April referendum and how they’ll support their students if it doesn’t pass. Representative Cruz says the answer is in the state budget.

Angelina Cruz:
I encourage you strongly to use your teacher voices. Call your legislators. Let them know, like, this is — you need to fully fund public schools. You need to fully fund special education. That’s something the state superintendent, Jill Underly, put into her recommended budget to the governor.

Aditi Debnath:
In Sheboygan, Representative Brill got started in politics young.

Lindee Brill:
My mom had kind of always been the political one in our house. We spent many times talking about the pro-life movement, how we wanted to be a part of protecting the unborn. Campaign manager was good friends with my mom, and he came to her funeral, and I promised him I would carry on the torch.

Aditi Debnath:
Brill took over her mother’s hobby farm after her passing.

Lindee Brill:
This time of year, production is down a little bit.

Aditi Debnath:
She says she ran with the goal of protecting life beginning at conception, an issue she won’t compromise on.

Lindee Brill:
I know that’s probably not one that I’m going to reach across the aisle and probably have a lot of conversations about, but I do think there are others.

Aditi Debnath:
Heading into the budget, her priority is addressing the fentanyl crisis in her district.

Lindee Brill:
Being able to see how people struggle in our community was one of my main pushes to want to go to Madison to see change for them.

Aditi Debnath:
Brill works at Samaritan’s Hand, a faith-based drug and alcohol treatment center, and was named vice chair of the Committee on Mental Health and Substance Abuse Prevention.

Lindee Brill:
These are people I’ve cared about. These are people I’ve called family I’ve lost, and people are still here. My dad has been sober for 12 years, and his journey was a part of me wanting to get involved in here.

Aditi Debnath:
Back in Madison, Representatives Brill and Cruz continue navigating their first term in the legislature. Cruz says she has never felt more like a grade schooler.

Angelina Cruz:
One of the things I always liked about teaching is working with kids. They bring such new and fresh perspectives and are excited about everything.

Aditi Debnath:
She says that in a way, there are 31 new kids under the dome.

Angelina Cruz:
Maybe that’s — you can assign that to our naivete about what we’re about to experience, but I like to think it brings an energy that maybe, maybe is needed at this moment in time.

Lindee Brill:
Throughout our state we have constituents who have elected Republicans and Democrats to represent us. So at the end of the day, we’re called to work together to best represent our people.

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

Frederica Freyberg:
For more on this and other issues facing Wisconsin, visit our website at PBSWisconsin.org and then click on the news tab. 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.