Tangle - The critical race in Wisconsin.

Episode Date: April 4, 2023

On Tuesday, voters in Wisconsin will vote in an election that could impact not just abortion rights in Wisconsin and the split in the Wisconsin Supreme Court, but also the future of the state’s elections and even presidential elections in the U.S. more broadly.You can read today's podcast here, today’s “Under the Radar” story here, and today’s “Have A Nice Day” story here. Today’s clickables: Quick Hits (3:16), Today’s Story (5:09), Right’s Take (7:48), Left’s Take (11:32 ), Isaac’s Take (15:04), Your Questions Answered (18:19), Under the Radar (19:42), Numbers (20:23), Have A Nice Day (21:02)You can subscribe to Tangle by clicking here or drop something in our tip jar by clicking here.Our podcast is written by Isaac Saul and edited by Zosha Warpeha. Music for the podcast was produced by Diet 75.Our newsletter is edited by Bailey Saul, Sean Brady, Ari Weitzman, and produced in conjunction with Tangle’s social media manager Magdalena Bokowa, who also created our logo.--- Send in a voice message: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/tanglenews/message Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Based on Charles Yu's award-winning book, Interior Chinatown follows the story of Willis Wu, a background character trapped in a police procedural who dreams about a world beyond Chinatown. When he inadvertently becomes a witness to a crime, Willis begins to unravel a criminal web, his family's buried history, and what it feels like to be in the spotlight. Interior Chinatown is streaming November 19th, only on Disney+. The flu remains a serious disease. Last season, over 102,000 influenza cases have been reported across Canada, which is Chinatown is streaming November 19th, only on Disney+. yourself from the flu. It's the first cell-based flu vaccine authorized in Canada for ages six months and older, and it may be available for free in your province. Side effects and allergic reactions can occur, and 100% protection is not guaranteed. Learn more at flucellvax.ca.

From executive producer Isaac Saul, this is Tangle. Good morning, good afternoon, and good evening, and welcome to the Tangle podcast, the place we get views from across the political spectrum. Some independent thinking without all that hysterical nonsense you find everywhere else. I'm your host, Isaac Saul, and I am on the road today. I want to give you guys a quick heads up at the top that you might hear some unusual sounds in the background, maybe some birds chirping or cows mooing or a little bit of construction noise. I am actually out of the country right now in

Colombia, in South America. We are going to be taking a couple of days off later this week for the Easter, Passover, Ramadan, congressional recess, all the stuff that's going on. There will be a note about it in tomorrow's podcast. But I'm down here visiting some friends and family. And yeah, I set up my recording space here best I could, but I know there might be a little bit of background noise. We'll see how good our podcast editors are. This is going to be the ultimate test of podcast editing skill. It's a beautiful place and I'm thrilled to be here. And we've got a full package of a podcast for you today. But I just wanted to let you know about that before we jump in. All right, with that out of the way, let's start off with a little bit of reader feedback from yesterday.

So yesterday, quite a few readers wrote in a little aggravated about my piece on Trump's indictment with two main criticisms. One, you shouldn't be covering this before the indictment is unsealed. And two, some version of you are wrong about your reaction to the indictment. Somehow this podcast and newsletter managed to piss off both my liberal and conservative readers, which I think in this case, I don't always do this, but in this case, I think I'll take this as a decent sign that we highlighted some good arguments on both sides. I'm not here to change your mind about my opinion on the indictment, but as for number one, the question of why we covered it before the indictment was unsealed, my answer is simple. Not covering it, not covering the first ex-president to ever be indicted would be journalistic malpractice. Even if we covered it two weeks ago,

the indictment had not yet been confirmed. It was last week. And even though it wasn't unsealed yet, I still felt like we needed to make it the main topic of the newsletter. We'll be kicking off a brief vacation tomorrow that coincides with Passover and Easter and recess in Congress, like I said.

So this was a good way to give the story some coverage while we could. Of course, we'll revisit it in some manner once the details of the indictment are out, maybe briefly tomorrow, but ignoring the story would have been worse than repeating myself a little bit, and yes, even a little bit of speculation. As always, I appreciate everyone's feedback and criticism, which I try to address whenever I have space here in the podcast. Alright, with that out of the way, let's jump in with today's quick hits. First up, the Justice Department is said to have more evidence of potential obstruction of justice by former President Trump and Mar-a-Lago, according to a new report from the Washington Post.

Separately, Trump is set to appear in Manhattan for arraignment on charges related to the alleged hush money payments made to Stormy Daniels. Number two, Florida Governor Ron DeSantis signed a bill allowing gun owners to carry a concealed weapon without a permit, making it the 26th state to pass such legislation. Number three, the purported Chinese spy balloon that flew over the United States in February was able to collect intelligence on sensitive U.S. military sites and transmit it back to China, according to a new NBC News report. Number four, today Finland officially joins NATO, the traditionally neutral country notably shares an 800-mile-long border

with Russia. Number five, House Speaker Kevin McCarthy, the Republican, is expected to meet with Taiwan's Tsai Ing-wen, a meeting China warned could have a severe impact on China-U.S. relations. And turning now to Wisconsin and what's being called the single most consequential election of the year, not just in the state, but for the whole country. Voting today will determine the makeup of the state Supreme Court, with liberals hoping to flip the balance of power there. This has become one of the most closely watched elections of the year. It is a battle between liberal Janet Protasewicz and conservative Dan Kelly that will determine the balance of power in Wisconsin's Supreme Court. Remember, that court came within one vote of overturning President Biden's narrow victory in the state

back in 2020. The election could determine the fate of abortion access for the millions of women in Wisconsin and potentially impact GOP control in the state capitol. On Tuesday, voters in Wisconsin will vote in an election that could impact not just abortion rights in Wisconsin and the split in the Wisconsin Supreme Court, but also the future of the state's elections and even presidential elections in the U.S. more broadly. The race is between Dan Kelly, a former state Supreme Court judge backed by Republicans, and Democrat-supported Janet Protasewicz, who serves as a Milwaukee County Circuit Court judge. While the race is technically nonpartisan, it has drawn national attention and tens of millions of dollars in funding from both major political parties. Currently, the state court

has a 4-3 conservative majority, as it has for the past 15 years. Recently, it has ruled against absentee ballot drop boxes and affirmed a 2011 law that ended collective bargaining for many public workers. The court also came within one vote of overturning President Joe Biden's narrow victory in the state in 2020, but conservative Justice Brian Hagedorn voted with the liberal justices to affirm the results. In this race, however, there has been an increased focus on abortion access and Republican-drawn congressional maps. The court is expected to rule on a lawsuit that challenges the state's 174-year-old ban on nearly all abortions, which went into effect after Roe v. Wade was struck down. Some political pollsters also believe the fate of the House majority could come down to how the court rules on gerrymandering in its state. In 2022, the court upheld Republican-drawn maps

that were largely considered to be some of the most gerrymandered in the United States. Despite being a state that is relatively evenly split between Republicans and Democrats, Republicans hold six of the eight Wisconsin congressional districts and have dominated in the state legislature, two things that could potentially change with a Democratic Supreme Court majority. A quick reminder that you can read our piece on the bipartisan gerrymandering crisis in America with a link in today's episode description.

The policy direction of Wisconsin is going to be determined in large part by this Supreme Court race, University of Wisconsin-Madison political scientist professor Barry Burden told the Associated Press, everything from abortion to disputes over the 2024 presidential election are going to land in the lap of this court, and the winner will be deciding justice on these issues, he said. As a result, more than $45 million has been spent on the race so far, the most expensive

for such a race in U.S. history. Today, we're going to take a look at some commentary from the right and the left about this race, and then my take. First off, we'll start with what the right is saying. Many on the right criticize Protasewicz for openly discussing her views and emphasize the need to preserve Republican advantages in Wisconsin. Some say national Republicans should be focusing more on Wisconsin and criticize the outside money pouring in from Democrats. Others say Democrats are wrong and that they can obviously retake the House if Protasewicz wins. The Wall Street Journal editorial board criticized Protasewicz for prejudging cases. She has publicly declared that she believes that former Governor

Scott Walker's landmark 2011 collective bargaining reform, known as Act 10, is unconstitutional. She admits she joined protests against the law and even signed a petition to recall then-Governor Walker. In an interview last week, she was asked whether she would remove herself from cases challenging the law and said, I'd have to think about it. Given the fact that I marched, given the fact that I signed the recall petition, would I recuse myself? Maybe, she said, maybe, but I don't know for sure. Maybe, the board asked. How can anyone believe she'd be able to fairly judge a challenge to a law she has already reached a conclusion about? Judge Protasewicz's unconstitutional comments are best read as an invitation to liberal groups to try again with a new challenge if she

makes it to the court, and are an admission that she won't defer to the precedents of the state court she aspires to join. She has signaled the same about the state's legislative maps, which she has called rigged despite their approval by the state high court. In The Federalist, Sean Fleetwood asked why Republicans were talking about 2024 and not the Wisconsin race this week. Rather than using their influence to draw attention to this critically important race, he said, many prominent conservative figures have spent the latter half of March discussing the 2024 GOP presidential primary. This is a remarkable spectacle to witness when considering the 2024 primaries don't start for several months

and Tuesday's Wisconsin election will have reverberating impacts on national and state politics that will be felt for years to come. This court has ruled that the Wisconsin Elections Commission had violated state law by authorizing the use of unmanned absentee ballot drop boxes, and that Democrat Governor Tony Evers violated state law by imposing and extending multiple COVID-related emergency orders without authorization from the state legislature. Meanwhile, Protasewicz has shown herself to be a radical, soft-on-crime leftist and has outraised Kelly more than five to one. Outside leftist mega-donors have also injected millions into the state to help the Wisconsin Democrat, while Republicans are falling into the trap of prioritizing the next national election over state and local issues that have lasting effects on the country. In the Wall Street Journal, Colin Levy said Democrats are

seeking the House with a win on the Supreme Court. The race is being driven by national Democrats who think if they can flip the court, they can help flip the United States House. Judge Protasewicz said of the court that, obviously, if we have a 4-3 majority, it is highly likely that we will be revisiting the maps. In fact, it isn't obvious, he wrote. In 2021, Democratic Governor Tony Evers vetoed maps drawn by the Republican-controlled legislature and the state Supreme Court sided with the governor. Lawmakers objected and appealed to the United States Supreme Court, which heard the cases in 2022. The high court approved the Evers congressional maps, but struck down the Evers state legislative maps on grounds that they violated the

Federal Voting Rights Act. The legislative maps were sent to the Wisconsin Supreme Court, which redrew them as instructed, and Mr. Evers' congressional maps were retained as is. But National Democrats now say the goal should be for a Protusewitz Supreme Court to revisit all of them, including the ones written by their own Democratic governor and upheld by the United States Supreme Court. All right, that is it for what the right is sayingBC News brings the story to you as it happens. Hundreds of wildfires are burning. Be the first to know what's going on and what that means for you and for Canadians. This situation has changed very quickly. Helping make sense of the world when it matters most.

Stay in the know. CBC News. Stay in the know. CBC News. Based on Charles Yu's award-winning book, Interior Chinatown follows the story of Willis Wu, a background character trapped in a police procedural who dreams about a world beyond Chinatown. When he inadvertently becomes a witness to a crime,

Willis begins to unravel a criminal web, his family's buried history, and what it feels like to be in the spotlight. Interior Chinatown is streaming November 19th, only on Disney+. Many on the left consider Kelly a threat to democracy and women's rights and emphasize the importance of winning this race. Some say this will be a test of the biggest electoral storylines in America right now. Others say the race is becoming about abortion, which is helping Protasewitz. In The Atlantic, Ronald Brownstein called it the first electoral test after Trump's indictment. This race will likely decide whether abortion

in the state is completely banned or whether the severely gerrymandered state legislative maps that have locked in overwhelming Republican majorities since 2011 are allowed to remain in place, he said. But it's also a revealing test of the electoral strength of the most powerful wedge issues that each party is likely to stress in next year's presidential race. Protasewicz has centered her campaign on portraying Kelly as a threat to legal abortion and an accomplice in Donald Trump's schemes to undermine democracy, the same issues that helped Democrats perform unexpectedly well in last November's elections. Meanwhile, Kelly and his allies have centered his campaign on presenting Protasewicz as soft on crime, the same accusation that Republicans stressed in many of

their winning campaigns last year, Brownstein said. With the choice framed so starkly in a state that has been so evenly balanced between the parties, Tuesday's results will measure which of those arguments remains more potent, particularly among the suburban voters who loom as the critical swing block in 2024's presidential contest. In Slate, Dennis Aftergood and Kent D. Peterson said abortion is turning the race blue. In February, Protesewitz won 46% of the vote in a four-way race and nearly doubled the 24% of the vote taken by former Judge Dan Kelly. If those results hold in the general, it will be just one more data point that voters around the country are furious with the Supreme Court's decision overturning Roe v. Wade and are making their choices at the ballot box with that in mind. Protesewitz said Dobbs was

the worst Supreme Court decision in decades, and there's a reason why that powerful condemnation struck a chord in Wisconsin. The ruling revived an 1849 Wisconsin law making abortion a crime. Democratic Governor Tony Evers and State Attorney General Josh Call have sued to overturn it. That suit will ultimately find its way to the Wisconsin Supreme Court, where the vote of either Protasewicz or Kelly will likely be the tiebreaker. And while Protasewicz took the issue head on, Kelly has ducked questions on abortion and other issues, offering only catchphrases like saying he will follow the law. The Washington Post editorial board said this is the reason we should not have elections for judges. The race has become an unseemly spectacle that underscores why judgeship should never be on the ballot. At their only debate, the two refuse to shake hands. Kelly

tries to maintain the pretense that he hasn't prejudged issues coming to the court, but he has previously written that abortion is a policy deadly to children, and he spoke virtually at an event this month that featured a pastor who has advocated for creating an anti-abortion militia and has called the murder of abortion providers justifiable homicide. This is a national problem, as 39 states choose judges at some level through elections, and nearly $100 million was spent on judicial ratios during the 2020 cycle. This editorial board has argued for decades against the perverse practice of electing judges. Studies show judges hand out longer sentences as elections approach because they don't want

to be attacked as soft on crime, and that they are more likely to rule in favor of their donors during election years. No matter who wins in Wisconsin on Tuesday, the rule of law will lose. All right, that is it for the left and the right are saying, which brings us to my take. First, I'd like to throw my weight behind the above argument from the Washington Post editorial board under what the left is saying, that judges shouldn't be elected. This kind of election is already a spectacle, and I imagine future elections will only be worse. We should not have political parties spending tens of millions of dollars on running television ads to influence how their preferred justices will rule on cases before those cases even appear before them. It is everything that is not supposed to happen in our courts. Speaking of donors, while they are arguing otherwise, I do think we should temper any national takeaways from this race. It certainly pits major issues at odds like abortion

and crime policy in which there's an obvious distinction between these two candidates, but the playing field is a little uneven. Democrats are beating Republicans in spending and vastly outspending them on television. They seem to be far more focused on this race, so it's hard for me to tell if the results will be as much about public sentiment as they are about Democrats' fundamental advantage in running a get-out-the-vote operation right now. Speaking of those donors, it's not just Democrats either. Republicans have massive mega-donors throwing money into this race as well, though they are being talked about a lot less. Given my concerns about gerrymandering, my view that the 2020 election was legitimate, and my belief that state government bans on

abortion are dangerous, I suppose supporting Protasewicz should be a slam dunk. But there really is a lot to dislike in every direction. As someone still holding onto my reverence for our institution and our courts, Protasewicz offering voters explicit declarations of her views is pretty astonishing. She is crossing lines that other justices that elevate to the state Supreme Court usually don't, while simultaneously claiming those views are simply her values and won't impact her decisions, which is, well, not very convincing. Potential judges simply shouldn't be making it so clear how they'll rule on cases they haven't seen. And it's not like Kelly is much better. Sure, he toes the line more when interviewed, but he has also served as a paid legal advisor

for the state's top abortion groups and even the state Republican Party. He was involved in at least some discussions about the fake elector plot to overturn the 2020 presidential election, and he hasn't exactly been coy about how he'd vote on these key issues. Part of me at least appreciates Protasewitz's candidness. One ace in the hole for Republicans is that they managed to also get a few red meat issues on the ballot for the election, which could drive up Republican turnout in a race where they are probably underdogs. One initiative would allow judges to consider a person's criminal history in setting bail, not just whether they are a flight risk. Another would open the door for making low-income people show proof they sought out work to receive welfare

benefits. Both policies have broad appeal, but could get the Republican base out to an election the GOP has otherwise seemed to be underselling. But again, it's the existence of this race in the first place that is really irksome. Part of the reason Protasewicz is breaking so many norms is that there are incentives to do so. And in a more sane and constrained judicial system, Kelly's extensive involvement in state politics would be disqualifying too. We should all want a better functioning democracy where overtly partisan judges aren't the key to winning elections or passing the legislation we want. All right, next up is your questions answered. This one is from Art in Cedar Park, Texas.

Art said, do you believe it is possible for Donald Trump to receive a fair trial? Art said, do you believe it is possible for Donald Trump to receive a fair trial? Uh, Art, in Manhattan? No, probably not. That's another problem with this whole affair that I didn't even initially get into. Imagine for a moment if Marjorie Taylor Greene's district in Georgia had a powerful district attorney who indicted Joe Biden for something. Would liberals really have faith that Biden would be judged fairly by a jury there? Now, consider this. Trump won just 12% of the vote in Manhattan. Green's opponent in 2022, Democrat Marcus Flowers, won 34% of the vote there. So by that measure, Manhattan is more biased against Trump than Green's district would be against Biden. Once both sides fulfill their challenges of jurists, up to eight, there could still be a lot of never-Trump people and rabid Trump haters on the jury.

It may be pretty much unavoidable, and I have no idea how a court can deal with the fact that jurors will already have deep biases about Trump. Matthew Galluzzo, a former prosecutor in the New York City District Attorney's Office, put it this way to NPR. If I had to pick which side to be on and I had to win to save my life, I would probably choose to be on the prosecution side, simply because the jury pool in Manhattan is so incredibly against Donald Trump. I think that just about sums it up. All right, that is it for our reader question of the day, which brings us to our under the radar section. Gen Z desires to work at Google more than any company in America, according to a new poll conducted by Axios. The survey was meant to better understand the companies that young Americans desire to work for in the future. Interestingly, second behind Google was the federal government for both young Democrats

and young Republicans, and then Apple. Young Americans were also asked what companies they thought were doing good in the world, and Patagonia took the top spot, followed by Google and then Tesla. Axios has the interesting results to this survey, and there's a link to it in today's episode description. All right, and next up is our numbers section. The percentage of the vote that Janet Protasewicz received in February's four-way primary was 46%. Dan Kelly received 24.2%. Jennifer Dorough, another conservative, received 21.8%. And the percentage of the vote liberal Everett Mitchell received in February's four-way primary was 7.5%. The split in Wisconsin in a hypothetical Trump vs. Biden 2024 matchup, according to a new Marquette Law poll, is 38 to 38. The percentage of Wisconsin voters who said they wouldn't vote or would vote for someone else in that hypothetical matchup was 24%. All right, and last but not least, our Have a Nice Day section.

NASA has officially named four astronauts for the next mission to the moon. The Artemis II team will be made up of three Americans, Victor Glover, Christina Hammett-Coach, and Reid Wiseman, and one Canadian, Jeremy Hansen. Artemis II will launch into space in 2024 for a lunar flyby before returning to Earth. It is the first mission to send a crew to the moon since 1972, more than 50 years ago, and two more are planned after it, which include lunar spacewalks and setting up a permanent base camp on the moon. Coach and Glover are set to become the first woman and the first person of color to ever step foot on the moon, according to ABC News.

All right, everybody, that is it for today's podcast. Like I said at the top, I apologize for some of the crazy noise out there. If you heard it, we'll be right back here tomorrow with a brief update and then a little bit of a political break for everybody. See you then. Have a good one. Peace. Our podcast is written by me, Isaac Saul, and edited by Zosia Warpea. Our script is edited by Sean Brady, Ari Weitzman, and Bailey Saul. Shout out to our interns, Audrey Moorhead and Watkins Kelly,

and our social media manager, Magdalena Bokova, who created our podcast logo. Music for the podcast was produced by Diet75. For more from Tangle, check out our website at www.tangle.com. We'll be right back. unravel a criminal web, his family's buried history, and what it feels like to be in the spotlight. Interior Chinatown is streaming November 19th, only on Disney+. The flu remains a serious disease. Last season, over 102,000 influenza cases have been reported across Canada, which is nearly double the historic average of 52,000 cases. What can you do this flu season? Talk to your pharmacist or doctor about getting a flu shot. Consider FluCellVax Quad and help protect yourself from the flu. It's the first cell-based flu vaccine authorized in Canada for ages six months and older, and it may be available for free in your province. Side effects and allergic reactions can occur, and 100% protection is not guaranteed. Learn more at FluCellVax.ca.