Tony Evers is a low-key guy. It’s probably the main reason he was able to edge out Gov. Scott Walker last November and his down-to-earth approach in office has been refreshing. His sincerity and moderation is something I respect.
But at this moment we needed a real fighter. Evers could have (and, in my view, should have) made history by being the first Wisconsin governor to veto an entire budget. Instead, he chose to use his line item veto power to make modest, incremental improvements in a budget that only hinted at his priorities. He didn’t wind up with half a loaf. He got the dust at the bottom of a canister of bread crumbs.
This is a huge lost opportunity. Evers could have vetoed the entire budget and then refused to sign any budget that did not include a nonpartisan redistricting commission similar to what he had proposed in his original budget — but was stripped out by the Republicans — and acceptance of the federal Medicaid money.
After last week’s Supreme Court decision ending any hope of overturning hyper-partisan maps, this was probably the only way to give Democrats any hope of winning back the Legislature for the next decade or longer. More importantly, it was the only way to give Wisconsinites of any political stripe any assurance that their vote really matters. Because while it’s true that the current maps, and the ones Republicans are likely to draw after the 2020 census, are designed to hurt Democrats, they also pack Democrats into blue enclaves, meaning that Republicans in those packed districts have no chance at all of electing anyone. In many of those districts, the GOP doesn’t even bother to field a candidate.
But because Evers didn’t veto and fight here is what will happen. After the 2020 census legislative Republicans, who will certainly control the Assembly (they currently have a 63-36 margin) and will probably control the Senate (where they are up 19-14), will once again produce the most pro-Republican maps they possibly can. Evers will veto them if Republicans don’t try an end around by passing the maps in the form of a joint resolution that doesn’t even need the governor’s approval. One way or another it will all wind up in court, but now that avenues into federal court have been substantially narrowed, the case might ultimately be decided by the state Supreme Court. That court will certainly still be controlled by Republicans and they will certainly uphold the Republican maps.
At that point it’s over. Another decade of Republican control of the Assembly and likely the Senate will be assured despite how many cumulative votes Democrats might get statewide. In the 2018 elections, Democrats won every statewide office on the ballot and yet Republicans ended up with those big legislative majorities. A post-election analysis found that the GOP starts out with a 29-seat advantage in the Assembly thanks to its rigged maps.
Make no mistake. Vetoing and fighting would have meant a long, bitter summer and the acrimony could have dragged on well into the fall. Their ability to rig the maps is at the heart of Speaker Robin Vos’ and Majority Leader Scott Fitzgerald’s power. They know that they can’t keep winning majorities with their extreme right wing policies in a purple state, so the only way to stay in power is to — there’s no better word for it — cheat. And cheating is just exactly what the U.S. Supreme Court’s conservative majority has now said it will do nothing to stop.
For Vos and Fitzgerald, the ability to cheat is existential. If they can’t cheat they can’t keep their power. They would have fought to the finish. Evers would have had to hang tough.
But Evers’ advantage would have been that he would have had overwhelming support for both fair redistricting and taking the Medicaid money. The most recent Marquette Law School poll recorded 70 percent support for the Medicaid provision and an earlier poll found 72 percent support for nonpartisan redistricting. In addition, virtually every newspaper in the state has editorialized in favor of nonpartisan redistricting and some have made it a crusade. And redistricting especially lends itself to simple, intuitive appeals to a sense of fairness. Evers wouldn’t be arguing for a rigged advantage for Democrats. He’d be arguing for a fair chance for either party to win in as many districts as possible. He’d have been saying that everyone’s vote — Democrat, Republican or independent — should matter. Certainly in the case of saving taxpayers $320 million by taking the Medicaid money, but especially in the case of redistricting, Evers is clearly on the side of the angels.
Evers could have treated it like a campaign. He should have gone hoarse speaking all over the state. And Democratic interest groups — even national ones — should have backed him up with a big air war. Radio and television commercials could have blanketed the state behind Evers’ campaign.
In signing the budget Evers said he considered a complete veto but rejected it because it would have, "been more of the same divisiveness and petty, political theatrics that the people of Wisconsin have put up with for far too long."
About 95 percent of the time I’d agree with him. But some things are worth fighting for. More to the point, some things have to be fought for when there’s no alternative. Redistricting was one of those things. I fear that Evers has given away our one chance to get fair maps for another decade.
