Good, good morning and welcome, welcome to Mattener on air.
Jane Mattener, Greg Mach, Calvin Butenoff coming to you live from her studio here at Radio Park in Racine.
You can always join us, you can call, you can text, the number is the same.
855-752-4842.
Leave a comment if you're watching on the live stream.
On Facebook, YouTube, and what used to be Twitter today, the average price of a gallon of 2% milk in Wisconsin
318 the same as yesterday and the average price of a dozen large eggs here in the state 624 also the same as it was yesterday.
And it's going to preserve jobs.
So stop with the tariffs.
It's the leverage
that we need to protect.
No,
no, no, no, no, I'm glad he did what he did with Canada
because you have enough money to serve.
That's
not the point.
This is for this is you look it's going to float all boats.
Come on, Jessica.
Really,
Janine Biro.
on tariffs from Fox News yesterday.
Of course, Judge Janine is worth $85 million.
Oh, she's got private island money.
She's OK.
She's great.
She'll be fine.
She can afford another dozen eggs.
She's not watching the stock market.
No matter what the stock market does, I think she'll be OK.
Yes, we have a very busy show coming up for you today.
Deb Cronmiller from the League of Women Voters going to be joining us.
After the 1030 news, the April 1st election rapidly approaching.
It's really important you be a voter.
I know everyone's exhausted.
I know everyone's exhausted.
I know I'm exhausted by all of the ads that are being run on television.
It is still remarkably important that you vote.
So if you have not registered, if you're not sure if you're registered, if you're not sure what's on the ballot,
You can answer all those questions.
Go to myvote.wi.gov, myvote.wi.gov.
All you have to do is put in your address and everything related to the April 1 election, including where you need to go vote, what is on the ballot, all of those things will come up for you.
Check it out, myvote.wi.gov.
Again, Deb Cronmiller from the League of Women Voters joining us after 10.33.
We're gonna talk once again about the SAVE Act.
Yes.
Which we did talk about before the presidential election and with everything else, there's been a couple things going on.
This kind of got pushed into the background.
Yeah.
But I think it's very important, especially if you are a married woman, to understand what this will mean if the SAVE Act passes.
So Deb Cronmiller will be here after the 1030 news.
Next hour, after the 11 o'clock news, Dr. Kristen Lierly will be here.
Yes.
That measles outbreak continues in Texas.
And our secretary of health and human services, Robert Kennedy Jr.
Bob Jr.
Bob Jr.
just thinks everybody should just get measles.
That's the best way.
Marjorie Taylor Greene suggested that we have measles parties.
Remember when COVID was happening, we were trying to like get herd immunity through vaccination and whatnot.
Now they're just like, Hey, let's do the opposite.
Let's do dead herd immunity.
Just everyone, the measles come over to my house, bring glass of wine, bring a game that requires touching like twister and let's just have at it.
Yeah.
So we're going to talk to Dr. Lierly about measles and how serious this is.
And if you're like me,
I've got my measles vaccination a long time ago.
I had measles when I was a sophomore in high school.
We're going to talk about whether or not we need boosters, what the status is of that.
If you ever have a question for Dr. Lierly, by the way, please send it in to janesaysatcivicmedia.us, J-A-N-E-S-A-Y-S.
Jane says atcivicmedia.us.
Wrapping up the show, 11.30.
We're going to talk about this, and this spurred something I heard listening to Pat Crichtlow from North News Radio on the way in this morning, talking about Batman.
Batman.
Batman, the TV show debuted on this date in 1966.
So at 11.33, we want to know what old TV show do you miss?
OK.
There's so much to choose from.
I already have one.
Oh, good.
Oh, good.
Yeah.
So start thinking about that.
What old TV show do you miss?
That'll be at 11.33.
And then we'll wrap it up with this shouldn't be a thing as always.
It floats.
Trust me, addition.
It's a good one.
You may want to stick around for that.
We did start off the show, of course, talking about.
Jeannie Pirro on Fox News, talking about how these tariffs are great.
This is the greatest thing.
And again, Jeannie Pirro is worth $85 million.
So no matter what happens with the economy, I'm pretty sure she's going to be OK.
Most of us, I think, are not in the position of having $85 million.
I currently do not have $85
million.
You do not.
No, I do not.
What a shame you didn't work harder, Greg.
I know.
I'm lazy, full of empathy and just
laziness.
We do have someone in Wisconsin who has concerns.
Who's who's that?
It's it's like our own Susan Collins.
Oh, grand Ron Johnson from Lawrence Andrea in the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel.
Ron Johnson says he has a lot of concerns over Trump's tariffs and the impacts on Wisconsin.
Ron Johnson telling the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, obviously we're a manufacturing state.
I'd be concerned about retaliation against those manufacturers.
I'm concerned about them losing overseas markets.
I'm concerned about the cost to builders.
I'm concerned about retaliation against our farmers.
There are a lot of concerns.
Let me count them.
One, two, three.
There are four concerns.
He's really concerned.
He's like super concerned, almost like all caps concerned.
I wonder if it'll keep him from voting.
certain ways then.
I wonder if that means he'll side with manufacturers, business people, individuals like that in here in Wisconsin.
I have a feeling no.
Okay.
All right.
Well, Ron is worth $54 million.
That it?
I know of the richest senators in the United States.
Ron Johnson ranks eighth.
How embarrassing.
Loser.
Mark Wayne Mullen of Oklahoma is better than Ron Johnson.
Come on, Rojo.
He has
three
names.
Rojo, work harder.
Yeah.
Work smarter.
Let's get you up on that list a little bit.
Put that concern aside because we know you're not going to do anything about it and, you know, make more money.
Scots and consumers and businesses expected to feel the impacts of the tariffs.
Yeah.
Yeah.
Raising prices on everything from produce to fuel.
to building materials.
As we've mentioned, Canada and Mexico are Wisconsin's two largest trading partners.
They bring in a combined $25 billion in cross-border trade in 2023.
China is Wisconsin's third largest trading partner.
However, again, this from the Milwaukee Journal sent in a number of Wisconsin Republicans defending the tariffs during his
Speech when Trump announced plans for these reciprocal tariffs, Ron Johnson and all the other Wisconsin lawmakers applauded.
Scott Fitzgerald.
Who?
Who was actually seen in the wild a couple of weeks ago.
That's never going to happen again.
I know.
Scott Fitzgerald said in a statement that he trusts Trump's tariff negotiations will ultimately benefit American citizens, workers and businesses.
That's a long con statement.
It's like ultimately maybe some, maybe a hundred years down the road.
We were supposed to, we're supposed to endure two years of pain.
That's what Elon said.
That's what Elon says.
Two years of pain.
I just think the way that the stock market has crashed, the way everything, the confidence has gone down.
It's going to be a lot longer than two years if he keeps doing this stuff.
I would think you're right.
Yes.
We're talking about the tariffs.
Tom Tiffany checking in.
Suggested that the president is selectively using tariffs as a negotiating tactic Tiffany posting on Twitter The cost of past trade deals have been too high for too many American workers for too long Reciprocal tariffs will change that by making trade fair again now correct me if I'm wrong, but when Donald Trump was first election elected the first time around He got rid of the NAFTA agreement
He believes so, yes.
And then he renegotiated an agreement with Canada and Mexico.
And again, if I'm wrong about this, please let me know.
855-752-4842.
So he's renegotiating the deal that he negotiated.
I
guess it's just not good enough anymore.
It's just not...
Oh,
God, it's...
Glenn Grossman also checking in.
Oh, Grant, great.
There are some countries taking advantage of the U.S., but he says lawmakers have to make sure these tariffs don't go overboard.
Obviously, trade wars are expensive for everybody, but there's probably some countries taking advantage of us.
Hopefully, President Trump will show urgency in wrapping this up.
So far, when Trump adds tariffs, he usually winds up removing them or reducing them in the near future.
We'll just have to see how this one goes.
Or he
Increases it and then a couple hours later says no I'm not gonna do that and then a couple hours later He comes back and says no I'm gonna double what I said I was gonna do and then yeah, it's a it's kind of up and down with the very stable genius
I do not know we're at tariffs wise not because I'm not up on the news because it changes every day it does I mean there's
it changes it
changes during the same day.
Yeah, so That is not a key point of strength for the president if you're gonna if you're gonna do an act tariffs do it
Stick to it We all have to go through this together whether we like it or not But this this as you've said before this uncertainty is terrible is terrible for everybody It's not good for it's not good for anyone in whether it's Wisconsin or the nation and And the markets are show are showing that that fact the confidence of the people the polling is going down for the president as well as Elon Musk who's polling worse than the president right now
But you know, you can get one of his cars for only $35,000.
Oh,
thank goodness.
I'll have to go to the DC dealership.
It's at the White House.
Exactly.
You know where to find that dealership.
Also, Donald Trump's commerce secretary, Howard Lutnick, said yesterday, Trump's tariffs will be worth it, even if it means a recession, folks.
So even if there's a recession, it's all good.
It's all good.
Howard Lutnick, too, I'm fairly certain, has a pretty nice nest egg.
you know, if the economy tanks, they're all going to be fine.
They're all, they're all going to have their own private islands.
It's, we're going to be the one who are, we're the ones who are going to be suffering for as long as they see fit.
Period.
He's worth $806 million.
Howard Ludnick?
Yeah.
Well, he's struggling.
He
needs a tax cut, Greg.
He's not a billionaire, Jane.
He
needs a tax cut.
Back to Ron Johnson, Wisconsin senior senator.
He did point to the U.S.
stock market, which has tumbled in the wake of the tariff as an announcement, quote, well, look what happened to the markets.
Johnson said, that concerns me.
He's very concerned.
So now I can sleep.
Right now, the Dow Jones industrial average is sitting currently at 41,089 points.
That is down 344 points.
It is heading towards under 40,000, which
it's all fine.
Well, it'll be reset.
But look,
guys, we'll just
hold hands.
Yeah, it's all going to we'll sing together.
Brad Schimmel knows who he's going to be working for.
If he makes it up on the state Supreme Court, we'll kick that around next.
Stay close.
You're listening to Matt Nair on air on the civic media radio network.
We'll be right back.
Good morning.
Welcome back to Matt Nair on Air.
Jane Matt Nair, Greg Bach, our resident young person, Calvin, on the board coming to you live from our studio at Radio Park in Racine.
You can always join us.
Call or text at 855.
7524842 leave a comment if you're watching on the live stream on Facebook, YouTube and what used to be Twitter just quickly.
If you are considering a job change, maybe you'd like a new challenge.
You'd like an opportunity to learn some new skills.
Oh, civic media is expanding and we have job openings for producers and reporters and sales reps.
If you would like to check it out, just go to our website, civicmedia.us slash careers and take a look at some of the jobs that civic media has to offer.
It's a wonderful company.
We have good benefits.
We have great benefits actually.
And it's a great place to work.
I say this from experience.
So check it out at civicmedia.us slash careers.
If you or someone you know is looking for a job change, looking to get always wanted to get into radio, this might be your chance.
civicmedia.us slash careers.
Before we went to the break, we were talking about Wisconsin senior senator $54 million worth Ron Johnson.
He's concerned.
What about the tariffs?
He's concerned, everybody.
So don't worry.
He's got it covered.
He's concerned.
He ain't gonna do
anything.
Ollie from the North Woods is on the line.
Good morning, Ollie.
Thanks for joining us.
What do you want to say about Ron Johnson?
Well, I heard you talking about Ron Johnson and reading out his concerns.
And I noticed that in each one of his concerns,
He brings up the point about retaliation.
That sounds more like a veiled threat, a reminder to anybody who speaks out against the Republicans that they face retaliation.
It sounds more like he's warning people to keep quiet rather than be concerned about...
what's going on with them.
You're not wrong, Ali.
Thank you.
I mean, and we're going to talk about this tomorrow with Jim Santel about the Trump administration squashing speech they don't like.
And they are approaching this in all kinds of different ways.
If you say something out loud, if you represent a client they don't like as a law firm, the Trump administration is going to come after you.
That seems, I don't know what would be the word, un-American.
an American cultie.
All those things, all the all the bad things, all the red flags
in the time that we have remaining before we go to the news.
It's important, I think, to point this out.
New article in the Milwaukee Journal sent no from Daniel Bice.
At least now we know if Brad Schimmel gets elected to Wisconsin Supreme Court, who he's going to be working for.
New Musk Mailer says Brad Schimmel will support President Trump's agenda from the bench.
What?
Good to know.
Conservative Waukesha County Judge Brad Schimmel will not only interpret the law as a member of the state Supreme Court, he will also be President Donald Trump's bestie on the bench.
This is from a new mailer by a super PAC from Elon Musk.
Quote, conservative Brad Schimmel will support President Trump's agenda.
Together we won the White House.
Now it's time to win the courthouse.
I'm not the smartest person in the room.
I'm not the sharpest knife in the drawer.
I didn't think that that was the role of a Wisconsin Supreme Court justice was to be working for the current administration.
No, they're supposed to be looking at cases, as some would say, a case-by-case basis.
Case-by-case basis.
Measuring all of the information, all the discovery, and then going forth and issuing an order.
And that order is either upholding the law, sending it back down.
I don't sit on the Supreme Court of a state or the country, but I know what they are supposed to do.
And let's see here.
This was last month, February 19th.
Brad Schimmel says he's not for sale after Elon Musk group drops $1.5 million in race.
It's almost up to 10 million now.
Yeah.
10 million dollars.
Elon's spending a lot of money to get his guy in the court.
Yes.
You can do your best by saying, no, we did this to Eric Hufty, we did this to Tim Michaels, just because your big business doesn't mean you get to run what happens here in the state.
And if Brad Schimmel is going to enforce the will of the current president on us, even though that is not the will of the people, that's what are you going to do?
What do you, I just don't see why we should be, why, first of all, I don't even see why he can be a candidate at this point.
I mean, this seems so wrought with like conflict of interest and all these problems.
But on the 19th of February, Brad Schimel says he's not for sale.
Well, I guess he can take that sign off, because he can put a little thing that says it's sold.
Or rent?
No, sold.
Sold?
Sold.
He's not for sale anymore, because he's already sold to Elon Musk and all his buddies and Donald Trump.
And we're not making this up.
These are
flyers.
And I think I just got one.
I got one in my house, too.
And they're big ones, too.
Oh, mine was a little door hanger that said, you can't let liberal justice.
Susan Crawford and then, you know, and then on the other side, it's Donald Trump with a big thumbs up saying.
Just keep this in mind.
Yeah.
As we prepare to go at the polls on April 1st and you cast a ballot for either Susan Crawford or Brad Schimmel.
Brad Schimmel has admitted if he gets this spot on the Wisconsin Supreme Court, he will not be ruling independently.
He will be ruling in order to support Donald Trump.
Again, I didn't realize that was in the job description.
No.
Neither did I. I thought you were supposed to be an independent jurist.
You would think so.
We can talk more about this with an actual lawyer, Jim Santel, when he joins us tomorrow.
And we can talk about this with Deb Cronbiller.
Oh, yeah.
Who's coming up next?
She is coming up next from the League of Women Voters.
But share what you know.
Yes.
There are still a lot of people from a recent poll that came out from Arquette Law School.
A lot of folks have no opinion yet.
on either Brad Schimmel or Susan Crawford.
But
they
know the, but they, but a overwhelming group of, an overwhelming group of those individuals polled know that that race is important.
Right.
But they just don't know anything about the candidates.
That's a scary place to be.
So share
what you
know.
Share what you know.
And again, we're not making this up.
It's on the flyers.
Brad Schimmel will be on the Wisconsin Supreme Court to help support the Trump agenda.
Cast your ballot accordingly.
Yeah.
That's what you want.
Go for it.
I don't think you should do it.
Okay, news is coming up next.
When we return, Deb Cronmiller will be here from the League of Women Voters.
Stay with us.
You are listening to Matt Nair on air coming to you across the vast statewide, countrywide, global on the app, Civic Media Radio Network.
Good morning welcome welcome to Matt Nair on air Jane Matt Nair Greg Bach the board lord coming to you from our studio here at Radio Park in Racine you can always join us call or text the number is the same 855-752-4842 leave a comment if you're watching on the live stream on Facebook YouTube and what used to be Twitter the Wisconsin Supreme Court election April 1st
is going to impact our economy, reproductive rights, public education, and more.
You can join the Protecting Justice for All event that's happening tonight at the Overture Center for the Arts in Madison, featuring expert panels and a debate watch party because Susan Crawford and Brad Schimmel will be debating tonight.
If you would like more details about this, you can also register to sign up.
at upnorthnewswi.com slash supreme and if you're not going to be a rugby in madison and you can't make it you can listen to the entire program across civic media from five to seven p.m.
across the civic media radio network again the uh april election is april first just a couple of weeks away one of the main reasons why we have our next guest deb kronmiller is here from the league of women voters good morning deb thanks so much for joining us
Absolutely.
We were talking right before you joined us about a particular Supreme Court candidate in Wisconsin, and I'm not trying to make this partisan.
But I find it interesting that now it was my understanding, Deb, that Supreme Court justices, even on the state level, are supposed to be impartial.
They're supposed to be impartial jurists who are not coming in with an agenda of the current administration.
And yet now we have one candidate who said, you elect me to the Supreme Court and I'm going to do what the Trump administration wants.
That seems like a new step, shall we say?
I think for all of us who read and believe in the Constitution of the United States, the founders obviously had a strategy for how to keep our government going.
Democratic Republic that we have, if you can keep it.
And one of the strategies was that we would have two branches of government, the executive and the legislative, that would be partisan.
And then we would have this third equal branch of government, our courts, our judiciary, that would be independent.
And their job essentially is to
kind of police the other two branches to make sure that we're not off the rails um that they the other two branches of government the politicized branches of government on purpose um would be following the laws or in the case of the legislature making the laws um and then uh in the executive not to overreach or over over
grab power you know and and so all three branches were intended to be equal and all three branches were intended to have a very specific purpose in what is governance of our nation and our state and I do think that and it's hard not to I guess in in this
world that we live in today, different from the world of our founders, obviously.
But when we have money interests coming in on both candidates' sides, that probably is going to exceed $70 million in the state of Wisconsin.
When you hear $70 million and you hear the word independent branch of government,
I think the average person likely says to themselves, okay, $70 million.
I mean, how do I stay independent when that much money has come to support me or oppose me?
And that's the problem.
And that's why the legal women voters for years and years and years has held a position that would take money out of politics.
And I mean we believe in a campaign finance system that would be more fair and equal and equalizing You know in today's world You know Again despite our founders good intentions not everybody can run for office because they're not independently wealthy Yeah, or they don't know the inroads to get to the money and without the money you can't sit
in a seat that's an elected seat, which is really a shame.
And I think that this conversation, so many conversations that are happening in the state and in the nation around money and politics, I think we're seeing what money reaps.
And I don't think everybody's happy with the consequences of so much money in what is our political system.
And as you said, Deb, when the founders set up our system of government, the judiciary was independent in order to, as you said, kind of police the executive and the legislative just to make sure they're not doing naughty things.
And they're supposed to be independent.
And that...
doesn't seem to be the case anymore, especially now when we have one person running for the Wisconsin Supreme Court who says, yep, I'm going to be here for a rubber stamp for the administration.
That seems bad to me.
Yeah, and I think that those were the same accusations that were floated in 23 when one of the candidates was very clear about her values.
And people thought, well,
then she's already predisposed.
She's not going to hear the evidence.
She's not going to hear the case as it's presented to the Supreme Court.
And I think that that gets us back to Supreme Court 101.
Our Supreme Court, like our appellate courts, looks at the lower court
evidence, the, the research that's been done, the, you know, why certain decisions have been made based on law or constitution at those lower courts to decide, you know, essentially, what's that the right decision?
And I think, you know, we've got courts all over the nation now that are taking cases on where they're the first court to hear the evidence.
And that's not
what the intention of the Supreme Court was.
It was certainly not the intention of how the whole court system works.
And there needs to be some, I think, education.
about why the process of what our judicial system is supposed to do is so important so that these lower courts are actually doing that important research so that a Supreme Court has a body of evidence that they're looking at to weigh in on whether those lower courts have done the
the right work in making the decisions they've made.
That's so important what you just pointed out.
The Supreme Court is supposed to be the last stop through the court system, right?
You're supposed to go through, as you said, all the lower courts and have judgments made on this argument and then ultimately it works its way up to the Supreme Court, but that's not the way it is anymore.
Now it's like plaintiffs are looking for an opening
to directly bring the case in front of the Supreme Court, as you said, without any of these earlier decisions.
It almost seems like those lower courts are formalities now.
Well, and I think that, you know, we have a legislature here in Wisconsin that's actually trying to make up or reconfigure some of the lower courts.
Again, it's, you know, if we stay within kind of the
old-fashioned rules, you know, I think that some of this questioning of the impartiality of the courts, of the judgments that are being made, of the process that's being used, you know, in Wisconsin and at the national Supreme Court level, there's no ethical standard.
that these judges are being held to.
So imagine everyone's surprise when they hear that you know a very significant case is being taken by the Supreme Court as the original court that's going to hear you know the case um you know that that's not
normal.
That's kind of outside of the realm of what is normal.
And it's also not normal, I think, when people hear that so many of our US justices are, you know,
accepting large gifts from donors and or high net worth individuals who own companies who have influence in spaces in the same spaces that the court might be hearing cases about.
And again, I think the thinking person says to themselves,
Well, maybe that's influencing their decision as they hear that body of evidence or as they look at evidence that maybe another lower court had looked at.
And these are legitimate questions to be asking.
And I think the response is, let's instate judicial ethical standards.
Let's make sure that
All our judges are playing by the same rules.
In Wisconsin, our Supreme Court actually has authority over all the lower courts, the judges, the ethical standards to which they hold themselves.
Yet our Supreme Court, as years ago, the league asked them to instate ethical standards.
And they basically responded with, no, no, no.
where the highest court in Wisconsin, of course, will maintain these high ethical standards.
Well, that was a long time ago.
And in the course of a decade and a half, we've seen court races go from being hundreds of thousands, total investment in electing a Supreme Court justice to what could be in excess of $70 million.
Times have changed.
We need different rules now because of that.
And those are the discussions I think should be happening.
We shouldn't be having a discussion about if you hear this case, because that should be an off-limits question to begin with.
But rather, what will you do to ensure the impartiality of the court in Wisconsin, in the United States?
These are the questions we should be asking.
If you're just joining us, Deb Cronmiller is our guest from the League of Women Voters and we're talking about the spring election coming up in Wisconsin on April 1st.
It is very, very important that everyone be a voter.
Go to myvote.wi.gov.
Make sure you're registered.
If you're not, there's ways you can rectify that, that all you have to do is put in your address.
It's super easy.
Myvote.wi.gov.
It really is remarkable to me, Deb, that no one screamed
and that we're still not collectively screaming about, you know what, I'm gonna issue my own set of ethics rules and then I'm gonna enforce those rules on myself because I'm trustworthy and you should just trust me.
What other business or any entity would we give that much power to?
Just trust us.
We'll make our own rules and we'll police ourselves.
It's all gonna be good.
Don't worry about
You know, on its surface, Jane, that really sounds so sensical.
But for, you know, hundreds of years, our justices have held themselves to that high standard.
But for hundreds of years, we haven't had money influencing every single decision that's being made, whether that's by the executive branch, the legislative branch, and now the judicial branch.
And so we do need a different set.
in this time of rules and and even when this money wasn't so pervasive the league thought the you know the supreme court in the united or in the wisconsin should have standards um but at the time when they said we don't need standards because we are of high integrity you know i didn't like that decision but at least i believed it and it's harder for me today to believe it
We can thank John Roberts and the Roberts Court for Citizens United deciding that money is speech everybody It's all good the more money you have the more speech you're entitled to
and I want to say something really quick is that you know There's no people are gonna donate money they have the right to do that because of Citizens United and it's not a matter to me.
It's not a matter of
the the people you're getting it from it's if you're saying you're going to align your decisions with a certain idea ideology and a certain group of individuals you know if you are if you are susan crawford and you're getting a lot of money from whomever if she if she comes out and says well george showers because that's who they love to talk about that's my guy there's a problem there and i have a problem with that but she's not doing it
The other guy is saying he's going to do it.
So that's where it's making me worried.
We're going to continue our conversation with Deb Cronnell or Deb.
When we come back, I want to talk about the SAVE Act and what this will mean, could mean for a particularly married women.
Stay with us.
You're listening to Matt Nair on air.
This is the Civic Media Radio Network.
We will be right back.
That you're thinking of.
You know, Jim, he's sincere.
Good morning.
Welcome back to Matt Nair on air.
Jane Matt Nair, Greg Box, Sweet Calbee on the board.
Coming to you from our studio here at Radio Park in Racine.
You can always join us.
Call her text at 855-752-4842.
You can leave a comment on the live stream on Facebook, YouTube and what used to be Twitter.
Next hour at this time, we'll wrap up the show as we always do with this shouldn't be a thing.
Today it is the it floats.
Trust me, addition, if you ever have a thing you think should not be, send it into Greg and me at janesaysatcivicmedia.us, J-A-N-E-S-A-Y-S, janesaysatcivicmedia.us.
Please use that same address if you have...
something going on in your community, no matter where you are across Wisconsin, that you would like us to highlight.
Maybe there's a fundraiser for something.
There's a guest you think we should have sent it into Jane says and all your complaints to.
We make sure Calvin sees them,
that's all good.
Deb Cronmiller is our guest from the League of Women Voters, and we were talking about the April 1 election just a couple of weeks away.
The school superintendent race is on the same ballot, along with the open seat on the Wisconsin Supreme Court.
Something else, though, I wanted to move on with the time we have left Deb is the SAVE Act, which we talked about before the presidential election.
The SAVE Act is part of Project 2025, which, as we see now, is being instituted by the Trump administration.
And there's this one part in the SAVE Act, which, again, is ostensibly about ballot security and voter security.
But in many ways, it's just about making it harder for certain groups of people to vote.
And the SAVE Act, if enacted, will really affect married women.
Can you explain how that would work, please?
Well, with the SAVE Act, if it's brought into law, every citizen would be forced to produce documents that can confirm.
that they are in fact a citizen of the United States.
Now, you know, the League is opposed to the SAVAG.
We were opposed to the Constitutional Amendment in November, which was also a citizenship test kind of amendment for here in Wisconsin.
And we oppose it because it is, as you were inferring, a voter suppression technique.
There's one.
no problem here that we need to solve to begin with.
It's already illegal.
It's a
solution in search of a problem.
It's already illegal for a non-citizen to vote in any election in the United States, and well, with some exceptions in local municipalities.
But at the state level and the federal level, you must be a citizen to vote.
And this system has worked.
pretty flawlessly for all these years because it is a felony for a non-citizen to cast a ballot.
And I don't know about you, but if you know non-citizens, you know one of their greatest fears is that they would be called on the carpet criminally for anything.
here in the United States.
So it's not like there's this mass citizen non-voting thing that was happening.
It never did happen, never will happen, and we don't need to save act.
But because
it's requiring every citizen to produce the citizenship documentation and the documents that they're allowing are the usual suspects, so a birth certificate, a passport.
And despite the fact that Congress knows, 50% of US citizens do not have a passport.
Women, married women,
The name on their birth certificate might very well be different than the name they are going by now because they've taken their husband's surname.
I don't know if these were unintended consequences or intended consequences, but the reality is this is going to cause an obstacle for people who are eligible to vote and have been eligible vote, have been voting for them to have to go through now an additional step to ensure that they have proven
their eligibility.
Before the SAVAC, before the constitutional amendment, our citizenship was something that we got to say, I am one of those.
I know I was born here in the United States.
I know I am a citizen, and I am affirming that.
And if I'm lying to you, that is a felony.
Well, and I think it's important again, this is a solution in search of a problem.
There is no evidence, and there never has been any evidence of widespread voter fraud.
You don't trust me?
Ask Robin Voss.
Ask Michael Gabelman, who spent $2 million of our money searching for voter fraud, which...
He never found.
There is no evidence of widespread voter fraud in this country.
This is all manufactured, as you said Deb, to make it more difficult for people to vote and for married women who didn't go to the court to have their name changed when they got married.
If this passes, you're going to have problems.
There will be problems for you trying to cast your ballot.
And in addition to the the actual nuts and bolts problems that the SABAC will have in disenfranchising certain voters, it's a distraction from what our legislature, our Congress, should be giving us in the form of laws.
You know, we need health care.
We need, you know, a clean, safe environment, you know, water, air.
You know, we should not be privatizing government services that are intended to promote the public good.
And yet these are the things that we're not talking about because we're talking about this safer.
Deb Cronmiller is with the League of Women Voters.
We will include the link to their website.
Check him out.
If you have questions, contact the League of Women Voters.
They're wonderful and they are there for you.
Thank you so much, Deb.
Really appreciate your time.
Stay with us.
News coming up next.
When we return, Dr. Kristen Lierly will be here to talk.
Measles.
You're listening to Mapping Air on Air.
This is the Civic Media Radio Network.