>> THE FOLLOWING PROGRAM IS A PBS WISCONSIN ORIGINAL PRODUCTION.

>> AN AVALANCHE OF ALMOST 6,000 MONTHLY CALLS TO THE 9-8-8 LIFELINE HIGHLIGHTS THE NEED FOR MENTAL HEALTH SUPPORT.

P.F.A.S.

ARE EVERYWHERE, BUT PREVENTION CAN START AT HOME.

AND CANDIDATES ANNOUNCING THEIR NEXT RUN PROVIDES A GLIMPSE INTO THE NEXT ELECTION CYCLE.

I'M FREDERICA FREYBERG, TONIGHT ON "HERE AND NOW," WE SPEAK WITH D.H.S.

SECRETARY KILLE KIRSTEN N ABOUT THE NEED FOR MENTAL HEALTH HELP.

A WATER QUALITY MANAGER LAYS OUT P.F.A.S.

MITIGATION IN DRINKING WATER.

ANTHONY CHERGOSKY EXPLAINS A SUDDEN PUSH FOR THIRD PARTY CANDIDATES AND A FUTURE WITH ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE.

IT'S "HERE AND NOW" FOR JULY 21.

>> FUNDING FOR "HERE AND NOW" IS PROVIDED BY THE FOCUS FUND FOR JOURNALISM AND FRIENDS OF PBS WISCONSIN.

>> NEARLY 92,000 CONTACTS RELATED TO MENTAL HEALTH AND SUBSTANCE USE SUPPORT CAME ACROSS THE 9-8-8 WISCONSIN LIFELINE IN ITS FIRST FULL YEAR OF OPERATION.

THE DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH SERVICES SAYS THE LIFELINE SYSTEM HAS REDUCED PRESSURES ON OTHER EMERGENCY SYSTEMS AND REPORTS THAT 98% OF INTERACTIONS WERE DEEMED RESOLVED.

FOR MORE ON THE STATE'S MENTAL HEALTH RESOURCES, WE TURN TO D.H.S.

SECRETARY DESIGNEE KIRSTEN JOHNSON.

THANK YOU FOR BEING WITH US.

>> THANK YOU FOR HAVING ME.

>> WERE YOU SURPRISED BY THE 92,000 NUMBER OF CONTACTS IN THE FIRST YEAR OF THIS 9-8-8 SERVICE?

>> I DON'T THINK I NECESSARILY WAS SURPRISED.

I THINK IT REALLY DEMONSTRATES THE NEED WE HAVE IN WISCONSIN AND ACROSS THE COUNTRY, FRANKLY, TO MEET PEOPLE WHERE THEY ARE IMMEDIATELY IN REAL TIME WHEN THEY NEED SUPPORT AROUND MENTAL HEALTH.

>> SO IF SOMEONE CALLS THE 9-8-8 LINE AND THEY ARE IN CRISIS, MENTAL HEALTH CRISIS, WHAT WILL THEY GET ON THE OTHER END?

>> SURE.

THEY'LL GET SOMEONE WHO IS TRAINED TO DEESCALATE A SCENARIO OR SITUATION, HOW TO FIND SUPPORT WITHIN THEIR COMMUNITY, TO CONNECT THEM WITH OTHER RESOURCES, A PROVIDER IF THEY NEEDED A BEHAVIORAL HEALTH PROVIDER, AND IF IT TRULY IS A SCENARIO WHERE THERE'S A CRISIS AND AN ACTION HAPPENING, THEY CAN BE CONNECTED TO EMERGENCY SERVICES.

>> WHAT DOES IT MEAN TO SAY THAT 98% OF THE CONTACTS ARE RESOLVED?

>> SURE.

SO THAT'S A REALLY GOOD QUESTION.

THAT MEANS 98% OF THE CALLS THAT ARE ANSWERED ARE RESOLVED IN TERMS OF THE PERSON IS COMFORTABLE HANGING UP THE PHONE, THE INDIVIDUAL WHO IS WORKING AT THE 9-8-8 CALL CENTER FEELS COMFORTABLE THAT THEY ARE SAFE, AND DEPENDING ON THE SCENARIO, THERE MAY BE A FOLLOW-UP CALL SCHEDULED IF THE INDIVIDUAL IS COMFORTABLE SHARING THEIR PERSONAL INFORMATION, CONTACT INFORMATION, THERE MAY BE A CASE MANAGER THAT'S ASSIGNED TO A FOLLOW-UP, BUT THAT MEANS WHEN THEY HANG UP THE PHONE, THE PERSON IN THE CALL CENTER FEELS COMFORTABLE THAT THAT PERSON IS SAFE.

>> AND THESE CALLS COULD PRESUMABLY TAKE SOME TIME.

RIGHT?

I MEAN, HOW LONG DO PEOPLE SPEND ON THE PHONE WITH PEOPLE WHO REALLY NEED THAT HELP?

>> SO THE AVERAGE CALL IS ABOUT 20 MINUTES, BUT THAT'S AVERAGE.

SO IT'S INTERESTING.

I JUST ASKED THIS QUESTION EARLIER OF THE 9-8-8 STAFF, HOW LONG -- SO A TEXT MESSAGE COULD TAKE UP TO TWO HOURS.

ON AVERAGE, CALLS ARE ABOUT 20 MINUTES.

>> HOW DO DO THE REGARDLESSULATIONS, THE CASES, THE CALLS THAT ARE RESOLVED, FREE UP OTHER SERVICES THAT MIGHT OTHERWISE BE CALLED UPON?

>> THAT'S ALSO AN EXCELLENT QUESTION.

ABOUT TWO-THIRDS OF CALLERS ARE ACTUALLY REPEAT CALLERS, SO THEY'RE PEOPLE WHO NOW RECOGNIZE THAT THIS IS A RESOURCE THAT THEY CAN ACCESS.

IT HAS ALLEVIATED SOME OF THE DEMANDS ON OUR CRISIS CALL CENTERS IN OUR COUNTIES, BUT ALSO ALLEVIATES SOME OF THE 9-1-1 CALLS, SO PEOPLE WHO NEED THE IMMEDIATE TOUCH POINT, THEY NEED SOMEBODY TO TALK TO, ACTUALLY HAVE AN OUTLET WHERE THEY HAVE A WARM BODY TO TALK THEM THROUGH THE SCENARIO THEY'RE IN.

>> OUTSIDE OF THIS LIFELINE, WHAT DOES ACCESS TO NON-EMERGENCY MENTAL HEALTH SERVICE LOOK LIKE ACROSS THE STATE RIGHT NOW?

>> CERTAINLY, WE HAVE CHALLENGES IN TERMS OF ACCESS TO CARE.

THROUGHOUT THE PANDEMIC, I THINK WE HAD CHALLENGES AROUND MENTAL HEALTH AND ACCESS TO MENTAL HEALTH SERVICES BEFORE THE PANDEMIC.

THEY WERE CERTAINLY EXACERBATED OVER THE COURSE OF THE LAST 3-1/2 YEARS, SO THERE ARE LONG WAIT TIMES TO GET INTO BEHAVIORAL HEALTH PROVIDERS.

THIS IS A TOUCH POINT FOR PEOPLE.

I'VE ALSO LEARNED FROM THE STAFF THAT THE PEOPLE THAT CALL BACK MAY HAVE AN APPOINTMENT SIX MONTHS OUT, NINE MONTHS OUTED, BUT BECAUSE THEY HAVE A CONTACT THAT THEY KNOW THEY CAN CALL WEEKLY, OR EVERY FEW WEEKS, SOMEBODY THAT THEY TRUST, THAT THEY MAY NOT NEED THAT CRISIS LEVEL IN SIX OR EIGHT MONTHS, THAT THEY MAY TALK ABOUT THE ISSUES THAT THEY'RE EXPERIENCING IN REAL TIME AND HAVE THEM RESOLVED.

>> BECAUSE I WAS THINKING THAT IF SOMEONE -- ONE OF THE CALL TAKERS ON THE LINE OFFERS RESOURCES TO PEOPLE WHO CALL, THEY MIGHT BE KIND OF THIN.

RIGHT?

OR THEY CALL AND IT'S LIKE, YEAH, LIKE YOU SAY, SIX MONTHS OUT, THAT KIND OF THING, SO I CAN SEE THAT REPEAT KIND OF CALL-BACK.

ARE THE PRESSURES OF DAILY LIFE AND THE OVERALL NEED FOR HELP GREATER RIGHT NOW?

>> YOU KNOW, I THINK THAT THERE WAS CERTAINLY AN INCREASED NEED FOR BEHAVIORAL HEALTH SERVICES BEFORE THE PANDEMIC, LIKE I MENTIONED.

I DO THINK THEY'VE INCREASED POST-PANDEMIC.

WE REALLY WENT THROUGH THREE YEARS OF UPHEAVAL IN TERMS OF, YOU KNOW, INCOME AND, YOU KNOW, ACCESS TO CHILDCARE AND HAVING TO WORK FROM HOME AND CHILDREN AT HOME AND KIDS AT HOME AND REMOTE WORK AND REMOTE SCHOOL I THINK THERE'S ABOUT A LOT OF CHANGE IN OUR SOCIETY OVER THE COURSE OF THE LAST 3-1/2 YEARS, AND I THINK PEOPLE ARE REALLY STRUGGLING.

>> DO YOU FEEL AS THOUGH THIS 9-8-8 SERVICE AND KIND OF THE DISCUSSION AROUND IT AND THE PROMOTION OF IT HELPS COMBAT THE STIGMA OF MENTAL HEALTH ISSUES?

>> I THINK IT HAS.

I DO THINK IT HAS.

AND I DO THINK THAT HAS, OVER THE COURSE OF THE LAST FIVE YEARS, PRE-PANDEMIC, PEOPLE ARE TALKING MORE ABOUT THE PERSONAL CHALLENGES AND STRUGGLES.

I THINK ANOTHER OUTLET FOR PEOPLE HAS BEEN SOCIAL MEDIA, WHICH HAS BEEN BOTH A BLESSING AND A CURSE IN TERMS OF PEOPLE ARE MORE FORTHCOMING ABOUT WHAT THEY'RE EXPERIENCING IN THEIR LIVES.

THE FLIP SIDE OF THAT IS THERE'S A TENDENCY TO PORTRAY PERFECTIONISM, WHICH I THINK IS CHALLENGING FOR KIDS TO TRY TO FEEL THAT THEY'RE NOT GOOD ENOUGH, THEY'RE NOT -- THEY'RE NOT GOOD ENOUGH WHEN THEY COMPARE THEMSELVES TO OTHERS ON SOCIAL MEDIA.

BUT AGAIN, I DO THINK THERE HAS BEEN AN INCREASED NEED OVER THE COURSE OF TIME AND I THINK THAT PEOPLE ARE MORE WILLING TO REACH OUT AND ASK FOR HELP.

>> IN SUM, WHAT MESSAGE TO PEOPLE WHO MIGHT NEED HELP DO YOU HAVE?

>> THAT THERE IS HELP.

THAT THERE IS HOPE.

THAT THERE ARE OUTLETS.

THEY CAN CALL 9-8-8.

THE OTHER VALUABLE TOOL THAT WE HAVE IS CONNECTED TO 2-1-1, WHICH IS A ROBUST SYSTEM OF RESOURCES, SO THOSE 9-8-8 -- THE PEOPLE ANSWERING THE PHONE ARE ABLE TO GIVE LOCAL RESOURCES TO PEOPLE WHO CALL, AND I THINK IT'S A TREMENDOUS VALUE TO WISCONSINITES.

>> ALL RIGHT.

KIRSTEN JOHNSON, THANKS VERY MUCH.

>> THANK YOU FOR HAVING ME.

>> TURNING TO THE ENVIRONMENT, AT LEAST 45% OF TAP WATER CONTAINS THE CANCER-CAUSING FOREVER CHEMICALS KNOWN AS P.F.A.S., ACCORDING TO A RECENTLY NATIONWIDE STUDY FROM THE U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY, VARYING GREATLY DEPENDING ON WHERE YOU LIVE.

AS RESEARCH INTO P.F.A.S.

EXPANDS, SO DOES THE REACH OF WHERE IT IT IS FOUND IN EVERYDAY LIVES.

FOR MORE ON HOW TO MITIGATE EXPOSURE TO THESE CHEMICALS IN YOUR OWN HOME, WE TURN TO JOE GRANDE, WATER QUALITY MANAGER FOR THE MADISON WATER UTILITY.

THANK YOU FOR BEING WITH US.

>> GLAD TO BE HERE.

>> SO WISCONSIN CLEARLY HAS P.F.A.S.

IN ALL CORNERS AND IN SOME PLACE, THERE ARE DEFINITE P.F.A.S.

HOT SPOTS, BUT HOW DOES SOMEONE KNOW IF THEY HAVE EXPOSURE TO P.F.A.S.

IN THEIR DRINKING WATER AND WHETHER IT'S ENOUGH TO WORRY ABOUT?

>> SURE.

SO REALLY DEPENDS ON WHAT THE SOURCE IS OF THEIR DRINKING WATER, WHETHER THEY ARE SERVED BY A PUBLIC UTILITY OR WHETHER THEY HAVE A PRIVATE WELL AND IT'S THEIR OWN INDIVIDUAL RESPONSIBILITY.

SO IF THEY'RE ON A PUBLIC WATER SYSTEM OR A PUBLIC UTILITY, THEY SHOULD REACH OUT TO THEIR UTILITY.

MAYBE THEY RECEIVE INFORMATION FROM THEIR CONSUMER CONFIDENCE REPORT OR THEIR ANNUAL WATER QUALITY REPORT AND IT REPORTS ON THAT.

SO THE LARGEST UTILITIES IN THE STATE WOULD HAVE DONE THEIR INITIAL TESTING LATE IN 2022, SO THAT SHOULD BE REPORTED ON THEIR CURRENT CONSUMER CONFIDENCE REPORT.

SOME OF THE SMALLER UTILITIES ACROSS THE STATE ARE CURRENTLY DOING THAT TESTING, SO THEY MIGHT NOT HAVE THOSE RESULTS ALREADY REPORTED, BUT THAT'S ONE WAY THAT THEY CAN FIND OUT, CHECKING THE WEBSITES FOR THEIR INDIVIDUAL UTILITY OR JUST CALLING THE UTILITY AND ASKING, HAVE YOU TESTED FOR P.F.A.S.

IF YOU HAVE, HAVE YOU FOUND ANYTHING AND WHAT HAVE YOU FOUND?

>> AND SO IF PEOPLE DO SEE IN THOSE REPORTS OR THROUGH PRIVATE WELL TESTING THAT THEY HAVE HIGH LEVELS OF P.F.A.S., WHAT SHOULD THEY DO ABOUT IT?

HOW DO YOU MITIGATE THAT IN YOUR DRINKING WATER?

>> THERE ARE TREATMENT ALTERNATIVES.

I'M NOT HERE TO ADVOCATE ONE WAY OR THE OTHER, BUT THERE ARE TREATMENT ALTERNATIVES THAT CAN REDUCE P.F.A.S.

CONCENTRATIONS IN DRINKING WATER.

THOSE INCLUDE ACTIVATED CARBON, LIKE A CHARCOAL FILTER, IT MIGHT BE IN A PITCHER FILTER OR SOMETHING THAT'S ATTACHED TO YOUR KITCHEN SINK.

THERE'S ALSO IN-LINE EXCHANGE, WHICH IS LESS COMMONLY USED.

THAT'S MORE FOR LARGE USERS LIKE UTILITIES THAT ARE TREATING IT BEFORE IT'S SENT OUT TO CONSUMERS, AND THEN THERE'S REVERSE OSMOSIS, AND THAT'S ANOTHER WAY THAT YOU CAN REMOVE.

SO THOSE ARE THE THREE GENERAL TECHNOLOGIES THAT ARE AVAILABLE.

>> AND SO APART FROM KIND OF THE PICTURES THAT YOU USE BY FILLING IT WITH TAP WATER IN YOUR KITCHEN, PITCHERS, CAN PEOPLE ININSTALL THOSE OTHER KINDS OF FILTERS THAT FILTER THE WATER AT ITS SOURCE?

>> THEY COULD BE ATTACHED UNDER THE KITCHEN SINK, FOR EXAMPLE.

YOU MIGHT HAVE A SEPARATE FAUCET THAT'S DELIVERING THAT FILTERED WATER, AND THAT MIGHT BE, LIKE I SAID, IT MIGHT BE CARBON-BASED SYSTEM OR IT MIGHT BE A REVERSE OSMOSIS SYSTEM, AND SO THOSE SYSTEMS ARE AVAILABLE.

>> CAN YOU DO THOSE SYSTEMS YOURSELF, OR DO YOU HAVE TO HAVE A PLUMBER?

>> DEPENDS ON HOW HANDY YOU ARE.

SOME PEOPLE MIGHT BE ABLE TO DO THAT ON YOUR OWN, BUT IN MOST CASES, IT'S PROBABLY A PLUMBER THAT NEEDS TO COME IN AND DO THAT.

>> WE GOT AN EMAIL FROM A VIEWER WHO TALKED ABOUT THE DISPOSAL OF USED FILTERS FOR P.F.A.S.

AND THAT THEY ARE THEN CONTAMINATED.

RIGHT?

AND HOW SHOULD THOSE BE DISPOSED OF, THOSE FILTERS?

>> THERE REALLY ISN'T AN INFRASTRUCTURE SET UP FOR HANDLING THOSE.

QUITE FRANKLY, THE CONCENTRATIONS OR THE AMOUNT OF P.F.A.S.

THAT MIGHT BE ON THOSE FILTERS IS REALLY SMALL QUANTITIES, AND SO THERE REALLY ISN'T ANY REGULATION IN TERMS OF SPECIAL IS DISPOSAL RECOMMENDATIONS FOR THAT.

TYPICALLY, YOU JUST PUT IT IN THE TRASH AND IT ENDS UP IN THE LANDFILL.

THE PROBLEM WITH P.F.A.S.

IS THAT THEY ARE THESE -- EXCUSE ME, FOREVER CHEMICALS, AND SO THEY DON'T BREAK DOWN.

WE'RE IS NOT DESTROYING THEM WITH OUR TREATMENT PROCESSES.

ALL WE'RE DOING IS CONCENTRATING THEM AND MOVING THEM SOMEWHERE ELSE, AND WE HAVE TO FIND SOME WAY, TECHNOLOGY HAS TO ADVANCE TO BREAK THESE DOWN AND TO BREAK THAT CYCLE.

>> SO P.F.A.S.

IN GROUNDWATER AND DRINKING WATER SEEMS TO GET KIND OF THE BULK OF THE ATTENTION, BUT WE'RE EXPOSED TO THESE CHEMICALS IN A LOT OF OTHER WAYS IN OUR DAILY LIVES.

HOW MUCH SHOULD WE FOCUS ON WATER VERSUS THE OTHER AREAS OF EXPOSURE?

>> YEAH.

I THINK WE SHOULD FOCUS ON ALL OF THEM.

FOOD IN PARTICULAR, IN SOME LOCAL BODIES OF WATER, THERE ARE FISH ADVISORIES, SO THAT'S ONE PIECE.

THERE'S THE DRINKING WATER, BUT THERE'S ALSO CONSUMER GOODS.

WE'RE SURROUNDED BY P.F.A.S.

IT'S IN UP UPHOLSTERY, IT'S IN OUR CLOTHING, IT'S IN OUR CARPETING.

IT'S IN A LOT OF PAPER PACKAGING.

SO IN ORDER TO MITIGATE OR REDUCE OR EXPOSURES, WE NEED TO BE LOOKING FOR P.F.A.S.-FREE ALTERNATIVES, AND SOME OF THOSE DO EXIST AND THERE'S A GROWING LIST OF COMPANIES THAT ARE NOW MAKING P.F.A.S.-FREE ALTERNATIVES, BUT IF YOU SEE THE WORDS "STAIN RESISTANT, STAIN REPELLANT, GREASE REASSISTANT, WATER REPEL MILITANT, ALL OF THESE TYPICALLY MEAN THAT THERE'S P.F.A.S.

IN THEM."

LIKE YOUR ANTI-STICK COOK WARE, THOSE KIND OF THINGS.

IN THE PAST CERTAINLY HAVE HAD P.F.A.S.

AND THERE ARE NOW ALTERNATIVES THAT ARE TRYING TO REMOVE THOSE FROM THE CONSUMER SUPPLY CHAIN.

>> THAT'S GOOD, BECAUSE IT'S EVERYWHERE.

JOE GRANDE, THANKS VERY MUCH.

>> THANK YOU.

>> IN POLITICAL NEWS, THE IDEA OF LAUNCHING THIRD-PARTY CANDIDATES IN THE 2024 PRESIDENTIAL RACE IS GAINING STEAM.

IN ADDITION TO CORNELL WEST PLANNING ON A GREEN PARTY TICKET, THE CENTRIST GROUP, NO LABELS, WHICH IS LOOKING FOR A IS CALLED UNITY CANDIDATE, IS EYEING SPECIALS LIKE WEST VIRGINIA SENATOR JOE MANCHIN.

WHERE DOES THIS PUT THE MAJOR PARTY CANDIDATES, DONALD TRUMP AND JOE BIDEN AND HOW WOULD WISCONSIN SWING WITH A THIRD PARTY ENTRANT?

FOR THIS AND MORE WE TURN TO LACROSSE POLITICAL SCIENCE PROFESSOR, ANTHONY CHERGOSKY.

THANK YOU FOR BEING WITH US.

>> THANK YOU, FREDERICA.

>> GIVEN THE MAJOR PARTY CANDIDATES, IS THIS UPCOMING ELECTION RIPE FOR THIRD-PARTY CANDIDATES?

>> YOU KNOW, I THOUGHT THAT WAS TRUE OF THE 2016 PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION.

I LOOKED BACK AT THE POPULAR VOTE FROM THAT YEAR AND FOUND THAT NEARLY 95% OF THE POPULAR VOTE WENT TO EITHER HILLARY CLINTON OR DONALD TRUMP.

SO COUNT ME AS A THIRD-PARTY SKEPTIC.

THERE TENDS TO BE A LOT OF TALK ABOUT THIRD-PARTY ENTRANTS POTENTIALLY COMING INTO THE PRESIDENTIAL RACE, AND IT ENDS UP BEING A LOT OF HYPE AND NOT A LOT OF VOTES FOR THAT THIRD-PARTY CANDIDATE.

I'M INTERESTED TO SEE HOW THE CAMPAIGN UNFOLDS, OBVIOUSLY, BEFORE MAKING A FINAL JUDGMENT, BUT THE AMERICAN POLITICAL SYSTEM MAKES IT EXTRAORDINARILY DIFFICULT FOR A THIRD-PARTY TICKET TO SUCCEED.

I EXPECT THAT WILL BE TRUE THIS TIME AROUND.

OF COURSE WE'LL HAVE TO WAIT AND SEE EXACTLY HOW THE CAMPAIGN UNFOLDS.

>> LET'S SAY WE DO HAVE A THIRD-PARTY ENTRANT.

WHO HE IS VOTES WOULD IT CUT INTO MORE?

BIDEN'S OR TRUMP'S?

>> I'M SEEING INCONSISTENT DATA ON WHETHER THE THIRD-PARTY CANDIDATE WOULD BE A IS CALLED SAMISPOILER FOR EITHER SIDE, AND THAT IS WHAT THE PARTIES ARE FOCUSED ON, IF THE THIRD PARTY IS GOING TO TAKE AWAY VOTES.

WE DON'T THINK OF THEM AS HAVING A SERIOUS CHANCE OF WINNING.

WE THINK ABOUT THEM PLAYING THAT SPOILER ROLE WHERE THEY COULD THROW THE ELECTION ONE WAY OR THE OTHER.

TO THE POINT ABOUT WISCONSIN, THE THIRD-PARTY CANDIDATE BE COULD BE HIGHLY RELEVANT IN WISCONSIN, EVEN IF THE THIRD-PARTY CANDIDATE WIDELY NOT WIN THE STATE BECAUSE OUR ELECTIONS HERE ARE SO CLOSE.

IN WISCONSIN, A THIRD-PARTY CANDIDATE COULD MAKE A BIG DIFFERENCE, EVEN IF THEY ONLY TAKE A SMALL PERCENTAGE OF THE VOTE.

>> LOOKING BACK IN PRESIDENTIAL ELECTORAL HISTORY, WHAT'S AN EXAMPLE OF A THIRD-PARTY CANDIDATE THAT DID, IN EFFECT, SPOIL CANDIDATES' CHANCES OF TAKING THE SEAT?

I MEAN, RALPH NADER COMES TO MIND, ROSS PEROT.

>> RALPH NADER COMES TO MIND BECAUSE HE RAN AS A LEFT WING CANDIDATE.

THUS, HE WOULD TAKE AWAY VOTES FROM AL GORE, THE DEMOCRAT.

THERE, IT WAS QUITE CLEAR WHO THE THIRD-PARTY CANDIDATE WAS TAKING AWAY VOTES FROM, AND IN THE CASE OF RALPH NADER, FREDERICA, THE BIG DEAL THERE WAS FLORIDA, WHERE FLORIDA WAS DECIDED BY SUCH A SMALL MARGIN, THAT NADER GOT ENOUGH OF THE PERCENTAGE TO POTENTIALLY SWING THE ELECTION IN FAVOR OF GEORGE W. BUSH, AND THAT'S WHAT WE WOULD BE LOOKING FOR IF A THIRD-PARTY CANDIDATE MAKES THE BALLOT IN WISCONSIN IN 2024.

>> RIGHT SO THE TREPIDATION ON THE PART OF THE MAJOR PARTY CANDIDATES IN WISCONSIN IS REAL AROUND A THIRD-PARTY POTENTIAL.

>> IT IS, BECAUSE ONLY A SMALL NUMBER OF STATES ACTUALLY MATTER IN THE ELECTORAL COLLEGE, AND SO THE BIG QUESTION IS, IF A THIRD-PARTY CANDIDATE WOULD BE ON THE BALLOT IN THAT SMALL NUMBER OF PIVOTAL STATES AND WHICH SIDE THAT THIRD-PARTY CANDIDATE MAY TAKE VOTES FROM.

>> SO A IN THE THIRD CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICT, WHERE YOU ARE, DEMOCRATS ARE KIND OF LINING UP TO RUN AGAINST INCUMBENT DERRICK VAN ORDEN THERE.

REBECCA COOKE WHO LOST TO BRAD PFAFF IS OFFICIALLY IN.

SO THEY MUST THINK THAT THE FIRST-TERM REPUBLICAN IS BEATABLE?

>> I THINK SO, FREDERICA.

A LOT IS GOING TO DPOAND O DEPED ON THE NATIONAL POLITICAL CONTEXT IN 2024.

WE ZONE KNOW IF 2024 IS GOING TO BE A REPUBLICAN FRIENDLY YEAR OR A DEMOCRATIC PARTY FRIENDLY YEAR.

THAT REMAINS TO BE SEEN AND THAT'S GOING TO HAVE A HUGE EFFECTS ON THE OUTCOME IN THIS DISTRICT, BUT IN ANTICIPATION OF POTENTIALLY A FAVORABLE POLITICAL CLIMATE, A LOT OF DEMOCRATS ARE LOOKING AT RUNNING AGAINST FIRST-TERM REPUBLICAN CONGRESSMAN DERRICK VAN ORDEN, VIEWING HIM AS POTENTIALLY VULNERABLE BECAUSE HE WON HIS PREVIOUS ELECTION BY LESS THAN 4 PERCENTAGE POINTS.

>> HE HAS MODERATED, IT SEEMS TO ME, IN POLITICAL MESSAGING SINCE THAT TIME.

>> I WOULD AGREE WITH THAT, FREDERICA.

HE HAS FOCUSED A LOT ON LIKE RAILROAD SAFETY, HE'S FOCUSED ON MENTAL HEALTH, TRYING TO FIND THAT COMMON GROUND WITH DEMOCRATS, TRYING TO HAVE SOME BIPARTISAN POSITIONS.

CONGRESSMAN VAN ORDEN ALSO TAKES SOME POSITIONS THAT ARE VERY MUCH IN LINE WITH HIS POLITICAL PARTY WHEN YOU LOOK AT HIS POSITION ON IMMIGRATION OR HIS POSITION ON GUNS.

SO I WOULD DESCRIBE CONGRESSMAN VAN ORDEN AS TRYING TO GENERATE SOME PUBLICITY AND GENERATE SOME MOMENTUM BEHIND BIPARTISAN EFFORTS WHILE ALSO STICKING WITH HIS PARTY ON OTHER ISSUES.

>> SO BRAD PFAFF SAYS HE'S CONSIDERING RUNNING AGAIN BUT AWAITS NEW DISTRICT MAPS.

HOW WOULD THAT HELP HIM OR OTHER DEMOCRATS?

>> THERE IS A VERY REAL POSSIBILITY THAT THE WISCONSIN STATE SUPREME COURT COULD ENTER THE PICTURE AND REDRAW THE CONGRESSIONAL MAPS.

MOST LINCOLN RILEY, LINCO LIKELT IN THE DISTRICT BECOMING MORE FAVORABLE TO THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY.

THERE ARE SEVERAL WAYS THAT THE DISTRICT MAPS COULD BE REDRAWN, BUT A LOT OF DEMOCRATS ARE VERY MUCH AWARE OF THE POSSIBILITY THAT THIS DISTRICT COULD BE REDRAWN TO MAKE IT MORE FAVORABLE TERRAIN FOR THEIR PARTY.

>> ALL RIGHT.

PROFESSOR ANTHONY CHERGOSKY OUT OF UW LACROSSE, THANKS VERY MUCH FOR YOUR EXPERTISE.

>> THANK YOU.

>> THE EXPLOSION OF MAINSTREAM USE OF ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE TOOLS HAS LED TO THE VERY DEVELOPERS OF THIS TECHNOLOGY WARNING OF ITS DANGERS, INCLUDING EXTINCTION, BUT THEIR EXTENSIVE EVERYDAY USE IS HERE TO STAY.

WE TURN TO LOIS BROOKS, CHIEF INFORMATION OFFICER AND VICE PROVOST FOR INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY AT UW MADISON, AND THANK YOU FOR BEING WITH US.

>> THANK YOU FOR INVITING ME.

>> SO IT'S NOT ONLY A.I., BUT GENERATIVE A.I., WHICH CAN GENERATE TEXT OR IMAGES THAT HAS REALLY EXPLODED INTO THE MAINSTREAM.

WHAT IS IT ABOUT THE MASS USE OF THIS GENERATIVE A.I.

THAT'S BEEN A GAME-CHANGER?

>> SO A.I.

HAS BEEN PRESENT FOR QUITE A LONG TIME, AND YOU'VE PROBABLY INTERACTING WITH IT THROUGH THINGS LIKE CHAT BOX OR FINDINGS THE BEST TRAVEL FARES.

WHAT HAPPENED WITH GENERATIVE A.I.

IS TOOLS LIKE CHAT GPT MADE IT ACCESSIBLE TO ANYONE TO BEGIN TO GENERATE CONTENT, SO YOU CAN GO GENERATE A REPORT OR THE DRAFT OF AN EMAIL OR AN IMAGE OR VIDEO YOURSELF, AND SO WE'VE SEEN THIS EXPLOSION IN CREATIVITY WITH PEOPLE CREATING SONGS AND POETRY AND MOVIES AND ALL SORTS OF THINGS WITH A.I., BUT AT THE SAME TIME, THE QUALITY OF SOME OF IT IS SO GOOD THAT IT'S HARD TO TELL WHETHER IT WAS GENERATED BY MACHINE OR NOT, SO WE HAVE SIMULTANEOUSLY AN EXPLOSION OF NEW CONTENT AND A CONCERN THAT YOU MAY NOT KNOW IF WHAT YOU'RE LOOKING AT WAS CREATED BY AN A.I.

ENGINE OR THE HUMAN WHO IT'S ATTRIBUTED TO.

>> WHY IS THAT DANGEROUS, IF AT ALL?

>> IF YOU'RE LOOKING, FOR EXAMPLE, AT A VIDEO OF SAYING SOMETHING ON SOCIAL MEDIA, YOU DON'T KNOW IF THAT PERSON ACTUALLY SAID THAT OR IF SOMEONE USED A.I.

TO GENERATE IT.

SIMILARLY, IF YOU'RE READING A REPORT, AN ANALYSIS OF SOMETHING, YOU DON'T KNOW WHETHER THAT WAS WRITTEN BY AN EXPERT WHO COULD BE CREDIBLE OR AN ENGINE THAT MAY BE PUTTING OUT FALSE INFORMATION.

AND AGAIN, BECAUSE THE QUALITY IS GOOD ENOUGH, SOMETIMES IT'S QUITE HARD TO TELL.

>> IF THE ACCURACY GETTING BETTER AND BETTER?

>> IT'S HARD TO SAY.

THERE IS MORE AND MORE DATA BEING AMASSED WITHIN THE ENGINES THAT CAN BE USED TO CREATE MORE OUTPUT, BUT THE ACCURACY WOULD COME FROM TWO THINGS, ONE, FROM THE DATA ITSELF BEING ACCURATE THAT WENT INTO IT AND THEN FROM THE ALGORITHMS USED TO CREATE GIVING YOU ACCURATE INFORMATION, SO I COULDN'T SAY IF IT'S BECOMING MORE ACCURATE, BUT I WILL SAY THE QUESTIONS ABOUT ITS ACCURACY ARE BECOMING MORE PRESENT AND SHARPER.

>> WHICH IS IMPORTANT AS WELL.

SO SPEAKING OF DATA, THE UNIVERSITY RECENTLY PUT OUT A STATEMENT RESTRICTING THE USE OF INSTITUTIONAL DATA THAT IS NOT CONSIDERED PUBLIC FROM BEING ENTERED INTO ANY GENERATIVE A.I.

TOOL.

WHY THAT RESTRICTION?

>> WELL, WE ALREADY HAVE RESTRICTIONS IN PLACE.

WE HAVE A LOT OF DATA THAT'S LEGALLY PROTECTED, LIKE STUDENT DATA OR MEDICAL INFORMATION.

WE DO USE SOFTWARE APPLICATIONS TO MANAGE THAT DATA, BUT WE VERY CAREFULLY CHECK IT FOR CYBERSECURITY AND ENTER INTO CONTRACTS TO HELP WITH CORRECTION.

THESE A.I.

TOOLS HAVEN'T BEEN SCRUTINIZED.

THE WAY THEY WORK MAY OR MAY NOT BE APPROPRIATE FOR CERTAIN KINDS OF DATA AND WE'RE NOT IN A CONTRACTUALLY PROTECTED ENVIRONMENT.

SO THERE WAS NOTHING -- A.I.

ITSELF ISN'T BAD AND THERE'S NOTHING NEW ABOUT THIS.

IT WAS REALLY A REMINDER TO OUR COMMUNITY OF THE STANDARDS WE ALREADY HAVE IN PLACE FOR WORKING WITH SENSITIVE DATA.

>> SO MACHINE LEARNING HAS BEEN AROUND FOR A WHILE AND IN ACADEMIC USE.

WHAT'S AN EXAMPLE OF IT, ITS USE AT THE UNIVERSITY?

>> WELL, WE'VE BEEN DOING A.I.

RESEARCH FOR MORE THAN A DECADE AT THE UNIVERSITY AND OUR RESEARCHERS ARE CONTRIBUTING TO THE DEVELOPMENT, TO THE POWER AND THE POSSIBILITY OF A.I.

TO RESEARCH INTO ETHICS AND BIAS.

WE'RE ALSO USING IT IN RESEARCH.

SO JUST A FEW EXAMPLES, IF YOU'RE WORKING WITH A CHEMICAL THERAPY, PERHAPS MEDICINE, AND YOU NEED TO UNDERSTAND THE CHEMICAL AND PHYSICAL INTERACTIONS, YOU CAN TRAIN A.I.

ALGORITHMS TO DO THAT WORK FOR YOU, BUT IT CAN DO IT ON A MASS SCALE THAT YOU COULDN'T ACHIEVE BEFORE.

ANOTHER EXAMPLE, ONE OF OUR RESEARCHERS IS WORKING WITH AGRICULTURAL ANIMALS AND TRACKING DATA ON THE ANIMALS AROUND THEIR WELL-BEING, THEIR NUTRITION AND SO ON, BUT AGAIN, THE DIFFERENCE IS HE CAN DO THIS WORK ON A MASSIVE SCALE THAT HE WASN'T ABLE TO ACCOMPLISH IN THE PAST, AND SO WE'RE SEEING IT COME IN IN TRANSPORTATION, SPACE, SCIENCE, MEDICINE AND IN MANY AREAS.

>> AS TO STUDENTS' USE OF A.I., GENERATIVE A.I.

TO COMPLETE ASSIGNMENTS, EVEN MAJOR ONES LIKE TERM PAPERS, WHAT IS THE UNIVERSITY'S POSITION ON THIS?

>> WELL, THERE ARE TWO WAYS TO TAKE THAT QUESTION.

ARE THEY USING A.I.

IN A WAY THAT'S BEEN ASSIGNED OR THAT'S NOT BEEN ASSIGNED?

SO WE TEACH A.I., WE TEACH IT IN COMPUTER SCIENCE, WE TEACH IT IN COMPUTERS THAT USE A.I., SO HELPING OUR STUDENTS LEARN HOW TO USE IT APPROPRIATELY.

THERE IS ALSO AN ACTIVE CONSIDERATION AROUND THE USE OF S.I.

TO GENERATE A PAPER THAT THE STUDENT WAS EXPECTED TO WRITE.

THERE'S AN ACTIVE CONVERSATION IN A COUPLE OF WAYS.

FIRST, THE STANDARDS HAVEN'T CHANGED.

CHEATING HAS ALWAYS BEEN DISALLOWED.

THIS IS JUST A NEW WAY TO POTENTIALLY DO IT.

BUT WE'RE ALSO HAVING ACTIVE CONVERSATION WITH OUR PROFESSORS AROUND ARE THERE WAYS TO ASSESS PERFORMERS THAT STEP AROUND THIS, ACTIVE LEARNING, PROJECT-BASED LEARNING, THAT WOULD NOT INTRODUCE THE POSSIBILITIES OF A MACHINE GENERATED RESPONSE.

>> ARE WE MOVING TOO FAST FOR THESE TOOLS WITHOUT ADEQUATE SAFEGUARDS IN PLACE?

>> THERE'S AN INTERESTING QUESTION NOW AROUND REGULATORY COMPLIANCE AND A.I.

AND A STATEMENT FROM THE WHITE HOUSE AROUND THE USE OF WATER MARKING IN IMAGES.

I THINK IT'S MOVING VERY, VERY QUICKLY, DISMT CONCERN I HAVE IS WHETHER THE CONVERSATION AROUND REGULATORY COMPLIANCE IS STRICTLY BETWEEN THE GOVERNMENT, THE CONGRESS AND LEGISLATURE, AND BIG TECH COMPANIES.

AND I THINK TO DO THIS CORRECTLY, THERE NEEDS TO BE A WAY FOR EXPERTS, FOR EMPHASIS, FOR CITIZENS TO WEIGH INTO CONVERSATION AS WELL.

SO WE ARE MOVING QUICKLY.

WILL WE MOVE SO QUICKLY THAT WE AS CITIZENS CAN'T WEIGH IN ON THE CONVERSATION IS A CONCERN FOR ME.

>> INTERESTING.

LOIS BROOKS, THANKS VERY MUCH.

>> THANK YOU.

>> FOR MORE ON THIS AND OTHER ISSUES FACING WISCONSIN, VISIT OR WEBSITE AT PBS WISCONSIN DOT-ORG AND THEN CLICK ON THE NEWS TAB.

THAT'S OUR PROGRAM FOR TONIGHT, I'M FREDERICA FREYBERG.

HAVE A GOOD WEEKEND.

(CLOSED CAPTIONING PROVIDED BY RIVERSIDE CAPTIONING COMPANY) >> FUNDING FOR "HERE AND NOW" IS PROVIDED BY THE FOCUS FUND FOR JOURNALISM AND FRIENDS OF PBS WISCONSIN.