American Transmission Co. wants to build new transmission lines, rebuild existing lines and build new substations across several counties as part of the project, according to a recent application with the Public Service Commission of Wisconsin. 

The post Proposed transmission line for a Wisconsin data center meets public opposition appeared first on WPR.

It’s the most recent loss to the UW system's footprint in smaller communities around the state. Alumni and education experts say the closures also make education less accessible for many in Wisconsin.

The post Latest UW branch closure comes after years of declining enrollment, budget cuts appeared first on WPR.

Farmers rely on the Mississippi River to ship grain and bring them imported fertilizer and other critical inputs. But another year of low river levels means barge travel will be more expensive.

The post Drought is shrinking Mississippi River levels — again. That’s a big problem for farmers. appeared first on WPR.

Swedish clarinetist Martin Fröst has released a new album of music by Johann Sebastian Bach.

The post WPR Music new album of the week: ‘B.A.C.H.’ appeared first on WPR.

Federal staff, volunteers and projects are experiencing effects of the federal government shutdown on national scenic trails running through Wisconsin and the Apostle Islands National Lakeshore.

The post National scenic trails, Apostle Islands grapple with government shutdown appeared first on WPR.

The bipartisan proposal would give prosecutors up to 20 years to file charges in many types of sexual assault cases.

The post Wisconsin bill would give sexual assault victims more time to pursue charges appeared first on WPR.

Madison-based molecular diagnostics company Exact Sciences recently made its cancer screening technology Cancerguard available to the public. But false positives could be cause for concern.

The post New cancer screening blood test from Madison firm is available to the public appeared first on WPR.

The new glass building will host several historic train cars and add more room for the museum to focus on its goal of educating children and the public about railroad history and its place in America.

The post National Railroad Museum opens major Fox River expansion in Wisconsin appeared first on WPR.

Enrollment across state universities has ticked upward for a third year, according to the Universities of Wisconsin. While the number of new freshmen from the dairy state hit a new record, international student enrollment fell by more than 7 percent.

The post State colleges report surge of Wisconsin freshmen, while overall enrollment flat appeared first on WPR.

No one really wants to talk about constipation. But, as a gastroenterologist recently discussed on "The Larry Meiller Show," treating the condition can be crucial.

The post Listen to your gut: The importance of treating constipation appeared first on WPR.

A view of medical marijuana products at a New York medical marijuana cultivation facility. Wisconsin Assembly Republicans have proposed a bill to legalize medical cannabis in the state under strict conditions. (Drew Angerer | Getty Images)

“Illness does not discriminate,” said Sen. Patrick Testin (R-Stevens Point) during a hearing of the Senate Committee on Health on Wednesday. “It affects people from all walks of life. There is no doubt that each and every one of us knows someone that has suffered through an illness and struggles to find ways to make it through each day.” 

Testin was speaking in favor of SB 534, a bill introduced by Republicans to legalize medical cannabis in Wisconsin. If passed, the bill would allow registered patients to have cannabis in a non-smokeable form such as a concentrate, oil, tincture, edible, pill, cream or vapor. The bill would also create an Office of Medical Cannabis Regulation attached to the state health department and tasked with overseeing the budding program. 

Testin shared a story about his grandfather, whom he described as his role model and as “the reason I decided to take a life of public service.” Back in the 1990s, Testin’s grandfather was diagnosed with lung cancer, which then metastasized to bone cancer. 

The senator recalled watching his grandfather undergo chemotherapy. The man “was a big guy,” Testin said, “and we watched him wither away.” At that moment, over 25 years ago, “my family made the very difficult decision to go outside the law to get him marijuana,” Testin said. “It gave him his appetite back, and it gave him time that we probably otherwise would not have had.”

Testin said his story was not unique. Although other medications exist, he said that many “come with side effects that can make living a normal life much more difficult.” He noted that 40 states, including Wisconsin’s neighbors Michigan, Illinois and Minnesota, give patients access to medical cannabis when recommended by doctors. Texas is the most recent state to legalize medical cannabis, he noted

“So both red and blue states alike have been able to come together and recognize that this is a viable option,” Testin said. “Medicine is never a one size fits all, and it’s time for Wisconsin to join the majority of the country and add another option which may help patients find relief they need.”

Legislation’s provisions

Under the proposed bill, medical cannabis sales would be tracked through the state’s prescription drug monitoring program. Pharmacists would also be required to be on-site at dispensaries. The legislation would only cover certain conditions: cancer, seizures or epilepsy, glaucoma, severe chronic pain, severe muscle spasms, severe chronic nausea, Parkinson’s disease, multiple sclerosis, inflammatory bowel disease, and any terminal illness, including patients with a life expectancy of less than a year. 

Patients must be at least 18 years old. Minors could have access if there is  written consent “from all” of their parents or guardians. Patients would be given registration cards and would be charged $20 a year to remain on the registry. 

The bill also prohibits dispensaries or their staff “from claiming that medical cannabis may cure, mitigate, treat, or prevent any disease or medical condition.” Dispensaries would also be prohibited from “advertising their services to the general public, with certain exceptions.” 

The bill includes a provision preventing courts from considering  lawful use or possession of cannabis, or being registered as a patient, when determining  custody or placement of a child, except where the child has access to the cannabis. Unlawful possession or use could still be used against parents in court, however. The bill also protects people who lawfully possess cannabis against housing discrimination, and prevents local governments from regulating legal medical cannabis programs or using zoning laws to restrict the location or operation of a legal cannabis operation. 

Support and opposition

Earlier this year, two-thirds of registered voters polled by Marquette Law School said that cannabis should be legalized in Wisconsin. The Wisconsin Wellness Coalition has registered with the Wisconsin Ethics Commission in support of the legislation and the Wisconsin Medical Society against it, The Alzheimer’s Association, Outdoor Advertising Association, and Pharmacy Society have all registered their positions as “other.” 

People from a variety of backgrounds also spoke during the public hearing. Many supported legalizing cannabis, but had concerns about restrictions in the bill. 

“This should not be a partisan issue,” said Testin. “It is clear that we as a state need to begin having a real discussion about medical cannabis legalization, and it is our hope that this bill will be the first step. It’s time for Wisconsin to provide our citizens with another option in their health care.” 

Sen. Mary Felzkowski (R-Tomahawk), who has proposed  medical cannabis legislation for years, echoed that sentiment. 

“Wisconsin is on an island surrounded by neighboring states that allow the use of medical cannabis products,” Felzkowski said during the Wednesday hearing. “Someone who suffers from a serious health condition should not have to make the choice to travel to another state or break the law so that they can try an alternative medicine for relief.”

Felzkowski recounted her battles with breast cancer, first when she was 40 years old, which resulted in a double mastectomy, and then a stage 4 diagnosis a decade later. She described the side effects of opioids that doctors prescribed to control her pain as “something nobody should have to live through.” 

She said her oncologist called medical cannabis  “another tool in the toolbox, and it could help a lot of people.” 

 “Here we are sitting in our Ivory Tower, denying that for people that really need it, and it’s wrong that we’re doing that,” Felzkowski said.

Legislators are divided

Lawmakers hope to get more colleagues behind the bill. Yet, despite lagging behind many other states, Wisconsin’s Legislature still struggles with just talking about cannabis. “We are not going to be talking about overall legalization for cannabis products,” said Sen. Rachael Cabral-Guevera (R-Appleton), as she chaired a meeting of the Senate Committee on Health on Wednesday. “So, if you’re here to testify on how this should be 100% legal, this is not the spot for you today.” 

The Legislature held its first public hearing on legalizing cannabis in 2022 in the Senate. Rep. Patrick Snyder (R-Weston), who also spoke during Wednesday’s hearing, said in an interview with the Wisconsin Examiner that he’s optimistic that the new bill will survive the Senate. “My goal this time,” Snyder told Wisconsin Examiner, “is something we haven’t done yet since I’ve been here and that is to have a hearing in the Assembly, where people I talk to can come down and explain their situations.”

Snyder said he hears from constituents who want the state to legalize medical cannabis. When he talks to Republicans who oppose the bill, he said, “I try to tell them first of all, this is something that helps a person. This is something that is going to be focused on folks that really need it.” 

Snyder stressed that “these are people not looking for shortcuts to get marijuana, I mean they could do that without [legalized medical cannabis].” Rather, his constituents are people who often don’t want to travel so far north or south to get their medicine, or who would prefer going to a local farmer or dispensary instead.

The bill’s critics include Republicans who feel medical cannabis would only lead to legalizing recreational use, which they don’t want, as well as Democrats who criticize the bill’s restrictive framework and want Wisconsin to legalize recreational use of cannabis. 

Even with the Republican bill’s restrictions on the form in which cannabis can be used and its system of rigorous licensing, testing and enforcement, Snyder said there are “far right” Republicans in the Assembly who need to be won over. 

Felzkowski said of the 24 states that allow recreational marijuana, 15 did so through ballot measures, which aren’t available in Wisconsin. “So that’s never going to happen in the state,” she said. 

Nine states that have legalized recreational  marijuana after legalizing medical cannabis “are solid blue states like Illinois, New York, and Connecticut,” she said. “Wisconsin is not a solid blue state.”  

Another 16 states have only legalized medical cannabis. Hawaii, the first state to pass a comprehensive medical cannabis program in 2000, still does not allow recreational cannabis, she said.  

“Fortunately, Wisconsin is able to learn from the experience of other states,” said Felzkowski. “We can create an effective program with safeguards, so patients and small businesses can benefit from medical cannabis products, while preventing abuse, or those without medical need from gaining access.”

A boy plays with a wooden numbers puzzle. Sensory exercises like this are often used in special education classrooms. (Getty Images)

WASHINGTON — Proposed mass layoffs at the U.S. Department of Education have raised alarm among disability advocates and Democratic lawmakers over the potential impact on millions of students with disabilities. 

Advocates warn that the department cannot carry out its legally mandated functions for special education services and support at the staffing levels put forward by President Donald Trump’s proposed reduction in force, or RIF. 

The agency is also reportedly weighing a transfer of special education programs to a different department. 

“If we’ve learned anything this year, it’s that the fight is just beginning,” Rachel Gittleman, president of American Federation of Government Employees Local 252, which represents Education Department workers, told States Newsroom. “And we’re going to do everything we can to fight these illegal firings and the dismantling of the department, but it is just beginning.”

Trump’s administration took another axe to the department earlier this month amid the ongoing government shutdown, effectively gutting key units that serve students with disabilities. The affected offices administer $15 billion in formula and discretionary grant programs under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, or IDEA, provide guidance and support to families and states and investigate disability-based discrimination complaints, among other responsibilities. 

Though a federal judge has temporarily blocked the administration from carrying out the layoffs, the ruling provides only short-term relief as legal proceedings unfold. 

The administration moved to lay off 465 department employees, including 121 at the Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services, or OSERS, 132 in the Office of Elementary and Secondary Education, or OESE, and 137 in the Office for Civil Rights, or OCR. 

The layoffs also hit the Office of the Secretary, Office of Communications and Office of Postsecondary Education. 

“You can’t look at any of this in a silo,” Gittleman said. “When you’re thinking about special education specifically, you also have to think about the fact that OESE, the Office of Elementary and Secondary Education, also saw an almost full RIF as well.” 

Gittleman called the civil rights office “the place that ensures families have a place to go for help when students are denied access for education based on their disability.”

“That was also almost entirely gutted,” she said. “So you’re debilitating these programs in multiple ways because … kids with disabilities benefit from OESE programs, OCR assistance and OSERS programs.” 

Those three units had already been hit with a separate set of department layoffs earlier this year. 

Parents as advocates

Katy Neas, CEO of The Arc of the United States, an advocacy group for people with intellectual and developmental disabilities, said that while IDEA has not been changed and the rights of children with disabilities continue, the government’s ability to enforce and implement those rights has deteriorated. 

OSERS is responsible for managing and supporting IDEA, which guarantees a free public education for students with disabilities and is in its 50th year. The umbrella unit OSERS includes the Office of the Assistant Secretary, Office of Special Education Programs and the Rehabilitation Services Administration.

“You take away the knowledge of the folks at the U.S. Department of Education at the Office of Special Education Programs — the law is complex, the combination of the federal law with state laws is complex — you need that trusted source of accurate information, and so, I think it’s going to make the implementation of this law that much more difficult,” Neas told States Newsroom. 

During the 2022-2023 school year, 7.5 million students in the United States received services through IDEA, according to the National Center for Education Statistics, a federal agency. 

Neas encouraged parents to “know your rights” and “understand what the law does and does not do for your child, and don’t take no for an answer.” 

She said parents “really have to be well-versed in what the law requires schools to provide to their child,” and “have to be the ones that insist that the law is implemented with fidelity, because they’re the ones that are going to be on the front lines trying to make that happen.” 

‘Flabbergasted’

Jacqueline Rodriguez, CEO at the National Center for Learning Disabilities, said the RIFs would make it “impossible” for the Office of Special Education Programs to “carry out its statutory requirements.” 

Rodriguez, whose organization advocates for people with learning and attention issues, said “we had hundreds of staff doing this type of work — the statutory requirements are monitoring, compliance, guidance, support — it’s not just pressing a button and issuing funding.” 

She also noted that advocacy groups, including hers, are “flabbergasted” regarding the sweeping layoffs of special education staff because of the contrast with previous assurances Education Secretary Linda McMahon has made to both Rodriguez and Congress about supporting students with disabilities. 

“I am not stunned that the administration would try to dismantle something that was legally required in place,” she said. “But I am flabbergasted that the secretary would sit and give congressional testimony at her confirmation hearing. She did it at the oversight hearing. She sat in front of me and said, ‘No, Jackie, this administration supports kids with special needs. We will always be good advocates. You don’t have to worry.’”

Just days after the layoff notices were sent out, McMahon took to social media to downplay the consequences of the shutdown on her department.   

Two weeks into the shutdown, “millions of American students are still going to school, teachers are getting paid, and schools are operating as normal,” McMahon wrote. 

The secretary added that “it confirms what the President has said: the federal Department of Education is unnecessary, and we should return education to the states.” 

McMahon also specified that “no education funding is impacted by the RIF, including funding for special education.” 

Rodriguez said McMahon’s post indicates the secretary believes the “status quo is perfectly reasonable — when we know that’s not the case — and she dismantles every opportunity for a kid with a disability to actually have his or her legally-entitled education.”

“I am beyond being polite and providing professional deference because there has been no consideration or deference to kids with disabilities for the last 10 months,” she added.

The groups that advocate for students with disabilities are united in their opposition, Rodriguez continued.

“Disability organizations across the country are united, we are all talking to one another,” she said. “We all work collaboratively, and we are in concert, lock and step.”

Congressional Dems fiercely oppose cuts 

Meanwhile, a slew of Democratic lawmakers expressed outrage and concern over the department RIFs in two separate letters to the administration this month. 

Reps. Lucy McBath of Georgia, Mark DeSaulnier and Lateefah Simon of California, led dozens of fellow House Democrats in an Oct. 17 letter voicing to McMahon and White House budget director Russ Vought their “deep opposition” to the layoffs and urging them to “immediately reverse course and rescind the termination notices that were sent to these workers.”

In another letter to McMahon, 31 members of the Senate Democratic Caucus wrote Monday that “punitive, reckless actions like these latest firings demonstrate how President Trump and …Vought are relishing the government shutdown they caused — and are treating students as political pawns,” adding: “That is outrageous — and flatly unacceptable.”

Sen. Patty Murray of Washington state, the top Democrat on the Senate Appropriations Committee, led the letter, along with: Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer of New York; Vermont independent Sen. Bernie Sanders, ranking member of the Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor and Pensions; and Sen. Tammy Baldwin of Wisconsin, ranking member of the Appropriations subcommittee overseeing Education Department funding.

U.S. House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., talks with reporters inside the Capitol building in Washington, D.C., on Tuesday, Oct. 21, 2025. (Photo by Jennifer Shutt/States Newsroom)

WASHINGTON — The government shutdown became the second longest in U.S. history Wednesday, though the mounting repercussions for dozens of federal programs, including food aid for some of the country’s most vulnerable residents, failed to spur any momentum in Congress. 

The Senate was unable for the 12th time to advance a stopgap spending bill that would have reopened the government and kept funding mostly on autopilot through Nov. 21. 

The 54-46 vote was nearly identical to those that have come before, a predictable outcome since neither Republicans nor Democrats are talking to each other. The legislation needed at least 60 votes to advance under the Senate’s legislative filibuster. 

Nevada Sen. Catherine Cortez Masto and Pennsylvania Sen. John Fetterman, both Democrats, and Maine independent Sen. Angus King voted with Republicans to advance the legislation. Kentucky GOP Sen. Rand Paul voted no.

The vote came shortly after Oregon Democratic Sen. Jeff Merkley held the floor for nearly 23 hours, speaking at length about his concerns and objections to President Donald Trump’s administration. 

The government staying shut down much longer will lead to a funding shortfall for the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or SNAP, which is relied on by 42 million low-income Americans, nearly 40% of them children younger than 17. 

Despite that looming deadline, congressional leaders remain in their political silos, just as they have since before the shutdown began 22 days ago. They’ve repeatedly held press conferences and meetings with their own members instead of making the types of compromises needed to keep government functioning on the most basic level. 

Republican leaders are waiting for Democrats to help advance the stopgap spending bill in the Senate and say they won’t negotiate on anything until after that happens. 

Democrats maintain they won’t support the House-passed continuing resolution until there is bipartisan agreement to extend tax credits that are set to expire at the end of the year for people who buy their health insurance through the Affordable Care Act Marketplace. 

Johnson warns funding process at risk

The stalled short-term spending bill is supposed to give lawmakers more time to work out agreement on the dozen full-year government funding bills, which Congress was supposed to pass by the Oct. 1 start of the fiscal year. 

But Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., warned during a morning press conference that lawmakers may scrap that process for a second year in a row if Democrats don’t advance the continuing resolution soon. 

“We’re getting closer to November. It is going to be more and more difficult with each passing hour to get all the appropriations done on time,” Johnson said. “We acknowledge that, but we have to do this on a day-by-day basis.”

House Democratic leadership dismissed the notion of a longer temporary spending bill or continuing resolution, possibly for a full year, during an afternoon press conference. 

Democratic Whip Katherine Clark, of Massachusetts, said her message to Republicans is, “Why are you talking about the length of the (continuing resolution)? Come to the table and negotiate with us. End this health care crisis, help the American people.”

Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries sidestepped specifics when asked about a longer stopgap funding bill.

“At this point, we need to reopen the government. We need to enact a spending bill that actually meets the needs of the American people in terms of their health, their safety and economic well-being, particularly in terms of driving down the high cost of living, while at the same time decisively addressing the Republican health care crisis that grows greatly by the day,” the New York Democrat said.

Lawmakers have been unable to approve all the annual funding bills on time since 1996 and have consistently relied on stopgap spending bills to give themselves more time to work out agreements between the House and Senate. 

The alternative to full-year government funding bills is to use a series of stopgap spending bills, or one that lasts the entire year that keeps spending mostly on autopilot. 

Either option requires bipartisanship to gain the support of at least 60 senators, since Republicans control 53 seats. That means the only solution to the shutdown is for Republican and Democratic leaders to compromise. 

But that seemed like a remote possibility Wednesday. 

Democrats criticize layoffs

House Democrats’ Steering and Policy Committee held a mock hearing where they railed against Republicans and Trump for how they’ve managed unified control of government. 

House Appropriations Committee ranking member Rosa DeLauro, D-Conn., rebuked Trump administration officials for trying to lay off federal workers by the thousands and for canceling funding to projects in regions of the country that vote for Democrats. 

“It is a corrupt abuse of power that they have chosen to carry out,” DeLauro said. 

White House budget director Russ Vought and Trump, she said, “have launched a scorched earth campaign to decimate the federal government and the programs and services the American people depend on.”

Rob Shriver, managing director of the civil service strong and good government initiatives at Democracy Forward, who worked as deputy director at the Office of Personnel Management during the Biden administration, said the layoffs could negatively affect federal operations for years. 

“The government has had historic challenges in recruiting young people and recruiting tech talent, and what this administration is doing is turning it into a workforce that doesn’t try to recruit the best and the brightest, but that tries to recruit the most loyal,” Shriver said. 

Lawsuit gains more unions

The Trump administration’s efforts to lay off thousands of workers during the shutdown have been on hold since last week, when a federal judge issued a temporary restraining order that was later expanded.  

The lawsuit was originally brought by the American Federation of Government Employees and the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees. It expanded last week to include the National Federation of Federal Employees, the National Association of Government Employees and the Service Employees International Union.

The updated restraining order issued by U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California Judge Susan Illston applies to any federal department or agency that includes employees represented by those unions, even if the Trump administration doesn’t recognize their contracts. 

Illston on Wednesday granted a request to add the National Treasury Employees Union, International Federation of Professional and Technical Engineers and American Federation of Teachers to the case. 

Illston wrote that she found “good cause exists to modify the existing TRO without a written response from defendants due to the emergency nature of this case.” 

Those three unions represent hundreds of thousands more federal workers, including those at the departments of Commerce, Defense, Energy, Health and Human Services, Interior, Justice and Veterans Affairs. 

Employees at the Environmental Protection Agency, Internal Revenue Service, National Aeronautics and Space Administration and Social Security Administration are also represented by the three new unions seeking to join the case. 

The next stage in the lawsuit comes on Oct. 28, when the judge has set a hearing to determine whether to issue a preliminary injunction in the case. 

‘Patently illegal’

AFGE National President Everett Kelley wrote in a statement released Wednesday that the “administration’s move to fire thousands of patriotic civil servants while the government is shut down is patently illegal, and I’m glad we are able to expand our lawsuit to protect even more federal workers from facing termination.”

“President Trump has made no secret that this is about punishing his political enemies and has nothing to do with the actual work that these employees perform,” Kelley added. “Data provided by the administration under court order illustrates how vast and unlawful these intended firings are and validates our union’s determination to challenge this illegal action.”

Ashley Murray contributed to this report. 

President Donald Trump speaks as FBI Director Kash Patel and U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi look on during a press conference in the Oval Office on Oct. 15, 2025. (Photo by Kevin Dietsch/Getty Images)

WASHINGTON — President Donald Trump said late Tuesday he is personally owed a massive payment from the Department of Justice and would have the authority to approve it, saying he was “damaged very greatly” during the government’s investigations into his alleged hoarding of classified documents and Russia’s meddling in the 2016 presidential election.

Responding to a question about reports that he was seeking up to $230 million in compensation from the Justice Department, Trump replied, “I don’t know what the numbers are. I don’t even talk to them about it. All I know is that they would owe me a lot of money, but I’m not looking for money.” 

“I’d give it to charity or something. I would give it to charity, any money. But look what they did. They rigged the election,” Trump said, apparently referring to his false claim that President Joe Biden did not win the 2020 election. Trump’s attempt to overturn the election results, including sparking the Jan. 6, 2021 Capitol riot, was the subject of a separate federal criminal investigation.

The situation shines a spotlight on ethical concerns that Trump’s former defense attorneys, who now occupy top positions at the Justice Department, would presumably play a role in deciding whether the president receives the money. 

Trump claimed he would make the final call on whether to pay himself the damages.

“It’s interesting because I’m the one that makes the decision, right? And you know that decision would have to go across my desk, and it’s awfully strange to make a decision where I’m paying myself,” Trump told CNN’s Kaitlan Collins Tuesday evening after a White House Diwali celebration.

The New York Times reported Tuesday that Trump submitted claims in 2023 and 2024 seeking compensation for violations to his rights during a special counsel probe into whether his 2016 presidential campaign colluded with Russia, and violations to his privacy when federal agents searched his Florida Mar-a-Lago residence in 2022 for classified documents.

“But I was damaged very greatly, and any money that I would get, I would give to charity,” he added.

The Department of Justice declined to comment on the status of Trump’s claims.

“In any circumstance, all officials at the Department of Justice follow the guidance of career ethics officials,” department spokesperson Chad Gilmartin said.

Attorney General Pam Bondi has been a vocal advocate and legal adviser for Trump on multiple probes, including the handling of the 2016 Russian meddling inquiry. Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche defended Trump during the government’s investigation into classified documents stored at Mar-a-Lago following the president’s first term. 

Stanley Woodward, the former defense lawyer for Trump’s co-defendent in the classified documents probe, now heads the Justice Department’s civil division, which reviews compensation claims, according to the Times.

When asked Wednesday morning, House Speaker Mike Johnson told reporters he was not aware of the details, but largely defended Trump.

“I didn’t talk with him about that. I know that he believes he’s owed that reimbursement. What I heard yesterday was if he receives it, he was going to consider giving it to charity. I mean, he doesn’t need those proceeds. But we’re for the rule of law, we’re for what is just and right. And it’s just absurd. As has been noted here several times this morning, they attack him for everything he does. It doesn’t matter what it is,” the Louisiana Republican said.

House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, a New York Democrat, slammed Trump’s request for compensation as the president trying to “rob taxpayers of $230 million to continue to line his pockets.”

Jennifer Shutt contributed to this report.

A “SNAP welcomed here” sign is seen at the entrance to a Big Lots store in Portland, Oregon. (Getty Images)

WASHINGTON — More than 42 million low-income Americans are at risk of losing food assistance Nov. 1 if the government shutdown continues.

The U.S. Department of Agriculture, which operates the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or SNAP, has about $6 billion in a multi-year contingency fund. That’s short of the roughly $9 billion needed to cover a full month of the program.

Even if a shutdown deal were reached immediately, the time needed to process the payments and make them available for recipients means benefits would likely be delayed.

The shortfall is caused by the shutdown, which hit its 22nd day Wednesday. The fund is supposed to maintain a balance of about $9 billion, but $3 billion of the funds expired at the end of the fiscal year Sept. 30. Because Congress has not approved the next year’s funding, the fund only has $6 billion.

USDA would have to come up with the remaining $3 billion. The department could try something similar to its shuffle of more than $300 million in tariff revenue into its Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children, or WIC, through the rest of the month. 

It’s unclear if USDA plans to use the SNAP contingency fund or any other maneuvers to extend benefits.

Nearly 40% of the 42 million SNAP recipients nationwide are children 17 and younger, according to the USDA. About 20% are seniors aged 60 and older and the remaining 40% are adults aged 18 to 59.

USDA did not respond to multiple requests for comment from States Newsroom.

Parties in Congress remained nowhere near a deal to end the shutdown as of Wednesday.

States scrambling

A Democratic congressional staffer familiar with the SNAP program said that even if Congress passes a stopgap before Nov. 1, the month’s benefits will still be delayed because it takes time to process the benefits and there are limited vendor processors.

The program issues electronic benefits on a card that can be used like cash to purchase food. States will upload either all or part of a month’s benefits on the first day of the month.

Even in states that say they have enough funds to extend SNAP through November, such as North Dakota, state officials have said they are unable to load the funds on the cards. 

Kansas officials said once Congress passes a stopgap, the state can distribute benefits to the state’s 188,000 SNAP recipients within 72 hours, meaning any deal would have to be completed by next week to avoid an interruption of services. 

Other states, including Minnesota, have halted new enrollments in SNAP. 

Wisconsin’s Gov. Tony Evers warned that 700,000 residents are at risk of losing their SNAP benefits. 

Tennessee officials have informed SNAP recipients — nearly 700,000 people — that it received notice from USDA that SNAP funding will cease entirely on Nov. 1 if the government shutdown doesn’t end.

Unheeded warnings

USDA on Oct. 10  warned states to hold off on sending SNAP files to electronic benefit transfer vendors due to the government shutdown

“Considering the operational issues and constraints that exist in automated systems, and in the interest of preserving maximum flexibility, we are forced to direct States to hold their November issuance files and delay transmission to State EBT vendors until further notice,” SNAP acting Associate Administrator Ronald Ward wrote. 

“This includes on-going SNAP benefits and daily files,” Ward continued. 

Last week, Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins said that SNAP will run out of funds by the end of the month if Congress fails to strike a deal and end the government shutdown.

U.S. Sen. Jeff Merkley, an Oregon Democrat, speaks on the Senate floor on Wednesday, Oct. 22, 2025. Merkley began speaking Tuesday evening. (Screenshot via C-SPAN)

U.S. Sen. Jeff Merkley spoke on the Senate floor for nearly 23 hours beginning Tuesday night against what he called President Donald Trump’s authoritarian actions. 

Merkley started speaking after 6 p.m. Eastern on Tuesday and ceded the floor at about 5 p.m. Wednesday.

The marathon speech was not a traditional filibuster, in which a senator holds the floor indefinitely to block action on a piece of legislation, as the chamber has been stalemated for weeks over government spending. 

Instead, Merkley spokespeople say he is seeking to draw attention “to how Trump is ripping up the Constitution and eroding our democratic institutions.”

Merkley read from the book “How Democracies Die,” blasted the administration’s efforts to control media companies that broadcast critical content, such as CBS and Disney, and spoke against Trump’s deployment of National Guard troops to Democratic-led cities. 

The speech follows thousands of No Kings demonstrations throughout the country Saturday that saw millions protest against Trump, particularly an immigration crackdown and the use of military troops for policing. 

Early in his speech, Merkley focused on the National Guard deployments, which include Portland, Oregon. 

“This is an incredible threat to our nation, to the entire vision of our Constitution, to the entire platform on which our freedom exists,” he said.  “If you remove a clear standard as to whether there is a rebellion, and just say a president can deploy the military on a whim in places he doesn’t like, … then you have flung the doors open to tyranny.”

A produce cooler at Willy Street Co-op in Madison, Wisconsin. FoodShare funding from the federal government will stop Nov. 1 if the federal government shutdown continues. (Photo by Erik Gunn/Wisconsin Examiner)

With 10 days to go until Nov. 1, the effects of the federal government shutdown are hitting closer to home in Wisconsin.

Unless the shutdown ends by that date, Wisconsin’s FoodShare program, which serves more than 700,000 Wisconsin residents — about 12% of the state’s population — will run out of funds Nov. 1, Gov. Tony Evers said Tuesday. FoodShare is funded through the federal Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or SNAP, previously known as Food Stamps.

Two Wisconsin Head Start early childhood education programs are at risk for not receiving their expected federal authorization that was to start Nov. 1, according to Jennie Mauer, executive director of the Wisconsin Head Start Association.

“Our social safety net is stretched,” Mauer said Tuesday. “This is just going to really short communities, and I think providers are bracing. We just don’t know the tidal wave that’s going to hit us, so everybody is really concerned.”

The U.S. Department of Agriculture notified states earlier this month that the SNAP program would not have enough funds to pay full benefits to the program’s 42 million participants nationwide.

The department directed states to hold off on the transactions that move SNAP funds onto the electronic benefit cards that FoodShare members use to buy groceries.

FoodShare “may not be available at all next month if the federal government shutdown continues, leaving nearly 700,000 Wisconsinites without access to basic food and groceries,” the governor’s office said in a statement Tuesday.

“President Trump and Republicans in Congress must work across the aisle and end this shutdown now so Wisconsinites and Americans across our country have access to basic necessities like food and groceries that they need to survive,” Evers said.

Both the FoodShare and Medicaid programs refer to their participants as members. “FoodShare benefits are 100 percent funded by the federal government and the shutdown will need to end before members can begin getting benefits again,” the state Department of Health Services announced in the FoodShare news page Tuesday.

If FoodShare benefits stop in November, they won’t be lost, but they will be delayed, said Matt King, CEO of the Hunger Task Force in Milwaukee. When the shutdown ends, benefits will become available again, including those not paid during the shutdown.

The Hunger Task Force supplies food pantries throughout the greater Milwaukee area. If benefits stop, food pantry operators and suppliers expect to see a sharp increase in the need for their services.

“FoodShare is the first and most critical line of defense against hunger,” King said Tuesday. “The food pantry network across Wisconsin acts as a safety net to help people in an emergency. It’s not set up to be a sustainable source of food to meet all of their grocery needs.”

While helping people get access to food in an emergency, the food pantry network also works to connect people with “more sustainable and ongoing resources like the FoodShare program,” he said.

The impending pause on FoodShare funds will compound a need that has already increased by 35% across the state in the past year, King said. “The longer the government shutdown goes on, the more strain it will put onto the emergency food system.”

Mauer of the Head Start association said two of the state’s 39 Head Start programs were to receive authorization for their next round of funding starting Nov. 1, and with them the ability to draw on their federal grants for the next several months.

So far, the authorization hasn’t been received, Mauer said. In addition, however, if the authorization is issued but the shutdown remains in effect, “there’s no money” until a budget is enacted, she added. “They need money in the coffers for [Head Start agencies] to draw down.”

The issue will repeat for programs that must reauthorize by Dec. 1 and Jan. 1 if the shutdown continues.

The remaining Head Start programs are not believed to be in peril, Mauer said, because their grants have already been funded by the previous fiscal year’s appropriations.   

The Head Start program operated by the Sheboygan Human Rights Association is one of the two awaiting its Nov. 1 reauthorization and the new round of funding that would ordinarily begin then.

“At this point, we are unsure how we will be affected,” said Theresa Christen-Liebig, the executive director of the nonprofit. The agency is using “some state funding resources to continue services until mid-November,” Christen-Liebig told the Wisconsin Examiner in an email. The agency’s board will meet next week to consider its steps for the rest of November and beyond, she said.

“The uncertainty makes the situation stressful and hard on our staff and families,” Christen-Liebig said. “We are keeping everyone updated as we try to work things out and decisions are made to continue to provide services.”

David Bintz, who was wrongly incarcerated, stands outside Mountains of Hope, the nonprofit where he finally found temporary housing after trying local shelters. | Photo courtesy Jarrett Adams Law

David and Robert Bintz’s release last fall drew attention to a Wisconsin law about compensation for people wrongly convicted of crimes. Wisconsin law allows less compensation for wrongly convicted people than many other states, unless the state passes a bill awarding additional money to a specific wrongly convicted person. 

In decisions released last week, the Wisconsin Claims Board decided the Bintz brothers, now 69 and 70, will each be awarded $25,000 and attorney fees. The board recommended an additional $1 million for each brother to the Wisconsin Legislature. Two of the board’s five members dissented from the majority’s decision on David Bintz’s compensation. 

“We are thankful for the board’s recommendation and pray that [legislators] vote to approve the recommendation in expedited fashion,” Jarrett Adams, an attorney advocating for the brothers, told the Wisconsin Examiner in an email. 

Over two decades after their convictions in a 1987 murder case, the brothers were released from prison. In April, the Examiner reported on challenges the brothers have experienced, as well as gaps in support for people who reenter society after being wrongly convicted of crimes in Wisconsin. The compensation claims that the brothers submitted included mention of medical expenses, housing needs, additional neurological testing and day-to-day needs.

“Increasing the annual cap and adding a robust layer of services would be beneficial to exonerees who are trying to reestablish themselves in their communities,” Rachel Burg, co-director of the Wisconsin Innocence Project, told the Examiner over email in March. 

The board’s decisions state that both brothers sought the maximum compensation under the statute — $25,000 — and attorney fees, as well as recommendations that the Legislature award $2 million for each brother. 

Under Wisconsin’s law, the board decides whether the evidence of the petitioner’s innocence of the crime for which they were imprisoned is “clear and convincing.” If they find the petitioner was innocent and that they did not contribute to bring about their conviction and imprisonment by action or inaction, the board decides how much money the petitioner should receive. 

A three-member majority of the board found David met the requirement about not contributing to his conviction and imprisonment. 

“Nonwithstanding any contradictory statements, David maintained his innocence and was willing to go to trial to defend his innocence,” the decision states. 

The Examiner has reported on how in his request for compensation, David Bintz argued that he was interrogated for several hours and coerced into a confession, and on Brown County District Attorney David Lasee’s disagreement with that argument. Bintz’s request also said he was intellectually disabled.

Over a quarter of 375 DNA exonerations between 1989 and 2020 were cases that involved false confessions, according to the Innocence Project. 

State Sen. Eric Wimberger (R-Oconto) and state Rep. Alex Dallman (R-Markesan) disagreed with the other three board members regarding David Bintz. Both legislators are part of the finance committees in the Assembly and the Senate, respectively, and on the Legislature’s Joint Finance Committee. 

According to Fox 11 News, Wimberger said that “it had everything to do with the fact that David Bintz’s conviction was really his own fault and not anything the state did wrong” in reference to a conversation David had with a cellmate. David Bintz’s cellmate Gary Swendby said David talked about committing the crime in his sleep and also admitted his involvement while he was serving time for a different crime. 

“I think on the Robert Bintz side of things, there’s a lot of sympathy and perhaps there should’ve been a better investigation done,” Wimberger said.

A research project took up the question of how much money states pay exonerees per each year lost, specifically for exonerees who were paid. For Wisconsin, they found an average of $4,947 per year lost. The research was by the National Registry of Exonerations and Professor Jeffrey Gutman of the George Washington University Law School.  

Gutman analyzed wrongful convictions compensation in Wisconsin in the 2022 publication “Compensation Under the Microscope: Wisconsin,” which was updated in July 2023. 

Gutman wrote about Wisconsin exonerees wrongly convicted in state courts and  recorded by the National Registry of Exonerations, going back to 1989. Of the exonerees awarded compensation, he wrote that only one appeared to have been provided additional compensation from the Legislature following a claims board recommendation. 

In 2014, then-Gov. Scott Walker awarded an additional $90,000 to Robert Lee Stinson, after the claims board had awarded $25,000. Stinson had requested reimbursement for 23 years in prison at the rate of $5,000 per year.

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

(The Center Square) – The definition of grooming in a new law being proposed in Wisconsin will include influence from a 2021 Illinois law and a 2024 law passed in Florida, according to the bill’s sponsor.

(The Center Square) – The expectations are not high headed into the Wisconsin Assembly hearing on teachers grooming students, and the state’s response.