A 'We Accept (Food Stamps)' sign hangs in the window of a grocery store on Oct. 31, 2025 in Miami, Florida.  (Photo by Joe Raedle/Getty Images)

The Trump administration continued Monday to press the U.S. Supreme Court to overturn lower court decisions requiring the federal government pay for full benefits for a major food program, even as Congress appeared to approach an end to the record-breaking government shutdown.

Late Sunday, the 1st U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals upheld a Rhode Island federal judge’s order that the U.S. Department of Agriculture pay full November benefits for the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or SNAP.

On Monday morning, the top federal litigator told the Supreme Court the administration was continuing its appeal.

Later Monday, a Massachusetts federal judge kept in place an order canceling a USDA memo to states over the weekend asking them to “undo” full November benefits, while chastising the administration for sowing confusion. The memo had left states unsure how to proceed, and some refused to obey it.

President Donald Trump and top administration officials have resisted calls to fund November SNAP benefits during the shutdown that began Oct. 1. They argue that because Congress had not appropriated any money for the program for the fiscal year that began that date, USDA lacked the legal authority to make payments. 

That position was a reversal from the first Trump administration’s 2019 guidance and a shutdown plan the department published Sept. 30, then deleted, and has sparked several court challenges.

About 42 million people, about 1 in 8 Americans, use SNAP. Monday was the 41st day of the longest government shutdown in U.S. history.

Trump attorney seeks high court pause

In an afternoon brief following his morning notice to the high court, U.S. Solicitor General D. John Sauer largely repeated the argument he made in an initial appeal to the high court Nov. 7. 

Sauer said courts could not command the USDA to “raid” a fund for child nutrition programs that holds about $23 billion, so as to fund a roughly $4 billion shortfall for SNAP in the short term.

He added Monday that the lower courts’ orders threaten to derail a deal in the Senate to reopen the government, expected to be completed this week.

“Literally at the eleventh hour, those orders inject the federal courts into the political branches’ closing efforts to end this shutdown,” Sauer wrote. “But the answer to this crisis is not for federal courts to reallocate resources without lawful authority. The only way to end this crisis—which the Executive is adamant to end—is for Congress to reopen the government.”

Sauer’s brief came after Supreme Court Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson ordered the government to say how it would proceed in light of the 1st Circuit order late Sunday and gave the coalition of nonprofit groups and municipal government that brought the original suit until 8 a.m. Eastern on Tuesday to respond.

Massachusetts federal judge slams USDA

At an afternoon hearing in Massachusetts, U.S. District Judge Indira Talwani denounced USDA’s Saturday night demand that states return authorized funding and maintained a temporary restraining order blocking it from going into effect.

The Saturday night memo called on states to “immediately undo” actions to send benefits to people who use SNAP.

But the states had been complying with a midday Nov. 7 memo from the same department official that instructed them to process full benefits in accordance with the Rhode Island order, Talwani said. 

“What you have right now is confusion of the agency’s own making,” Talwani said.

Keith Becker, who represented the administration in the hearing, said that guidance was meant to keep states from distributing benefits while the Supreme Court stay, issued late Nov. 7, was in place. 

Minnesota authorized benefits after the Supreme Court order, he said.

Talwani said he had provided no evidence of that.

Becker also said Wisconsin, Oregon and Michigan sent out benefits between the time of the Rhode Island order and the Nov. 7 guidance telling states to issue benefits, but Talwani said they were complying with the Rhode Island court order.

The Saturday letter to states was inappropriate, she added.

“It seems to me that the states acted fairly reasonably to follow your Nov. 7 guideline,” she said. “Even if there is a mistake here, the notion that the next move, on Saturday night, is a blustering order, that they’re all going to be sued, and this thing and that thing — we’re trying to get … benefits to people who need food.”

She also said the administration appeared to be using Americans who use SNAP as political leverage, noting that even as the shutdown appears near its end, the administration was refusing to transfer reserve money from a fund that had enough to stay solvent into the spring.

“You’ve chosen not to pay your benefits at this point, and it’s hard to see how it’s not just being used as a leverage point,” she said. “I understand that there’s nice language about saying it’s for child nutrition, but it doesn’t really ring true right now.”

Appeals court ruling

Federal courts have issued a flurry of rulings on the matter since groups, cities and Democratic states sued to force Trump to release November benefits late last month. 

The late Sunday ruling came from a three-judge panel of the 1st Circuit, which upheld a Thursday order from U.S. District Chief Judge John J. McConnell Jr. that the government forfeited its option to issue partial November benefits when it missed a Nov. 5 deadline McConnell had set.

USDA had argued that making partial SNAP payments, which it had never done before, would be difficult. But it made no plans to prepare those partial benefits nearly a month into the shutdown, Judge Julie Rikelman wrote in the panel’s opinion.

“The record here shows that the government sat on its hands for nearly a month, unprepared to make partial payments, while people who rely on SNAP received no benefits a week into November and counting,” Rikelman wrote. “In light of these unique facts, we cannot conclude that the district court abused its discretion in requiring full payment of November SNAP benefits.”

The U.S. Senate is expected to vote Monday night on a bill to end the shutdown. The measure is likely to pass after advancing in a key procedural vote Sunday, but the House would still need to clear it and Trump would have to sign it before the government will reopen. House members have been told to begin returning to Washington.

Sauer noted in his Monday letter that if the bill were to become law, the case would become moot.

Dems blast court fight

Congressional Democrats have been unsparing in their criticism of Trump’s efforts to keep from paying November benefits.

U.S. House ranking Democrat Angie Craig of Minnesota said administration officials “simply do not care about America’s hungry children, veterans, seniors or people with disabilities.”

“Instead of helping hungry seniors and children, President Trump and Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins spent weeks illegally withholding food assistance from hungry Americans,” Craig said. “Now, they are again asking the Supreme Court to stop states from feeding hungry residents. The Trump administration would rather preserve its own sense of power than preserve the lives and wellbeing of hungry Americans.” 

Republicans have blamed Democrats for the lack of benefits payments, which they say could have been avoided if enough Senate Democrats voted with Republicans for a bill that would have temporarily reopened the government at current spending levels. 

California Democrat Adam Schiff “voted against funding SNAP 15 times,” the Senate GOP X account wrote in response to a tweet from Schiff. “If he wants to fund SNAP, he should join the eight other Democrats who have voted to reopen the government instead.”

All but three Senate Democrats voted against the measure in 14 consecutive votes. Most continued to oppose the 15th vote Sunday, but seven Democrats and independent Sen. Angus King of Maine voted with Republicans on the bill to reopen the government that also included three full-year spending bills and reinstated fired federal workers. 

Those votes gave Republicans the margin needed to bypass the Senate’s filibuster rule.

Gov. Tony Evers speaks to reporters at a food pantry in La Crosse on Monday. (Screenshot/CSPAN)

Gov. Tony Evers reiterated Monday that Wisconsin won’t pull back the money that the state distributed to its FoodShare program late last week.

“They [the federal government] want that money back — they’re not getting it back,” Evers said in a short news conference at a La Crosse food bank. “It’s for the people that are part of this program.”

The Evers administration moved swiftly Thursday evening to funnel $104.4 million to Wisconsin’s FoodShare program after a federal court ordered the U.S. Department of Agriculture to fully fund November Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program payments.

Wisconsin FoodShare participants spent $9.9 million of the benefits on groceries Friday, according to the Evers administration.

By Monday, however, the administration said that it was lacking sufficient SNAP funds to reimburse retailers after the U.S. Treasury blocked the federal benefits payment to Wisconsin on Friday.

USDA said it would fully fund November’s SNAP payments in response to Thursday’s court order. Instead, however, the Trump administration petitioned the U.S. Supreme Court to halt the order and Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson put it on hold for 48 hours.

On Saturday the Trump administration directed states to return a portion of their SNAP funds to the federal government.

“No,” Evers declared in response.

On Monday, Wisconsin joined more than two dozen states in a motion filed in federal court in Massachusetts to block the Trump administration’s Saturday directive.

The directive “underscores the arbitrary and capricious nature of their conduct in this matter and demonstrates the need for immediate relief,” the motion states. “USDA must make full benefits available to SNAP beneficiaries without delay, and the November 8 guidance should be enjoined.”

A federal judge temporarily blocked the directive Monday.

On Monday afternoon, Evers toured WAFER Food Pantry in La Crosse, where he spoke with reporters about USDA’s order to states to pull back funds pushed out to electronic benefit cards used by SNAP recipients, including FoodShare users in Wisconsin.

“That’s embarrassing. That’s embarrassing for any president of the United States,” said Evers in a news conference that was televised on CSPAN.

“He [Trump] can claw all he wants,” Evers said. “It’s not going to happen. They have no authority to do that.”

Evers said that grocery stores should not have to wait for FoodShare funds that they are due when customers make purchases on their electronic benefits cards. “They should be getting reimbursed like they always have,” he said.

The state Department of Health Services and the state Department of Agriculture, Trade and Consumer Protection both issued statements Monday warning retailers and grocery stores that are part of the FoodShare program that they cannot reject customers with funds legally loaded onto their QUEST benefit cards, and businesses cannot turn away people using the cards.

“While there haven’t been reports of people being turned away or of price gouging thus far, we want to make sure everyone is clear on the expectations. No one in Wisconsin should have to worry about their next meal,” said DATCP Secretary Randy Romanski.

Evers signed an anti-price-gouging order on Oct. 31.

In a letter Sunday to Wisconsin’s congressional delegation, Evers called the administration’s clawback attempt “a shocking and disturbing request—and one that should be condemned by every person, regardless of their political beliefs or party.”

Evers noted that the state’s three Democratic federal lawmakers have spoken up in opposition to the administration’s actions.

“I find it deeply troubling the rest of you have failed to do so,” he wrote, referring to Wisconsin’s seven Republican Congress members, “and I implore you to change that today.”

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., speaks to reporters while walking to his office on Nov. 10, 2025 on Capitol Hill in Washington, D.C. (Photo by Tom Brenner/Getty Images)

WASHINGTON — The U.S. Senate approved a stopgap spending bill Monday that will end the longest government shutdown in American history once the measure becomes law later this week.

The 60-40 vote sends the updated funding package back to the House, where lawmakers in that chamber are expected sometime during the next few days to clear the legislation for President Donald Trump’s signature. 

Shortly before the vote, Trump said he plans to follow the agreements included in the revised measure, including the reinstatement of thousands of federal workers who received layoff notices during the shutdown. 

“I’ll abide by the deal,” Trump said. “The deal is very good.”  

Republicans, he added, will soon begin work on legislation to provide direct payments to Americans to help them afford the rising cost of health insurance, one of the core disagreements between the political parties that led to the shutdown. 

“We want a health care system where we pay the money to the people instead of the insurance companies,” Trump said from the Oval Office. “And I tell you, we are going to be working on that very hard over the next short period of time.”

House members told to head to D.C.

Earlier in the day, House Speaker Mike Johnson urged representatives to begin traveling back to Capitol Hill as soon as possible to ensure they arrive in time to vote on the bill to reopen the government, after the measure arrives from the Senate. 

The Louisiana Republican’s request came as airlines were forced to delay or cancel thousands of flights on the 41st day of the shutdown, a situation that could potentially impact a House vote on the stopgap spending bill if members don’t follow his advice. 

“The problem we have with air travel is that our air traffic controllers are overworked and unpaid. And many of them have called in sick,” Johnson said. “That’s a very stressful job and even more stressful, exponentially, when they’re having trouble providing for their families. And so air travel has been grinding to a halt in many places.”

Johnson then told his colleagues in the House, which hasn’t been in session since mid-September, that lawmakers from both political parties “need to begin right now returning to the Hill.”

Trump threatens air traffic controllers

Trump took a markedly different tone over the challenges air traffic controllers have faced during the shutdown in a social media post that he published several hours before he spoke to reporters about the deal to reopen government. 

“All Air Traffic Controllers must get back to work, NOW!!! Anyone who doesn’t will be substantially ‘docked,’” Trump wrote, without explaining what that would mean for workers who had to take time off since the shutdown began Oct. 1. 

Trump added that he would like to find a way to provide $10,000 bonuses to air traffic controllers who didn’t require any time off during the past six weeks.

“For those that did nothing but complain, and took time off, even though everyone knew they would be paid, IN FULL, shortly into the future, I am NOT HAPPY WITH YOU. You didn’t step up to help the U.S.A. against the FAKE DEMOCRAT ATTACK that was only meant to hurt our Country,” Trump wrote. “You will have a negative mark, at least in my mind, against your record. If you want to leave service in the near future, please do not hesitate to do so, with NO payment or severance of any kind!” 

An end in sight

The Senate-passed package will provide stopgap funding for much of the federal government through January 30, giving lawmakers a couple more months to work out agreement on nine of the dozen full-year spending bills.  

The package holds several other provisions, including the full-year appropriations bills for the Agriculture Department, the Legislative Branch, military construction projects and the Department of Veterans’ Affairs. 

Seven Democrats and one independent broke ranks Sunday on a procedural vote that advanced the package, drawing condemnation from some House members and outside advocacy groups unhappy that no solution was arrived at to counter skyrocketing health insurance premium increases for people in the Affordable Care Act marketplace.

Republicans hold 53 seats in the Senate, where bipartisanship is required for major bills to move forward under the 60-vote legislative filibuster. 

Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., said during a floor speech Monday he was “grateful that the end” of the stalemate was in sight. 

“We’re on the 41st day of this shutdown — nutrition benefits are in jeopardy; air travel is in an extremely precarious situation; our staffs and many, many other government workers have been working for nearly six weeks without pay,” Thune said. “I could spend an hour talking about all of the problems we’ve seen, which have snowballed the longer the shutdown has gone on. But all of us, Democrat and Republican, who voted for last night’s bill are well aware of the facts.”

Schumer bid for deal on health care costs fails

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., was far less celebratory after his bid to get Republicans to negotiate a deal on health care costs by forcing a shutdown failed. 

“The past few weeks have exposed with shocking clarity how warped Republican priorities truly are. While people’s health care costs have gone up, Republicans have come across as a party preoccupied with ballrooms, Argentina bailouts and private jets,” Schumer said. “Republicans’ breach of trust with the American people is deep and perhaps irreversible.” 

“And now that they have failed to do anything to prevent premiums from going up, the anger that Americans feel against Donald Trump and the Republicans is going to get worse,” Schumer added. “Republicans had their chance to fix this and they blew it. Americans will remember Republican intransigence every time they make a sky-high payment on health insurance.” 

Schumer was insistent throughout the shutdown that Democrats would only vote to advance a funding bill after lawmakers brokered a bipartisan deal to extend tax credits that are set to expire at the end of December for people who purchase their health insurance from the Affordable Care Act marketplace. 

That all changed on Sunday when Democratic Sens. Dick Durbin of Illinois, John Fetterman of Pennsylvania, Maggie Hassan and Jeanne Shaheen of New Hampshire, Tim Kaine of Virginia, and Catherine Cortez Masto and Jacky Rosen of Nevada voted to move the bill toward a final passage vote.

Maine independent Sen. Angus King of Maine, who caucuses with Democrats, also voted to advance the legislation.  

Jeffries still supports Schumer

House Democratic Leader Hakeem Jeffries said during a press conference Monday afternoon that he still believes Schumer is effective and should keep his role in leadership, despite the outcome. 

“Leader Schumer and Senate Democrats over the last seven weeks have waged a valiant fight on behalf of the American people. And I’m not going to explain what a handful of Senate Democrats have decided to do. That’s their explanation to offer to the American people,” Jeffries said. 

“What we’re going to continue to do as House Democrats, partnered with our allies throughout America, is to wage the fight, to stay in the coliseum, to win victories in the arena on behalf of the American people notwithstanding whatever disappointments may arise,” he said. “That’s the reality of life, that’s certainly the reality of this place. But we’re in this fight for all the right reasons.” 

Speaker Johnson said earlier in the day that the “people’s government cannot be held hostage to further anyone’s political agenda. That was never right. And shutting down the government never produces anything.”

Johnson reiterated that GOP lawmakers are “open to finding solutions to reduce the oppressive costs of health care,” though he didn’t outline any plans to do that in the weeks and months ahead. 

The U.S. Supreme Court denied a challenge to a landmark ruling protecting same-sex marriage equality. The rainbow flag of the gay pride movement and the flag of the United States | Getty Images

The United States Supreme Court has declined to revisit the 2015 landmark ruling that gave same-sex couples marriage equality, a failure for former Rowan County Clerk Kim Davis.

Davis made national headlines in 2015 for refusing to issue marriage licenses to several same-sex couples based on her religious beliefs. With the help of conservative legal firm Liberty Counsel, Davis has tried to avoid paying $100,000 as ordered by a federal jury to one of the couples she refused, David Ermold and David Moore. She ultimately tried to use that appeal to challenge Obergefell v. Hodges, the case that required states to license same-sex marriages.

The nation’s highest court on Monday said it will not hear the challenge.

Mat Staver, Liberty Counsel’s founder and chairman who represents Davis, said he “will continue to work to overturn Obergefell.”

“Davis was jailed, hauled before a jury, and now faces crippling monetary damages based on nothing more than purported hurt feelings,” Staver said. “By denying this petition, the High Court has let stand a decision to strip a government defendant of their immunity and any personal First Amendment defense for their religious expression.”

Kevin Jennings, the CEO of Lambda Legal, a pro-LGBTQ+ advocacy law firm, called the case “frivolous” in celebrating its defeat.

“This is a victory not only for the LGBTQ+ community, but for everyone who believes in our Constitution and the rule of law. The court’s decision reaffirms a simple fact: equal protection of the law applies to all, not just some,” Jennings said in a statement. “This frivolous case now belongs in the trash bin of history.”

Jenny Pizer, Lambda Legal’s senior director of strategic initiatives said the decision to not hear the case by the Supreme Court “rightly leaves marriage equality crystal clear and undisturbed.”

Pizer said LGBTQ+ people and their families “still need vigilance and protection,” though.

“We secured the freedom to marry for same-sex couples over a decade ago in our landmark 2015 Supreme Court victory, Obergefell v. Hodges, thanks to the powerful stories of thousands of couples and their families throughout the country, including in our many court cases,” Pizer said. “The fundamental rights of liberty and equal protection that the court affirmed back then remain essential for all American families today.”

Kentucky Lantern is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Kentucky Lantern maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Jamie Lucke for questions: info@kentuckylantern.com.

The U.S. Supreme Court agreed Monday to take up a challenge to a mail-in voting law in Mississippi. (Photo by Jane Norman/States Newsroom)

The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday took up a Republican-backed challenge to counting mail-in ballots received after Election Day.

Depending how the justices rule, the case could be consequential for Washington and other states that vote by mail.

It stems from a lawsuit against a Mississippi state law allowing mail-in ballots received within five business days after Election Day to still be counted. Roughly 30 states have similar laws, with varying grace periods. 

The decision could also have ramifications for next year’s high-stakes midterms, which will decide whether Republicans maintain control of both the U.S. House and Senate. The court will likely hear arguments and rule by mid-2026.

Washington is one of a handful of states that conduct elections by mail and ballot drop boxes. The state accepts mail-in ballots up until the day before certification, which is 21 days after the election, as long as they are postmarked by Election Day. 

Ballots for this month’s elections in Washington are still being counted, and the results of some close races have flipped and narrowed during the past week.

A federal judge in Mississippi upheld the state’s law, ruling the state’s statute isn’t preempted by federal law, which says Election Day is the Tuesday after the first Monday in November. 

But a federal appeals panel sided with the law’s challengers, the Republican National Committee and the state’s Republican and Libertarian parties. The appeals judges cited the U.S. Constitution’s clause that gives states the power to regulate elections, but also noted that clause says “Congress may at any time by Law make or alter such Regulations.” 

President Donald Trump, in his first term, appointed the three judges who issued that decision.

The legal question now is whether “election day” is when voters cast their ballots, or also when they must be received. The appeals court decided that ballots aren’t cast until election officials get them.

While the ruling doesn’t apply in Washington, if the Supreme Court upheld it, the ballot-counting system here would also be thrown into question.

Mississippi officials appealed to the Supreme Court to protect their five-day grace period. The state’s attorney general, a Republican, wrote in a brief to the high court that the appeals decision “would require scrapping election laws in most States.”

“The stakes are high: ballots cast by — but received after — election day can swing close races and change the course of the country,” Attorney General Lynn Fitch wrote.

The law’s opponents say these measures “deprive the electorate of a clear nationwide deadline that ‘puts all voters on the same footing.’”

In the 2024 general election, Washington election officials received nearly 120,000 valid ballots after Election Day that were postmarked on time. 

Washington Attorney General Nick Brown, a Democrat, along with colleagues in other states, filed a friend-of-the-court brief urging the Supreme Court to side with Mississippi. They note the appeals court decision “jeopardizes the ability of military service members and their families stationed abroad to have their timely cast ballots counted.”

Asked for comment on the case Monday, Brown’s office referred to the earlier brief.

A spokesperson for Secretary of State Steve Hobbs, also a Democrat, said in a statement that Hobbs’ office supports the Supreme Court’s decision to hear the case.

“We view this as an important opportunity for the Court to provide clarity on the authority of states to accept ballots received after Election Day, provided they are mailed by Election Day and meet all other requirements established in state law,” Charlie Boisner added.

President Donald Trump has repeatedly attacked mail-in voting. 

In a March executive order, for example, he urged U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi to stop states from counting absentee or mail-in ballots received after Election Day in federal elections. 

Brown and Oregon Attorney General Dan Rayfield sued the Trump administration over the order. That case is pending in federal court in Seattle.

Washington state’s Republican Party also wants to see a return to in-person voting, with same-day vote counts.

The Supreme Court is already grappling with other litigation focused on mail-in ballots. 

Last month, they heard arguments in the case of an Illinois congressman who sued over a law in his state counting ballots received up to 14 days after Election Day. That case deals with the more procedural issue of the standard plaintiffs must meet to be allowed to sue over an election law.

This article was updated with comment from the Washington secretary of state’s office.

U.S. Sen. Tim Kaine, D-Va., speaks at a campaign event in Norfolk earlier this month. Kaine was one of seven Senate Democrats to join Republicans in advancing a bipartisan deal to reopen the federal government, a move he said was aimed at protecting federal workers and ensuring a future Senate vote on Affordable Care Act tax credits. (Photo by Charlotte Rene Woods/ Virginia Mercury)

This story has been updated.

In a rare public split from his party, U.S. Sen. Tim Kaine, D-Va., broke ranks with most Senate Democrats on Sunday to help advance a bipartisan deal to reopen the federal government — a package that restores pay and protections for federal workers but doesn’t deliver on the extension of the health care tax credits Democrats had been holding out for. The latter immediately prompted criticism from some within his party’s progressive wing.

Kaine, one of seven Democrats and one independent to join Republicans in moving the measure forward, framed his decision as a pragmatic step to end the record-long shutdown and secure key concessions for federal employees. 

“After the elections in Virginia last Tuesday, I kind of assessed on Wednesday, ‘Where are we?’ (on the shutdown). And so I decided to then join the discussions to try to find the path out, and brought to the table an issue that wasn’t subject to the negotiation really before I got there … which was how to treat federal workers,” Kaine said Monday in a Zoom call with reporters.

“And I asked my progressive colleagues in the caucus, do you think another week of punishing SNAP recipients is going to make the Republicans cave, and will another month make them cave? I don’t need to court anybody’s approval and I don’t need to fear anybody’s judgment,” Kaine said.

The Democrat isn’t up for reelection until 2030.

Vote signals a pivot — and a compromise

The procedural vote moving the stop-gap funding measure forward cleared the Senate late Sunday by a 60-40 vote. The legislation aims to reopen the federal government and fund key programs through the next several months, while laying out commitments to debate health-care subsidies and other policy priorities.

For Kaine, the deal included specific safeguards he said he insisted upon. 

The legislation would rehire federal employees who were terminated during the shutdown, provide back pay for all federal employees regardless of status, and include a pledge to prevent future reductions in force for the federal workforce. Those terms, Kaine said, constituted the threshold enabling his support.

He said that after weekend negotiations he locked in the agreement at “4:45 p.m. yesterday afternoon, and I feel very, very good about it.”

Kaine also said his action received support from Virginia Democratic Gov.-elect Abigail Spanberger, who said on the CBS program Face the Nation Sunday that “Virginians need to and Virginians want to see the government reopen.”

“Controversial, tough call, some of my colleagues don’t like it,” Kaine said. “But my governor-elect is very happy with it, and I’m hearing from Virginians this morning. … ‘Thank God you did this.’”

Following up in an email Monday afternoon, a spokesperson for Spanberger emphasized that she supports Kaine’s effort.

“Governor-elect Spanberger has been consistent: Democrats and Republicans in Congress must bring an end to this government shutdown,” the spokesperson said. “Hundreds of thousands of Virginians are feeling the devastating impacts — lost paychecks, work disruptions, and lost SNAP benefits. Governor-elect Spanberger appreciates Senator Kaine fighting for protections for Virginia’s workforce and securing them as part of the negotiations.”

Virginia is disproportionately affected by the ongoing federal work stoppage. With more than 850,000 residents relying on the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) and one of the nation’s largest federal workforces, the ripple effects of the funding freeze have already hit home. 

The shutdown — triggered by a stalemate over annual appropriations bills and a tied debate over extending subsidies under the Affordable Care Act — began in early October and has since grown into the longest in modern U.S. history. 

In Virginia, the freeze of SNAP payments spurred state action. In late October, Gov. Glenn Youngkin declared a state of emergency and launched the Virginia Emergency Nutrition Assistance program to bridge benefit gaps. The crunch on federal workers and beneficiaries of food assistance added urgency to the political and policy equation.

Implications and dissent

Kaine presented the vote as a tactical win that would help reopen the government, secure worker protections, and then debate the more contentious health-care issues openly rather than under a shadow of shutdown chaos. 

“We don’t have a guarantee, but we have a guarantee of a very high-stakes debate and vote on the Senate floor in the full view of the American public, without the background noise of shutdown consequences drowning out the critical nature of the healthcare debate,” he said.

Still, not everyone agrees with his decision. Some progressive Democrats decried the move as ceding too much to Republicans and weakening leverage in negotiations. 

Political commentator Keith Olbermann, on X, demanded Kaine resign: “Don’t vote and then resign — RESIGN NOW. You are no longer a Democrat.” 

Others, such as retired Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman, the brother of U.S. Rep. Eugene Vindman, D-Woodbridge, criticized the broader Senate Democratic caucus for collapsing before the public’s appetite for a fight.

“It’s striking and inexplicable that Senate Dems crumbled following decisive signals from the American electorate,” Vindman said on X. “Americans expect the Democrats to fight Trump and Republicans.”

In Virginia’s congressional delegation, responses further reflected the divide. 

Rep. Suhas Subramanyam, D-Loudoun, said he would vote “no” on the Senate proposal once it reached the House, faulting it for failing to fully address health-care costs or federal worker firings. 

“A promise not to fire federal workers in the future is no comfort … to federal workers already fired or contractors who lost their job or aren’t receiving back pay,” he said.

In contrast, Rep. James Walkinshaw, D-Fairfax, applauded Kaine’s move as protecting federal workers and ending “attack after attack” under the Trump administration.

On the Republican side, Rep. Ben Cline, R-Botetourt, said, “After 40 days of unnecessary hardship, Democrats have finally recognized that their government shutdown strategy was a failure. … Sadly, it came at the expense of our troops, SNAP recipients, and federal employees who bore the brunt of their political brinkmanship.” 

A calculated risk

Political scientist Stephen J. Farnsworth of the University of Mary Washington said Kaine’s calculation reflects the kind of decision lawmakers make when they’re freed from the immediate pressures of reelection.

“The farther an elected official is from their next election, the more likely they are to make the decision about how to proceed based on sound public policy evaluation,” he said, noting that Kaine’s next reelection campaign is five years off.

“The fact that the Democratic senators who are part of this negotiation are some distance from their next election, or have announced their retirement, suggests that this is more about their evaluation of how the government should proceed rather than reelection considerations,” he said.

On the intra-party split between Kaine and fellow Virginia Sen. Mark Warner, Farnsworth added: 

“It seems to me that reasonable people could disagree on what the party’s best step forward would be. And it’s certainly unusual when there is a difference of opinion between the two Democratic senators, but even people who agree most of the time don’t agree all the time.”

Warner, who voted against the compromise, said in a statement that while he appreciated that the Senate proposal includes “important language preventing further mass layoffs of federal employees,” he could not support an agreement that “still leaves millions of Americans wondering how they are going to pay for their health care or whether they will be able to afford to get sick.”

Whether Kaine’s move proves bold or miscalculated remains to be seen. 

“Only time will tell,” Farnsworth cautioned. “The reality is that an awful lot of people are suffering from the economic consequences of the shutdown. It’s better for the government to be open than not.”

 

President Donald Trump attends inauguration ceremonies in the Rotunda of the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 20, 2025 in Washington, D.C. (Photo by Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images)

WASHINGTON — President Donald Trump announced on Monday he pardoned his former lawyer Rudy Giuliani and other people allegedly involved in the attempt to overturn the 2020 presidential election, but the president’s federal pardon does not shield members of the group from state charges.

Posting to social media early Monday, U.S. Pardon Attorney Ed Martin released the names of 77 people for whom Trump signed federal pardons in a proclamation dated Nov. 7. Martin is an attorney who represented several people charged in the Jan. 6, 2021 insurrection on the U.S. Capitol. 

After losing the 2020 presidential election, Trump goaded his supporters to storm the U.S. Capitol and stop Congress from certifying the election results. He was later impeached by the House for a second time, in connection with the insurrection, but the Senate acquitted him.

It’s the latest move from the president, following his return to the White House, to absolve anyone involved in the efforts to overturn or challenge former President Joe Biden’s victory. The proclamation notes that pardons were granted to address “a grave national injustice.”

Those on the list include former White House chief of staff Mark Meadows and Sidney Powell, a lawyer who was indicted along with Trump in a Georgia election case to overturn the state’s results in the 2020 presidential election. 

The proclamation, which is only for federal charges, is symbolic and does not prevent state-level prosecutions. Many of the people named on the list were alleged to have been part of the fake electors’ plot to submit fraudulent certificates claiming that Trump won the battleground states of  Arizona, Georgia, Michigan, New Mexico, Nevada, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin, instead of Biden.

The White House did not respond to States Newsroom’s request for comment. 

‘Pardoning a conspiracy’

A coalition of more than 100 pro-democracy groups, Not Above the Law, condemned the move by the president to pardon people involved in trying to subvert the 2020 presidential election.

“Trump isn’t just pardoning people – he’s pardoning a conspiracy and trying to rewrite history,” according to the coalition. “He’s creating a two-tier justice system where he and his allies operate above the law. In Trump’s America, loyalty overrides accountability to the Constitution and our federal laws.”

Those on the list include:

• Mark Amick, a fake elector from Georgia.
• Kathy Berden, a fake elector from Michigan.
• Christina Bobb, a former personal lawyer for Trump.
• Tyler Bowyer, a fake elector from Arizona.
• Joseph Brannan, a fake elector from Georgia.
• Carol Brunner, a fake elector from Wisconsin.
• Mary Buestrin, a fake elector from Wisconsin.
• Darryl Carlson, a fake elector from Wisconsin.
• James “Ken” Carroll, a fake elector from Georgia.
• Brad Carver, a fake elector from Georgia.
• Robert Cheeley, a lawyer who pushed false claims about Georgia’s 2020 presidential election results.
• Kenneth Chesebro, an architect of the fake electors plot.
• Hank Choate, a fake elector from Michigan.
• Jeffrey Clark, a Trump attorney who allegedly assisted the president in his failed bid to overturn the 2020 presidential election results.
• Vikki Townsend Consiglio, a fake elector from Georgia.
• Nancy Cottle, a fake elector from Arizona.
• James DeGraffenreid, a fake elector from Nevada.
• John Downey, a fake elector from Georgia.
• John Eastman, an alleged architect of the fake electors plot.
• Jenna Ellis, a Trump attorney who allegedly assisted the president in his failed bid to overturn the 2020 presidential election results.
• Boris Epshteyn, a Trump advisor who was indicted in Arizona for trying to overturn the state’s 2020 presidential election results.
• Amy Facchinello, a fake elector from Michigan.
• Bill Feehan, a fake elector from Wisconsin.
• Carolyn Hall Fisher, a fake elector from Georgia.
• Harrison Floyd, a lawyer who allegedly tried to overturn Georgia’s 2020 presidential election results.
• Clifford Frost, a fake elector from Michigan.
• Gloria Kay Godwin, who tried to obtain signatures for a recall election petition in Georgia’s 2020 presidential election.
• Edward Scott Grabins, a fake elector from Wisconsin.
• Stanley Grot, a fake elector from Michigan.
• John Haggard, a fake elector from Michigan.
• Scott Hall, the first to plead guilty in the 2020 election subversion case in Georgia.
• Misty Hampton, who was indicted in Georgia’s Fulton County election interference case.
• David G. Hanna, a fake elector from Georgia.
• Mark W. Hennessy, a fake elector from Georgia.
• Mari-Ann Henry, a fake elector from Michigan.
• Durward James Hindle III, a fake elector from Nevada.
• Andrew Hitt, a fake elector from Wisconsin.
• Jake Hoffman, a fake elector from Arizona.
• Burt Jones, a fake elector from Georgia.
• Anthony T. Kern, a fake elector from Arizona.
• Kathy Kiernan, a fake elector from Wisconsin.
• Timothy King, a fake elector from Michigan.
• Trevian Kutti, former publicist of Kayne West, now Ye, who was accused of intimidating Fulton County election workers into falsely admitting to fraudulent ballots in the 2020 election.
• James Lamon, a fake elector from Arizona.
• Cathleen Alston Latham, a fake elector from Georgia.
• Jesse Law, a fake elector from Nevada.
• Stephen Cliffgard Lee, a Chicago pastor accused of intimidating Fulton County election workers into falsely admitting to fraudulent ballots in the 2020 election.
• Michele Lundgren, a fake elector from Michigan.
• Meshawn Maddock, a fake elector from Michigan.
• Michael J. McDonald, a fake elector from Nevada.
• Shawn Meehan, a fake elector from Nevada.
• Robert Montgomery, a fake elector from Arizona.
• Daryl Moody, a fake elector from Georgia.
• Samuel I. Moorhead, a fake elector from Arizona.
• Loraine B. Pellegrino, a fake elector from Arizona.
• James Renner, a fake elector from Michigan.
• Eileen Rice, a fake elector from Nevada.
• Mayra Rodriguez, a fake elector from Michigan.
• Mike Roman, a Trump attorney from Wisconsin who allegedly took part in the efforts to overturn the 2020 presidential election.
• Rose Rook, a fake elector from Michigan.
• Kelly Ruh, a fake elector from Wisconsin.
• Greg Safsten, a fake elector from Arizona.
• David Shafer, a fake elector from Georgia.
• Marian Sheridan, a fake elector from Michigan.
• Ray Stallings Smith III, an attorney for Trump who allegedly tried to overturn the 2020 presidential election results in Georgia.
• Robert F. Spindell Jr., a fake elector from Wisconsin.
• Shawn Still, a fake elector from Georgia.
• Ken Thompson, a fake elector from Michigan.
• Pam Travis, a fake elector from Wisconsin.
• James Troupis, an alleged architect of the fake electors plot.
• Kent Vanderwood, a fake elector from Michigan.
• Kelli Ward, a fake elector from Arizona.
• Michael Ward, a fake elector from Arizona.
• C.B. Yadav, a fake elector from Georgia.

Blister packs of hormone replacement therapy medication. (Getty photos)

WASHINGTON — The U.S. Food and Drug Administration announced Monday it plans to remove warnings from hormone replacement therapy drugs that can be used to address symptoms of menopause, saying the statements are no longer needed. 

The black box warning, the strongest caution possible from the FDA, was added in the early 2000s after a study from the Women’s Health Initiative showed an uptick in rates of blood clots, breast cancer, heart attacks and strokes for women who used certain types of hormone replacement therapy. 

FDA Commissioner Marty Makary said during a press conference the change for estrogen-related products “is based on a robust review of the latest scientific evidence.”

Makary rebuked the medical establishment for not putting enough effort into researching women’s health conditions, including menopause. 

“A male-dominated medical profession, let’s be honest, has minimized the symptoms of menopause, and as a result, women’s health issues have not received the attention that they deserve. More than 80% of women have notable severe symptoms lasting up to eight years. How could the medical establishment get it so wrong for so long?” Makary said. “Women deserve the same rigorous sciences as is used for men.”

Study criticized

Department of Health and Human Services Advanced Research Projects Agency for Health Director Alicia Jackson said the black box warning on estrogen was based on “the flawed, overgeneralized and misinterpreted WHI study.” 

Jackson said menopause leads to a series of complicated and often painful experiences for women, including “sleepless nights, derailed careers, painful sex, broken bones and a loss of wellbeing.”

Jackson explained that when the level of estrogen drops throughout and after menopause, “a cascade of disease and aging begins.”

“A preponderance of data now shows that estrogen, when started early, acts as a protective shield for the brain, lowering risks of memory loss, mental health decline and neurodegenerative disease, even Alzheimer’s,” Jackson said.  

Makary said women should talk with their doctors and can request their estrogen levels be monitored as they approach the age where menopause typically begins and throughout that years-long process. 

He said that sometimes doctors can prescribe microdosing for hormone replacement therapy, followed by a half-dose and eventually a full dose as a woman’s estrogen levels decrease over time. 

Makary didn’t say how many of the companies that produce hormone replacement therapies plan to remove the black box warning but said he expects nearly all will do so. 

“Companies are, generally speaking, very excited when the FDA tells them they can remove a scary warning on your product,” he said. 

Review by panel

The FDA’s process for removing the black box warning requirement, Makary said, began with an expert panel earlier this year. The FDA’s subject-matter experts then conducted a “comprehensive review of the literature” and recommended the agency remove the requirement, which Makary accepted. 

The scientists who were part of the expert panel, he said, have written an article that will be published in the Journal of the American Medical Association.

President of the American College of Obstetricians & Gynecologists Steven J. Fleischman wrote in a statement that he “commends the HHS leadership for improving the lives of perimenopausal women by making the estrogen products they need more accessible to them.”

“The modifications to certain warning labels for estrogen products are years in the making, reflecting the dedicated advocacy of physicians and patients across the country,” Fleischman wrote. “The updated labels will better allow patients and clinicians to engage in a shared decision-making process, without an unnecessary barrier, when it comes to treatment of menopausal symptoms. ACOG has long advised clinicians to counsel patients based on an individual’s unique risk factors and treatment goals; this announcement does not change ACOG’s guidance on estrogen therapy.”

Former Dane County Judge James Troupis appears in court on Dec. 12. He faces felony forgery charges for his role in developing the 2020 false elector scheme to overturn the election results for Donald Trump. (Screenshot | WisEye)

President Donald Trump has pardoned a group of Wisconsin Republicans who participated in his scheme to overturn the results of the 2020 election by casting false Electoral College votes. 

The pardons were issued to a large group of people instrumental to Trump’s 2020 effort, including Rudy Giuliani and Sidney Powell. Included on the list, posted to X Sunday night by Trump’s pardon attorney Ed Martin, are some of the Wisconsin Republicans who cast the fake votes as well as two attorneys and a former aide who were instrumental in planning the effort. 

The pardons are largely symbolic because the president’s authority only extends to federal, not state, crimes. 

Wisconsinites Carol Brunner, Mary Buestrin, Darryl Carlson, Andrew Hitt, Kelly Ruh, Bob Spindell and Pam Travis received pardons. Attorneys Kenneth Chesebro and Jim Troupis, and former Trump aide Mike Roman were also on the list. 

The 10 people who served as false Trump electors had previously settled a lawsuit against them, which included a formal statement that Joe Biden won the 2020 election and an agreement that they would not serve as electors in any election in which Trump was on the ballot. 

Cheseboro, Troupis and Roman are all facing felony charges in Wisconsin for their role in planning the false elector plot. 

Sen. Ron Johnson, whose office played a part in the scheme by trying to pass the fake Electoral College ballots to then-Vice President Mike Pence, celebrated the pardons. 

“Thank you [Trump] and [Martin] for issuing these well-deserved pardons. It’s well past time for [Wisconsin Attorney General Josh Kaul] to end his corrupt lawfare against a good and honorable man, Judge James Troupis,” Johnson wrote on X. 

While the pardons won’t have any effect on the state prosecutions, critics said the real effect is Trump creating a permission structure for his allies to undermine U.S. election results. Jeff Mandell, general counsel of Law Forward, the progressive voting rights focused firm that filed the lawsuit against Wisconsin’s 10 false electors, called the pardons “offensive” and said they invite attacks on democracy.

“Many are dismissing these pardons as merely symbolic. That misses the point,” Mandell said in a statement. “While the pardon has little immediate effect, its purpose is emblematic: it sends an unmistakable message that this White House disdains democracy and will assist, in word and in deed, any effort, no matter how extreme and outrageous, to cling to power regardless of election results.”

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

The Wisconsin Legislature is considering a bill to legalize online sports gambling. (Getty Images)

A bipartisan bill to legalize online sports betting in Wisconsin is speeding through the state Legislature.

After being introduced in late October, the Assembly and Senate versions of the legislation received public hearings this week, and on Thursday the Senate Committee on Agriculture and Revenue voted 5-3 in favor of advancing the bill to the Senate floor. 

Under the Wisconsin Constitution, any gambling must be managed by the state’s federally recognized Native American tribes. Sports betting was first allowed in the state in 2021, but all of those bets had to be made in person at tribal casinos. The proposed new legislation would allow online sports betting using a “hub and spoke” model in which the servers running the betting websites and apps are housed on tribal land. 

The structure is similar to the state of Florida’s agreement with the Seminole tribe, which owns and operates the Hard Rock Casino brand. 

Proponents of the bill, including a bipartisan mix of legislators, representatives of the tribes and the state’s professional sports teams, say that hundreds of millions of dollars in unregulated online sports bets are already being made in Wisconsin, so legalizing the practice will kill the black market while providing tax revenue and consumer protections. 

But critics say the Legislature is rushing through a bill that could face legal hurdles and ignoring the ways in which online sports betting can be especially harmful for people with gambling addictions. 

Wisconsin’s legalization move comes seven years after the U.S. Supreme Court legalized sports betting in 2018. So far, 39 states have legalized sports betting and 32 of them have allowed online or mobile sports bets. 

Wisconsin would be the first state to legalize online sports gambling since North Carolina and Vermont did so in June 2023. Only now, Wisconsin’s legislators are doing so amid a national reassessment of the country’s relationship with sports gambling. Ads for apps such as FanDuel and DraftKings are ubiquitous. Both the National Basketball Association  and Major League Baseball are dealing with the fallout of player gambling scandals. Questions have arisen about the healthiness of frictionless sports gambling for the predominately young, male users of these apps. 

“American culture, and American sporting culture is trying to adjust to this new widely legalized moment,” Dr. Jason Lopez, a professor at UW-Madison who studies sports media and gambling, told the Wisconsin Examiner. 

If the bill is passed and signed into law, sports betting wouldn’t be immediately legalized. The state and tribes would need to renegotiate their existing gaming compacts and then those new agreements would need approval from the U.S. Bureau of Indian Affairs. 

But, Rep. Tyler August (R-Walworth), said at Tuesday’s Senate hearing, the state should get moving before the illegal betting market grows too large. 

“I don’t gamble, but I think  it’s the right thing to do, based on some of the data that we’ve seen,” said August, whose district is right on the Illinois border, which residents can easily cross to place online bets. “This is an activity that’s not declining, it’s increasing. And I think that it’s appropriate for us to deal with this now before it gets even bigger.”

Jim Crawford, attorney general of the Potawatomi tribe, said an estimated $1 billion in illegal online sports bets were made by Wisconsinites last year. At the hearing, tribal representatives highlighted the services tribal governments could improve with the increased sports betting revenue. 

“While online gaming is currently the wild west in Wisconsin with no regulations or protections for consumers,” Crawford said. “It does not have to be. This bill is a first step in ensuring that consumers will be able to have a legal, regulated and protected way of participating in this extremely popular technology.”

Sen. Howard Marklein (R-Spring Green), one of the bill’s co-authors, said he doesn’t believe the bill will put gambling addicts at further risk. But Sens. Andre Jacque (R-New Franken), Rachael Cabral-Guevara (R-Appleton) and Sarah Keyeski (D-Lodi) voted against moving the bill out of committee. Jacque said at the hearing he was worried about the recent gambling scandals in professional sports and the risk of gambling addiction. 

“This would allow them to place bets by their device anywhere in the state, as opposed to going on site at a casino, at a reservation,” Jacque said. “I would say, from an opportunity standpoint, that potentially could feed more into addictive behavior.” 

Noah Henderson, the director of the sport management program at Loyola University Chicago, said the frictionless nature of online sports betting is one of its challenges. 

“Brick and mortar sports books provide a cooling-off period, when people are trying to chase losses, if they have to get in their car again and go to the sports book, they might realize halfway there that they’re acting impulsively,” Henderson said. “It’s easier for families to see the signs of gambling disorder or problem gambling when individuals have to leave the home, right? It’s a lot easier to hide problem gambling or a gambling disorder when it’s only on a mobile device, where there’s no absences, they’re not leaving the house more than they normally do.” 

Henderson said there’s not much Wisconsin’s Legislature can do about the societal acceptance of legalized sports betting and a culture that has fully absorbed the promotion of gambling. 

“It is incredibly common to see on the pre-game show, the halftime show, the best bets, the best live bets, the best parlay combinations. So I think that there’s only so much Wisconsin can do to stop that, to stop sports gambling from being the culture of young men — predominantly young men — watching sports,” he told the Examiner. 

So, according to Henderson, the state is faced with a choice between legalizing and facing the broader cultural changes head-on while getting the tax revenue or hoping that prohibition disincentivizes sports betting. 

“I think that there might be a bit of harm reduction in this public policy where, if we keep mobile sports wagering outlawed in this state, it’s not going to curtail the sweeping normalization of sports gambling that we’ve seen,” Henderson said. “That’s at a national level. So Wisconsin has two options, which is to not allow it, and hope that the lack of resources for legal sports gambling incentivizes young men and women not to partake in this. But at the end of the day, there’s still a market and a need … they would rather regulate and tax it for consumer protection and to grow a tax base off of it and not have sports gambling happening without being able to derive some tax benefit from it that can go towards gambling education, public schools, or whatever else Wisconsin’s government deems important.” 

One organization that is against the bill is the Sports Betting Alliance, which represents the major online sportsbooks. 

The bill uses the federal Indian Gaming Regulation Act as a mechanism to allow online bets in Wisconsin. That law allows tribes to license their gaming operations out to third parties so long as the tribe gets 60% of the net revenue. 

Damon Stewart, an attorney for the alliance, said at the hearing that the revenue sharing requirement would make it too expensive for the most popular apps to partner with the tribes and provide their already existing apps and infrastructure. He also said he believes the law as currently written runs afoul of federal law. 

“We support the goal of legal online sports betting in Wisconsin. We want to work with the tribes. We want to partner with them,” Stewart said. “But this bill will only result in limited choices for customers. There’s no national brands, no chance for all the tribes to actually participate in the market, no ability to make an effective dent in the illegal market that already exists and years of litigation that will hold up the implementation of the law.” 

Stewart argued in his testimony that without the name recognition of the most popular apps, the legalization effort may not effectively kill the black market. Henderson said it’s possible for the tribes to develop their own infrastructure, but it’s easier to let the bigger companies manage the administration if the revenue sharing deal can be worked out. 

“This is probably a losing endeavor for those big sports books to enter a mid-sized sports gambling market with already pretty challenging margins,” Henderson said. “Especially when sports books enter a new market for sports gambling, there’s a lot of upfront costs that come with advertising that usually these businesses and markets take several years to even become profitable with more favorable regulations in place.” 

“Legislation can be amended. It doesn’t seem like this is the only formulation of it, but I think revenue sharing can definitely happen,” he continued. “I just don’t know if the 60-40 model makes sense for retailers to want to come in. Otherwise it would just be much like Florida, where tribal governments would have to build the infrastructure on their own or purchase white light label sports gambling software and pass it off as their own.”

In his testimony, Stewart called for the Legislature to slow down the process and get it right the first time. 

“I want to be respectful. It’s just my perception that with a bill dropped last week, two hearings this week, it does seem to be, compared to a lot of legislation, a bit of a rush,” Stewart said. “And on the topic of this complexity, a topic of this importance that affects a lot of citizens of the state, I would hope it would be seen as reasonable as asking to let us have the chance to work with the tribes.” 

The tribal representatives testifying said they were prepared to move forward without the big name apps. 

“We certainly appreciate the Sports Betting Alliance’s support of the goal of this legislation,” Crawford said. “But it’s also something that is a little bit concerning to us, that they are sort of implying that we don’t have the capability of operating statewide mobile sports, which, if you’ve ever been to our facility and to our retail sports betting, you know that we do a pretty good job, and the customers are happy. And so we look forward to doing that on a statewide basis, on a regulated basis, where the consumers are protected and they are generating revenues for the state of Wisconsin that stay in the state of Wisconsin.”

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

Fred Clark (standing) Democrat from Bayfield County, talking to John Kotar, retired UW-Madision Forestry, Ecology and Management Proffesor in Cable, Wisconsin, Oct. 22. | Photo by Frank Zufall/Wisconsin Examiner

In 2021, Fred Clark, who represented Baraboo as a Democratic representative in the state Assembly from 2009 to 2014, moved north to Bayfield County to retire, but over the last year, he said, he has become concerned about what he sees as an assault on the U.S. Constitution and the future of America, so he decided to re-enter politics.

Clark recently announced he’s running for Congress to represent Wisconsin’s 7th Congressional District.

Incumbent Tom Tiffany (R-Minocqua) is running for governor and two of the highest profile Republican state senators in the district — Romaine Quinn of Rice Lake and Mary Felzkowski of Tomahawk — both recently announced they will seek reelection to  the state Senate. The other candidates who have announced they are running for Tiffany’s seat,  three Republicans and one Democrat, have little districtwide name recognition. 

Clark sees an opportunity to mount a strong campaign as he tries to flip the large, Republican-leaning district, which covers much of the top half of Wisconsin, from red to blue.

“I think this is the first time in 15 years to have a truly competitive election in the 7th Congressional District,” he said. 

Clark, who is also not widely known in the 7th CD, has his work cut out for him. His background in logging, as the owner of Clark Forestry, Inc., could appeal to voters in the northwestern district, where forestry products are a critical part of the economy. He has also worked as a forestry consultant with the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources and as a forest ecologist for The Nature Conservancy, and was the executive director and a founding board member of Wisconsin’s Green Fire, a conservation group. 

He also has a history of building relationships with Republicans and independents, which is critical in a  district that has voted by wide margins for Republicans since 2010, starting with former U.S. Rep. Sean Duffy (R-Hayward), now Secretary of Transportation. Duffy who won the district before it was redrawn following the last Census, and then increased his winning margins in the redistricted boundaries for four more elections. Tiffany also won by wide margins.

At a meeting of Democrats in Cable on Oct. 22 at The River Eatery, a venue heavily supported by the silent sports community that tends to vote blue, Clark was asked if he would reach out to independents and Republicans in the district. He answered in the affirmative, saying his goal is to convince 40,000 voters who either did not vote or voted Republican in the last congressional election to “reevaluate” their decision.

“I’m asking a lot of people who may have voted Republican in the past to think about who’s going to represent their interest the best and who’s got the ability to work for you and will show up and listen,” he said. “People want to shake your hand and look you in the eye and believe that they share enough with you that they could trust you to represent them, even if you didn’t agree with them on everything.”

At that Oct 22 meeting, Clark criticized policy decisions in Washington he said were “hurtful and damaging and are being felt across rural America right now.”

Clark is critical of the Big Beautiful Bill passed this summer by Republicans, and of their refusal to extend Affordable Care Act health insurance subsidies. More than 270,000 Wisconsinites are projected to lose health insurance because of either dropping their coverage when premiums rise or losing Medicaid under the new rules. .

Clark is also concerned there will be fewer federal dollars to support rural hospitals.

“The health care outcomes are going to be worse and the rural health care system that we all rely on is going to continue to get worse because we’re going to lose doctors and we’re going to lose specialists and we’re going to lose clinics,” he said.

Support for wood pulp sustainable fuel initiative

Hayward is in the running, along with two other sites in Michigan and Minnesota, for a large $1.5 billion sustainable aviation fuel plant using pulp wood. The Wisconsin Economic Development Corporation is offering $60 million in incentives on top of a  $150 million grant funded through the Department of Natural Resources forestry account. It could be a boon to the wood pulp industry, but there have also been environmental concerns that the operation involving chipping trees in the field would leave less timber debris that adds nutrients to the soil, helping to protect the long-term health of the forest.

As a forester, Clark  believes the project would be good for the economy. The state’s  pulp and paper industries have been in a long  decline.  Clark says chipping  can be done in a manner that doesn’t risk the forest, but he is also critical of the  state’s plan to offer  the $150 million grant.

“We need to find new uses for wood from Wisconsin forests, and it’s really important that we have those markets for wood so that people managing forest land can continue to do that and we have a strong forest-based economy,” he said. “The sustainable aviation fuel truly is an opportunity to add a new product, or forest products mix, that could be good for forest conservation and forest ownership.”

“What I’m concerned about,” he added “and I don’t think it’s a good idea, is to hand out a $150 million cash subsidy to try to get into a bidding war with other states to land this plan.” He says he prefers the idea of offering tax credits as incentives to “writing a big blank check to this company.”

Worries about privatizing forestry

Clark also supports the Good Neighbor Authority program with the U.S. Forest Service, which involves county forestry departments helping to manage federal forest harvests. U.S. Senator Tammy Baldwin (D-Madison) was instrumental in establishing the program.  

“What the Good Neighbor Authority has done is just provide some extra flexibility for the Forest Service to get important work done and to meet their timber goals,” he said. “Working through states, it can work well when it’s well managed, but the risk here is that this administration throws open the door to basically privatize most of forest management, and if you let that happen, you’re going to have people and organizations setting up these timber sales that aren’t respecting the wildlife habitat and the soil conservation and the water protection that all needs to be part of any forest management. So the training and the standards and maintaining consistency are some of the most important things that we need to do with Good Neighbor Authority, and it’s got to be well managed or it won’t be successful.”

Help for Wisconsin farmers and small business

The number of small dairy farms in Wisconsin continues to decline as giant operations grow. Clark says the solution to the scourge of farm bankruptcies is to work on returning to supply management, keeping the milk supply at a level that offers attractive prices instead of emphasizing higher production, which suppresses prices and favors larger dairy operations.

“Honestly, as long as the incentives are all toward maximizing production that’s going to continue to keep prices at a place where only the biggest producers are going to survive and we’ll continue to see the erosion of the small farms who simply can’t produce enough milk at a cost above production,” he said. “Other countries that have effective supply management programs are actually able to maintain pricing that allows everybody to stay in business, and I think that’s the conversation among milk producers and folks in Congress that needs to be had.”

Clark is also critical of Trump’s tariffs for undermining efforts in the farming community to establish overseas markets.

“We’re seeing right now the impacts of the tariff war on everything from soybean producers who [lost]  markets in China … to hardwood lumber producers here in Wisconsin, who also have depended on Canadian and other international markets that are losing those markets, to ginseng producers in Marathon County, who have now lost their single biggest customer, China, which purchases the vast majority of American ginseng,” he said.  “All those markets that took years to develop are being essentially kneecapped by this president in this crazy tariff war.”

On his platform for “rebuilding our rural economy” Clark notes the need for “long-overdue tax reform that claws back 40 years of tax giveaways to the wealthiest Americans and our most profitable corporations.”

“We need a much fairer system,” he said. “There are simply way too many gigantic tax benefits that the largest corporations are able to use in order to effectively pay almost no taxes, and in many cases, these are some of the most profitable industries in our nation. You know, the net result of that is that we’ve got a giant amount of national debt. I believe it’s over $37 trillion of national debt. That is not good for America, and we can’t balance that debt on the backs of the people who need the services of the government the most.”

Clark is advocating for targeted subsidies for small- and medium-sized businesses, which he said generate jobs in rural communities. Asked about one notable failure in the district — the millions in federal grant dollars allocated to the Park Falls mill, which failed to keep the plant operational, he said, “When you’re providing incentives to private businesses, there’s always a risk.” 

“So because the business used a subsidy and ended up failing, that doesn’t mean we failed, but it does mean to me, we’ve got to make those investments smartly,” he added. Giving a large grant to a business that might come from outside the state to build a sustainable aviation fuel plant is one plan he says needs more scrutiny.  

“If you’re trying to start a small farm or small forest products business or manufacturing business, and you go to the Small Business Development Corporation, the Small Business Administration for a loan, you’re going to be wading through paperwork tall as your arm on your desk by the time you’re done, hours and hours,” he said.  “I think we can make that easier, and I think we can make those funds more available. And what we know is that even though big employers get a lot of the attention, if you add up the scope of small businesses, that’s actually where most of the jobs are, and those owners are the people who are committed and rooted in those communities.”

One of the things Clark doesn’t directly cover in his platform is the affordable  housing crisis. 

Clark said housing may be more important in tourist areas, like the 7th District, where so many seasonal homes are used as short-term rentals (STRs) instead of long-term family housing.

“We need communities that have the ability to zone and regulate that (STRs) more effectively, and then we need to go back and figure out how to make housing affordable, which is the availability of financing,” he said.

Immigration reform

Clark acknowledges that many voters in the 7th CD supported Trump’s promise to beef up border security and deport immigrants who commit crimes, but he is critical of how the U.S. Immigration and Custom Enforcement (ICE) law enforcement agents are operating in communities.

“We need to have a secure border and immigrants who are here illegally, and most especially immigrants associated with criminal activity — we absolutely need enforcement on that,” he said. “And those people should be deported. What we have going on right now, however, is it’s essentially a war of fear in American cities. And ICE is an agency that is really one of the only federal agencies that’s seen its budget dramatically increased. They’re hiring new ICE agents as fast as they can, with a minimal amount of training, and it’s already clear that many of these people simply don’t have the experience and the training to be doing what they’re doing. And I don’t care what party you belong to, seeing people in masks who aren’t even identifying themselves, calling citizens and legal residents out of their homes without judicial warrants, many of whom will never see a court or a judge — it’s wrong and it’s unconstitutional, and it’s not making American communities safer.”

Clark also wants Congress to fully flex its constitutional authority to “curb the abuse of emergency powers” exercised by Trump. Democrats would be able to provide that check if they win the majority of the House in 2026. He also said Democrats should hold town hall meetings, “taking the case to voters.”

“Republicans in Congress have been completely afraid to do that,” he said of in-person town hall meetings. “Congressman Tiffany hasn’t done it. And that’s talking to the people that you represent. You know that’s No. 1.”

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

(The Center Square) – A group of bills dubbed the Red Tape Reset are on the move after passing a Senate committee with a 3-2 vote on a party line.

(The Center Square) – Wisconsin’s Democratic U.S. Senator is not on board with the plan that could reopen the federal government.

(The Center Square) – The Town of Palmyra board violated Wisconsin’s Open Meetings Act on five occasions, a Jefferson County judge recently ruled.

Reading Time: < 1 minute

The Constitution’s Fifth Amendment says: “No person shall be … deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law.” 

The 14th makes the same declaration and says no state shall “deny to any person … the equal protection of the laws.”

The U.S. Supreme Court has held that all people in the U.S. have constitutional protections, though citizens have additional rights.

Due process generally means that the government must give individuals a chance to defend themselves in a fair hearing, such as in court.

Politico reported Oct. 31 that more than 100 federal judges have ruled that the Trump administration’s effort to systematically detain immigrants facing possible deportation appeared to violate their rights or was illegal.

All people also have other constitutional protections, including the right to free speech and assembly and to a public education.

Citizens have additional constitutional protections, such as the right to vote.

This fact brief is responsive to conversations such as this one.

Sources

• Congress.gov: Fifth Amendment
• Congress.gov: 14th Amendment
• U.S. Department of Justice : Title VI Legal Manual
• Congress.gov: ArtI.S8.C18.8.7.2 Aliens in the United States
• National Constitution Center: The Fourteenth Amendment Due Process Clause
• Politico: More than 100 judges have ruled against the Trump admin’s mandatory detention policy
• U.S. Department of Education: Equal Rights to Public Education Regardless of Immigration/Citizenship Status
• Wisconsin Watch: Has the District of Columbia adopted a law allowing noncitizens to vote in local elections?

Do unauthorized immigrants have constitutional rights? is a post from Wisconsin Watch, a non-profit investigative news site covering Wisconsin since 2009. Please consider making a contribution to support our journalism.

Reading Time: 3 minutes

Legislation is being introduced that would, for the first time in a decade, increase benefits for the most severely injured workers in Wisconsin. 

The bill, if adopted by the Republican-majority Legislature and signed by Democratic Gov. Tony Evers, would make a number of changes to the state’s worker’s compensation system. 

In particular, it would give raises to people declared permanently and totally disabled such as 77-year-old Jimmy Novy and paraplegic Scott Meyer.

They were featured in a September Wisconsin Watch article. It reported that more than 300 PTD recipients haven’t gotten a raise in their worker’s compensation benefits since 2016.

Novy, who lives in southwest Wisconsin, receives a worker’s comp check of $1,575 per month. Had his benefit kept pace with inflation, which rose 34%, he would have received nearly $21,000 more over the past nine years.

Meanwhile, Wisconsin employers have seen their premiums for worker’s compensation insurance decrease 10 years in a row, saving them $206 million in the past year and over $1 billion since 2017.

Unlike most workers injured on the job, who get temporary worker’s compensation benefits before returning to the job, Wisconsin PTD recipients get worker’s comp checks for life. Twenty-three states provide automatic cost-of-living raises for PTD recipients. But Wisconsin PTD recipients get raises only if worker’s comp legislation proposed every two years, known as an “agreed bill,” becomes law. 

The new agreed bill was proposed by employers and labor leaders on the state Worker’s Compensation Advisory Council. The Assembly Workforce Development, Labor and Integrated Employment Committee will hold a hearing on the bill Thursday. 

The bill would make these changes for PTD recipients:

• Make an estimated 210 more PTD recipients eligible for raises, known as supplementary benefits. Currently, only PTD recipients injured before Jan. 1, 2003, are eligible for raises. The bill would change that date to Jan. 1, 2020.
• Raise the maximum weekly benefit for PTD recipients by 57%, from $669 to $1,051, effective Jan. 1, 2026.
• Give PTD recipients annual raises, with the amounts set shortly before taking effect. The raise amounts would vary based on when the recipients were injured and their earnings at the time. 

One example, provided by the state Department of Workforce Development when the agreed bill was proposed: A PTD recipient injured in 1985 and receiving $535 a week would get a 57% increase to $840. The increase would amount to nearly $16,000 per year.

Spokespersons for the Assembly committee chair, Rep. Paul Melotik, R-Grafton, and for Sen. Dan Feyen, R-Fond du Lac, chair of the Senate Committee on Government Operations, Labor and Economic Development, said the lawmakers had not yet reviewed the bill.

Novy, while in his late 20s, learned he had been exposed to manganese, a key component in batteries, from working in a battery manufacturing plant. He suffered neurological problems that affected his left leg, severely limiting his ability to walk or even maintain his balance.

The bill would raise Novy’s monthly worker’s comp check to about $2,450 from $1,575, an annual increase of about $10,000.

“That’s about time,” Novy said Friday about the bill, eager to hear when he might see a raise in his check.

The money for worker’s compensation checks comes from worker’s compensation insurance companies and from employers who are self-insured for worker’s comp. No tax dollars are involved.

Agreement among employer and labor members on the Worker’s Compensation Advisory Council on the bill was reached after a “fee schedule” for worker’s compensation medical services was included in the 2025-27 state budget adopted in July. 

The schedule limits how much health care providers can charge for worker’s comp care.

Meyer, who lost both legs following a workplace accident in 1993 and now lives in Colorado, said he hopes that for PTD recipients on fixed incomes, the proposed raises make “a meaningful impact on their day-to-day lives.”

Appleton lawyer John Edmondson, who represents worker’s comp recipients, said the raises would be “a very nice step in the right direction, albeit coming far too late for those PTD workers who economically suffered and some who simply died waiting.”

Worker’s comp bill with first raise in a decade for permanently disabled up for public hearing this week is a post from Wisconsin Watch, a non-profit investigative news site covering Wisconsin since 2009. Please consider making a contribution to support our journalism.

Reading Time: 6 minutes

More than 300,000 veterans who served their country call Wisconsin home. 

During the 2025-26 legislative session, state lawmakers from both parties have proposed bills that would extend benefits to veterans, support memorials to wars they fought in and fund programs that help veterans who struggle with housing, mental health and substance abuse following their service. 

But one of the biggest debates at the Capitol this session has been funding for the Veterans Housing and Recovery Program, which supports Wisconsin veterans at risk of homelessness. Veterans homes in Chippewa Falls and Green Bay closed in September after the Wisconsin Department of Veterans Affairs did not receive additional funding for the program during the budget process. 

Earlier this year, Democratic Gov. Tony Evers proposed an additional $1.9 million for the Wisconsin Department of Veterans Affairs to fund increasing costs of operating veterans homes. But the Republican budget-writing committee later removed those dollars. GOP lawmakers have argued the WDVA already has funding to cover the costs of the veterans homes in a general appropriation that annually has been underspent, but the department has said the removal of veterans home funding from the budget casts doubt on the legality of using those funds.

Several proposals to fund the veterans homes have been introduced at the Capitol this year, but a solution has not yet made its way to Evers’ desk. 

Here are notable bills on veterans issues moving through the legislative process. More legislation could be introduced as the current session continues. 

Homeless veterans funding 

Senate Bill 411/Assembly Bill 428

Lead authors: Sen. André Jacque, R-New Franken/Rep. Benjamin Franklin, R-De Pere

Summary: The bills would provide $1.95 million over the biennium to support the Veterans Housing and Recovery Program operated by the WDVA. It also requires the Universities of Wisconsin Board of Regents to fund the Missing in Action Recovery and Identification Project and reduces the disability rating threshold for veterans or their surviving spouses to claim property tax credits. 

Of note: Evers told Wisconsin Watch in October that he would sign Jacque’s bill if it reaches his desk.  

Status: Senate Bill 411 passed the Senate Committee on Natural Resources, Veteran and Military Affairs in October. Assembly Bill 428 was introduced in September but has not received a hearing. 

Assembly Bill 596/Assembly Bill 597

Lead author: Franklin

Summary: Assembly Bill 597 would create a state-administered grant program to provide grants to organizations that house homeless veterans through the veterans trust fund. Assembly Bill 596 would provide $1.9 million over the biennium for up to $25 per day for homeless veterans housing organizations. The state funding would complement a federal Veterans Affairs grant program that awards up to $82.73 per day. 

Of note: Joey Hoey, the assistant deputy secretary for the WDVA, testified before lawmakers that while the agency supports funding for homeless veterans, the bills would not allow the WDVA to reopen the veterans homes in Green Bay and Chippewa Falls that closed in September. 

Status: The bills received public hearings in the Assembly Committee on Veterans and Military Affairs in October. 

Senate Bill 385/Assembly Bill 383

Lead authors: Sen. Jeff Smith, D-Brunswick/Rep. Jodi Emerson, D-Eau Claire 

Summary: The bills would provide $1.9 million over the next biennium to cover the increased costs of operating the Veterans Housing and Recovering facilities in Union Grove, Green Bay and Chippewa Falls. They also would help fund the lease of a new facility in Chippewa Falls. 

Of note: The bills are the only proposals that provide the funding WDVA says it needs to fund the veterans homes without additional provisions in the legislation. 

Status: The bills were introduced and referred to legislative committees.

Substance abuse and recovery support

Senate Bill 396/Assembly Bill 404

Lead authors: Sen. Dianne Hesselbein, D-Middleton/Rep. Robyn Vining, D-Wauwatosa

Summary: The bills would provide an additional $512,900 in the 2025-26 fiscal year and $602,800 during the 2026-27 fiscal year for the WDVA’s Veterans Outreach and Recovery Program, which provides support to veterans with mental health conditions and substance abuse disorders. It also increases the number of full-time positions for the program by seven employees. 

Of note: A fiscal estimate states that the seven full-time positions were previously funded through American Rescue Plan dollars, but funding expired in July. 

Status: Both bills were introduced this session and referred to legislative committees. 

Housing and property taxes

Senate Bill 175/Assembly Bill 247

Lead authors: Jacque/Rep. Patrick Snyder, R-Weston

Summary: The bills would require local governments to reduce building permit fees by 75% or $500 if the permit is for improvements to the home of a disabled veteran and are necessary to accommodate their disability. 

Of note: Paul Fisk, the legislative chair of the American Legion Department of Wisconsin, testified in support of the bill in April but noted Wisconsin’s proposal would be more restrictive than an Illinois proposal that became law in January. The Illinois law entirely waives permit fees for disabled veterans. 

Status: The Senate version of the bill passed the Committee on Natural Resources, Veteran and Military Affairs in May. The Assembly bill was introduced and referred to a legislative committee. 

Senate Bill 261/Assembly Bill 264

Lead authors: Smith/Rep. Christian Phelps, D-Eau Claire

Summary: The bills would allow a person to claim both the farmland preservation tax credit and the property tax credit for veterans and their surviving spouses in the same tax year. 

Of note: A fiscal estimate for the bill indicates allowing Wisconsinites to claim both credits would reduce tax revenues by about $160,000 per year starting in the 2026 fiscal year. 

Status: Both bills were introduced and referred to legislative committees.

Education

Senate Bill 587/Assembly Bill 591

Lead authors: Sen. Kristin Dassler-Alfheim, D-Appleton/Rep. Jill Billings, D-La Crosse

Summary: The bills would remove the funding cap for the Wisconsin GI Bill, which provides full tuition and fee remission to eligible veterans and their dependents at UW system schools and technical college districts.

Of note: In an October press release, Dassler-Alfheim said Wisconsin only covered 15% of the total costs for individuals attending a tech school and less for those attending a public university. 

Status: Both bills were introduced in October and referred to legislative committees.

Senate Bill 59/Assembly Bill 47

Lead authors: Jacque/Rep. Dave Murphy, R-Hortonville

Summary: The bills eliminate five-year residency restrictions in current law that specify when a veteran or surviving spouse or child can be eligible for tuition and fee remission for UW system schools and technical colleges. Under the bills, people can get tuition and fees waived as long as they indicate they are Wisconsin residents immediately before registering at a school. 

Of note: Representatives of the UW system and Wisconsin technical colleges testified that legislative appropriations are not covering the rising costs of remissions at their institutions.

Status: The Senate version of the bill passed the Senate Committee on Universities and Technical Colleges in October. The Assembly bill was introduced and referred to a legislative committee in February. 

Memorials

Senate Bill 254/Assembly Bill 250

Lead authors: Sen. Eric Wimberger, R-Oconto/Rep. Tony Kurtz, R-Wonewoc

Summary: The bills would create a continuing appropriation at a total of $9 million within the Wisconsin Department of Veterans Affairs designated to support the preservation of the Milwaukee War Memorial Center. 

Of note: Annual maintenance costs for inside the 67-year-old memorial exceed $800,000, members of the war memorial’s board of trustees wrote to lawmakers in April. 

Status: The Assembly bill unanimously passed the Committee on Veterans and Military Affairs in June but hasn’t been scheduled for an Assembly vote. The Senate bill was introduced in May and referred to a legislative committee. 

More veterans benefits

Senate Bill 2/Assembly Bill 27

Lead authors: Jacque/Murphy

Summary: The bills would expand the definition of veterans in Wisconsin to include people who served in Special Guerrilla Units operating in Laos during the Vietnam War and were naturalized under the Hmong Veterans’ Naturalization Act of 2000. It would not include admission to state veterans homes or burial in a veterans cemetery. Those are subject to federal laws. 

Of note: In January testimony, Jacque said that there are as many as 1,000 Hmong veterans in Wisconsin. 

Status: The Senate bill passed the chamber in May. The Assembly bill passed the Committee on Veterans and Military Affairs but has not been scheduled for a floor vote. 

Senate Bill 387/Assembly Bill 389

Lead authors: Jacque/Franklin

Summary: The bills would change the definition of veteran to allow former members of the U.S. Army reserves or the National Guard to indicate their veteran status on their driver’s license or identification card. Current law does not allow veterans of the reserves or the National Guard to include that status on licenses. 

Of note: A fiscal estimate for the bill from the WDVA states that license applicants who want their veteran status on their identification must provide verification of their eligibility to the agency or a county veterans service officer. The agency processes 6,000 to 7,000 veteran status forms each year. 

Status: Both bills were introduced and referred to legislative committees.

Senate Bill 505

Lead author: Smith

Summary: The bill would allow disabled veterans with an up-to-date deer hunting license to hunt deer of either sex during any open firearm season, which is currently only available to active members of the U.S. military who are on furlough or leave in Wisconsin. 

Of note: A fiscal estimate for the bill suggests about 5,947 gun deer licenses sold by the Department of Natural Resources in the 2025 fiscal year were purchased by disabled veterans.

Status: The bill was introduced in October and referred to a legislative committee.

As Wisconsin celebrates Veterans Day, lawmakers are considering these 12 veteran-related bills is a post from Wisconsin Watch, a non-profit investigative news site covering Wisconsin since 2009. Please consider making a contribution to support our journalism.

Phil Anderson is a member of the Lake Superior Region Veterans for Peace. He spoke with WPR’s “Morning Edition” about the group’s effort and the origin of Veterans Day and other national holidays that originally celebrated peace.

The post On Veterans Day, Wisconsin peace activists who served push to restore Armistice Day appeared first on WPR.

A police chief in Milwaukee County has been charged with felony misconduct after he allegedly used his department's surveillance camera to watch his own home during his divorce. 

The post Police chief in Milwaukee County charged with felony misconduct appeared first on WPR.

During a visit to WAFER Food Pantry in La Crosse on Monday, Gov. Evers said the state followed the judge's ruling in issuing the payments.

The post Evers calls out Trump administration for trying to claw back food assistance appeared first on WPR.