The U.S. Justice Department has sent letters to election officials in at least two key swing states, threatening action against the states if they don’t comply with provisions of a 2002 federal election law.
Lawyers from the department’s civil rights division sent letters in recent weeks to both Arizona and Wisconsin. The Arizona letter said that state officials are not properly verifying voters’ identities as dictated by the Help America Vote Act, and it warned of a lawsuit. The Wisconsin letter said the Wisconsin Elections Commission is not properly resolving administrative complaints as required by the same law and threatened to withhold federal election funds over that issue.
The Justice Department recently sued North Carolina also, claiming that the state has not been properly verifying voter identity.
The department issued a press release and publicly released the Wisconsin letter, dated June 4; Votebeat obtained the previously unreported Arizona letter, dated May 20, through a records request.
The letters are an early sign of how President Donald Trump’s administration is scrutinizing state election practices after his March executive order on elections, which called for stricter citizenship checks and revised voting machine standards, among other things. The Justice Department has also dropped or withdrawn from several voting rights cases dating from before Trump took office again in January.
Arizona Secretary of State Adrian Fontes, a Democrat, responded in a June 2 letter to the Justice Department that state election officials conduct a complete residency and citizenship check and fully comply with the Help America Vote Act when someone registers to vote.
“Arizona has a long history of adherence to voter registration requirements, both state and federal,” Fontes wrote.
The Wisconsin Elections Commission declined to immediately comment on the letter that it received, which noted that the commission has declined to adjudicate administrative complaints against itself since at least 2022, due in part to a Wisconsin Supreme Court decision.
The letter said the commission’s actions “justify a bar” on future grants to the state from the U.S. Election Assistance Commission.
The DOJ appears to be raising a “legitimate” violation in that case, David Becker, the executive director of the Center for Election Innovation and Research and a former attorney in the voting section of the Justice Department, said after reviewing the letter. But he characterized it as minor and stressed that the agency has limited resources to devote to enforcing voting laws.
The DOJ didn’t immediately respond to requests for comment about the letters.
Under the Help America Vote Act (HAVA), any state receiving money for elections must also establish an administrative process allowing people to file complaints about alleged violations of the law. If the state determines there’s a HAVA violation, it must provide an appropriate remedy, the law says; if not, it can dismiss the complaint.
But in recent years, the WEC has been summarily dismissing HAVA complaints that are about the agency’s own actions.
In rejecting those complaints, the commission cited a 2022 Wisconsin Supreme Court opinion in which Justice Rebecca Bradley, a conservative, said it would be “nonsensical” for the Wisconsin Elections Commission to adjudicate a complaint against itself. Bradley was joined in her opinion by two other justices, and a fourth justice echoed her in a separate opinion in the case.
Becker said that WEC practice probably doesn’t comply with the federal law, which supersedes state laws, especially for federal elections.
While the election commission said it would be a conflict of interest to adjudicate complaints against itself, Becker said other agencies “do investigations of themselves all the time.”
Because of the WEC’s position, complainants are left “without any recourse,” Assistant U.S. Attorney General Harmeet Dhillon wrote in the letter. The commission’s actions jeopardize future federal funding, she wrote.
But in at least some cases, the agency has told complainants they can appeal a WEC ruling in court, Rob Yablon, a law professor at UW-Madison, pointed out. Yablon also said it’s unclear whether WEC’s position that it can’t resolve the complaints could itself count as a determination that meets the requirements in HAVA.
Right now, Wisconsin doesn’t stand to lose much in federal funding over the issue. The U.S. Election Assistance Commission allocated about $272,000 in election security grants to Wisconsin in the 2025 fiscal year, money that has yet to come in, according to WEC Chair Ann Jacobs, a Democrat.
“The commission would have to decide to take it. We would have to know the conditions of receiving it,” Jacobs said, adding that she questioned “whether or not the work that would be involved in (administering the grants) would justify the receipt of the money when … it would amount to $147.03 per clerk.”
It would take a majority vote of the commissioners for the WEC to begin adjudicating claims against itself, Jacobs said, but she wouldn’t be in favor of it.
“I think our legal analysis is correct: It’s improper for us to be the adjudicating body on whether or not we did something wrong,” she said. “I think that we can have both statutes, both federal and state law, harmoniously work together. And I think that is, in fact, what’s going on.”
WEC member Don Millis, a Republican, didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment.
Following the DOJ letter, Republicans in charge of the state’s budget committee delayed a planned session to finalize the election commission’s budget, saying they had to review the Justice Department’s allegations first.
In both the North Carolina lawsuit and the Arizona letter, the DOJ asserted that the states have failed to require applicants’ driver’s license numbers when they register to vote.
North Carolina has since fixed its form to require this information, but it hasn’t contacted every voter who registered through the faulty registration form to provide the missing information. The issue of missing identification numbers was central to the recent challenge to results of the state’s Supreme Court race.
In the letter to Arizona’s secretary of state, Maureen Riordan, senior counsel and acting chief of the voting section of the civil rights division, wrote that HAVA requires the state to request the applicant’s driver’s license number if the applicant has one. If not, a Social Security number is acceptable, she wrote.
The DOJ claims Arizona improperly allows registrants to use either ID number, regardless of whether the applicant has a driver’s license.
The division asked the state to revise the form and retroactively check all applicants who provided only a Social Security number “to identify any non-citizens.”
Fontes in his response explained that since 2005, Arizona has required voters who register to vote in state and local elections to provide evidence of citizenship and has designed its form to meet that requirement as well as HAVA requirements.
When someone applies, an election official completes what the state calls a “HAVA check” using the state’s driver’s license database to check the driver’s license data, as well as to confirm citizenship, he said.
“Our system and processes ensure that if those individuals have MVD credentials, the number of such credential is included in their voter record,” he wrote.
Alexander Shur is a reporter for Votebeat based in Wisconsin. Contact Shur at ashur@votebeat.org.
Jen Fifield is a reporter for Votebeat based in Arizona. Contact Fifield at jfifield@votebeat.org.
Votebeat is a nonprofit news organization reporting on voting access and election administration across the U.S. Sign up for Votebeat’s free national newsletter here.
US warns Wisconsin and Arizona over compliance with federal election law 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.
Ramón Morales Reyes was thrust into the national spotlight last week when Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem accused him of writing letters threatening Trump.
The post What to know about Ramón Morales Reyes, a Wisconsin man falsely accused of threatening Trump’s life appeared first on WPR.
The Brown County Board of Supervisors has approved a deal that will pave the way toward moving Green Bay’s century-old downtown coal piles.
The post ‘Our Louisiana Purchase’: Green Bay area officials reach deal to move century-old coal piles appeared first on WPR.
In Wisconsin almost 1.3 million children and adults are enrolled in Medicaid, and more than 700,000 receive FoodShare. Wisconsin’s Medicaid Director Bill Hanna says under the new legislation, many of those people will likely lose their benefits.
The post Wisconsin Medicaid director: New federal requirements would affect ‘the whole health care economy’ appeared first on WPR.
The Joint Committee on Finance voted Thursday to increase borrowing by $732.2 million under the state’s Environmental Improvement Fund, which includes the clean water fund and safe drinking water loan programs.
The post Legislature’s budget-writing committee boosts borrowing by $732M for water programs appeared first on WPR.
In Waushara County, an area gardening club and food pantry are working together to feed those facing food insecurity.
The post Wisconsin gardeners and food pantries unite to feed the hungry appeared first on WPR.
Maxwell Anderson was found guilty Friday of killing and dismembering 19-year-old Sade Robinson after a first date last year.
The post Jury finds Maxwell Anderson guilty of killing and dismembering 19-year-old Sade Robinson appeared first on WPR.
Insight from the scientists and politicians who encouraged Ronald Reagan and Margaret Thatcher to take action to fix the hole in the ozone layer.
The post Ozone Hole: How We Saved the Planet appeared first on WPR.
Blueberry cream pie; the rarity of blue foods in nature; travel utensil sets; sweet tea-brined fried chicken.
The post Cook’s Country:Classic Cookout appeared first on WPR.
Turning a reclaimed beam into a fireplace mantel; changing a bathroom faucet; innovations to geothermal installations.
The post Ask This Old House:Reclaim Beam Mantel; Geothermal appeared first on WPR.
A protester holds a photo of Maryland man Kilmar Abrego Garcia as demonstrators gather to protest against the deportation of immigrants to El Salvador outside the Permanent Mission of El Salvador to the United Nations on April 24, 2025. (Photo by Michael M. Santiago/Getty Images)
WASHINGTON — Kilmar Abrego Garcia, a Maryland man wrongly deported to his native El Salvador three months ago, was brought back to the U.S. on Friday and will face federal charges, U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi said.
Abrego Garcia’s case had become a flashpoint in a debate over what due process rights protect immigrants from deportation after federal officials conceded he was sent to a notorious El Salvador mega-prison because of an administrative error.
Still, President Donald Trump, El Salvador President Nayib Bukele, Bondi and other administration officials said for months Abrego Garcia could not be released because of criminal conduct they had not publicly produced evidence of.
In a gaggle with reporters on Air Force One Friday night, Trump declined to say whether it was his decision to bring Abrego Garcia back to the U.S., according to White House pool reports.
“He should have never had to be returned,” Trump said. “It’s a disaster.”
Bondi said Friday a federal warrant for Abrego Garcia’s arrest on human trafficking charges compelled his release from the Salvadoran prison system.
“Abrego Garcia has landed in the United States to face justice,” Bondi said at a Department of Justice news conference Friday afternoon. “He was a smuggler of humans and women and children.”
The 10-page indictment filed in the Middle District of Tennessee comes after a federal grand jury indicted him on May 21 for allegedly transporting migrants in the U.S. without legal authorization within the country.
Chris Newman, an attorney representing the Abrego Garcia family said at a virtual press event Friday that he remained skeptical of the federal charges lodged at Abrego Garcia.
“I can tell you that we should all treat whatever charges that are being leveled against him with a high degree of suspicion,” Newman said. “We should make sure that he gets a fair (trial) in court because he’s clearly not getting a fair hearing in the court of public opinion.”
Bondi did not detail when the investigation into Abrego Garcia began, but said the federal indictment charges contained “recently found facts.”
“This is what American justice looks like upon completion of his sentence, we anticipate he will be returned to his home country of El Salvador,” Bondi said.
WKRN in Nashville said Abrego Garcia’s arraignment has been scheduled for 10 a.m. Friday.
Abrego Garcia’s wrongful deportation to the notorious mega-prison Centro de Confinamiento del Terrorismo, or CECOT, drew national outcry as the Trump administration clashed with a federal court that ordered the return of the Beltsville man and resisted the U.S. Supreme Court’s order to “facilitate” his return.
Despite the orders, Trump administration officials did not appear to take any public steps to secure Abrego Garcia’s release, and at times seemed to relish their defiance of the courts.
Bondi thanked El Salvador’s government Friday for releasing Abrego Garcia in compliance with the warrant.
The Trump administration has argued in federal court in Maryland for months that Abrego Garcia is in the custody of El Salvador and therefore cannot be returned, despite a $15 million agreement between the U.S. and the Salvadoran government to keep roughly 300 men removed from the U.S. and detained at CECOT. Abrego Garcia had been moved to a different El Salvador prison prior to his release.
Abrego Gacia had deportation protections to his home country of El Salvador since 2019.
He was pulled over by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents in March and informed that his immigration status had changed. He was later placed on one of three deportation flights on March 15 to CECOT.
The Trump administration admitted his removal was an “administrative error” but has since alleged that Abrego Garcia was a leader in the MS-13 gang without producing evidence in the federal civil court overseeing the suit challenging his removal.
Maryland U.S. Sen. Chris Van Hollen, who traveled to El Salvador to press for Abrego Garcia’s release and return to the U.S., welcomed the news as a victory for due process rights.
“As I have repeatedly said, this is not about the man, it’s about his constitutional rights – and the rights of all,” the Maryland Democrat said in a statement. “The Administration will now have to make its case in the court of law, as it should have all along.”
William J. Ford contributed to this report.
U.S. Senate Majority Leader Sen. John Thune, R-S.D., left, listens as Sen. Mike Crapo, R-Idaho, center, speaks to reporters outside of the West Wing of the White House on June4, 2025 in Washington, D.C. (Photo by Anna Moneymaker/Getty Images)
WASHINGTON — U.S. Senate Republican Leader John Thune will spend a crucial next few weeks working behind the scenes with other top GOP senators to reshape the party’s “big beautiful bill” — a balancing test accompanied in recent days by incendiary exchanges between President Donald Trump and billionaire Elon Musk over whether the current proposals are so bad that Congress should just go back to the drawing board.
South Dakota’s Thune will need to gain support from deficit hawks, who want to see the mega-bill cut at least $2 trillion in spending, and moderates, who are closely monitoring how less federal funding for safety net programs like Medicaid and food assistance could harm their constituents and home-state institutions like rural hospitals.
Interviews by States Newsroom with Republican senators in early June showed many major elements of the package could change, including provisions that would put states on the hook for unanticipated costs. Arkansas Sen. John Boozman, for example, indicated the Senate may rewrite a proposal in the House-passed bill that would shift some of the cost of the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, which provides food aid to low-income people, to state governments.
“We can do whatever we want to do,” the Agriculture, Nutrition and Forestry Committee chairman said when asked by States Newsroom about amending that policy.
The final deal — intended to extend the 2017 tax cuts — cannot lose more than three GOP senators and still make it back across the Capitol to the House for final approval, since all Democrats are expected to oppose the bill. Thune only needs a majority vote in the Senate for the special process being used by Republicans.
Internal debates about just how to rework the Trump-backed tax and spending cuts measure began in the first week of June during meetings on Capitol Hill and at the White House, as GOP senators began critiquing the House-passed package line-by-line to ensure it complies with their strict rules for the complex reconciliation process and their policy goals.
Republicans said during interviews that several provisions in the House version likely won’t comply with the chamber’s Byrd rule, which could force lawmakers to toss out some provisions.
Complicating all of it was the very public back-and-forth between not just Trump but GOP leaders and former White House adviser Musk over the bill, which Musk on social media labeled “a disgusting abomination” and a “big, ugly spending bill” for its effect on the deficit and debt limit. “KILL the BILL,” Musk said on X, the platform he owns. Senate leaders so far have dismissed Musk’s criticisms.
The talks, and whatever the legislation looks like after a marathon amendment voting session expected in late June, have already raised deep concerns among House GOP lawmakers, who will have to vote on the bill again in order to send it to Trump.
The extremely narrow majorities mean House Republican leaders cannot lose more than four of their own members if all the lawmakers in that chamber vote on the party-line bill.
Any changes the Senate makes could unbalance the fragile coalition of votes Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., cobbled together last month for a 215-214 vote. But GOP senators are adamant they will amend the legislation.
Complicating matters is a new report from the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office that shows the proposed changes to tax law, Medicaid, the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program and higher education aid wouldn’t actually help to reduce deficits during the next decade but raise them by more than $2.4 trillion.
The numbers are the exact opposite for what Republicans hoped their sweeping tax and spending cuts package would accomplish.
The first stop for the House-passed reconciliation package in the Senate appears to be the parliamentarian’s office, where staff have begun evaluating whether each provision in the current version of the bill complies with the upper chamber’s strict rules.
Boozman said staff on his panel have already begun meeting with the parliamentarian to go over the House provisions within its jurisdiction.
He expects that section of the package will have to change to comply with the strict rules that govern the reconciliation process in the Senate and to better fit that chamber’s policy goals.
“We can’t really decide exactly what we want to use in the House version until we know what’s eligible,” Boozman said. “We’ve got some other ideas too that we asked them about. But we need to know, of the ideas that we have, what would be viable options as far as being Byrd eligible.”
The Byrd rule, which is actually a law, requires reconciliation bills to address federal revenue, spending, or the debt limit. This generally bars lawmakers from using the special budget process to change policies that don’t have a significant impact on those three areas.
Alabama Sen. Tommy Tuberville, who is campaigning to become his home state’s next governor, said pushing some of the cost of the nutrition program to states may be problematic.
“We’re trying to send more costs to the states. Most states can’t afford that, so we want to take care of people, but we need people to go back to work,” Tuberville said. “It’s not a forever entitlement. It’s for part-time, you know, take care of yourself until you get a job, go back to work and let people that need it really, really get it.”
Senate GOP leaders will have to navigate how best to reduce federal spending on Medicaid, the state-federal health program for lower-income people and some with disabilities, that is relied on by tens of millions of Americans, many of whom are loyal Republican voters.
The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office projects that 7.8 million people would lose access to Medicaid during the next decade if the House’s policy changes are implemented as written.
There are also concerns among GOP lawmakers about how losing the revenue that comes with treating Medicaid patients would impact rural health care access and hospitals.
Missouri Sen. Josh Hawley said under no circumstances would he vote for a bill that cuts benefits to Medicaid recipients and is worried about how provisions in the House package would affect rural hospitals.
“They’re very concerned about it, rightly so,” Hawley said, referring to conversations he’s had with health care systems in his home state.
“This is something that we need to work on. I don’t know why we would penalize rural hospitals,” he added. “If you want to reduce health care spending, then cap the price of prescription drugs. I mean, that’s the way to do it. If you want to get major savings in the health care sector, don’t close rural hospitals, don’t take away benefits from working people. Cap the costs, cap the price that (the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services) is going to pay for prescription drugs.”
West Virginia Sen. Shelley Moore Capito said she’s not yet come to a decision about whether to keep, amend, or completely scrap some of the House changes to Medicaid.
“I talked to a lot of our hospitals when I was home to see what the impacts would be, because we have a very high Medicaid population,” Capito said. “I want to see it work and be preserved, but I want it to be there for future generations. And it’s just getting way out of control on the spend side. So right now, we’re looking at everything.”
Louisiana Sen. Bill Cassidy — chairman of the Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee — said he doesn’t expect all of the health care provisions in the House bill make it through the “Byrd bath” with the parliamentarian. But he declined to go into detail.
“Some of it is more regulatory, that’s all I can say,” Cassidy said.
West Virginia’s Sen. Jim Justice said he is in favor of requiring some Medicaid enrollees to work, participate in community service, or attend an educational program at least 80 hours a month to stay on the program, a sentiment shared by many of his GOP colleagues.
“I’m good with every bit of that,” he said.
But Justice expects the Senate will make its own changes to the package and that it will be “proud of their own pond.”
“Any frog that’s not proud of your own pond’s not much of a frog,” Justice said.
He did not go into detail on what those changes would entail.
The state and local tax deduction, or SALT, represents another tightrope for Thune, who is no fan of the changes made in the House. But he has said repeatedly this week he understands altering that language too much could mean a Senate-amended version of the bill never makes it back through the House to actually become law.
Thune said outside the White House following a June 4 meeting with Trump and others that there will very likely be changes to SALT.
“There isn’t a single Republican senator who cares much about the SALT issue,” Thune said. “It’s just not an issue that plays.” States that are most affected generally don’t elect Republicans to the Senate.
The House tax-writing panel originally proposed raising the SALT cap from $10,000 to $30,000, but Johnson had to raise that to $40,000 in order to secure votes from House Republicans who represent higher tax states like California, New Jersey and New York. The revised cap would benefit more high-income taxpayers in their states.
“In 2017, that was one of the best reforms we had in the bill,” Thune said. “But we understand it’s about 51 and 218. So we will work with our House counterparts and with the White House to try to get that issue in a place where we can deliver the votes and get the bill across the finish line.”
Republicans hold 53 seats in the Senate, but can rely on Vice President J.D. Vance to break a tied vote if necessary.
At least 218 House lawmakers must vote to pass bills when all 435 seats are filled. But with three vacancies at the moment, legislation can move through that chamber with 216 votes. The GOP has 220 seats at the moment, meaning Johnson can afford four defections on party-line bills.
North Dakota Sen. John Hoeven told reporters this week that he’d like to see GOP senators rework the SALT section of the bill, even if that causes challenges for Speaker Johnson’s ability to pass a final version.
“Let’s talk about SALT, for example. The House has a very large SALT number. The Senate is probably going to take a look at that,” Hoeven said. “There’ll be a lot of areas we can look at. There’ll be other things we’re going to look at. We’d like to get to $2 trillion in savings.”
Ohio Sen. Bernie Moreno joined in putting his House colleagues on notice that they likely won’t get the agreement they struck with the speaker in the final version of the bill.
“I think we’re going to make common-sense changes. For example, the SALT cap, by the way, something that definitely helps very wealthy people in blue states,” Moreno said. “I think that cap, the 400% increase, is too much, so we’re going to work on tweaking that.”
Hawley, of Missouri, speaking more generally about the tax provisions, said he would like the Senate to make sure middle-class Americans benefit from the tax changes, just as much as companies.
“I want to be clear, I’m in favor of additional tax relief for working people. So my view is this corporate tax rate, which they lowered in 2017, they made that permanent back then. I know some workers that would like permanent tax relief,” Hawley said. “So I think it’s imperative that we do some addition to tax relief for workers. So I think that’s important.”
Deficit hawks in the Senate have also voiced objections to raising the nation’s debt limit by $4 trillion, arguing that GOP leaders haven’t done enough to assuage their concerns about the nation’s fiscal trajectory.
Kentucky Sen. Rand Paul argued that the debt limit increase is more about next year’s midterm elections than good governance.
“This is really about avoiding having to talk about the debt during election times because people like to go home and talk to the Rotary or the Lions Club and tell them how they’re fiscally conservative and they’re against debt,” Paul said. “It’s embarrassing to them to have to vote to keep raising the debt. But they’re unwilling to have the courage to actually look at all spending.”
Paul suggested that House Republicans created problems by inflating some of the spending levels in their package, including to continue construction of a wall along the U.S.-Mexico border. Paul is chairman of the Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee.
“The $46.5 billion for the wall is eight times higher than the current cost of the wall. If you’re going to do 1,000 miles, you can actually do it for $6.5 billion. They want $46.5 billion,” Paul said. “We can’t be fiscally conservative until it comes to the border, and then we’re no longer fiscally conservative.”
The border wall has been a constant focus for Trump, who made it a central part of his 2016 presidential campaign, when he said repeatedly that the United States would build it and Mexico would pay for it.
South Carolina’s Lindsey Graham, chairman of the Budget Committee, hinted during a brief interview that Congress can only cut so much spending without going near programs like Social Security, which accounted for $1.5 trillion in expenditures last year, or Medicare, which spent $865 billion. Both are normally considered untouchable.
“I think we’re going to make some changes to try to find more spending reductions. I think that’s a fair criticism of the bill, but you can’t do Social Security by law,” Graham said, referring to one of the many rules that govern the reconciliation process. “Nobody’s proposed anything in the Medicare area.”
Graham added that “trying to make the bill more fiscally responsible is a good thing, but we need to pass it.”
Education was one of the primary areas of additional cost states and local governments that saw a surge in new immigration starting in 2021. (Photo by Phillippe Gerber/Getty Images)
WASHINGTON — The unprecedented increase in immigration starting in 2021 brought extra revenue to states and local governments, but the cost of services for those newly arrived migrants was greater, leading to a net cost of $9.2 billion in 2023, according to a report the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office published Thursday.
The roughly 4.3 million immigrants who arrived from 2021 to 2023 paid about $10.1 billion in state and local taxes in 2023, according to the report. Accounting for births and deaths, the net population gain from immigration in those years was about 4.4 million, CBO said.
Across the country, state and local governments spent about $19.3 billion in goods and services for those immigrants, with costs concentrated on providing education and shelter, CBO estimated.
The $9.2 billion direct net cost amounts to 0.3% of state and local spending, CBO said.
“State and local governments saw both their tax revenues and their spending increase in 2023 as a result of the surge in immigration,” the CBO report said. “In CBO’s estimation, the increase in spending was greater than the increase in taxes.”
In an alternative calculation, CBO estimated that when accounting for indirect effects — for example, increases in property taxes and economic activity, greater demand for government services — the surge led to a spending increase of $28.6 billion and increased revenue of $18.8 billion for state and local governments, netting a loss of roughly $9.8 billion.
More than half of newly arrived immigrants resided in six states: California, Florida, Illinois, New Jersey, New York and Texas.
CBO estimated that in 2023, about 550,000 children in public schools, or 1.1% of students, were immigrants who’d arrived since 2021.
“In CBO’s estimation, the surge in immigration directly increased spending for public primary and secondary education by $5.7 billion, or 0.7 percent, in 2023,” according to the report.
Those higher costs were “due to lower English proficiency among the surge population.”
“Because recent immigrants are often English-language learners, they tend to need additional instructional and support services,” according to the report. “CBO estimates that those services cost state and local governments $1.2 billion in 2023.”
Another high cost was shelter services, CBO found. Four states — New York, Massachusetts, Illinois, and Colorado — “spent a total of $3.3 billion to provide shelter and related services, including food and legal support, to the surge population in 2023,” according to the report.
In 2021, the Biden administration dealt with the highest levels of migration at the southern border in 20 years. In an effort to ease the increase at the U.S.-Mexico border, several programs were created to allow migrants to obtain work permits or enter the country while their asylum cases were pending before immigration court.
A nonpartisan New York think tank that studies domestic and international migration, the Center for Migration Studies, released a report that found the population of people in the United States without permanent legal status increased to by 2 million to 12.2 million by 2023, using the most recent Census Bureau American Community Survey data.
Committee Co-Chairs Rep. Mark Born (R-Beaver Dam) and Sen. Howard Marklein (R-Spring Green) said at a press conference ahead of the meeting that they were looking forward to getting to work on the budget despite negotiations stalling and were optimistic that they could still get the budget done on time. (Photo by Baylor Spears/Wisconsin Examiner)
The Wisconsin Legislature’s Joint Finance Committee on Thursday took its first actions on the budget since the breakdown in negotiations between Republican lawmakers and Gov. Tony Evers by approving over $700 million in bonding authority for clean water and safe drinking water projects and taking action on several other agencies.
Committee Co-Chairs Rep. Mark Born (R-Beaver Dam) and Sen. Howard Marklein (R-Spring Green) said at a press conference ahead of the meeting that they were looking forward to getting to work on the budget despite negotiations stalling and were optimistic that they could still get the budget done on time.
“We’ve had some good conversations in the last few weeks between the governor and the legislative leaders, and unfortunately, those, you know, conversations have stopped,” Born said.
Lawmakers and Evers announced Wednesday evening that their months-long negotiations had reached an impasse for the time being.
Republicans said they would move forward writing the budget on their own, saying the state couldn’t afford what Evers wanted, and Evers said Republicans were walking away because they refused to compromise. Evers had said he was willing to support Republican tax cut proposals that even as they were similar to proposals he previously vetoed.
“The spending really that the governor needs is just more than they can afford,” Born said Thursday, “and it’s getting to the point where it’s about 3 to 1 compared to the tax cuts that we were looking at.”
He declined to share specifics about the amounts that were being discussed.
“I don’t think we’re going to relive the conversations of the last few weeks in any details, but certainly, you know, we’ve been focused on tax cuts for retirees and the middle class,” Born said.
Evers’ spokesperson Britt Cudaback said in an email that Republicans’ “math is not remotely accurate.”
Despite the breakdown in discussions, the GOP lawmakers said they were optimistic about the potential for Evers to sign the budget they write, noting that he has signed budget bills passed by Republicans three times in his tenure as governor.
“I’m very hopeful that we will do a responsible budget that we can afford that addresses the major priorities and a lot of the priorities that I think the governor’s office has,” Marklein said. “I’m very hopeful that the governor will sign the budget.”
Democrats on the Joint Finance Committee were less optimistic about the prospect for the budget to receive support from across the aisle, saying that it likely wouldn’t adequately address the issues at the top of mind for Wisconsinites, including public K-12 education, public universities and child care.
“We’re going to see a budget that prioritizes more tax breaks for the wealthiest among us at the expense of all of the rest of us and a budget from finance that will get no Democratic votes and that will likely be vetoed by the governor,” Sen. Kelda Roys (D-Madison) said.
Roys said they didn’t know about the specifics of what Evers had agreed to.
“We can’t really speculate on that, but I can say that we absolutely support the process and the idea of collaborative, shared government,” Roys said. “We are committed to that. We have been ready from Day One to sit down with our Republic colleagues to negotiate.”
She said for now JFC Democrats will focus on providing alternatives to Republicans’ plans.
“We’re going to do our best to advocate for what Wisconsinites have said they want to need,” Roys said. “We want a lower cost for families. We want to make sure that our kids are the first priority in the budget, and we’re going to be offering the Republicans the opportunity to vote in favor of those things.”
There is less than a month until the June 30 deadline for the Legislature to pass and Evers to sign the state budget. If the budget isn’t passed on time, then state agencies continue to operate under the current funding levels.
While negotiations have hit a wall, some committee’s actions on Thursday received bipartisan support.
The committee unanimously approved an additional $732 million in bonding authority for the Environmental Improvement Fund (EIF). The program uses a combination of federal grants from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s clean water and drinking water state revolving funds and matching state funds to provide subsidized loans to municipalities for drinking water, wastewater and storm water infrastructure projects.
“This is going to be very good for a lot of our local communities when it comes to clean water,” Marklein said ahead of the meeting. He noted that many communities were on a waiting list for their projects.
The Department of Administration and the Department of Natural Resources told lawmakers in late 2024 that that year was the first time the fund had not had enough resources to meet demand.
Demand for aid from the program increased dramatically starting in 2023, with a 154% increase in the clean water fund loan demand in 2023-24 and a 325% increase in demand for the safe drinking water loan program that year. Insufficient funding for the clean water program led to constraints in 2024-25 and left needs unmet for at least 24 projects costing around $73.9 million.
Rep. Deb Andraca (D-Whitefish Bay) said she was thrilled that lawmakers were approving money for infrastructure in the state.
“The state has over $4 billion here,” Andraca said. “A lot of that is one-time money and one-time money should be used for infrastructure — making sure that our communities are in a great position moving forward should the economy turn down.”
The action is meant to cover the next four years of state contributions to the fund.
Sen. Eric Wimberger (R-Oconto) said in a statement the loans will help Wisconsin communities address aging infrastructure and water contaminants.
“With these additional funds, municipalities will be able to access low-interest loans to modernize their water systems, saving local taxpayers millions of dollars and keeping their water clean for years to come at the same time,” Wimberger said.
Peter Burress, government affairs manager for environmental nonprofit Wisconsin Conservation Voters, said including the additional revenue bonding authority in the budget is a “smart, substantive way” to make progress towards ensuring Wisconsinites have “equitable access to safe, affordable drinking water.”
“We urge every legislator to support this same investment and send it to Gov. Evers for his signature,” Burress said.
Republicans on the committee approved an additional $500,000 for the Medical College of Wisconsin’s North Side Milwaukee Health Centers Family Medicine Residency Program, which focuses on training family physicians with expertise and skills to provide individualized, evidence-based, culturally competent care to patients and families.
The measure also included $250,000 annually starting in 2026-27 for the Northwest Wisconsin Residency Rotation for family medicine residents. According to budget papers, starting the funding in the second year of the budget would allow time to find a hospital partner to support residents.
Democrats voted against the measure after their proposal for higher funding was shot down by Republicans. The Democrats proposal also called for funding a Comprehensive Assistance, Recovery, and Empowerment Fellowship Program focusing on treating substance use disorders and anAdvancing Innovation in Residency Education project to improve the behavioral health expertise of family medicine residents.
“I hope that my colleagues are reading national news because we’re seeing lots and lots of research funding being cut,” Andraca said. “The Medical College has lost about $5 million in research grants recently, and in addition to other research programs being canceled, I don’t know who has tried to make an appointment with the primary care physician, but there’s really long wait times right now, and this program is literally designed to bring doctors into the state.”
Democrats proposed transitioning the Educational Communications Board’s Emergency Weather Warning System from relying on fees for funding to being covered by state general purpose revenue.
Andraca, in explaining the proposal, said state funding for a system like that is more important now than ever.
“We’re talking weather alerts. We’re talking about making sure that people know when there’s something heading their way. We are in a time where we need these alerts more than ever. In fact, yesterday was an unhealthy air day, and… we’re looking at drastic federal cuts,” Andraca said.
Republicans rejected the measure and instead approved a 5% increase that will be used on general program operations, transmitter operations and emergency weather warning system operations. Rep. Tip McGuire (D-Kenosha) joined Republicans in favor of the motion.
The committee also took action on several other agencies with support splitting along party lines
Republicans approved a modification to the Wisconsin Economic Development Corporation’s budget, lowering it by $3.8 million, due to projections that surcharge collections appropriated to WEDC will be lower than estimated. They also rejected Democrats’ proposal to provide an additional $5 million in the opportunity attraction and promotion fund, which makes grants to attract events that will draw national exposure and drive economic development.
The committee was scheduled to take action on the Wisconsin Elections Commission budget, but delayed that after the U.S. Department of Justice sent a letter to the state agency accusing it of violating the Help America Vote Act. The letter threatened to withhold funding and criticized the absence of an administrative complaint process or hearings to address complaints against the Commission itself. Ann Jacobs, the commission chair, has disputed the accusations and said there is no funding for the federal government to cut.
Marklein said the state lawmakers want more information before acting on the agency’s budget.
“Out of caution, we think we’re just going to wait and see,” Marklein said. “We need to analyze this and see what implications there may be for the entire Elections Commission and what impact that may have on the budget.”
GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.
Participants walk through the Broadway Townhouses in Camden, N.J., as part of a training program to help neighborhoods affected by violence. The Community-Based Public Safety Collective, which offered the training, is one of at least 554 organizations affected by the U.S. Department of Justice’s abrupt termination in April of at least 373 public safety grants. (Photo courtesy of Aqeela Sherrills)
Community-based violence intervention programs nationwide have long worked alongside law enforcement officers to deescalate conflict, prevent retaliatory shootings and, in some cases, arrive at crime scenes before police do.
In many communities, these initiatives have been credited with saving lives and reducing violence.
But the Trump administration last month abruptly terminated at least 373 public safety grants from the U.S. Department of Justice’s Office of Justice Programs, pulling roughly $500 million in remaining funds across a range of programs, according to a new report by the Council on Criminal Justice, a nonprofit think tank. The cuts come just as summer is approaching — a season when violence consistently peaks.
The grants were initially valued at $820 million, but many were multiyear awards at different stages of rollout, which means some of the money has already been spent.
At least 554 organizations across 48 states are affected by the cuts, many of them small, community-based nonprofits that rely on this money. The rescinded grants supported everything from violence prevention and policing to victim advocacy, reentry services, research, and mental health and substance use treatment. Some of the grants also were cut from state and local government agencies.
Another new report from the Council on Criminal Justice dug deeper into local effects: It found that the Trump administration’s cuts also eliminated 473 minigrants — known as “subawards” — passed from primary recipients to smaller groups that often face challenges accessing federal dollars directly, such as rural government agencies and grassroots nonprofits.
About $5 million of those subawards was intended for state, local and tribal law enforcement agencies working to reduce violence in rural areas, according to the report.
Experts warn the timing couldn’t be worse. The summer months — historically linked to higher rates of violent crimes — are approaching, and the safety net in many cities is fraying. A growing body of research has found a correlation between spikes in temperature and violent crime, with studies suggesting that heat waves and sudden weather swings can inflame tensions and increase aggression.
“These programs are having to cut staff and cut services, and that will be felt in communities in states all over the country at exactly the time when they’re most needed,” said Amy Solomon, a senior fellow at the Council on Criminal Justice and the lead author of the report.
Solomon also previously served as assistant U.S. attorney general in the Biden administration, where she led the Office of Justice Programs — the Justice Department’s largest grantmaking agency.
Many of the primary grants that were terminated contained no references to race, gender or diversity-related language, according to the report — despite claims from federal officials that such criteria were driving the cuts. Primary grant recipients received their funding from the feds directly.
U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi defended the cuts in a late April post on X, stating that the department has cut “millions of dollars in wasteful grants.” She also signaled that additional cuts may be on the way. In her post, she specifically cited grants that supported LGBTQ+ liaison services in police departments and programs providing gender-affirming care and housing for incarcerated transgender people.
The Department of Justice’s cuts come amid a broader push by the Trump administration and the newly created Department of Government Efficiency to pull funding from a range of federal programs — a move they say is aimed at reducing spending and saving taxpayer dollars.
For some groups, the sudden withdrawal of funds has meant scaling back crime victim services or pulling out of some neighborhoods altogether.
Community violence prevention groups aim to stop shootings and other forms of violence before they happen by working directly with those most at risk. Staff — often with experience in the justice system — mediate conflicts, respond to crises, and connect people to support such as counseling or job training. In some cities, they’re dispatched to high-risk areas to deescalate tensions, often before police arrive.
And research shows that community-level violence prevention programs can contribute to drops in crime.
After a historic surge in homicides in 2020, violent crime in the United States dropped in 2024 to pre-pandemic levels — or even lower — in many cities. Preliminary 2025 data suggests that the downward trend is continuing in major cities, including Baltimore, Houston, Los Angeles and Washington, D.C.
But the progress hasn’t reached every community. Some neighborhoods are still grappling with high rates of gun violence and car theft.
Organizations that faced the toughest financial cuts had been funded through the U.S. Department of Justice’s Community Based Violence Intervention and Prevention Initiative — the federal government’s primary mechanism for supporting this work.
Since the program’s launch in 2022, the federal Office of Justice Programs has invested about $300 million in community violence intervention efforts and related research. But nearly half of that funding has now been wiped out, according to the Council on Criminal Justice report.
“It’s really unprecedented to see these kinds of grants cut midstream,” Solomon told Stateline. “This was an effort that had bipartisan support [in Congress] and in the field all across the country.”
In late April, Aqeela Sherrills received a letter from the federal Justice Department terminating a $3.5 million grant that supported the Community-Based Public Safety Collective. Sherrills is the co-founder and executive director of the national organization, which focuses on community-led approaches to preventing violence, including mediating conflicts, building relationships in high-risk neighborhoods and connecting people to resources such as housing, mental health care and job training.
The letter said the organization’s efforts no longer aligned with the federal Justice Department’s priorities, which include supporting “certain law enforcement operations, combatting violent crime, protecting American children, and supporting American victims of trafficking and sexual assault.”
Until the end of April, the collective had an agreement with the Justice Department to provide training and technical assistance to 95 local groups — including community groups, police departments, city and county governments, and state agencies — that had each been awarded $2 million over three years to run community violence intervention programs.
We're bracing for what could potentially be a high-violence summer.
– Aqeela Sherrills, co-founder and CEO of the Community-Based Public Safety Collective
But after the department cut $3.5 million, the Community-Based Public Safety Collective was forced to lay off 20 staff members.
“Without the significant funding … it destabilizes the organizations. People’s ability to be able to provide for themselves and their family is at risk,” Sherrills said in an interview. “We’re bracing for what could potentially be a high-violence summer.”
The deepest funding cuts hit states led by both Republican and Democratic governors, including California, Florida, Illinois, Kentucky, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New York, North Carolina, Virginia and Washington.
About $145 million in violence intervention funding was rescinded overall, along with an additional $8.6 million for related research and evaluation efforts, according to the Council on Criminal Justice report.
Some of the canceled grants funded studies and research on forensics, policing, corrections issues and behavioral health. Now, those projects may be left unfinished.
Some of the largest losses hit intermediary organizations, such as the Community-Based Public Safety Collective, that support smaller programs by providing microgrants, training and technical assistance.
For organizations such as the Newark Community Street Team in New Jersey, the loss of federal funding has left some areas of the city without coverage.
The funding had allowed staff to monitor neighborhoods and engage directly with community members to prevent violence. That included weekly community walks, where team members connected with victims of crime and people who may have witnessed violence, linking them to resources such as counseling or legal aid. The team also operates a hotline where residents can report crimes or alert staff to tensions that might escalate — allowing the team to step in before violence occurred.
Some of the lost funding also supported school-based initiatives, where mediators helped students resolve conflicts before they escalated into fights or other forms of violence.
Of the 15 Newark positions affected by the cuts, four employees were reassigned to other departments; the others were let go. Some of the team’s staff members are formerly incarcerated, a vital trait that helps them connect with residents and build trust in communities that are often wary of traditional law enforcement.
“We just have to continue working and serving our community the best we can,” said Rey Chavis, the executive director of the street team.
That work appears to be contributing to a decrease in the community’s crime rates.
City crime data from Jan. 1 to April 30, 2025, shows a significant drop in violent crime in Newark compared with the same period in 2024. The total number of violent crimes reported to police fell by 49%, driven largely by a 68% decrease in robberies, according to Stateline’s analysis of the data. Homicides dropped by 53%, while aggravated assaults declined by 43%. Rapes dropped slightly by 3%.
Stateline reporter Amanda Hernández can be reached at ahernandez@stateline.org.
Stateline is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Stateline maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Scott S. Greenberger for questions: info@stateline.org.
On May 21, the community of Edgerton, Wisconsin, came together for a renovation celebration at Edgerton Retirement Apartments (ERA). This event, half a decade in the making, marked both the completion of a construction project and a turning point in how this rural nonprofit cares for its residents and the planet.
With balloons, speeches, and a palpable sense of pride, the event commemorated the energization of a new 44.5-kilowatt solar array—one of many upgrades made possible through an innovative blend of clean energy funding, community partnerships, and a commitment to equity and sustainability.
The celebration drew a crowd of residents, supporters, and clean energy advocates. Among the attendees were Edgerton Mayor Christopher Lund, Paul Schechter, Executive Director of Sunny Side Development; Sam Dunaiski, Executive Director of RENEW Wisconsin; and Cal Couillard, Founder of the Couillard Solar Foundation.
Nestled in the heart of Edgerton, ERA is a 24-unit housing complex built in 1983 to serve low-income seniors and people with disabilities. The property keeps rents affordable for low-income individuals, offering a safe, welcoming place to live in community with one another. Originally developed with Rural Development funding on land donated by a local hospital, ERA has long embodied the spirit of community care and resource-sharing.
The vision for transformation began as a way to overcome the challenges of rising energy costs and aging infrastructure. The new rooftop solar installation, installed and energized by Midwest Solar Power on May 21, is mounted on the south-facing roof of ERA’s eastern housing cluster. The 44.5-kilowatt array is expected to produce 54,918 kilowatt-hours annually, covering approximately 39 percent of the building’s total electricity needs.
The solar panels are paired with a new geothermal heat pump HVAC system that will replace the outdated electric resistance heating system. Together, these improvements will significantly reduce energy consumption while shifting most of the electric load to a single meter. The utility savings will be passed directly to ERA’s residents.
The ERA solar project was made possible through a unique mix of grants, tax credit equity, and philanthropic support. The Solar for Good Program, an initiative of the Couillard Solar Foundation administered by RENEW Wisconsin, donated 41 solar panels, roughly half of what was needed, valued at over $9,000.
Sunny Side Development collaborated with long-time property managers Broihahn Management and Consulting to secure additional funding from Rock County HOME, FHLBank Chicago’s Affordable Housing Program, and the USDA Rural Development Program. The project also leveraged tax credit equity, a key tool for bringing clean energy projects to nonprofits and affordable housing developments. These partnerships brought solar within reach for ERA and ensured that the benefits of clean energy would go directly to the people who can most benefit from them.
The solar installation was just one piece of a comprehensive rehabilitation effort at ERA. All 24 units received health and safety upgrades, enhanced ADA accessibility, and the installation of the new geothermal HVAC system. Together, these changes modernize the property while supporting the long-term sustainability of affordable housing in Edgerton.
Just weeks before the event, a hailstorm had pelted Rock and Dane counties with golf ball-sized ice, damaging roofs across the region. But ERA’s new solar array was unscathed, and the sturdy panels even protected a portion of the roof from more extensive damage—a surprising and welcome side benefit. Project leaders and electricians alike were excited to know that the array will simultaneously decrease residents’ energy bills and shield the covered portion of the roof from inclement weather.
With the success of the solar installation, Edgerton Retirement Apartments has become a model for how rural communities can be an integral part of the clean energy transition. For nonprofit housing providers, solar is a way to live out their mission of service in a rapidly changing world. For the broader community, it’s a powerful example of what’s possible when compassion and innovation come together. Edgerton Retirement Apartments now shines brighter—not only because of the solar panels on the roof, but because of the community-wide commitment to a cleaner, more equitable future.
The post Solar Power Brings Energy Savings to Edgerton Seniors appeared first on RENEW Wisconsin.
Login