(The Center Square) – The front-runner to manage Wisconsin’s Medicaid system has a history of missing deadlines, inflating costs and a “questionable track record.”

Reading Time: 2 minutes

If you’re following recent national headlines, you know that attacks on press freedom are having a moment — from the FBI’s raid on the home of Washington Post reporter Hannah Natanson and seizure of her devices to the arrests of journalists Don Lemon and Georgia Fort following their coverage of a protest at a Minneapolis church.

But some positive news is emerging in Wisconsin: State legislation is advancing that would make it harder to use the courts to silence people speaking on matters of public concern — whether they’re journalists or private citizens — by draining their time and resources.

About 14 months ago, I wrote about how Wisconsin is particularly vulnerable to these kinds of lawsuits, one of just 11 states without legislation to shield residents from them. Our friends at the Wausau Pilot & Review felt the consequences firsthand, spending $200,000 to defend themselves against a since-dismissed defamation lawsuit.

There was little momentum for anti-SLAPP legislation when I wrote the column. But that has since changed. 

Lawmakers last year introduced bills that would create a clearer process for quickly dismissing SLAPP suits and require defendants’ legal fees to be paid by plaintiffs who bring meritless claims: AB 701/SB 666, introduced by Republican Reps. Jim Piwowarczyk and Sen. Eric Wimberger, with a suite of co-sponsors, including Democratic Reps. Sylvia Ortiz-Velez and Randy Udell.

The Assembly passed AB 701 last month with unanimous consent — a rare show of bipartisan agreement. The legislation still requires Senate passage before reaching Gov. Tony Evers’ desk.

If it makes it to the finish line before the Senate wraps up for the year, its impact would extend well beyond newsrooms. Everyday people face SLAPP risks, too. People in other states have been sued for leaving negative reviews online. 

As a fiercely independent newsroom, Wisconsin Watch doesn’t typically opine on specific policies; we assemble information on matters of public concern so residents can form their own views through their own value systems. But free expression is fundamental to what we do — and fundamental to a functioning democracy.

That’s why Wisconsin Watch is joining other newsrooms and free speech advocates in urging the Senate to enact protections against frivolous lawsuits.

Have thoughts about this legislation or this moment for free speech in Wisconsin and the U.S.? I’d love to hear from you. Reach me at jmalewitz@wisconsinwatch.org.

Opinion: How Wisconsin can slap down efforts to silence speech 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

Click here to read highlights from the story

• In most states, career and technical education programs have received increasing bipartisan support and financial investments. That includes lawmakers creating funding flows in several states that previously lacked them.

• But Wisconsin hasn’t done the same, despite efforts from some state leaders. 

• As a result, access to these courses is uneven across the state, and the programs rely on federal funds many school leaders say are insufficient.

• Wisconsin Superintendent of Public Instruction Jill Underly said she’ll continue to press the Legislature to fund career and technical education programs in the next budget cycle.

As Wisconsin Superintendent of Public Instruction Jill Underly traversed the state last month to visit classrooms, she saw students harvesting and selling farm-fresh food, managing coffee shops and learning in wood shops, among other hands-on training. 

Through career and technical education programs, high school students can take unconventional classes like these that train them for in-demand jobs. The classes are popular among students, and schools want to offer more of them.

“Kids’ imaginations and their talents completely jump to life when they’re immersed in these settings and in these classrooms,” Underly said. 

But whether students can access classes like these largely depends on if their school district can cobble together the funding. That’s because Wisconsin is one of just five states that don’t dedicate state funding to public schools for career and technical education programs. 

In most states, programs teaching students hands-on job skills have secured increasing bipartisan support and financial investments in recent years, with lawmakers creating funding flows in states that previously lacked them. 

Wisconsin hasn’t done the same, leaving access to career and technical education uneven across the state. The programs rely mainly on federal funds many school leaders call insufficient. 

During Wisconsin’s most recent budget process, Underly requested $45 million for schools to spend on career and technical education. But as other issues took precedence, lawmakers rejected that proposal, likely leaving schools without guaranteed state funding for at least another two years. 

“I want to make sure that every kid has these opportunities, and if we were to have dedicated state funding, we can make sure that they do,” Underly said. “Otherwise, we’re just leaving it up to districts. And sometimes whether a district can pass a referendum or not is going to be the difference of if they offer these programs.”

Schools and state education leaders say the federal funding schools get right now falls short of covering these programs, which are often pricey and require high-tech tools and teachers with field experience. 

To make up the difference, schools often rely on piecemeal funding such as grants and donations, or ask voters to approve tax increases to fund new programs. The state has offered more piecemeal grants in recent years, but those funds are unpredictable.

“Career and technical education programs are among the most effective tools we have to keep students engaged, prepare young people for good-paying jobs, and address Wisconsin’s ongoing workforce shortage … Wisconsin employers are already facing serious labor shortages, and failing to invest in our workforce pipeline only makes that problem worse,” state Sen. LaTonya Johnson, D-Milwaukee, a member of the Joint Finance Committee, wrote in a statement to Wisconsin Watch.

Wisconsin an outlier

Early hands-on job training for students has emerged as a popular solution for nationwide skilled worker shortages.

States passed 90 policies bolstering high school career and technical education in 2024, illustrating its increasing political support. 

Advance CTE, a nonprofit representing state career and technical education leaders, reported in 2023 that state funding for high school programs was increasing, while Wisconsin was among a handful of states with no such funding formula.

States have since continued to increase funding, and at least one — Nebraska — has created a funding formula.

Underly made her $45 million request during the 2025-27 biennial budget process. Gov. Tony Evers then suggested a pared-down version – dedicating $10 million – which was scrubbed by the Republican-controlled Joint Finance Committee and not included in the final bill. 

Underly believes lawmakers rejected her request due to widespread pressure to boost funding for the special education services schools are legally required to provide. 

“I do think, though, that our Legislature values these programs,” Underly said. “They’re very proud of the programs that they have in their school districts, but it’s one of those things where it’s just, ‘What’s the most pressing need right now?’”

Wisconsin Watch asked all 16 lawmakers on the Joint Finance Committee why these funds were not included in the budget. Just three responded. Two Democratic lawmakers pointed to the lack of bipartisan communication during the budget process, making it impossible to know why the funding didn’t make the cut. 

“There is no discussion. It is not like we’re having a Mr. Smith goes to Washington, kind of a debate,” said state Sen. Kelda Roys, D-Madison. “There’s no WisconsinEye footage where I can point to them, where Democrats say, ‘Well, we should do this,’ and Republicans say, ‘Well, actually, we don’t want to do that.’”

Continuing the status quo?

The number of Wisconsin students enrolled in career and technical education courses has remained stagnant over the past few years, the most recent state data shows. 

Roughly 64% of Wisconsin high schoolers have taken one of these classes, while just 25% have taken more than one career-focused course. 

Wisconsin gets $25.5 million in federal funds for career and technical education, $8.3 million of which is appropriated to high school programs. Schools have used these funds to “keep the lights on,” said Sara Baird, the Department of Public Instruction’s career and technical education section director. In fact, 23 states give more in state dollars than they receive in federal funds, said Laura Maldonado, senior research associate for Advance CTE.

In the meantime, Wisconsin has allocated career and technical education grant money to schools. Rather than directly funding programs, the funds are “incentive grants,” meaning they give schools money after students graduate from a career and technical education program and earn a certification in a high-need industry. In the 2023-25 biennium, lawmakers bumped the pot from $6.5 million to $8 million, where it stayed in the 2025-27 budget. 

In a response to Wisconsin Watch’s request for an interview, Joint Finance Committee Co-Chair Mark Born, R-Beaver Dam, didn’t say why the committee denied the request for career and technical education funding. He pointed to the incentive grants as proof the Legislature “has consistently supported career and technical education by investing in workforce focused programs.” 

Advance CTE advocates for states to have dedicated funding because it expands access to more students, lends stability and allows flexibility as workforce needs change, according to Maldonado. 

“You’re trying to keep up with that labor market demand, and oftentimes it’s harder to do that with the federal funding,” Maldonado said. “You want to have that more flexible state funding source to be able to adjust that. So I think the main thing is that (federal funding) is often insufficient.”

In December, Wisconsin Watch reported on an Appleton technical charter school that struggles to manage high program costs and secure donations to stay afloat. The school received state grant funding to open, but a decade later, after those initial funds dried up, staff must chase down donations from local businesses.

Underly, whose term ends in July 2029, said she’ll continue to press for the creation of a state funding mechanism in the next budget cycle. 

“If it was up to me … It wouldn’t be $45 million, it would be a lot more,” Underly said.

Miranda Dunlap reports on pathways to success in northeast Wisconsin, working in partnership with Open Campus. Find her on Instagramand Twitter, or send her an email at mdunlap@wisconsinwatch.org.

Nearly every state funds hands-on job training in high schools. Why not Wisconsin? 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.

One of the largest remaining parcels of private land within Wisconsin’s most popular state park will be transferred to the state under a land deal funded through Wisconsin's contested land acquisition program.

The post Land deal expands popular Wisconsin state park as Stewardship program remains in limbo appeared first on WPR.

Legal advocates are raising alarms about a bill that would allow Wisconsin courts to use interpretation assisted by artificial intelligence. Republican sponsors say they introduced the plan to cut back on costs and alleviate a statewide shortage of court interpreters.

The post Legal advocates object to bill to allow AI interpretation in court appeared first on WPR.

Northwood Technical College professor Mark Langenfeld's new book offers help toward letting go of what we can’t control and trusting the instincts that keep us safe.

The post Listening to nature and instincts: From Lake Superior ice shards to an angry mama bear appeared first on WPR.

A former member of the Green Bay City Council is suing both the city and its mayor, claiming his constitutional rights were violated by the city’s use of audio recording devices in City Hall several years ago. 

The post Former Green Bay council member sues city, mayor over years-old audio recording dispute appeared first on WPR.

Pure Prairie Poultry was found guilty due to a no contest plea on Tuesday after failing to send a representative to the Buffalo County court.

The post Bankrupt processor convicted of animal mistreatment for abandoning 2M chickens appeared first on WPR.

U.S. Rep. Mark Pocan of Wisconsin said he isn’t satisfied with the justification the White House gave during a classified briefing on Tuesday for joining Israel in attacking Iran.

The post US Rep. Mark Pocan: More questions for White House than answers on war in Iran appeared first on WPR.

WASHINGTON — Senate Republicans and a single Democrat blocked a War Powers Resolution Wednesday aimed at limiting President Donald Trump’s joint war with Israel in Iran that has taken the lives of six American troops and killed top Iranian leaders.

The resolution failed 47-52, with Sen. Rand Paul, R- Ky., the only Republican to cosponsor the measure, joining Democrats in challenging Trump’s war in Iran. 

Sen. John Fetterman, D-Pa., was the lone Democrat to break with his party and vote against moving ahead with the measure.

The vote came five days after Trump ordered the military to join Israel in surprise strikes on Iran that killed its Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. Pentagon officials say the administration does not plan to let up on the continuing offensive.

Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth said earlier Wednesday that U.S. B-1, B-2 and B-52 aircraft, as well as Predator drones, will fly with Israeli airpower “day and night” to deploy “death and destruction from the sky all day long.”

Republicans have largely fallen in line to support Trump’s actions and have panned the War Powers Resolution that would compel the president to answer to Capitol Hill on moving forward in Iran. 

Democrats assert Trump’s war in Iran is illegal, violating the Constitution’s Article I power given to Congress to declare war. Republicans maintain Trump acted well within war powers granted to the president in Article II of the Constitution.

‘Members of the Senate, this is war’

The 1973 War Powers Resolution mandates the president report to Congress within 48 hours of deploying troops. If after 60 days from first notice Congress has not authorized a war or passed legislation related to the military action, the president’s use of armed forces is automatically terminated. 

Congress passed the act to rein in presidential war powers, despite a veto from President Richard Nixon amid the ongoing Vietnam War. Congress overrode the veto.

Sen. Tim Kaine, D-Va., said on the floor ahead of the vote that Republicans want “to give the president an easy pass around the Constitution.”

“You can’t stand up and say, this is one and done, and no troops are engaged in hostilities against Iran. Members of the Senate, this is war. The president of the United States has called it a war against Iran,” said Kaine, who sits on the Senate Committee on Armed Services.

Kaine sponsored the War Powers Resolution alongside Paul.

Kaine said on the floor that during a classified briefing from the administration Tuesday, he asked officials if the recent pattern of military interventions in Venezuela and now Iran meant “that you believe you never need to come to Congress to wage war against anyone, anywhere.”

“No one” refuted his point, he said.

Briefings for Congress

Administration officials briefed all members of Congress Tuesday, for the first time since the war began. Officials had briefed congressional leaders and intelligence committee heads.

Sen. Gary Peters, D-Mich., who also sits on the Armed Services Committee, said ahead of the vote the Constitution “leaves no room for doubt that Congress, not the president, has the sole power to declare war.”

“And that check is in place for a very important reason. Our founders did not want to place the immense power over whether or not to go to war in the hands of just one individual,” Peters said. 

Sen. Jim Risch, R-Idaho, said on the floor ahead of the vote the vast majority of presidents in American history “have ordered kinetic acts, just like President Trump has done, without going to Congress.”

“This isn’t new,” said Risch, who chairs the Senate Committee on Foreign Affairs.

Lindsey Graham again lauds Trump

In lengthy comments on the Senate floor prior to the vote, Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., praised Trump’s decisions on Iran and argued the War Powers Resolution violates the Constitution.

“To my Democratic colleagues, what you’re proposing will cause chaos for every commander-in-chief that follows,” said Graham, a Trump ally who has been outspoken in support of the war all week. 

Graham said if Congress wants to stop Trump’s war in Iran, it can do so by cutting funding during the annual appropriations process.

“The president, as commander-in-chief, has the ability to use our armed forces to protect our nation. And Congress, if we disagree with that choice, has the ability to terminate the action, taking the money away, and that’s the check and balance that was created a long time ago,” Graham said.

Speaker Johnson says US not at war

The U.S. House is expected to take up the War Powers Resolution Thursday. Mike Johnson, R-La., told reporters multiple times this week he expects it to fail.

During a morning press conference, Johnson said he doesn’t believe the military is “at war right now” and argued that Congress limiting the president’s ability to continue attacking Iran “would put the country in serious harm.”

Johnson brushed aside the possibility that Americans may vote Republicans out of power during November’s midterm elections if the war drags on, especially without a formal authorization from Congress. 

“I think they’ll reward it politically, but if people get a bad taste in their mouth for what happened back here in the first part of the year in Iran, they just do,” he said. “But we know, and history will record that we did the right thing.”

Johnson added that he believes lawmakers voting against continued military action in Iran “would be a terrible, dangerous idea.”

A War Powers Resolution to halt Trump’s military actions in Venezuela narrowly failed in January in both the House and Senate.

Ground troops?

The White House maintains Iran rejected any negotiations with the U.S. on reining in its nuclear program, and that the objective of the war launched over the weekend is to destroy Iran’s current weapons capacity and missile production, and “end their pathway to nuclear weapons,” White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said Wednesday.

The press secretary said American ground troops are “not part of the current plan” but did not rule out that it’s an option “on the table.”

Leavitt denied any claims that the goal of the offensive is regime change, despite the killing of some of Iran’s leaders.

Leavitt said during the press briefing that the U.S. bombing of Iran’s nuclear facilities in June, dubbed Operation Midnight Hammer, “obliterated Iran’s three major nuclear sites.”

“Yet the terrorist Iranian regime has remained fully committed to rebuilding its nuclear program,” she said.

Iranian authorities said in November the nation was no longer enriching uranium, according to The Associated Press. The AP further reported the reclusive government has blocked international inspectors from assessing its four nuclear enrichment facilities, citing a confidential report journalists viewed from the International Atomic Energy Agency.

Control of the skies, sinking a ship

Hegseth underlined Wednesday morning the U.S. will not slow down its offensive in Iran, already having struck 2,000 targets, and that more troops and airpower will arrive Wednesday.

The secretary said the U.S. and Israel will have “complete control of the Iranian skies” within a few days. 

Hegseth also showed a video of an apparent U.S. submarine strike in the Indian Ocean on Iran’s “prize ship,” sinking it. 

General Dan Caine, chair of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said the submarine used a single torpedo to sink the ship — the first time a U.S. submarine has done so since World War II, he said.

U.S. Central Command wrote on social media that it had “struck or sunk to the bottom of the ocean” more than 20 Iranian regime ships.

The Pentagon cited a significant decrease in Iran’s retaliatory strikes. The regime launched rockets and drones on civilian sites throughout the Persian Gulf states beginning Sunday, and on regional U.S. military bases. 

Caine said to date, Iran’s missile and drone strikes respectively dropped 86% and 73% from the first day of fighting.

A drone attack killed six U.S. troops Sunday at a commercial port in Kuwait, a U.S. ally.

Caine said the remains of the six U.S. soldiers will return to the U.S. “as soon as possible.” The Pentagon publicly identified four late Wednesday, and Caine said the military will release the names of the other two troops killed “as soon as we can ensure that all of those families have been properly notified.”

Leavitt said Trump will attend the transfer of the troops’ remains upon arrival at Dover Air Force Base in Delaware.

Hegseth bashes media

Hegseth said the Pentagon moved 90% of U.S. troops out of the range of Iran’s missile reach prior to the war.

“We’ve taken control of Iran’s airspace and waterways without boots on the ground. We control their fate, but when a few drones get through or tragic things happen, it’s front-page news. I get it. The press only wants to make the president look bad,” he said.

Both Hegseth and Leavitt declined to provide details about a strike Saturday on an elementary school in southern Iran that local authorities said killed 168 people, many of them children.

“All I can say is that we’re investigating that. We, of course, never target civilian targets,” Hegseth said. 

When pressed on whether it was a U.S. or Israeli munition that struck the school, Hegseth replied: “We’re investigating it.”

Jennifer Shutt contributed to this report.

Dozens of western Wisconsin residents packed into rooms at the Eau Claire State Office Building this week for the start of a contested case hearing against the state Department of Natural Resource’s decision to grant a permit allowing Ridge Breeze Dairy to expand its operations to include 6,500 cows. 

The Pierce County dairy currently houses 1,700 cows. The expansion would make it the largest factory farm in the seven county region of Barron, Buffalo, Dunn, Pepin, Pierce, Polk and St. Croix counties. 

Local opponents to the Ridge Breeze expansion have been working against the plan since 2024, packing  public hearings and combing through public documents. The activists have uncovered inconsistencies in the dairy’s application — which first had to be sent back by the DNR because the farm’s plan for managing its manure said it would spread liquid manure on nearby fields without the permission of the property owners.

If expanded, the farm would produce 80 million gallons of liquid manure every year. 

Despite the initial application’s problems and the widespread opposition, the DNR approved the expansion in February 2025. 

Tuesday’s hearing was the beginning of the process to challenge that DNR permit decision. The contested case will be decided by Wisconsin Administrative Law Judge Angela Chaput Foy. Foy’s decision will be appealable to the state circuit court system. 

On Tuesday, activists involved in the fight against Ridge Breeze tied their work for the past two years to the recent efforts in other parts of the state by residents working to stop the construction of massive AI data centers in their communities. 

Both conflicts have brought together people of diverse political persuasions to fight outside corporate interests that try to assert the authority to build whatever they want, no matter what the ramifications are for local water, energy use, economies or quality of life. 

“Whether it’s a data center coming into your community, or a massive factory farm like Ridge Breeze, everyday people need to continue to stand together, organize and create greater change that will protect and put the power back into the hands of regular people,” Danny Akenson, an organizer with Grassroots Organizing Western Wisconsin, said at a news conference before the hearing. 

Akenson told the Wisconsin Examiner that it’s no surprise that people of “all political stripes” are seeking basic protections for their communities against corporate extraction. 

“The reality is that rural America — and really communities of all different sizes, rural, urban, suburban — are standing up against massive corporate overreach and the extraction of wealth from their communities into the pockets of shareholders and investors,” he said. 

GRO-WW has been heavily involved in the fight against Ridge Breeze and against the growing popularity of factory farms across western Wisconsin. The organization helped connect the plaintiffs in the contested case with attorneys from Midwest Environmental Advocates to dispute the permit decision. 

Their petition against the permit asks that at the very least it be modified to make sure the DNR is monitoring the local water so the farm is held accountable if the state’s groundwater pollution rules are violated. 

“There is substantial concern as to whether Ridge Breeze can appropriately manage the manure and process wastewater it intends to generate following expansion,” the petition for review states. 

The day began with several hours of public testimony. Members of the public packed into the small conference room where the hearing was held and two overflow rooms, while dozens more watched on the Zoom stream. 

Only opponents of the farm expansion testified, largely rehashing the arguments they’ve made against the expansion for years — that it doesn’t have an adequate manure spreading plan, that the farm traffic will be too loud, that the farm’s location will harm local trout streams and that the already high level of nitrates in the local groundwater will only be made worse.  

Juliet Tomkins, a retired agricultural lawyer who operates a small Pierce County farm, questioned how the judge would feel if the case were about her drinking water.

“I would like you to think about how you would feel if the regulator of your water supply that keeps you and your family and your loved ones safe failed to keep 80 million gallons of contaminants annually out of your water supply because the regulators inadequately reviewed the contamination procedures, and the result of this inadequate oversight was the permanent contamination of your water, the groundwater, for generations to come,” Tomkins said.

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

WASHINGTON — U.S. House Republicans spent a Wednesday oversight hearing with Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem blasting local governments for policies that limit immigration cooperation, while Democrats slammed her leadership of the department, saying it led to the deaths of two U.S. citizens in Minneapolis. 

House Republicans were more friendly to Noem than GOP senators who on Tuesday pressed, and at times yelled at, her for her quick judgment in labeling those killed in Minneapolis — Renee Good, a poet and mother of three, and Alex Pretti, an intensive care unit nurse — as domestic terrorists. Senators were also critical of slow responses from the Federal Emergency Management Agency.

At the House Judiciary Committee hearing, Chairman Jim Jordan of Ohio blamed the Biden administration for immigration policies Jordan said created a crisis and slammed local jurisdictions that decline to assist the federal government in immigration enforcement, often referred to as sanctuary cities. 

He referred to that as “the dumbest policy I have ever heard,” and vowed that Congress would ban it.

During the nearly six-hour hearing, Noem said she agreed, and supported Republicans’ efforts to move forward with legislation to prevent states and local governments from resisting immigration enforcement.

“Illegal aliens that come into this country know where they can go where elected officials will protect them,” she said.

Republicans also criticized Democrats for refusing to approve funding for the Department of Homeland Security for fiscal year 2026 unless there are changes to immigration enforcement tactics. Democrats took a hard line on the issue following Pretti’s death in late January. 

The House Wednesday voted 211-209 to advance a DHS funding bill. A final vote is expected Thursday. 

‘Blankie’ left on jet

The top Democrat on the panel, Jamie Raskin of Maryland, took up a litany of issues with Noem, starting with a report from the Wall Street Journal that detailed how special government employee and top Noem adviser Corey Lewandowski fired a U.S. Coast Guard pilot after Noem’s blanket was left behind on a prior flight. 

The pilot had to be rehired because no one else could fly the plane, according to the WSJ story. 

“Apparently when your special blanket, your blankie, was left on one of the government jets and not transported over to the new one, your special government employee, Corey Lewandowski, chivalrously stepped forward to fire the pilot — mid-air,” Raskin said. “But then he had to be rehired immediately because there was no one else who could fly the two of you on the rest of the journey home.”

Noem denied the story.

Florida Democratic Rep. Jared Moskowitz, pressed Neom about multiple media reports that she currently has a romantic relationship with Lewandowski and raised concerns about how much authority Lewandowski has at the agency.

“You go off and you attack conservative women, and you say that we’re either stupid or we’re sluts,” Noem said, but did not answer if she was having an affair. 

Moskowitz also said he got Noem a “new Coast Guard blankie” and held up a packaged blanket with the emblem of the Coast Guard.

FEMA problems

As in Tuesday’s Senate hearing, Noem was again grilled by a North Carolina lawmaker over delays in FEMA assistance, with Democratic Rep. Deborah K. Ross filling the role Wednesday.

Ross said that thousands of residents in western North Carolina are still waiting for Noem to approve additional FEMA funding that Congress provided in a separate disaster relief funding law after Hurricane Helene in 2024.  

“These delays in paying out this desperately needed recovery funds are simply unacceptable, and you heard that from my Republican senator, (Thom) Tillis, yesterday,” Ross said. 

Ross slammed Noem for instituting a policy to require any FEMA contract costing more than $100,000 to be approved by her first. 

Ross said that policy “has contributed to many of these delays, creating a bottleneck, blocking reimbursement for hundreds of millions of dollars of disaster funding that stand directly between North Carolinians and that relief.” 

Noem blamed former President Joe Biden for not sending disaster relief money to the state, saying he “failed North Carolina,” and that the state had received billions more under the Trump administration.

“Because we appropriated the money!” Ross shouted. 

In late December 2024, Congress passed a separate disaster relief package that Biden signed into law in the final month of his term.

Minneapolis questions

Noem was pressed by Raskin about referring to Good and Pretti, both 37 years old and shot and killed by federal immigration agents, as domestic terrorists. 

“I want to give you a chance before the entire country to correct your false and defamatory claim based on what you know today, Madam Secretary, were Renee Good and Alex Pretti domestic terrorists?” Raskin asked. 

Noem did not answer repeated questions from Raskin if she believed Good and Pretti were domestic terrorists, but said “what happened in Minnesota in those two incidents was an absolute tragedy.”

Editor’s note: This is the first report in an ongoing series.

The patient came in with a belly full of blood, Dr. Leilah Zahedi-Spung recalled. Her pregnancy was ectopic, no longer viable, and could have killed her if left untreated. But when she went to a mobile pregnancy help center offering free care in an RV in St. Louis, she was told the pregnancy could be saved.

By the time she saw Zahedi-Spung days later, her fallopian tube had ruptured.

In North Lauderdale, Florida, Ieshia Scott was pregnant and in the throes of postpartum depression. She thought she’d arrived at an abortion clinic. She told the staff she might hurt herself if she had another baby. They told her God would give her strength.

A woman and her partner in Sheboygan, Wisconsin, went to a pregnancy help center by mistake. When they made it to a Planned Parenthood clinic across the street, the pregnant patient handed Dr. Kristin Lyerly a copy of the sonogram. But the scan was not of her uterus. It was her bladder.

All three patients had gone to crisis pregnancy centers, organizations that advertise free pregnancy tests and ultrasounds but dissuade women from pursuing abortions and contraceptive options. Since the U.S. Supreme Court ended national abortion access in June 2022, the centers have seen an infusion of taxpayer dollars in many Republican-led states. But medical experts have urged lawmakers to reconsider the state support, as the centers can endanger public health by “causing delays in accessing legitimate health care,” according to the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. 

States Newsroom conducted a 50-state investigation examining state and federal budgets, as well as the tax records of these organizations, finding that while the magnitude of public funding for them is growing, oversight is not. 

Twenty-one states funneled nearly a half-billion dollars, or $491 million, of taxpayer money to crisis pregnancy center organizations between fiscal years 2022 and 2025. That figure does not include millions some states diverted from federal programs like Temporary Assistance for Needy Families, and it does not include multimillion-dollar tax credit programs launched after federal protections for abortion rights were overturned. 

Nearly $1.3 billion in local, state or federal government grants were awarded to 1,259 crisis pregnancy centers in total between 2019 and 2024, according to States Newsroom’s analysis of tax records. The actual figure may be higher, as digital records are not comprehensive or entirely up to date.

Yet that largesse hasn’t been matched by corresponding regulation. Oversight of taxpayer funding remains weak, either blocked by legislators or ignored by state agencies. 

The centers are most often faith-based nonprofits that say they provide much-needed support for pregnant clients at no cost. An estimated 2,633 crisis pregnancy centers were operating in the United States as of March 31, 2024, according to research from the University of Georgia. 

John Mize, CEO of Americans United for Life, argues that pregnancy centers are important for people who really don’t want an abortion, and for anyone who regrets their abortion to find support. 

“I am strongly of the opinion that most women that have abortions do it because they don’t feel like they have any other option,” Mize said.

But critics and researchers say the pregnancy centers mislead potential clients about their services or pose as medical clinics despite lacking proper licensure. They sometimes promote treatments like abortion pill reversal, which is unproven and potentially dangerous. 

“Often, patients are lured in by this idea of getting free care,” said Dr. Rachel Jensen, Darney-Landy complex family planning fellow at the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. “It’s free, because it’s often subsidized by taxpayer dollars. Free health care sounds amazing. It should be available to all people. But the problem is, then, that the CPCs are unregulated — and they operate outside of ethical principles and best care practices.”

Firsthand accounts: ‘What’s your plan for this pregnancy?’ Comfort, shame and a missed diagnosis

Indiana state Sen. Shelli Yoder, a Democrat, said access to maternal health care in her state continues to decrease while support for crisis pregnancy centers increases. Indiana boosted its budget for the centers from $250,000 in 2021 to $2 million, then doubled it to $4 million by 2024. The state’s maternal mortality rate is among the worst in the country. 

“It’s not that these centers don’t serve a purpose. But they certainly are not a replacement for maternal health care, and they are not health care centers, and yet our state is using taxpayer money to fund them as if they are,” Yoder said. “And we are sending a message to moms, or to women, that they are health care centers, and they are not.”  

Zahedi-Spung was working an emergency room shift in 2019 at a St. Louis hospital, not too far from the pregnancy center housed in an RV and frequently parked in front of a Planned Parenthood clinic. She said she was horrified to learn the patient with the ruptured ectopic pregnancy had been told at the mobile crisis pregnancy center a few days before that it could be saved. A tubal ectopic pregnancy is never viable.

Today, Zahedi-Spung works in Colorado as a high-risk OB-GYN. But that experience in the ER still haunts her.

“They’re a private organization providing medical care without a medical license, so they are not liable for anything they tell anyone,” she said.

Andrea Trudden, spokesperson for Heartbeat International, one of the largest pregnancy center networks in the U.S., said that as of 2025, more than 75% of Heartbeat affiliates offer medical services and are different from pregnancy resource centers, which offer parenting classes and material aid but not medical services.

“Medical affiliates that provide limited obstetrical ultrasound or other services follow applicable state laws, professional standards, and clinical protocols,” Trudden said in a written statement.

According to a report from the Charlotte Lozier Institute, 37% of 2,775 crisis pregnancy centers provided testing for sexually transmitted infections, and 29% provided STI treatment in 2024. The institute, which is the research arm of one of the largest anti-abortion policy groups, Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life America, found that 81% of surveyed centers provided ultrasound services in 2024. The report notes that 28% of paid center staff have medical licenses, along with 12% of volunteers.

The only option for miles

In North Florida’s largely rural Wakulla County, there are no full-time practicing OB-GYNs. Wakulla Pregnancy Center is in Crawfordville, the county seat of about 4,800 people. Many women in the area lack transportation, said the center’s director, Pam Pilkinton. They have to travel about 20 miles north to Tallahassee for prenatal care.

Run by a local ministry, the center has a blue-and-white sign that advertises “Free Pregnancy Tests.” Inside, a cozy living room furnished with sofas leads to a counseling room and donation space, where moms peruse a range of free baby clothes and supplies. Most of the center’s clients have low incomes, and are on Medicaid or uninsured.

When Florida passed a six-week abortion ban in 2023, legislators simultaneously increased state funding for crisis pregnancy centers by 455% — from $4.5 million to $25 million. The following legislative session, they added another $4.5 million. 

The funds go to the Florida Pregnancy Care Network, which manages contracts with more than 100 crisis pregnancy centers across the state. The organization is required to report the amount and types of services provided and the expenditures to the governor and state legislature once a year. But it is not required to make any noncompliance findings public. 

The public money for centers in Florida doesn’t end there. Wakulla Pregnancy Center received a separate allocation in the 2025 budget of $136,000. According to the funding request, $60,000 is allocated for a building asbestos issue, and $58,000 pays for the salary and benefits of the executive director and client coordinator. The rest is for pregnancy tests, educational materials, ultrasound referrals and other supplies. 

But Pilkinton is clear about one point: The center does not provide medical care in this maternal health care desert. 

“We’re not a medical facility, and that is something that we let everyone know up front,” Pilkinton said. “We provide material support, education, information and peer counseling.”

That doesn’t include practices like referring a patient to an OB-GYN for prenatal care after a positive test, for example, “because we’re not a medical facility,” she said.

Wakulla County’s severe maternal hospitalization rates ranked among the worst in the state in 2023 and 2024.

Like in other states, maternal health care has continued to flounder in Florida — and shortages are likely to worsen. Nearly half of 1,500 OB-GYNs who responded to a state survey say they plan to stop delivering babies within the next two years. 

The money Florida allocated for pregnancy centers might have covered more maternity care across the state, said Democratic state Rep. Anna V. Eskamani.

“We do need to strengthen our safety nets when it comes to supporting new moms,” Eskamani said. “Instead of addressing those gaps and investing in those areas, we continue to dole out millions of dollars to these unregulated and often religiously affiliated anti-abortion centers that are not addressing any of these disparities.”

In previous legislative sessions, Eskamani filed bills to repeal state funding and introduce regulation of existing centers. The bills have yet to receive a hearing, but she and her colleagues have filed them again.

“These not-for-profit organizations run with very little federal or state oversight, and sometimes they don’t even have licensed medical staff on site,” she said. “At this point, it’s a blank check.”

Big checks, little oversight

Much of the state funding for pregnancy centers did not exist before the U.S. Supreme Court’s Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization decision ended federal protections for abortion rights in June 2022. 

Conservative-led states — such as Texas — that already allocated tens of millions to pregnancy centers have doubled or tripled their budgets for pregnancy resource groups since 2022. In Missouri, lawmakers have budgeted nearly $50 million since fiscal year 2022 from the general fund and federal block grant dollars. Texas’ allocation ballooned from $140 million in fiscal years 2024 and 2025 to $180 million in 2026 and 2027. 

In southwest Missouri, Republican state Rep. Christopher Warwick’s support of the centers is a focus of his reelection campaign.

“I think it’s important that we fund organizations that are willing to save life,” he said.

Read more: Federal funding for people in poverty heading to anti-abortion centers instead

Louisiana lawmakers directed $4 million from the state’s general fund to pregnancy centers for 2025, as part of its Pregnancy and Baby Care Initiative. But an audit found the state doled out the maximum amount per center allowed by state law — $100,800 — to most of the groups without requiring them to fully document how they spent it.

Auditors were concerned Louisiana paid the centers more than the cost of the actual services provided.

In Oklahoma, state auditors discovered in 2022 that an anti-abortion nonprofit called Oklahoma Pregnancy Care Network disbursed less than 7% of the $1.6 million it promised to nonprofits under the state’s Choosing Childbirth program. A month and a half before its contract was scheduled to end, the group had served 524 women, less than 6% of the 9,300 Oklahoma women it initially projected it would serve. An administrator with the nonprofit told The Oklahoman she was unaware there were problems.

Despite those findings, state lawmakers later directed nearly $18 million — a quarter of the state health department’s entire budget — toward Choosing Childbirth through November 2027. More than $4 million of it went to the Oklahoma Pregnancy Care Network. The network did not respond to States Newsroom’s requests for comment.

Inner workings

Lyerly, the OB-GYN in Sheboygan, Wisconsin, said the couple with the mislabeled sonogram came into her Planned Parenthood clinic in the early months of 2022. It wasn’t uncommon for patients with appointments at Planned Parenthood to accidentally go to the crisis pregnancy center across the street. This couple sought an abortion, she said, but came in with the ultrasound image of the woman’s bladder rather than her uterus. On top of the mislabeled ultrasound, they felt misled, because they were told the pregnancy was just a few weeks along when it was much more advanced.

“This was a challenging situation for them, was emotional and frustrating and upsetting to them, and it was so unnecessary,” said Lyerly. She stopped providing abortions in Wisconsin later that year when a state law banning the procedure went back into effect after the Dobbs decision.

Many centers are affiliated with umbrella organizations, including Care Net, Heartbeat International (formerly Alternatives to Abortion International) and National Institute of Family and Life Advocates, but often do not disclose that connection on their website. The parent companies provide guidance for operations, including yearly conferences, along with training for limited ultrasounds and other services. Training and funding for many of these centers’ ultrasound programs also come from national religious groups like Focus on the Family and the Knights of Columbus.

Heartbeat International is the largest of the three, with more than 4,000 affiliated service providers across the U.S. and in more than 100 countries, according to Trudden.

Trudden said Heartbeat International offers professional training and practical resources for affiliates, who determine their own governance, leadership and location and must agree to a set of standards also shared by Care Net and the National Institute of Family and Life Advocates. Those standards include practicing honesty and confidentiality with clients and complying with all legal and regulatory requirements. 

Some pregnancy centers are staffed with licensed professionals trained in sonography. The National Institute of Family and Life Advocates says it has trained more than 6,000 health care professionals “in the medical and legal ‘how to’s’ of limited obstetrical ultrasound.” But at its national conference last year, leaders discouraged centers from performing ultrasounds on women who they suspect have ectopic pregnancies to avoid liability. The guidance came in the wake of a lawsuit against a Massachusetts center, in which the plaintiffs alleged that center staff failed to diagnose an ectopic pregnancy that ruptured, prompting emergency surgery. The clinic reached a settlement with the patient. 

Some centers offer more medical services, like prenatal support and testing and treatment for STIs, such as Idaho’s Stanton Healthcare, which is accredited by the Accreditation Association for Ambulatory Health Care and does not receive any public funding. 

“We have caught ectopic pregnancies. … I can think of three in the last eight months off the top of my head,” said Angela Dwyer, Stanton’s director of client services. 

But advocacy groups such as Campaign for Accountability have raised alarms about how many clinics do not have to follow federal health privacy laws, including the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act, known as HIPAA.

Clinics that offer free services and do not bill insurance face no penalty for disclosing a client’s information. 

In contrast, Jessica Scharfenberg, CEO of Healthfirst Network in central Wisconsin, said if any of her 10 reproductive health clinics violated HIPAA, they would face steep federal fines and possible jail time for staffers. 

“If my entity broke HIPAA, we would have federal consequences, even though we also have an internal policy for it,” Scharfenberg said. “They have their internal policies. They break HIPAA, there’s no consequences for it.”

The websites of some centers give the appearance of being HIPAA compliant even though they aren’t, States Newsroom has reported. 

The other two main umbrella organizations did not respond to multiple requests for comment by email and phone. 

‘So much help’

In North Lauderdale, Ieshia Scott would stare at her 6-month-old, unable to hold the baby when she cried. Scott, who also had a 10-year-old, felt overwhelmed by a constant cloud of stress and sadness, all while trying to keep up with college classes.

When she found out she was pregnant again, Scott searched for an abortion clinic in the city, and a pregnancy resource center came up in the search results. That 2018 visit would last nearly three hours, during which she fielded dozens of questions about why she wanted an abortion. Scott had suicidal thoughts and was depressed but felt totally unheard. 

“I really was disregarded,” said Scott, now 36. “I was actually saying to her, like — ‘I don’t know, I might hurt myself, I might hurt the baby.’”

The center didn’t refer her to a psychiatrist, therapist or OB-GYN. The staff member instead reminded her of the Ten Commandments.

“I’m literally telling her, I can’t — I can’t do it. And she was like, ‘You can, you can. And there’s so much help.’”

Mental health is a contributing factor in about 23% of the nation’s maternal deaths, reports from the federal Centers for Disease Control and Prevention show.

Scott eventually went to a clinic to get the care she needed. But she worries for women who can’t. 

More than a dozen states passed abortion bans after Dobbs, and efforts continue nationwide to dismantle what access remains. Several states with abortion bans — including Missouri, South Carolina and Texas — have moved to cut Planned Parenthood out of state Medicaid programs as well, after the U.S. Supreme Court ruled last year that excluding the organization did not violate Medicaid’s provision requiring freedom of choice in providers. Florida legislators are also discussing cutting Planned Parenthood out of the state Medicaid program.

In 2025, at least 51 Planned Parenthood locations closed or limited medical services after losing state and federal support. Those communities lost access not only to abortion services but also to other reproductive and primary medical care. Independent clinics such as Maine Family Planning stopped offering primary care services for about 600 patients because of a funding loss of about $1.9 million, even though none of the Medicaid dollars were used for abortion.

‘Government handouts’

Lawmakers are not only opening public coffers to provide direct financial support to pregnancy centers, but they’re also creating tax breaks, drawing on federal sources and shifting funds meant to help low-income families to aid the anti-abortion organizations — with few regulations.

Some legislators have resisted stronger oversight. 

In Missouri, state Rep. Warwick opposed a colleague’s suggestion to require the centers to report how they spend their donations in a tax credit program, saying he wanted to limit bureaucracy. He said in a February 2025 legislative hearing that the tax credit keeps the state from having to “verify what programs work.” 

“I don’t think they’re funded enough to be able to mishandle their money,” he told States Newsroom in December. “At least not the ones I’m familiar with.”

Warwick proposed raising the tax credit for pregnancy center donations from 70% to 100% in 2025, meaning someone donating to a pregnancy center could reduce their state tax bill by the exact amount donated. 

The credits that Missourians redeemed shot up from about $2 million to an average of more than $7 million per year after lawmakers removed a cap on credits in 2021, according to a fiscal note attached to Warwick’s bill. State officials estimated a 100% tax credit just for pregnancy center donations would cost the state more than $10.7 million in the first year.

Missouri also funnels more than $2 million per year in state and federal dollars to pregnancy resource centers and similar organizations through its Alternatives to Abortion program. That’s in addition to what the centers receive from Missouri’s federal Temporary Assistance for Needy Families fund — $10.3 million in this fiscal year.

Although Warwick’s 100% pregnancy center tax credit failed, he plans to try again in this year’s session. “I don’t think it (a 100% tax credit) would significantly hurt the state, especially when we’re talking about protecting life, protecting the birth of children,” he said.

Nebraska Sen. Joni Albrecht, a Republican who also sponsored a six-week abortion ban, said the centers were a valuable investment when she sought to create a $10 million tax credit program that was revised down to $1 million in 2024. 

Of the 13 pregnancy centers approved for tax credits in Nebraska, four provided less than $150,000 in services, according to tax returns, and one had three consecutive state audit reports with findings of deficiencies in controlling and complying with federal grant funding requirements.

In Montana, a state without an abortion ban, Republican Gov. Greg Gianforte found another way to give taxpayer money to pregnancy centers by donating a portion of his annual salary. In 2020, he pledged to give his salary to nonprofit organizations and charities, and has for the past three years included pregnancy centers in that list for a total of more than $60,000.

Idaho state Sen. Ben Adams, a Republican who sponsored a bill to establish a grant fund of $1 million for crisis pregnancy centers in 2025, told States Newsroom he felt it was important to put resources into helping people choose to have a baby. 

“We have, for a very long time, primarily through the federal government, essentially funded abortion through funding for Planned Parenthood and all these different organizations,” Adams said. “We say we’re going to restrict a woman’s access to abortion and that we’re pro-life. Well then, we actually have to be investing in those folks who are choosing life and show them that we mean it when we say we want them to choose life.”

For decades, the Hyde Amendment, a provision Congress has renewed annually, has prohibited the use of federal funding for abortions, except in cases of rape, incest and to save the mother’s life.

Idaho is one of a few states with an abortion ban that isn’t providing government support for crisis pregnancy centers. Adams’ bill failed by one vote in committee and faced opposition from many constituents, including a former board chairman of a crisis pregnancy center in Idaho who said subsidizing nonprofit entities with taxpayer dollars is not the proper role of government.

“Providing taxpayer funds on either side of this moral question is inappropriate,” said John Crowder in his testimony to the legislative committee, prefacing his comments by saying he is a Christian who believes life begins at conception. “Such decisions to lend financial support should be left to churches and individuals, not the government.”

Based on his knowledge of the finances of that center, Crowder said, it was clear they could meet the goals of their mission with the donations they received and “without government handouts.” 

Stateline reporter Amanda Watford contributed to this report. 

This story is part of a reporting fellowship sponsored by the Association of Health Care Journalists and supported by the Commonwealth Fund.

States Newsroom’s investigation is ongoing. If you have had an experience with a crisis pregnancy center, please get in touch at cpcproject@statesnewsroom.com.

METHODOLOGY: To identify government grant funding received by nonprofit crisis pregnancy centers (CPCs), a team of States Newsroom reporters used multiple data sources. Reporters reviewed state and federal budgets and legislation to identify public funding allocated to CPCs between 2019 and 2025, with a particular focus on the period following the U.S. Supreme Court’s Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization decision in June 2022, as well as in prior years, as applicable. The team did not include federal funding from sources such as Temporary Assistance for Needy Families in the nationwide analysis, and state tax credit programs were also excluded.

Data reporter Amanda Watford cleaned and analyzed a publicly available dataset of CPCs originally collected by the nonprofit advocacy group Reproductive Health and Freedom Watch. Organizations that appeared to be permanently closed or did not report enough revenue to file a full IRS Form 990 were removed from the States Newsroom analysis. Watford extracted filings from ProPublica’s Nonprofit Explorer for about 2,000 organizations, covering 2019 to 2025. Government grant totals were only available for 217 organizations for 2023 and 2024 due to data infrastructure limitations. A separate analysis using the GivingTuesday 990 database captured basic financial and government grant data for 1,243 organizations between 2019 and 2023. Watford combined the 2019-2023 GivingTuesday data and 2023-2024 ProPublica data. The total amount of government funding provided to CPCs was calculated for each year, yielding a grand total of nearly $1.3 billion across 1,259 CPCs between 2019 and 2024.

This analysis is not comprehensive. Some IRS Form 990 filings were unavailable digitally, and some organizations did not report any government grant funding, so grant funding reported outside the available electronic filings was not fully captured. Financial information available through IRS Form 990 filings is self-reported by organizations to the IRS and is not independently audited. Additionally, there is a lag between when organizations are expected to file returns and when filings are publicly available. Due to these factors, the States Newsroom  findings likely undercount the total amount of public, government funding directed to CPCs. An estimated 2,633 CPCs were operating in the United States in 2024, according to research from the University of Georgia.

The bulk of the money Missouri gives to its crisis pregnancy centers comes from federal funds meant to assist families experiencing poverty with basic necessities and child care, Republican Rep. Jason Smith said on the U.S. House floor in January.

As many as $3 of every $4 for pregnancy centers in Missouri was from the federal Temporary Assistance for Needy Families program in 2024, and in the 2026 fiscal year, it will be $2 out of $3. The amount of TANF funding has steadily increased since 2022, from $4.3 million then to $10.3 million in fiscal year 2026. 

At least eight states have given TANF funds to crisis pregnancy centers in recent years, even before the U.S. Supreme Court overturned federal protections for abortion rights in 2022. According to data from the consulting firm Health Management Associates, more than $102 million from TANF went to the centers in those eight states between 2017 and 2023, including $22.5 million in Ohio, $11.75 million in Indiana and $12 million in Texas. 

The federal government gives TANF funds to each state as a lump sum, and states get to decide how to spend it. There are broad rules for how the funds can be used, but federal law specifies they should assist with facilitating housing or employment; prevent and reduce “out-of-wedlock pregnancies”; and help form and maintain two-parent families. The U.S. House passed a bill in January that would explicitly lay out that crisis pregnancy centers can be a recipient of the funds. It hasn’t been taken up by the Senate yet.

Diana Rodin, associate principal at Health Management Associates, said block grants like the ones associated with TANF can be used broadly, and there isn’t much oversight after the funds are distributed. 

“You have some states that might say in their state plan, ‘We are spending this much on our Alternatives to Abortion program,’ but there’s some states where it’s going to them (crisis pregnancy centers), but there’s nothing you can find,” Rodin said. 

Conservative advocacy groups and lawmakers say anti-abortion crisis pregnancy centers provide many free goods and services and are deserving of TANF funds. 

Former Democratic President Joe Biden’s administration proposed regulatory changes that would have required states to show how allocations to pregnancy centers accomplished the purpose of TANF but withdrew them in early January 2025, shortly before Republican President Donald Trump was sworn in. 

On the House floor, Smith said that if the Biden administration had been successful, it would have been detrimental. Yet most crisis pregnancy centers do not provide any medical services beyond nondiagnostic ultrasounds and do not provide prenatal care from physicians. 

“Think of what would’ve happened to maternal care in this country,” Smith said. “One of the few places women can get care and support would have been closed.”

More money on the way

Crisis pregnancy centers are nonprofit organizations, often affiliated with religious groups, that have a mission of preventing people from terminating a pregnancy. A nationwide States Newsroom analysis found that 21 states funneled nearly a half-billion dollars in public money to crisis pregnancy center organizations between 2022 and 2025, and more in the form of tax credit programs. That figure did not include the millions in TANF distributions allocated by those eight states. 

More pregnancy centers are also tapping into federal sources, such as grants for abstinence-only education programs, teen pregnancy prevention, and U.S. Housing and Urban Development funds. 

Read our investigation: Taxpayer dollars flood pregnancy centers. Oversight hasn’t followed.

Medical organizations, including the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, object to the misleading and deceptive practices of many pregnancy centers. Federal audits have also shown that some are not properly managing the public funds they receive.

Two centers in California and Washington identified in States Newsroom’s analysis doubled the amount of grants received for abstinence-focused sex education programs in the past two years, according to federal records. In Louisiana, the Department of Children and Family Services shifted $2.26 million in TANF funds to its pregnancy center grant program for fiscal year 2026 after lawmakers cut the program’s state funding by the same amount because more than two-thirds of it went unused, according to a recent state audit.

Millions more in federal dollars are likely to be accessible if the Trump administration changes rules for Title X family planning funding, as it did during the first term in 2019, allowing organizations to receive funds without offering birth control. Under current rules, Title X requires clinics to prescribe birth control and provide other family planning services to low-income populations for free or at low cost. Most pregnancy centers do not prescribe or refer for birth control, which is considered an essential aspect of reproductive health care by the medical community. 

Clare Coleman, president and CEO of the National Family Planning and Reproductive Health Association, said she and her staff are prepared for the administration to propose a rule change that would allow providers to not offer or refer for birth control, abortion or other family planning services as a condition of receiving the funding. 

“We’re expecting it any day now,” she said. 

Crisis pregnancy centers and other anti-birth control organizations will be better prepared to apply for the funding if the change is adopted, Coleman said. “And that’s not something our folks really had to deal with before, so we’re quite concerned.”

Audit finds mismanagement

Federal records show millions of federal dollars flow to crisis pregnancy centers under the Title V Sexual Risk Avoidance Education program, which focuses on abstinence and relationship development for teens. Some states apply for the grant dollars, but individual organizations can also apply for a portion of the funding in a competitive award process. 

A major recipient is The Obria Group and its affiliates, including RealOptions in California. Obria, a chain of pregnancy centers that offers some medical services like testing and treatment for sexually transmitted infections, operates largely in states with strong protections for reproductive rights. Those states typically do not provide state funding for pregnancy centers, but the centers have tapped into federal funding. Under the first Trump administration, Obria received a $1.7 million grant from the Title X program, with the possibility of two more years of funding for a total of $5.1 million, despite Obria’s unwillingness to provide birth control. 

Obria did not respond to a request for comment from States Newsroom.

RealOptions has received nearly $4 million in Title V funding for an abstinence-only education program since 2020, federal records show, including $900,000 in 2024 and 2025 — double the amount received in prior years. 

 

 

A routine federal audit published in October found RealOptions had placed more than $127,000 of the funding in the wrong budget year. The company did not have adequate policies and procedures for ensuring federal awards were tracked, according to the audit, and RealOptions also failed to complete a form detailing how grant funds were spent as required by law.

In their findings, auditors said the lack of sufficient oversight on the funds created a “high risk” that the company would be out of compliance with federal regulations, and the errors would not be caught or corrected in a timely manner.

RealOptions did not respond to questions from States Newsroom about the audit.

Sex ed funding  

In Washington state, a crisis pregnancy center called Life Choices of Yakima runs a program with abstinence-focused funding called Think Twice Yakima. It has received at least $335,000 per year in Title V federal funding for the program since 2019, and partners with several local schools to administer the curriculum. In early December, the website included the logo of the Washington State Department of Children, Youth & Families in a list of its partners. 

When States Newsroom reached out to the state agency to ask about the partnership, spokesperson Nancy Gutierrez said it was not a partner, and the organization was asked to remove the logo, which it did. 

Life Choices of Yakima did not respond to a request for comment from States Newsroom. 

Like many of the abstinence programs, Life Choices uses a curriculum from the Dibble Institute, a nonprofit organization in Berkeley, California, that provides a spectrum of sex education materials for licensing. Kay Reed, president and executive director of the institute, said clients include Planned Parenthood and centers like Life Choices, as well as various universities and colleges. The Dibble Institute recently released an abstinence-only curriculum to align with executive orders from the Trump administration. 

The funding, Reed said, dates back to former President George H.W. Bush, a Republican. 

“It’s been around a long time, and it’s part of the push and pull between Republicans and Democrats,” she said. 

But the curriculum has grown more restrictive now than with prior administrations, Reed said, pushing for abstinence only “until marriage.” 

Federal housing dollars

Other crisis pregnancy center groups are moving into less common areas of federal funding. Georgia Wellness Group received $450,000 from U.S. Housing and Urban Development block grant funds in July to help build a maternity home in the Atlanta area. County commissioners approved the grant despite vocal opposition from community members, who called it a fake clinic and alleged it deceives people about its true anti-abortion intentions. 

At a public hearing in August, Georgia Wellness CEO Robin Mauck said the grant will be used to purchase a residential home to accommodate up to six women and their children for up to eight months after birth. In January, the group applied for nearly $636,000 in new HUD grant funding for the 2026 cycle, which is under consideration by the county. 

Firsthand accounts: ‘What’s your plan for this pregnancy?’ Comfort, shame and a missed diagnosis

The organization used to be affiliated with The Obria Group, a national chain of crisis pregnancy centers that has been criticized for its practices, including by a former leader of the organization. Mauck said at the August hearing that it was a relationship they used to help them “transition to prenatal care.” 

In addition to the HUD dollars, Georgia Wellness Group received more than $1.27 million from the Title V Sexual Risk Avoidance Education program between 2021 and 2023, and another $445,000 in 2024. U.S. Rep. Lucy McBath, a Georgia Democrat, helped the organization apply for the federal funding that year with a letter of support, when it was still affiliated with Obria Medical Clinics. The program received another grant of the same amount in 2025.

Attorneys for Georgia Wellness Group sent cease-and-desist letters to people for tying them to Obria during public hearings and for saying the group misleads patients about the services they provide. One of those letters was sent to Allison Glass, state campaign director for the Amplify Georgia Collaborative, a group of reproductive rights advocacy organizations. She shared a copy with States Newsroom.

“There’s a huge housing need in Georgia, and especially around Atlanta, for affordable housing, but that should not come with the shame and deception,” Glass said. “They are so good at being so deceptive about who they are and truly what kind of services they provide and what credentials they have, that they really have unfortunately been able to really dupe a lot of stakeholders and decision-makers in Georgia.” 

Glass said this is the first time she and other advocates know of in which a crisis pregnancy center has received HUD funding. 

Mauck did not respond to a request for comment from States Newsroom. 

The group is one of few crisis pregnancy centers that says it has medical professionals who are fully licensed and overseen by a board-certified OB-GYN, offering many more health services, including breast and cervical cancer screenings, sexually transmitted infection testing and treatment, and prenatal care. But Georgia Wellness does not list birth control as an offered service, only IUD removal. 

A former medical director for the organization, Dr. Marc Jean-Gilles, has said the clinic is misleading people about its ability to provide obstetrical care, because it does not have admitting privileges and patients are told to seek emergency services elsewhere when they are in labor. He also said surrounding hospitals refuse to coordinate care with the organization because of alleged unethical practices. Those statements were read aloud at the August public hearing to approve the first installment of HUD funding.  

Jean-Gilles told States Newsroom in February that he has no problem with the organization receiving HUD funding if they are using it to shelter people, but from a patient safety standpoint, he said all clinics providing prenatal care should be able to coordinate with local hospitals. 

“My whole take is, it doesn’t matter if you’re a crisis pregnancy center or not. I think when you delve into the realm of prenatal care and delivery, if you can’t provide a provider who’s going to deliver … then you’re doing a disservice to the patients,” Jean-Gilles said. 

Grant Adams, a staff member at Georgia Wellness, said any allegations that the organization misleads anyone about its clinical capabilities are false, as are claims that the youth outreach program is “abstinence only.” During the August public hearing, Adams, who teaches the program to Atlanta-area middle and high school students, said the curriculum includes “medically accurate information about contraception” and tells young people about the risks of early sexual activity so they can make healthy decisions. 

“It doesn’t matter how loud a claim is made, that doesn’t make it true. It doesn’t matter how often a claim is made, that doesn’t make it true,” he said. 

Stateline reporter Anna Claire Vollers contributed to this report.

This story is part of a reporting fellowship sponsored by the Association of Health Care Journalists and supported by the Commonwealth Fund.

States Newsroom’s investigation is ongoing. If you have had an experience with a crisis pregnancy center, please get in touch at cpcproject@statesnewsroom.com.

For nearly 60 years, crisis pregnancy centers have been a pillar of the anti-abortion movement.

Largely staffed by volunteers or part-time workers, these centers — sometimes referred to as pregnancy resource centers — offer limited services related to pregnancy and are guided by a religious mission to stop people from considering abortion.

States Newsroom conducted a 50-state investigation examining state and federal funding for these centers. Between 2022, when the U.S. Supreme Court overturned federal protections for abortion rights, and the end of fiscal year 2025, 21 states have funneled nearly a half-billion dollars to crisis pregnancy centers. Physicians and researchers told reporters they’re concerned about the magnitude of public money crisis pregnancy centers are receiving while Planned Parenthood clinics and other community clinics offering reproductive health care are defunded.

Read our investigation: Taxpayer dollars flood pregnancy centers. Oversight hasn’t followed.

As part of an ongoing series to shed light on the issue, States Newsroom spoke with dozens of doctors, patients and people who found themselves in crisis pregnancy centers. These are some of their stories.

Alabama

When Valkyrie Brodt, 30, became pregnant for the first time last year, she did an online search to find a clinic that would take someone without insurance. She and her husband were waiting to be approved for health insurance, and she was hoping to find a provider who would confirm her pregnancy and check that it looked healthy so far. In her search results, she found what she thought was a pregnancy-focused medical clinic a couple of blocks from the hospital in her hometown of Huntsville, Alabama. She booked an appointment. 

The couple arrived and began to fill out the clinic’s paperwork, but Brodt said something felt off.

“A lot of the questions were less about medical history and more so faith-based questions, and other questions like, ‘What’s your relationship with the baby’s father?’ ‘What’s your plan for this pregnancy?’ I think it did specifically ask what your religion was.

“At that point I realized, OK, this is clearly a Christian-run kind of place. I grew up Church of Christ, and I have a lot of religious trauma from the way that I grew up. I would not consider myself religious at this point. I’m very open-minded towards people who are religious, no bias other than just not wanting it shoved on me.

“I was also under the impression they were going to do the blood test analysis to confirm pregnancy, but it was just another urine sample. And I was like, well, I’ve already done four of these, and they were all positive.

“Then when they called us back, she (the clinic staffer) literally used the words ‘divide and conquer.’’’

Brodt was taken to one room, while a male counselor took her husband to another room. She said she understands why staff might want to separate them, in case of concerns about possible domestic violence or coercion. But Brodt said she was never asked about the couple’s relationship or whether she felt safe. The counselor confirmed that Brodt wanted to keep the baby, asked more faith-related questions, and told her that if she attended counseling sessions she could earn “baby bucks” to redeem on baby items from their store.

“At one point, towards the end, she (the counselor) said, ‘Well, if you know anybody who’s thinking about getting an abortion, send them our way.’ So it was very clear at that point that that was their goal. They gave us probably three or four different pamphlets, and only one of them was a piece of paper with the pregnancy confirmation on it. The rest was ministry stuff, like faith-based parenting classes.”

The clinic scheduled an ultrasound for her, but she and her husband decided not to go back.

“It felt very predatory to me as a 30-year-old woman that’s married. So I can’t imagine how it would feel to a teen mom or a single mom having to walk in there by herself.” 

Read more: Federal funding for people in poverty heading to anti-abortion centers instead

Idaho

Dr. Cate Heil knew people in her hometown who worked at crisis pregnancy centers, and she didn’t have much of an opinion about the centers, other than they seemed like good places for pregnancy counseling. 

That perspective changed.

During her training to become a family medicine physician in Idaho in 2020, she saw a 17-year-old patient who had gone to a pregnancy center, where she received a transabdominal ultrasound. The center told the patient there was “a lot of fluid.” 

“Based on her period, she would’ve been about eight weeks and three days. It didn’t seem like they told her much else. 

“We did a transvaginal ultrasound and saw some concerning things. This patient had a molar pregnancy, which shows up pretty characteristically on ultrasound and is considered a pre-malignancy. Her uterus at supposedly eight weeks was 1 centimeter above her pubic bone, which is much larger than would be expected. She underwent surgery the next week.

“It was concerning to me that this wasn’t recognized as something that’s abnormal. This is not quite an emergency, but it’s something that needs to be managed within a week or so, or needs immediate referral for a surgeon — and that made me nervous.

“Is there other stuff that we’re missing? This is a fairly rare thing, but it’s not unheard of, and it should be able to be recognized by people who are operating an ultrasound, in my opinion. … It made me want to double-check things when someone has gone to a crisis pregnancy center.”

Oregon

Emily Gartman wanted to keep her baby. Unexpectedly pregnant at 21, a friend recommended a pregnancy center, saying nice people would quickly confirm the pregnancy without an appointment. She took a test there, but before the results came back, Gartman said the staff asked her what she would do if she were pregnant. 

They showed her pictures of how an embryo develops into a fetus and told her that it would respond to painful stimuli at 13 weeks, an idea that is not supported by science. Multiple studies have shown that a fetus does not have the capacity to experience pain until at least 24 weeks’ gestation.

“They just kept driving home that if I got an abortion, my baby would be in pain. That it would feel itself being chopped up.

“I was 11 weeks pregnant, and they were clearly trying to make me feel like a piece of s— if I did get an abortion because I was hurting the baby. I wasn’t sure what I wanted to do, but they basically told me if I waited any longer, I wouldn’t have a choice.

“There’s a very high chance that I would’ve kept it. The person I was pregnant by had Marfan syndrome, and the thing I wanted to wait for was an amniocentesis.”

Severe forms of Marfan syndrome, a connective tissue disorder, can cause fatal heart problems. Gartman had wanted more information about her options. An amniocentesis is typically performed between 15 and 20 weeks of pregnancy.

“I ended up having that abortion three days later. I felt like if I didn’t do it right away, I was going to have no choice, and that they’d be right, that I would be a monster.”

Despite many years passing, Gartman, 45, of Portland, said the trauma she endured is one of the main reasons she never had any children. The shame stuck with her, she said, and she thought she had no right to try to have another baby after having an abortion.

“Seeing public money going to these places pisses me off a lot. That’s my money. I don’t want my money being used to do this to someone else.

“My experience with them has been to just tell everybody I know who’s going to go to them to just not do it. I would never set foot in one of those places again.”

North Carolina

After Carley Causey discovered she was pregnant last year, she wanted to know how far along she was. 

So she searched online for a place to “get an ultrasound to try and date how pregnant” she was. 

Causey, 36, said she had originally called an OB-GYN’s office, but she was told that she couldn’t get an appointment for at least seven weeks. 

“Well, most doctors’ offices won’t see you until you’re, like, 12 weeks pregnant. I did call, and they were like, like, not very helpful, because they were like, ‘You’re not far enough along,’” Causey said. 

So she ended up calling a crisis pregnancy center. 

“And this place is totally free. If you wanted to go to the ER and get an ultrasound, that’s like hundreds of dollars. And this is a community resource that charges you nothing, right?” 

Causey said center volunteers told her that it may be too early to do an ultrasound and that she could potentially have an ectopic pregnancy for which she would have to go to the emergency room. But she wanted a transvaginal ultrasound, and she found out that she was almost two months pregnant. 

Causey said her mom used to volunteer at “pregnancy support centers,” and she felt more comfortable going there. And as a Christian woman and family ministries director at a church in Durham, North Carolina, she said she felt awkward going to a place like Planned Parenthood, which she associated with abortion, although it offers a range of medical services. 

“I know that they (pregnancy centers) totally have this reputation of trying to scare women into not having abortions, but that’s just not been my experience with the people who work there,” Causey said. “And I want to give space for that, because I don’t know all these Christian pregnancy centers, but the truth is like, yeah, they do value life, but they also want to provide resources that make it seem possible.” 

Florida

Taylor Biro was sleeping under bridges all over Tallahassee when she found out she was pregnant in 2006. She called a local pregnancy center, telling them she was homeless and seeking an abortion. 

“I was 19 … I was pregnant, and I had no business having a child — I had a lot of difficult things going on around me at the time.

“I remember being very clear. I talked to them on the phone. I told them what I wanted to do. They said, ‘Great, come on in.’

“I went in, and they counseled me — and it ended up not being an actual place that helps, or had any means to help, with abortions. They were more like a faith-based group and wasted a lot of my time. I ended up passing the window when I was able to get an abortion.’’

It was “degrading” when she’d have to attend their classes to earn “mommy bucks” before she could have a few diapers — not even a full pack, she said. 

“Less than a week after I gave birth, I was working at a sandwich shop. I remember standing there taking someone’s lunch order, hoping the pad in my underwear was thick enough to last till my break. For the first five years of my son’s life, I worked four jobs and made less than $11,000 a year. I was exhausted and trying to hold on to some version of myself before all this.”

Being pregnant and giving birth as a homeless teen, Biro experienced violence.

“It forces you to play into relationships that you probably never would have had to endure. You don’t have all the safety nets. It opened me up to domestic violence; it opened me up to sexual violence.”

Biro went on to start her own drop-in center for runaway and homeless youth. She and her team raised money for teens who needed abortions and provided Plan B for those over age 18. 

After her experience with the crisis pregnancy center, she made diapers much more accessible for the new parents who came to the drop-in center, telling them: “You want to take five packs of diapers? Take six.”

She also worked with officers investigating sexual violence and human trafficking of youth, and helped write legislation requiring special training for law enforcement interviewing victims of sexual assault. Biro works with the National LGBTQ Task Force, and also founded Bread and Roses Collective, a team of grant writers for social justice organizations. Her child is now 18.

“It took me years to understand that the shame was never mine to carry. A Christian organization manipulated a homeless teenager into having a child when it was not safe, but (I) should be embarrassed? I know now that my struggle and trauma was not some penance for being young and irresponsible. But that experience, being tricked out of health care, was my origin story.

“It’s strange that even now, I feel compelled to preface it all by saying how much I love my son. As if naming my trauma or the loss of my autonomy could mean I love him less. That guilt buries stories like mine. We hear more about how a child ‘saved’ someone, when the truth is my life had meaning on its own.”

States Newsroom’s investigation is ongoing. If you have had an experience with a crisis pregnancy center, please get in touch at cpcproject@statesnewsroom.com.

In a critical 2026 battle for control of the U.S. Senate, The Associated Press early Wednesday declared James Talarico the winner of the Democratic primary in Texas, while incumbent Republican Sen. John Cornyn and Attorney General Ken Paxton will spend weeks to come competing in a runoff election.

The AP called Talarico as the victor over U.S. Rep. Jasmine Crockett at 2:37 a.m. in a closely watched race that offered candidates with contrasting styles and was seen as an indicator of Democrats’ approach to the midterms. 

As of later Wednesday morning, Talarico led Crockett, 53% to 45.7%, with 91% of the votes counted. But Crockett raised questions Tuesday night about vote tabulation in her home base of Dallas County, blaming Republicans for targeting the county with a rules change about where voters could cast ballots.

On the Republican side, Cornyn had eked out a single percentage-point lead over Paxton in the GOP primary as of Wednesday morning, with the AP reporting he had 41.9% of the vote and Paxton had 40.8%, with 93% of the votes counted.

With U.S. Rep. Wesley Hunt pulling in about 13.5% of the vote in the Republican primary, neither Cornyn nor Paxton earned the more-than 50% needed to avoid a runoff, set for May 26. President Donald Trump has so far not made an endorsement, which both candidates would treasure.

No Democrat since Lloyd Bentsen

Whoever emerges as the Republican nominee will be considered the favorite in a state that has not elected a Democrat to the U.S. Senate since the late Lloyd Bentsen in 1988. Democrats would likely need to win the race to have any chance of taking control of the Senate, which is now dominated by Republicans with 53 seats and would require Democrats to net four new seats nationwide.

But a Paxton-Talarico matchup would likely provide Democrats with their best chance to win over independents. 

Paxton has drawn comparisons to Trump for his unapologetic conservative streak on cultural issues — and a propensity for controversy. A favorite of hard-right Texas Republicans, Paxton was attacked relentlessly in the primary for scandals related to bribery and infidelity.

Those controversies could turn off the moderate voters Talarico courted in the Democratic primary more than the base-driven Crockett.

Democrats in Washington praised the outcome. “James Talarico spent his time in the State House fighting for working families and standing against the corrupt special interests making life unaffordable for Texans. That record is exactly what this moment calls for — and what neither Ken Paxton nor John Cornyn can offer,” said Lauren French, a spokesperson for the Senate Majority PAC, the campaign arm for Senate Democrats, in a statement.

‘Judgment Day is coming’

The GOP primary pitted an establishment figure in Cornyn against a MAGA favorite in Paxton and has been bitterly fought.

The runoff appeared likely to be just as heated, with Cornyn making a direct appeal to electability, saying Paxton would likely drag down House races, and blasting the attorney general as an unworthy standard-bearer.

“I refuse to allow a flawed, self-centered and shameless candidate like Ken Paxton risk everything we’ve worked so hard to build over these many years,” he said. “If he’s nominated, there’s a high risk that Paxton would lose this Senate seat, taking five congressional seats down with him … Ken Paxton as the nominee would be a dead weight at the top of the ticket.”

Cornyn previewed a no-holds-barred approach to the last 12 weeks of the race.

“Texas Republican primary voters will hear more about my record of delivering conservative victories in the United States Senate and learn more about Ken’s indefensible personal behavior and failures in office,” he said. “Judgment Day is coming for Ken Paxton.”

‘Change won’

Paxton counterattacked in his own speech Tuesday night, criticizing Cornyn as insufficiently loyal to Trump and assailing him for sponsoring a gun safety law after a 2022 school shooting that killed 19 in Uvalde, Texas.

Paxton noted that most GOP primary voters cast ballots against the incumbent, despite the record spending Cornyn and allied groups poured into the race.

“Nearly 60% of Texas voters who have known Cornyn for over 40 years, after hearing $100 million worth of ads, chose to vote against the incumbent,” he said. “That’s historic.”

“Tonight, change was on the ballot and change won,” he said. “Texans want new leadership. They want someone with a proven record of fighting and winning for them, and that’s exactly what I’m going to deliver.” 

House races in Texas deliver some surprises

State legislators in Texas redrew their U.S. House maps last year, a rare mid-decade redistricting that scrambled some incumbents’ districts.

One casualty appears to be Rep. Dan Crenshaw, a four-term incumbent Republican from the Houston area.

Crenshaw is a reliable conservative who nonetheless has at times gotten on the wrong side of Trump. Crenshaw was the only Texas U.S. House Republican incumbent whom Trump did not endorse.

Beleaguered Republican Rep. Tony Gonzales is headed to a runoff against challenger Brandon Herrera, The Associated Press said early Wednesday. Sordid details of Gonzales’ affair with a married staffer, who later died by suicide, surfaced and dogged his campaign in the race’s closing weeks.

The House Ethics Committee announced Wednesday morning its members had voted to create an investigative subcommittee to look into allegations that Gonzales “engaged in sexual misconduct towards an individual employed in his congressional office” and “discriminated unfairly by dispensing special favors or privileges.”

The members of that subcommittee will be announced once they are chosen. 

The Ethics Committee, a 10-member panel made up of an equal number of Republicans and Democrats, wrote in the press release announcing its investigation into Gonzales that the creation of a subcommittee “does not itself indicate that any violation has occurred.”

A Democratic incumbent-against-incumbent race in the Houston area also appeared runoff-bound, with Rep. Christian Menefee leading Rep. Al Green 45.9% to 44.4% with 87% of the votes counted by early Wednesday. The state’s redistricting threw the two House members into the same district.

North Carolina, Arkansas 

The Tuesday primaries in Texas, North Carolina and Arkansas marked the first elections of the midterm year. 

In the North Carolina race to replace Sen. Thom Tillis, who is retiring, Democratic former Gov. Roy Cooper and former state GOP Chair Michael Whatley easily earned their party’s nominations.

The race, seen as one of very few considered a true tossup, like Texas will be crucial to which party controls the Senate next year.

In a closely watched U.S. House race, incumbent Democrat Valerie Foushee narrowly led challenger Nida Allam by a single percentage point, 49.22% to 48.21%.

In Arkansas, Sen. Tom Cotton easily won his primary and will be heavily favored to beat Hallie Shoffner, a sixth-generation farmer who won the Democratic nomination Tuesday.

Jennifer Shutt contributed to this report. 

A bill to implement a “bell-to-bell” cell phone ban in Wisconsin schools is making its way through the state Legislature, though Gov. Tony Evers hasn’t decided whether he would sign it if it makes it to his desk.

Wisconsin became the 36th state last year to implement a limit on cell phones in schools. Wisconsin Act 42, signed in 2025, requires school districts to implement policies that ban cellphones during instructional times starting in July 2026. The policies have to include exceptions for emergencies, for educational purposes and cases involving student health care, individualized education plans (IEPs) or learning environment accommodations, also known as 504 plans.

When Evers signed the law in October, he said he had a hard time deciding whether to do so because  he believes in local control and wished lawmakers had taken a different approach. Nevertheless, he said he signed the bill because he was “deeply concerned” about the effect cell phones and social media are having on students. 

Last week, however, Evers said  he hasn’t made up his mind about the bill that would go a step further.

“That’s tough. We already, you know, did something,” Evers told reporters last week when asked if he would sign the new measure. He said it could put the state in the position of telling districts to do something that not all of them may want to do. “I have to think through that,” he added. “I’m concerned about that.”

Wisconsin school districts can already choose to implement a bell-to-bell ban under current law, but AB 948 would require policies banning cell phone use in school — prohibiting them throughout the school day, including during class time, recess, the time between classes and the lunch period. The bill requires the policies to be implemented by July 1, 2027.

Prior to Act 42, most Wisconsin school districts had already restricted student cellphone use, though policies and enforcement varied widely across the state.

Currently 38 states limit student phone use in schools, including 18 with bans for the entire day. 

The state Assembly passed the “bell-to-bell” ban bill in February on a voice vote. It needs to pass the state Senate before it would go to Evers.

At a Senate Education committee meeting Tuesday, Reps. Lindee Brill (R-Sheboygan Falls) and Joel Kitchens (R-Sturgeon Bay) said the bill would do more to ensure support for students and educators.

“This isn’t something that we’re doing to schools because we don’t think they’re doing a good job,” Kitchens said. “This is something we’re helping them with. I think everyone that has looked at this at all recognizes that this is the way to go and we are backing them up.”

Brill said she has heard support from school superintendents and teachers. 

Evers is not the only person with concerns about further limiting school districts from making  these decisions. According to the Wisconsin Ethics Commission lobbying website, several school organizations are registered against the bill, including the Wisconsin Association of School Boards, the Wisconsin Association of School Business Officials, the Wisconsin Association of School District Administrators and the Association of Wisconsin School Administrators.

In written testimony provided when the Assembly heard the bill, Peshtigo School District Superintendent Patrick Rau said that he opposes the bill because it removes local flexibility. 

Rau noted that in a recent incident at his district, a student was able to quickly report a threat on campus during a blood drive using her phone. Police arrested a man who was carrying a loaded handgun, a magazine concealed inside his shirt and two knives, and who later assaulted officers.

“This was a situation that could have become every parent’s and educator’s worst nightmare,” Rau said. The bill would enforce “a one-size-fits-all requirement that does not reflect the real-world conditions schools face each day.”

Brill said that there is an issue with phone addiction in schools, and access to social media is affecting students’ mental health.

“They’re being lost in depression. They’re being lost in keeping up with unrealistic expectations,” Brill said. “We have to do what we can to support the future generation.”

Kitchens,  who authored the first cell phone ban bill, said that views on cell phone bans in schools have been changing since the earlier one was discussed. 

“I got a lot of pushback just for that one,” Kitchens  said, “but I think in that year since that came out, the public has become so much more aware.”

A 2025 Marquette Law School poll found that 72% of Wisconsinites strongly or somewhat support a ban on using cell phones during the entire school day. 

Kitchens noted that there is reporting from across the country where students get used to and appreciate the ban once it is implemented. The ban in New York has encouraged students to turn to using portable CD players and MP3 players while in school.

“The schools that have gone ‘bell-to-bell — and you see it across the country — the reports have overwhelmingly been positive from the kids. After they get past that first week of withdrawal, they appreciate having it,” Kitchens said. “It doesn’t solve the whole problem, but they have a safe space during the day where they can concentrate on what they should be concentrating on.”

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

The post Action Alert: Submit Comments in Support of Fox Solar appeared first on RENEW Wisconsin.

(The Center Square) – There are lots of words of support from Democrats at the Wisconsin Capitol for Gov. Tony Evers special session on redistricting, but the state’s Democratic leaders are measuring their words.

(The Center Square) – There is another bird flu outbreak in Wisconsin after the state’s Department of Agriculture confirmed a case in Dane County.