There are a lot of big things Democrats in Wisconsin can do with their new, trifecta control of state government. Reinvesting in public schools — and shifting the burden for keeping schools afloat off local property taxpayers — would be a great start. So would overturning Act 10 (unless the state Supreme Court beats them to it), restoring the prevailing wage law and getting rid of so-called right-to-work legislation, thus reversing the largest decline in union representation in any state over the last 40 years. Add to that getting rid of PFAS, preserving public land, creating a nonpartisan redistricting process that ends gerrymandering once and for all. All of these things are possible when the new governor and Legislature get to work. 

While state officials can’t reverse federal policies that are driving up the cost of living, let alone end the disastrous Iran war, they can do a lot to improve the material wellbeing of state residents just by turning the page on 15 years of austerity.

Wisconsin is sitting on a state budget surplus that mostly represents the money the state no longer pays to support schools. For more than a decade, Wisconsin has let its education historic system degrade while hoarding that money. 

At the same time, local property taxpayers are overextended and grouchy from years of reaching into their own pockets to make up for the state’s failure to support schools.

Former Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker’s assault on unions hurt teachers and other public employees directly, but it also created a much harsher, leaner environment for working people across Wisconsin and their families. 

A recent report by the Illinois Economic Policy Institute highlights the ways anti-union policies in Wisconsin have harmed the middle class, degraded a once-great public school system and made life more expensive and less secure for working families. 

This was not what Walker and his allies advertised when they pioneered the divide-and-conquer politics that pushed down union membership, wages and labor force participation for both union and non-union workers. 

Supposedly, busting teachers’ unions was going to give schools the budget flexibility to do more with less, and slashing state funding for education would mean lower taxes. Instead, schools went into a long financial slide, accompanied by cuts to programs, increasing class sizes and declining test scores, while property tax rates soared. 

Walker and the Republicans talked a lot about making Wisconsin “open for business” and ushering in a new era of prosperity. But the promised 250,000 new private sector jobs never materialized, and wages, job growth and GDP languished compared to our neighboring Great Lakes states, as “data wonk” Bruce Thompson wrote in an analysis for Urban Milwaukee of the effects of Act 10.

All of this, plus Republicans’ stubborn refusal to accept the federal Medicaid expansion for years before President Donald Trump’s massive assault on healthcare, contributed to Wisconsinites’ particular struggles with affordability — the issue that drove the blue tsunami across the country in the 2026 midterms.

Voters in the last election expressed serious doubt about some of the core tenets of Republican economic policy, including the idea that tax breaks for the very rich will make us all more prosperous, and spending on schools and other basic social goods is a burdensome waste. 

In the Republican radio address this week, incoming Republican Senate minority leader Julian Bradley acknowledged the stunning midterm rebuke to his party, saying “folks who are struggling to get by want to know that there’s a path to get ahead.”

“We hear you,” he said on behalf of his fellow members of Wisconsin’s severely diminished Republican caucus. Then he doubled down on the philosophy that got them where they are today: “If the new Democrat majority wants to focus on affordability, then we should be talking about meaningful tax cuts, returning the surplus to the families who earned it and clearing away the red tape that makes it harder to build a home or hire a worker.”

If voters wanted more of the same Republican tax cuts and deregulation Bradley is pushing, and which reached a new peak with Trump’s massive “One Big Beautiful” transfer of wealth from the many to the few, the election wouldn’t have gone the way it did.

According to Bradley, Democrats are talking about “higher taxes, more spending, redrawing maps” and “not a single one of these ideas will lower your grocery bills.”

It’s true that ending Trump’s tariffs and the war in Iran that is driving record-high diesel prices would be the fastest route to cheaper groceries. But state Democrats can do a lot to improve Wisconsinites’ economic wellbeing by bringing back middle class jobs and union protections that raise wages. Using state money to support schools will lower property taxes. Investing in healthcare, child care, mass transit, environmental protection and clean energy will improve the economy and the future of our state.

Wisconsinites are eager to see government get to work to get those things done. 

LAMPASAS, Texas — Standing at the edge of his family’s 300-acre cattle ranch in Central Texas, Clayton Tucker is characteristically attired in a white Stetson western hat, a beige shirt with pearl snaps, and lightly faded Wrangler jeans.

At 35, Tucker is poised to become the first Democrat in more than three decades to serve as Texas agriculture commissioner, a post from which he will oversee policies affecting much of rural Texas. The last Democrat to serve as agriculture commissioner left office in January of 1991— a month before Tucker was born.

Tucker, who takes office in January, benefitted from the Democratic wave that swept across Texas and other states in the midterm elections, propelled by widespread disenchantment with Republican policies, both in the cities and on the farm.

Across the country, rural voters — staunchly Republican in recent decades — either defected to Democrats or stayed home to protest the spread of data centers, rising fuel prices, the war in Iran and other grievances.

In Texas, about 90% of the counties where turnout decreased were rural, according to The Texas Tribune. While many rural voters stayed faithful to GOP candidates, their diminished numbers at the polls helped clear the way for Democratic victories: In the state’s U.S. Senate race, the Democrats improved their performance in all 254 Texas counties, compared with the 2024 U.S. Senate contest.

“People felt like they were being treated as sacrificial lambs for Wall Street, for Silicon Valley, for all these tech bros and oligarchs and everyone else,” Tucker said in an interview behind the steering wheel of his parked 1982 GMC pickup truck, “and they just weren’t being supported by our government anymore.”

Rural disenchantment also helped drive epic Democratic victories in other states.

In Kansas, Methodist minister Adam Hamilton was elected to the U.S. Senate, the first Kansas Democrat to win a Senate seat since 1932. Analysts attributed Hamilton’s victory to a rural backlash over high fuel and fertilizer prices and cheap imported beef. In Montana, former smoke-jumper Sam Forstag flipped one of the state’s two congressional seats, becoming the first Montana Democrat to win a U.S. House seat since 1994.

Partisan control also shifted in Iowa, where agriculture-related jobs employ roughly 1 in 5 residents. Iowa Democrats won the governor’s race, a U.S. Senate seat and three of the state’s four congressional seats. Republicans maintained their grip on both chambers of the state legislature, but Democrats narrowed the gap.

Iowa Republican U.S. Rep. Ashley Hinson won just over half of rural and small-town voters in her unsuccessful bid for one of Iowa’s U.S. Senate seats, according to The Associated Press. But that was a smaller percentage of rural and small-town voters than the GOP got in 2022, and the diminished margin helped secure a victory for Democratic candidate Josh Turek.

“It was a setback for Republicans and now they have to figure out how they’re going to get back some of the voters they probably lost,” said Abhishek Chatterjee, an associate professor of political science at the University of Montana.

Texas the epicenter

Texas, the nation’s second-largest state, was an epicenter of the midterm upheaval. Voters there turned against three-term Republican Gov. Greg Abbott to choose state Rep. Gina Hinojosa as the state’s first Latina governor and the first Democrat to hold the office since Ann Richards left in 1995.

Texas voters also elected Democratic state Rep. James Talarico to the U.S. Senate and placed Democrats, including Tucker, in all of the top statewide offices. Democrats also took over the Texas House, which has been controlled by Republicans since 2003.

Republicans still hold the majority in the Texas Senate and are considering rule changes to undercut the power of incoming presiding officer Vikki Goodwin, a Democratic legislator who defeated incumbent Republican Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick for the state’s number two post, which includes leadership of the legislature’s upper chamber.

In the aftermath of what she called a “nationwide Republican defeat,” Texas Republican Party Chair D’rinda Randall announced the formation of an invitation-only Texas Mandate Committee composed of statewide leaders charged with “examining what occurred and developing a strategy to win Texas back.”

“This is not about placing blame,” she said in a statement. “It is about planning to win.”

Kendall Scudder, chair of the Texas Democratic Party as well as the Democratic National Committee’s Rural Council, told Stateline that his party’s Texas triumph resulted in part from a concentrated campaign that included a heavy focus on rural Texas.

“What I think happened was folks in rural Texas gave Democrats an opportunity to state our case, and we hadn’t had that in while,” said Scudder, who grew up in Sulphur Springs in largely rural East Texas.

“I think we started making inroads, and part of that could be because Republicans weren’t worth showing up and voting for. But I think another piece is that Democrats were talking about things that were important to rural Texas.”

Top issues that resonated strongly in rural Texas, he said, included the spread of data centers, “mass surveillance” by mounted Flock cameras that read license plates, and inadequate funding for state schools. As result, he said, 21 largely rural counties that voted red in previous elections “went blue this time.”

“I think we moved the needle in a good way, and I think if Democrats deliver for those communities, we can start to unlock more and more gains,” he said.

Outgoing Agriculture Commissioner Sid Miller, a Republican who lost his primary race for re-election, echoed Tucker and Scudder’s assertions that rural voters are up in arms over data centers, artificial intelligence, Flock cameras, and soaring fuel prices. Tucker says he will push for a moratorium on data centers after he takes office in January.

“We’ve never had any real property tax relief,” Miller said in a phone interview “Diesel’s the highest it’s ever been. Fertilizer’s the highest it’s ever been. I don’t think the Democrats took anything away from the Republicans,” Miller said, “we basically gave it to them.”

Miller put much of the blame for rural dissension on Abbott’s policies.  Abbott endorsed Miller’s Republican primary opponent, Nate Sheets, who in turn was beaten by Tucker in the general election.

A $1 billion publicly funded private school voucher program that Abbott pushed through the Texas Legislature in 2025 also stirred dissent in parts of rural Texas, amid fears that it will siphon money from public schools.

“There was a lot of hard feelings about the voucher program out there,” said Snapper Carr of Austin, a managing partner and general counsel of Focused Advocacy, a lobbying firm that represents cities and communities throughout the state. The Republican downturn, he said, was particularly evident in what he said are typically “bright red areas of West Texas,” where residents “talk about the price of diesel like we all talk about the weather.”

“The Republicans still carried them,” he said, “but their margins were much less than what they’ve been in the past…There was a large number of past Republicans that didn’t show up this time.”

‘Totally surprised’

In Briggs, an unincorporated Central Texas community with around 100 residents, Ray Bizzell, 83, offered his thoughts on the election outcome as he left Sunday’s services at the Briggs Baptist Church. Bizzell, who runs a floor covering business about 20 miles away in Georgetown, Texas, said he voted “Republican, straight ticket” and “was totally surprised” by Democrats’ strong showing in the state.

“I really thought we might hold it,” he said. “I just think my beliefs align better with the Republican Party.”

In Williamson County, which stretches from the high-growth Austin suburbs to patches of rural Texas further east, the unexpected Democratic surge propelled first-time candidate Chris Jimenez, 42, into a state legislative victory over a Republican incumbent backed the governor.

In this year’s U.S. Senate race, Williamson County swung nearly 19 points toward the Democrats compared with the Senate race in 2024, according to The Associated Press.

Jimenez, who lives on a pecan farm with his wife and 16-year-old daughter near the town of Elgin, is headed to the statehouse after defeating Republican state Rep. Caroline Harris Davila for the House seat once held by Talarico. Jimenez’s opponent was endorsed by Abbott.

Jimenez grew up on a ranch near Sanderson and served in the Marine Corps. He said his thoughts of running for office intensified after he was “pulled over and profiled by a police officer,” he told Stateline. “I was very concerned on multiple levels. I  figured, ‘Hey, if this is happening to me, a Marine Corps veteran just trying to make my life here on the farm, it’s got to be happening to multiple people.’”

“Did I expect to win? I felt our message resonated with people, regardless of their political affiliation,” he said. “It was never about being red or blue.  It was about survival in Texas and it’s gotten hard for a lot of folks.”

Jimenez has joined other incoming lawmakers in pre-filing bills before the January start of the legislature. His measure call for repealing “the private school voucher scheme,” eliminating a sales tax exemption for data centers and expanding Medicaid benefits in Texas.

Republican data analyst Derek Ryan said Republicans needed to win by “a very large margin” in rural counties to counter strong turnout in predominately Democratic urban areas.  The GOP only had 32-point advantage in those counties in this year’s mid-term elections,  he said, compared to 55 points in 2022 and 46 points in 2018.

Ryan estimated that about 625,000 Republicans sat out the election, according to the Texas Rural Report.

“We knew there was going to be a slight shift towards the Democrats in rural Texas,” Ryan told Stateline. “I didn’t think it was going to be this significant, but it comes down to the economy and gas prices.

“When you live in rural Texas, it’s a long drive anywhere you go. So when it’s costing you more to fill up your tank, you know you’re going to vote with that in mind.”

Suzanne Bellsnyder, who owns and runs a newspaper in the small town of Spearman near the Oklahoma state line, said she has analyzed all 184 Texas counties with a population under 50,000 and found signs of Republican slippage in areas that have typically served as Republican bulwarks.

“Republicans have always depended on the rural counties to kind of be their firewall, their insurance policy,” she said. But this time, she added, “they just weren’t there.”

Gov. Tony Evers has granted commutations to 14 of the 24 people who came before his Commutation Advisory Board in August and September, his office announced Friday. They are the first commutations since the administration of former Gov. Tommy Thompson in 1995.

That doesn’t mean 14 people will be immediately released from prison. A commutation doesn’t necessarily mean a person will be released or have their sentence shortened, the governor’s office said. 

For one of the 14, Amanda Weaver, the commutation will allow for immediate release from confinement; she will have two years of extended supervision in the community. 

In 2008, Weaver was sentenced to 30 years of incarceration and 20 years of extended supervision in the community, the Examiner reported in August. She had been convicted of five counts of burglary. At Weaver’s sentencing hearing, the prosecution and defense recommended jointly that she receive five years of confinement and 12 years of extended supervision, according to the governor’s office. The others involved in the burglaries were sentenced to no more than three years of confinement, the governor’s office said. 

The rest of the 14 will not be immediately released, but they may see release sooner than they would have without a commutation. For example, Touissant Harley’s sentence was reduced “to reflect a mandatory transition to parole” by June 1, 2027.

Not all incarcerated people are eligible for parole. Under Wisconsin’s Truth-in-Sentencing laws, if a person committed a felony offense on or after Dec. 31, 1999 and is sentenced to at least a year in prison, the person will not be eligible for parole.

Some legislators are criticizing the commutations, with Sen. Eric Wimberger (R-Gillett) stating that Evers “is releasing 10 murderers, a burglar, an arsonist and a drug dealer — who all deserve their punishments,” and that this puts “our communities in physical danger.” Sen. Julian Bradley (R-New Berlin), who was recently elected to be the next Senate Minority Leader, also voiced opposition to the news. 

“So there’s no confusion, Tony Evers is commuting the sentences of 10 convicted murderers and he’s releasing it on a Friday afternoon, hoping nobody notices,” Bradley said in a Facebook post.

The ACLU of Wisconsin praised the commutations in a statement.

“Voters across the political spectrum support the use of commutations to end or shorten unjust prison sentences so that people can rejoin their communities and get a fair chance at life. Granting clemency is the right thing to do — and it’s also the popular thing to do,” the ACLU said. “We urge the governor to continue commuting sentences before he leaves office, and we hope Governor-elect Crowley builds on this by expanding the commutations process and making it a routine part of his administration, just like it is for many Republican and Democratic governors across the country. Wisconsin’s prison population is at record highs. This is a start, but so much more needs to be done.”

Who are the people receiving commutations? 

Mighty Howell, 50, who has served 33 years of a life sentence for first-degree intentional homicide, had his parole eligibility moved up from 2038 to September 2027.

Howell was 17 years old when convicted and sentenced in 1993 for the May 27, 1993 death of Roger Bucholz in Milwaukee during an attempted robbery.

He had applied for a commutation under the Juvenile Life Sentence Commutation because he was at least 19 at the time of his conviction.

In Evers’s announcement, it was noted that Howell had worked on rehabilitating himself and helping others, maintained continuous employment, and received 20 letters of support from family members and a retired correctional officer he had worked with in prison.

Michael Maldonado, 47, having served 31 years of a life sentence, had his sentence shortened to four more years of incarceration followed by parole.

Maldonado was sentenced in 1995 for first-degree intentional homicide (use of a dangerous weapon and party to a crime), for his part in the 1994 killing of Ruben Borchardt of Jefferson County when Maldonado was 15.

His first eligible parole hearing was set in the year 2044, but after an accomplice who had been given a shorter sentence took responsibility for the actual shooting, noting Maldonado had only supplied the weapon, Maldonado had his sentence modified in 2025, making him currently eligible for release from prison and parole by the Wisconsin Parole Commission.

As part of the commutation, Maldonado was recognized for his “rehabilitation efforts while incarcerated,” noting his educational achievements, including an associate’s degree in business and certifications, along with his extensive work history and volunteering efforts.

He also received several letters of support from family members and others who offered housing and support upon his release.

Daniel Cerney, 43, was sentenced with two concurrent life sentences for the 1999 shooting deaths of Wiliam Leis, 51 and his 85-year-old mother, Evelyn Leis, when Cerney was 16, and also sentenced for burglary-armed with a dangerous weapon and theft of movable property He had his parole eligibility moved from the year 2044 to 2030.

After serving 26 years in prison, it was noted that Cerney had participated in several rehabilitation programs, developed job skills, and worked productively for Badger State Industries in several capacities.

He also had several letters of support, including one from the victims’  family who had consistently visited Cerney in prison.

Sabir Wilcher, 46, having served 31 years of a life sentence given in 1995 when he was 15 years of age for the killing of Elvis Anderson, 20, in Milwaukee, had his sentence commuted to three more years of incarceration before he will be placed on parole.

Wilcher has been eligible for parole since 2025, and depending on a decision by the Wisconsin Parole Commission, he could be released earlier than the commutation release date.

Wilcher had obtained a bachelor’s degree and other certifications and also participated in several programs for rehabilitative development, and worked in several capacities, including as a certified peer specialist, helping other incarcerated people.

The victim’s son spoke on Wilcher’s behalf, and the prosecuting district attorney also supported Wilcher’s commutation.

Wazir El-Amin, formerly Wade A. Curtis, 55, having served 36 years of confinement for a life sentence given on November 21, 1990, for first-degree intentional homicide with a dangerous weapon in Racine County, was made immediately eligible for parole, with the parole commission to hold a hearing as soon as possible.

Previously, El-Amin had been eligible for parole in 2028.

Besides significant educational achievements and programs he had completed, he had also participated in a childhood trauma group and had spoken to at-risk youth.

In El-Amin’s application, it was noted that he had secured work with a construction company upon his release, and that he would also volunteer in a non-profit he had started with his wife to work with those who had been recently released from prison.

DeQuelvin Douglas, 47, who was convicted of first-degree intentional homicide and attempted first-degree intentional homicide in Kenosha County at age 15 and sentenced to life imprisonment when he was 16, resulting in 31 years in prison, had his parole eligibility commuted from the year 2056 to 2029.

Rep. Amanda Nedweski (R-Pleasant Prairie) criticized the commutation of Douglas, citing “significant opposition from the Kenosha County District Attorney’s Office.”

Douglas had received a letter of support from a former Department of Corrections sergeant who said, “of all the individuals I supervised, he stands out as someone who truly deserves a second chance.” 

Dawn Dobbs, 59, who has been incarcerated for 32 years, convicted of first-degree intentional homicide (party to a crime) in Milwaukee County and sentenced July 1, 1994, to life imprisonment for the killing of her life partner and father of their two sons, had the date of her parole eligibility changed from 2035 to November 2026.

In 2010, she helped the DOC make a suicide prevention video that is still being used, and she also has served as a peer mentor and volunteered to make masks during the COVID pandemic.  

The district attorney and her son each supported a commutation.

The other 10 people heard at the August and September hearings of the Commutation Advisory Board have been denied commutation, the governor’s office said. 

What’s next for commutations? 

Evers may issue more commutations before leaving office. The Commutation Advisory Board heard from other applicants seeking a commutation in October and November. The board also has hearings scheduled for Nov. 20 and Dec. 11. 

WASHINGTON — The Trump administration announced Friday that states can take an additional six months to implement a provision in Republicans’ “big, beautiful” law that requires most people enrolled in Medicaid work, participate in community service, or attend an education program at least 80 hours a month.

The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services wrote in a statement that it’s established an “optional hold harmless period” to give state governments more time to update their systems and improve the processes they have in place. 

“States have made real progress, and they’ve been clear with us about what it takes to get this right for beneficiaries—at scale and for the long term,” Director of the Center for Medicaid and CHIP Services Dan Brillman wrote in the statement. 

“If the state can use data to show that someone is working or qualifies for an exclusion, that person should not have to track down paperwork to prove it. And when someone needs support, they should know exactly what to do, when to do it, and where to go. That’s how we build a Medicaid program that works better for people, connects them to work, education, and training opportunities, and supports paths to prosperity.”

Democrats in Congress raised concerns as recently as this week that states hadn’t had enough time to prepare for the new 80-hours-a-month requirement. 

House Energy and Commerce Committee ranking member Frank Pallone Jr., of New Jersey, and Senate Finance Committee ranking member Ron Wyden, of Oregon, wrote in a letter dated Wednesday that administration officials use their “discretion to give states additional time to implement work reporting requirements and protect eligible beneficiaries from losing coverage.”

The provision in the law requires Medicaid enrollees between the ages of 19 and 65 to work, participate in community service, or attend an education program for at least 80 hours a month.

The law detailed several exceptions, including for pregnant people, parents of dependent children, people who have complex medical conditions, tribal community members, those in the foster care system, people who were in foster care who are below the age of 26 and individuals released from incarceration in the last 90 days, among others.

WASHINGTON — Colorado Democratic Rep. Jason Crow, a military veteran, is making an attempt during Congress’ lame-duck session to provide legal protections for Afghanistan immigrants who aided the U.S. military for years, but now face swift deportations. 

Earlier this week, Crow filed a discharge petition. If he gains 218 signatures, he can force a House vote on his measure, H.R. 9899, which would allow certain Afghan nationals to qualify for Temporary Protected Status until July 2029. 

So far, the discharge petition has 114 backers, with two Republicans, Reps. Brian Fitzpatrick of Pennsylvania and Don Bacon of Nebraska, on board. There are 218 Republicans, 214 Democrats and one independent in the House.

“After more than two decades of war, we made a promise that we’d look after them. It’s both a moral and national security imperative that we keep that promise,” Crow said in a statement. “I’m working to force a vote that will protect Afghans already in the United States because I won’t let our nation leave these brave Afghans behind.”

The Trump administration has moved to effectively end the TPS program that Congress created in the 1990s to temporarily grant relief for nationals hailing from countries deemed too unsafe for return. The administration also has sought to revoke humanitarian protections, including TPS, for Afghans initially given under the Biden administration. 

The Department of Homeland Security initially moved to deport hundreds of Afghan allies to Pakistan, where they would likely then be removed to Afghanistan, but paused those efforts, which Bloomberg Law first reported. 

The practice of removing a noncitizen to a country with which they have no ties and then back to a home country where they will face harm is known as refoulement and it’s prohibited under international law. 

The Taliban currently controls the government in Afghanistan and the State Department’s travel advisory for the country is at the highest level, which means it advises against traveling.

DHS estimated that there were roughly 11,000 Afghan nationals with TPS before then-Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem revoked protections in May 2025. 

Legal protections sought

Crow is a former paratrooper and Army Ranger who was deployed to Afghanistan and has long petitioned for thousands of Afghan allies to receive legal protections after the chaotic 2021 U.S. withdrawal from the country that resulted in the Taliban taking over. Many of those Afghan allies and their families had to flee because of likely harm from the Taliban, a terrorist organization, for aiding the United States.

“Our Afghan partners put their lives on the line to help protect American servicemembers like me,” Crow said. 

While Crow’s discharge petition might reach the 218-vote threshold for a vote, it will likely not move in the Senate, which Republicans control, or reach the 60 votes needed to advance. 

But in the 120th Congress, Democrats and independents who caucus with them will have 55 votes in the Senate, potentially 56 if Democrat Mary Peltola wins the Alaska race against GOP incumbent Sen. Dan Sullivan. 

Passing any legal protections for immigrants, especially nationals from Afghanistan, will likely face a veto from President Donald Trump, and need a two-thirds majority to override. 

During his second administration, Trump instituted a ban on nationals from Afghanistan, and directed the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services to stop processing legal immigration paperwork for Afghans after last year’s National Guard shooting in Washington, D.C.

A federal judge in June ordered the Trump administration to continue processing that paperwork. 

The person charged with killing West Virginia U.S. Army Spc. Sarah Beckstrom, 20, and injuring another, came to the U.S. under the humanitarian program for Afghan allies and was granted asylum. 

A federal judge in August, allowed the Trump administration to force-feed Rahmanullah Lakanwal, the man charged in the National Guard shooting, because he has refused to eat while incarcerated. 

The number of confirmed measles cases across the U.S. this year has soared to 5,412 as of Nov. 12, more than double the 2,289 cases through all of 2025, according to the latest release of data from the federal Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. The trend has pushed the nation to lose its official “measles elimination status” after more than 25 years, according to news reports. 

“It’s pretty clear we’re hitting one grim milestone after the other,” Dr. Susan Kansagra, chief medical officer of the Association of State and Territorial Health Officials, a group representing local health officials, told Stateline. “It’s really, really just a hard time to see something that we know has been eliminated in the past, and to see this rapid growth that we have seen over these last two years.” 

The U.S. launched a national campaign to eliminate measles in the 1960s, around the time the first official measles vaccine was licensed to the public. In 1994, the Pan American Health Organization (PAHO), a regional office of the World Health Organization representing states across the Americas, set a goal of ending the measles epidemic through a concerted vaccination effort, and by 2000 a panel of experts had concluded that the United States had eliminated measles from its population. 

This elimination status means that the nation is able to squash instances of measles transmission for 12 months or more. To reverse that status, measles must be spreading for 12 months or more – and now that’s where the U.S. is. A panel of experts at PAHO meeting in the past week to review cases has determined that the United States is no longer in elimination status, according to KFF Health News, which reported the news Nov. 14 citing researchers with direct knowledge of deliberations. The Wall Street Journal first reported the change Friday night. 

“And that means the disease has become what we call endemic again, meaning it’s just spreading in the community,” Katrine Wallace, an epidemiologist at the University of Illinois, Chicago School of Public Health, told Stateline. “I definitely blame it on the anti-vaccination kind of propaganda that’s been all over, and the lack of our (U.S. Department of Health and Human Services) really doing anything about these cases.

“There’s not been a real push for vaccination efforts to counteract the 5,000 cases or something that we have now,” Wallace said. 

Measles is a highly contagious respiratory virus that leads to symptoms of fever, rash, and other serious health complications, including death, but is entirely avoidable through the two-dose MMR, or measles, mumps, and rubella vaccine. Children, who generally don’t get vaccinated before a year of age, are highly susceptible. 

But in his time in charge, U.S. Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. has been an outspoken vaccine skeptic who opposes many vaccine mandates. His agency has called into question the safety and efficacy of vaccinations and recommended fewer vaccines for children. Many Republican-led states have ended vaccine mandates for their populations. Thirty-nine states now have MMR vaccination rates below 95% – the percentage necessary for herd immunity. 

According to the latest CDC data, measles cases have been reported this year across 47 states, plus the District of Columbia, and New York City. Among those cases, 58% of them, or 3,134, are among people under the age of 19.

Among all cases, 96% are within people who are unvaccinated, and 11%, or 591 cases, have resulted in hospitalizations. The CDC has confirmed six measles-related deaths so far, though other investigations are continuing within individual states. 

Pennsylvania is experiencing a major outbreak, with 1,542 cases confirmed so far this year, including 37 cases since Nov. 9, according to the state’s health department. 

Just since Election Day, Pennsylvania has reported two “measles-associated” deaths, the most recent one announced Nov. 13. Two other deaths, in New York and Wisconsin, have been reported by state health agencies during the same period.

“Revoking our elimination status doesn’t really change the reality on the ground, right? We all know, you know, that we have measles in our community,” said Dr. Ali Khan, a medical epidemiologist and dean of the College of Public Health at the University of Nebraska Medical Center. 

“Measles has always been the sort of ultimate stress test for public health infrastructure,” Khan said in an interview Friday. “And we’re failing that test … if you can’t get people vaccinated, that says something about the quality of your health system.” 

Khan said the real message behind the potential revocation of the elimination status is that the nation’s leaders desperately need to fund and promote public health infrastructure in communities, so that people can protect themselves. 

Kansagra, who works with local and state health departments, said it’s particularly worrisome that major federal public health grant programs and pandemic-era funds are expiring at the end of next year. 

“That type of core infrastructure support for public health is so important because these are exactly the types of threats that public health is dealing with and working to respond to,” Kansagra said.  

Wallace is hopeful on the heels of the 2026 midterm elections in November that Democrats, especially ones steeped in public health like Michigan Sen. Abdul El-Sayed, a medical doctor, can change the direction of the country’s public health policy in time to prevent more death and spread of disease. 

“We’re voting these people in,” Wallace said. “So it seems like the country is moving towards wanting to rein this in.” 

Stateline reporter Shalina Chatlani can be reached at schatlani@stateline.org.

The Federal Aviation Administration issued a nationwide ground stop for all flights in the United States on Friday due to communication problems. Air space opened up again at about 8:15 p.m. Eastern, officials said in in a White House briefing Friday night.

In a statement, the FAA said all flights were grounded “due to extraordinary circumstances and for reasons of safety.” 

Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy said in an X post that a communications problem was affecting Air Route Traffic Control Centers. 

The stop is the most severe shutdown of air travel since the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks in 2001, according to reporting from The New York Times.

“We have no reason to believe as of right now that this was a threat to the United States,” Homeland Security Secretary Markwayne Mullin said at the White House on Friday afternoon. “This was a telecommunication outage throughout FAA. Now, out of abundance of caution, we have grounded all the flights, and all the flights are accounted for.” 

Mullin also said there was no indication the issue was connected to the widespread Microsoft outage earlier this week. 

U.S. Sen. Tammy Duckworth, an Illinois Democrat who serves as ranking member on the Aviation Subcommittee, said that the ground stop “will warrant a thorough and complete investigation.”

While the cause of the issue is not yet known, some have noted that the FAA recently expanded the use of an artificial intelligence tool to assist in managing air traffic. The agency has said the tool only suggests routes and will not affect safety, but some Democrats have raised concerns about its rollout, Gizmodo reported. 

When asked about the possibility that the issue could be related to AI, Mullin said “you just can’t rule out anything at this point.”

“This is unprecedented when you see something like this,” Mullin said. “It’s going to take some time, and so this isn’t going to just be resolved and turned around within the hour.”

A second Wisconsin child has died as a result of measles amid outbreaks that have sickened hundreds of people in 20 counties, the state health department reported Friday.

The state Department of Health Services withheld demographic details about the child to protect the privacy of the child’s family. The death was reported in Grant County, located in the southwest corner of the state.

DHS reported Friday that measles has infected at least 649 people in Wisconsin, the highest number of cases in the state in more than 35 years.

Because not everyone infected with measles seeks medical care or gets tested for the viral illness, reported case counts may not reflect the full extent of the measles spread, according to DHS.

DHS officials reported a child’s death from measles Nov. 5.

The Wisconsin outbreaks coincide with the spread of measles nationwide. The New York Times reported this week that a consensus of medical experts concluded the illness can no longer be considered “eliminated” in the U.S.

Measles is highly contagious and spreads through the air and through close contact, according to the health department.

A measles infection typically begins with a fever, cough, runny nose and red eyes. Its most common symptom is a red rash over the body that shows up several days later. Measles can lead to permanent disability and death in some people.

“It can cause life-threatening complications including pneumonia and swelling of the brain,” DHS stated in its announcement of the second death Friday. “Although anyone can become seriously ill, children younger than 5 years old, pregnant people, and people with weakened immune systems are at increased risk of complications.”

The state health department is working with local and tribal health departments and other healthcare providers to respond to the measles outbreaks, identifying cases, tracking infections, testing people for the virus and supporting vaccination.

Measles vaccination is the most effective way to prevent the spread of the virus. Vaccination rates for measles in Wisconsin have fallen below the 95% of the population that ensures widespread protection from the illness, according to DHS.

WASHINGTON — Dozens of incoming U.S. House Democrats are urging party leaders to tackle a stock trading ban for lawmakers on the first day of the 120th Congress in January.

Just over 50 representatives-elect sent a letter Thursday to House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, D-N.Y., Democratic Whip Katherine Clark, D-Mass., and other top House Democrats asking that the House adopt a rule barring House members and their spouses from owning and trading individual stocks.

“Democrats may have won the election, but we have a long way to go to earn back the trust of voters across the country. The existing laws around insider trading are insufficient. We should hold ourselves to the highest standard and work to restore faith in government. Nobody should leave Congress with millions more in their bank accounts,” according to the letter signed by 51 incoming House freshmen.

More than half of the new members who signed the letter flipped their seats from Republican to Democrat.

“A stock trading ban alone will not fix Washington, but it is the fastest way to show voters we heard them. This rule would be a down payment on much-needed reform to prevent elected and appointed government officials and their spouses from trading stocks. We promised our communities we would clean up this place. In January, we should do just that,” the one-page letter continued.

Those who signed the letter include newly elected members in Arizona, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Iowa, Illinois, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Montana, New Hampshire, New York, North Carolina, Ohio, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas and Wisconsin. 

The offices of Jeffries and Clark did not immediately respond to a request for a comment.

A stock trading ban for members of Congress has gained bipartisan support over several years. 

Thirteen House Democrats joined all Republicans in passing a stock trading ban in July, though the bill received significant criticism from Democrats who said it did not go far enough, and because House Republicans attached the bill to a voter ID measure.

Senate Democrats blocked the bill in September, solidly across party lines.

WASHINGTON — Maryland Sen. Chris Van Hollen has a considerable amount of support to shore up if he wants to become majority leader next Congress, a role New York Sen. Chuck Schumer appears far more likely to secure when votes are cast behind closed doors Dec. 1. 

Van Hollen, a senior member of the Appropriations Committee, said during a press conference in Denver on Friday “it’s important to give Senate Democrats a choice.

“That’s what we just gave voters — all over the country — a choice,” he said. “They chose change, and I think that the Democratic caucus needs to be open to new ideas, a different way of governing and a different way of conducting and approaching politics.” 

Van Hollen also told reporters he will not run for the presidency in 2028. Earlier this year, the Maryland Democrat had said he was “kicking the tires” on a potential 2028 presidential bid. 

Schumer, who has led Senate Democrats since 2017, is far more likely to secure the votes needed to continue on in that rule, judging from statements as of Friday.

He wrote in a statement released shortly after Van Hollen announced his longshot challenge that he was “proud” of the number of seats Democrats flipped in this year’s midterm elections. 

“I welcome any discussion about the future of our caucus and the important work ahead,” Schumer wrote. “I’m proud of what we’ve accomplished together — 55 seats and counting is an amazing result – and I have the votes to continue serving as Democratic Leader. I look forward to leading our new Democratic majority and delivering for the American people.”

The comments indicate that Schumer has already locked in the votes needed to remain Democratic leader for the next two years. 

El-Sayed backs Van Hollen

Michigan Sen.-elect Abdul El-Sayed told the Michigan Advance shortly before Van Hollen made his decision public that he planned to support his bid. 

“I was the first to be calling on him as the next leader, so I would love to see him run, and I’d love to see him as our next leader,” El-Sayed said.

Minnesota Sen.-elect Peggy Flanagan posted her support for Van Hollen to social media, writing that he “is the leader and fighter we need to bring about real change, so no American is left behind.”

“Minnesotans are demanding change,” she wrote. “Democrats need to deliver. That starts with new voices in our leadership.”

Michigan Sen. Elissa Slotkin and Vermont independent Sen. Bernie Sanders, who caucuses with Democrats, both indicated earlier this week they were open to voting for a challenger. 

Sanders said during a press conference he would not be voting for Schumer, but Slotkin said she would only vote for a candidate who had a clear plan for how Democrats should lead in the majority. 

“I think whoever wants to run this caucus should come forward with a plan on how they’re going to govern differently, what they’re going to do in the first 100 days to put money in people’s pockets and then in particular how they’re going to communicate differently,” Slotkin said, adding she did not intend to challenge Schumer. 

Maine Sen.-elect Troy Jackson told reporters on Nov. 6 that he didn’t intend to vote for Schumer during leadership elections, according to WGME.

“I’ve already said, I told Senator Schumer I’m going to support somebody else, so that’s no different now,” Jackson said at the time. 

Schumer allies: Schatz, King, Baldwin

But other Senate Democrats rallied to Schumer as speculation swirled around Van Hollen and after the Maryland lawmaker formally announced his challenge. 

Hawaii Sen. Brian Schatz, who is likely to become whip next year, wrote in a statement that voters in this year’s elections “sent a clear message: they want us to lower costs, end a needless war, and fight corruption. 

“Our caucus has the right to have a conversation about the path ahead, but we have no time to waste. We must move quickly to vote, unify, and get to work. I endorse Senator Schumer for leader and will be voting for him in the caucus election.”

Maine independent Sen. Angus King, who caucuses with the Democrats, wrote in a statement that “Schumer is one of the principal architects of the most successful election in modern history, and I see no reason to change the leadership that helped make that success possible.”

“Chuck has outlined an aggressive plan for the new Democratic majority which is directly responsive to the message we heard from the voters, and he has the experience and unique mastery of the Senate process to make it happen,” King added. “Why would you fire the manager when you just won the World Series?”

Wisconsin Sen. Tammy Baldwin also made a reference to baseball when announcing her support for Schumer. 

“The Brewers just had a record season, and next year is not the time to change our management,” she wrote. “The same is true in the Senate. Under Leader Schumer, Democrats won at least 55 seats. He earned his position as Majority Leader next Congress, and together we’ll deliver for Wisconsin families.”

More senators’ opinions

Arizona Sen. Mark Kelly indicated earlier this week that he would support Schumer, saying in a brief hallway interview that “he’s worked really hard to get this majority.” 

Virginia Sen. Tim Kaine said Tuesday in a brief interview that he didn’t intend to share his thinking on the leadership races with reporters, though he didn’t explicitly say he’d support Schumer. 

“All the discussions about caucus leadership I’m having with my colleagues,” he said. “I’m not trying to give messages through the press.”

Kaine said the most important policy work in the next Congress will be ending the war in Iran, undoing the tariffs and rescinding the changes to Medicaid and the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program that Republicans included in their “big, beautiful” law. 

When asked by States Newsroom whether he believed Schumer is capable of accomplishing those goals for Democrats, he responded, “We are capable of doing them as a caucus.”

Rhode Island Sen. Jack Reed, when asked whether he would support Schumer or a potential challenger, first said “I’m going to wait to see what develops. But Chuck has done a great job.”

He added a few seconds later he planned to support Schumer.

Nevadans back Schumer

Nevada Sens. Jacky Rosen and Catherine Cortez Masto both threw their support behind Schumer in social media posts Thursday night. 

Rosen wrote Schumer “did the work to deliver what will soon be a 56-seat Senate majority against all odds, and I know he has the experience and the fight to continue leading our diverse caucus at this crucial moment.” 

Cortez Masto wrote Schumer “was instrumental in Democrats flipping 8 – soon to be 9 – Senate seats and securing a historic majority.”  

This report has been updated.

After a seven-year campaign to reinstate union rights at UW Health hospitals in Madison, organizers are looking to the incoming Democratic governor and majority in the Legislature to help finish the job.

Service Employees International Union’s Wisconsin branch mobilized support across the state for winning candidates — from Gov.-elect David Crowley on down to incoming Assembly members who flipped seats on Nov. 3 and put the Democrats in charge of both houses in the Legislature.

In an announcement issued Thursday, SEIU Wisconsin members and leaders spelled out their next goal: passing legislation to restore collective bargaining rights at the UW Hospital and Clinics Authority — the corporate parent of UW Health hospitals and clinics.

“This moment represents the beginning of a new era,” Colin Gillis, SEIU Wisconsin vice president for nursing and a nurse at UW Health for nine years, told the Wisconsin Examiner.

“I’m really excited to have the opportunity, at long last after years of organizing and campaigning — knocking doors, doing phone banking, organizing with my co-workers — to have the opportunity to have a Democratic trifecta that can restore our collective bargaining rights,” Gillis said, “so that we can advocate for our patients and our community and ensure that Wisconsin has the healthcare system it deserves.”

The UW Health hospital system’s employees are not classified as state employees. Nevertheless, former Gov. Scott Walker’s 2011 Act 10 — which stripped collective bargaining rights from most public employees in Wisconsin — also eliminated state laws that had guaranteed union rights for UW Hospital & Clinics Authority employees since 1996.

SEIU Wisconsin is calling for the new Democratic majority in the Legislature to reintroduce and pass a bill that would “restore full collective bargaining rights for thousands of nurses and over 25,000 total UW Health employees,” the SEIU Wisconsin announcement Thursday said.

UW Health responded to a question about the SEIU announcement and the prospect of such a law with a statement released Friday: “UW Health respects the legislative process and will continue to work collaboratively with policymakers, care team members and other stakeholders as these issues are considered. We remain committed to constructive dialogue while preserving our ability to provide high-quality care to patients and communities across Wisconsin.”

Nurse cites assurances from Dem leaders

Legislation to restore UW Health employees’ union rights was last introduced in February, toward the end of the current legislative session. The bills, AB 999 and SB 965, were never taken up. The SEIU announcement Thursday identified them as the union’s objective.

Gillis said that at campaign events before the Nov. 3 election, he and other SEIU members spoke with the Legislature’s Democratic leaders, Sen. Dianne Hesselbein and state Rep. Greta Neubauer, along with David Crowley, now the governor-elect.

“And they gave me and my coworkers, assurance, directly to our faces, verbally, that this would be a top priority,” Gillis said. He said he hasn’t yet heard about a timeline, however.

Rep. Lisa Subeck (D-Madison), who has been the lead Assembly author on the previous bills, said Thursday the timeline for action and the exact form it might take still has to be determined.

“I’m definitely still committed to restoring collective bargaining rights for our UW Health nursing staff and others,” said Subeck. “I think there is broad support among Democrats for restoring collective bargaining rights broadly.”

Subeck, who has been elected Speaker Pro Tempore in the next legislative session, added that it is “a little too soon to say exactly how these bills may be introduced and exactly what that timing would be.”

She also said that it “remains to be determined” whether simply repealing Act 10 — as Democratic leaders have said they intend to do — would be sufficient for restoring the UW Health workers’ union rights.

“It’s unfortunate that this hasn’t happened already,” Subeck said. “We all know that when the people who care for us, and in this case that’s our nurses at UW, have a voice in their workplace and can have a role in working conditions, it is good for patient care.”

Gillis said that he and other union members believe the legislation introduced in February would offer stronger protections for the rights of UW Health employees to union representation than simply repealing Act 10.

AB 999/SB 965 include provisions that would allow a majority of employees to win union recognition by signing a petition rather than through an election — the only mechanism for unionizing under current state law, according to the Legislative Reference Bureau analysis of the bill.

The measure, if enacted, also would require UW Health to allow unions that represent current employees to provide information at new employees’ orientation sessions, and to allow them to use the work email system to discuss workplace issues, administer union contracts and organize employees.

After 2019 launch, union drive escalates

After Act 10 ended the UW hospital system’s collective bargaining guarantees, the last contracts expired in 2014. Five years later, in 2019, UW Health nurses announced they were joining SEIU Wisconsin.

Initially they sought voluntary talks on working conditions with the hospital system’s management. UW Health rejected their demand.

A series of legal memos followed arguing that, despite Act 10, there was a stronger case in existing Wisconsin laws to support union rights for UW Health employees.

Encouraged by those arguments, nurses sought union recognition from the hospital system’s management and were rebuffed. On the verge of a threatened three-day strike in September 2022, Gov. Tony Evers brokered a deal between UW Health and nurses affiliated with SEIU Wisconsin.

That agreement set in motion a court case that concluded with a unanimous 2025 decision in which the Wisconsin Supreme Court affirmed that because of Act 10, state law does not require the hospital system to recognize or bargain with unions representing its employees.

The 2022 agreement also included a provision for voluntary meetings between union representatives and UW Health management. Gillis, who has participated in those meetings, said they have continued since then.

“Every other month we sit down for a process, a two-hour meeting called ‘meet and discuss,’” Gillis said. “We have enjoyed a productive and collaborative relationship with our counterparts across the table in that process, but that process is no substitute for negotiation at the bargaining table.”

That’s because it doesn’t lead to a formal contract, he said.

“Nurses know that a contract is, collective bargaining is, the most powerful tool they have to advocate for their patients and their co-workers and their communities,” Gillis said.

In 2025, more than 360,000 abortions — about a third of all U.S. abortions last year — were provided by advanced practice clinicians rather than physicians, according to new data released by the Guttmacher Institute, a think tank that researches and advocates for abortion access. 

Twenty-five states and the District of Columbia allow abortions to be provided by health providers who are advanced practice clinicians, a category that includes physician associates, advanced practice registered nurses, nurse practitioners, certified midwives and certified nurse midwives. 

The new findings show that abortions provided by advanced practice clinicians – which included both procedures and those by pill – accounted for nearly a third of all abortions nationwide last year, not counting self-managed abortions or those obtained outside the formal medical system. The organization says these types of providers fill a crucial access need at a time of OB-GYN shortages and more than a dozen state abortion bans. 

Arizona nurses say Prop. 139 should give them the right to perform abortions

“These data help to illustrate the critical role that (advanced-practice clinicians) play in providing abortions across the country, including in many underserved communities,” said Isaac Maddow-Zimet, Guttmacher data scientist and study lead, in a written statement. He added that such providers also provide counseling and follow-up care “even in states where they are not permitted to provide direct abortion services.” 

Whether advanced practice clinicians can provide abortions varies by state laws and regulations, with many states limiting the types they can provide to aspiration procedures in the first trimester or pills. Twenty-five states and the District of Columbia allow at least some nonphysician occupations to provide abortions. The states include: Alaska, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Illinois, Kansas, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Montana, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, Ohio, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont, Virginia and Washington.

Arizona, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin could also consider allowing those providers to offer abortions after Democrats won trifectas in this month’s midterm elections and promised to expand abortion access. 

The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists recommends allowing advanced practice clinicians to provide abortions, saying in an issue brief that restricting abortion care provision to only physicians or board-certified OB-GYNs “are not based in science; improperly regulate medical practice; and impede patients’ access to quality, evidence-based health care.” 

In 2016, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration changed the guidelines around the abortion drug mifepristone, permitting advanced practice clinicians such as midwives to prescribe mifepristone.  

In the years since Roe v. Wade was overturned, several states, including Alaska, Michigan, North Carolina and Ohio, have struck down physician-only abortion laws.

An ongoing lawsuit brought by nurses and midwives in Arizona challenges laws barring them from providing abortion, saying they violate the state’s constitutional amendment enshrining abortion rights passed in 2024. 

After striking down many of Missouri’s abortion restrictions earlier this year, a judge upheld that state’s physician-only law, noting the difference in training for different types of abortions.

Stateline reporter Sofia Resnick can be reached at sresnick@stateline.org.

Sen. LaTonya Johnson (D-Milwaukee) and Rep. Tip McGuire (D-Kenosha) were named as the co-chairs of the state’s powerful Joint Finance Committee on Tuesday. 

The lawmakers will lead the 16-member committee, which is made up of eight senators  and eight Assembly members. It’s the latest announcement in Democratic leadership for the upcoming session. 

Democrats will hold a majority in the state Legislature for the first time in 16 years, and that means being responsible for writing the state’s next two-year budget, a process that falls majorly to the Joint Finance Committee.

The last time the state budget was written by Democrats was the 2009-2011 legislative session, and lawmakers entered that situation in a much different financial position — the state had a $6 billion budget deficit. Wisconsin will enter 2027 with a $3 billion budget surplus. 

In a statement, incoming Senate Majority Leader Dianne Hesselbein (D-Middleton), who is responsible for deciding committee assignments, said Johnson had “demonstrated her ability to connect with people across the state and fight for their needs during her time on JFC.”

Johnson, who was first elected to the Senate in 2016 and previously operated an in-home childcare center, has served on the budget committee since the 2018 session. Hesselbein said that she has the “judgment and leadership to deliver a budget that reflects the needs of this moment in our state’s history.” 

Johnson said it’s been a privilege to listen to people from across the state  and she promises to “keep listening and to carry your stories with me into the Capitol as we write a responsible budget investing in the people because I know what having opportunity means to a family, and how much can change when people have a fair shot to build a better life.”

Incoming Assembly Speaker Greta Neubauer (D-Racine) named McGuire as the Assembly co-chair. She said in a statement that he has “spent his career fighting for working families” and has “deep experience in the budget process.”

“I know that he is going to make sure that the next state budget truly reflects the will of the people,” Neubauer said. “He understands that every appropriation and every line item affect people in communities across Wisconsin.”

McGuire, who previously worked as a Kenosha County special prosecutor and Milwaukee County assistant district attorney, was first elected to the state Assembly in an April 2019 special election. He has served on the state budget committee since the 2023-24 legislative session. 

McGuire said in a statement that he is “humbled” to have the chance to craft a budget. 

“For nearly fifty years in America, working men and women have struggled while the rich get richer and corporations get bigger. When I first ran for office, I made it my No. 1 priority to fight to restore the middle class and advocate for the working people of our state,” McGuire said. “I am more committed than ever to that mission.”

WASHINGTON — Two top Democrats in Congress are calling on the Trump administration to delay new requirements for people on Medicaid, arguing there is not enough time for states to prepare before the change takes effect on Jan. 1.

House Energy and Commerce Committee ranking member Frank Pallone Jr., of New Jersey, and Senate Finance Committee ranking member Ron Wyden, of Oregon, wrote in a letter released Thursday that officials must use their “discretion to give states additional time to implement work reporting requirements and protect eligible beneficiaries from losing coverage.”

The two lawmakers, who will become chairmen in early January when Democrats regain control of Congress, added that failure “to permit states to delay implementation despite known operational deficiencies will worsen preventable coverage losses for which Congressional Democrats will hold the Trump Administration accountable.”

Medicaid and the ‘big, beautiful’ law

Republicans included several changes to Medicaid, the state-federal health program for lower income Americans and some people with disabilities, in the “big, beautiful” law they approved in the summer of 2025. 

The provision raised in Pallone and Wyden’s letter requires Medicaid enrollees between the ages of 19 and 65 to work, participate in community service, or attend an education program for at least 80 hours a month.

The law detailed several exceptions, including for pregnant people, parents of dependent children, people who have complex medical conditions, tribal community members, those in the foster care system, people who were in foster care who are below the age of 26 and individuals released from incarceration in the last 90 days, among others.

Republicans also included a carve-out for people who are “medically frail” or who otherwise have “special medical needs (as defined by the Secretary).” 

This summer, CMS released a rule telling states how to determine if someone is “medically frail” and therefore doesn’t need to meet the 80-hours-a-month requirement. 

But that aspect of the law’s implementation is on hold after a federal judge issued a ruling in an ongoing lawsuit, an aspect that Pallone and Wyden wrote makes it even more difficult for states to enforce the new rules once they take effect in the new year.

Pallone and Widen urged Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services Administrator Mehmet Oz to reconsider what types of diagnoses the administration believes make a person “medically frail.”

“In one example, even a diagnosis of cancer could be insufficient to meet CMS’ extra-statutory definition of ‘medically frail,’” they wrote.

Millions projected to lose access to healthcare

The two also called on Oz to approve any “good faith exemptions” states have sent to CMS to ensure those Medicaid administrators have more time to implement the changes. 

“Congress gave CMS flexibility in the statute for a reason; the agency should not direct states away from good faith exemptions out of concern that they highlight the shortcomings of this policy—not when Americans’ access to health care hangs in the balance,” they wrote. “We intend to rigorously oversee CMS’ determinations on good faith exemptions and its decision to demand states to proceed with implementation even when out of compliance with federal requirements.”

The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office released a report in July 2025 showing that changes throughout the “big, beautiful” law would result in 10 million people losing access to healthcare.

West Virginia state officials said this week that come January, about 40,000 of the 160,000 Medicaid enrollees in the state will likely lose access to the program due to the new work requirements. 

A long-postponed reckoning could be coming soon for millions of student loan borrowers who are now faced with garnished wages and seized tax refunds as soon as next year. 

Since pandemic forbearance finally expired last year, more than 9 million borrowers already are in default, owing a collective $234 billion, and millions more are late in their payments. Those borrowers are likely to face severe collection measures such as wage garnishment and seizure of tax refunds next year. Such collections have been repeatedly paused, most recently this past January.

Betsy Mayotte, president and founder of The Institute of Student Loan Advisors, a nonprofit that advises borrowers, schools and employers, said she expects collections to start next year. 

“It’s heartbreaking,” Mayotte said. “People tend to get caught off guard when their tax refund is taken and if they’re struggling financially, a lot of times they’re counting on that refund to catch up.”

The Washington Sun reported in October that collections plans would likely be announced after the midterm elections. The U.S. Department of Education did not respond to a Stateline question.

States with the highest default rate, Mississippi, Louisiana and New Mexico, had more than a quarter of borrowers living there in default, but even the lowest state rates were 15% for Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Utah and Wisconsin. That’s according to a Stateline analysis of Education Department data from the second quarter of this year.  

Defaults began to start up again in late 2025 and early 2026. In those two quarters alone, 13% of student loans went into default in Louisiana and Mississippi, and at least 5% went into default in every state, according to data from the Federal Reserve Bank of New York based on credit reports. 

Older borrowers seemed to be struggling more than they were before the pandemic, according to the bank’s analysis. 

One of them is Timothy Varro, 40, who has made payments for the past 10 years but can’t keep up even with the interest on the roughly $120,000 he borrowed for college in New Jersey and law school in Rhode Island. 

Despite a good job as an attorney for a bank in New York City, the balance has ballooned to $375,000, and he can’t make the $2,000 minimum payment. It didn’t help that he graduated in a recession and took low-paying public service jobs at first. 

“I don’t have rich parents to pay this off for me,” Varro said in an interview. “This may be my conspiracy theory, but I think this is punishment. They’re trying to send a message that this is what’s going to happen if you’re lower or working class and you strive for upward mobility.” 

Varro said he worries about collection efforts because he’s supporting his fiancé in a small apartment in New York City and has been ill at times with epilepsy that requires breaks from work. 

“I fear that unless something miraculous happens, I will default and my wages will be garnished for life,” Varro said. “I don’t think it’s asking too much to just give us a payment plan that’s reasonable.” 

Even on a smaller scale student debt can be a burden when a college education doesn’t pay off as planned. 

Taylor Lewis, 26, owes $29,000 for her time at Kennesaw State University, where she earned a bachelor’s degree in media and entertainment. 

“I was young, I was just trying to chase my dreams. I wanted to be a talk show host. I wanted to work in the media world,” Lewis said. “I was just young and stupid, pulling out loans every semester and thinking, ‘Yeah I could pay that back. I don’t care about that.’  They prey on undergraduate students. They know we don’t have anything to lose at the time.“ 

After graduating in 2023 Lewis found that her degree did not get her into the media world without more experience, and she now works as an assistant manager for United Parcel Service in Atlanta.

After missing a payment by mistake, she said her loan went into default and she wasn’t allowed to rectify it without paying the full $29,000, which she can’t afford. She’s hoping to be offered a repayment plan and planning to go back to school, paying her own way this time, to get a degree in human resources. 

Some states, such as Maine, have initiatives to advise students on loans starting in high school. The state suffers too if young people fall into debt, said Mila Tappan, education affordability training manager at the Finance Authority of Maine, known as FAME.  Maine is among the states that offer a tax credit for student loan payments to help keep and recruit educated workers. Connecticut has similar credits for employers who help with student loans. 

Maine had one of the lowest rates of new defaults at the peak in late 2025 and early 2026, along with other New England states such as New Hampshire and Vermont, but also Kentucky and Wisconsin.

Maine’s finance authority offers student loan counseling through emails, webinars and in-person events. “We like to think that what we do makes a difference. Some of it is as simple as the mentality here in Maine, that you do what it takes to repay your debts,” Tappan said. 

Preston Cooper, a senior fellow at the conservative American Enterprise Institute, has written about the student loan crisis and lobbied for changes to benefit taxpayers, he said. He helped craft a process that could deny schools student loans if they can’t prove their degrees raise pay for graduates, for instance. 

Some private vocational schools have very high rates of late payment on student loans, as high as two-thirds for some that are mostly in the South, according to a 2025 federal report. Schools of medicine and health, on the other hand, often have little or no default. 

The current crisis caught a lot of student borrowers by surprise because they were allowed to stop payments during the pandemic without being classified as delinquent or in default, and the pause was extended many times. 

“The government did not do a very good job of communicating the fact that repayment was starting again for real. There were a lot of false starts,” Cooper said. “They would say the student loan payments are about to resume, only to extend the pause. 

“You had heartbreaking stories where people only found out they were delinquent on their loans when they suddenly got dinged on their credit.” 

Stateline reporter Tim Henderson can be reached at thenderson@stateline.org.

The U.S. Postal Service faces renewed calls to drop restrictions ordered by President Donald Trump on mail ballots, setting up a major clash between states and the federal government ahead of the 2028 election.

Postal worker unions, civic groups and Democratic secretaries of state are demanding the Postal Service rescind a rule that imposes sweeping new requirements on states if they want ballots delivered through the mail. As part of the rule, states must submit the names of likely mail voters to the federal government.

The U.S. Supreme Court blocked the Postal Service from implementing the rule for the midterm elections. But the decision applied only to this year’s elections, leaving its ultimate fate unclear.

With the midterms over, opponents of the rule have quickly turned to pressuring the Postal Service to abandon the restrictions — warning that the Trump-backed rule undermines the USPS’ closely guarded image as outside of partisan politics.

“We should not allow a policy that threatens public confidence in the Postal Service neutrality to remain in place while its long-term status is debated in court,” Jonathan Smith, president of the American Postal Workers Union, said at a news conference in Washington, D.C., on Tuesday.

The rule’s future carries significant consequences for states with large numbers of mail voters. Eight states — California, Colorado, Hawaii, Nevada, Oregon, Utah, Vermont and Washington state — authorize all-mail elections. Nationwide, at least 33.9 million mail ballots were cast in the November general election, according to the University of Florida Election Lab.

The Postal Service declined to answer questions from States Newsroom on Thursday, citing pending litigation.

Executive order

Trump signed an executive order in March directing Postmaster General David Steiner to put forward a rule requiring states, at least 90 days before a federal election, to notify the Postal Service whether they intended to allow ballots to be sent through the mail. States would then have to submit to USPS at least 60 days before the election a list of voters planning to vote by mail.

Separately, the executive order required the U.S. Department of Homeland Security, with help from the Social Security Administration, to compile a list of voting-age U.S. citizens living in each state and then provide that information to state officials at least 60 days before each federal election. The order did not tell states how to use the data.

The Supreme Court didn’t make clear its position on the mail ballot rule if it comes before the court again in the future. But Justice Brett Kavanaugh, who agreed with the decision to halt the rule for the midterms, wrote in a concurring opinion that there was “at least a fair prospect” the rule falls within the Postal Service’s authority.

The Trump administration and some Republican states argued the rule would provide additional security safeguards. Ahead of the election, Republican officials in 11 states, led by Missouri, urged a federal judge not to pause implementation of the rule.

“The Rule — if implemented — would help bolster the security of mail voting in Missouri and reduce the risk of fraud,” Missouri Secretary of State Denny Hoskins, a Republican, wrote in an August court declaration. 

Hoskins’ office didn’t respond to a request for an interview this week. The other states included Alabama, Florida, Indiana, Kansas, Louisiana, Montana, Nebraska, Oklahoma, South Carolina and South Dakota.

On Thursday, those Republican-led states, as well as Texas, filed a notice in court that they will appeal a D.C. district court’s preliminary injunction of the mail ballot rule to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit. The move kicks off the next round of legal fighting over the rule.

The White House didn’t respond to a request for comment.

Opponents of rule filed suit

Democratic states argued the rule encroached on their power to run elections. The U.S. Constitution assigns states the responsibility of administering elections.

Multiple lawsuits were filed against the executive order in the spring. U.S. District Judge Indira Talwani, an appointee of President Barack Obama in Massachusetts, issued a preliminary injunction halting USPS from implementing the rule, which the Supreme Court declined to block.

“This executive order is trying to force federal control over who can and cannot receive a ballot in the mail,” Chelsey Wininger, executive director of the Democratic Association of Secretaries of State, said at the Tuesday news conference.

When the Postal Service published the final version of the mail ballot rule in August, the agency wrote that the rule doesn’t place the Postal Service in the role of an election administrator or dictate how states run elections. States maintain complete control over their voter registration rolls and decide who votes by mail, the USPS wrote.

“States also retain complete autonomy to determine the extent to which they utilize the postal system as an aspect of their elections,” the USPS statement said, adding that the rule was consistent with the Constitution.

During a USPS Board of Governors meeting on Tuesday, the board members didn’t discuss the mail ballot rule, according to a recording of the Tuesday meeting posted to the Postal Service website. The meeting mostly focused on the agency’s difficult financial condition, though postal workers received praise for their performance during the election.

“In this election, the USPS did exactly what we always do,” Steiner, the postmaster general, said. “We put our heads down and we got the job done.”

WASHINGTON — A federal judge in the District of Columbia on Thursday seemed weary of the Trump administration’s arguments that it should be allowed to proceed with its second attempt to redefine the constitutional right to birthright citizenship. 

During the hearing, Judge Christopher Reid Cooper pressed Department of Justice attorneys to clarify when the second executive order went into effect, because no date was included when President Donald Trump signed his executive order in August. 

Cooper also questioned the advocacy groups that brought the suit, led by the American Civil Liberties Union, if he should make a decision on whether to grant a preliminary injunction or wait, as he was concerned about issuing a ruling that would be redundant because there is a similar case out of Maryland. He noted that the judge who handled the first challenge to the president’s executive order in 2025 was also presiding over the second attempt and had more knowledge about the issue.

This is the Trump administration’s second try at curbing birthright citizenship. In June, the U.S. Supreme Court struck down the president’s executive order that would deny citizenship to babies born to parents who were either in the United States on a temporary visa or were immigrants without legal status. 

The case was brought by the ACLU, ACLU of New Hampshire, ACLU of Maine, ACLU of Massachusetts, ACLU of the District of Columbia, Legal Defense Fund, Asian Law Caucus and Democracy Defenders Fund. They are representing immigrants and their children who could be subject to the new executive order, and the groups previously challenged the first executive order relating to birthright citizenship. 

Trump’s recent executive orders would deny citizenship to babies born in the United States to parents deemed part of a designated terrorist organization and to parents who purposefully came to the United States to gain citizenship in what critics call “birth tourism.” 

The executive order also aimed to deny citizenship to children born to foreign diplomatic staff and children born in U.S. territories where Congress has not passed a law granting citizenship.

Passports potentially revoked?

Cooper, who was appointed by former President Barack Obama, wanted to know when children would be subject to the second executive order, which Trump signed on August 6. 

Lucia Goin, an ACLU staff attorney, said there is concern that the second executive order is retroactive and that children who were issued passports would have them revoked by the State Department if the order went into effect. 

She added that the order does not have a set date, compared to the first executive order that made clear that any child born 30 days after the order was signed would be subject to it. 

Ty Turley Trejo, a DOJ attorney, said the Trump administration views the order as going into effect when it’s published. 

Cooper questioned if that meant a child who was born before the Aug. 6 order was published, such as on Aug. 4, would be subject to the order. 

Trejo said the executive order would not apply to the newborn, or any child born before the executive order was signed. 

Cooper said if he decided to proceed with the case, he would issue an order soon. 

WASHINGTON — The possibility of a government shutdown next month increased somewhat Thursday as a group of U.S. senators said the stopgap spending bill must cut off funding for the Iran war.

Democratic Sens. Michael Bennet of Colorado, Tammy Duckworth of Illinois and Chris Van Hollen of Maryland, as well as Vermont independent Sen. Bernie Sanders, wrote in a joint statement that a short-term funding bill “must include language that restricts the Trump Administration from using appropriated funds to continue his war against Iran.” Legislation must be enacted by Dec. 11 to avert a shutdown.

“The American people do not want more war in the Middle East — but that is what President Trump has given them. Congress cannot allow Trump to continue his conflict — we must force him to end it,” they wrote. “Not doing so will only prolong the American people’s pain, and opens the door to further escalation as he has threatened.”

Washington state Sen. Patty Murray, the top Democrat on the Appropriations Committee, said Tuesday that leaders on the panel were debating how long the stopgap spending bill should last and whether to add any restrictions to how the Trump administration can spend the funding. 

“We’re exploring all options at this point,” she said. 

Murray said during the brief hallway interview in the Capitol that Democrats did not intend to approve the tens of billions of dollars in additional funding that the Trump administration requested this summer for the Iran war. 

Any short-term funding bill will need support from Democrats to move through the Senate, where at least 60 votes are needed to advance major legislation. While Republicans hold a majority of 53 seats for the rest of this year, it’s not enough to pass bills without bipartisan support. 

But, President Donald Trump’s signature will also be needed unless there are veto-proof margins in each chamber, an unlikely prospect with Republicans in charge of the House and Senate. 

That makes avoiding another government shutdown when funding expires a complicated balancing act. 

Bennet, Duckworth, Sanders and Van Hollen wrote in their joint statement that the midterm election results showed voters want Congress to end the “illegal and disastrous war with Iran.”

“This conflict has driven up the cost of gas, groceries, and fertilizer,” they wrote. “More than 20 American service members have been killed and hundreds more wounded, while achieving none of President Trump’s stated goals and harming civilians across the region.”

House Democratic Leader Hakeem Jeffries, asked about the possibility of adding language to an appropriations bill to end the war, said he didn’t want to get ahead of bipartisan negotiations. 

He said that Connecticut Democratic Rep. Rosa DeLauro, ranking member on the House Appropriations Committee, was “working through all of our Democratic priorities to see what’s possible in advance of Dec. 11.”

“I don’t want to get out ahead of Congresswoman DeLauro but House Democrats have uniformly opposed providing any additional money to Donald Trump’s war machine, to Pete Hegseth’s war machine over in the Middle East,” Jeffries said. “Taxpayer dollars should be spent to make life more affordable for everyday Americans, not to drop bombs overseas in an endless war that Donald Trump and Republicans promised they would not get the country into, but turned around and did the exact opposite.”

Following a campaign in which Wisconsin voters frequently cited concerns about data centers and energy affordability as major issues and Democratic candidates for the Legislature touted plans to restart the state’s land conservation program, Wisconsin Democrats are signaling they’ll use their new control of state government to take action on a number of climate and environmental issues. 

“We are going to deliver bold action for Wisconsinites. We are going to lower costs, support our public schools, protect our rights and freedoms, help working families, ensure safe and welcoming communities, hold big corporations accountable, fight back against federal overreach, ensure a clean environment for future generations, and much more,” Rep. Greta Neubauer (D-Racine) said in a statement after being elected to serve as the next speaker of the Assembly.  

Wisconsin Democrats will take over state government at a time when President Donald Trump’s administration has prioritized extractive industries and rolled back environmental protections. 

There are limits to what officials in one state can do to address a global problem like climate change, but state government’s purview over environmental issues includes regulating pollutants in the state’s air, land and water, purchasing and maintaining public land, overseeing the state’s electric utilities and funding efforts to protect the environment. 

As Democrats prepare to take majority control of the Legislature  in January, advocacy groups are pressing Democratic lawmakers to address their concerns both through standalone legislation and in the next state budget — which will dominate the agenda next summer. 

Clean Wisconsin has released a list of its policy priorities for 2027, which include increasing efforts to keep pollutants such as PFAS, nitrates, lead and phosphorus out of the state’s water; providing farmers with more tools to responsibly manage the land; investing in county-level initiatives; regulating data centers; changing how utility companies plan their energy development and expanding renewable energy.

“We’re really focused on pragmatic work, like a long list of on-the-ground programs that help protect our water systems, our groundwater, drinking water, our surface water, and help protect our climate and our air, and put some meaningful guardrails in place around AI data centers,” Amy Barilleaux, a spokesperson for Clean Wisconsin, told the Wisconsin Examiner. “I think people want to hear, ‘Oh, this big thing and that big thing,’ but it takes like a thousand little things to accomplish that big thing.

Barilleaux said that Gov.-elect David Crowley and whomever he appoints to run the state Department of Natural Resources can have a significant effect on environmental protection in the state simply by working to restore the agency’s muscle to what it was before Republicans slashed its staffing and budget under former Gov. Scott Walker. 

“I think it’s not that the DNR doesn’t recognize some authority, but you have to have people to do the work,” she said. “It’s been very difficult with understaffing at some agencies to really be able to do the work they are in statute being asked to do. So that’s a big one as well. We just need to improve the function of our government.”

Utility regulation 

In the days since their electoral victory, Wisconsin Democrats have signaled that their first priority in January will be addressing the affordability concerns that dominated the debate on the campaign trail. For environmental groups, that has led to a focus on how the state regulates its utility companies. 

In recent months, the Public Service Commission — the agency responsible for utility regulation — has taken some actions to prevent data center developments from increasing electric bills and to slow down requests to raise rates. But, Barilleaux said, the commission has also said in its recent decisions that if it’s going to do more, the Legislature needs to give it some help. 

Clean Wisconsin and a number of other groups are pushing for integrated resource planning. Under current law, the state’s utilities are not required to make long-term plans for where they’ll get the energy required to meet the state’s demand. This means that as hyperscale data centers have begun to pop up around the state, the utilities can do whatever they want to meet that increased demand. So far, that has meant extending the life of or planning to build new plants that rely on fossil fuels such as coal and natural gas. 

Moving to integrated resource planning would require that the utilities get their future plans approved by the PSC, which advocates say will encourage them to use energy from sources that are cheaper in the long term, largely solar and wind. 

“Our utilities don’t have to be transparent about what they’re doing, they don’t have to have a big picture where we look at different utilities together for a full statewide energy system in Wisconsin, and that leaves us very vulnerable in this moment, extremely vulnerable as we have these AI data center projects coming in and demanding just intense amounts of energy, historic amounts of energy,” Barilleaux said. “So we’re just sitting here flat-footed with no integrated resource plan. So the Public Service Commission … when it approved the latest two gas plants, it was almost a cry for help, saying, ‘We can’t, we don’t have any authority to do anything about this,’ and that should be alarming to everyone. Even though integrated resource planning does not sound like a super exciting topic, when you see how things are unfolding here in Wisconsin, when you see the Public Service Commission saying we need help from lawmakers right now — we’re expecting lawmakers to take that very seriously.”

PFAS

Barilleaux said that another big priority for Clean Wisconsin is doing more to clean up PFAS contamination in the state’s water. 

Over the last year, the Legislature and Gov. Tony Evers have finally passed legislation to spend $125 million set aside for PFAS mitigation after years of partisan deadlock. The Natural Resources Board recently established a standard for the amount of PFAS allowed to be in the state’s groundwater after years of failed efforts. 

Barilleaux said more money beyond that previous appropriation is needed to address the full scope of the problem statewide and added she’d like to see a total ban on the use of PFAS in the state. 

“We need to take this seriously. We can’t pretend like it’s not happening. We can’t pretend like groundwater standards and surface water standards and drinking water standards are it, because it’s not,” she said. “It is over $100 million a year in health harms that PFAS exposure is causing right here in Wisconsin, and so these are tremendous costs. I think sometimes things get characterized as, you know, cost versus environmental protection, or jobs versus environmental protection, but really, this is people’s health on the line. It is expensive to be sick from pollution and contamination. You know, this is about protecting the health of our communities.” 

Knowles-Nelson

Among the most divisive environmental issues during the last legislative session was the failure to reauthorize the Knowles-Nelson Stewardship Grant Program, which for nearly four decades had allowed the DNR to fund the purchase and maintenance of public land. 

A faction of Republicans in control of the Legislature had become hostile to the program — which had previously enjoyed bipartisan support — over broad objections to government land conservation and more specific complaints about the hit to local property tax revenues that can be caused by state land purchases. 

Multiple compromise bills were proposed, but nothing was able to pass and the program expired this summer. The reauthorization of the program was a campaign issue in some of the legislative races that helped Democrats win majority control. 

Charles Carlin, the director of strategic initiatives at the land conservation nonprofit Gathering Waters, told the Examiner that Democratic control opens up new possibilities for what the program can become, balancing how much money is spent purchasing new public land and how much is spent developing existing public land into both usable space for recreation and wildlife habitat. 

“It feels like everybody is sort of absorbing the ramifications of the elections, what’s possible,” Carlin said. “But I think that certainly one of the things that you know that we are looking at now is it feels like there is a real opportunity here to have a long-term authorization for Knowles Nelson, one that is appropriately funded, and I think the other thing we’re looking at is there’s an opportunity to rebalance the program between development projects and land acquisition.” 

He said it’s helpful not to have to negotiate with people who are hostile to the idea of public land conservation and added that the complaints about dwindling local government revenue on this issue tie in to coming debates about local government funding in general that are likely to play a major role in the work of the new government. 

“Local government revenue is likely to be a hot topic of conversation in the next legislative session on all kinds of issues,” Carlin said. “So public lands is one small one, but shared revenue, school funding, transportation — these are all going to be things that get talked about and considered a lot. But I do want to see a renewed emphasis on DNR soliciting input from local governments on projects that are happening in their jurisdiction and taking those viewpoints and that feedback into account. I also think that if the conversation in the Legislature can be more fact-based and less driven by an anti-conservation ideology, then I think that creates the space for us to have a really solution-focused conversation about how tax and land use policy really impacts local government revenues.”

The cost of healthcare was front and center across Wisconsin in last week’s election — and in western Wisconsin, the story was no different.

“It’s really bad,” says Shawn Phetteplace of Main Street Alliance, which counts some 400 western Wisconsin small business owners among its members.

They’ve been distressed by a spike in the cost of health insurance for people who buy coverage on the federal healthcare marketplace, Phetteplace says. He adds that “a disturbing number of people” have dropped coverage entirely.

Now two western Wisconsin cities, Eau Claire and La Crosse, are preparing to appoint teams of local citizens to dig into the issue. Voters in each city approved ballot measures on Nov. 3 to create healthcare action task forces.

Eau Claire voters approved the proposal 55% to 45%, while in La Crosse, the vote was 67% in favor to 33% opposed.

“It’s a novel approach, but I think it’s an exciting opportunity for people who are feeling directly the impact of healthcare costs skyrocketing, small business owners  and people interested in seeing city government taking a bigger role,” says Nick Padesky, who worked as a full-time time organizer for the campaign to pass the measures.

“In many ways it’s an expression of frustration with the federal and state governments for doing so little on managing healthcare costs,” says William Garcia, who led organizing for the La Crosse vote.

Sam Roecker, a Madison political strategist and a member of the team that pulled  the task force campaign together, says the proposals grew out of conversations among advocates in the spring of 2026.

People who joined the campaign were frustrated about steep Medicaid cuts that will start in 2027 from the massive tax-cut and spending bill passed by Republican members of Congress and signed by President Donald Trump in 2025, Roecker says. The bill is expected to carve almost $1 trillion out of Medicaid over the next 10 years.

Roecker says people have already been seeing how the end to enhanced subsidies for health plans sold at HealthCare.gov has sent premiums soaring for people buying  their own coverage. GOP lawmakers in Congress rebuffed repeated attempts to extend the subsidies, which expired at the end of 2025.

While the healthcare task force campaign was officially nonpartisan, Roecker has worked on Democratic campaigns in Wisconsin and elsewhere. Local Democratic groups promoted the ballot measures, and the reelection campaign of U.S. Rep. Derrick Van Orden in Wisconsin’s 3rd Congressional District was also a backdrop.

“Van Orden was still out there trying to frame that he in no way cut Medicaid,” says Roecker.

Van Orden, a Republican, voted for the 2025 GOP law while rejecting the characterization that the measure had imposed Medicaid cuts. He lost on Election Day to Democrat Rebecca Cooke.

Garcia chairs the 3rd Congressional District Democratic Party, but says that for the task force campaign, “I signed on not as a Democrat but as a citizen of La Crosse.”

Members of Main Street Alliance got involved in advocating for the ballot measures, Phetteplace says. Health professionals who belong to the advocacy group Committee to Protect Health Care did as well, says that group’s spokesperson, Annika Isaguirre.

The measures were introduced as direct legislation, provided for in the Wisconsin statutes for residents of a municipality to introduce local ordinances on their own. The state law requires that the municipality’s board or council vote on the measure or submit it to voters in a referendum.

Organizers in La Crosse submitted more than 5,000 signatures and in Eau Claire more than 8,000 signatures. While they could have left the issue just in the hands of the city councils, “We asked them specifically to send it to referendum,” Garcia said. “We wanted the community to have a say that this was a good idea.”

The ballot measures in each city asked voters whether the city should create a citizens advisory healthcare action committee. Each was tied to a lengthier ordinance that prescribes the number of members for the committee (seven), how they’re selected and what their duties and responsibilities are. Each committee is to produce a report every two years.

“They’re tasked with analyzing the state of healthcare in the cities,” says Padesky — what premiums residents are paying for their health insurance, how many small businesses have health insurance plans for their employees, the presence and demographics of population groups with less access to healthcare and other facts and trends.

The committees’ recommendations could include advocacy as well as possible strategies — “what do we need from state and federal policymakers to what direct actions can the cities of La Crosse and Eau Claire take to make healthcare more accessible and affordable with everyone in the cities,” Padesky says.

In structuring the proposals, the organizers sought to keep the committees open-ended, Roecker says, avoiding prescribing specific solutions.

Organizers say they didn’t encounter a concerted campaign against the ballot measures in either city. In Eau Claire, the local chamber of commerce issued a statement the Friday before Election Day that raised objections to the proposal, but stopped short of calling for a vote against it.

“Our concern is not with the goal of the proposal, but with whether the committee’s structure, authority, and resource requirements would meaningfully advance that goal,” the chamber statement said.

The organizers acknowledge that many of the problems relating to healthcare costs are due to state and federal policies.

“When I talked to people individually about it, the only concern that anybody expressed was the fact that, in many ways, the city does not have a lot of leeway in terms of what happens with healthcare costs,” Garcia says.

“Everyone acknowledges that most healthcare policy is decided at the federal and state level,” he says. “But that doesn’t mean local governments are completely useless in the matter.”