WASHINGTON — U.S. senators showed no movement Wednesday toward a deal to end the shutdown at the Department of Homeland Security, despite the problems it’s causing for the thousands of federal workers set to miss yet another paycheck and travelers waiting hours to get through airport security lines. 

Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., said an offer from Democrats, sent over in the morning, was completely unacceptable and that GOP lawmakers wouldn’t even bother to send back a counterproposal. 

“They know better. They’re asking for things that have already been turned down,” he said. “So it just seems like they’re going in circles.”

Thune said the chamber would vote later on a funding bill for DHS that doesn’t include Enforcement and Removal Operations at Immigration and Customs Enforcement, the deportation and detention arm of the agency.

“They said over the weekend that they didn’t want to fund ERO. They’ll fund everything else,” he said. “So we’re going to give an opportunity to vote to do that.”

Thune said Republicans’ decision to remove funding for those deportation programs represents a “significant” compromise that shows GOP lawmakers are “coming to the table and trying to get a deal.”

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., said the offer Democrats sent over represented “a reasonable, good-faith proposal that contains some of the very same asks Democrats have been talking about now for months.”

Schumer said a proposal Republicans sent earlier this week didn’t include any of the overhauls to immigration enforcement that Democrats have been talking about since January, when federal officers killed two U.S. citizens in Minneapolis. 

“For Republicans to send us a proposal that has no reforms is bad faith as well and will only slow things down,” he said. 

Trump ‘pretty much not happy’ with ‘any deal’

President Donald Trump remains a wild card in the negotiations. His support will be needed for any DHS funding bill to become law, regardless of how much longer it takes lawmakers to reach consensus. 

“Well, I don’t want to comment until I see the deal,” he said Tuesday when asked about ongoing DHS talks. “But as you know, they’re negotiating a deal. I guess they’re getting fairly close. But I think any deal they make, I’m pretty much not happy with it.”

Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., when asked about those comments during a Wednesday morning press conference, appeared skeptical of breaking off some line items in the DHS funding bill.

Any legislation to end the shutdown that passes the Senate will need to move through the House before it could reach Trump’s desk. 

“We always have Homeland funded as an entire department. There’s obvious reasons for that. It’s very important. I don’t think we need to be breaking it apart,” he said. “And so I think that’s what the president is reflecting there. He wants Congress to do its dang job.”

Will Congress leave town without an agreement?

It isn’t clear whether the Senate will still depart for its two-week spring break without a bipartisan agreement to fund DHS, which has been shut down since Feb. 14. 

Legislation cannot advance in that chamber without the support of at least 60 senators, making buy-in from each party essential to end the shutdown. 

Thune said he hadn’t made a final decision but seemed likely to let lawmakers head back home for the scheduled recess absent progress toward a deal. 

“If we’re not here, and when the Democrats are willing to make a deal, we’d certainly get everybody back to vote on it,” he said. “But no decisions on that yet. So hopefully the next couple days will be productive.”

Until a deal is reached, the DHS funding lapse will continue to affect workers and programs run by many of the agencies within the department, including the Coast Guard, Federal Emergency Management Agency, Secret Service and Transportation Security Administration.

ICE and Customs and Border Protection operations have largely continued uninterrupted since Republicans approved tens of billions in additional funding for those agencies in their “big, beautiful” law. 

‘We’ve got a lot of plate spinning’

Oklahoma Republican Sen. James Lankford said lawmakers need to find some sort of solution to fund DHS following weeks of stalemate. 

“At the end of the day, we got to get them open,” he said. “And the frustration that we have is we literally offered what they asked for three days ago, and then suddenly it’s like, ‘Oh no, no, we got new stuff.’”

Lankford said he doesn’t want to see senators leave for the recess without a deal to reopen DHS. 

North Carolina Republican Sen. Thom Tillis said lawmakers should stick around Capitol Hill until they solve at least some of the several outstanding issues. 

“We’ve got a lot of plate spinning. And I’m afraid if we leave until we get some certainty around them, a few of them are going to fall to the floor and people are going to be wondering what’s going on,” he said.

Connecticut Sen. Chris Murphy, the top Democrat on the Homeland Security Appropriations Subcommittee, said the way the Trump administration has approached immigration enforcement and deportation has led to the problems over DHS funding. 

“I have a constitutional responsibility to fund only a government that obeys the law,” he said. “I would be violating my oath of office to fund ICE without reforms.”

Moreno and Merkley face off

Ohio Republican Sen. Bernie Moreno went to the floor in the evening to ask unanimous consent to approve a bill that would fund every component of DHS for two weeks, providing back pay to all of its employees. 

Moreno said that would give senators enough time to work out a bipartisan deal on the full-year DHS spending bill if they canceled the recess and stayed around to work. 

Oregon Democratic Sen. Jeff Merkley proposed that lawmakers instead fund TSA through the end of September, when the current fiscal year ends. 

Moreno then asked Merkley to change that request to fund every agency within DHS except for Enforcement and Removal Operations for the rest of the fiscal year. 

Merkley then said he would agree to fund every agency within DHS except ICE and CBP.

“He keeps asking for Customs and Border Protection to be funded without modifying how they’re behaving across the nation,” Merkley said. “He keeps asking for ICE to be funded without modifying their actions where they’re acting like a secret police.”

The senators were unable to come to an agreement to approve funding for any of the agencies at DHS for any length of time during a nearly hour-long exchange that became tense at several points. 

Moreno said the impasse represented “a sad day for the United States Senate.” 

Ariana Figueroa contributed to this report. 

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency will allow gas stations to sell a blended fuel containing 15% ethanol into the summer season in an effort to lower gas prices, Administrator Lee Zeldin said Wednesday.

The blend, known as E15,  is usually barred in many Midwest states over the summer to reduce smog, though the federal government has routinely in recent years issued waivers to allow summer sales. The move, which ethanol producers applauded, could prevent a spike in prices at the pump during the war with Iran that has scrambled oil markets.

“EPA is working with our federal partners to reduce unnecessary costs and uncertainty and ensure that gas prices remain affordable for all Americans through the summer,” Zeldin said in a statement. “This emergency action will provide American families with relief by increasing fuel supply and consumer choice.”

Bipartisan officials in corn-producing states had sought the waiver, and continue to push for year-round availability of the product. Ethanol is manufactured from corn and other plant materials.

Move wins praise from industry, officials 

Seven Midwestern governors — Republicans Kim Reynolds of Iowa, Mike Kehoe of Missouri, Jim Pillen of Nebraska and Larry Rhoden of South Dakota and Democrats Tim Walz of Minnesota, JB Pritzker of Illinois and Tony Evers of Wisconsin — signed a March 6 letter to Zeldin requesting the waiver.

More recently, the top Democrat on the U.S. Senate Agriculture Committee also endorsed the move.

“With gas prices spiking, now’s the time to make E15 available year-round,” Minnesota U.S. Sen. Amy Klobuchar, said in a March 19 statement. “It will help lower costs and decrease our dependence on foreign oil.”

U.S. Rep. Adrian Smith, a Nebraska Republican, also applauded Wednesday’s announcement, and called on Congress to make the policy permanent.

Ethanol industry groups also approved of the waiver. Geoff Cooper, the president and CEO of the national ethanol advocacy group Renewable Fuels Association, said the move was “exactly what the supply chain needs right now.”

“President Trump and Administrator Zeldin understand that year-round E15 is a solution that can extend domestic fuel supplies and reduce pump prices for hardworking American families,” Cooper said. “With geopolitical conflict roiling energy markets worldwide, we applaud President Trump and Administrator Zeldin for acting quickly and decisively to combat potential fuel shortages and help keep a lid on gas prices this summer.”

Iowa Renewable Fuels Association Executive Director Monte Shaw also thanked the administration in a statement.

“With rising fuel prices and a war in the Middle East, this is the worst time to force retailers to bag E15 pumps. E15 adds home-grown supply and reduces prices for consumers,” he said.

Iran war disrupts oil market

Gas prices have risen since President Donald Trump launched strikes against Iran on Feb. 28. Transport through the Strait of Hormuz has been limited due to threats from Iran during the conflict.

White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt noted at Wednesday’s press briefing the waiver was a part of the administration’s response to rising fuel costs during the war.

“Obviously the administration is coming up with creative new solutions by the day to keep the price of oil stable, something the president wants to see,” she said.

Trump will also welcome nearly 1,000 farmers to the White House for a National Agriculture Day event on Friday, where the president plans to promote his record on the issue, Leavitt said.

The E15 waiver will be in effect May 1 through May 20. Twenty days is the longest period a single waiver can be applied under the Clean Air Act, the EPA said in the press release. The move signals the administration views further waivers as an option as restrictions ramp up over the summer.

Shauneen Miranda contributed to this report. 

State rainy day funds — money reserved to cover unexpected expenses and patch short-term budget holes — are declining nationally as states face increased costs, lower tax revenue and federal budget cuts, a new analysis found. 

The decline follows a period of strong reserves bolstered by federal pandemic aid and higher-than-expected tax collections, the report said.

Researchers at The Pew Charitable Trusts found that the number of days that state reserves could cover state operations fell in fiscal year 2025 — the first decline since the Great Recession. 

State reserve funds will play a critical role in stabilizing state finances as they confront the most widespread budgetary pressures since at least 2020, the researchers said. Like household savings accounts, state reserves help fund major one-time investments or provide a cushion in times of disrupted tax revenues, including economic downturns. Lower reserves means states could be quicker to cut state services or raise taxes in times of tight budgets.

Examining data from a survey conducted by the National Association of State Budget Officers, Pew researchers concluded that the median state in 2025 could fund its operations on reserve funds for 47.8 days — down from a record 54.5 days in fiscal 2024. 

States last fiscal year held a collective $174 billion in savings, though reserves varied widely. Wyoming, for example, held enough cash on hand to operate for 320 days. But New Jersey’s reserve didn’t hold enough to cover a single day of state operations. The other states with the smallest share of rainy day reserves were Washington, Illinois, Delaware and Rhode Island. 

The Pew analysis found that 26 states in 2025 had less capacity in their rainy day funds — meaning they would cover fewer days of state operations. In 14 of those states, officials drew on reserves, while 10 grew their balances but did so more slowly than they increased state spending. Two states maintained flat reserve levels as expenses grew.

While helpful in the short term, reserves won’t provide a long-term solution for states as many are confronting structural imbalances, meaning revenue streams are not keeping up with government spending. 

“Although reserves exist to provide relief during times of fiscal stress, they are not a sustainable solution for persistent budget shortfalls,” the analysis said. 

Budget pressures are expected to increase as states grapple with major federal policy changes that cut state funding and increase state administrative costs for federal safety net programs including Medicaid and food assistance. 

In its most recent survey of state budgets, the National Association of State Budget Officers found that general fund spending was projected to be “nearly flat” in fiscal year 2026 budgets. More states last year began enacting spending cuts and hiring freezes to balance budgets, the survey found, and slow revenue growth was projected for a fourth consecutive year. 

The survey showed 23 states expected spending to stay flat or decline in 2026, while 14 expected spending to grow by less than 5%. Seven states projected growth between 5% and 10%, while five expected spending to grow by more than 10%. 

Stateline reporter Kevin Hardy can be reached at khardy@stateline.org.

The candidate debate scheduled for Wednesday night between Wisconsin Supreme Court candidates Chris Taylor and Maria Lazar was canceled after Taylor was hospitalized with kidney stones Wednesday morning. 

According to a release from Taylor’s campaign, she woke up “feeling unwell” and went to urgent care where doctors recommended she visit the hospital for further evaluation. In a later release, the campaign said she’d rest a few days before returning to the campaign trail. 

“This afternoon Judge Taylor was diagnosed with kidney stones and will rest and recover for the next couple days before returning to the campaign trail,” the campaign said. “Judge Taylor will soon launch a statewide tour to meet voters across Wisconsin and we are committed to rescheduling today’s debate next week on a date that works for WISN, debate partners, and our opponent’s campaign. We appreciate everyone who has reached out to wish Judge Taylor well and we’re looking forward to a quick recovery.”

Wednesday’s debate, scheduled to be held at 7 p.m. at the Marquette University School of Law, was the only planned debate between the two candidates. A rescheduled debate is set to be held April 2 at 7 p.m. The makeup will be held at WISN’s studio without any audience. 

The race between Taylor and Lazar, both judges on state appeals courts, has drawn less attention than other recent Supreme Court races, with the ideological balance of the Court not at stake. A Marquette Law School poll released on Tuesday found that Taylor holds an 8 percentage point edge among likely voters, yet nearly half of those polled had still not decided whom to support.

This story has been updated.

Racine County election conspiracy theorist Harry Wait was found guilty of election fraud Tuesday for requesting absentee ballots on behalf of two elected officials in 2022. 

Wait has been a prominent voice in Wisconsin’s community of election deniers since the 2020 presidential election, including as a leader of the group H.O.T. Government. He was convicted of two counts of misdemeanor election fraud and one count of identity theft by a Walworth County jury. 

Wait was charged by Wisconsin Attorney General Josh Kaul in 2022 after he requested absentee ballots using the names of Racine Mayor Cory Mason, a Democrat, and Wisconsin Assembly Speaker Robin Vos, a Republican. Wait said at the time he requested the ballots as part of an effort to prove the state’s absentee ballot system is vulnerable to fraud. 

After requesting the ballots, Wait publicized his effort, gaining the attention of Racine County Sheriff Christopher Schmaling. Schmaling and other members of the Wisconsin Republican party celebrated Wait’s work as highlighting a vulnerability in the system. However election administrators said Wait had committed a crime by requesting the ballots and the fact he was caught showed the system was not actually vulnerable. 

Voting by mail has been under attack from Republicans in Wisconsin and across the country since President Donald Trump began to make his false claims that the 2020 election was stolen partially because of absentee ballots. Trump lost the 2020 election in Wisconsin by about 21,000 votes and numerous audits, reviews and investigations have affirmed that result. 

Wait faces up to seven years imprisonment, but his sentencing has not yet been scheduled. After his conviction, he told reporters he “would do it again.”

A bill that aimed to prevent the use of expensive lawsuits to silence journalists and other members of the public was blocked by the state Senate due to opposition from Sen. Cory Tomczyk (R-Mosinee), who previously imperiled a local Wausau paper. 

Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation — also known as SLAPP lawsuits — are a way of intimidating and quieting critics, including journalists and activists, by burdening them with the cost of expensive, baseless legal proceedings. Anti-SLAPP laws aim to provide a remedy.

Rep. Jim Piwowarczyk (R-Hubertus), who coauthored the bill, said in an email to the Wisconsin Examiner that he was “very disappointed that one or two Republican senators would block a bill that would protect everyone’s First Amendment rights.” He said he identified a few senators opposed to allowing the bill to make it to the Senate floor, and made several attempts to contact them and address potential concerns. 

“The vast majority of Republicans AND Democrats in the state Legislature supported this bill,” Piwowarczyk said. 

Bill cosponsors included Reps. Elijah Behnke (R-Town of Chase), Lindee Brill (R-Sheboygan Falls), Barbara Dittrich (R-Oconomowoc), Randy Udell (D-Fitchburg) and Sylvia Ortiz-Velez (D-Milwaukee).

Piwowarczyk is the co-founder of Wisconsin Right Now, a conservative publication focused on state government issues. He was elected to his first term in the state Assembly in 2024, and the anti-SLAPP legislation became a top priority because he said he has “seen firsthand how ordinary citizens, citizen activists, influencers, concerned parents and small media outlets are systematically targeted with lawsuits by entities with large or unlimited resources in an attempt to silence them.” 

“These lawsuits weren’t about legitimate grievances; they are a form of legal warfare or lawfare. As the saying goes, ‘The punishment is the process,’” Piwowarczyk said. 

The bill passed on a voice vote in the Assembly in February, but never received a vote in the Senate. 

Wisconsin Right Now cofounder with Piwowarczyk, Jessica McBride, recently accused Tomczyk in a Facebook post of maneuvering behind the scenes to block the bill from a vote. 

Tomczyk has some history with the issue, having prompted the introduction of anti-SLAPP legislation by Democratic lawmakers in 2023. He placed the Wausau Pilot & Review, a small digital newspaper started and edited by Shereen Siewert, in a dire financial situation when he sued the paper for defamation in 2021 after the it published a report that Tomczyk called a young teen an anti-LGBTQ slur at a Marathon County board was meeting. The paper reported that Tomczyk was overheard using the slur as a resolution called “A Community for All,” an effort  to reinforce acceptance of diversity and inclusivity, was being debated. 

According to the New York Times, Tomczyk admitted in a deposition to having used the slur before “out of joking and out of spite” about his gay brother.

The case was dismissed in April 2023 after the judge found that Tomczyk had failed to meet the legal standard for defamation. His appeal of the judgement was dismissed in 2024. Tomczyk’s lawsuit prompted Democratic lawmakers to introduce anti-SLAPP legislation in 2023, although it never advanced in the Republican-led Legislature. 

This session, Piwowarczyk introduced his own proposal, the Uniform Public Expression Protection Act, to curb retaliatory lawsuits and gathered bipartisan support for it. 

Piwowarczyk’s bill would have created a process for courts to quickly dismiss lawsuits that target protected speech or participation in government proceedings, including by requiring a prompt hearing and halting constant discovery while the motion is pending. The bill would have also allowed for the parties that prevailed in court to recover attorney fees. The bill was based on model legislation developed by the nonprofit Uniform Law Commission. 

Piwowarczyk has cited other cases he said prompted the bill, including one in which Moms For Liberty activist Scarlett Johnson was sued for defamation for calling a former teacher in the Mequon-Thiensville School District a “bully,” “lunatic,” “woke” and “white savior” on social media. Johnson eventually got representation from the Wisconsin Institute for Law & Liberty, a conservative legal nonprofit, and her case was dismissed. 

Wisconsin Right Now is not the only conservative endorser of the legislation. Meg Ellefson, a conservative podcast host, wrote in a Facebook post that she was “very disappointed” and that Tomczyk has a “shallow and myopic view” of the issue.

“This was an opportunity to protect the free speech of conservatives in Wisconsin and likely won’t come around again due to predictions that Republicans will lose control of the state Senate in this next election,” she wrote. 

A coalition of Wisconsin local media stakeholders including Siewert, Freedom of Information Council president Bill Lueders and Wisconsin Watch managing editor Jim Malewitz, signed a letter urging lawmakers to pass the bill and protect journalists and members of the public earlier this month. 

“Amid the many threats facing our communities, it’s more clear than ever that our right to free speech is under attack,” the letter stated. “We firmly believe that this bill is a strong solution to threats against the First Amendment in Wisconsin. By advancing this piece of legislation, lawmakers would be making a wise nonpartisan investment in protecting the speech and civic health of the commonwealth while laying the groundwork for a sustainable, community-rooted local news ecosystem.” 

Wisconsin is one of 11 states in the U.S. that does not have Anti-SLAPP protections in place.

Tomczyk, however, has rejected the claim that he is the only reason did not advance.

“I have to respond to the ridiculous notion that I have somehow made an assault on free speech in our state,” Tomczyk wrote in a Facebook post on Sunday evening. “Most media is dominated by the left with only 2 or 3 right leaning outlets in the entire state. This bill provides more [protection] for the media and does little or nothing for the ordinary citizen.” 

Tomczyk said the bill was discussed during a Republican Senate caucus meeting where he was the only person to speak on the bill. 

“It is in caucus that the Senators who have proposed bills,,, have the opportunity to support and promote their bill if there is opposition to it.” he wrote on Facebook. “When appropriately numbered Senate Bill 666 came up for discussion, I simply told my colleagues to be very careful and make sure they understand what they are voting for,” Tomczyk said. “I was the only Senator to speak against the bill. No Senator spoke FOR the bill.”

In his post, Tomczyk also, again, denied that he ever said the slur at the meeting, noted that he wasn’t a state lawmaker at the time and questioned the effectiveness of the legislation. 

Language in the bill states that one of three criteria that would be used to determine whether a case can be dismissed through the process is if “the responding party fails to establish a prima facie case as to each element of the cause of action or the moving party establishes either that the responding party failed to state a cause of action or that there is no genuine issue as to any material fact and the moving party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law.”

“You got that?” Tomczyk wrote about the language. “Clear as mud right?” 

Piwowarczyk said, however, that many of his colleagues got on board with the legislation after he explained its purpose and some of the examples. 

Sen. Eric Wimberger (R-Gillett) was the lead Senate author. He was not available for an interview with the Examiner, but said in a statement that “we unfortunately didn’t have the votes on Senate Bill 666 in the Senate as we prepared for last week’s floor session.”

The state Senate and Assembly have both adjourned their final regular floor sessions of the year. Work in the Capitol will be minimal for the remainder of the year as lawmakers turn their attention to running for reelection. 

Free Press Action said it would also be advocating for the bill next year.

“SLAPP lawsuits are designed to punish and silence, not to win. Even when dismissed, they can cost defendants tens of thousands of dollars and years in court. When anti-SLAPP laws are enacted, targeted victims can defeat these speech-chilling attacks,” Arin Anderson, the Wisconsin civic media campaign manager for Free Press Action, said in a statement. “Passing this broadly supported bill would send a clear message: Wisconsin stands up for free speech, open debate and the right of people to hold the powerful accountable. 

When lawmakers return in January 2027, the makeup of both the state Assembly and Senate could be quite different, with Republican leaders and other incumbents retiring and Democratic lawmakers eyeing majorities. 

“I look forward to reintroducing the bill next session and working with my colleagues to protect Wisconsin residents from meritless, anti-speech lawsuits,” said Wimberger, who is not up for reelection. 

Piwowarczyk said reintroducing the bill at the start of the next legislative session will be one of his first actions should he be elected to another term in office. 

“This bill is bipartisan, so regardless of what happens in November, I expect to have wide support again,” he said.

Transportation Security Administration officers are struggling to afford basic necessities as they approach their second missed full paycheck since a funding lapse began last month, union leaders said at a virtual press conference Tuesday.

Officials from the American Federation of Government Employees, which represents more than 44,000 TSA officers nationwide, urged Congress to immediately find a solution to the partial government shutdown that began Feb. 14. More than 400 TSA workers have quit their jobs since the start of the shutdown, with thousands missing shifts.

Mac Johnson, who represents TSA workers in North Carolina, Maryland, Virginia and West Virginia, said his members are increasingly telling him about difficulties affording groceries, housing costs, auto insurance and other essentials. 

Some have turned to selling plasma to make ends meet, he said.

“It’s not that these employees, their families, are hungry,” Johnson said. “They’re beginning to starve, literally starve, because they do not have the funds … to provide food for their families … So we not only strongly encourage, we demand that the Congress and this administration sit down like adults and resolve this matter so these employees won’t be placing themselves between a rock and a hard place.”

Dispute over immigration crackdown

After two fatal shootings of U.S. citizens by federal immigration agents in Minneapolis in January — and other chaotic episodes sparked by President Donald Trump’s aggressive deportation push — Democrats in Congress demanded changes to immigration enforcement policy as a condition for funding the Department of Homeland Security, which includes TSA and conducts most immigration enforcement. 

Senators have indicated in recent days they could be approaching a deal to fund the non-immigration parts of TSA, but union officials said their members must be paid immediately.

“We’ve been hearing about optimism and progress for weeks,” AFGE President Everett Kelly said. “Our members cannot eat optimism or pay rent with progress.”

As airports see TSA staffing shortages while officers miss work, security lines in some airports have stretched for hours.

Even once the shutdown ends, it could take two weeks to a month for workers to receive their back pay, Aaron Barker, the president of the union covering airports in Georgia, and Johnny Jones, the secretary-treasurer of the nationwide AFGE chapter for TSA workers, said. 

That could potentially mean it will take weeks to return to normal staffing levels as officers continue to miss shifts to seek gig work or other quick payouts, they said.

TSA officers have missed one partial and one full paycheck since mid-February. Another paycheck is due this weekend, the AFGE officials said.

Blame game

Asked about the situation affecting TSA employees, DHS provided a statement from spokeswoman Lauren Bis that closely resembled a comment she gave a day earlier blaming Democrats for the shutdown.

“American travelers are facing HOURS long waits at airports across the country and more than 450 TSA officers quit and thousands have called out sick from work because they are not able to afford gas, childcare, food, or rent,” Bis said.

At the U.S. Capitol, Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer blasted Trump for demanding that a national voter ID bill be included in a deal to reopen DHS.

“We wasted a day of negotiations because of Donald Trump’s temper tantrum,” Schumer, a New York Democrat, said in a floor speech. “A day may not seem a lot to the president, but that’s another day of TSA workers needlessly waiting for checks, another day of travelers standing for hours at a time at security.”

ICE ‘in the way’

The administration has dispatched agents from Immigration and Customs Enforcement, another DHS agency, to a handful of airports to assist TSA workers. ICE is fully funded, despite the DHS shutdown, because Republicans’ spending and tax cuts law last year provided money for immigration enforcement.

White House border czar Tom Homan has said ICE agents would help with tasks like guarding exits and not conduct activities that require extensive training, freeing up TSA officers to operate x-ray machines and other more specialized tasks.

But AFGE officials said the ICE officers are not helping.

“All ICE is doing is in the way,” Hydrick Thomas, the president of the AFGE council covering TSA workers, said. “We’re still trying to figure out why they’re there. No way ICE is gonna help us make passengers feel safe.”

WASHINGTON — U.S. Senate Republicans on Tuesday were waiting to hear back from Democrats after they sent them a new offer to fund the Department of Homeland Security, which has been shut down since mid-February. 

Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., said the proposal would fund many of the agencies within DHS, including the Federal Emergency Management Agency and the Coast Guard, but wouldn’t provide new spending for some immigration enforcement and deportation activities. 

Those programs, mostly run by Immigration and Customs Enforcement, received tens of billions of dollars in Republicans’ 2025 “big, beautiful” law, largely exempting those federal workers from the shutdowns.

Thune said the offer currently on the table would leave the door open to the House and Senate moving another budget reconciliation bill through that complicated process to provide additional funding for immigration and deportation programs.

The special legislative pathway would allow GOP leaders to move a bill through the Senate with a simple majority vote as long as they adhere to its rules. That would skirt the need for Democratic votes to get beyond the 60-vote legislative filibuster that applies to other bills. 

Pressure for a bipartisan deal to fund DHS mounted in recent days after security lines at airports throughout the country ballooned into multi-hour waits, leading passengers to miss their flights and face expensive rebooking fees. Union leaders on Tuesday demanded lawmakers reach a deal to fund the Transportation Security Administration, which is part of DHS.

SAVE Act as well

A possible reconciliation package, Thune said, could include elements of the SAVE America Act, an elections bill backed by President Donald Trump that remains stalled in the Senate amid Democratic opposition.

“This is a really good outcome, where we’ve moved the Democrats a long way in our direction,” Thune said. “And I think also an understanding that reconciliation could be a possibility in terms of additional funding and for perhaps addressing the SAVE America Act.”

Thune said the DHS spending bill wouldn’t include any of the overhauls to immigration enforcement that Democrats have advocated for since federal officers shot and killed two U.S. citizens in Minneapolis in January.  

“What was pretty clear is that they didn’t want funding,” he said. “So if you’re not going to have funding, I don’t know how all of a sudden now you can demand reforms, because I think for them, that was the issue.”

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer said during an afternoon press conference Democrats would prepare a counteroffer that would include changes to how ICE functions. 

“This does not have any reforms in ICE. But negotiations are ongoing and they’ve sent us an offer and we’ll be sending them an offer back,” the New York Democrat said. “And I can assure you it will contain significant reform in it.”

Schumer outlined what he described as “common sense” changes to immigration enforcement activities in late January after two U.S. citizens were killed by federal immigration officers in Minneapolis.

Dems stick to immigration reforms

Senate Appropriations Committee ranking member Patty Murray, D-Wash., said she will continue to press for “modest reforms” to immigration activities during negotiations over the DHS spending bill.  

“If we are talking about funding any part of ICE or CBP, we absolutely must take some key steps to rein them in. The current Republican offer in front of us does not do that,” she said. 

Murray later added that negotiators “have made some progress and the White House has already agreed to some steps” but that the entire point is that “reforms must make it into law.”

Connecticut Sen. Chris Murphy, the top Democrat on the Homeland Security Appropriations Subcommittee, said the Trump administration has “created this problem in which it’s really hard to address an immigration enforcement operation that’s out of control because it is funded out of almost every part of the DHS budget.”

Murphy said his sense is that Democrats are “still firm on our insistence that we’re not going to fund an immigration enforcement operation without reform.”

Republicans argue for deal

Oklahoma Republican Sen. James Lankford said the latest DHS funding offer represents what Democrats have “asked for multiple times” and that Trump has signed off on it. 

Lankford said GOP senators “could” move additional spending on immigration enforcement through the reconciliation process, pointing to the funding they approved just last year in the “big, beautiful” law.

“We’ve had things like that, even in the last year, and then Democrats had things like that in the (Inflation Reduction Act) as well,” he said. 

North Dakota Republican Sen. John Hoeven said he believes Democrats “need to take” the deal on DHS funding. 

“They keep telling us they’ll go with us and now they need to do it,” he said. “They can’t keep trying to back up or change the deal. It’s time to get it done.”

Adding SAVE Act could be difficult

Republicans’ plan to use the complex budget reconciliation process to pass additional funding for immigration and deportation programs as well as elements of their voter identification bill, dubbed the SAVE America Act, could face headwinds. 

Any reconciliation bill would need the support of nearly every Republican in Congress, a complicated obstacle given the party’s especially narrow majority in both chambers. 

The reconciliation process is also arduous and filled with rules at nearly every turn, including that all of its elements must address federal revenue, spending, or debt. And those changes cannot be deemed “merely incidental” by the Senate parliamentarian. 

Senate Appropriations Chairwoman Susan Collins, R-Maine, cast some doubt on using the reconciliation process to move elements of the SAVE America Act, saying, “I don’t think that’s a good approach.”

West Virginia Sen. Shelley Moore Capito said Republicans “are at the beginning” of figuring out what, if any, elements of the SAVE America Act can move through the reconciliation process. 

“It’s going to be difficult because it’s not a budgetary impact, it’s a policy impact. But that doesn’t mean some good things can’t move forward that would help with the integrity of the vote,” she said. “So we’ll just have to wait and see. I think reconciliation is probably something we’re going to be strongly considering when we get back.”

Citizenship proof

The legislation has several elements but generally would require Americans to prove their citizenship by showing a birth certificate or a passport when they register to vote. When voters try to cast a ballot they would need to show photo identification. And all states would be required to submit their voter rolls to a DHS database. 

The bill will not be able to make it through the Senate’s 60-vote legislative filibuster given strong opposition from Democrats.

South Dakota Republican Sen. Mike Rounds said one option for moving “items” in the SAVE America Act through reconciliation would be to provide funding for states to implement some of its provisions. 

“I haven’t seen the specific language on it. I just know that in most cases, what you’re talking about is making money available,” he said. “The policy would not be included, but the resources would be made available because you can’t do policy in reconciliation, you do resources.”

Ohio Sen. Bernie Moreno said GOP senators will “do whatever we can in reconciliation to get pieces and parts of” the SAVE America Act into law. 

And while he wasn’t entirely sure how Republicans would prove that those changes aren’t “merely incidental” to the multi-trillion-dollar federal budget, he said there is “a whole team of really, really smart people that will answer that question.”

Moreno said Republicans “don’t have to get every single thing in every single way” on the SAVE America Act. 

“You just keep the conversation going,” he said. “Eventually, the American public is going to punish Democrats who aren’t following up on 80-20 issues.”

WASHINGTON — Alan Armstrong, a Tulsa businessman, was sworn in Tuesday as Oklahoma’s newest U.S. senator.

Armstrong temporarily fills the seat of Markwayne Mullin, who was sworn in as U.S. Department of Homeland Security secretary earlier Tuesday. 

The Senate on Monday confirmed Mullin’s nomination to lead the agency responsible for carrying out President Donald Trump’s mass deportation agenda. 

Armstrong was sworn in at the U.S. Capitol just hours after Oklahoma GOP Gov. Kevin Stitt appointed him to the post Tuesday morning at the Oklahoma state Capitol in Oklahoma City. 

Iowa GOP Sen. Chuck Grassley, who serves as president pro tempore of the Senate, swore in Armstrong. Grassley joined Armstrong and his family in the Old Senate Chamber for a reenactment of the swearing-in shortly after. 

Armstrong has served as executive chairman of the board of directors for Williams. The major energy company is headquartered in Tulsa. 

Armstrong joins Oklahoma GOP Sen. James Lankford in the Senate and will serve alongside him until January 2027 — the remainder of Mullin’s term. 

Under Oklahoma law, Armstrong signed an affidavit earlier Tuesday vowing to not run for a full Senate term in 2026, the Oklahoma Voice reported. 

Earlier in March, Trump gave Oklahoma GOP U.S. Rep. Kevin Hern — who is running in November for the Senate seat — his “complete and total endorsement.” 

WASHINGTON — President Donald Trump hailed his new Homeland Security head, former U.S. Sen. Markwayne Mullin, as “strong, professional and fair” during an Oval Office swearing-in ceremony Tuesday.

Mullin, who until Monday was one of Oklahoma’s Republican senators, takes the reins at the Department of Homeland Security amid a weekslong partial shutdown in the aftermath of two high-profile fatal shootings of U.S. citizens by two departmental agencies.

Mullin, accompanied by family at the Oval Office ceremony, described his swearing-in as “surreal” and “humbling” during brief remarks after Attorney General Pam Bondi administered his oath of office.

“I made this very clear that I don’t care what color your state is. I don’t care if you’re red or you’re blue. At the end of the day, my job is to be secretary of Homeland and to protect everybody the same. And we will do that. I’ll fight every single day,” Mullin said. 

The partial shutdown has snarled major airports nationwide as thousands of Transportation Security Administration personnel, part of DHS, have quit or skipped work in the absence of paychecks.

Mullin said he met with many DHS employees Tuesday, noting they had been working without pay for more than a month because of “politics.”

Former fighter

Trump praised Mullin at Tuesday’s ceremony.

“I have no doubt that as he takes the helm of DHS, Markwayne will fight for Homeland Security, the United States and securing the country and making it really strong and the way it should be,” Trump said. “Our country’s come a long way in the last year.”

In rising to the role, Mullin became the first member of the Cherokee Nation to serve in the president’s Cabinet, a fact Trump said he “didn’t know.”

Mullin, an award-winning wrestler and former professional mixed martial arts fighter, began his Senate term in 2023. Until being elected as senator, he represented Oklahoma’s 2nd Congressional District starting in 2013.

Mullin resigned from the U.S. Senate Monday evening following the body’s confirmation of his appointment in a 54-45 vote.

The former senator, who will be tasked with leading a department of 260,000 employees, has not sat on a committee that handles policy for Homeland Security.

Alan Armstrong, a Tulsa businessman, was sworn in Tuesday to replace Mullin in the Senate.

Department in turmoil

Mullin replaces former Secretary Kristi Noem who, since Trump’s second term began, oversaw the president’s mass deportation crackdown and publicly flaunted her role in ad campaigns and public appearances — including being photographed while touring a notorious mega-prison in El Salvador where the U.S. deported hundreds of migrants against a judge’s order. 

Noem notably immediately defended two fatal shootings by department personnel in Minneapolis when Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents killed 37-year-old Renee Good on Jan. 7, and Customs and Border Patrol agents killed Alex Pretti, also 37, on Jan. 24.

Democrats have refused to fully fund DHS unless Republicans agreed to new policies for immigration enforcement — including banning face coverings on agents, mandating body camera usage and requiring judicial warrants. 

“The department that Markwayne takes over today is currently shut down by radical left Democrat thugs in Congress who have blocked all funding for DHS because they’re trying to shield illegal aliens, criminals and gang members,” Trump said, incorrectly stating that all DHS funding has been blocked. 

While a significant number of DHS employees, like TSA officers, have been working for weeks without pay, both ICE and Customs and Border Protection are fully funded under a new influx of cash Republicans approved in July as part of the massive tax and spending package.

Speaking to reporters following Mullin’s swearing-in, Trump declined to talk in detail about negotiations with the Senate to end the partial shutdown.  

“They’re working on all of that,” he said.

WASHINGTON — U.S. Supreme Court justices seemed split Tuesday on whether the Trump administration should be allowed to turn away asylum-seekers who present themselves at ports of entry at the U.S.-Mexico border.

The question presented to the justices was whether migrants have to fully cross into the United States in order to have the right to apply for asylum and be processed, or if they can apply for asylum when they appear at a port of entry while on Mexico’s side of the border. 

The policy requiring a full crossing, known as metering, is defunct, but the Trump administration is asking the high court to make a determination in order to potentially revive the practice for future use at the southern border.

“This is an important tool in the government’s toolbox for dealing with border surges when they occur,” Vivek Suri, assistant to the U.S. solicitor general, told the court during oral arguments on the asylum case. “I can’t predict when the next border surge occurs, but I can say that when it does occur, this is a tool that (the Department of Homeland Security) would want in its toolbox. It’s not something the court should leave to future uncertainty.”

The six conservative justices seemed to agree with the Trump administration’s position, and questioned the definition of when a migrant “arrives” in the United States and can therefore seek asylum — legal protection granted to those fleeing danger or persecution in their home country.

The three liberals of the Supreme Court — Justices Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan and Ketanji Brown Jackson —  asked whether the policy violated federal law protecting refugees. 

Lower and appeals courts have repeatedly blocked the metering policy, finding it violated U.S. asylum and refugee law for those escaping persecution after the first Trump administration expanded its use in 2017. The Biden administration rescinded the policy in 2021. 

A 2020 investigation by the Department of Homeland Security’s Office of Inspector General found that up to 680 migrants per day were turned around as a result of the metering policy. 

The ‘magic thing’

Conservative Justice Amy Coney Barrett asked Kelsi Corkran, an attorney who argued on behalf of the immigrant legal aid and humanitarian group Al Otro Lado, how close an asylum seeker has to be to qualify as “arriving” in the U.S.

The immigration advocacy group originally brought the challenge in 2017 after asylum seekers were turned away by border officials at U.S. ports of entry. 

“What is the magic thing, or the dispositive thing, that we’re looking for, where we say, ‘Ah, now that person we can say arrives in the United States?’” Barrett asked. 

Corkran said someone arrives in the U.S. at a port of entry “when they are at the threshold of the port’s entrance, about to step over.” 

“I think that’s consistent with ordinary meaning,” she said. “I arrive at my house, or I arrive in my yard, when I’m going through the gate. Now that process of arriving is interrupted by the border officer physically blocking them from completing the arrival.”

Barrett also asked Suri if the Trump administration plans to reinstate the metering policy. 

Suri said the Trump administration would like to, “when border conditions justify.”

Jackson noted the policy, in practice, would require an asylum seeker to violate U.S. immigration law by entering into the country without authorization, based on the Trump administration’s argument that a migrant has to be on U.S. soil before making an asylum claim. 

That would be considered entering the U.S. unlawfully.

“So imagine a polite asylum seeker who wants to do everything by the book, he approaches the border but does not cross precisely because the law says you are not supposed to enter the United States without authority,” Jackson said. “If we’re trying to think about what ‘arriving in’ means, surely Congress was contemplating that a person would be coming to the United States, would be doing so with an intent to comply with the law that says you’re not supposed to enter, and thereby asking for entry.” 

Justice Brett Kavanaugh also questioned Suri about how the policy seems to give preference to migrants to enter the U.S. without authorization, rather than those who are seeking to make an asylum claim. 

Suri said the metering policy doesn’t prevent a migrant from seeking asylum. 

“It’s saying ‘our port (of entry) is at capacity today, try again some other day,’ and that time when that person comes in, that person could come in legally,” he said. 

Refugee laws

Sotomayor questioned Suri how the metering policy didn’t violate the United Nations Refugee Convention of 1951. That act, which the U.S. signed in 1967, was created after the M.S. St. Louis ship, carrying more than 900 Jewish refugees during World War II, was prevented entry to the U.S. and turned back to Europe. 

Some passengers were able to find refuge in other countries, but 254 died in the Holocaust.

Suri said the metering policy doesn’t send people back to their home country. 

“No, you’re just telling them to walk back,” Sotomayor said, adding that if the turn-back policy were applied to the Jewish refugees on the St. Louis, it would be the same as telling them to swim back. 

“They happened to be on a boat, but that’s what we did,” she said. “We didn’t let them dock. We didn’t consider whether they were being persecuted. And the majority of those people were shipped back or had to go back from where they came and were killed. That’s what we’re doing here, isn’t it?”

Suri said that he does “not deny the moral weight of claims made by refugees, but that is not the question before the court.”

He said the issue is whether Congress imposed the obligation “in the asylum and inspection statutes, and those refer only to aliens who arrive in the United States.”

Sotomayor pushed back and noted that if someone were to fly into LaGuardia Airport in New York, they “may not have put their foot on U.S. land, but they’ve arrived in the United States. They’re knocking on the door.” 

The justices are likely to make a decision on the case by late June. 

The U.S. government will pay a French energy firm nearly $1 billion to cancel its plans to build a pair of wind farms off the East Coast, the Trump administration announced Monday in its latest move to stymie offshore wind. 

The French firm TotalEnergies will forfeit its leases for projects off the coasts of New York and North Carolina, with the United States paying $928 million to reimburse what the company initially spent on the leases.

Under the deal, TotalEnergies will reinvest that money into oil and gas projects, including a liquefied natural gas export facility in Texas. 

President Donald Trump has repeatedly vowed to block the development of offshore wind projects, which many East Coast states have been counting on to meet their energy needs in the coming years. The projects canceled under the deal announced Monday would have provided power to more than 1 million homes. 

Late last year, the Trump administration invoked classified national security threats to stop work on five wind farms that were under construction, but courts have ruled that the projects can proceed. But for dozens of other projects still in the planning and permitting stages, industry experts expect little progress while Trump remains in office. 

The administration claimed in a statement that the projects were “unreliable and costly.” But New York Gov. Kathy Hochul, a Democrat, condemned the agreement.

“Using a pay-not-to-play scheme to pressure a company to not build offshore wind is an outrageous abuse of taxpayer dollars,” Hochul said in a statement to The New York Times.

Environmental groups also blasted the deal, with some noting that it comes as Trump’s war with Iran has caused chaos for global oil markets.

“This deal is an outrageous misuse of taxpayer dollars to prevent Americans from having clean, affordable power exactly when they need it most,” Ted Kelly, director and lead counsel for U.S. clean energy at the Environmental Defense Fund, said in a statement. 

Stateline reporter Alex Brown can be reached at abrown@stateline.org.

Federal Medicaid cuts could exact a heavy toll on psychiatric units at hospitals across the country, many of which are already struggling to keep their doors open but provide essential mental health care to people who need it.

Psychiatric units are costly and, like labor and delivery services, typically lose money for hospitals and tend to be reimbursed at lower rates than other health services. In contrast, some specialty units, such as cardiovascular care, are lucrative: Cardiologists can generate up to seven times their salaries for hospitals.

Between 2023 and 2024, 126 hospitals across the U.S. shut down their inpatient psychiatric units, according to data provided to Stateline by the American Hospital Association.

“(Psychiatric units) are often in the red, and, for lack of a better word, kind of subsidized by the rest of the health system,” said Sarah Steverman of the National Association for Behavioral Healthcare. Steverman oversees regulatory affairs and is the liaison for a committee of hospital psychiatric unit administrators and clinicians.

The One Big Beautiful Bill Act that President Donald Trump signed into law last year will add to the strain, Steverman and other experts say.

The law is projected to cut federal Medicaid spending by an estimated $886.8 billion over the next decade, largely because new work requirements will push people off the rolls, according to estimates by the Congressional Budget Office. CBO estimates that it could increase the number of people without health insurance by 7.5 million in 2034.

Those cuts will have a significant effect on mental health care because Medicaid, jointly funded by the federal government and the states, covers more people with mental illness than any other public or private insurer — roughly 29% of the estimated 52 million nonelderly adults with mental illness, or about 15 million people, according to health research group KFF.

Behavioral health policy experts say the Medicaid changes will force hospital psychiatric units to provide care to many more people who don’t have insurance. Even before the law, Medicaid often didn’t fully reimburse hospitals for the cost of mental health care, unit administrators said.

Along with increasing the number of people without insurance, the One Big Beautiful Big Act places new limits on states’ ability to maximize federal funding and reimburse providers.

The federal government allows states with contracted Medicaid managed care organizations running their Medicaid programs to direct them to pay providers more. But beginning in 2028, the One Big Beautiful Bill Act will cap these state-directed payments, forcing state Medicaid programs to reduce reimbursement rates by 10 percentage points each year until they reach either 100% or 110% of what Medicare pays.

The federal law also caps provider taxes, a strategy states have used to boost the Medicaid dollars they get from the federal government.

As a result, states will face the choice of replacing the lost federal money with state dollars, scaling back services or providing coverage to fewer people.

Conservatives who have backed the Medicaid cuts say such tools are accounting tricks that states have used to draw down more federal money. Some have even called the provider taxes a “money laundering” scheme. Eliminating them, they say, will force states to be more accountable for their Medicaid spending.

“States are gaming the system — creating complex tax schemes that shift their responsibility to invest in Medicaid and rob federal taxpayers,” Dr. Mehmet Oz, the administrator of the federal Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, said in a news release last year.

But Angela Kimball, chief advocacy officer at Inseparable, a mental health advocacy organization, said the tools are essential, and that the cuts will be detrimental.

“For the mental health system, and particularly for facility-based care, it (Medicaid) is the financial foundation. And when you simultaneously reduce who’s covered, what providers get paid, and limit the tools states have to make up the difference, you’re not just trimming around the edges; you’re undermining the whole structure,” Kimball said.

The mental health field is also struggling with workforce shortages across states, especially in rural areas. As of December 2024, more than 122 million Americans lived in designated mental health professional shortage areas.

Dr. Arpan Waghray, a psychiatrist and CEO of Providence’s Well Being Trust, serves as a member of the American Psychiatric Association’s Council on Healthcare Systems and Financing. Providence has 16 psychiatric units across Alaska, California, Oregon and Washington state, and Medicaid and Medicaid HMOs account for 42% of patients across those units. That number increased as the states expanded eligibility under Obamacare.

In contrast, Medicaid pays for roughly 13% of oncology inpatients and about 10% of cardiology inpatients across the hospital systems.

“Inpatient psychiatric units, especially when they’re part of larger hospitals and academic centers, like our community hospitals … they generally tend to operate on a loss,” Waghray said. “We are no exception to that.”

He noted that estimates show psychiatric units have a negative operating income of about 37%.

“We don’t want to make a profit on psychiatric units,” he said, adding the goal is to at least “break even.”

Waghray said if more units are forced to shutter, that will lead to more crowding in emergency rooms and jails. Often, jails and prisons — facilities with inadequate care — end up being mental health care providers for people who lacked access to care. People in crisis also may be forced to wait for a psychiatric bed to open up elsewhere.

“It has this cascading effect that touches everyone’s lives,” Waghray said. “The two places where people get care if they don’t get care in the right setting is the inpatient (psychiatric) unit, and you cut that, then essentially you have emergency departments that are overcrowded or jails that are overcrowded.”

Health economist John McConnell, director of the Center for Health Systems Effectiveness at Oregon Health and Sciences University, said “the whole mental health system is really going to get hit with a shock here.”

“Crisis care funding is all over the place, and there’s not really a consistent way of funding it, and it’s often underfunded,” he said. “You had a fragile system … made more fragile with a lot of the executive orders from the Trump administration — and then (the new federal law) has sort of further chipped away at it.”

Steverman said that people with severe mental health emergencies — such as acute psychosis, mania or suicidality — who need urgent treatment after emergency room intake often require multiple clinical staff and observation.

Gretchen Clark Bower, senior director of Behavioral Health Services at Providence Regional Medical Center Everett, in Washington state, said the hospital’s inpatient psychiatric unit, which opened about five years ago, relies heavily on Medicaid: Roughly 80% of psychiatric inpatients are covered by Medicaid, and many have severe illnesses.

“It has been a stretch financially for a long time,” Bower said. “The costs of providing care are far more than what we’re getting reimbursed. And that is extremely challenging.”

Everett’s average psychiatric hospitalization is about 16 days. But sometimes, insurers will only cover up to a certain number of hospitalization days for mental health, Bower said. That leaves the hospital to absorb the rest of the costs.

“We want to make sure that we are discharging people when they are safe to discharge — not just when their insurance stops paying,” Bower said.

Bower said she worries the cuts will destabilize people if their care gets interrupted after losing coverage, putting more pressure and costs on the health system.

“It worries me a lot,” she said. “How do we continue to take care of our community into the future, and how do we sustain ourselves financially as we do that? It’s an incredibly difficult task.”

A report from the American Psychiatric Association found that states that had expanded Medicaid eligibility saw smaller increases in suicide compared with nonexpansion states: Medicaid expansion was associated with about 0.4 fewer suicides per 100,000 people yearly.

“Combined with workforce shortages and long-standing insufficient reimbursement for psychiatric services, further reductions in Medicaid will increase pressure on already struggling facilities,” said Ben Teicher, spokesperson for the American Hospital Association. “Our members have been worried about their psych units for a long time, and any further erosion of what Medicaid pays for would make it even worse.”

Stateline reporter Nada Hassanein can be reached at nhassanein@stateline.org.

The Wisconsin State Senate passed a bill last week that will request funding for health care coverage for incarcerated people from the federal government. State Assembly lawmakers had already passed the bill last month. 

In a Facebook post last week, Sen. Jesse James (R-Thorp) celebrated the measure and said he hopes Gov. Tony Evers will sign it into law. 

James said that “as people leave our correctional system, they have a 40 TIMES higher risk of overdose death within the first TWO weeks after release.” This appeared to be a reference to a North Carolina study of opioid overdose death rates between 2000 and 2015. 

“This bill is a great step forward for Wisconsin as it ensures we become a healthier, safer community,” James said.  

The vote was nearly unanimous, with only Sen. Steve Nass (R-Whitewater) voting no. 

A federal “inmate exclusion policy” limits incarcerated people’s ability to use Medicaid, but the bill seeks to have the state apply for a waiver under an exception outlined by the federal government. 

Under the bill, the state’s Department of Health Services would submit a request to conduct a demonstration project to provide 90 days of prerelease coverage to incarcerated people for case management services, medication-assisted treatment for all types of substance use disorders and a 30-day supply of prescription medications. Incarcerated people would have to be otherwise eligible for coverage under the Medical Assistance program, which provides health services to people with limited financial resources.  

The advocacy organization WISDOM celebrated the Senate’s passage of the bill in an email newsletter signed by Mark Rice, the group’s transformational justice campaign coordinator. 

Rice said that full implementation of the bill would reduce needless suffering and the number of people being detained, benefit public safety, save resources and put more people on a path to successful reentry into society. 

In written testimony dated Oct. 31, director Dawn Buchholz of the Juneau County Department of Health Services said that passing the bill “will help us provide crucial services to inmates reentering our communities.”

“In the past, our agency literally completed hundreds of suicide and other behavioral health assessments for inmates experiencing emergency mental health and substance use crises in the Juneau County Jail,” Buchholz testified. “This was a frustrating process because while we can assess inmates, we cannot provide them with mental health or substance abuse treatment due to Medicaid rules.”

Buchholz testified that providing prerelease coverage to incarcerated people, along with a 30-day supply of prescription medications, “will help our agency work more effectively with our jails and prisons, result in a seamless reentry into community behavioral health services and decrease recidivism.”

DOC communications director Beth Hardtke referred the Examiner to the DOC fiscal estimate for information on what the agency is currently able to provide and the potential impact of the legislation. 

The department estimated it may have over $750,000 in potential cost savings if the waiver is approved and implemented, allowing the state to expand health care access for incarcerated people. 

The Examiner reported last month that in the fiscal estimate, the DOC said that in FY 2025, the agency spent $500,000 on the 30-day medication supply dispensed for incarcerated people before they were released, $300,000 on pre-release medication assisted treatment medications and $3.9 million on the Opening Avenues to Reentry Success (OARS) program. The OARS program supports the transition from prison to the community of incarcerated people living with a severe and persistent mental illness who are at medium-to-high risk of reoffending. 

Because not all incarcerated people will qualify, the estimate assumes that half of the medication and medication assisted treatment medications costs will be reimbursed, as well as 10% of the OARS program costs. There may be other costs DOC can have reimbursed. 

The Examiner previously reported that states have to reinvest federal matching funds received for carceral health care services currently funded with state or local dollars. Reinvested money must go toward activities that increase access or improve the quality of health care services for people who are incarcerated or were recently released, or for health-related social services that may help divert people released from incarceration from involvement in the criminal justice system. 

In the fiscal estimate, the DOC said that incarcerated people in local detention facilities may also be eligible for the services. This could result in local cost savings in addition to DOC cost savings. The department couldn’t estimate the potential local cost savings of the bill because not all local detention facilities provide the same type or level of services.  

Hardtke noted that the bill only allows the state to apply for the federal waiver, and it isn’t guaranteed that a waiver would be approved. 

As of Nov. 21, 19 states had approved waivers, according to the health policy research organization KFF. Nine, including the District of Columbia, had pending waivers. 

In an email to the Examiner in November, the Wisconsin Department of Health Services said the bill requires the three services that the waiver would need to include to be submitted to the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services. The bill doesn’t require other criteria for the project, aside from current Medicaid eligibility requirements. 

Beyond those requirements, the department said it needs the authority that the bill would provide before it starts work on putting together the details of the waiver. The bill requires the department to submit the request for a waiver by Jan. 1, 2027. 

Milwaukee lawmakers and residents who have lost loved ones to traffic accidents advocated Monday for a measure that recently failed to pass the Legislature allowing the city to use cameras to catch speeders and other traffic law violators. 

Wisconsin law currently prohibits the use of cameras to capture photos of vehicles that speed or run a red light. SB 375  would have carved out an exception for Milwaukee law enforcement to use a speed safety camera system to identify speeding violations and a traffic control photographic system to identify traffic signal violations.

Milwaukee has been grappling with high rates of traffic deaths and injuries for several years, and Sen. Dora Drake (D-Milwaukee) said during the press conference in the state Capitol rotunda that the bill would help prevent further injuries and deaths. 

“One life loss is too many, and it’s time that we get this bill passed. If it’s not during this session, then next session, it needs to be a top priority,” Drake said.

The state Senate adjourned its final regular floor session of the year last week. The state Assembly had already adjourned its final session, meaning that work in the building will be minimal for the remainder of the year. 

Recent data from the city of Milwaukee found that traffic deaths hit a six-year low in 2025. 

In 2022, traffic deaths peaked at 77. In 2025, 57 people died, down from 70 deaths in 2024. Mayor Cavalier Johnson credits the work of the city and its Office of Vision Zero, which aims to reduce annual traffic deaths to zero. 

According to Milwaukee’s Traffic Violence Dashboard, there have been 7 deaths and 966 people injured across 682 crashes with injuries so far in 2026.

“We know that speed is one of the most significant factors in traffic fatalities and severe injuries in Milwaukee and across Wisconsin,” Drake said. “Traffic safety cameras are a proven, evidence-based solution and in hundreds of other communities, cameras have reduced crashes, injuries and fatalities.”

According to the U.S. Department of Transportation, traffic cameras can reduce crashes in large urban areas by up to 54% and cut down on injuries from crashes by up to 47%.

Drake noted the bill never received a vote in the Senate Transportation and Local Government committee even as a majority of the lawmakers on the committee were coauthors or cosponsors. 

The bill had bipartisan support. Its lead authors were Sen. Cory Tomczyk (R-Mosinee) and Rep. Todd Novak (R-Dodgeville). Tomczyk has not replied to a request for comment from the Wisconsin Examiner about why the proposal never received a vote.

In written testimony, Tomczyk said the bill wouldn’t solve all of the traffic violation problems in the state’s largest city, but would be “a tool in the toolbox that law enforcement can use to try and make the streets a little safer.”

“As a conservative, having more cameras watching our every move is not ideal. Unfortunately, in this modern world, cameras are everywhere, and that train has ‘left the station’,” he said. “When it comes to the safety of Milwaukee residents and visitors, having a few more mechanical eyes watching is something we can live with.” 

Tomczyk also said in the testimony that he was expecting to receive criticism from his party for authoring the bill. 

“That is OK. We need debate and discussion on issues such as these, and I welcome that discussion,” Tomczyk said.

Drake said at the press conference that concerns about the bill being a “cash cow” — a way for the city to bring in money — was one of the biggest barriers to advancing the legislation. 

Lawmakers in the Republican-led Legislature have often been hesitant to increase the amount of revenue going to the city of Milwaukee.

Under the bill, speeders who go more than 15 miles per hour over the speed limit and are caught by the camera system could get a citation. Drivers who don’t stop at a red light and are caught by the system would be subject to a forfeiture of between $20 and $100.

The money collected from forfeitures would be required to be used for the costs of implementing and operating the system. After the costs have been paid, the money would only be allowed to be used for traffic enforcement, traffic safety programs and traffic safety infrastructure. 

“This is an additional tool that is necessary to ensure that all partners can assure that we are actively changing the behavior in Wisconsin, in Milwaukee, as well as giving the tools necessary to create more calm traffic patterns,” Drake said. 

The bill would have limited the number of cameras to up to five in each of Milwaukee’s 15 aldermanic districts and included a five-year sunset date to allow for an evaluation of the system’s effectiveness.

Sen. LaTonya Johnson (D-Milwaukee) thanked the families who have advocated for the legislation at the Capitol and said she was angry that the bill did not make it across the finish line this session. 

“I know that the cost of the Legislature refusing to act will be paid in funerals and trauma to our communities. It will be paid in my neighbors’ lives. It will be paid by families burying their children,” Johnson said. 

Gloria Shaw’s son, Xavier, died in 2022 at the age of 23 while crossing the road in downtown Milwaukee near Fiserv Forum. She said she has been advocating since then for measures to curb reckless driving in the city.

“I’d have my closure by now had there been more cameras on that corner when he got hit,” Shaw said at the press conference. “I’m fighting for this bill because, not only am I his voice, I’m the voice of others who suffer in silence, who don’t know where to go and what to do. This bill is important.” 

Ruth Ehrgott said that when used correctly the traffic cameras would “create accountability in places where no one is present.” Her pregnant daughter, Erin Mogensen, died in 2023 after a man ran a red light while fleeing police in Milwaukee. He was sentenced to 40 years in prison. Her family also advocated for the state law that increased mandatory minimums for reckless drivers who flee police and cause serious injuries or deaths.

“For me, this is not theoretical. It was camera technology that helped identify and ultimately lead to the apprehension of the person who killed my daughter and my grandbaby,” Ehrgott said. “Wisconsin has an opportunity right now. Let’s not miss it. No more names. No more families changed forever.”

WASHINGTON — The U.S. Senate voted Monday evening to confirm Markwayne Mullin to lead the Department of Homeland Security, which is responsible for carrying out President Donald Trump’s mass deportation agenda. 

The 54-45 vote means that Mullin, a Republican senator from Oklahoma, will take over the department in the midst of a five-week shutdown. He will replace outgoing Secretary Kristi Noem, whom the president reassigned to another role in the administration.

Mullin voted for himself. Democratic Sens. John Fetterman of Pennsylvania and Martin Heinrich of New Mexico were the only Democrats to back Mullin’s confirmation.

Just before the Senate adjourned, Mullin submitted his resignation letter.

The department has been shut down since mid-February while Democrats have called for restraints on federal immigration agents after officers killed two U.S. citizens in Minneapolis. On Jan. 7, Renee Good was shot and killed by an Immigration and Customs Enforcement agent and on Jan. 24, Alex Pretti was pinned down and killed by Customs and Border Protection officers.

Senate Majority Leader John Thune, Republican of South Dakota, said on the Senate floor before the vote Monday that Mullin will be entering DHS at a difficult time. 

“It’s a tough assignment, made all the more challenging right now by Democrats having shut DHS down for five weeks,” Thune said. “We all know that Markwayne isn’t afraid of a challenge.”

Speaking to reporters early Monday, Trump said that Mullin is “gonna be fantastic” as DHS secretary. 

As an enrolled member of the Cherokee Nation, Mullin will be the first Indigenous DHS secretary. 

Shutdown effects

Though DHS is shuttered, ICE and CBP are still fully funded because the Republican-led Congress last year passed a separate funding stream of $175 billion for immigration enforcement. 

Trump over the weekend directed his administration to place ICE agents in several airports in an attempt to aid Transportation Security Administration agents, who are working without pay. ICE and TSA are both agencies within DHS.

Mullin does not have any experience on a committee that handles policy for Homeland Security and will be tasked with leading a department of 260,000 employees.

Some senators have raised concerns about Mullin’s temperament, citing a 2023 incident in which he physically challenged a witness before Congress. Mullin also expressed sympathy toward a man who attacked Sen. Rand Paul, breaking six of the Kentucky Republican’s ribs and damaging a lung. 

Paul, who chairs the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee, voted against advancing Mullin’s nomination to the Senate floor. Paul also voted against Mullin’s confirmation Monday night. 

The Senate advanced Mullin’s nomination in a 54-37 procedural vote Sunday. Two Democrats, Pennsylvania’s John Fetterman and New Mexico’s Martin Heinrich, joined all Republicans who voted Sunday. Paul did not vote on Sunday. 

Wisconsin and 20 other states filed a lawsuit Monday that seeks to prevent the U.S. Department of Agriculture from imposing “anti-discrimination” conditions on all the money the department disburses to the states. 

USDA provides billions of dollars in funding to the states every year to administer programs such as the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program — which in Wisconsin helps nearly 700,000 residents afford groceries. 

Under a new policy issued late last year, USDA states it will not provide any financial disbursements unless the states agree to conditions involving “gender ideology,” “fair athletic opportunities” for women and girls and immigration. 

The lawsuit argues the conditions are overly broad and vague, that sub-agencies within USDA are interpreting the rules differently, potentially conflict with existing state laws and amount to unconstitutional roadblocks between the states and the money that Congress has already appropriated to be sent to the states. 

“With billions at stake for life sustaining food and critical funding for their residents, the States may be forced to accept funding conditions that they fundamentally do not understand, that are designed to coerce the States and their instrumentalities to adopt USDA’s policies, and which are ultimately unlawful,” the lawsuit states. 

Wisconsin Attorney General Josh Kaul, along with the attorneys general of California, Illinois and Massachusetts led the development of the suit which is being joined by Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, the District of Columbia, Hawaii, Maine, Maryland, Michigan, Minnesota, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont, Virginia, and Washington. 

Aside from the nutrition assistance programs, USDA also funds programs that aid and support Wisconsin farmers, prevent forest fires and protect local ecosystems. UW-Madison received $68 million from USDA during the 2024-25 fiscal year for agricultural research and other programs. On Monday, USDA announced more than $2 million in spending to support timber operations in Monroe and Shawano counties.  

“USDA funding helps keep kids and families fed and healthy,” Kaul said in a statement. “Attempting to use this critical funding to further unrelated policy goals of the Trump administration is wrong and unlawful.”

Airport security workers missed work Monday at the highest rate since a partial government shutdown began in mid-February, the Department of Homeland Security said, and the Trump administration sent immigration officials to some airports in an attempt to keep lines moving.

Travelers reported hourslong security lines at major airports in Atlanta and Houston, while waits of 30 minutes or more were reported at several other hubs Monday.

Nearly 3,500 Transportation Security Administration agents, roughly 11.8% of the scheduled nationwide workforce, called out from work Monday. TSA officers have been working without pay since the department that oversees TSA began a funding lapse Feb. 14 due to a dispute in Congress over immigration enforcement.

Call out rates were over 20% at a handful of major airports, according to DHS. They were:

• 42.3% in New Orleans
• 41.5% in Atlanta
• 39.1% in Houston
• 38.1% in Baltimore
• 37.4% at New York’s John F. Kennedy International Airport
• 24.7% in Pittsburgh
• 24.2% in Philadelphia
• 21.7% at New York’s Laguardia Airport
• 20.3% in Phoenix

ICE to airports

More than 400 TSA workers have quit since the “pointless, reckless shutdown” began, DHS spokeswoman Lauren Bis said in an emailed statement. 

Bis blamed the shutdown and related problems with air security staffing on Democrats in Congress, and confirmed DHS would send officers from Immigration and Customs Enforcement, another DHS agency, to assist TSA at airports.

TSA officers “are not able to afford gas, childcare, food, or rent,” she said. 

“While the Democrats continue to put the safety, dependability, and ease of our air travel at risk, President Trump is taking action to deploy hundreds of ICE officers, that are currently funded by Congress, to airports being adversely impacted. This will help bolster TSA efforts to keep our skies safe and minimize air travel disruptions.”

President Donald Trump praised ICE in comments to reporters Monday morning and suggested he could also call upon National Guard troops to help at airports.

“They stepped in so, so strongly,” he said of ICE officers. “They’ll do great. And if that’s not enough, I’ll bring in the National Guard.”

Tom Homan, the White House border czar who coordinates much of Trump’s immigration enforcement agenda, said in a Sunday interview on CNN’s “State of the Union” that ICE officers would primarily handle duties that did not require extensive training, such as making sure no one entered secure areas through exits.

“We’re simply there to help TSA do their job in areas that don’t need their specialized expertise,” he said, rather than screening through the X-ray machines, he told CNN’s Dana Bash. “But there are roles we can play to release TSA officers from the non-significant role, such as guarding an exit, so they can get back to the scanning machines and move people quicker.”

DHS declined to provide a list of airports to which ICE would deploy, citing “operational security” concerns.

ICE officers were spotted at Hartsfield-Jackson Atlanta International Airport, the nation’s busiest, where waits of four hours in security lines were reported on Monday.

Shutdown persists

Federal law requires TSA officers to work, even during a shutdown, though they will not be paid until funding is restored.

Despite being at the center of the shutdown debate, ICE has not been affected by the DHS funding lapse because Republicans provided the agency massive funding in the tax cuts and spending bill they passed along party lines last year.

Democrats have refused to fund a fiscal 2026 appropriations bill for the department without major changes to the administration’s immigration enforcement, which reached a tipping point following the deaths of two U.S. citizens in Minneapolis in January.

“Because of the Democrat shutdown, President Trump is using every tool available to help American travelers who are facing hours long lines at airports across the country—especially during this spring break and holiday season that is very important for many American families,” Bis said.

In a rare weekend session, the U.S. Senate again failed to advance a funding measure for DHS on Saturday.

Deadly LaGuardia crash

The pilot and co-pilot of an Air Canada plane died, and more than 40 people were injured, after the jet collided with a fire truck at LaGuardia airport late Sunday.

The incident was unrelated to problems with TSA, which is not responsible for safety on runways or elsewhere outside of airport terminals, but it further delayed and complicated travel in the New York City area.

Ashley Murray contributed to this report.

WASHINGTON — President Donald Trump on Monday said his administration is in talks with Iran about resolving the war, a claim that significantly tamped down oil prices and spurred market increases in Europe and the United States — though Iran denied any progress in negotiations.

Writing on his social media platform, Truth Social, the president said the United States and Iran “HAVE HAD, OVER THE LAST TWO DAYS, VERY GOOD AND PRODUCTIVE CONVERSATIONS REGARDING A COMPLETE AND TOTAL RESOLUTION OF OUR HOSTILITIES IN THE MIDDLE EAST.” 

Trump’s 109-word, all-caps post brought the cost of Brent crude oil briefly below $100 a barrel, after his threat Saturday to bomb Iran’s major energy infrastructure spiked prices.

The historic shock to the global energy market has caused gasoline prices to soar across the U.S. to an average of $3.95 per gallon on Monday, up from $2.93 a month ago, according to AAA.

Trump said he had called off his 48-hour ultimatum for Iran, set to expire Monday evening, to conduct negotiations over “a five-day period,” he told reporters.

“We’ll see how that goes, and if it goes well, we’re going to end up with settling this, otherwise we just keep bombing our little hearts out,” he said during roughly 20 minutes of comments to the press at the steps of Air Force One prior to boarding a flight to Memphis, Tennessee, for an appearance.

Fourth week of hostilities

Trump claimed Iranian negotiators have agreed on a 15-point plan, as the U.S.-Israeli war in Iran enters its fourth week.

“Well, they’re not going to have a nuclear weapon. That’s number one. That’s number one, two and three, they will never have a nuclear weapon. They’ve agreed to that,” he said.

Trump also said the Strait of Hormuz, a major oil shipping passage that Iran has effectively closed to ships flagged under Western and Persian Gulf nations, “will be opened very soon if this works.” 

He suggested “​​maybe me and the ayatollah, whoever the ayatollah is” will share joint control of the strait, which handles a fifth of the world’s petroleum products.

As for Iran’s stockpile of enriched uranium, Trump said capturing and removing it will be “very easy.”

“If we have a deal with them, we’re going down, and we’ll take it ourselves,” he said.

Iran denial

Iran’s Foreign Ministry has denied such talks were underway, according to a statement cited in media reports.

The speaker of Iran’s parliament Mohammed-Bagher Ghalibaf also denied any negotiations in a post on X just before noon Eastern, saying “Our people demand the complete and humiliating punishment of the aggressors.”

“All officials stand firmly behind their Leader and people until this goal is achieved. No negotiations with America have taken place. Fake news is intended to manipulate financial and oil markets and to escape the quagmire in which America and Israel are trapped,” Ghalibaf wrote.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu released a video statement Monday afternoon, Eastern time, confirming that he spoke with Trump, who he said “believes there is an opportunity to leverage the tremendous achievements we have reached alongside the U.S. military to realize the goals of the war through an agreement, an agreement that will safeguard our vital interests.”

“At the same time, we are continuing to strike in both Iran and Lebanon. We are smashing the missile program and the nuclear program, and we continue to deal severe blows to Hezbollah. … We will safeguard our vital interests under all circumstances,” Netanyahu said, according to his office’s English translation.

Trump’s schedule Monday included the trip to Memphis to participate in a roundtable regarding public safety.

WASHINGTON — The Trump administration is again trying to send the wrongly deported Kilmar Abrego Garcia to the west African nation of Liberia and urging a federal judge to dismiss a bar on his removal, according to legal documents filed over the weekend. 

Abrego Garcia, of Maryland, has agreed to be deported to Costa Rica, which will accept him as a refugee, and is fighting his removal to another third country. The Trump administration cannot remove him to his home country of El Salvador, after he was mistakenly deported there in 2025 and kept in a brutal Salvadoran prison. 

His erroneous deportation cast a national spotlight on the Trump administration’s aggressive immigration enforcement.

Acting U.S. immigration and Customs Enforcement Director Todd Lyons, in a Friday court declaration, said he was disregarding Abrego Garcia’s proposal to accept removal to Costa Rica for two reasons. 

Lyons said Abrego Garcia did not designate Costa Rica as a third country of removal in 2019, when he was granted a withholding from removal to El Salvador. Lyons argues that Abrego Garcia therefore “forfeited his right to designate an additional country of removal when he failed to designate any other country prior to the completion of his removal proceedings.”

Lyons said the second reason is the Trump administration has already invested in “high-stakes political negotiations” with Liberia’s government to accept Abrego Garcia and if the administration were to abandon “agreements negotiated at the highest levels of government (it) could cast doubt on the diplomatic reliability of the United States in relation not only to the Republic of Liberia but also other nations with whom it negotiates on these and other matters.” 

Lyons said for those reasons, federal Judge Paula Xinis of the U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland should dissolve her injunction that prevents the Trump administration from removing Abrego Garcia. 

Third-country removals were somewhat rare until the second Trump administration, which is relying more on them as the president aims to carry out mass deportations. 

Abrego Garcia’s situation dates back years. In 2019, when Abrego Garcia was granted the withholding of removal because a judge found he would face violence from gangs if removed to El Salvador, he had an agreement with ICE to check in yearly. 

In 2025, ICE agents stopped Abrego Garcia while he was picking his son up from day care and he was informed there was a change in his immigration status. He was placed on a deportation flight with hundreds of other men to the brutal Salvadoran mega-prison known as CECOT. 

Later in 2025, the courts ordered Abrego Garcia’s return to the United States.

The Trump administration is asking for Xinis to make her decision by April 17. Xinis was appointed by former President Barack Obama.