Photos of flooded streets in Milwaukee during the August 2025 storm. (Photo courtesy of Anne Tuchelski)

Disaster relief for six Wisconsin counties inundated by historic flooding back in August has again been denied by the federal government. It’s the second time that Waukesha, Ozaukee, Washington, Grant, Milwaukee, Door and Grant counties have been denied assistance from the Trump administration since the floods drowned parks, damaged homes and trapped people in their cars in the middle of the night. 

This latest denial was in response to an appeal filed by Gov. Tony Evers in November, after the first denial came from  the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). At the time, Evers stressed that the extreme storms had left over $26.5 million in disaster costs. 

In a statement Monday, Evers called the new denial “completely unsatisfactory,” saying that the Trump administration  had again denied the  relief for Wisconsin “without any explanation” and calling for the decision to be reversed. “Wisconsinites have been hard at work to build back from these historic flooding events, but folks are not out of the woods yet,” said Evers. “Efforts to rebuild will cost tens of millions of taxpayer dollars that local communities will be on the hook for, and it’s really disappointing to see our federal leadership turn their backs on Wisconsin, our families, and our communities in our time of need. We will continue to advocate to the Trump Administration and our federal partners that Wisconsin needs these resources to rebuild and recover, and we will continue to do what we can to support our local partners however we can in the meantime.” 

FEMA’s letter to Evers said that assistance “is not warranted,” but does not otherwise explain the rationale for the denial. 

Evers declared a state of emergency on Aug. 11, as communities across Wisconsin picked themselves up from the storms. A ceaseless downpour began on Aug. 9, though the extent of the flooding wasn’t apparent to many until after the sun went down. In Milwaukee County, the Wisconsin State Fair had to close early as people fled the grounds in waist-high water. People who traveled the roads that evening found themselves trapped by floodwaters, requiring rescue from local authorities and neighbors. 

Swaths of Hart Park in Wauwatosa were left underwater, and the storm’s aftermath left neighborhoods strewn with downed trees and abandoned vehicles. Flooding also challenged emergency response in Waukesha County, though no injuries or missing persons reports had been received by the sheriff’s department. In Milwaukee, reports of people missing from homeless encampments emerged in the days after the floods. 

Milwaukee County Executive David Crowley called the denial for disaster relief “deeply disappointing” in a statement Monday. “My administration has worked to rebuild and recover after last summer’s historic storms and flooding,” said Crowley. “Without federal assistance, the financial burden of these public infrastructure repairs falls to local governments to cover. Communities rely on intergovernmental partnerships in times of crisis, and this decision by the Trump administration erodes that public trust. To move forward, my administration will continue working with the State of Wisconsin, our municipalities, and community partners to identify responsible funding solutions to rebuild our roads, bridges, parks, and public buildings. Our residents should not be forced to shoulder the full cost of disasters beyond their control, and we will continue advocating for the resources our community deserves.”

Leaders from the other counties, most of them Republican-leaning, that were  denied disaster relief have not commented. A spokesperson for the Waukesha County Executive’s Office was unable to provide an immediate response, though this story will be updated if one arrives. The executives for Door, Washington, and Ozaukee counties could not be reached and Robert Keeney, the county board chairman for Grant County, refused to comment on the denial. 

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

Federal agents in fatigues gather in Minneapolis last month. Health care workers in Minnesota and other states say ICE is increasing its presence in health care facilities, deterring people from seeking medical care. (Photo by Nicole Neri/Minnesota Reformer)

Last month, the parents of a 7-year-old girl whose nose wouldn’t stop bleeding took her to Portland Adventist Health in Portland, Oregon, for urgent care. Before the family could get through the doors, federal immigration agents reportedly detained them in the parking lot and took them to a detention center in Texas.

At Hennepin County Medical Center in Minneapolis, workers say U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers hang around the campus, asking patients and employees for proof of citizenship. Last month, tensions came to a head when ICE agents used handcuffs to shackle a 31-year-old Mexican immigrant to his hospital bed. ICE claimed the man, who had broken bones in his face and a fractured skull, had run headfirst into a wall on purpose while handcuffed and trying to flee.

And last summer, ICE agents chased an immigrant into the Ontario Advanced Surgery Center in Ontario, California, precipitating a confrontation with two surgery center workers wearing scrubs. The two workers were later indicted by a federal grand jury, charged with assaulting and interfering with federal immigration officers.

As the Trump administration intensifies its immigration crackdown, health care workers in multiple states say ICE is increasing its presence in health care facilities, deterring people from seeking medical care and creating chaos that jeopardizes the safety of their patients.

Even before Trump took office last year, Republican-led states such as Florida and Texas began mixing health care and immigration enforcement by requiring hospitals to ask patients about their immigration status. Now that ICE has extended its enforcement activities to hospitals and health care facilities — areas that were largely off-limits during the Biden administration — an increasing number of Democratic-led states are pushing back.

Last month, Massachusetts Democratic Gov. Maura Healey filed legislation “to keep ICE out of courthouses, schools, child care programs, hospitals and churches,” and signed an executive order to limit ICE actions on state-owned property.

In December, Illinois Democratic Gov. JB Pritzker signed a measure that bars health care providers from sharing sensitive health information with federal immigration agents and requires hospitals to develop policies around how they will interact with agents.

And in September, California Democratic Gov. Gavin Newsom signed legislation that makes immigration status and place of birth protected health information, and prohibits agents from entering nonpublic, patient-sensitive areas of health care facilities without a warrant signed by a judge.

Other Democratic states — including Maine, New Jersey, New York, Oregon and Washington — are considering similar bills.

Meanwhile, Republican lawmakers in Arizona are pushing legislation that would require hospitals accepting Medicaid patients to include a question on intake forms about immigration status.

Skipping medical care

Whether or not ICE presence is actually increasing at health care facilities, it’s clear that people living in the country illegally are being deterred from seeking medical care, said Drishti Pillai, director of immigrant health policy at the health policy research group KFF.

A KFF and New York Times survey released last November showed that 43% of respondents identifying as immigrant parents living in the country illegally skipped or delayed health care for their children over a 12-month period because they were concerned about immigration enforcement. Even among lawfully present immigrants,10% said that they avoided seeking medical care for their children due to immigration-related concerns.

Pillai also pointed to the Trump administration’s efforts to consolidate the bits of personal data held across federal agencies, creating a single trove of information on people who live in the United States.

“We are expecting that these fears have further been exacerbated this year since the data sharing agreement was made public, and there are certain concerns around privacy of data going forward,” Pillai told Stateline.

Dr. Paula Latortue, an OB-GYN in Washington, D.C., who volunteers with the Migrant Clinicians Network, a nonprofit group that provides health care to immigrants, said it’s unclear how many people are avoiding health care, and how often.

“The one part that is really hard to know is people who are not showing up to the hospital when they usually would for some sort of urgent or emergency complaint,” Latortue said in an interview. “But I think there’s a concern for many physicians in the community that has happened.”

States step in to protect sensitive locations

The Biden and Obama administrations directed ICE to avoid enforcement activities in “sensitive” places such as hospitals, schools and churches unless it received permission from top leaders at the U.S. Department of Homeland Security.

In January 2025, however, the Trump administration rescinded those guidelines, opening up these spaces to immigration enforcement.

Stateline reached out to the White House and the Department of Homeland Security multiple times but did not receive a response. When the administration changed the guidelines, the Department of Homeland Security said that opening up “sensitive” areas to agents “empowers the brave men and women in CBP [Customs and Border Protection] and ICE to enforce our immigration laws.”

The previous guidelines didn’t prohibit ICE from operating in those locations, but it did “strongly discourage” them, according to Sophia Genovese, a legal fellow specializing in immigration law at Georgetown University.

She added, however, that states and cities can enact laws to protect such spaces, even though they are limited in their capacity to “infringe and engage in immigration lawmaking.”

“Warrants are always needed to conduct searches or investigations in private, nonpublic areas, and these warrants need to be signed by a judge. This is just a basic Fourth Amendment right,” Genovese said. “When it comes to ICE entering hospitals and gaining access to private areas of hospitals, that’s an issue of individual hospital policy.”

Genovese said states also can require that hospitals standardize their policies on where law enforcement agents can go within a medical facility and create protocols to ensure agents are presenting a warrant before entering the premises.

Health care workers want protections

Those moves are exactly what health care workers in many states are asking for.

“There’s a high level of fear and anxiety. Nurses see the videos of what’s happening around the country, and nurses have experienced it themselves,” Peter Starzynski, spokesperson for the Oregon Nurses Association, told Stateline.

Last month’s incident involving the 7-year-old girl and her parents in Portland highlighted the importance of protecting health care spaces from ICE, he said.

“That should never happen. That’s disgusting,” Starzynski said.

The Oregon Nurses Association also has condemned ICE’s presence at Legacy Emanuel Medical Center in Portland, claiming agents are violating hospital policies, including on access to patients. Legacy has disputed the union’s allegations, saying that no ICE officers have entered its facilities “unless accompanying a patient in custody.”

“Nurses in emergency rooms deal with local law enforcement on a regular basis, and those relationships are built on mutual respect, where law enforcement understands what they need to do once they enter a hospital,” Starzynski said. “That has changed with the increase in federal agents in Oregon.”

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

An absentee ballot drop box with updated signage in Madison following the Wisconsin Supreme Court's decision to allow the use of ballot drop boxes. (Wisconsin Examiner photo)

A Dane County judge on Monday denied a motion from the city of Madison to dismiss a lawsuit against the city over its loss of nearly 200 absentee ballots during the 2024 election. 

Since misplacing and failing to count the ballots, Madison has been subjected to penalties from the Wisconsin Elections Commission and has hired a new city clerk. The lawsuit against the city was brought by a group of the voters whose ballots were not counted. The voters are represented by the voting rights focused firm Law Forward. 

Madison’s defense against the lawsuit has sparked criticism from voting advocates across the state for diminishing the importance of the right to vote. The city had argued it could not be sued for losing the ballots because absentee voting is a “privilege” and not a constitutional right. A legislative policy statement adopted in 1985 states that “voting is a constitutional right,” but that “voting by absentee ballot is a privilege exercised wholly outside the traditional safeguards of the polling place.”

The lawsuit comes as Wisconsin election officials and Democrats have been defending absentee voting rights from Republican attacks for years. The argument by Madison officials drew criticism from a number of Democrats, including Gov. Tony Evers.

Dane County Judge David Conway wrote in his order denying Madison’s motion to dismiss that it wouldn’t make sense if the constitutional right to vote did not extend to absentee voting.

“Just because the absentee voting process is a privilege does not mean that those who legally utilize it do not exercise their constitutional right to vote,” he wrote. “Of course they do. Once a voter casts a valid absentee ballot that complies with the Legislature’s rules for utilizing the absentee process, the voter has exercised the same constitutional right to vote as someone who casts a valid in-person ballot at a polling place. And that right to vote would be a hollow protection if it did not also include the right to have one’s vote counted.”

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

President Donald Trump and first lady Melania Trump arrive for the National Governors Association Evening Dinner and Reception in the East Room of the White House on Feb. 22, 2025 in Washington, D.C. Trump hosted the governors in Washington for the annual National Governors Association meetings. (Photo by Tierney L. Cross/Getty Images)

WASHINGTON — President Donald Trump decided to exclude Democratic governors from a traditional annual meeting at the White House and to disinvite several others from a black-tie dinner, according to the White House, the governors and the National Governors Association.

The National Governors Association organizes the bipartisan winter gathering that usually includes a working meeting with the U.S. president and a major dinner at the White House. Oklahoma Gov. Kevin Stitt, a Republican, serves as current chair of the association, and Maryland Gov. Wes Moore, a Democrat, is vice chair.

The governors’ visit to the nation’s capital comes amid rising tensions over Trump’s deployment of the National Guard and surge of federal immigration border patrol agents into Democratic-led states, including California, Illinois, Minnesota and Oregon.

Moore: ‘blatant disrespect’

Moore issued a statement Sunday that he was “uninvited” from the dinner, adding that the decision was “especially confounding” given that he was among a bipartisan group of governors at the White House in recent weeks to discuss lower energy costs.

“My peers, both Democrats and Republicans, selected me to serve as the Vice Chair of the NGA, another reason why it’s hard not to see this decision as another example of blatant disrespect and a snub to the spirit of bipartisan federal-state partnership,” Moore said. “As the nation’s only Black governor, I can’t ignore that being singled out for exclusion from this bipartisan tradition carries an added weight — whether that was the intent or not.”

Moore’s exclusion also comes on the heels of Trump’s posting of a racist video Friday depicting former President Barack Obama and former first lady Michelle Obama as apes. Trump deleted the post following loud disapproval that included criticism from his own party but has declined to apologize.

The offices of Illinois Gov. JB Pritzker and Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz did not immediately respond for comment. Oregon Gov. Tina Kotek decided “some time ago” not to attend the event so that she could be in her state during the legislative session, according to spokesperson Elisabeth Shepard.

Moore added: “As Governor of Maryland and Vice Chair of the NGA, my approach will never change: I’m ready to work with the administration anywhere we can deliver results. Yet, I promised the people of my state I will work with anybody but will bow down to nobody. And I guess the President doesn’t like that.”

The office of Colorado Gov. Jared Polis, a Democrat, learned Friday about the exclusion of Democratic governors and similarly issued a statement of concern.

“Gov. Polis has always been willing to work with anyone across the political spectrum who wants to help work on the hardest problems facing Colorado and America, regardless of party or who occupies the White House. This is a disappointing decision for a traditionally bipartisan event between governors and whomever occupies the White House,” according to a statement from his office emailed to States Newsroom. 

California Gov. Gavin Newsom’s office confirmed Monday he had also been uninvited.

‘Many Democrats’ invited, but not all

A White House official on Monday confirmed Trump’s exclusion of some Democratic governors from the annual dinner.

“Many Democrats were invited to dinner at the White House, and others were not. These are White House events and the President reserves the right to invite whomever he wants,” the official told States Newsroom in an emailed statement.

Brandon Tatum, the National Governors Association’s acting executive director and CEO, said, “The bipartisan White House governors meeting is an important tradition, and we are disappointed in the administration’s decision to make it a partisan occasion this year.”

“To disinvite individual governors to the White House sessions undermines an important opportunity for federal-state collaboration. At this moment in our nation’s history, it is critical that institutions continue to stand for unity, dignity, and constructive engagement. NGA will remain focused on serving all governors as they deliver solutions and model leadership for the American people. Traditionally the White House has played a role in fostering these moments during NGA’s annual meeting. This year, they will not,” Tatum said in a statement.

This year’s meeting follows a tense exchange during the 2025 gathering between Maine Gov. Janet Mills, a Democrat, and Trump, who threatened to withhold all federal funding from the state unless Mills complied with the president’s executive order to ban transgender athletes from women’s sports.

The association’s 2026 meeting is scheduled for Feb. 19-21. The gathering will include “special guests and national experts for solutions-driven conversations on pressing national issues including education, energy, economic growth, artificial intelligence and more,” according to the association website.

Julia Shumway contributed to this report.

Enbridge pumping station, Mackinaw City, Feb. 7, 2023 | Laina G. Stebbins

On Friday, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers released the final version of its Environmental Impact Statement on Enbridge’s proposed Line 5 tunnel project, starting a 30 day waiting period before making its final decision on whether to grant the pipeline company a permit to move forward with the proposal.

Canada-based Enbridge celebrated the release of the statement as a true milestone, with spokesperson Ryan Duffy praising the six-year review as “thorough, transparent, and science driven.” However, Line 5 opponents argue the final document fails to address several key concerns, including the project’s impacts on Indigenous treaty rights and alternatives for transporting oil outside of the Great Lakes.

The Line 5 tunnel project would replace the segment of dual pipelines operating in the Straits of Mackinac – where Lake Michigan and Lake Huron meet – with a new, single segment housed in a tunnel in the bedrock beneath the lakes. 

The 645-mile long pipeline runs from Northwestern Wisconsin, through Michigan where it ends in Sarnia, Ontario. It carries up to 22.68 million gallons of crude oil and natural gas liquids through the Straits of Mackinac each day. 

Julie Goodwin, a senior attorney for Earthjustice, which is supporting the Bay Mills Indian Community in its fight against the pipeline, said the final environmental impact statement sets up a predetermined decision to approve the tunnel by failing to consider scenarios where oil is not flowing through the straits.

In its review, the corps looked at four main scenarios: taking no action and allowing the dual pipelines to continue operating, constructing a tunnel beneath the lakebed as Enbridge would prefer, placing a gravel/rock protective cover over the dual pipelines, and replacing the dual pipelines with a new segment installed using horizontal directional drilling under the lakebed.

“The corps had the opportunity, of course, during this environmental review process to look at alternatives that transport oil outside of the Great Lakes region or in different ways. And they just, they never took that opportunity,” Goodwin said.

A 2016 study from the University of Michigan determined more than 700 miles of shoreline in lakes Huron and Michigan would be vulnerable to pollution should Line 5 rupture. A 2018 study published by Michigan State University determined that the economic damage from a Great Lakes oil spill would amount to $5.6 billion dollars.

While the environmental impact statement acknowledges the straits are a profoundly sacred place in the culture, history and spirituality of Anishinaabe Tribal Nations, it does not address the tunnel project’s impact on treaty rights, which grant tribal nations the right to hunt, fish and gather on lands ceded to the federal government. 

The corps writes that its review of treaty rights is separate from its review of the project under the National Environmental Policy Act and that it is consulting on a government-to-government basis with federally recognized Tribes to determine if the tunnel project would infringe upon treaty rights. The final finding will be included in its record of decision.

On March 21, 2025, Bay Mills Indian Community alongside the Little River Band of Ottawa Indians, Sault Ste. Marie Tribe of Chippewa Indians, Grand Traverse Band of Ottawa and Chippewa Indians, Match-E-Be-Nash-She-Wish Band of Pottawatomi, and Nottawaseppi Huron Band of the Potawatomi sent a letter to the Army of Corps of Engineers withdrawing their participation as cooperating agencies in drafting the environmental impact statement, due to President Donald Trump’s Administration’s plan to expedite review of the tunnel project. 

The Little Traverse Bay Bands of Odawa Indians similarly withdrew from talks with the corps on March 26.

Whitney Gravelle, president of the Bay Mills Indian Community, said it has been frustrating to watch the corps move forward with the environmental impact statement without completing surveys and research on cultural resources and treaty rights. 

“That’s one of the reasons we left as a cooperating agency,” Gravelle said. “The corps has disregarded tribes. They’ve disregarded tribal treaty rights, they’ve disregarded cultural resources, and it has just been one of the most dehumanizing processes I have ever participated in.”

The tunnel itself will bore through several cultural sites, archaeological resources and what Anishinaabe consider to be the site of creation, Gravelle said and there are hundreds if not thousands of archaeological sites on the north and south ends of the straits.

“Those burial places are how we understand our history, how we understand our culture, how we understand our trade movements, or where we’re meant to be harvesting, hunting and gathering,” Gravelle said. “To then be told that all of these places can be destroyed and that it doesn’t really matter, what you’re really saying is that our Indigenous lifeways then don’t matter.”

Gravelle emphasized that the impacts from the tunnels construction are not abstract or theoretical, telling Michigan Advance that these places are where parents go to teach their children ceremony on the water, uncles teach their families how to hunt and put food on the table and elders share stories so their community can understand who they are as a people. 

“To have those rights limited or overlooked or misunderstood is really undermining the impact that will be felt by generations,” Gravelle said. “Not only by myself, but by my niece, you know, by my children, by the generations that will exist long after I’m gone from this earth.”

In a statement, Sean McBrearty, the campaign coordinator for anti-Line 5 Oil & Water Don’t Mix coalition pointed to several of the environmental impacts included within the assessment. 

“The EIS confirms that the tunnel would result in permanent wetland loss and require excavation and removal of roughly 665,000 cubic yards of bedrock from beneath the Straits of Mackinac, the ecological heart of the Great Lakes system,” McBrearty said. “These impacts are not temporary, and they cannot be undone.”

While much of the focus on Line 5 has centered around the Straits of Mackinac, Gravelle noted that concerns about an oil spill stretch the length of the pipeline, which has leaked more than 30 times over its lifespan, spilling more than 1 million gallons of oil.

However, Gravelle and several other pipeline opponents emphasized that a permitting decision from the Army Corps of Engineers does not give Enbridge a green light to move forward with the project, as the Michigan Department of Environment, Great Lakes and Energy has yet to decide on a Clean Water Act permit for the project. The Sierra Club and Oil and Water Don’t Mix have already called on Gov. Gretchen Whitmer to block the project from moving forward. 

“All eyes are really turning to Governor Whitmer,” Goodwin said. “She has two choices to either cave to the Trump administration’s agenda and their friends in the oil industry, or stand up for Michigan and protect the Great Lakes.”

Gov. Tony Evers vetoes legislation in April 2024 that would have eliminated work permits for 14- and 15-year-olds. A large child labor case against a Burger King franchise owner demonstrates the importance of the work permit requirement in educating employers and youth workers about the state's child labor regulations, says Amy Pechacek, the head of Wisconsin's Department of Workforce Development. (Governor's Facebook page photo)

A child labor investigation that uncovered more than 1,600 violations of Wisconsin law at more than 100 Burger King restaurants was probably the largest case of its kind in the state’s history, according to the head of the Wisconsin Department of Workforce Development. 

DWD has ordered Chicago-based Cave Enterprises to pay more than 600 Wisconsin teens back pay as well as damages totaling $237,436. The company owes the state an additional $828,000, according to DWD — $500 for every one of the 1,656 violations uncovered in an extensive audit of the company’s payroll and employment records.

The company has until Feb. 25 to pay the back wages and penalties, although it also has the option of challenging DWD’s actions in court. 

Cave Enterprises has not responded to requests for comment about DWD’s audit findings, which the department announced Friday.

State alleges child labor violations at more than 100 Wisconsin Burger Kings owned by one firm

Amy Pechacek, the department’s secretary-designee, said in an interview after the agency announced the results of its investigation that the case was the largest one DWD could document. 

“Since the records are somewhat limited in terms of going back several decades, we just chose to be safe and said this was the largest violation we have in modern history,” Pechacek said. 

Cave Enterprises received a formal letter notifying it of the investigation findings on Thursday, according to DWD. But in the months before, there were repeated communications between DWD auditors and management personnel for the company, Pechacek told the Wisconsin Examiner.

The investigation was triggered by a series of complaints DWD’s Equal Rights Division received in 2024, Pechacek said. The division’s responsibilities include enforcing Wisconsin’s child labor and wage laws. 

Pattern of company behavior

The complaints in 2024 prompted investigators to look back through department records. Investigators turned up 33 previous complaints in the years since 2020. Pechacek said those complaints were resolved individually.

The number of complaints, however, showed investigators a disturbing pattern in “how this employer interacts with its minor-age workforce,” Pechacek said. “And due to that, they then said, this warrants a very deep-dive, intensive audit about their practices as it relates to employing minors here in the state of Wisconsin.”

DWD has 25 auditors who review workforce practices in response to complaints, eight of them focusing on minors. 

“So this was a large undertaking,” Pechacek said of the Cave Enterprises review. “They poured their heart and soul into this, and we’re just really proud of that work and what this means in terms of making sure our youth can engage and work in a meaningful and safe way in our state.”

The audit showed that the problems weren’t confined to just a handful of the more than 100 Burger King locations that Cave owned between 2023 and 2025, the audit’s time span. There were violations found at 103 of the company’s stores, according to DWD. 

Work permits underscore child labor rules

In the letter to Cave detailing the audit findings, DWD reported that 593 14- and 15-year-olds started work without required work permits — 84% of the company’s employees in that age group, according to the agency. At a Green Bay Burger King, one teen started working at the age of 13, auditors reported — too young for that work under Wisconsin law.

In 2024, Republican majorities in both houses of the state Legislature passed bills that would have repealed Wisconsin’s work-permit requirement for 14- and 15-year-olds. Supporters of the repeal argued they amounted to a needless bureaucratic roadblock and discouraged young people from working. 

Democrats opposed the bill and Gov. Tony Evers vetoed it. Pechacek said cases like the audit of Cave Enterprises demonstrate the value of the work permit requirement. 

“Every time a permit is even requested for a minor child, there is an explanation of obligations that are sent to the employer as it relates to child labor laws,” Pechacek said. Those informational documents list Wisconsin’s wage and hour laws, the requirements for breaks and the restrictions on what machines minors can operate under state law. The parents, who must sign the work permit, get the same information.

“We want to be able to allow youth to participate in a safe manner that doesn’t impact or impair their ability to still go to school and still be children, but also help out our local economies and our businesses,” Pechacek said. “These duties of the employer and the rights of the minor-aged worker are continually enforced and communicated throughout the process.” 

The widespread lack of work permits at the Cave Burger Kings means that neither the employer nor the teenage workers would have received that communication at hiring. Despite that, each of the previous 33 complaints would have resulted “in another explanation of the law throughout the complaint process,” Pechacek said. “So there are many opportunities for this employer — and for every employer — to get it right.”

The audit also found 627 workers 17 or younger — 45% of the company’s minor employees — who worked longer than six hours without a required 30-minute meal break. 

“All minor employees under the age of 18 must have a 30-minute, duty-free break during shifts of six or more consecutive hours,” states the DWD audit report sent to Cave management. “Multiple shorter breaks totaling 30 minutes are not a lawful substitute for the required 30-minute break.”

Breaks that are less than 30 minutes must be paid under Wisconsin law, regardless of the worker’s age, the DWD report states. Unpaid breaks must be at least 30 minutes, with no duties during that time and with the employee free to leave the worksite.

“We found multiple instances of employees taking unpaid breaks of less than 30 minutes in length,” the DWD letter states — one of the reasons for back pay owed to teen workers. 

Large Wisconsin footprint

The Cave Enterprises website states the company currently owns 100 Wisconsin restaurants and that it has the largest number of Burger King franchises under a single owner in the country. The company also operates 77 Burger King franchises in seven other states. 

The company’s list of Wisconsin locations has 105 restaurants, but internet search results for three of them — two in Milwaukee and one in Waukesha — describe them as permanently closed. 

The Wisconsin Examiner’s review Friday of a job portal on the company website showed 379 openings at the company’s Wisconsin Burger King locations. 

Pechacek acknowledged that filling job openings has been a stiff challenge for employers for years.

“We know that youth are a very important part of our workforce, especially during worker shortages,” Pechacek said. “There is no excuse ever to violate labor laws — especially when it comes to protecting our youth, but for any worker.”

DWD has an outreach operation and can send personnel to help train employers about the ins and outs of state and federal child labor regulations. The department has videos available online along with other information in plain language, she said.

“We aren’t here just to be a compliance arm. We would rather have this conversation before any type of laws are violated and before anybody’s rights are infringed on,” Pechacek said.

“So there are many opportunities for education and compliance before forfeitures and penalties even come into play — or large-scale audits. And we are always available to have those conversations with any employer and any minor-aged child or parent who is unclear about what the rules are.”

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

Milwaukee's Fire and Police Commission (FPC) holds a public hearing on facial recognition technology used by the Milwaukee Police Department. (Photo by Isiah Holmes/Wisconsin Examiner)

A years-long debate over the use of facial recognition software by the Milwaukee Police Department (MPD) came to a head at a contentious Thursday meeting of the city’s Fire and Police Commission (FPC) attended by more than 60 local residents. Over the course of questioning, stretching late into the evening hours, commissioners learned from MPD leadership that the department had continued using facial recognition software, even as a draft policy to put guardrails on the technology was still being developed outside of the FPC’s control. 

By meeting’s end, FPC vice chairwoman Bree Spencer expressed a desire for the commission to consider finding some way to push for a pause to MPD’s use of facial recognition software, though the FPC itself did not take any immediate formal action. Less than 24 hours later, MPD Chief Jeffrey Norman announced that the department would ban the use of facial recognition technology, and discontinue its efforts to acquire permanent access to the technology. 

During the Thursday meeting, Norman and his staff were grilled by FPC commissioners after hours of impassioned public testimony. The sweltering meeting room was packed almost shoulder-to-shoulder, with every seat taken and people standing along the wall in spaces not already taken by the local news station’s bulky cameras. Many others waited in the hallway, as an overflow room had not been set up.

One by one, local residents expressed a variety of grievances about facial recognition. Some decried MPD’s prior use of software without disclosure to the public or FPC, while others expressed fears about how the technology could be used against Milwaukeeans by what many called an authoritarian federal government. 

Paul Smith, a member of the Oneida Nation who serves on Milwaukee’s Equal Rights Commission, was the first to speak. Smith described how his relatives had been among the first to come down from the Oneida reservation to Milwaukee seeking factory work. “We are also people who have to carry two IDs all the time,” said Smith. He suggested that facial recognition and other camera technologies are methods the government uses to track people it considers enemies. 

“I live in fear every day,” said Smith, describing how his heart rate accelerates when he drives out of Milwaukee County. Smith added that facial recognition technology is unreliable.  “My dad can use my phone because his face looks like mine,” he said.  “These cameras don’t work and they punish people, and there’s no presumption of innocence when you’re being watched all the time.”

Nadiyah Johnson, founder and CEO of the Milky Way Tech Hub, highlighted the notoriously high error rates facial recognition software has for people of color. Johnson said that federal tests have shown false positive rates as much as 10 to 100 times higher for Black people. “I’m sure that we all can understand why that would be a problem for the city of Milwaukee,” said Johnson. She added that “guardrails do not fix the core problem.” 

When surveillance infrastructure is created, Johnson said, the scope of who is targeted expands. She and other community members who spoke brought up Flock license plate reader cameras which, like facial recognition, are AI-powered and a top concern for many who attended Thursday night’s FPC meeting. Flock has attracted criticism for being used for vague or unlawful reasons by police, and for leaving some feeds exposed on the open internet. “This is not a future concern, this is already happening nationally,” said Johnson. “The public cannot meaningfully consent to systems we can not see, audit, or challenge.”

Amanda Merkwae, advocacy director for the American Civil Liberties Union of Wisconsin, recounted her attempts to learn more about MPD’s use of facial recognition by filing open records requests. After waiting five months and threatening to sue, the ACLU was sent a response that the MPD does not track requests made for use of facial recognition in individual investigations. When the city’s IT department ran an email search, the term “facial recognition” appeared in 196,688 emails from 2020-2025. 

When the ACLU narrowed the request to 16 cases which MPD cited in presentations to city commissions, they found that “in a handful of those cases” which had been “hand picked” by MPD for those presentations, “the police reports did not mention [Facial Recognition Technology] at all,” Merkwae told the FPC. “In conversations with some defense attorneys, it appears that [Facial Recognition Technology] use was not turned over to the defense in discovery in some cases,” said Merkwae. “In cases where attorneys filed pre-trial motions to get insight into the notoriously racially biased [Facial Recognition Technology] algorithms, they hit a brick wall because that information is proprietary.” 

In its presentations to city officials, MPD had said that facial recognition helped identify suspects in cases including sexual assault and shooting investigations.

Much of the public testimony Thursday focused on the potential for surveillance technologies to harm democracy. Speakers focused on the immigration crackdown in Minnesota, where thousands of people have been arrested and two people killed by federal agents. Videos posted online show immigration agents taking pictures of protesters, legal observers and vehicles, using facial recognition technology to identify detainees, and taunting members of the public by saying their pictures were going to be uploaded to a database of  domestic terrorists. An immigrants’ rights group recently discovered what it describes as a watchlist of immigration attorneys created by ICE.

Taleavia Cole and her husband Caliph Muab-El have experienced police surveillance after protesting the killing of Cole’s brother Alvin. Several of Cole’s family members, their lawyers and dozens of others were placed on a list created by the Wauwatosa Police Department. The list, which also included a Wisconsin Examiner reporter, was shared with numerous state, local, and federal agencies and was also referred to by police as a “target list”.

Muab-El said Black and brown communities have been used as test subjects for surveillance and militarized policing. This is how he views MPD’s deal with the data company Biometrica, which has offered to trade 2.5 million jail and booking photos from Milwaukee for MPD to have access to facial recognition software. 

“We’re talking about people,” said Muab-El. “And when we’re talking about people, we need to focus on the things that are most important for people to thrive in circumstances like this. Everything in our society and our community has been gutted from us almost. The resources are very scarce already…To institute something like this that will exacerbate the circumstances of our already falling and broken-in-pieces communities is definitely an attack on justice on our people.” 

He stressed that “anybody can be misidentified at any time,” and that the city will not be able to prevent federal agencies from accessing the data it collects using facial recognition software. “No one is safe,” said Muab-El. “Bystanders who believe in justice and the cause of people, these people are going to become more vulnerable. These attacks are going to become more prevalent…They’re going to become more intense.”

Cole recounted her own experiences of being placed on the target list, and her belief that even her family’s phone calls were being monitored. “So whose side are you on is the real question, because someday it could be your family member,” she said. “And next thing you know, they want to know what you know, what you’re saying, what you’re doing. Like you’re a criminal, like you’re nobody.” 

Testimony went on for several hours, pausing for a presentation on facial recognition technology from the New York University Law School Policing Project. The presenters said that while facial recognition can assist law enforcement investigations, the technology also carries serious constitutional and civil risks. Whether a city or town uses facial recognition software should be a decision made by the entire community, the presenters said, adding that having guardrails to prevent abuse of the technology is important. 

Late in the meeting, after many people had left, Chief Norman and MPD staff provided an update and took questions from the FPC. Norman said a draft policy his department’s use of facial recognition technology had not yet been finalized, and that he was “slow walking” the process to get as much input as possible. He stressed that facial recognition software is used to develop leads, and cannot be used as the sole basis for establishing probable cause for an arrest. The department had also begun logging uses of facial recognition, but those records only captured uses since 2024. 

Under sharp questioning from FPC Commissioner Krissie Fung the commission learned that MPD had continued using facial recognition technology even as the drafting of a policy was ongoing. Some sort of of a draft policy — described by Fung as a “draft of a draft of a draft” — appeared to have been viewed by at least some members of the city’s common council, but not the FPC. 

Although several commissioners expressed concerns about facial recognition technology and MPD’s deal with Biometrica, the FPC’s power to do anything about it is limited, since the Republican-controlled Legislature had worked to eliminate the FPC’s policy-making powers for the Milwaukee police. The debate over the use of facial recognition software in Milwaukee had gone on since last year, with members of the public speaking against its adoption consistently and in great numbers. Spencer, the FPC’s vice-chairwoman, said that the public shouldn’t have to attend more meetings to say the same things, and that her own trust in the department on the issue had eroded. 

In a statement issued Friday, Heather Hough, Norman’s chief of staff, said the police department understands “the public concern, particularly in light of national circumstances…Despite our belief that this is useful technology…we recognize that public trust is far more valuable.” Hough’s statement continued, “therefore, effective immediately, Chief (Jeffrey) Norman will issue a department directive banning the use of facial recognition for all members.” 

Hough said that MPD will continue work on creating a policy, but will not use facial recognition technology until that process is complete. While MPD appeared to be responding to the public outcry, the Milwaukee Police Association (the department’s union) said in a statement that it was “deeply concerned and disappointed” by the decision to restrict facial recognition technology. The police association was also irked by recent restrictions on vehicle pursuits saying that both policy shifts do not “eliminate crime or danger,” but instead “risks shifting that danger onto Milwaukee residents and the officers sworn to protect them.” 

The union’s statement described facial recognition as “an investigative tool that can assist detectives in generating leads in violent crime cases. It does not replace traditional police work or serve as a basis for arrest without further investigation. When used responsibly and with appropriate safeguards, this technology can help identify violent offenders, support victims, and improve case clearance rates.”

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

An advocacy group's report highlights the financial impact Trump administration policies is having on Wisconsin residents. (Getty Images)

Democrats hoping to end GOP control of the state Legislature and Congress are stepping up their argument that the administration of President Donald Trump along with Republican majorities in both the U.S. and Wisconsin capitols have driven up costs for average members of the public.

On Monday, an advocacy group that opposes the Trump administration released a six-page document that focuses on Wisconsin examples of higher costs across the board, from groceries to utilities to health care. The report, from Defend America Action, draws on news reports, government data and polling to argue that federal policies “are ripping away Wisconsinites’ economic security.”

The opening page of the document — signed by five state Senate Democrats and Secretary of State Sarah Godlewski — declares, “Between his massive cuts to government spending, the Trump-GOP Big, Ugly Bill, and his disastrous tariff regime, Trump’s agenda is hurting the local economy in all areas, stoking a dire affordability crisis as food prices, energy bills, health care costs, and housing costs spike.”

“What I am hearing in the district every day is that ‘Everything is getting more expensive. I am working more and I am getting less in return,’” state Sen. Dora Drake (D-Milwaukee), one of the signers, told the Wisconsin Examiner via email.

“The common theme here is who is looking out for them,” Drake said. “Trump and the Republican Party are praising higher stocks, but that investment is not trickling down to working families, and they are paying the price.”

Combining the answers of people who are “very concerned” and “somewhat concerned,” the report cites the finding that 89% of people who answered a Marquette Law School poll released Oct. 29, 2025, were worried about the state of the economy. The poll also found 95% of those surveyed were concerned about inflation.

The same poll found that 80% of Wisconsin voters surveyed were concerned about housing affordability, including 53% who answered that they were “very concerned.”

The October poll was the most recent from Marquette Law School focusing on Wisconsin’s 2026 elections and voter issues. (Two subsequent Marquette poll reports, in early November and late January, surveyed national samples on national issues, focusing on the U.S. Supreme Court.)

The report marshals data from across nearly all sectors of the economy. It cites the persistence of higher grocery prices and increases in health insurance premiums, particularly for people who buy their own coverage through the HealthCare.gov marketplace created by the Affordable Care Act.

Enhanced subsidies to lower the cost of those premiums expired at the end of 2025. A bill to extend them for another three years has passed the U.S. House but has been stalled in the U.S. Senate.

Sen. Brad Pfaff (D-Onalaska), who also signed the report, said in an interview that he recently heard from a farmer in his district whose insurance through the marketplace, which used to cost $50 per month last year, is now $500 per month due to the loss of the subsidies.

“It went from $600 a year, I guess, to $6,000,” Pfaff said. Referring to the federal government’s decision to end enhanced subsidies, he added, “When we are telling the self-employed and those at small businesses that purchase their health insurance though the marketplace that, you know what, we’re not going to do that anymore because of partisan politics, that causes real consternation.”

The report also cites recent data showing a cooling job market and cuts to clean energy projects that had been initiated under President Joe Biden. It blames agricultural economic turmoil on see-sawing tariffs as well as, in some sectors, the Trump administration’s focus on deporting immigrants.

Farmers “are being squeezed on both ends,” Pfaff said, with the rising costs for seed, fertilizer, machinery repairs and other inputs.

“When farmers need certainty, you add on top of that the fact that they continue to struggle to move their crop commodities in the marketplace because of this ping pong that’s being played at the national level by the White House when it comes to trade policy,” Pfaff said. “When you have a situation in which grocery prices are rising, but yet farmers struggle in order to put a crop in the ground, there’s something wrong.”

The Defend America Action report pins responsibility for other impending cost increases on the 2025 federal tax- and spending-cut bill that Republicans in Congress passed and Trump signed in July. The bill rolled back clean energy tax credits enacted in the 2022 Inflation Reduction Act and also made changes to Medicaid and to the federal Supplemental Food Assistance Program (SNAP).

A clean energy advocacy organization has estimated that canceling clean energy tax credits will raise utility costs for Wisconsin consumers by 13% to 22%. Gov  Tony Evers has projected Medicaid changes could cost Wisconsin $284 million.

A separate report Feb. 3 from the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities found that overall the megabill — referred to by Trump and Republican authors as  the “One Big Beautiful Bill Act” — “will redistribute trillions of dollars upward over the next decade, making it harder for families with modest incomes to meet their basic needs while helping those at the top accumulate more wealth.”

The bill cuts taxes by $4.5 trillion, primarily benefiting the wealthiest households, the CBBP reported. The bottom 20% of households by income “will lose more from the cuts in health coverage, food assistance, and other programs than they will gain in tax cuts,” the CBPP said, citing Congressional Budget Office data. 

For the bottom 10% of earners, average household incomes will fall by $1,200, or 3.1%, the report said, and the top 10% of earners  will see their household incomes rise by $13,600 on average, or 2.7%.

Drake told the Wisconsin Examiner that she believes the Trump administration’s actions attacking democracy and targeting immigrants are aimed at distracting people from policies that redistribute wealth upwards.

“Affordability is the underlying issue affecting everyone regardless of who you are,” said Drake. “Instead of helping people and holding those with the most power accountable, he wants Americans to blame our neighbors and communities of different backgrounds for the reasoning behind their struggles.” 

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

Alabama state Sen. Matt Woods, a Republican, speaks to a colleague on the floor of the Alabama Senate in January. The Senate passed a bill Woods sponsored that would prohibit civil courts from issuing nondisclosure agreements against survivors of child sexual abuse. (Photo by Brian Lyman/Alabama Reflector)

Editor’s note: If you or someone you know needs help, the national suicide and crisis lifeline in the U.S. is available by calling or texting 988. There is also an online chat at 988lifeline.org.

Cindy Clemishire was 12 years old on Christmas night in 1982 when a traveling evangelist staying with her family first abused her.

According to Clemishire, the sexual abuse continued over the next four years. She eventually told her family and the abuse stopped. But her abuser, Robert Morris, went on to found Gateway Church in Texas, which became one of the largest megachurches in the nation.

When Clemishire sought restitution in 2007, Morris’ attorney offered her $25,000 if she would sign a nondisclosure agreement that would prevent her from speaking publicly about the abuse. She refused.

“Had I agreed to that NDA, Robert would have continued to have power over me,” Clemishire told Texas lawmakers last May, as she urged them to pass a state law that would ban nondisclosure agreements in child sexual abuse civil cases.

“Because I refused to sign that NDA at 37,” she said, “I am able to sit here today at 55 years old and share my story in hopes of helping others.”

Texas Gov. Greg Abbott, a Republican, signed the bill into law last June. Texas joined other states, including California, Missouri and Tennessee, in prohibiting nondisclosure agreements, or NDAs, from being used in civil settlements that involve child — and in some states, adult — sexual abuse.

Morris pleaded guilty to child sex abuse charges in October, publicly admitting what he did to Clemishire.

This year, Clemishire’s home state of Oklahoma, as well as Alabama and Georgia, are considering similar laws.

Oklahoma’s bill was introduced this week. Last month, Alabama lawmakers unanimously passed identical bills in the state House and Senate. If one of the bills passes the other chamber, it will head to the governor’s desk. In Georgia, Republican Gov. Brian Kemp announced during his final State of the State address last month that he would support a version of the law.

Kemp said the bill would “further protect our children, expose abusers, and save lives by preventing the silence imposed on far too many victims.”

Many of the new bills are versions of Trey’s Law, model legislation — first passed in Missouri — named for Trey Carlock, a survivor of child sexual abuse. Carlock died by suicide in 2019 at age 28. Though his abuser was convicted of sexually abusing several boys, Carlock had signed a nondisclosure agreement in a civil settlement that prevented him from speaking about his abuse at Kanakuk, a popular Christian sports camp based in Missouri, and the camp’s role in enabling the abuse.

Elizabeth Phillips, Carlock’s sister, later founded the Trey’s Law movement in his memory. Trey’s Law works to get NDA bans passed at the state and federal levels.

Such bills attempt to address a civil litigation issue that gained increased attention during the #MeToo movement. Organizations such as Kanakuk that are caught up in child abuse allegations sometimes offer financial settlements to abuse survivors in exchange for their signing agreements that legally restrict them from speaking publicly about the abuse or the organization’s role in it.

Critics of these kinds of NDAs say they’re a legal tool — originally intended to protect confidential corporate information — that’s been misused to suppress survivors’ stories and shield organizations that enable abuse.

“NDAs may be presented as legal formalities, but in cases like mine, they are tools that continue the abuse,” Clemishire told Texas lawmakers last year. “They protect the abuser and keep victims in shame. They prevent the children from being protected and they make it harder to stop abuse from happening again.”

State laws vary in their protections. California enacted a law in 2016 banning NDAs for felony sex offenses, child sexual abuse and sexual assault against vulnerable adults, such as older adults and those with disabilities. Tennessee‘s 2018 law voids NDAs in child sexual assault claims. New Jersey, New York and Pennsylvania have placed restrictions on NDAs. Various courts have also struck down some NDAs that appeared to be designed to hide misconduct.

There’s not currently a federal law analogous to Trey’s Law, though Congress has tried to address the issue. The 2022 federal Speak Out Act specifically targets preemptive NDAs used in workplaces. It nullifies nondisclosure contracts that are signed, often as a condition of employment, before a dispute involving sexual assault or sexual harassment happens. But the law doesn’t apply to NDAs signed after allegations are made.

Much of the new state legislation, such as in Oklahoma and Texas, applies retroactively, nullifying older NDAs. Alabama’s bill would only apply to contracts entered into or amended after the measure is signed into law.

It’s difficult to find public detractors for such legislation. It’s one of the few issues that has, so far, united both sides of the political aisle. In the handful of states that have enacted bans on NDAs in sexual assault cases, they’ve passed with unanimous or near-unanimous bipartisan support.

But in Alabama last month, Republican state Sen. Greg Albritton expressed concern that a blanket ban could harm churches and institutions like the Boy Scouts of America that have faced civil allegations that they ignored child abuse or protected abusers.

“That nondisclosure statement is a lifeline, very often, for the institution to continue its efforts in trying to do good,” Albritton told Alabama lawmakers from the Senate floor, adding that he believes NDAs allow organizations to implement reforms and move forward. “If we pass this, we could be doing damage to institutions — including churches, including those not-for-profit organizations — that are doing their best to do good in the communities.

“I would caution that eliminating that tool from civil procedure does more harm to our society than it does good.”

The lawmaker sponsoring Alabama’s bill is another Republican, state Sen. Matt Woods. The Alabama version of Trey’s Law is his first bill in the Senate, after he was elected in a June 2025 special election. He said the bill was brought to his attention by some of Carlock’s relatives who live in his home county.

“We need to allow victims of this terrible act to heal,” Woods told the Alabama Reflector in January.

“The only way they can heal is to be able to disclose what’s happened to them, talk about it, and move on with the healing process.”

Stateline reporter Anna Claire Vollers can be reached at avollers@stateline.org.

FBI agents load boxes of election documents onto trucks at an elections warehouse in Fulton County, Ga. State and local election officials are bracing for the prospect of federal action after President Donald Trump’s call to nationalize elections. (Photo by Ross Williams/Georgia Recorder)

President Donald Trump’s calls this week to “nationalize” elections capped a year of efforts by his administration to exercise authority over state-run elections. The demands now have some state and local election officials fearing — and preparing for — a tumultuous year ahead.

“I don’t think we can put anything past this administration,” Oregon Democratic Secretary of State Tobias Read told Stateline in an interview. “I think they’re increasingly desperate, increasingly scared about what’s going to happen when they are held accountable by American voters. So we have to be prepared for everything.”

Ever since Trump signed an executive order last March that attempted to impose a requirement that voters prove their citizenship in federal elections, the federal government has engaged in a wide-ranging effort to influence how elections are run. Under the U.S. Constitution, that responsibility belongs to the states.

Then came Trump’s remarks on a podcast Monday that Republicans should nationalize elections and take over voting in at least 15 places, though he didn’t specify where. In the Oval Office the next day, the president reaffirmed his view that states are “agents” of the federal government in elections.

“I don’t know why the federal government doesn’t do them anyway,” Trump told reporters on Tuesday, despite the Constitution’s clear delegation of that job to states.

Across the country, election officials are watching recent developments and, in some instances, grappling with how the Trump administration’s moves could affect their preparations for November’s midterm elections, which will determine control of Congress. Local election officials say they are considering how they would respond to the presence of federal law enforcement near polling places and what steps they need to take to ensure voting proceeds smoothly.

Several Democratic election officials, and some Republicans, have spoken out. Placing voting under control of the federal government would represent a fundamental violation of the Constitution, they note.

The U.S. Constitution authorizes states to set the time, place and manner of elections for Congress but also allows Congress to change those regulations. The elections themselves are run by the states.

“Oh, hell no,” Maine Democratic Secretary of State Shenna Bellows said in a video statement posted to social media about federalizing elections. Bellows, who is running for governor, said she would mail the White House a pocket Constitution, “because it seems they’ve lost their copy.”

The U.S. Department of Justice already has sued 24 states and the District of Columbia to obtain unredacted voter rolls that include sensitive personal information that it says is needed to search for noncitizen voters. The Department of Homeland Security wants states to run their voter rolls through a powerful citizenship verification tool. Those opposed to the demand say sharing the data risks the privacy of millions of voters. Many fear the administration could use the information to disqualify eligible voters, challenge the legitimacy of a victory in a closely contested midterm election, or use the information to target political enemies.

In recent weeks, U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi linked the presence of federal immigration agents in Minneapolis in part to Minnesota’s refusal to turn over its voter rolls. And the FBI seized ballots from an elections warehouse Fulton County, Georgia — a state that was a central focus of Trump’s push to overturn his 2020 election loss.

“I think it does affect our planning as far as, what if there is some sort of federal law enforcement presence on Election Day or before or after? So that definitely factors into our planning,” said Scott McDonell, the Democratic clerk in Dane County, Wisconsin, which includes Madison.

Ingham County, Michigan, Clerk Barb Byrum, a Democrat running for secretary of state, said she and other election administrators conduct tabletop exercises and keep emergency plans for numerous scenarios. Those used to focus on floods, power outages and cyberattacks.

“Now, unfortunately, it’s turning into the president of the United States meddling in elections,” Byrum said. “We will be prepared. Voters will hopefully not see anything different at their polling locations. … But we need to be diligent.”

Pamela Smith, president and CEO of the election security nonprofit Verified Voting, said election officials and their lawyers need to study up on laws and regulations, including chain-of-custody requirements for ballots.

David Becker, director of the nonpartisan Center for Election Innovation & Research, which operates the Election Official Legal Defense Network, said more than 10,000 lawyers have been recruited who are ready to provide pro bono legal assistance or advice to election officials.

Trump doubles down on calling for the feds to take over state elections

When Stateline asked Read whether he anticipates Oregon facing federal pressure over its voter rolls, the secretary of state said he was set to meet this week with county clerks in the Portland metro area “to talk about that very question.” Read’s office later confirmed the meeting took place.

Oregon’s largest city, Portland, has been a focus of the Trump administration. Last year, Trump deployed federalized Oregon National Guard members to the city after protests outside an Immigration and Customs Enforcement facility. And federal agents last month shot two people in a hospital parking lot. Portland is a self-described sanctuary city that does not aid the federal government in immigration enforcement.

The concern in Oregon comes after Bondi on Jan. 24 sent a letter to Minnesota Democratic Gov. Tim Walz after federal agents killed Renee Good and Alex Pretti in separate shootings in Minneapolis that were captured on video.

Bondi’s letter outlined three “common sense solutions” that would help end the “chaos” in Minnesota, she wrote. One of those solutions called for the state to provide the Justice Department with its full, unredacted voter rolls.

Minnesota Democratic Secretary of State Steve Simon has called Bondi’s letter an “outrageous attempt to coerce Minnesota” into handing over the data. Simon hasn’t provided the voter list, but White House border czar Tom Homan is pulling 700 immigration agents from Minnesota amid outrage over their presence. Roughly 2,300 agents will remain in the state.

In North Carolina, Durham County Director of Elections Derek Bowens called Trump’s rhetoric and recent federal actions concerning. Bowens, a nonpartisan official appointed by the Durham County Board of Elections, said that as long as the rule of law persists, a “constitutional guard” will protect election administration.

Still, Bowens, who oversees elections in a largely Democratic area in a presidential swing state, said he and other local officials are preparing to prevent potential “intrusion” into the process.

“I’m not at liberty to divulge what that would be in terms of security protocols, but that’s definitely in the forefronts of our minds,” Bowens said in an interview, adding that he would be working with local emergency services officials “to make sure we’re positioned to ensure everyone that is eligible has unfettered access to the ballot box.”

Trump wants federal control

Trump appears to be crossing a line from urging Congress to set additional election requirements into wanting the federal government’s hands on states’ election administration infrastructure, said Barry Burden, a professor of political science at the University of Wisconsin-Madison and the director of the Elections Research Center at the university.

“That would be brand new,” Burden said.

After Trump called for nationalizing elections during Monday’s appearance on the podcast of Dan Bongino, a right-wing media personality who was previously a top FBI official, the White House said Tuesday that the president had been referring to legislation in Congress that would require individuals to show proof of citizenship to register to vote. The bill has passed the House but is stalled in the Senate.

But Trump late Tuesday doubled down on his original comments during an unrelated bill-signing ceremony in the Oval Office. He suggested the federal government should take a role in vote counting.

“The federal government should get involved,” Trump said. “These are agents of the federal government to count the votes. If they can’t count the votes legally and honestly, then somebody else should take over.”

Even before Trump’s nationalization comments, Democratic state chief election officials and some Republicans had refused to turn over copies of voter rolls containing driver’s license numbers, date of birth and full or partial Social Security numbers after the Justice Department began demanding the data last spring.

Federal judges in California and Oregon have ruled those states don’t have to provide the data; numerous other lawsuits against other states are ongoing.

Missouri Secretary of State Denny Hoskins, a Trump-supporting Republican who campaigned for office on calls to hand-count ballots, told a Missouri House committee on Tuesday that he wouldn’t provide the state’s full voter list without a court order. He said his office had only shared a public version of the voter rolls; Missouri hasn’t been sued by the Justice Department.

The Trump administration has previously confirmed it is sharing records with Homeland Security, which operates an online program that it uses to verify citizenship. The Justice Department has also offered some states a confidential agreement to search their voter lists.

“Clean voter rolls and basic election safeguards are requisites for free, fair, and transparent elections,” Assistant U.S. Attorney General Harmeet Dhillon wrote in a statement to Stateline.

“The DOJ Civil Rights Division has a statutory mandate to enforce our federal voting rights laws, and ensuring the voting public’s confidence in the integrity of our elections is a top priority of this administration.”

But U.S. District Court Judge David O. Carter, a Clinton appointee, wrote in a Jan. 15 decision that the voter roll demands risk a chilling effect on Americans who may opt not to register to vote over concerns about how their information could be used. He dismissed the Justice Department’s lawsuit seeking California’s voter rolls.

“The taking of democracy does not occur in one fell swoop; it is chipped away piece-by-piece until there is nothing left. The case before the Court is one of these cuts that imperils all Americans,” Carter wrote in a 33-page decision.

Some Republicans oppose nationalization

Amid Trump’s call for nationalizing elections, some Republican election officials have broken with the president even as they have avoided criticizing him directly. State control has long been a central tenant of conservatism, though Trump has challenged elements of Republican orthodoxy over the past decade.

Hoskins, the Missouri secretary of state, told state lawmakers on Tuesday, “I personally don’t believe we should nationalize elections.”

Georgia Republican Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger in a news release on Monday urged lawmakers to focus on strengthening state administration of elections. He said that was better than “moving to federalize a core function of state government.”

Raffensperger, who is running for governor this year, was famously targeted by Trump following the 2020 election to overturn his loss in Georgia. In a phone call, Trump told Raffensperger he wanted to “find 11,780 votes” — the size of his loss in the state. Raffensperger refused to aid Trump.

Five years later, Raffensperger now faces pressure from Georgia state lawmakers to provide the state’s unredacted voter list to the Justice Department. The Georgia Senate on Monday passed a resolution calling on the secretary of state to fully comply with the department’s request.

Georgia Republican state Sen. Randy Robertson, the resolution’s lead sponsor, said during a state Senate committee hearing last month that federal law supersedes limits on data sharing in Georgia law. He didn’t respond to an interview request.

In a statement to Stateline, Raffensperger said that state law is “very clear” that officials aren’t allowed to turn over the information. “I will always follow the law and the Constitution,” Raffensperger wrote.

The Georgia Senate vote came less than a week after the FBI searched the Fulton County elections warehouse and seized ballots. Fulton County, which includes much of the Atlanta metro area, was where Trump was indicted on charges of conspiracy and racketeering related to his efforts to overturn the state’s 2020 presidential election. The case was dismissed last year.

The Justice Department didn’t answer a question from Stateline about whether it plans to seek search warrants for other election offices.

On Wednesday, Fulton County filed a motion in federal court demanding the return of the seized ballots and other materials, Fulton County Board of Commissioners Chair Robb Pitts, a Democrat, said at a news conference. The motion also asks for the unsealing of the affidavit used by the FBI to support its search warrant application.

“We will fight using all resources against those who seek to take over our elections,” Pitts said. “Our Constitution itself is at stake in this fight.”

Stateline reporter Jonathan Shorman can be reached at jshorman@stateline.org.

An Amazon Web Services data center is shown situated near single-family homes in Stone Ridge, Va., in 2024. As Americans grow increasingly frustrated over their electricity bills, states are trying to keep the nation’s growing number of data centers from causing higher energy costs for consumers. (Photo by Nathan Howard/Getty Images)

As Americans grow increasingly frustrated over their electricity bills, states are trying to keep the nation’s growing number of data centers from causing higher energy costs for consumers.

For years, many states competed aggressively to land data centers, sprawling campuses full of the computer servers that store and transmit the data behind apps and websites. But many officials are now scrutinizing how those power-hungry projects might affect the electric bills of households, small businesses and other industries.

Oregon last year became one of the first states to enact a law requiring utilities to charge data centers different electric prices than other industries because of how they drive up the cost of energy production and transmission.

“We are now making data centers pay a higher rate commensurate with the amount of energy they’re sucking out of the system,” said Oregon state Rep. Tom Andersen, a Democrat.

Republican and Democratic leaders in at least a dozen states have targeted data centers with separate, higher electric rates to protect other customers. States also are requiring long-term commitments and financial guarantees through collateral before greenlighting infrastructure investments for new data center projects. But lawmakers acknowledge that numerous factors affect energy prices, so targeting data center-specific costs can be complicated.

An increasingly digital world and the rise of energy-intensive artificial intelligence has led to major expansion of data centers: Consultant McKinsey & Company expects companies to spend nearly $7 trillion worldwide on data centers by 2030. But the industry is facing growing scrutiny, from neighbors who don’t want to live near the massive server farms and from residents worried about how data centers will affect their own swelling utility bills.

Delaware legislation that would charge data centers higher rates advanced out of committee last week. On Tuesday, a Florida state Senate committee approved a bill that would create new rate structures for data centers.

In Oklahoma, a Republican state senator has proposed a moratorium on new data centers until late 2029, allowing the state to study how data centers affect utility rates, the environment and property values.

Separate legislation from state Rep. Brad Boles will seek to protect other ratepayers from the costs of data centers. Boles, the Republican chair of the state Energy and Natural Resources Oversight Committee, said his in-the-works measure would ensure data centers pay their fair share.

Boles told Stateline that his constituents are increasingly worried about data centers, with a dozen potential major ones proposed across the state.

“We’re trying to ensure that those data centers pay for their own infrastructure and we don’t shift that cost or burden to everyday Oklahomans,” he said.

In Oregon, Andersen’s legislation created a new rate structure for data centers with long-term contracts and required regulators to separate the costs of those facilities from other ratepayers.

But consumer advocates have already accused the state’s largest utility of trying to skirt the new law by making residential customers pay part of the long-term cost of supplying large data centers in a pending rate case.

Andersen, a member of the state House Committee on Climate, Energy and Environment, said the new rate structure is unlikely to immediately lower consumer bills. Rather, it aims to curb future increases as data centers require more power generation and transmission.

“We’re not going to change the rates that are being currently paid by the ratepayers and the users of the electricity,” he said. “It’s just going to stop future raises.”

The data center boom

Rising utility bills continue to outpace inflation, sparking anger from consumers and more scrutiny from state regulators, governors and lawmakers.

The boom of data centers is frequently cited as a prime reason for rising electricity prices, as their operation requires more power generation, transmission and distribution upgrades. A Bloomberg News analysis in September found wholesale electricity costs as much as 267% more for a single month than it did five years ago in areas with significant data center activity.

Data center companies say they aren’t the only reason prices are rising.

“It’s inaccurate to draw a clear line between large load customers like data centers coming online and increases in prices. It’s just not that simple,” said Lucas Fykes, senior director of energy policy and regulatory counsel at the Data Center Coalition, a trade group representing data center owners and users, including Amazon, Meta and Visa.

He said many factors have contributed to higher electricity prices, including extreme weather events and the nation’s aging electric grid.

Fykes said his organization opposes rate structures that treat data centers differently from other large electric users such as industrial sites. The organization is working with regulators as states increasingly implement practices to ensure residents and small businesses aren’t on the hook for big energy investments if major projects including data centers don’t come to fruition.

Fykes said the country is likely just in the “beginning innings” of a longer ramp-up in technology and power needs.

“We are also in a global race to build out data centers, to support AI, to support cloud infrastructure,” he said. “It’s important to make sure that we maintain those assets here in the United States.”

That can pose competing interests for political leaders, including mayors, who have pushed hard to land investments from tech companies.

“We want to be leaders in AI, but we don’t want the infrastructure needed to support it,” said Rusty Paul, the mayor of Sandy Springs, Georgia, in the Atlanta metro area.

He was among several mayors addressing the issue of data centers at last month’s winter meeting of the United States Conference of Mayors in Washington, D.C. On a data center panel, Paul acknowledged the effect of Georgia’s tax incentives for data centers: “They’re just popping up everywhere,” he said.

But utilities and regulators are also making long overdue grid upgrades that aren’t tied to data centers, he said.

“The cost of electricity is going up for everybody — and it’s not all related to data centers,” he said.

A bipartisan push

The Georgia Public Service Commission last year created new rules that officials said would protect ratepayers from data center costs. In addition to covering costs of power consumed at their facilities, data centers would have to fund the costs incurred by upstream generation, transmission and distribution, the regulator said.

But lawmakers aren’t convinced those steps went far enough.

State Sen. Chuck Hufstetler, a Republican, is again pushing legislation that would solidify the regulator’s rules into law. His bill would prohibit utilities from passing along the fuel, generation or transmission costs of data centers to other customers.

He told Stateline that the regulator’s rules need to be codified into law so they can’t be weakened later.

Hufstetler said rising utility bills are among the biggest issues facing his constituents. High prices played a key role in November’s election, when Democrats flipped two seats on the state’s Public Service Commission board — the first time Democrats won statewide constitutional office in nearly two decades.

“I saw people with MAGA hats going into the election polling places that were saying, ‘I’m not voting for those guys that raised my rates,’” Hufstetler said, referring to the Republican incumbents who lost.

Hufstetler said the bill, which passed out of committee last year, has already gained major bipartisan support in the Senate, where it is sponsored by multiple Republicans and Democrats.

“This is very bipartisan,” he said. “We have all heard from our people around the state of Georgia.”

The Georgia Public Service Commission agrees in principle with the legislation, said agency spokesperson Tom Krause. But he said the regulator worries about losing flexibility if its rules are written into law.

“Not just this bill, but whenever the legislature codifies a rule that we put in place, we get a little nervous because it can tie our hands in special circumstances,” he said.

A complex challenge

As part of implementing a law enacted last year, Maryland’s utility regulator is weighing a new rate structure for data centers and other large load users.

Proposed regulations would require certain preapproval analysis for heavy power users, a separate rate tariff for data centers and collateral to ensure other ratepayers don’t end up paying for major investments if projects do not come to fruition.

Maryland’s Office of People’s Counsel, an independent agency representing residential utility users, said the proposed changes meet statutory requirements but could do more to protect consumers.

In a news release last month, Maryland People’s Counsel David S. Lapp said residents are already facing higher costs from data centers from outside the state.

“While we push for better federal rules to address those costs, Maryland has the power—and customers a clear need—to make sure data centers within Maryland take on every cost that they impose on residential customers,” Lapp said.

Democratic Gov. Wes Moore recently joined 12 other governors and the Trump administration in urging the regional grid operator, PJM Interconnection, to shield residents and businesses from the infrastructure costs from data centers.

Maryland state Del. Lorig Charkoudian, a Democrat, said the grid operator has for years failed residents in the 13 states plus the District of Columbia that it serves. By delaying renewable energy projects, she said, PJM has kept older, more expensive power plants online, driving up prices as data centers increase demand.

PJM’s board last month rolled out a new data center plan that it said would improve demand forecasting, accelerate the addition of new generation projects and give states a larger role.

Charkoudian said states and utilities struggle to determine just how much power is needed. Data center users shop around for sites, which can cause wildly inaccurate forecasts of just how much power a utility will need.

“It actually has a very concrete financial impact on ratepayers,” she told Stateline. “And so that’s why one of the things that really could make a difference for ratepayers is if we actually had an accurate count of how much we’re getting online.”

While some of those challenges lie outside the realm of state control, Charkoudian said there are things the state can do, including the new rate structure for larger users. She’s crafting a bill encouraging data centers to curtail their power usage during peak periods, such as hot days, when the electrical system is taxed by heavy usage of air conditioners, Maryland Matters reported.

Charkoudian said adding solar generation and storage are low-cost ways to respond quickly to demand. And states can avoid the need for more generation by doubling down on energy efficiency programs that lower demand and also consumer costs.

“The best time to fix this was five years ago,” she said. “The next best time is right this minute, because it’s only going to get worse.”

Stateline reporter Robbie Sequeira contributed to this story. Stateline reporter Kevin Hardy can be reached at khardy@stateline.org. 

Roger Williams Medical Center in Providence, R.I. A new study shows that women with breast cancer living in Rhode Island and other states that expanded Medicaid eligibility were less likely to die from the disease. (Photo by Michael Salerno/Rhode Island Current)

Women with breast cancer living in states that expanded Medicaid eligibility were less likely to die from the disease — but not everyone benefited equally, according to a recent study published in the medical journal JAMA Network Open.

Researchers from Howard University, the University of Alabama, Henry Ford Hospital in Michigan, and others looked at data from about 1.6 million women ages 40 to 64 who were diagnosed with breast cancer between 2006 and 2021.

They compared survival rates among women living in states that expanded Medicaid eligibility under the Affordable Care Act, commonly known as Obamacare, with the rates in states that did not expand. About 58% of the women lived in expansion states, and roughly 42% lived in nonexpansion states. States began expanding Medicaid in 2014.

The researchers found that Medicaid expansion was associated with lower overall mortality — no matter the disease stage, race or ethnicity, or neighborhood income of the women. Women in expansion states whose cancer had spread to other organs — the most advanced stage of disease — saw the most significant decline in deaths.

Among racial and ethnic groups, the largest relative gains were among Hispanic women — they were 19% less likely to die if they lived in an expansion state. There were smaller gains among non-Hispanic Black women and residents of low-income areas. The smallest difference was among white women.

Hispanic women’s large gains could be due to many previously lacking insurance, said Dr. Oluwasegun Akinyemi, senior research fellow at the Howard University College of Medicine’s Clive O. Callender Outcomes Research Center and a coauthor of the study.

Black women have higher breast cancer death rates compared to white women, even though there are fewer cases among them, partly because they are often diagnosed with the disease at a later stage.

Overall, Black women with breast cancer benefitted less from Medicaid expansion than other groups because they are disproportionately located in the South, where most states have not expanded, Akinyemi noted. The expansion holdout states include Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Mississippi, South Carolina, Tennessee and Texas.

The remaining three nonexpansion states are Kansas, Wisconsin and Wyoming.

The researchers also compared mortality rates in low- and high-income neighborhoods. Women living in the highest-income neighborhoods, as well as those who received immunotherapy treatment, had lower mortality rates. Akinyemi said that result suggests that coverage leads to greater access to treatment.

In July, President Donald Trump signed a broad tax and spending bill  that will cut federal Medicaid funding by more than $900 billion over the next decade. As a result, about 15 million people may lose Medicaid coverage, according to estimates by the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities.

Editor’s Note: Because of inaccurate information provided to Stateline, an earlier version of this story misstated the position of Dr. Oluwasegun Akinyemi. Stateline reporter Nada Hassanein can be reached at nhassanein@stateline.org.

Robert F. Kennedy Jr. promotes "real food" at a rally in Harrisburg, Penn., last month. Over the next decade, obesity rates across the nation could surge to close to half of U.S. adults, a new study says. (Photo by Whitney Downard/Pennsylvania Capital-Star)

Over the next decade, obesity rates across the nation could surge to close to half of U.S. adults, a new study published in the medical journal JAMA estimates.

Researchers at the University of Washington conducted the analysis using body mass index data from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey and self-reported weight data from a national survey of adults ages 20 and older. They examined the 2022 rates and created estimates for 2035 based on current trends. The researchers also looked at race, ethnicity and state-level data, finding wide disparities across states and racial groups.

About a fifth of U.S. adults were living with obesity in 1990. By 2022, the percentage increased to nearly 43%. Obesity was more prevalent in states in the Midwest and South.

If current trends continue, about 47% of U.S. adults will be living with obesity by 2035, according to the researchers. Obesity rates are projected to increase among Americans of all ages and racial groups.

In 2022, non-Hispanic Black women had the highest age-standardized obesity rate, at about 57%, followed by Hispanic women at 49%. Hispanic males, non-Hispanic white males and females, and non-Hispanic Black males had similar rates, ranging from about 40% to nearly 43%.

The study comes amid exploding demand for weight-loss drugs, and as U.S. Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. continues to push his Make America Healthy Again campaign.

HHS and the U.S. Department of Agriculture last month made changes to the federal food pyramid, placing a greater emphasis on animal protein, dairy and fats. Like the previous guidelines, the new pyramid discourages the consumption of processed foods, which can cause weight gain.

Despite disparities between men and women and between racial groups, HHS says its nutrition strategy moves away from the “health equity” focus of the Biden administration, in favor of making “the health of all Americans the primary goal.”

For Hispanic people, obesity rates were generally higher in states in the Midwest and the South in 2022, a pattern that is expected to continue through 2035.

In 2022, the obesity rate for Hispanic women was highest in Oklahoma, at about 54%. For Hispanic men, the rate was highest in Indiana, at roughly 47%. In 2035, Indiana is projected to have the highest rate of obesity among Hispanic men at about 54%, while the highest rate for Hispanic women, nearly 60%, is expected to be in South Dakota.

The Midwest and South also had high rates of obesity for non-Hispanic white men and women. In 2022, West Virginia had the highest obesity rates for white men and women — about 47% and 49%, respectively. In 2022, obesity rates for white men and women were lowest in the District of Columbia, at roughly 24% for men and 26% for women.

Among Black women, obesity rates were over 50% for all states, except Hawaii, in 2022. That pattern is expected to continue through 2035. Black men have lower obesity rates than Black women across all states. In 2022, the highest obesity rate for Black men was in Oklahoma, at about 44%. That rate projected to rise to 49% in 2035.

“While no locations were predicted to have decreases in obesity prevalence between 2022 and 2035, there were many with small increases over this time,” the authors wrote. They pointed to Mississippi, where Black women had the highest obesity rates between 1990 and 2022, but are projected to see one of the smallest changes — an increase of about 1.8% — by 2035.

“Predictions in states with historically high levels of obesity, such as Mississippi, suggest that the prevalence of obesity may be plateauing in some locations,” the researchers wrote.

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

Snow and ice boulders at the Forest Glen Metro stop in Silver Spring, Maryland, on Jan. 29, 2026, days after Winter Storm Fern hit the region. (Photo by Jane Norman/States Newsroom)

A focus on addressing climate change, including by producing wind and solar energy, has not helped Americans keep their electricity and heat on during winter storms, U.S. Energy Secretary Chris Wright said Friday.

Ahead of another major cold snap on the East Coast, Wright briefed reporters at the agency headquarters in Washington, D.C., on the importance of maintaining electricity and heat supply during winter storms and advocated for a national energy strategy that focuses more on grid resilience and less on reducing carbon emissions. 

His statements continued a Trump administration stress on fossil fuels like coal, oil and gas that contribute to global climate change.

Americans elected President Donald Trump to move away from a focus on climate, Wright said.

“Today, the policies that get in the way of reasonable energy development and mess up the math are things focused around climate change,” he said. “We’ve done almost nothing to change global greenhouse gas emissions — as close to nothing as you can get — from endless regulations on electricity that have just driven up prices and driven down reliability in the name of climate change.”

Electricity grids and peak demand 

Electricity grids must be designed for peak demand, such as during winter storms or summer heat waves, Wright said. Efforts to increase generation capacity with renewable sources are misguided, as the United States electricity grid produces hundreds of excess gigawatts of power during normal conditions, he said.

During President Joe Biden’s administration, Democrats enacted a law providing massive tax credits for wind and solar production. Without naming that law or specific officials, Wright said those efforts were not useful.

“When I hear politicians say, ‘We just need more electrons on the grid,’ no, we don’t,” he said. “When the sun shines or the wind blows, (it) doesn’t add anything to the capacity of our electricity grid. It just means we send subsidy checks to those generators, and we tell the other generators, turn down.”

During the winter storm that gripped much of the country last month, wind energy provided 40% less electricity than it had on the same days in 2025, Wright said. Solar provided only 2% of energy to affected areas, according to a pie chart shown at the briefing.

By contrast, coal provided 25% more power than usual and natural gas produced 47% more, he said. Nuclear energy was about the same.

Renewables strengthen grid, climate group says

The clean energy group Climate Power said in a Tuesday statement that renewable sources helped fortify energy supply during peak demand times. Solar energy produced 300% more in a 2024 Texas storm than it had in a storm three years earlier. And during last month’s cold streak, areas that relied on wind saw lower prices, according to the group.

Climate Power also said natural gas infrastructure was “prone to freezes and mechanical failure.”

“As back-to-back winter storms pummeled communities across the country in January, the facts about Donald Trump’s reckless energy policies have come into focus: fossil fuels have proved less reliable and more expensive as families struggle to keep the power on,” the statement read.

Wright favors natural gas

But while Democrats and climate activists have said the U.S. should move away from oil, coal and gas because of the climate-warming emissions they release and toward renewables, Wright suggested natural gas should be emphasized instead to substitute for oil, which is more expensive and produces more air pollution.

The proposed Constitution Pipeline, which would carry natural gas from New York state to Pennsylvania, should have been approved years ago, Wright said, but was held up by a “bad political decision.”

Planners abandoned the controversial project in 2020 in the face of regulatory difficulties in New York, but revived it last year. Its federal reviews are pending.

Wright said producing more energy would also be needed for another Trump administration priority: leading in artificial intelligence development. The industry needs massive energy sources to run the data centers AI relies on. 

Chair of the Senate Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs Sen. Tim Scott, R-S.C., on Feb. 5, 2026, in Washington, D.C.  Scott criticized President Donald Trump's use of a racist meme on social media. (Photo by Kevin Dietsch/Getty Images)

WASHINGTON — The White House on Friday pulled down a social media post depicting former President Barack Obama and first lady Michelle Obama as monkeys after members of Congress from both political parties expressed dismay and called it racist.

A White House spokesperson told States Newsroom around noon that a “staffer erroneously made the post” that was shared on President Donald Trump’s social media platform late Thursday night. 

But White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt wrote in a statement earlier in the day the video wasn’t a real issue.

“This is from an internet meme video depicting President Trump as the King of the Jungle and Democrats as characters from the Lion King,” she wrote. “Please stop the fake outrage and report on something today that actually matters to the American public.”

The White House press office also shared via email the full video, which was published in October. Trump shared a clip of the video on his social media account on Thursday at 11:44 p.m. Eastern within another video about allegations of 2020 election fraud in Michigan. 

The decision to delete Trump’s social media post followed hours of pushback from lawmakers.

“Praying it was fake because it’s the most racist thing I’ve seen out of this White House,” wrote South Carolina Republican Sen. Tim Scott. “The President should remove it.”

Scott is chairman of the National Republican Senatorial Committee, which is tasked with ensuring the GOP maintains its majority in that chamber following November’s midterm elections. 

Nebraska Republican Sen. Pete Ricketts posted that, “Even if this was a Lion King meme, a reasonable person sees the racist context to this. The White House should do what anyone does when they make a mistake: remove this and apologize.”

New York Republican Rep. Mike Lawler wrote the “post is wrong and incredibly offensive — whether intentional or a mistake — and should be deleted immediately with an apology offered.”

Mississippi Republican Sen. Roger Wicker called the post “totally unacceptable. 

“The president should take it down and apologize.”

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., described the video as something that “is dangerous and degrades our country” as well as “Racist. Vile. Abhorrent.” 

“The President must immediately delete the post and apologize to Barack and Michelle Obama, two great Americans who make Donald Trump look like a small, envious man,” Schumer wrote. 

Michigan Democratic Sen. Elissa Slotkin posted, “This is racist garbage from President Trump. If you’re finding yourself defending it, you’re on the wrong side of history.” 

House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, D-N.Y., wrote that “President Obama and Michelle Obama are brilliant, compassionate and patriotic Americans. They represent the best of this country.”

“Donald Trump is a vile, unhinged and malignant bottom feeder,” Jeffries added. “Why are GOP leaders like John Thune continuing to stand by this sick individual? Every single Republican must immediately denounce Donald Trump’s disgusting bigotry.”

New York Democratic Rep. Yvette Clarke, chairwoman of the Congressional Black Caucus, wrote that while some people “still find Donald Trump’s behavior shocking. I do not.”

“This is the man who built his political fortune by way of a vile campaign of birther lies and harassment against President Obama,” Clarke wrote. “Bigotry has been his brand since Day 1, and the wretched ‘yes’ men who surround him enabling or endorsing this conduct aren’t going to change that.

“As his scandals continue to escalate, and as he continues to lose the little lucidity that remains with him, I expect Donald to only retreat deeper into the sewers of racism and ignorance. That’s where he’s most at home. That’s where he’s most comfortable.”

Virginia Democratic Rep. Don Beyer wrote, “Donald Trump greets the first week of Black History Month with one of the most racist things he’s ever posted. This man is unwell.”

U.S. Secretary of Health and Human Services Robert F. Kennedy Jr. speaks during a policy announcement event at the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services on Jan. 8, 2026 in Washington, DC.  (Photo by Anna Moneymaker/Getty Images)

WASHINGTON — Congress has approved the first public health funding bill since President Donald Trump began his second term, with lawmakers largely rejecting his proposed spending cuts and the elimination of dozens of programs. 

A bipartisan group of negotiators instead struck a deal to increase funding on several line items within the Department of Health and Human Services’ annual appropriations bill, including for major initiatives at the National Institutes of Health and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. 

“When you look at the differences between what was proposed and what was agreed to, it is astonishing,” House Appropriations Committee ranking member Rosa DeLauro, D-Conn., said during a hearing on the bill in late January.

The Trump administration’s budget request, released in May, called on Congress to cut funding for the Department of Health and Human Services by $33 billion, or 26.2%.

The president asked lawmakers to implement an $18 billion funding cut to the NIH, which he argued would bring the agency in line with the Make America Healthy Again agenda. 

The Trump administration proposed a $3.6 billion cut for CDC programs, including the elimination of the National Center for Chronic Diseases Prevention and Health Promotion, National Center for Injury Prevention and Control, and Public Health Preparedness and Response, all of which it said could “be conducted more effectively by States.”

The budget request said more than $1 billion should be cut from the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, though it said the administration was “committed to combatting the scourge of deadly drugs that have ravaged American communities.”

Trump also requested lawmakers zero out any funding for the Low Income Home Energy Assistance Program, or LIHEAP, which he deemed “unnecessary.” The federal program helps millions of low-income households meet their home energy needs, via states and tribes.

The final spending bill Congress approved rejected nearly all of the major cuts. 

Collins, Murray both praise final product

Senate Appropriations Committee Chairwoman Susan Collins, R-Maine, said the bills “reflect months of hard work and deliberation and contributions from members of both parties and on both sides of the Capitol.”

“Funding for NIH is not decreased, as was proposed in the administration’s budget,” she said. “Rather, it is increased by $415 million, including increases of $100 million for Alzheimer’s research and $10 million more for diabetes research, with a focus on type 1 diabetes.” 

Collins also touted an increase in “funding for low-income heating assistance, which is absolutely crucial for states like Maine and is an issue that I have worked for years on with my Democratic colleague Jack Reed of Rhode Island.”

Senate Appropriations Committee ranking member Patty Murray, D-Wash., said the difference between Trump’s budget request and the final bills was like the difference between “night and day.”

“Our bill rejects President Trump’s asks to rubber stamp his public health sabotage,” she said. “Instead, it doubles down on lifesaving public health investments. It rejects Trump’s efforts to slash opioid response funds. It rejects his proposal to chop the CDC in half. It rejects his call to end programs like title X, the teen pregnancy program, essential HIV initiatives, and more.” 

Rare bipartisan agreement in Trump’s second term

Senators from both political parties indicated last summer they weren’t fully on board with Trump’s budget proposal and used a hearing with HHS Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. in May and a separate hearing with NIH Director Jay Bhattacharya in June to highlight their concerns. 

The Senate Appropriations Committee approved its HHS spending bill on a broadly bipartisan vote in July, while the House Appropriations Committee approved its funding bill in September without any Democratic support.

Neither of the original bills went to the floor for debate and amendment votes, though negotiations to find compromise on a final bill began late last year after the record-breaking government shutdown ended in November. 

Republicans and Democrats brokered a final agreement on the HHS funding bill in late January, the first time bipartisan agreement was reached during Trump’s second term. 

Congress previously approved a series of stopgap spending bills to keep HHS up and running, mostly on funding levels and policies last set during the Biden administration. 

The House originally voted on Jan. 22 to send the package that included funding for HHS to the Senate. But it stalled after federal immigration agents shot and killed a second U.S. citizen in Minnesota and Democrats demanded changes to the spending bill for the Department of Homeland Security. 

The Senate voted 71-29 on Jan. 30 to send the package back to the House after removing the full-year DHS spending bill and replacing it with a two-week stopgap. The House then voted 217-214 on Tuesday to clear the package for Trump, who signed it later in the day, ending a four-day partial government shutdown.  

The package also holds funding for the departments of Defense, Education, Housing and Urban Development, Labor, State, Transportation and Treasury. 

‘Months of hard work turned into results’

House Appropriations Chairman Tom Cole, R-Okla., said during floor debate last month the process that led to the final bills proved lawmakers “can make tough decisions.”

“This is where months of hard work turned into results,” Cole said. “You see, we aren’t here for just another stopgap temporary fix. We’re here to finish the job by providing full-year funding and specifically this package addresses core areas of national consequence — defense; labor, health and education; and transportation and housing development.”

Congress is supposed to pass the dozen full-year appropriations bills by the start of the fiscal year on Oct. 1, though it hasn’t completed all of its work on time in decades. 

Last fiscal year, it didn’t complete its work at all, making March 2024 the last time Congress approved all of the funding bills. 

Cole said during debate the programs funded “aren’t abstract concepts on a page, they affect how Americans live, work, learn and travel every day.”

DeLauro said the package of bills represents “a strong bipartisan, bicameral agreement that rejects the Trump administration’s efforts to eviscerate public services and reasserts Congress’ power of the purse.”

“It provides funding levels, removing ambiguity that the White House sought to exploit in the past,” DeLauro said. “It establishes deadlines for required spending, provides minimum staffing thresholds to prevent agencies from being hollowed out and increases notification requirements to ensure the administration is complying with the laws that Congress makes.” 

HHS ends up with $210 million bump

The bill provides HHS with more than $116 billion, $210 million more in discretionary funding than the previous level and a rejection of Trump’s request to cut $33 billion, according to a summary from Murray’s office. 

NIH will receive $48.7 billion in funding, $415 million more than its current spending level, showing that lawmakers were unwilling to slice its budget by $18 billion as requested. 

Congress bolstered funding for the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration by $65 million to a total of $7.4 billion, according to Murray’s summary. Trump asked lawmakers to reduce its allocation by more than $1 billion. 

A $3.6 billion funding cut for the CDC was also rejected, with appropriators agreeing to provide the Atlanta-based agency with $9.2 billion.

A summary of the bill from DeLauro’s office says negotiators were able to keep funding for domestic and global HIV/AIDS activities, Firearm Injury and Mortality Prevention Research and Tobacco Prevention and Control, among other programs that House Republicans originally proposed to zero out. 

The legislation bolstered, instead of eliminated, funding for the Low Income Energy Assistance Program, or LIHEAP, according to a summary from Cole’s office. 

The bill, it said, “reprioritizes taxpayer dollars where they matter most: into lifesaving biomedical research and resilient medical supply chains, classrooms and technical programs that set Americans up for success, and rural hospitals and primary health care to support strong and healthy families.”

CDC program axed

The legislation does eliminate the CDC’s Social Determinants of Health program, which the agency’s website states are “nonmedical factors that influence health outcomes.” Those can include whether a person has access to clean air and water, a well-balanced diet, exercise, a good education, career opportunities, economic stability and a safe place to live.

HHS’ Office of Disease Prevention and Health Promotion writes that “people who don’t have access to grocery stores with healthy foods are less likely to have good nutrition. That raises their risk of health conditions like heart disease, diabetes, and obesity — and even lowers life expectancy relative to people who do have access to healthy foods.” 

Cole’s summary of the HHS spending bill says that program “promoted social engineering while distracting grant recipients from combating infectious and chronic diseases.” 

The American Public Health Association urged Congress to approve the bill, writing in a statement the compromise “rightly maintains funding for most public health agencies and programs.”

“While the bill is not perfect and we disagree with cuts to several HHS agency programs included, overall, the agreement rejects the devastating cuts and nonsensical agency reorganizations proposed by the Trump administration and is a positive outcome,” APHA wrote. “Importantly, the bill also includes language to ensure that CDC and other health agencies maintain an adequate level of staffing to carry out their statutory responsibilities. 

“The bill will also ensure that Congress exercises its oversight over any future proposed agency reorganizations.”

The starting line at the 2024 American Birkebeiner ski race in Cable, Wisconsin | Photo by Frank Zufall/Wisconsin Examiner

The 52nd American Birkebeiner, “Birkie,” cross-country ski race between Cable and Hayward, Wisconsin, is scheduled for Saturday, Feb. 21, featuring thousands of skiers from across the United States and several hundred from 16 foreign countries, including  Norway, France, Finland and Germany.

However, according to American Birkebeiner Ski Foundation Executive Director Ben Popp several international participants have called the Birkebeiner office in Hayward to express concerns after the federal immigration crackdown in Minnesota  and the death of Minneapolis residents Renee Good and Alex Pretti, who were both shot by federal immigration agents.

The Birkebeiner course in northwestern Wisconsin is close to the Minneapolis-St. Paul international airport. So far, Popp said, the Birkie doesn’t know if any foreign skiers have canceled their plans to attend the upcoming race, the largest cross-country/Nordic ski race in North America.

“We had people say, ‘Is it safe to fly into Minneapolis?’” said Popp. “I mean it’s no secret, globally speaking, people are looking at the United States in a very different light these days, especially if you’re a foreigner.”

He added, “it’s predominantly people asking questions like, ‘Is it safe to fly to Minneapolis? What’s it like? Should I still come?’ You know, those are kind of the questions I think we’re getting from the foreigners. And, you know, a lot of those are pretty savvy travelers. Typically, it’s like this is not their first international trip.”

Popp said a skier from Slovenia wanted a contract number with the Birkie in case the skier was stopped by immigration officers and questioned why he was in the U.S..

“So those are legitimate questions we’re getting and encouraging them to come,” Popp said. “And certainly there are some crazy things going on, but we think it’s safe to fly into Minneapolis and get to the Northwoods.” 

The Birkie will be able to assess how many skiers  canceled their trips after organizers see  who doesn’t participate in the 50K ski or the 53K classic events. 

“I think there’s certainly an economic impact that can happen if they don’t come,” said Popp. “But, you know, we’re trying to reassure them that we think it is safe to travel, you know, through Minneapolis.”

International tourism to the United States reportedly dropped dramatically  after President Donald Trump took office on January 21, 2025, and voiced an “American First” policy emphasizing a crackdown on immigrants, suspension of foreign visa programs and a tougher foreign-policy and trade stance toward other nations.

Images and videos of ICE officers breaking car windows and dragging people out of their homes, some of whom were immigrants who legally reside in the U.S., as well as the shooting deaths of U.S. citizens Good and Pretti, haven’t played well for international travelers considering visiting the U.S.

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

A cheesehead placed at the Minneapolis memorial of Green Bay native Alex Pretti, who was killed by federal agents Jan. 24. (Henry Redman | Wisconsin Examiner)

BALDWIN — Hours after White House border czar Tom Homan announced Wednesday morning that the Trump administration would be pulling 700 immigration agents out of Minnesota, agents crossed the St. Croix River to conduct a number of raids in the Twin Cities exurban communities of Hudson and Baldwin, Wisconsin. 

Those operations included the arrest of immigrants at the St. Croix County Courthouse in Hudson and a Mexican restaurant in Baldwin. In prior weeks federal immigration agents have regularly crossed the river, arresting people working at small manufacturing operations and gas stations, ranging as far east as Eau Claire. 

While Wisconsin has seen an increase in immigration enforcement since President Donald Trump took office last year — as well some high profile cases such as the arrest of a migrant at the Milwaukee County Courthouse that sparked the federal felony charges against former Judge Hannah Dugan — the level of ICE action in the state has been lower than in the neighboring states of Illinois and Minnesota, where the Department of Homeland Security launched massive operations targeting migrants in Chicago and Minneapolis/St. Paul. 

Ben Nelson, a St. Paul resident who serves as the pastor of Zion Lutheran Church in Woodville and works as a coach on the track team at Baldwin-Woodville High School, said that when students returned to classes after winter break, as many as 50 households in the school district had seen at least one parent taken by federal agents. 

On Wednesday, several ICE agents arrived at the St. Croix County Courthouse and went inside to arrest immigrants who were in  the building for court hearings.

Agents also raided Rancho Loco Mexican restaurant in Baldwin, where four members of the staff were arrested. 

“Within the last 48 hours, we probably had another 10 people taken from Baldwin,” Kimberly Solberg, a Baldwin resident who has been involved in local support networks, said Wednesday evening. “We are a small town, but they’re still doing the raids here, taking two, three, five, eight people at a time.” 

In the shadow of the Minnesota crackdown

Since ICE increased its Minnesota presence in December, these Wisconsin communities have been living in the shadow of the chaos caused by the immigration enforcement surge across the border. Residents work, shop and get their health care in Minnesota — including at the Veterans Affairs hospital where Green Bay native Alex Pretti worked before he was killed by federal agents Jan. 24. 

While the presence of ICE in the Twin Cities has galvanized resistance in the largely blue urban area, the operations in western Wisconsin are deeply dividing residents in a solidly Republican county. 

“The vitriol is so so thick, and the divide is so deep that people on one side, in the local minority, who are trying to do what they can to protect their neighbors, to support their neighbors, or just call for calmness and peace — which even calling for empathy, calmness and peace is radical leftist nonsense at this point,” Solberg said. “They’re terrified. People speak in code, there’s like signals, winks and nods. Everybody tiptoes around to suss out whether or not the person they’re talking to is safe because they’re so scared of how people react.”

Nelson, the Woodville track coach and pastor, said the lack of trust in the community is affecting how people are responding.

“There’s some really just strong opinions … it’s sort of difficult to know who you can trust, because there is a significant amount of people who believe that ICE is operating lawfully and doing the right thing, and will support them in those efforts,” Nelson said. “So honestly, I think we’re just still figuring it out as we go, figuring out how to speak and what we can do.”

Some networks that are helping western Wisconsin’s current immigrant communities were established when Hmong and Vietnamese refugees first arrived in the region after the Vietnam War, according to River Falls resident Ellie Richards. 

“There is a caring community here who is trying to provide the support we feel like these wonderful souls need,” Richards said. “We view them as an asset to our community. None of us feel the least bit threatened by their presence, despite what the federal government may try to tell us.” 

But the best way to respond has been unclear because of the political divide in the rural communities and the fact that there are fewer people nearby to rush to the scene when immigration agents are conducting an arrest.

On the evening of Jan. 28, about 50 residents of Baldwin met in sub-zero temperatures at a park to hold a candlelight vigil for Pretti and Renee Good. Residents of the small rural community lamented that ICE’s presence in St. Croix County has caused immigrant-owned businesses to close — including the local Mexican grocery store, Thai and Indian restaurants. 

Other area residents have been driving across the border to join Minnesota’s protests against the federal immigration enforcement crackdown. 

‘We don’t have the numbers and support’

In the Twin Cities, the presence of ICE agents often sparks an immediate response from neighbors who come outside to observe and make noise in an effort to deter an arrest. In rural Wisconsin communities, there are often fewer people in the immediate area who can respond in the same way. 

Even when responders arrive on the scene, they often don’t have enough people to feel comfortable standing up to the federal agents. 

“We don’t have the numbers and support, at least not in any way organized like they do in the Cities,” Solberg said. “None of the whistles, none of the honking or shouting. It’s intimidating, because if you don’t have a big group, we’ve all seen the videos of the attitude of some of these ICE agents, specifically that video where the agent tells the protester, ‘You raise your voice, I’ll erase your voice.’ It’s very clear that there’s an attitude that if you resist us in any way, we will come after you, whether we legally can or not.” 

St. Croix residents have joined group chats on encryption apps such as Signal and taken observer training offered by Twin Cities-based immigrant advocacy groups in Hudson and River Falls. But often, immigrants are arrested and swept away by federal agents before help can arrive, meaning that the support networks are largely left to help families handle the effects afterwards. 

Neighbors are bringing groceries to families staying home out of fear of arrest and providing rides to undocumented immigrants, who are legally barred from obtaining Wisconsin driver’s licenses. Residents say they are providing this type of help to immigrants whether they have legal status to be in this country or not, because of ICE’s history of arresting people based on their appearance. 

Strained relationship with local police

The presence of ICE in the community is straining the relationship between residents and local law enforcement. Several residents have complained that the Baldwin Police Department is at the scene when ICE conducts operations in the community. The St. Croix County Sheriff’s Department is not a participant in ICE’s 287(g) program granting deputies some civil immigration authority and the department policy states that victims and witnesses of crimes will not be turned in to federal authorities. But the policy states that the department can notify ICE about undocumented immigrants who are held in the county jail for other crimes. 

Solberg, who said she comes from a law enforcement family, said the perceived assistance local cops are giving ICE is harming their relationship with the community. 

“I have personally seen, with my own eyes, I have seen Baldwin P.D. conferencing, standing with ICE immediately prior to ICE raiding an apartment complex,” she said. “I want to give police every benefit of the doubt, because I’ve lived in places that have bad police, and Baldwin police is very community oriented, but also I’m not going to be willfully blind when so many people are saying that they have personally seen Baldwin P.D. working with ICE, assisting in detention, assisting in action, actively assisting in actions.” 

“The worst is it’s the perception, the perception in the community, for sure, across the board, among the ICE supporters and the ICE detractors, the perception in the community is that all the P.D. is working with ICE,” she continued. “Which, for people who are scared, who are legal migrants or possibly illegal immigrants, the police are supposed to be there to protect the community, and those entire groups of people do not feel safe with the law enforcement.”

But Baldwin Police Chief Kevin Moore denied that his officers were cooperating with federal agents.

“I am concerned that members of the immigrant community may feel hesitant to report crimes or contact law enforcement due to perceptions about immigration enforcement,” he said in an email. “That concern is taken seriously. The Baldwin Police Department is committed to serving everyone in our community, and we want residents to know that contacting our department for help does not place them at risk of immigration enforcement. As a small, community-focused department, our officers live and work in and around Baldwin and care deeply about the trust of the people we serve. While we occasionally encounter federal agents in the course of routine patrol or unrelated law enforcement activity, as we do with many agencies, these encounters are unplanned and do not reflect coordinated operations or cooperation related to immigration enforcement. Our intent is to maintain open communication with community members, address concerns directly, and ensure that Baldwin remains a safe place for everyone who lives, works, or visits here.”

ICE did not respond to a request for comment.

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

Washington, D.C., and 38 states have enacted some form of statewide restriction or requirement for districts to limit student phone use. Of those, 18 have bans for the entire day. (Photo by SDI Productions via Getty Images)

Wisconsin lawmakers are calling for the state to ban cell phones throughout the school day and to implement regulations on social media and other platforms in an effort to protect children from the negative consequences of internet and social media use.

The bills regulating cellphone and internet use are the result of a task force organized by Assembly Speaker Robin Vos (R-Rochester) last year. The group of lawmakers, which met four times, was tasked with examining the effects of social media on youth development, evaluating the benefits and drawbacks to children having unlimited, unsupervised access to the internet and assessing the risks and dangers of children being online.

Bell-to-bell cell phone ban

Following the lead of several other states, Wisconsin lawmakers are pushing for a “bell-to-bell” cell phone ban in schools, about six months before school districts in Wisconsin are required to implement the instructional cell phone ban in schools recently required by state law. 

Washington, D.C., and 38 states have enacted some form of statewide restriction or requirement for districts to limit student phone use. Of those, 18 have bans for the entire day. 

AB 948 would require policies banning cell phone use in school to prohibit them throughout the entire school day including during instructional time, recess, the time students travel between classes and the lunch period. This would need to be implemented by July 1, 2027, under the bill. 

Rep. Lindee Brill (R-Sheboygan Falls) told lawmakers on the Assembly Education committee that the bill is just one part of a “multifaceted approach” to addressing the question of protecting children online. 

“If schools can be a safe zone that this bill helps implement, that is a huge piece,” she said. 

Brill said that a student during one of the task force meetings said that he had many experiences on social media and “most of them were bad” and that social media “brings you down.”

Wisconsin recently enacted a statewide cell phone ban, signed into law by Gov. Tony Evers in October. But  2025 Wisconsin Act 42 only requires school districts to implement policies that ban cellphones during instructional times. These policies need to include exceptions for emergencies, for educational purposes and cases involving student health care, individualized education plans (IEPs) or 504 plans (learning environment accommodations).

Even prior to the recent state law, according to a Wisconsin Policy Forum report, most Wisconsin school districts already restricted student cellphone use, though policies and enforcement varied widely across the state.

However, Brill said the state should go further.

“School districts are right now considering adopting these policies independently and there’s a groundswell of parents calling for it,” Brill said.

Rep. Joel Kitchens (R-Sturgeon Bay), who led the first cellphone ban law, noted that he got a lot of pushback when he first proposed the idea because it was a “fairly new concept.” He said he would have liked to pass a bell-to-bell ban to begin with, but he didn’t think there was the political support necessary.

“Since that time, though, this issue has exploded across the country and Wisconsin is now on the weaker end of it,” Kitchens said, adding that New York, a Democratic-led state, and Louisiana, a Republican-led state, have the strictest bans in the country.

AB 948 would also explicitly allow school districts to use pouches or other storage devices for cellphones or ban having cellphones on school premises. 

Democratic lawmakers on the education committee questioned the approach as a  “one-size-fits-all” solution to the issue of cellphones, as well as the exclusion of the state’s private choice and independent charter schools, which receive taxpayers dollars, from the requirement.

“Why the one-size-fits-all nature of this?” Rep. Christian Phelps (D-Eau Claire) asked. He noted that there may be students who have a part-time job and need to stay in-touch with their employers during the school day and asked whether lawmakers would be open to allowing exceptions for phones during lunch if a school chooses.

“We did it for 200 years without cellphones before and I think we can do it again,” Kitchens said. “The more you understand the issue the more clear it becomes. You have to have a strict policy.”

Rep. Joe Sheehan (D-Sheboygan) said that the superintendent of the school district in the area he represents in the Assembly did not want the broader ban on cellphones. He also asked about the exclusion of the state’s voucher schools. He said if the schools don’t want to follow the regulations placed on schools getting taxpayer funding then “don’t take the money.” 

Brill said that parents are sending their children to voucher schools so they can get the education that fits their children best and that she doesn’t want there to be “punitive damages on private schools because they’re getting tax dollars when, in reality, it’s that child who’s getting the education.”

Kitchens said a bill that only includes public schools is all they can get done “politically” right now.

No one else testified on the bill.

Regulations on content, social media access

The Assembly Children and Families committee took up a set of bills that would regulate social media companies and platforms. 

AB 961 would require distributors of media, including print publications and digital platforms, to use prominent “explicit content” warning labels.

Rep. Joy Goeben (R-Hobart) said the bill would establish a “common-sense framework ensuring that material intended strictly for adults … is clearly identified before it is accessed.”

The bill defines “explicit content” as material “intended for an adult audience” that “lacks serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value” and that “depicts or describes sexual conduct in a patently offensive way.”

Under the bill, the warning label would need to be on the front cover or first page or on the packaging for print publications and for digital platforms, the label would need to appear for at least 10 seconds or until a user acknowledges the warning.

The warning label would need to be similar to: “WARNING: This material contains explicit content that may be harmful or offensive. Viewer discretion is advised. Not intended for minors.”

“Ultimately, this bill is about consumer transparency, helps protect minors by ensuring explicit material clearly is labeled and responsibly presented,” Goeben said. 

Rep. Jill Billings (D-La Crosse) asked Goeben whether she would be open to an amendment to remove printed materials from the bill, citing concerns from book sellers. 

“If this got this signed, you betcha I would, but realistically most things that are sold, aren’t they sold, like, in a wrapper?” Goeben asked, adding that she didn’t think it would be fair to social media or internet stakeholders to exclude printed materials.

“I think we really need to think about applying equally to all the people who create disturbing content,” Goeben said. 

“Maybe take print media out of it because again… this isn’t like the emerging technology where parents are struggling with trying to address what their kids are seeing and how they’re putting parental controls on it. Print media is a bit of a different animal,” Billings said. 

AB 962 would require app developers and app stores to verify the age of users and, if they identified a minor’s account, to get parental consent before child users are able to download or purchase apps or make in-store purchases. Accounts belonging to a minor would have to be affiliated with an account owned by a parent.

Goeben said the bill would give parents tools they have been asking for. 

“Parents should never discover after the fact that an app that their child has used daily has become more invasive or more dangerous,” Goeben said. “This proposal is narrowly and carefully tailored… it does not ban apps or censor content or interfere with innovation… What it does do is establish clear and uniform rules so families are no longer forced to navigate a confusing patchwork of opaque policies… written by corporations.” 

The bill would also prohibit apps and app stores from enforcing a contract or terms of service against a minor unless there is parental consent. And it bars knowingly misrepresenting any information in a parental consent disclosure and sharing or disclosing any personal information collected when conducting age verification.

The bill includes a provision to allow a minor or parent of a minor harmed by a violation to bring civil action against an app store provider or developer. They could be awarded actual damages or $1,000 for each violation, whichever amount is greater, and punitive damages if the violation was egregious, as well as court costs and reasonable attorney fees.

AB 963 would impose a number of requirements related to underage users on social media platforms that bring in more than $1 billion in revenue per year. Social media platforms would need to estimate the age of users and whether they are minors. 

The requirements include setting the default privacy settings at the most private; not allowing for “addictive features” including infinite scrolling, a profile-based feed, push notifications, autoplay and displaying likes; and preventing profile-based, paid commercial advertising in a minor’s feed.

Platforms would also need to terminate an account if they have reason to believe the user is a minor without parental consent. If a parent requests the termination of a child’s account, it must be done within 14 days, and the means to terminate an account must be clear, simple, and easy to locate. 

The bill includes a provision to allow a private civil action by a parent or child aggrieved by a negligent, reckless or knowing violation for declaratory or injunctive relief and damages. If the violation was reckless or knowing, the parent or minor would be entitled to $10,000 or actual damages per violation.

Brittney and Luke Bird, the parents of Bradyn Bohn, the 15-year-old who killed himself after falling victim to sextortion, testified in favor of the bill. They have become prominent advocates for online safety and child protection in the wake of the death of their son. 

Luke Bird told lawmakers on the committee that the bills are “meaningful steps towards preventing further tragedies.” 

“Over the last 11 months, we’ve learned firsthand how inadequate current safeguards are when it comes to internet use. The dangers are real, they’re immediate, and they’re widespread and growing,” he said. “There’s an active case against Meta involving sextortion scams. Snapchat is facing cases tied to drug distribution. TikTok has been tied to dangerous online challenges…. As parents and as citizens we’re expected to trust that our children can safely navigate these digital spaces. We believe safeguards, accountability and stronger protections must be put in place. That begins with you, in here.”

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

A Madison Burger King owned by Cave Enterprises of Chicago. The Wisconsin Department of Workforce Development has found more than 1,600 violations of state child labor laws by Cave, which owns 100 Burger King outlets in Wisconsin. (Wisconsin Examiner photo)

This report has been updated.

The owner of more than 100 Wisconsin Burger King franchises will be required to pay more than $1 million after Wisconsin’s labor department found more than 1,600 violations of state child labor and wage laws, officials said Friday.

The violations took place during a two-year period ending in January 2025, the state Department of Workforce Development reported. The case involves the largest number of child labor and wage payment violations identified by the department “in modern Wisconsin history,” according to the office of Gov. Tony Evers.

“We have a responsibility to make sure kids who are working are protected from exploitation, predatory employer practices, and being subjected to hazardous or illegal working conditions, and that’s a responsibility we must take seriously,” Evers said in a statement released Friday.

The franchise owner, Chicago-based Cave Enterprises, operates Burger King locations in eight states, according to the Cave Enterprises website. Wisconsin has 100 of those restaurants currently — more than any of the other states.

On Thursday, DWD informed Cave that investigators reviewed records from the company from January 2023 to January 2025.

A  letter from DWD to Cave states that the company:

• Employed 593 14- and 15-year-olds who started work without required work permits;
• Failed to provide a required 30-minute meal break for 627 minors who worked at least one shift of six hours or longer without a break;
• Failed to pay required overtime to 67 workers who were 16 or 17 and who worked at least one shift longer than 10 hours — after which state law requires payment at time and a half;
• Violated state requirements on permitted work hours for 369 minors. 

DWD “counted violations of Wisconsin’s Employment of Minors laws by counting only one violation per child per type of violation found,” the department stated in a cover letter accompanying the notification of violations. By that count, “Employer violated Wisconsin’s Employment of Minors laws and related regulations at least 1,656 times during the investigative period.”

DWD told Cave the company owes the employees a total of $3,498 in back wages, $1,994 in unpaid overtime wages, and $231,944 in wage penalties — liquidated damages amounting to 200% of the wage shortfall. 

Cave also must “immediately change its business practices to ensure that it is no longer in violation of Wisconsin’s Employment of Minors laws and related regulations which were found to be violated,” the investigation report states.

The cover letter states Cave also must pay DWD a direct penalty of $828,000 — $500 for each of the 1,656 violations, according to the department. The company must make the payments within 20 days to resolve the case.

Cave has not replied to an email message from the Wisconsin Examiner sent Friday to the company’s human resources manager seeking comment on the DWD’s findings.

DWD launched the investigation after receiving several complaints in 2024 and subsequently reviewing department records, which produced 33 previous complaints against the business for wage payment and child labor violations from 2020 through 2023.

Those complaints were resolved individually, DWD Secretary-designee Amy Pechacek told the Wisconsin Examiner in an interview Friday.

But they also pointed to a larger pattern in “how this employer interacts with its minor-aged workforce,” Pechacek said. Investigators decided that “this warrants a very deep-dive, intensive audit about their practices as it relates to employing minors here in the state of Wisconsin.”

On Jan. 23, 2025, DWD requested records from Cave on the company’s employment of minors younger than 18 going back to Jan. 1, 2023. The records started coming in on March 4, 2025, with the last batch received Nov. 11, 2025, according to DWD.

DWD’s auditors “literally reviewed thousands and thousands and thousands of records for months,” Pechaeck said.

The DWD letters to the company state that both the payments for the employees, which must be made with individual checks for each worker, and the penalty that is owed to the state must be sent to DWD’s Equal Rights Division, which investigates child labor  and other workplace violations.

In 2024, Evers vetoed a bill passed by Republicans in the Legislature that would have eliminated a requirement that 14- and 15-year-olds in Wisconsin have a work permit approved by their parents in order to take a job.

The legislation was supported by Wisconsin Independent Business and the National Federation of Independent Businesses, according to lobbying records posted by the Wisconsin Ethics Commission.

It was also promoted by the Opportunity Solutions Project, the lobbying arm of the Florida-based Foundation for Government Accountability, which Wisconsin Watch reported had gotten “attention for its successful drive to relax child labor restrictions in Iowa and Arkansas.”

“After years of Republican lawmakers working to get rid of Wisconsin’s basic child labor law protections, I’m proud my administration is working to do the opposite by making sure bad actors are held accountable for taking advantage of kids in the workplace,” Evers said Friday.

When DWD issues work permits, it also sends employers letters informing them about the details of Wisconsin’s child labor regulations, including the limits on hours of work and requirements such as the one for paid meal breaks after six hours of work. 

“It’s just not in the best interest of the youth, our families, or even the business to be using workers and youth workers in a way that again is really going to potentially impact their success in other areas that we want them to be protected in,” Pechacek said. 

“We have to put some guard rails around utilizing youth workforce so that we can protect them,” she added. “That also protects the businesses. These kids are going to school all day. They need breaks. They need to be able to focus on also being a kid.”

Cave was founded in 1999 by Adam Velarde with a Burger King outlet in Lemont, Illinois, and grew to be the largest group of Burger King franchises with a single owner, according to the company website.

“The majority of Cave’s growth has been through purchasing distressed restaurants and improving the value of the location and brand through hard work, smart decisions and dedication to the guests,” the company states. “We pride ourselves on being leaders in the Burger King Brand in traffic and profit growth.”

While the investigation found minors employed at 104 Wisconsin locations that Cave owned, the company’s current list of 100 locations would appear to suggest that Cave closed or divested at least four restaurants sometime in the last three years.

Cave also operates four locations in Iowa, 28 in Illinois, one in Indiana, eight in  Michigan, 13 in Minnesota, one in Nebraska and 22 in South Dakota. 

This report was updated Friday following an interview with DWD Secretary-designee Amy Pechacek.