A nurse gives an MMR vaccine at the Utah County Health Department on April 29, 2019, in Provo, Utah. The vaccine is 97% effective against measles when two doses are administered. (Photo by George Frey/Getty Images)

The Wisconsin Department of Health Services (DHS) is urging residents to get vaccinated amid the confirmation of the first measles cases in the state this year and as families begin back-to-school preparation with vaccine rates still down. 

DHS confirmed nine cases of measles in Oconto County over the weekend — the first cases in the state this year. The agency said no public points of exposure have been identified and the risk to the community remains low. 

The first case was confirmed through testing at the Wisconsin State Laboratory of Hygiene, and the eight other cases were confirmed based on exposure and symptoms. Each person was exposed from a common source during out-of-state travel.

Dr. Ryan Westergaard, chief medical officer of DHS’s Bureau of Communicable Diseases, told reporters during a press conference Monday afternoon that given the number of cases across the country, the agency has been preparing for its case investigations and outbreak response for months. 

“While we were surprised that we had our first cases this past week, we were prepared,” Westergaard said. “We’ve been making sure that we have adequate MMR vaccine in stock and have worked in partnership with all of our local and tribal health departments to make sure that we have a solid response that everyone is aware of, and so far for this case,… things have gone well.”

Cases of the highly contagious disease have hit a 33-year high nationally, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). There are reports of over 1,300 cases this year, with more than 150 people having been hospitalized for measles. Three people have died this year. 

Measles was declared eliminated in 2000, but decreasing vaccine rates, which have fallen below herd immunity, have led to a resurgence of the disease. Prior to 2025, the last similar outbreak was in 2019 when more than 1,200 cases were confirmed in the U.S. 

Westergaard said the state agency is not considering the nine cases in Wisconsin an outbreak because  the investigation found a common source during out-of-state travel. He said the agency won’t be releasing additional information about the cases due to state privacy laws. The agency has said it is working to identify and notify people who may have been exposed. 

The agency is urging families to get vaccinated in light of the cluster of cases and reported Monday that vaccination rates among students mostly held steady during the 2024-25 school year. Vaccination rates are still below pre-pandemic levels. 

“Vaccination is the first line of defense for your child’s health. Each vaccine is approved only after being proven safe and effective,” Stephanie Schauer, director of the Wisconsin Immunization Program, said in a statement. “Taking time now to ensure your children have received the recommended vaccines will make them less likely to get seriously ill, meaning less time out of school and away from work. And routine vaccines don’t just protect your child — they help keep classrooms and the whole community safe.”

During the 2024-25 school year, 86.4% of students met the minimum immunization requirements — a 2.8 percentage point decrease from the 2023-24 school year. 

“This tells us that most Wisconsin families are protecting their children with vaccines,” Westergaard said at the press conference. “Unfortunately, this level is below where we need to be to protect our state against outbreaks of vaccine-preventable diseases. As we head into the new school year as a physician and as the father of kids who attend public schools, I want to encourage all caregivers to reach out to a trusted health care provider with any questions or concerns that you have to concern to ensure that students are up to date on their vaccines this year.” 

The agency attributed the overall decrease in meeting the immunization requirement to people being unfamiliar with a new meningitis vaccination requirement for 7th and 12th grade students. Without data on the meningitis vaccination, 89.3% of Wisconsin students met the minimum requirements — a 0.1% increase from the 2023-24 school year.

DHS reported in December that families in the state have fallen behind other states when it comes to receiving childhood vaccines including polio, pertussis, diphtheria and tetanus (DTaP), and measles, mumps, and rubella (MMR). When it comes to measles in particular, Wisconsin has one of the lowest vaccination rates in the country.

Measles can spread from person to person through the air, and the vaccines to prevent it are highly effective. One dose of the MMR vaccine provides about 93% protection from measles, while two doses are about 97% effective.

“Our school vaccination data tells us there are children in our schools who are not protected from an outbreak of preventable diseases like measles,” State Health Officer Paula Tran said in a statement. “In public health, we know that 95% of people in a community need to be vaccinated against measles in order to prevent an outbreak, which is why it’s so important to get children the vaccines they need on time.”

Milwaukee city leaders, looking to take preventative steps due to the measles cases, also urged residents to get vaccinated on Monday.

“As a father and as mayor, I take this threat seriously,” Mayor Cavalier Johnson said in a statement. “We’ve seen how quickly diseases can spread when vaccination rates fall behind.”

Children’s Wisconsin President of Pediatrics Dr. Mike Gutzeit emphasized that serious side effects from the MMR vaccine are rare. 

“The risk from measles itself is far greater. When families choose not to vaccinate, they’re not just putting their own children at risk, but also newborns and people with weakened immune systems,” Gutzeit said. “Measles was nearly eliminated in the U.S., but now we’re seeing hundreds of cases and hospitalizations again. We can’t afford to go backward.”

Other vaccine-preventable illnesses surged in classrooms last year, according to DHS. Nearly 3,000 cases of pertussis, or whooping cough, were reported.

The measles cases and data on school vaccine rates come as some Republican lawmakers are seeking to increase awareness of vaccine exemptions. Sen. Rachael Cabral-Guevara (R-Appleton) and Rep. Lindee Brill (R-Sheboygan Falls) recently introduced a bill that seeks to highlight Wisconsin’s vaccine exemptions, saying there isn’t enough transparency around them. Current law already requires that schools and day care providers “inform the person in writing of the person’s right to a waiver.” 

During the 2024–2025 school year, 6.7% of students had a waiver for one or more vaccinations. Of those, 5.8% of students had a personal conviction waiver, 1% had a religious waiver and 0.4% had a health waiver. 

Westergaard said the rate of waivers in Wisconsin is higher than other states. 

“We’re one of only 13 states that has the personal conviction waiver. Many states do not allow that,” Westergaard said, adding that health forms typically include notice of the waiver availability. 

“We feel in public health that knowledge of the exemptions of the waivers is commonplace,” Westergaard said. “We don’t hide them, but our recommendation is that people get their kids vaccinated because we, as a public health entity, feel any risks far outweighed by the benefit, both to individual health and to our community health.”

Westergaard said those with concerns should speak with a trusted physician and be open with their questions. 

“For many families, childhood immunizations are a fact of life, and they’ve accepted them when they’re recommended, but we know other families have questions and concerns,” Westergaard said. “If there are questions you have, if there is information that you’ve seen online or heard that makes you question the safety or the effectiveness, let’s talk about them… There’s near unanimity among people who have seriously reviewed MMR safety data and other childhood vaccine data that they are on balance very safe and very effective and continually monitored for safety and adverse effects.”

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

Melissa Beson. (Photo courtesy LDF Police Department)

The Lac du FlambeauTribal Police has received new information about a tribal member missing since March 17, Melissa Beson, 37.

The new information has redirected searches on the reservation in Vilas County and raised a new theory that she may have been picked up while walking along a county road.

Initially, Beson was last reported on Indian Village Road in Lac du Flambeau on the afternoon of March 17. Subsequently, thousands of acres of the forested reservation in the vicinity were searched.

New information received by the police reveals that after Beson had been seen on Indian Village Road, she received a ride from three local individuals in a van that ended up at a Kiboniki Lake boat landing on Highway D, where Beson got out of the vehicle and walked toward the south.

Police report that a male in the van said he was concerned for Beson’s safety because of the remoteness of the area, and he followed her and encouraged her to return to the van.

When a northbound vehicle stopped near Beson, the man said he ran into the woods because he had an outstanding warrant, and he believed the vehicle was law enforcement.

Police have identified the driver of the northbound vehicle, who reported that Beson appeared to be “highly agitated,” and refused a ride. She continued walking south as the driver continued northbound.

After this new information was reported, search efforts were conducted in an area near Highway D, south of the Kiboniki Lake boat landing, according to the tribal police department. Searches have been conducted on foot and using drones and dogs with no success in finding Beson.

Police Chief TJ Bill said his office is also considering the possibility that Beson may have been picked up by another driver on Highway D.

Previously, police investigated reports that Beson may have been staying with friends in the Wausau area, but those reports have never been confirmed.

Beson’s mother, Winifred Ann Beson, “Winnie,” has expressed concerns that human traffickers may have taken her daughter.

Beson is a Native American female, 5’7”, with a medium build, brown hair and brown eyes. She has numerous tattoos, including on her neck, arms and legs.

The Lac du Flambeau Band of Lake Superior Chippewa Indians Tribal Governing Board has authorized a $25,000 reward for credible tips leading to the recovery of Beson, to charges against  those who might be responsible for her disappearance, or both. 

Anyone with any information regarding the disappearance of Beson is asked to call either the Lac du Flambeau Tribal Police Department at (715) 588-7717 or the Vilas County Sheriff’s Office at (715) 479-4441.

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

A voter leaves a polling place after casting a ballot in the state’s primary election on March 5, 2024, in Mountain Brook, Ala. Before the November 2024 election, the Alabama secretary of state initiated a purge of thousands of registered voters but was blocked by a federal judge. (Photo by Elijah Nouvelage/Getty Images)

Alabama resident Roald Hazelhoff treasures his newly won right to vote. When election officials flagged the naturalized U.S. citizen’s voter registration for possible removal last August, the Dutch native fought back.

Hazelhoff, then a 67-year-old college instructor, sued to stop Alabama Secretary of State Wes Allen, a Republican, from seeking to kick him and more than 3,200 other registered voters off the rolls. The lawsuit was part of a multifront legal challenge led by him and three other voters, along with voting rights groups and the Biden-era U.S. Department of Justice.

A federal judge halted Alabama’s effort within weeks — and Hazelhoff voted in his first presidential election last November without incident.

Ten months later, Hazelhoff is watching with deep concern as the Department of Justice, in President Donald Trump’s second term, is demanding that states turn over their voter registration lists and other election information, citing unspecified concerns with voter list maintenance.

“My initial reaction was of sadness that this could happen but that still a mistake could be made,” Hazelhoff, who lives in the Birmingham area, told Stateline. “Now, I’m more in a stance of saying this is the most fundamental right afforded to citizens of the United States, and I am a legal citizen of this country and I will fight for that right.”

The Trump administration’s effort to scoop up voter registration lists and other information from a growing number of states underscores how state-controlled voter lists are a major battleground in fights over access to the polls. The Justice Department told the National Association of Secretaries of State that it will eventually contact all states, an association spokesperson wrote in an email.

Minnesota, New Hampshire and Wisconsin have so far declined to provide full voter registration lists to the department amid questions over the legality of the requests and uncertainty over how the information will be used. Maine Democratic Secretary of State Shenna Bellows plans to deny a similar request, telling the Maine Morning Star that federal officials can “go jump in the Gulf of Maine.”

The Justice Department declined a Stateline request for comment.

Even before states began tangling with the department, how election officials oversee these lists — including when and why voters can be removed — was under increasing scrutiny. The stakes for voters are foundational: How states maintain the lists determines who is on them — and therefore who is able to vote. Power over voter registration lists is the power to shape the electorate.

“Voting should be easy, not akin to trying to get a U.S. passport when it’s been lost or stolen and you’re in Nicaragua, you know what I’m saying?” Hazelhoff said. “It should be something that we encourage and this is not encouraged. This is the exact opposite.”

Some states in recent years have signed up for competing systems to help identify duplicate or noncitizen voter registrations, after the largest operation came under fire from Trump. Election officials in some states have also entered into ad hoc agreements with some of their counterparts to share data.

Other states continue to tighten voter list maintenance requirements as well. New Hampshire legislators in June approved a bill requiring local officials to verify voter lists annually instead of once a decade; the governor signed the bill on Friday. Idaho lawmakers passed a bill, signed by the governor in April, that requires state agencies to share data with the state secretary of state to help check the accuracy of voter registrations.

Chief election officials in some states tout their annual or regular elimination of registrations.

Georgia Republican Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger announced in mid-July that his office was sending cancellation mailers to 477,883 inactive registrants. Last week, Ohio Secretary of State Frank LaRose, a Republican, directed local election officials to begin a new round of removals. The registrations will be eligible for cancellation in 2029 following a federally mandated notification process, he said in a news release.

The Trump administration is also pushing states to use a U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services tool, typically used to determine the immigration status of people seeking government benefits, to identify noncitizen registered voters. The agency now allows state and local officials to conduct bulk searches using the tool, the Systematic Alien Verification for Entitlements, or SAVE, program, instead of one at a time.

Voter fraud and noncitizen voting rarely occur. But Trump’s false claims of a stolen election in 2020, along with an uptick in anti-immigrant sentiment among conservatives before last year’s election, has driven attention to the voter registration lists.

Election officials and voting rights activists across the political spectrum agree accurate, up-to-date voter rolls ensure that elections remain secure. They split over how to balance cleaning the lists with protecting voters from accidental deletion — and where to draw the line between legitimate maintenance and politically driven purges.

“It has to be done fairly. It has to be done transparently. And it has to be done legally,” said Celina Stewart, CEO of the League of Women Voters, a nonpartisan group that often challenges voter restrictions in court, including the Alabama effort.

“I think that any time you are doing voter list maintenance in a way that disenfranchises more people or is careless, then there has to be a hard ‘no’ on things like that,” Stewart said in an interview.

After initial request, U.S. DOJ has not obtained Wisconsin voter data

New Hampshire Secretary of State David Scanlan, a Republican, said he wants to find a middle ground where “everything is balanced.”

Scanlan declined to provide the Justice Department with his state’s voter rolls. He wrote in a July 25 letter that state law doesn’t authorize him to release the list to the department. Still, he noted that under the law the department could obtain voter lists by contacting local election officials.

In an interview, Scanlan also predicted the New Hampshire legislation requiring annual verification wouldn’t be an onerous change and would improve the accuracy of the rolls. He said he wants a system that makes voting easy, but one that’s also transparent and ensures everyone casting a ballot is a legitimate voter.

“I think that’s where we’re headed,” Scanlan said. “It’s not a straight line to get there.”

Undermining ERIC

Trump helped usher in the current era of division over cleaning voter rolls in March 2023 by attacking the Electronic Registration Information Center, or ERIC, and calling on states to pull out of the group. He posted on social media at the time that it “‘pumps the rolls’ for Democrats and does nothing to clean them up.”

Within months, eight Republican-led states had withdrawn.

The Washington, D.C.-based nonprofit allows member states to submit voter registration and motor vehicle department data. It also has access to Social Security death data and address change information from the U.S. Postal Service.

ERIC then identifies potential duplicate and out-of-date registrations, dead voters and possible illegal voting. Member states also reach out to individuals who are likely eligible to vote but haven’t registered, a requirement that angers some Republicans.

Some Democrats are now quick to point out what they see as the irony of Trump’s Justice Department voicing concerns with voter list maintenance practices after the president undermined ERIC — a system they say is effective in helping states clean their voter rolls.

“It is an extra layer of … hypocrisy and ridiculousness that they would turn around and be critical of the one organization” ensuring voter rolls are clean and up to date in its member states, said New York state Sen. James Skoufis, a Democrat who sponsored a bill passed by the state legislature to require New York to join ERIC. The measure hasn’t been delivered to the governor.

Twenty-five states — a mix of red and blue states, as well as presidential swing states such as Michigan, Minnesota and Pennsylvania — and the District of Columbia currently use ERIC. In an email, ERIC Executive Director Shane Hamlin wrote that the organization remains committed to attracting new members. Hamlin cited the New York legislation and noted that Hawaii recently joined.

Republican states haven’t coalesced around a single alternative to ERIC, but an Alabama-led system comes closest. The Alabama Voter Integrity Database, or AVID, includes Alabama and 10 other mostly Southern states; the latest state, Virginia, joined in late May.

The Alabama secretary of state’s office, which maintains the database, didn’t respond to multiple interview requests or written questions from Stateline.

“Voter file maintenance is the foundation of election integrity,” Allen, the Alabama secretary of state, said in a June news release. “Ensuring that Alabama’s voter file is the cleanest and most accurate voter file in the country has been a top priority of mine since day one.”

As states weigh the value of ERIC and AVID, some election officials aren’t racing to pick a side.

Idaho Secretary of State Phil McGrane, a Republican, said ERIC likely isn’t the right solution, though he said he had no reason to criticize it. To have an effective system, every state needs information from their neighboring states, as well as the states where their “snow birds” go, he said.

He identified those states as Florida in the East, Texas in the Midwest and California and Arizona in the West. Florida and Texas belong to AVID, while Arizona belongs to ERIC. California belongs to neither.

“We need a broader solution. … It’s tough in this environment, where everyone’s guards are up on the political spectrum,” McGrane said in an interview.

‘A total shock’

In Alabama, Hazelhoff said his experience demonstrates the nightmare that can unfold when voter roll cleaning crosses the line into an illegal purge.

“That was a total shock when that happened,” said Hazelhoff, who was born in the Netherlands, moved to the United States in 1977 and became a citizen in 2022.

In August 2024, he received a letter from the Board of Registrars in Jefferson County, where he lives, informing him his voter registration had been made inactive and that “you have been placed on a path for removal from the statewide voter list.”

The reason, the letter said, was that Allen had provided information showing Hazelhoff was issued a noncitizen identification number by the U.S. Department of Homeland Security while also being a registered voter.

After Hazelhoff and others sued, U.S. District Court Judge Anna M. Manasco, a Trump appointee, ruled that Allen had blown past a deadline in federal law that prohibits systematic purges of ineligible voters less than 90 days before a federal election.

Allen had announced his purge 84 days before the election, she wrote, and had later admitted his purge list included thousands of U.S. citizens. He had also referred everyone on the list to the Alabama attorney general’s office for criminal investigation, despite the inclusion of citizens.

When Hazelhoff went to his polling place last year, he said he still felt some trepidation, even after the court ruling. He questioned whether he would be escorted out for casting an illegal vote.

“It worried me,” Hazelhoff said. “But then the actual voting experience was great and the people were polite. The system seemed to be working.”

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

Stateline is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Stateline maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Scott S. Greenberger for questions: info@stateline.org.

Madison Mayor Satya Rhodes-Conway and other Wisconsinites took part in a city celebration for Transgender Day of Visibility in March. Wisconsin and 14 other states are suing in opposition to a Trump administration executive order blocking gender-affirming care for people under 19. (Photo by Baylor Spears/Wisconsin Examiner)

A coalition including 15 state attorneys general have filed a multistate lawsuit challenging the Trump administration’s effort to restrict access to medically-necessary care for transgender, intersex and nonbinary youth.

The lawsuit challenges recent federal action to deter doctors and medical providers from offering gender affirming care to youth under the age of 19 years old, including states like Michigan where that care is legal and protected.

Joining the suit are the attorneys general of Michigan, New York, California, Massachusetts, Illinois, and Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Maine, Maryland, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, Rhode Island, Wisconsin, and the District of Columbia, as well as Pennsylvania Gov. Josh Shapiro.

“The Trump administration shouldn’t be interfering with the provision of health care,” said Wisconsin Attorney General Josh Kaul in a statement Friday. “The administration should be respecting individual liberty and equal rights, not shamefully targeting transgender people.”

The attorneys general have asserted that President Donald Trump’s White House is overstepping its authority, using threats of criminal prosecution and federal investigations to pressure health care providers.

“The Trump Administration is attempting to strip away lawful, essential healthcare from vulnerable youth. These orders are illegal and dangerous and have no medical or scientific basis,” said Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel in a statement. “I will continue to protect families, defend doctors, and stop politicians from putting our kids’ lives at risk.”

Trump in the beginning of his second administration signed an executive order stating that the U.S. would only recognize two sexes, and called for an end to what Trump labeled “gender ideology.” A second order focused on medical restrictions, directing the U.S. Department of Justice to pursue enforcement actions related to that care.

Since then, Nessel’s office said the Department of Justice has issued subpoenas to providers under the guise of criminal law enforcement, but the attorneys general filing the lawsuit Friday argue those efforts lack legal standing and are intended only to intimidate.

“Health care decisions for kids should be made by parents and doctors, not by politicians,” said Erin Knott, executive director of Equality Michigan, a LGBTQ+ advocacy group, in a statement. “The federal government is using funding as a weapon to force providers to abandon their patients and override parents’ rights to make health care decisions for their own children.”

Patricia Wells, a doctor and the medical director of The Corner Health Center in Ypsilanti, Michigan, said in a statement that she and her colleagues are distressed by new punitive changes to funding and regulations, which threaten to dismantle essential care.

“These policies do not protect children; they endanger them,” Wells said. “They undermine trust in the medical system and place affirming providers in an impossible position, forcing hospitals to close clinics and providers to stop offering the very care that helps young people survive and thrive. The loss of these services would not simply be a policy failure; it would be a moral one.”

Wells said the nation must do better.

“These young people deserve our compassion, our evidence-based care, and our unwavering commitment to their well-being,” she said. “I applaud the leadership of the state of Michigan for protecting transgender and gender nonconforming youth, their families, and the caregivers who are saving lives every day.”

Erik Gunn of Wisconsin Examiner contributed to this report.

Michigan Advance is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Michigan Advance maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Jon King for questions: info@michiganadvance.com.

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

Democratic National Committee Chair Ken Martin stands outside Woodlawn Coffee and Pastry in Portland, Oregon, on July 31, 2025. (Photo by Jacob Fischler/States Newsroom)

PORTLAND, Oregon — Democrats must be more aggressive organizers and campaigners to win back the working-class coalition they have increasingly lost to President Donald Trump, according to Democratic National Committee Chair Ken Martin.

Too often in recent decades, the party has ceded ground to Republicans, Martin told States Newsroom in a one-on-one July 31 interview during a stop on a visit to community groups, activists and fundraisers in Oregon.

Since 2009, the national party’s infrastructure has deteriorated, allowing the GOP to build organizational advantages across the country, define Democratic candidates before they can define themselves and put too many states out of reach, he said.

In sometimes more pugnacious terms than might be expected from someone with Martin’s clean-cut corporate look and Midwestern demeanor, he said his task as party leader is to reverse that trend.

“We’re not here to tie one of our hands behind our back,” Martin said. “In the past, I think our party would bring a pencil to a knife fight. We’re going to bring a gun to a knife fight.”

The knife-fight analogy was an answer to a question about how Democrats should respond to Texas Republicans redrawing congressional district lines as the GOP struggles to keep its slim U.S. House majority, but it could apply to other aspects of Martin’s vision for the party.

Martin, whom Democrats elected in February to lead them for the next four years, said Democrats should never turn off their messaging and campaigning apparatus, and work to build party infrastructure in regions, states and cities where they have not competed in decades.

Over 45 minutes, he invoked the late U.S. Sen. Paul Wellstone, a liberal whose populist approach to campaigning and governing practically sanctified him among Democrats in Martin’s native Minnesota, several times and indicated Wellstone would be an effective model for Democrats in 2024 and beyond.

“I think what the American people are looking for is people who are going to stand up and fight for what they believe in,” he said. “People didn’t always agree with Paul Wellstone all the time, but they still voted for him. They said … ‘He’s not one of these finger-in-the-wind politicians. He’s standing up for what he believes, and I’m going to give him credit for it even if I don’t agree with him on a particular issue.’ They want authenticity.”

Texas redistricting

The day after Texas Republicans released a map of proposed new congressional districts in a rare mid-decade redistricting effort that could net them five more U.S. House seats, Martin implied he would support blue-state leaders who retaliated with their own maps to give Democrats an advantage — even as he disparaged the move by Republicans.

He called the redistricting effort “a craven power grab” by Trump and Republicans, accusing them of “trying to rig the system.”

“If they can’t win on their own merits, they’re going to cheat and steal,” he said. “That’s essentially what they’re doing right now.”

But, even as Martin condemned those moves, he said Democrats should feel empowered to respond in kind. “We can’t be the only party that’s playing by the rules,” he said.

Leading Democrats in California, New York and Illinois have openly explored the possibility of emergency redistricting if the proposed Texas map becomes final, even though the issue has raised the ire of some usual allies who support less partisan election infrastructure.

The national party would be “very involved” in challenging the Texas map, as well as working with governors seeking to change their own maps, Martin said.

Never stop campaigning

Martin brought up, unprompted, some of the challenges his party faces.

Twice as many voters had an unfavorable view of Democrats as a favorable one in a July Wall Street Journal survey that showed the party with only 33% of support.

Voters now see Republicans as the party of working-class voters and Democrats as representatives of the elite, Martin said. In the 2024 election, the party did worse with nearly every slice of the electorate other than college-educated voters and wealthy voters.

Martin noted Trump made historic inroads with some traditional Democratic constituencies, earning a higher share of Latino, Black, Asian and Pacific Islander, young and working-class voters in 2024 than any Republican candidate in years.

That result was part of an ongoing trend going back 20 years, Martin said, and represents an existential threat to the Democratic party.

“We lost ground with every part of our coalition,” he said. “If we continue to lose ground with working people in this country, with all of the other parts of our coalition, we’re toast. We’ve got to reverse course.”

Democrats’ slide with those constituencies is in part “a branding issue,” permitted by the party’s willingness to let Trump and other Republicans’ campaigning in off-years go unanswered and a lack of a positive message articulated to voters, said Martin.

“We didn’t start our campaign until the spring of 2024 — way too late,” he said. “I would argue that they had already defined us before we ever had a chance to define ourselves. That can never happen again. Never, ever, ever. So that means we have to be campaigning all the time, year-round. Year-round organizing, year-round communications. We never stop talking to voters. We never stop campaigning.”

‘We all do better’

That campaigning should be focused on a positive view of what Democrats offer voters and include an appeal to “the vast majority of Americans, not just the people at the top.”

“We have to fix our brand,” Martin said. “We have to give people a sense that we’re fighting for them. We have to stand up and fight with everything we have right now, not just against Donald Trump, but for something. We have to give people a positive vision of what their lives would look like with Democrats in charge.”

Democrats’ message should be about a rising tide lifting all boats, Martin said, quoting Wellstone, for whom Martin, 52, interned at the beginning of his career and still considers an inspiration.

“Remember Paul’s famous slogan: ‘We all do better when we all do better,’” he said. “That should be the slogan of the Democratic Party.”

He praised Zohran Mamdani, the winner of New York City’s Democratic mayoral primary, for running an energetic campaign that was focused on showing how he could improve New Yorkers’ lives.

That should include a policy focus on affordability, health care access and a government that works for people beyond the elite.

But even as Martin articulated the positive message he said Democrats should focus on, he slipped into slamming Trump and Republicans, saying the tax and spending cuts law Trump signed last month would take health care away from people. The law was among the least popular in decades, he noted.

There was room for both a positive campaigning and highlighting Republicans’ unpopularity when appropriate, said Martin.

“It’s a both/and,” he said. “Let’s tell folks what is happening and let’s tell folks what Democrats are going to do.”

Senate in reach?

The unpopularity of Republicans’ law, which is projected to cut more than $1 trillion over 10 years from Medicaid, food stamps and other programs while lowering taxes on high earners, gives Democrats an opening in a difficult cycle for U.S. Senate races, Martin said.

Democrats — who control 47 seats, including two independents, compared to 53 for Republicans, who also hold a tie-breaking vote in Vice President JD Vance — need to net four additional seats in next year’s elections to win the majority in the chamber, which Martin said was possible under the right circumstances.

That view is out of step with current projections, which show Democratic seats in Georgia and Michigan at least as likely to flip as Republican seats in North Carolina and Maine. Democrats would have to win all four of those most competitive races, plus two that would be further stretches, to gain a majority.

Beyond North Carolina and Maine, Martin said the map to Democrats’ regaining the Senate would go through traditionally red states.

Iowa, where incumbent Sen. Joni Ernst could be vulnerable, and Alaska, where former U.S. Rep. Mary Peltola would be a strong challenger to incumbent Republican Dan Sullivan, could be Democrats’ 50th and 51st Senate seats, he said.

Or, if right-wing primary challengers defeat more establishment incumbents in Louisiana and Texas, those states could turn into pickup opportunities, he said — though Trump won both states easily, by more than 20 points in the former.

Growing the party, growing the map

To win next year and beyond, Democrats must unify, he said.

Elements of the party that would impose purity tests on others — whether that’s progressives excluding moderates or vice versa — make that harder, he said.

“I believe you win elections by addition, not subtraction,” he said. “You win by bringing in people, new voices, and growing your coalition.”

Martin also wants to grow the map and compete across the country, using a strategy pioneered by former DNC Chair Howard Dean, who was chair from 2005 to 2009.

When President Barack Obama’s political team took control of the party apparatus in 2009, it “completely eviscerated” the state party infrastructure Dean had built, Martin said.

Earlier this year, he announced an initiative to provide at least $1 million a month to all state parties. The goal is to expand the number of competitive states and districts, reversing a trend that has seen fewer presidential contests focused on fewer states.

“There’s no such thing as a perpetual red state or a perpetual blue state,” he said. Turning states from Republican strongholds to competitive, or from competitive to favoring Democrats — or even to maintain Democratic strength — takes investment of money and energy, he said.

“It’s critical, and it’s something I firmly believe in,” he said. I’ve seen for so many years our national party and other party committees not making the investments to actually call themselves a national party,” he said. “You can’t be a national party if you’re just competing in seven states.”

Diana Higgenbottom is pictured during the filming of “Love Differently,” a short documentary film depicting her journey of adoption and finding her identity. (Photo by Emma Siewert/Courtesy of Racine County Eye)

This report is republished by agreement with the Racine County Eye, where it originally appeared.

If a bill making its way through the sponsorship process becomes law, adult Wisconsin adoptees for the first time will have access to their original birth certificates.

Advocates say the measure is a long-overdue correction to a system that keeps vital identity and medical information hidden from the very people it concerns.

“We’re not asking for anything extraordinary,” said Diana Higgenbottom Anagnostopoulos. “We’re just asking for the right to know who we are.”

Renewed push, familiar champions

The proposed legislation — currently known as LRB-3879/1 — was introduced by State Rep. Paul Tittl (R-Manitowoc) and State Sen. André Jacque (R-New Franken). According to Steve Hall, spokesperson for Tittl, this is not the first time Tittl has championed this cause.

“This was the first bill that he introduced back in 2014,” Hall said in an interview. “And he’s introduced it every session since.”

Hall noted that Tittl is not adopted himself but believes strongly in adoptees’ rights. “He just thinks that people ought to have that right,” he said.

The bill would give adult adoptees access to their original, unredacted birth certificates—something currently restricted under Wisconsin law. While most modern adoptions are open, Hall said that a small but significant number—about five percent—remain closed, which can leave adoptees in the dark about crucial health and identity information.

“We spoke with someone who was close to 50 years old,” he added. “She had been worried about health conditions she thought ran in the family, only to learn after her adoptive parents passed away that she’d been adopted. When she finally got her real family history, it turned out she was concerned about the wrong things all along.”

Groundwork from the grassroots

Behind the renewed momentum is former Racine resident and adoptee Diana Higgenbottom Anagnostopoulos, who has worked with legislators and advocates across the country.

She traveled to Madison in late July to speak with lawmakers and staff, sharing clips from “Love Differently,” a documentary she produced that highlights the emotional and legal struggles adult adoptees face.

“When we were in Madison, we knocked on as many doors as we could,” she said. “It’s about educating lawmakers. Most people don’t even realize this is still an issue.”

According to Anagnostopoulos, several lawmakers have shown early support. Rep. Angelito Tenorio (D-West Allis) and Sen. Rob Hutton (R-Brookfield) — who now represent Anagnostopoulos’s district after redistricting — were among the first to notify her when the bill began circulating. She now lives in Wauwatosa.

“Tenorio emailed me first thing the morning it started to circulate,” Anagnostopoulos said. “He made a promise to help restore our civil rights.”

She also credited the office of state Rep. Robert Wittke (R-Caledonia) with keeping her updated.

“They’ve been stellar. They actually sent me the draft of the new bill introduction,” Anagnostopoulos explained.

Civil rights and medical realities

Anagnostopoulos sees the legislation as a civil rights issue, not a challenge to birth parents’ privacy.

“We’re not asking for our full adoption file,” she explained. “We just want our original birth certificate. There’s nothing in it that should be controversial—it’s just a record of who we are.”

She also pointed out that adoptees face practical barriers because of redacted records.

“With REAL ID requirements, some of us can’t even prove who we truly are with the documents we have,” she said.

While some critics argue that birth parents may have chosen closed adoptions for privacy reasons, Anagnostopoulos and others believe that does not outweigh an adoptee’s right to know.

“I didn’t sign up for this. I was a baby — I didn’t consent to having my identity sealed,” she said. “We’re not trying to show up for Thanksgiving. We just want to know who we are.”

A long legislative road

Despite the growing support, Hall said it’s too soon to predict whether the bill will pass this session.

“There’s a lot of momentum, yes—but as we’ve seen with other bills, anything can happen,” he said, pointing to Tittl’s previous efforts that stalled despite early enthusiasm.

The co-sponsorship period for the bill closes July 31. After that, the Speaker of the Assembly Robin Vos has 10 working days to assign a bill number and refer it to a committee.

“We’ll know more in the next couple weeks,” Hall said. “But there’s no question: the groundswell of support is bigger than it’s ever been.”

A story told on screen

The issue gained visibility with the release of “Love Differently,” which features Anagnostopoulos’s own story and others across the country. The film was screened earlier this year in Sturtevant and won an award at the 2024 Door County Film Festival.

According to a story from CBS 58, the documentary showcases both the emotional and legal dimensions of adoptee experiences.

One scene features a New York state senator changing his position during live testimony. Anagnostopoulos shared that clip with lawmakers in Madison to show what can happen when people truly listen.

“This feels different,” she said of the current bill. “It feels like we’re closer than we’ve ever been.”

Broader momentum across the U.S.

According to a report from Adoptees United, Wisconsin’s efforts mirror a broader national movement. States like Oregon, New York, and Illinois have passed laws restoring unrestricted access to original birth certificates.

Wisconsin has introduced several similar bills in past sessions, including SB 483/AB 502 in 2021, but none have passed.

“Change is coming,” Anagnostopoulos said. “Whether it’s this year or not — I believe we’ll get there.”

Reports republished from Racine County Eye are not available for republishing elsewhere.

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

U.S. President Donald Trump displays a signed executive order during the "Winning the AI Race" summit hosted by All‑In Podcast and Hill & Valley Forum at the Andrew W. Mellon Auditorium on July 23, 2025 in Washington, DC. Trump signed executive orders related to his Artificial Intelligence Action Plan during the event. (Photo by Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images)

An executive order signed by President Donald Trump last week seeks to remove “ideological agendas” from artificial intelligence models sold to the federal government, but it’s not exactly clear how the policy would be enforced, nor how tech companies would test their models for these standards, technologists and policy experts say.

The executive order says that AI companies must be “truth-seeking” and “ideologically neutral,” to work with the government, and mentions removing ideologies involving diversity, equity and inclusion from AI models.

“Really what they’re talking about is putting limitations on AI models that produce, in their mind, ideology that they find objectionable,” said Matthew  F. Ferraro, a partner at Crowell & Moring’s privacy and cybersecurity group.

Ferraro said that refinement of AI models and testing them for bias is a goal that gets support on both sides of the aisle. Ferraro spent two years working with the Biden administration on the development of its AI policy, and said that Trump’s AI Action Plan, rolled out last week, shares many pillars in common with the Biden administration’s AI executive order.

Both named the potentials for biohazard threats enabled by AI and the impact on the labor force in their AI action plans, and the importance of growing AI for American innovation, Ferraro said. Biden’s plan prioritized protections against harms, while Trump prioritized innovation above all else.

“It just so happened the Biden administration put those concerns first, not last, right?” Ferraro said. “But I was struck when reading the Trump AI action plan how similar the provisions that made recommendations the Department of Labor were to initiatives under the Biden administration.”

In the executive order, Trump assigns the Office of Management and Budget to issue guidance for compliance in the next 120 days. But Ferraro said as it stands, the order doesn’t provide enough clarity around the technical compliance companies would need to meet, nor how to reach a standard of “truth.”

“It’s not at all clear to me, one, what exactly this executive order seeks to prevent, beyond sort of a gestalt of political speech that the administration found objectionable,” Ferraro said. “Second, it’s not all clear to me, technically, how this is possible. And third, it’s not at all clear to me that even by its own terms, it’s going to be enforceable in any comprehensive way.”

Technical challenges

AI companies looking to contract with the government under the policies in this executive order would likely need to prepare for ongoing testing of their models, said David Acosta, cofounder and chief artificial intelligence officer of ARBOai.

When an AI model is in its early days of training, developers are mostly looking for its technical functionality. But ongoing reviews, or audits, of the model’s growth and accuracy can be done in a process called “red teaming,” where a third party introduces testing scenarios that help with compliance, bias testing and accuracy.

Auditing is a part of what Acosta’s company specializes in, and he said his team has been flooded with requests since last year. The team anticipated there could be a struggle around objectivity in AI.

“This is something that essentially we predicted late last year, as far as where this narrative would come from,” Acosta said. “Who would try to steer it, load it and push it forward, because essentially it’s going to create a culture war.”

Many AI models have a “black box” algorithm, meaning that the decision-making process of the model is unclear and difficult to understand, even for the developers. Because of this, constant training and testing for accuracy is needed to assess if the model is working as intended.

Acosta said that AI models should seek to meet certain accuracy requirements. A model should have a hallucination score — how often a model produces fabricated, inaccurate, or misleading information — below 5%. A model should also have “uncertainty tax,” the ability to tell a user that there’s a level of uncertainty in its output. 

This testing is expensive for AI firms, though, Acosta said. If the federal Office of Management and Budget requires some sort of testing to meet its requirements, it may limit smaller firms from being able to contract with the government.

Third-party red teaming uses thousands of prompts to prod models for hallucinations and politically loaded responses, Acosta said. A well-balanced model will refuse to answer questions using certain ideology or rhetoric, or produce primary sources to validate factual information.

“Explainable AI and reasoning have always, always, always, always been important in order to make sure that we can substantiate what the feedback is,” Acosta said. “But at the end of the day, it always comes down to who it is that’s training these machines, and if they can remain neutral.”

What is “truth-seeking?”

The dataset that an AI model is trained on can determine what “truth” is. Most datasets are based on human-created data, which in itself can contain errors and bias. It’s a system many laws around discrimination in AI are aiming to address. 

“One would hope that there’s a surface level of, not unified — because you’re never going to get a 100% — but a majority agreement on what absolute truth is and what it isn’t,” Acosta said.

He used an example of textbooks from decades ago; much of the information widely known as truth and taught in schools in the 1980s is now outdated. If an AI model is trained on those textbooks, its answers would not stand up to an AI model trained on a much larger, more diverse dataset.

But the removal of “ideological” information like race and sex from AI model training, as outlined in Trump’s executive order, poses a risk for inaccurate results. 

“It’s such a slippery slope, because who decides? Data sanitization – when you’re filtering the training of data to remove ‘overtly ideological sources’ — I mean the risk there is, that in itself, is a subjective process, especially when you’re coming to race, gender and religion,” Acosta said.

The concept of ideological truth is not something the AI algorithm considers, Ferraro said. AI does not produce truth, it produces probabilities.

“They simply produce the most common next token,” based on their training, Ferraro said. “The AI does not know itself what is true or false, or what is, for that matter, ideological or not. And so preventing outputs that expressed [Trump’s] favorite ideological opinions can simply basically exceed the ability of the model builders to build.”

Compliance

Enforcement of this executive order will require clarity from the OMB, said Peter Salib, an assistant professor of law at the University of Houston Law Center.

“It seems like there is one thing happening at the level of rhetoric and then another thing happening at the level of law,” Salib said.

The OMB would need to define the political ideology outlined in the executive order, and what is included or excluded, he said. For example, is a dataset tracking racial wealth inequality over 150 years considered some kind of DEI?

The order also puts companies that wish to comply with the executive order in a position to decide if they want to develop two versions of their AI models — one for the private sector, and one that fits Trump’s standards, Ferraro said.

There are exceptions carved out for some AI systems, including those contracted by national security agencies, the executive order said. Salib also highlighted a section that walks back some of the intent of the order, saying that it will consider vendors compliant as long as they disclose the prompts, specifications, evaluations and other training information for their model to the government. 

“It’s saying you don’t actually have to make your AI ideologically neutral,” Salib said. “You just have to share with the government the system prompts and the specifications you used when training the AI. So the AI can be as woke or as right wing, or as truth seeking or as falsity seeking as you like, and it counts as compliance with the neutrality provision if you just disclose.”

In this case, the executive order could turn out to be a de facto transparency regulation for AI, more so than one that imposes requirements on AI’s ideology, he said.

The rollout of Trump’s AI Action Plan and the executive orders that accompanied it, including one that fast tracks data center permitting and expands AI exports, are the first real look into how the administration intends to handle the quickly growing AI industry.

If the OMB rolls out technological and accuracy-focused requirements for the order, it could be a win for those looking for more transparency in AI, Acosta said. But the office needs to be clear in its requirements and seek true neutrality.

“I think the intent is well with this, but there needs to be much, much, much more refinement moving forward,” Acosta said. 

From left, Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz, Rhode Island Gov. Dan McKee, Kansas Gov. Laura Kelly, Wisconsin Gov. Tony Evers and Kentucky Gov. Tony Evers said Democratic governors need to respond "in kind" to GOP mid-decade redistricting that's intended to protect the Republican House majority. (Photo by Baylor Spears/Wisconsin Examiner.)

MADISON — Wisconsin Gov. Tony Evers, Kansas Gov. Laura Kelly and other Democratic governors said responding “in kind” to Republican mid-decade redistricting is necessary at a Friday Democratic Governors Association press conference.

Kelly said she thinks courts would rule that redrawn maps from Republicans and Democrats are unconstitutional. If Republicans take this path, however, Democratic governors must also pursue mid-decade redistricting to “protect the American people,” she said.

“It’s incumbent upon Democratic governors, if they have the opportunity, to respond in-kind,” Kelly said. “Things are bad enough in Washington right now. What it would look like if there’s even a greater majority that this President controls — God help the United States of America.”

Kelly and other Democratic governors were in Madison for the DGA’s summer policy conference. 

Discussion over redistricting ahead of midterm elections started in Texas, where President Donald Trump’s political team pressured state leaders to redraw its map to gain more seats in the U.S. House and help Republicans maintain their congressional majority in 2026. Trump said a “very simple redrawing” of the state’s maps could help pick up five seats. 

Redistricting, the process of redrawing state legislative and congressional district boundaries, typically happens every ten years after the U.S. Census. 

Other Republican-led states, including Florida and Ohio, also said they would look at redrawing their maps mid-decade.

California Gov. Gavin Newsom, who was not at the press conference, was the first Democrat to float the idea of gerrymandering the Democratic state to have fewer Republican seats in response. Democrats in New York and Maryland have also been looking for a path to gain additional seats in their states as well. 

None of the governors at the press conference said they would pursue that route but said they supported those that had a path to use it. Kelly joked that she “could” do mid-decade redistricting. “But what would I do? I’d just give them another Republican.” 

Evers said the blatant direction from Trump to pursue redistricting is a “constant threat to our democracy.” 

“I’m really pissed frankly, and we’re going to do whatever we can do to stop this,” Evers said, adding that Wisconsin would not be changing its maps. He said the state has already worked hard to “get fair maps.”

The Republican-led Legislature and Evers adopted new maps for the state Legislature in 2024 following a state Supreme Court ruling. Some have been calling for new Congressional maps, though those efforts have so far been rejected by the state Supreme Court. 

Wisconsin’s current congressional maps were drawn in 2022 by Evers and selected by the state Supreme Court with a conservative majority at the time. Democrats and their allies filed a new challenge to the maps in Dane County Circuit Court in July, arguing they are unconstitutional because they’re anti-competitive. Republicans currently represent six of Wisconsin’s eight congressional districts. 

“Because of those fair [state legislative] maps that we had, we were able to pass a relatively bipartisan budget, and it was a good budget, and so, in my heart of hearts, this is where we have to be, but… when you have a gun up against your head, you gotta do something,” Evers said.

“This move is unconstitutional. It’s again breaking the system. It’s, again, meant to game the system,” Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz said. “Democrats are expected to have the decorum — we’re expected to protect the institutions, we’re expected to follow the rules on this.”

The times call for a different approach, however, he argued. 

“We’re not playing with a normal administration,” Walz said. “We’re playing with one that has thrown all the rules out of there… I think it is incumbent upon states that have the capacity or the ability to make sure that we are responding in kind.”

Governors criticize GOP over effects of the Republican megabill 

The Democratic governors also warned about the potential effects of Republicans’ federal reconciliation package. Kelly, who chairs the Democratic Governors Association, said government systems and programs being cut are not set up for states to operate on their own. 

“They were set up with the federal government as a very robust partner, and without them being a partner, there is no way that any of our states will be able to pick up the tail,” Kelly said. “The best we could do is perhaps mitigate the pain, but even that will be difficult.” 

The legislation, ” signed by President Donald Trump on July 4, made major changes to the federal Medicaid and the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP).

Trump and Republicans in Congress are “trying to gut programs that Wisconsin families count on,” Evers said. “They’re willing to break our constitutional system to make that happen.” 

The megabill is just one tool, he suggested. “Whether it’s the Republican budget or the continued illegal action to fire Wisconsin workers, strip funds away from our state, damage public education, we have to fight.” 

A memo released this week by the nonpartisan Wisconsin Legislative Fiscal Bureau found that the exact effects of the federal reconciliation law on Medicaid and FoodShare in Wisconsin are uncertain, but will likely result in fewer enrollees.

Currently, about one in five Wisconsin residents rely on Medicaid for health care coverage. 

“The full impact of the Act’s Medicaid provisions on the state’s MA enrollment and costs remains uncertain,” the fiscal bureau memo states. “This is partly because some of the details of implementation requirements will depend upon forthcoming federal guidance, but also because the eligibility and enrollment requirements are new for the program and so little is known about their actual effects.” 

Starting in January 2027, childless adults will be required to complete 80 hours per month of paid work, school, employment training or community service per month to maintain their Medicaid eligibility. There are about 184,000 childless adults currently enrolled in Wisconsin. DHS estimates that 63,000 Wisconsinites will be at high risk of losing their coverage.

The LFB memo said that enrollment will likely drop due to the work requirement provisions. 

“Enrollment reductions could occur either because of the additional complexity of the application process or because the work requirements cause some individuals to increase their earnings to above the eligibility threshold. The magnitude of the program disenrollment, and associated reduction in [Medicaid] benefits costs, is uncertain,” the memo states. 

The governors warned that hospitals still face a difficult environment under the federal law. 

“Our rural hospitals in particular are extremely at risk,” Kelly of Kansas said. “We’ve already closed 10 of them in those 10 years and many more are on the brink, and this reconciliation bill is going to throw them over the edge.” 

Kentucky Gov. Andy Beshear said 35 hospitals are at risk in his state, making it the state with the most hospitals at risk in the nation. 

“Donald Trump’s big ugly bill is the single worst, most devastating piece of legislation that I have seen in my lifetime. It is a direct attack on rural America,” Beshear said. 

Three hospitals in Wisconsin have been identified as at risk of closure. 

Costs for the SNAP program will increase in Wisconsin as the law reduces the federal share of the program — known as FoodShare in Wisconsin — from 50% to 25%. This will leave states responsible for 75% of the costs, a change that the Wisconsin Department of Health Services estimates will require an additional $51 million annually from the state. 

The FoodShare program currently helps nearly 700,000 Wisconsinites access food, and nearly 90,000 Wisconsinites will be at risk of losing their benefits due to the new federal provisions, according to the Wisconsin Department of Health Services. 

Rhode Island Gov. Dan McKee echoed concerns over the ability of the state  to pick up the gaps left by federal cuts in social programs.

“We’re not going to be able to absorb in funding what’s coming our way,” McKee said. “The taxpayers are going to pay for it in our states or the benefits are going to get reduced.” 

The law extends work requirements for SNAP recipients from the current top age of 54 to age 64. It narrows the work requirement exemption for caregivers and parents by changing the definition of “dependent child” from under 18 years of age to under 14, meaning that parents of 15- to 17-year-olds could now be required to have employment in return for their SNAP benefits. 

It provides an exception from work requirements for a married person responsible for a child under age 14 and residing with someone who complies with the work requirements. It also exempts individuals who are eligible for the Indian Health Services. 

“While Wisconsin just passed a Wisconsin budget that invests in our kids, cuts taxes for working families and supports our rural hospitals, Trump and Congressional Republicans are moving in just the opposite way,” Evers said. “Democratic governors aren’t going to just sit idly and watch it happen. When Trump tried to strip hospital funding, we moved real quickly to protect $1.5 billion dollars in health care funding for Wisconsin. When they threaten our schools, we stand up and fight back. When they attack programs that matter to working families, we find ways to fill the gaps.”

“Republican governors fall in line behind Trump’s agenda. Democratic governors are standing up for the people that we serve,” Evers said before mentioning 2026 elections. He said Wisconsinites will “make a choice about the future of our state when they elect our next governor. They’re going to choose a leader who will work together and expand health care, support working families and build an economy that works for everybody.”

Evers announced on July 24 that he would not be running for a third term in office, setting up the first open race for governor in Wisconsin since 2010.

“I know that [Evers’] leadership is not going to end just because the title might, and that he is going to be out there fighting for what he believes in moving into the future,” said Kentucky Gov Andy Beshear, who won’t be able to run for another term in 2027 due to term limits.

So far, Wisconsin Lt. Gov. Sara Rodriguez has announced her campaign, Milwaukee County Executive David Crowley is planning on entering the race and other Democrats are still mulling a decision. There will likely be a crowded Democratic primary. Two Republicans have officially launched their campaigns for governor, while U.S. Rep. Tom Tiffany has been teasing a run.

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

A sign for the Public Broadcasting Service  is seen on its building headquarters on Feb. 18, 2025 in Arlington, Virginia.  (Photo by Kayla Bartkowski/Getty Images)

WASHINGTON — The Corporation for Public Broadcasting announced Friday that it will be shutting down.

The announcement came just one day after a major Senate appropriations bill omitted funding for the nonprofit that funds public media and a week after President Donald Trump signed a bill into law that yanked $1.1 billion in previously approved spending for CPB. 

CPB, which Congress authorized in 1967, provides funds for National Public Radio, the Public Broadcasting Service and hundreds of local stations across the United States. President Donald Trump and fellow Republicans have criticized NPR and PBS of left-leaning bias, an accusation the public media organizations have rejected.

“Despite the extraordinary efforts of millions of Americans who called, wrote, and petitioned Congress to preserve federal funding for CPB, we now face the difficult reality of closing our operations,” Patricia Harrison, president and CEO of CPB, said in a statement Friday.

“CPB remains committed to fulfilling its fiduciary responsibilities and supporting our partners through this transition with transparency and care,” Harrison said.

She added that “public media has been one of the most trusted institutions in American life, providing educational opportunity, emergency alerts, civil discourse, and cultural connection to every corner of the country.”

CPB said employees were notified Friday that the majority of staff positions “will conclude with the close of the fiscal year on September 30, 2025,” and a small transition team will stay through January 2026.

The Senate Appropriations Committee on Thursday approved the Labor, Health and Human Services and Education spending bill for fiscal year 2026, which did not include any CPB funding.

Sen. Patty Murray of Washington state, the top Democrat on the panel, expressed her disappointment over the lack of a CPB allocation in the bill during a committee markup. 

“It is a shameful reality and now communities across the country will suffer the consequences as over 1,500 stations lose critical funding,” Murray said.

In a win for the Trump administration, Congress passed a rescissions package in July that clawed back $9 billion in previously approved spending for public broadcasting and foreign aid, including $1.1 billion for CPB.

Trump signed the measure into law just days later. 

A container ship arrives at the Port of Oakland on Aug. 1, 2025 in Oakland, California. President Donald Trump announced that his Aug. 1 deadline for trade deals will not be extended and sweeping tariffs will be imposed on certain countries beginning that day. (Photo by Justin Sullivan/Getty Images)

WASHINGTON — President Donald Trump pushed ahead with his promise to raise tariffs on foreign goods by Aug. 1, signing an order late Thursday increasing import taxes on products from nearly every U.S. trading partner.

Trump’s directive, and new data on weaker job growth, sent markets tumbling Friday.

The president imposed a 15% base tariff on products imported from nearly three dozen nations across five continents, plus the 27 trading nations that comprise the European Union. Trump slapped higher rates on select other countries, ranging from 18% on goods from Nicaragua to 30% on South Africa and 50% on Brazil.

The White House hailed the “reciprocal” tariffs as “a necessary and powerful tool to put America First after many years of unsustainable trade deficits that threaten our economy and national security,” according to a press release accompanying the executive order.

Trump describes the tariffs as “reciprocal” because they are his response to countries that have trade deficits with the U.S. — meaning that country sells more products to the U.S. than it buys.

U.S. Trade Representative Jamieson Greer called the new rates “historic.”

“Over the past few months, the President’s tariff program and the ensuing ‘Trump Round’ of trade negotiations have accomplished what the World Trade Organization and multilateral negotiations have not been able to achieve at scale: expansive new market access for U.S. exporters, increased tariffs to defend critical American industries, and trillions of new manufacturing investments and purchases of goods that will create great American jobs and help reassert American leadership in key strategic sectors,” Greer said in a statement Wednesday.

The tariff announcement, combined with a weaker-than-expected jobs report Friday from the Bureau of Labor Statistics, caused sell-offs Friday from the three major U.S. stock indexes, according to financial media reports.

Trump fumed Friday afternoon about report adjustments that significantly decreased jobs numbers for May and June, even calling for the commissioner for labor statistics to be fired.

Tariffs and lawsuits

Trump made history earlier this year when he became the first president to trigger tariffs under the 1977 International Emergency Economic Powers Act.

The move sparked legal challenges from small businesses and Democratic-led states, and the plaintiffs faced the Trump administration Thursday in federal appeals court.

Tariffs are taxes on imported products that U.S. companies and other buyers pay to the U.S. government.

Trump announced staggering tariffs under an emergency declaration on April 2, what he referred to as “Liberation Day,” but delayed the new import taxes after global markets plummeted in response to the shock announcement.

Trump also separately announced Thursday a 35% levy on imported products from Canada that fall outside the bounds of an already established trade agreement between the U.S., Canada and Mexico.

Trump continued a 25% tariff on certain Mexican goods, but paused any rate increases to allow for 90 days of negotiations, according to media reports. The U.S. is continuing negotiations with China, whose products face a base import tax rate of 30%.

Marc Noland, executive vice president and director of studies for the Peterson Institute for International Economics, said Trump’s latest tariff rates are “unfortunate.”

“It will contribute to higher prices and slower growth here in the United States,” Noland said, adding there’s “a question about how sustainable they are legally here in the U.S.”

“And it’s particularly unfortunate, because I’m looking at the entire list of countries and see that the countries with the highest rates are the countries that are in the worst shape — Laos gets 40%, Syria got 41%,  Myanmar gets 40%. It’s the poorest, most desperate countries that are getting hit with the highest tariffs. So it’s bad for us and it’s bad for the world,” Noland told States Newsroom in an interview Friday.

The 15% rate on imports from dozens of countries mirrors the deals Trump announced in recent weeks with Japan, South Korea and European Union — though many details remain unknown.

“There are real questions about what exactly did anybody agree to,” Noland said. “And you know this, these don’t have the force of law that a treaty negotiated and passed by our Congress and somebody else’s national legislature have like, say, the U.S.-Korea Free Trade Agreement, which, as we see, was unilaterally abrogated.”

‘Predictable’ trade agenda urged

Trade and industry advocates have also reacted to the new tariffs.

Gary Shapiro, CEO and vice chair of the Consumer Technology Association, issued a statement Thursday saying Trump’s new rates “highlight the uncertainty American innovators face in today’s trade environment.”

“CTA continues to urge the Administration and Congress to pursue a predictable, forward-looking trade agenda rooted in fairness and collaboration with trusted partners,” said Shapiro, whose organization hosts the annual CES trade show in Las Vegas, Nevada. “American innovation thrives when markets are open, trade rules are clear, and businesses are free to focus on creating jobs and bringing groundbreaking technologies to market.”

The National Foreign Trade Council warned that “Whatever progress that’s ultimately achieved as part of these new trade deals will come at the steep price of significant U.S. tariff increases and the erosion of trust with America’s key partners.”

The statement Thursday from the industry group’s president, Jake Colvin, continued: “Institutionalizing the highest U.S. duties since the Great Depression, coupled with ongoing uncertainty, will ultimately make American businesses less competitive globally and consumers worse off while harming relationships with close geopolitical allies and trading partners.” 

First District U.S. Rep. Bryan Steil (R-Janesville) holds an in-person listening session at Elkhorn High School in Elkhorn, Wisconsin, Thursday evening July 31, 2025. (Copyright Mark Hertzberg/for Racine County Eye)

ELKHORN — At a raucous listening session in a high school auditorium Thursday evening, U.S. Rep. Bryan Steil (R-Janesville) defended the immigration and tariff policies of  President Donald Trump and the Republican budget reconciliation law that Trump signed on July 4.

From the roars of the crowd, critics of the congressman appeared to account for the majority of the group that filled nearly two-thirds of the 600-seat Elkhorn High School auditorium. But there were also recurring cheers, shouts and applause at key moments from a smaller coterie of supporters in the room.

Steil represents the 1st District in Congress, which covers Southeastern Wisconsin from Janesville and Beloit east to Racine and Kenosha on the shores of Lake Michigan.

Over the last several months, Republican members of Congress have been counseled not to hold in-person events with constituents after publicity about angry crowds turning up at some GOP town halls.

Steil’s constituents have been protesting weekly outside his office in Racine for months, calling on him to hold an in-person meeting rather than telephone ones. 

Taking the stage shortly after 5 p.m. and lasting for about 80 minutes there, Steil stuck with a cheerful, breezy tone. He treated the loud, impassioned and often angry audience cries as mostly a difference of opinion.

When an audience member asked Steil how he might take a stand against other congressional Republicans “who lie to the American public and malign the dignity of 70 million people on Medicaid by suggesting that they are lazy,” Steil lamented the tone of political discourse and vowed not to denigrate anyone. Then he turned the subject back to the boisterous auditorium.

“I’d say the overall majority of people here want to learn and understand my perspective, want to hear the question,” he said. “And then there’s a small group of people that are challenging.”

It was left to the moderator of the session, Janesville radio host Tim Bremel, to lecture the crowd to refrain from shouting over Steil’s answers during a Q&A period.

During one interruption, the radio host scolded, “Ladies and gentlemen, we will never get questions if we can’t keep the auditorium quiet. And please do the person who asked the question the respect of allowing his question to be answered.”

Pledge of Allegiance

Steil kicked off the session with the Pledge of Allegiance, inviting the audience to join him. They did so, some shouting the final words “and justice for all” with vehemence.

He followed with a short talk offering “just kind of an overview of where we’re at in this country to get ourselves back on track” — words that prompted more angry taunts.

Steil said that the nation’s spending is about “$1.8 trillion more than on the revenue side,” a comment that prompted scattered shouts scoffing at “tax breaks.”

He defended the expansion in the budget reconciliation law of work requirements for SNAP food aid, saying the change followed a model that Wisconsin had already instituted for the program in the 1990s.

When he switched to immigration and a graph that Steil said showed “the dramatic drop, the decrease that we have seen in border apprehensions,” a cry of “We are all immigrants!” came up from several rows of seats.

Nine minutes in, Steil made a pitch for his office’s constituent services, then appealed for restraint from the crowd.

“The more civil we are with each other — there’s people that have different views in here, we heard applause and boos on the border security issue, we’ve heard it a couple of times,” he said. “We have people on all sides, it’s great, that’s what makes us so great.”

Tariffs, ICE and deportation

The questions that followed came from members of the audience who filled out forms at tables in the school lobby.

Bremel told the crowd that the questioners would be chosen at random. Some greeted that claim with loud skeptical scoffs. Over the course of the hour, however, the vast majority of people who were chosen asked questions sharply critical of Steil, Trump, the Republican congressional majority, or all three.

Criticizing Trump’s tariffs, Tom Burke asked Steil “what dire economic circumstances” justified the president’s executive orders to impose them.

“What we need to do is make sure that we’re having other countries treat the United States fairly,” Steil replied, adding that the U.S. should “work collectively with our allies to address the real culprit, which is China.”

Burke wasn’t satisfied with the answer. U.S. allies, “seem to be alienated beyond belief,” he told Steil, adding that until he got a satisfactory answer to his question about their rationale, “I’m going to be totally opposed to these tariffs — period.”

Specifying that her question was about “not politics, but morality,” Jean Henderson of Elkhorn told Steil, “What I see happening to our immigrant population embarrasses me, terrifies me.”

Henderson criticized the deployment of Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) personnel, their faces hidden by masks, against immigrants “who are doing the right thing by going to the immigration office,” only to be taken into custody. “It is a trap,” she said. “Why is this happening and why aren’t you stopping it?”

Steil began in reply, “What I view is the moral hazard created by the Biden administration…,” prompting a roar of disapproval from the crowd, then a shout of “Joe Biden sucks!” from someone perhaps more sympathetic to the congressman.

The rest of Steil’s response was largely drowned out.

When it was her turn at the microphone, Kelly Neuens connected the experiences of her grandparents and great aunt and great uncle, who were held in U.S. internment camps during World War II as U.S. citizens of Japanese descent, to the conditions in the El Salvador prison where the Trump administration has sent some immigrants taken into custody.

“President Trump said, ‘Homegrowns are next’ when he was speaking to the El Salvador president,” Neuens told Steil. “My worry is that we are repeating history here.”

A plea for the climate

In his answer, which was repeatedly interrupted, Steil described the World War II internment as “one of the more darker chapters of American history,” then added, “As we look at the engagement that law enforcement is doing now against immigrants who are in the country illegally, I don’t see the  exact parallel.”

Another questioner asked Steil to explain “why you support Linda McMahon and defunding the Department of Education?”

Congress, Steil said, is still “analyzing what the spending will be for the upcoming fiscal year.” He added that the department “has burdened a lot of our local school districts with unnecessary red tape” in the course of distributing funds to the states. “I think what we will see as we negotiate this going forward is a way to make sure that those funds are there” for local schools, he said.

When it was her turn to ask a question, Sharna Ahern of Fontana thanked Steil and his staff “for answering all the contacts I’ve made with you over the years.”

She enumerated a wide range of concerns she has had — about the Department of Education, about the treatment of immigrants, “about the rule of law and civil rights” — and then turned her focus on the environment.

“Extreme weather conditions are happening more frequently as we experience them,” she told Steil. “The EPA is deregulating the standards that are in place to fight climate change, to protect the citizens. Where do you stand on this issue? And how can you be an advocate for us to initiate legislation to restore our safeguards?”

Steil praised Wisconsin as “one of the most beautiful states in the country” and asserted that “making sure that we’re protecting our air and water and soil is absolutely essential.” He said that on the issue of climate change, “what we need to be doing is focused on addressing that global aspect. But again, make sure other countries are doing their fair share of it.”

The crowd largely jeered at the response. When another audience member asked about Trump’s executive orders rolling back Biden administration measures to address climate change, Steil said that action was necessary to “correct … the overreach in the previous administration.”

It was after 6 p.m. when Bremel called for the final question.

A few minutes earlier, someone had shouted a question about “children starving in Gaza,” and the woman whose turn it was asked Steil to address that topic as well as to defend the SNAP cuts.

“I can do them both,” Steil said. He started with SNAP, reiterating his earlier assertion that Wisconsin would not be affected by the program’s changes to work requirements because of policies the state had in place already.

Turning to Gaza, Steil said, “To me the easy answer to address this crisis is for Hamas to surrender and release the hostages. Release them. Israel was unfairly, unjustly attacked.”

His comments gave rise to another brief demonstration, punctuated by repeated chants of “60,000 people are dead!”

By the time the chanting ended, Steil had left the stage. 

The photos accompanying this report are not available for republishing except by agreement with photographer Mark Hertzberg. 

A health care provider bandages a child after giving a vaccination shot. (Photo by Scott Housely/CDC)

A pair of Wisconsin Republicans want to increase awareness of the state’s vaccine exemptions by requiring waiver forms be given to parents with the health forms they receive from schools and child care center providers. 

Coauthors of the bill Rep. Lindee Brill (R-Sheboygan Falls) and Sen. Rachael Cabral-Guevara (R-Appleton) said in a cosponsorship memo that there is a “lack of transparency” around the exemptions that “can create confusion and unnecessary barriers for parents” and “increase administrative burden on schools when immunization documentation is incomplete or delayed.” 

Wisconsin law requires children in elementary, middle, junior or senior high school, a child care center, or a nursery school to get vaccinated for various diseases based on their grade or age. The vaccine and booster schedule covers mumps, measles, rubella, diphtheria, pertussis, poliomyelitis and tetanus. 

Wisconsin allows parents to get the requirement waived if they submit a written statement objecting for reasons including health, religious or personal conviction. 

Lawmakers noted that the bill would not change current requirements for vaccines. The bill would require schools, child care centers and nursery schools to create a process to present a vaccine waiver form with each health-related form it requires before a student can be enrolled.

“Many parents are unaware of this right or are unclear about how to obtain that waiver and feel pressured to make medical decisions for their children that they otherwise would not have,” Brill said in a statement. “This bill ensures that schools make parents aware of the rights already afforded them by Wisconsin law and include information about the waiver from the vaccine requirement and a procedure for presenting it in any required pre-enrollment health-related forms.”

The proposal comes as Wisconsin’s vaccination rates have not caught up with pre-pandemic levels. According to a 2024 U.S. Centers for Disease Control report, Wisconsin is falling behind other states in childhood immunizations for illnesses including polio, pertussis, diphtheria and tetanus, and measles, mumps and rubella. 

The decline in vaccine rates is partially to blame for diseases, including measles and pertussis, increasing across the country, according to health officials. 

According to the Wisconsin Department of Health Services, 86.4% of students met the minimum immunization requirements during the 2024-25 school year — a 2.8 percentage-point decrease from the prior year. The agency also reports that 6.7% of students had a waiver for one or more immunizations, representing a 0.6 percentage-point increase from last year, though the number of students waiving all vaccines fell to 1.3%. 

Amid falling rates, DHS officials have ramped up efforts to encourage vaccinations to help improve effectiveness. 

Wisconsin has one of the lowest measles vaccination rates in the country, with only Alaska falling below it. One dose of the MMR vaccine, which fights measles, provides approximately 93% protection, while two doses are about 97% effective.

As measles vaccine rates have fallen, cases of the highly contagious disease have hit the highest level in 33 years, according to the CDC with 1,288 cases this year. More than 150 people have been hospitalized from measles, and three people have died this year. No cases have been reported in Wisconsin so far, but its neighboring states, including Illinois and Minnesota, have had cases.

The lawmakers’ efforts to increase awareness of vaccine exceptions comes amid a national wave of skepticism to vaccination, including from U.S. Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., who is a leading and prominent vaccine skeptic and was appointed by President Donald Trump this year. 

Brill thanked Kennedy for his work on his “Make America Health Again” agenda in her statement about the bill.

Cabral-Guevara, a board certified family nurse practitioner, has supported legislation that would loosen vaccine requirements before including a 2024 bill that would have allowed immunization exemptions at higher education institutions without documentation. 

The bill passed the Senate and Assembly, but was vetoed by Gov. Tony Evers, who said in a veto message that he objected to “the Wisconsin State Legislature’s efforts to micromanage decisions to respond to public health incidents and restrict existing tools available to higher education institutions to keep students, faculty, staff safe and healthy on their campuses.”

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

U.S. Senate Appropriations Chair Susan Collins, a Maine Republican, left, and the top Democrat on the committee, Sen. Patty Murray of Washington state, at a committee markup on Thursday, July 31, 2025. (Photos from committee webcast)

WASHINGTON — The U.S. Senate Committee on Appropriations Thursday largely rejected Trump administration proposals to slash funding for education programs, medical research grants, health initiatives and Ukraine security assistance.

Instead, senators from both parties agreed to increase spending in the Labor, Health and Human Services and Education spending bill for fiscal year 2026, as well as the Defense bill, and rebuked the White House’s move to dismantle the Department of Education.

The pushback against President Donald Trump was significant as Congress heads toward a possible standoff and partial government shutdown when the fiscal year expires on Sept. 30.

In response to the Trump administration’s separate cancellation of grants and freezing of funds approved by Congress, senators also included language in the Labor-HHS-Education spending bill to create deadlines for formula grants to be released to states on time.

Senate Appropriations Committee Chair Susan Collins, Republican of Maine, said the bill to fund the departments of Labor, Health and Human Services and Education “prioritizes funding to make Americans healthier and supports life-saving medical research through targeted funding.”

The measure provides $116.6 billion for HHS, an increase of $446 million in discretionary funding over the previous fiscal year. Included is a $150 million increase for cancer research and a $100 million increase for Alzheimer’s disease research, as well as a ban on an administration cap on indirect costs at the National Institutes of Health, according to a summary from Democrats. The cap on how much NIH pays research universities and medical schools for indirect costs is the subject of a permanent injunction in an ongoing lawsuit.

Trump’s budget proposal also cut funding for the Atlanta-based Centers for Disease Control and Prevention to $4.2 billion, but senators voted to instead allocate $9.1 billion for the agency.

Also included is $8.8 billion for the Child Care and Development Block Grant and nearly $12.4 billion for Head Start.

The top Democrat on the committee, Sen. Patty Murray of Washington state, said that while the bill rejects many of the funding cuts from the Trump administration, it’s “only half of the equation.”

“We have an administration right now that is intent on ignoring Congress, breaking the law, and doing everything it can without any transparency, to dismantle programs and agencies that help families,” she said. “There is no magic bullet that will change that unfortunate reality.”

Murray also expressed her disappointment that the bill did not fund the Corporation for Public Broadcasting. Trump sent what is known as a rescissions request to Congress, approved by both chambers, that yanked $1.1 billion in previously approved funding over the next two years for the agency, which funds NPR and PBS.

The Labor-HHS-Education spending bill for fiscal year 2026 passed out of the Senate committee with a bipartisan 26-3 vote.

Senators also passed the Defense appropriations bill for fiscal year 2026 on a 26-3 vote.

Dismantling of Education Department spurned

The bill text tightens requirements so that Education Department staffing levels must be sufficient to carry out the agency’s missions, and its work cannot be outsourced to other agencies or departments to fulfill statutory responsibilities, according to Sen. Tammy Baldwin of Wisconsin, the top Democrat on the spending panel dealing with Labor-HHS-Education spending. 

The agency saw a reduction in force, or RIF, earlier this year that gutted more than 1,300 employees and hit wide swaths of the department. The Supreme Court cleared the way earlier in July for the agency to temporarily proceed with those mass layoffs.

The bill also provides $5.78 billion for School Improvement Programs — which support before- and after-school programs, rural education, STEM education and college and career counseling, among other initiatives.

Trump’s fiscal 2026 budget request had called for $12 billion in spending cuts at the Education Department but the committee allocated $79 billion in discretionary funding.

Education Secretary Linda McMahon defended Trump’s sweeping proposals while appearing in June before the Senate Labor-HHS-Education subcommittee.

During Thursday’s markup, Murray called the president’s proposal to defund the Department of Education “absurd.”

“I still hope we can do more when it comes to demanding accountability, transparency, and that this administration actually follows our laws,” Murray said. “We all know President Trump cannot dismantle the Department of Education or ship education programs to other agencies. Authorizing laws prevent that.”

The agency has witnessed a dizzying array of cuts and changes since Trump took office, as he and his administration look to dramatically overhaul the federal role in education and dismantle the department.

The bill maintains the same maximum annual award for the Pell Grant from the previous award year at $7,395. The government subsidy helps low-income students pay for college.

Trump’s budget request had called for cutting nearly $1,700 from the maximum award.

Health spending

Baldwin said the overall bill is a “compromise.” She pointed to how Republicans and Democrats agreed to increase funds for the 988 Suicide hotline by $2 million and by another $20 million for substance abuse recovery.

The spending bill will also provide $1.6 billion for State Opioid Response grants, which is a formula-based grant for states to address the opioid crisis.

Senators rejected the Trump administration’s request to cut National Institutes of Health research by 40% and instead included a more than $400 million bump in funding for a total of $48.7 billion.

Georgia Sen. Jon Ossoff said that he was grateful that the committee worked on a bipartisan basis to reject major Trump cuts for the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, in his home state.

“I made (it) very clear that I would not accept the destruction of the CDC,” Ossoff said. “I am grateful that Republicans and Democrats on this committee are coming together to defend this vital institution based in the state of Georgia.”

Advocates for medical research praised the legislation.

“Chair Collins and Vice Chair Murray deserve special recognition for their leadership in making this a priority. Thousands of ACS CAN volunteers from across the country have been writing to their lawmakers on this issue and it’s deeply encouraging to see their voices have been heard loud and clear,” Lisa Lacasse, president of the American Cancer Society Cancer Action Network, said in a statement.

AmeriCorps, Job Corps funding sustained

Trump’s budget request also proposed $4.6 billion in spending cuts at the Department of Labor. 

The spending bill also maintains funding for Job Corps, a residential career training program for young adults, at $1.76 billion.

Trump’s budget request sought to eliminate the program entirely.

The administration says the program is “financially unsustainable, has an exorbitant perparticipant cost, risks the safety of young adults, and has often made participants worse off,” according to a summary of the budget request.

The spending bill also includes $15 billion for the Social Security Administration, an increase of $100 million from the president’s budget request, to address staffing shortages.

The administration also proposed the elimination of AmeriCorps.

However, senators kept funding for AmeriCorps for fiscal year 2026 at $1.25 billion.

Defense spending also increased

The Defense appropriations spending bill for fiscal year 2026 that senators worked on represented an increase from the president’s budget request.

“I think not only the prior administration, but this administration as well, have underestimated the level of challenge that we have,” said Sen. Mitch McConnell, chairman of the Defense appropriations panel.

The Kentucky Republican said the bill provides $851.9 billion for fiscal year 2026.

He said the topline is higher than the president’s budget request because “we cannot seriously address these challenges while artificially constraining our resources” — challenges such as the war in Ukraine and conflicts in the Middle East.

The bill also rejects the Trump administration’s effort to slash funding to aid Ukraine in its war against Russia.

“Shutting off engagement with Ukraine would undermine our military’s efforts to prepare for the modern battlefield,” McConnell said.

During the markup of the defense spending bill, Sen. Dick Durbin, Democrat of Illinois, introduced an amendment to require the Department of Homeland Security to reimburse costs to the Department of Defense for immigration enforcement.

As the Trump administration aims to carry out its plans for mass deportation of people without permanent legal status, it’s intertwined the U.S. military and immigration enforcement, ranging from deploying the National Guard to quell immigration protests in Los Angeles to housing immigrants on the Guantanamo Bay, Cuba military base.

Durbin said that so far, DHS has cost the Defense Department $900 million, from personnel costs to housing immigrants on military bases.

Durbin said the cost to house 180 people on Guantanamo Bay cost the Department of Defense $40 million over three months.

His amendment failed on a 14-15 vote. 

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, pictured July 31, 2025. (Photo by Ashley Murray/States Newsroom)

WASHINGTON — Judges on the U.S. Appeals Court for the Federal Circuit questioned the legality of President Donald Trump’s sweeping emergency tariffs Thursday as the White House pushes on with its Aug. 1 deadline for import taxes at levels not seen since the 1930s.

The case originated from consolidated lawsuits brought by a handful of business owners and a dozen Democratic state attorneys general who argued the president does not have the authority to impose tariffs under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, or IEEPA.

Through nearly two hours of questioning Thursday, the 11-judge panel probed whether the president could use IEEPA authority to set tariffs without approval from Congress.

The U.S. Department of Justice’s Brett Shumate argued the law is “one of the most powerful tools” to protect the economy and national security during emergencies.

Oregon Solicitor General Benjamin Gutman, who argued on behalf of the Democratic states challenging the tariffs, maintained Trump’s reason behind declaring the unilateral emergency tariffs — U.S. trade deficits with other nations — did not actually merit a national emergency.

Trump became the first president to trigger tariffs under the 1977 law when in February and March he ordered punitive import taxes on products from Canada, Mexico and China after declaring illegal fentanyl smuggling from those countries a national emergency.

The president took his tariffs worldwide in an April executive order that declared trade deficits an emergency and slapped what he described as “reciprocal” import taxes on nearly all foreign goods.

In late May, the U.S. Court of International Trade sided with Democratic attorneys general from Arizona, Colorado, Maine, Minnesota, Nevada, New Mexico and Oregon, as well as the business owners from across the country, including in New York, Pennsylvania, Utah, Vermont and Virginia.

The word ‘tariff’

Judges on the panel grilled Shumate about how IEEPA grants the authority to impose tariffs.

“A major concern that I have is IEEPA doesn’t even mention the word tariffs,” said Judge Jimmie V. Reyna, adding that Congress “certainly was aware about tariffs” when it wrote the law.

Existing laws already create “a highly structured … framework” for tariffs, said Reyna, who was appointed to the bench in 2011 by President Barack Obama. “You would agree with me that those statutes do pertain to tariffs?”

“Correct,” replied Shumate, the assistant attorney general for the Justice Department’s Civil Division.

Pressed again by Reyna on “tariff” not appearing in the statute, Shumate said “I don’t think that’s unusual.”

“There are at least two examples of statutes that authorize tariffs that don’t use the word ‘tariff’ — Sections 232c and 122, which authorize the president to restrict imports,” Shumate said.

Judge Leonard P. Stark, who was appointed in 2022 by President Joe Biden, jumped in with skepticism.

“Both of those are part of the code that deals expressly with customs and duties, unlike IEEPA, which is not in that chapter,” Stark said.

Dependence on deficits probed

The panel also quizzed legal counsel for the businesses and states, including on the weight and content of Trump’s emergency declaration that launched his April 2 “Liberation Day” tariffs.

The states ignored arguments in Trump’s executive order that an emergency existed because of a hollow manufacturing base, a threat to national security, supply-chain disruptions and other issues, Judge Richard G. Taranto said to Gutman, of Oregon.

“Your arguments in your brief to us are devoted to the more narrow question of trade deficits alone as not amounting to unusual and extraordinary threat,” Taranto, who was appointed by Obama in 2013, said.

Gutman replied that all other matters the order cites are related to trade deficits.

“You can look at the executive order itself, the justification, the unusual and extraordinary threat that it is identifying, is what it calls persistent trade deficits,” he said. “Everything else that’s discussed there is either mentioned as a cause or an effect.”

Stark followed up with, “Is that the only fair reading of the executive orders, though? Can it be read as there are some recent consequences, some recent effects of the long and persistent trade deficit that now are unusual and extraordinary?”

Gutman said those effects are mentioned “in about a sentence in the executive order.”

Chief Judge Kimberly A. Moore fact-checked that answer.

The executive order “goes on for paragraph after paragraph,” Moore said, mentioning production capacity, military equipment, national security concerns and other threats to the U.S. economy, she said.

“How could you stand here and say to me that the president said it’s all about the deficit, and it’s one throwaway sentence at most in this whole order about the rest of these things constituting a threat?” Moore, who was appointed by George W. Bush, asked.

After back and forth, Gutman said, “I will walk back that it was a single sentence. But I think if you read this, the fairest reading of this executive order is that it is about the large and persistent trade deficits.”

Debate continues

Oregon Attorney General Dan Rayfield said after oral arguments the U.S. Department of Justice had a “monster flop” during the arguments when at one point Shumate told Moore that the court did not have authority to review the tariffs.

“I think for those in the audience today, they are concerned when the federal government comes in and says that (judges) have absolutely no role to review what the president does under IEEPA. You actually heard laughter in the room,” Rayfield said.

During the White House daily briefing following the arguments, press secretary Karoline Leavitt defended tariffs as a success, citing that the duties have raised $150 billion in revenue since Trump took office.

“Those revenues will skyrocket even further, starting tomorrow, when new reciprocal tariff rates take effect,” Leavitt said.

Tariffs are paid to the U.S. government by American businesses and individuals who purchase foreign goods.

Critics across the spectrum

The case against Trump’s sweeping emergency tariffs has attracted support from various points on the political spectrum.

Democratic members of Congress filed an amicus brief on behalf of the state attorneys general and small businesses arguing the president’s import taxes under IEEPA usurped Congress’ tariff powers and violated the Constitution.

Congress has “explicitly and specifically” delegated tariff-raising powers to the president, but not under IEEPA, according to the lawmakers.

“Unmoored from the structural safeguards Congress built into actual tariff statutes, the President’s unlawful ‘emergency’ tariffs under IEEPA have led to chaos and uncertainty,” the lawmakers wrote.

The libertarian CATO Institute also filed an amicus brief raising several issues with Trump’s emergency tariffs, including that IEEPA contains “no textual support for tariff authority” and that it violates tariff power granted to Congress in the Constitution.

Brent Skorup, legal fellow at the CATO Institute, said it’s hard to predict the outcome of the case and whether a longstanding judicial branch deference to the executive branch will “win out” over a recent trend of skepticism of the president’s plans.

“In some ways I think this case has many analogies to President Biden’s attempt to forgive student loans,” he said in an interview with States Newsroom. “I mean, almost an identical issue — a vague statute, a president using it in a way that had never been used before for an economically major event.”

U.S. consumers bear costs

Economists are cautioning that the costs of the tariffs will fall on the shoulders of U.S. consumers.

The Yale Budget Lab’s most recent estimate shows the overall average effective tariff rate is 18.4%, the highest since 1933. The analysis, released Wednesday, included Trump’s latest trade announcement that he will impose a 25% duty on goods from India.

The overall price level and distributional effects of the tariffs are projected to cost American households roughly $2,400 in 2025 dollars, Budget Lab projected.

The analysis shows tariffs are expected to disproportionately affect clothing and textiles, with the prices of shoes increasing by 40% in the short run.

The Tax Foundation, a right-leaning think tank that advocates for lower taxes, found that Trump’s Aug. 1 tariff regime will affect nearly 75% of imported foods, with products from the European Union seeing the worst of it.

The five food imports that would be most affected, barring any deal changes, include liqueurs and spirits, baked goods, coffee, fish and beer, according to the foundation’s July 28 review.

Economists and some lawmakers also warn that Trump’s constantly evolving tariff policy is perpetuating an air of uncertainty for businesses. 

Sameera Fazili, the deputy director of the National Economic Council during the Biden administration, said the rapid changes are “undermining our economy.”

“You can see it in CEO surveys, where the Conference Board CEO Sentiment Survey for Q2 reported that a quarter of CEOs now plan to cut back on capital investments,” Fazili, now a senior fellow at the liberal think tank the Roosevelt Institute, said Tuesday during a press call organized by the Economic Speakers Bureau.

The same can be said for mid-sized and small businesses, said Republican Sen. Rand Paul of Kentucky.

“When I go home, I’ve yet to come across a businessman or -woman who says, ‘Oh, I love the tariffs.’ It’s the opposite,” Paul said at an event Wednesday at the CATO Institute.

Of the court case, Paul said he thinks the administration is “going to lose.”

“I think there’s a constitutional reason against it,” he said. “And I think there’s, in addition, a statutory reason they may fail.”

Frederick Prehn, seen during a 2021 meeting of the Natural Resources Board. (Screenshot/Wisconsin DNR)

The Wisconsin District I Court of Appeals ruled against former state Natural Resources Board Chair Frederick Prehn this week in a case over a public records request filed while Prehn was refusing to vacate his seat on the board. 

Prehn, a Wausau dentist, was appointed to the NRB by former Republican Gov. Scott Walker to a term that was supposed to expire in May 2021. Despite his term’s expiration, Prehn announced he would refuse to step down, preventing Democratic Gov. Tony Evers from appointing his replacement and flipping ideological control of the board, which sets policy for the Department of Natural Resources. 

Emails obtained through public records requests showed that Prehn was working with legislative Republicans to remain in his seat and maintain influence over state policies on controversial issues such as wolf hunting and water quality standards. 

Prehn ultimately remained on the board for 20 months past the expiration of his term. 

While he was refusing to leave, Midwest Environmental Advocates filed a public records request seeking all communications Prehn made about his refusal to leave — including emails and text messages made on public and personal devices or accounts. Through the DNR, Prehn turned over emails relevant to request but not text messages. A second records request by MEA to another Republican member of the board showed that Prehn had been texting about his decision. 

MEA sued in Dane County Circuit Court to have those text messages released. The circuit court found that Prehn had improperly withheld the text messages and a schedule was set for him to turn over those records. 

MEA filed a motion requesting that Prehn pay damages and attorney’s fees. The circuit court denied that motion under a 2022 state Supreme Court decision which found if a government agency voluntarily turns over records while a lawsuit for those records is pending, the government does not have to pay attorney’s fees to the requesting party. 

That decision, Friends of Frame Park v. Waukesha, has drawn criticism from legislators from both parties and a bill to negate the decision has been working its way through the Legislature. 

On Tuesday, the appeals court ruled that Prehn’s text messages count as public records and therefore should have been turned over under the state’s open records law. The court majority rejected  Prehn’s contention that the texts were about his “purely personal” decision to remain in office. The court also overturned the circuit court decision not to award MEA attorney’s fees. 

“This decision is a win for the people of Wisconsin. It strengthens our democracy by ensuring that government officials conduct their business with openness and transparency,” MEA attorney Adam Voskuil said. “Had Prehn’s arguments been accepted, the public records law and our state’s commitment to open government would have been significantly weakened.”

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

The stormwater pond at the Emerald Sky Dairy in St. Croix County that was polluted after a 2016 manure spill. A new survey finds that waste produced in the St. Croix River watershed is as much as if more than 3 million people lived there. (Wisconsin DNR photo)

The waste produced by livestock in the St. Croix River watershed is equivalent to 3.25 million more people living in the region, according to a study conducted by a retired University of Iowa professor on behalf of local clean water activists. 

The study, conducted by Dr. Chris Jones, who studied water quality and agriculture at Iowa, totals the number of beef cattle, dairy cows, hogs, chickens and turkeys across the river’s watershed in Minnesota and Wisconsin, calculates the amount of waste those animals excrete in terms of nitrogen, phosphorus and solids. It also  projects  how many  humans it would take to produce that much waste. 

“Some of these nutrients from the manure get into our streams, we know that,” says Jones, who has authored a book about the effect of factory hog farming on the water in his home state. “And so, since the waste is not treated, and since the distribution of it on the fields is not very regulated … this volume of waste certainly makes the river and its tributaries more vulnerable to nutrient groups.”

In recent years, western Wisconsin has become the site of the state’s most intense fights over factory farming. Most of the state’s largest farms, known as concentrated animal feeding operations (CAFOs), have been in the eastern part of the state. But large agricultural companies have been working to expand factory farming operations across western Wisconsin’s Driftless Region and the St. Croix watershed. 

That effort to expand has sparked a growth in local opposition. A number of communities have worked to pass local ordinances regulating how and when a factory farm can be built or expanded within their borders. Industry groups have filed lawsuits to block those efforts. 

Community members have also worked to stop or change permitting decisions by the state Department of Natural Resources for the expansion of factory farms. 

“I think it’s very important for citizens to realize that the counties and other local governments retain some power in being able to zone their land for the construction of these CAFOs because, as I said in Iowa, when the counties lost control, that’s when the big expansion occurred,” Jones says.

Despite local opposition, CAFOs have continued to grow, causing increased amounts of nutrients in the local water systems. Runoff and manure spills have caused massive fish kills in local streams, beaches have regularly been closed due to excessively high levels of pollutants and the groundwater — the sources of drinking water for most rural residents — has been found to contain high levels of nitrates. 

The St. Croix River has been part of the National Park System as a Wild and Scenic River since 1968 and listed as an “impaired water” by the Environmental Protection Agency since 2012. 

According to Jones’ study, most of the livestock within the watershed is raised on the Wisconsin side of the border. The waste created by just the livestock in Barron County is equivalent to 1.7 million extra people. The livestock waste in St. Croix County is equivalent to 911,000 more people.

The population of Barron County is about 46,000 and of St. Croix County is about 96,000, according to U.S. Census data. 

Jones says it’s within the capabilities of the regulating agencies and university systems in both Minnesota and Wisconsin to calculate the exact number of livestock the watershed is capable of enduring. He says they should do that, because the industry won’t. 

“This is an approach the state should think about in regulating these areas on a watershed by watershed basis, based on what we assume they can endure,” he says. “And that ought to be done for the Saint Croix to protect it.”

He doesn’t expect the St. Croix River’s designation as a national waterway by itself to influence the agriculture industry to change its practices.

“We have evidence here in Iowa, but any special status that the streams have is not going to affect decision making on the ag side, it’s just not,” Jones says. “So the state’s got to try to get in front of this and get their arms around it, because once the horse leaves a barn, it’s too late.”

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

Anne Chapman (with the microphone), research director for the Wisconsin Association of School Business Officials Association, called the lack of funding “unprecedented" during a panel discussion. From left, WPEN Executive Director Heather DuBois Bourenane moderated the panel with Chapman, Julie Underwood, and Chris Thiel. (Photo by Baylor Spears/Wisconsin Examiner)

GREEN BAY — After putting in a significant amount of time advocating for school funding during the most recent state budget cycle, public education advocates are looking towards their next effort — helping local communities show how much  private school vouchers cost taxpayers.

Advocates met at Preble High School, the state’s fourth largest high school, for the Wisconsin Public Education Network’s annual summit last week, an opportunity to connect and discuss the state of school funding and an array of other issues schools face. Denise Gaumer Hutchison, northeast regional organizer for the network and mother of two Green Bay students, told the Wisconsin Examiner that the importance of advocacy and working together is “at an all time high.” 

“It’s not just one type of people that are understanding that we have to have high quality public schools and we have to advocate for it now,” said Hutchison, a member of a variety of advocacy groups including Citizen Action and the League of Women Voters. “The Wisconsin State Legislature showed us that they are not advocates for public schools.”

Wisconsin Superintendent of Public Instruction Jill Underly told attendees in a video message she was grateful for the partnership with WPEN and advocates during the budget cycle that concluded in early July, when Gov. Tony Evers signed the 2025-27 state budget. 

“You are without question the strongest and most consistent advocates for public schools in our state. You are the link between policy and practice. You lift up what’s working and you fight for what’s needed,” Underly said. “Your voices have been loud, clear and grounded in what matters most kids, and you’ve reminded Wisconsin that public education isn’t just a line item. It’s a promise.” 

The budget set state aid for districts for the next two years. To the disappointment of many, however, it  included no general aid increases. Increases to the special education reimbursement rate didn’t reach the goal advocates had set.

“This is the gas you put in the tank,” Milwaukee Public Schools Legislative Policy Manager Chris Thiel said about the lack of general state aid during a panel discussion. “You can’t say the funding system is broken, if you didn’t fund it.”

Anne Chapman, research director for the Wisconsin Association of School Business Officials, called the lack of funding “unprecedented.” School districts have a $325 per pupil revenue limit increase, but without state funding, school districts will have to raise property taxes to benefit from it. 

Chapman noted that the state did significantly increase the special education reimbursement rate, but said the actual reimbursement would likely fall below the estimated rate of 42% in the first year and 45% in the second year. 

“When you hear the governor and others say that this budget provides $1.4 billion in spendable resources for schools, that is not state money,” Chapman said. “About $577 million of that is state money. The rest is mostly going to be borne by property taxpayers.”

Thiel noted that a recent Wisconsin Policy Forum report found that the state’s national ranking for school funding has fallen from 11th place in 2002 to 26th place now. 

“Were it not for local communities lifting their school districts up against these cuts from the state, we conceivably will be worse than 26th,” Thiel said, noting that increased local property taxes made the difference. “We didn’t get into this to do referenda every year, and we’ve got a really concerning situation.” 

Green Bay Area Public School Board Vice President James Lyerly said at the conference that without general aid and without a 60% special education reimbursement rate from the state budget, the district will have to go to referendum again. The district currently gets funding through a 10-year operating referendum that voters approved in 2017.

“It ensures that the district will once again need to seek voter support for a referendum to replace our current $16.5 million dollar per year non-recurring operational referendum that ends in 2027,” Lyerly said. The district’s current operational and recent building referendums, including one in November 2024, have ensured “our students are able to attend schools that meet their instructional needs and provide for safe learning spaces,” he said. 

“The continued underfunding of public education at the same time that there is an increased funding and expansion of unaccountable choice schools, not only creates these budget challenges, but it widens the opportunity gaps for students who rely on the comprehensive support systems that public schools provide,” Lyerly said.

The new state budget did include increases in per-pupil funding for voucher schools in Wisconsin, along with a $325 annual per-pupil revenue limit adjustment to keep parity with public schools.

Publicizing voucher programs’ cost

Advocates are turning to transparency on the cost of the voucher schools programs as the next item on their agenda.

Green Bay recently became the first municipality in the state to add the cost of private voucher schools as a line on residents’ property tax bills. 

Private school vouchers are paid out of school districts’ general state aid, and school districts have the option of raising property taxes to make up for the lost revenue. Property tax bills currently include information on the money going towards the town, the county, the technical college and local public school districts, but costs for private voucher schools are lumped in with public school costs.

A handful of Wisconsin municipalities have added inserts about voucher costs to their tax bills, but Hutchison said having it on the tax bill will be more effective at informing people, who often throw inserts away.

“[People] were totally appalled that they didn’t know that their taxes were going to support private schools and it wasn’t so much that they objected to supporting private schools, it was the lack of transparency and the knowledge they didn’t have the knowledge of where their tax dollars were going,” Hutchison said. 

The proposal to add a printed line on private voucher costs was introduced by Ald. Alyssa Proffitt. The city council voted 6-6 in April, with Green Bay Mayor Eric Genrich breaking the tie to approve it. The council worked with the school district administrative staff, the school board, Brown County, the Wisconsin Department of Revenue and the City Legal department to determine the legality and feasibility of adding another line to the printed city tax bill.

Genrich said at the conference that Green Bay residents will have a better understanding of how much they are paying for private schools, and he hopes the practice spreads.

“We really believe that we’ve created a template that other communities across the state of Wisconsin can use and adopt,” Genrich said at the conference. “I’ve been a supporter of this at the state level for some time. That is what we’re hoping to build towards, so we create some momentum within municipalities across the state of Wisconsin and actually get it done at the state level hopefully here in the near future.”

Genrich, a former state representative, supported a similar policy in the Wisconsin Assembly, but a bill authored by former Democratic Rep. Dana Wachs never received a public hearing. Similar bills have faced the same fate in recent years under the Republican-led Legislature.

WPEN is planning to launch an effort in the fall to help communities interested in going through a similar process. 

“If the Legislature won’t support transparency on tax bills for communities, then the communities are going to support transparency on their tax bills, and it’s going to go municipality by municipality by municipality,” Hutchison, the network’s Northeast regional organizer, said in an interview. “We’re not going to wait any longer, because this has been needed for a very long time, and we have some momentum now.”

Transparency on voucher costs is essential, she said, especially as public school districts continue to rely on property taxes for funding and must seek increases by referendum.

“We have a constitutional responsibility to fund our public schools, and people think in their communities that they’re doing that,” Hutchison said. “They’ve been misled, because the private school dollars are hidden inside of the tax bill, and all we’re asking for is to be transparent so that people can make informed decisions.” 

She said it can be difficult to ask taxpayers to vote to increase taxes if they don’t understand their tax bills.

“If you’re going to somebody’s door saying, ‘Hey, the Green Bay Area public school district or XYZ school district is going to referenda to help pay their bills because there’s no new money from the state of Wisconsin… and they say, ‘Look at my tax bill. Look how much money I’m paying in taxes to support schools.’ That’s not really the whole story,” Hutchison said.

“It’s a challenging conversation to have at somebody’s door. If I now can go to somebody’s door and say, ‘Did you see your latest tax bill? Did you see what percentage is being taken out and what dollar amount is being taken out of that amount to go to private schools?’ you may get somebody to say yes to increase their taxes because now they have a clearer picture of what’s really happening.” 

Hutchison said WPEN has a tool kit with resources on the issue. Changing the tax bill information has to start with a resolution from the school board asking the city or the township to support the effort, she said, and it then has to get approval from the city or local government. 

“We’re doing it district by district, community by community, and we’re having conversations with people that have come to us to see what we’ve done in other communities,” Hutchison said. “So we’re going to support them in how they approach this.” 

Hutchison said she has been having early conversations with some communities, including having three communities reach out following the summit. One superintendent, Amy Starzecki of Superior Public Schools, thanked the Green Bay community for its work around voucher transparency at the conference, saying Superior would be looking into the issue.

The effort to publicize private voucher costs comes as caps on Wisconsin’s school voucher programs are set to lift in the 2026-27 school year. Since 2017, the cap, which limits the percentage of students in a district who can participate, has been increasing by 1% until it hit 9% this year.

“Next year, there will be no limit. Those caps come off,” said Julie Mead, a professor emerita in UW-Madison’s department of educational leadership and policy analysis, during a session titled “It’s just not fair: Unpacking Fairness from Special Education to Funding-by-Referendum to Privatization.”

Eliminating the caps could make it hard for districts to plan, Mead said. 

“The ability of Green Bay superintendent to predict what’s going to happen next year in terms of the money coming in and going on and what their membership will be is going to be really, really difficult,” she said, “and it means our school districts are frankly going to be in a world of hurt.”

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

U.S. Deputy Agriculture Secretary Stephen Alexander Vaden testifies before the U.S. Senate Agriculture Committee on July 30, 2025. (Photo via committee livestream)

Members of both parties on the U.S. Senate Agriculture Committee chastised a U.S. Department of Agriculture official Wednesday for not consulting Congress before proposing to shift thousands of jobs out of the Washington, D.C., area.

USDA Deputy Secretary Stephen Alexander Vaden defended the sweeping proposal, which Secretary Brooke Rollins announced with a five-page memo last week, saying it would help bring the department closer to the people the government oversees and lower the cost of living for federal workers, while pledging to work with members of the committee over the next month of planning.

“The secretary’s memorandum was the first step, not the last step,” Vaden told Minnesota’s Amy Klobuchar, the top Democrat on the panel, who criticized several aspects of the plan.

The proposal calls for cutting 2,600 of the 4,600 USDA jobs in the District of Columbia, Maryland and Virginia and expanding the department’s footprint in five regional hubs: Raleigh, North Carolina; Indianapolis; Kansas City, Missouri; Fort Collins, Colorado; and Salt Lake City.

Klobuchar said moving workers out of the capital region hurts the constituencies USDA serves. Agency officials should be nearby to meet with members of Congress, other executive branch offices and trade groups that are based in the nation’s capital, she said.

“Whittling down USDA’s resources to do this crucial work puts rural America at a disadvantage when they don’t have people in the room where it happens,” Klobuchar said.

“We have differences across the aisle,” she continued. “But I think every one of my colleagues understands that you need people that can meet with you, you need people that can go over to the White House so that you don’t have people that don’t have the interests of rural America in mind making all the decisions.”

Vaden said the USDA would keep employees in all of the department’s mission areas in the Washington area.

No advance notice

Even Republicans who said they generally agreed with the aims of the proposal indicated they did not appreciate the lack of notice before it was announced.

“I support finding cost savings where you can, I support the idea of moving people out of the D.C. area and out into the field and closer to the farmer,” North Dakota Republican John Hoeven said. “We support the goals, but we want it to be a process where you work with Congress, with the Senate, both the authorizing committee and the Appropriations Committee on it, and we achieve those results together. And I think that’ll help garner a lot more support for the effort.”

In an opening statement, Chairman John Boozman, an Arkansas Republican, thanked Vaden for being available for the hearing on “very, very short notice”

Klobuchar took issue with that description.

“The reason it’s short notice is because the administration put out a half-baked plan with no notice and without consulting agricultural leaders,” she said.

Interest groups were not told ahead of the announcement, Vaden told Klobuchar, though the White House Office of Management and Budget did receive notice.

In response to complaints about the lack of engagement with Congress, Vaden said that lawmakers were notified at the same time as USDA employees, shortly before the announcement was public, and he emphasized that the announcement started a 30-day engagement period that would involve Congress.

He also compared the reorganization plan to the remote work that the department’s workforce used well past the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic.

“From January 2021 to January 2025, the Biden administration, 2,200 employees left Washington, D.C.,” he said. “There was no congressional notice, there was no outcry, there was no committee hearing. For more than 1,700 days, extending well beyond any fair definition of the COVID pandemic, USDA was on a maximum telework footing.”

Midwest Republicans miffed

Some Republicans on the panel offered hearty endorsements to the proposal, including Jim Justice of West Virginia, who used his time to promote the plan instead of questioning Vader.

“I don’t have any questions,” Justice said. “All I’m telling you is, we absolutely need to move and do the very best that we can for these great people.”

But the issue transcended party lines in several cases. Some Republicans whose states were passed over in selecting the proposed hubs had sharp questions for Vaden, while some Democrats who would gain a federal presence under the proposal were less critical.

Hoeven questioned the proposed siting selections, noting Fargo, North Dakota, didn’t have a hub within 600 miles. Fargo is “in the heart of ag country,” Hoeven said.

“What’s magic about five hubs?” he asked. “How much agriculture is there in the state of Utah? We can go through all those things and whether, in fact, it’s actually easier or better for our farmers and our ranchers in North Dakota, given the five hubs you’ve selected.”

Utah ranked 37th in total agricultural income, according to the USDA’s 2023 statistics.

No Nebraska hub

Nebraska Republican Deb Fischer said she had discussed with Vaden, prior to his confirmation hearing this year, the possibility of moving some of the USDA’s workforce outside the Beltway, and advocated for Nebraska as a suitable location.

Because of that, she was underwhelmed by the proposal and its introduction.

“I would have liked to see a process that allowed for Nebraska to demonstrate its strong value proposition,” she said. “So while I do agree with the overreaching goal here, I have to express disappointment in how this has been rolled out and the lack of engagement with Congress prior to the announcement.”

Meanwhile, Colorado Democrat Michael Bennet, whose state would see a regional hub that would also house a consolidated U.S. Forest Service office, said he agreed with the plan’s goals.

“I have long called for the idea of trying to relocate people from Washington, D.C., to parts of the country, to partly to get out of the insulation of this place, to just be closer to, in this case, producers, but others as well,” Bennet said. “So philosophically, that’s where I’ve been.” 

The Immigration and Customs Enforcement detention center in Aurora, operated by private prison firm GEO Group, is pictured on Jan. 30, 2025. U.S. Rep.  Jason Crow said he was denied entry to the facility while attempting an oversight visit. (Chase Woodruff/Colorado Newsline)

WASHINGTON — A dozen Democratic members of Congress filed a lawsuit Wednesday charging that the Trump administration is blocking lawmakers from conducting congressional oversight of federal immigration detention centers.

The suit in the U.S. District Court of the District of Columbia argues that the Department of Homeland Security’s new policy to limit or block lawmakers from visiting immigrant detention facilities is unlawful. The members cite an appropriations law in effect since 2019 that grants a lawmaker the ability to conduct oversight of such centers without prior approval from the department or Immigration and Customs Enforcement.

“This oversight informs potential legislation on the subject of immigration detention, ensures that administration officials are carrying out their responsibilities consistent with federal law, and ensures that funds appropriated to DHS and ICE are being used appropriately on the ground,” according to the suit.

DHS did not respond to States Newsroom’s request for comment.

As the Trump administration aims to carry out mass deportations, one of the few tools Democrats, who are in the minority in both chambers of Congress, have is oversight of immigration detention centers.

It’s already led to clashes between Democratic lawmakers and immigration officers after New Jersey Democrats protested the reopening of a detention center.

The lawmakers said that since June, they have tried to obtain information about conditions at DHS facilities “for the purpose of conducting real-time oversight of that facility” and each “of those attempted oversight visits has been blocked by” DHS.

For example, Colorado’s Jason Crow, who is part of the suit, said this month he was denied entry to an ICE facility to conduct oversight.

“​​As part of its campaign of mass deportation, the Trump-Vance administration has stretched the U.S. immigration detention system far beyond its capacity,” the suit said.

The suit cites the deaths of 11 people while in immigration custody in the past five months and the unlawful detainment of U.S. citizens, often without access to legal counsel.

“More people are being held by the United States in immigration detention than ever before, with many facilities housing more individuals than they were built to contain,” according to the suit. “Reports of mistreatment have been widespread and have included disturbing details of overcrowding, food shortages, lack of adequate medical care, and unsanitary conditions.”

The suit is being led by the advocacy group Democracy Forward, which is representing the House lawmakers, most of whom are in leadership roles or top Democrats on committees, such as Bennie Thompson of Mississippi on Homeland Security, Jamie Raskin of Maryland on Judiciary and Robert Garcia of California on Oversight and Government Reform.

The other Democrats include Congressional Hispanic Caucus Chair Adriano Espaillat and Dan Goldman of New York; J. Luis Correa, Jimmy Gomez, Raul Ruiz and Norma Torres of California; Crow and Joe Neguse of Colorado; and Veronica Escobar of Texas.

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., speaks during a news conference with Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee member Sen. Richard Blumenthal, D-Conn., demanding the release of the Epstein files at the U.S. Capitol on July 30, 2025 in Washington, DC.  (Photo by Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images)

WASHINGTON — U.S. Senate Democrats on Wednesday began charting a little-known legal path to force President Donald Trump’s administration to release the investigative files on the now deceased Florida sex offender and financier Jeffrey Epstein.

In a letter to Attorney General Pam Bondi, Democratic members of the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs, along with Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, requested the “full and complete Epstein files” by Aug. 15.

“After missteps and failed promises by your Department regarding these files, it is essential that the Trump Administration provide full transparency. In 2024, President Trump stated on the campaign trail that he would declassify the Epstein files, with his political account on X stating, ‘President Trump says he will DECLASSIFY the 9/11 Files, JFK Files, and Epstein Files,’” according to the three-page letter led by Sen. Gary Peters of Michigan, the committee’s top Democrat.

“We call on you to fulfill those promises of transparency,” the letter, dated July 29, continued.

In addition to Schumer, other co-signers included Sens. Richard Blumenthal of Connecticut, Maggie Hassan of New Hampshire, John Fetterman of Pennsylvania, Elissa Slotkin of Michigan, Andy Kim of New Jersey and Ruben Gallego of Arizona.

Five senators

The senators are invoking a nearly century-old law that compels the executive branch to comply if at least five senators on the committee sign on to a request, Schumer told reporters at a Wednesday press conference.

“While protecting the victim’s identities can and must be of top importance, the public has a right to know who enabled, knew of or participated in one of the most heinous sex trafficking operations in history,” Schumer said.

Blumenthal added that any notes and recordings of Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche’s interviews last week in Tallahassee, Florida, with Ghislaine Maxwell should also be made public. Maxwell was convicted in 2021 and is now serving a 20-year sentence in a Florida federal prison for conspiring with Epstein to secure and transport minors for sexual abuse.

Along with requesting all investigative materials by mid-August, the senators also demanded a briefing for committee staff by Aug. 29.

Schumer said committee Democrats are “still talking” to Republican colleagues to urge them to join the request.

“And that may help get this public, but if not, there’s recourse in the courts. This is the law,” Schumer said.

A Justice Department spokesperson confirmed to States Newsroom that it received the letter but declined to comment further.

Ghislaine Maxwell subpoenaed

The Justice Department’s decision in early July to keep what are described as the Epstein files out of public view sparked uproar and division among Republicans in Congress, administration officials and Trump’s base.

House Oversight and Government Reform Committee Chair James Comer, a Kentucky Republican, issued a subpoena for an Aug. 11 deposition with Maxwell. Committee leadership rejected the convicted sex trafficker’s request Tuesday for the condition of immunity, according to media reports.

The continued noise led House Speaker Mike Johnson, a Louisiana Republican and Trump ally, to release members early for the six-week August break to avoid votes related to compelling the release of Epstein material.

The DOJ’s unsigned memo on July 7 stated that a review of the files did not reveal an “incriminating ‘client list’” and that no further disclosure of the investigative materials “would be appropriate or warranted.”

Since the memo’s release, the Wall Street Journal revealed that Bondi briefed Trump in May that his name appeared in the Epstein materials. The context in which his name appears remains unknown.

The Journal also reported the existence of a 50th-birthday greeting that Trump drew and wrote for Epstein that featured the outline of a naked woman with Trump’s signature as pubic hair. Trump has denied he made the drawing and sued the Wall Street Journal.

The reports have further fueled calls for the files to be released.

Falling-out between Trump and Epstein

Trump told reporters Tuesday that he had a falling-out with Epstein after the financier began “taking” spa workers, whom Trump said were young women, from his Mar-a-Lago estate. Trump said Epstein “stole” Virginia Giuffre who worked at the Palm Beach, Florida, resort in 2000 at age 16, according to a 2016 deposition.

Giuffre alleged Maxwell and Epstein trafficked her as a teen for illegal sex with influential men, including Britain’s Prince Andrew, who settled with Giuffre and stepped down from his royal duties.

Giuffre became an advocate for victims of sex trafficking. She died by suicide in April.

The Justice Department concluded Epstein harmed more than 1,000 victims.

Epstein was found hanged in August 2019 in his New York City jail cell, where he was awaiting trial on federal sex trafficking charges.

This story mentions suicide.  If you or a loved one are suffering with thoughts of suicide, call or text 988. An online chat option is also available at 988lifeline.org.