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

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

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

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

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

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

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

‘Members of the Senate, this is war’

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

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

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

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

Kaine sponsored the War Powers Resolution alongside Paul.

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

“No one” refuted his point, he said.

Briefings for Congress

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

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

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

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

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

Lindsey Graham again lauds Trump

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

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

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

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

Speaker Johnson says US not at war

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

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

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

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

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

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

Ground troops?

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

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

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

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

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

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

Control of the skies, sinking a ship

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Hegseth bashes media

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

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

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

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

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

Jennifer Shutt contributed to this report.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

‘Blankie’ left on jet

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

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

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

Noem denied the story.

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

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

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

FEMA problems

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

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

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

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

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

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

“Because we appropriated the money!” Ross shouted. 

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

Minneapolis questions

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

The only option for miles

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Big checks, little oversight

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Inner workings

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

‘So much help’

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

‘Government handouts’

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

Some legislators have resisted stronger oversight. 

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Stateline reporter Amanda Watford contributed to this report. 

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

More money on the way

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Audit finds mismanagement

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

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

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

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

 

 

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

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

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

Sex ed funding  

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Federal housing dollars

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Stateline reporter Anna Claire Vollers contributed to this report.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Alabama

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Idaho

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

That perspective changed.

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

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

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

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

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

Oregon

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

North Carolina

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

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

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

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

So she ended up calling a crisis pregnancy center. 

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

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

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

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

Florida

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

No Democrat since Lloyd Bentsen

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

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

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

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

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

‘Judgment Day is coming’

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

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

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

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

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

‘Change won’

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

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

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

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

House races in Texas deliver some surprises

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

North Carolina, Arkansas 

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

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

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

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

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

Jennifer Shutt contributed to this report. 

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

With rising costs for health insurance purchased through the Affordable Care Act, Democrats in the Legislature are proposing another tactic to help more people afford health coverage.

Rep. Tara Johnson (D-Town of Shelby) announced legislation Tuesday that would enable members of the public buy into the state’s BadgerCare Plus health insurance plan.

BadgerCare Plus is Wisconsin’s name for Medicaid and is available to families and individuals with household incomes up to the federal poverty guideline — $15,960 for a single person and $33,000 for a family of three.

Johnson’s bill would expand BadgerCare’s coverage by creating a “public option” — allowing families with higher incomes to pay for the health plan out of pocket. Democrats in Wisconsin have offered similar proposals in the past that have not advanced. At the same time, the idea has been catching on in some other states, Stateline reports, although not all of them are connected to Medicaid. 

“When this law is passed, Wisconsinites will have an affordable option instead of the sky-high premiums and massive deductibles currently available from private insurance carriers,” Johnson said at a news conference in the Capitol Tuesday morning. “Public health care keeps prices down because it is not beholden to insurance company stockholders or bonuses for executives, and those savings will get passed on to Wisconsinites.”

“This will dramatically increase, for a large number of people, the number of affordable insurance options at a time when there is a crisis in affordability generally, and health care is one of the top reasons why,” said Robert Kraig, executive director of the advocacy group Wisconsin Citizens Action.

Sen. Chris Larson (D-Milwaukee) said the bill would provide an affordable health care alternative for people who had relied on plans purchased through the federal marketplace, HealthCare.gov, that was created by the Affordable Care Act. Enhanced subsidies that had lowered the cost of policies bought through the marketplace expired at the end of 2025.

On HealthCare.gov policies, “average premiums more than doubled when Republicans in Congress allowed those enhanced subsidies to expire at the end of last year,” Larson said. The subsidies were eliminated for families with incomes of more than 400% of the federal poverty guideline — around $86,000 for a couple.

For a 55-year-old couple at that income level, the premiums on the second-tier of plans sold at HealthCare.gov would increase “from $601 a month to $2,311 per month this year,” Larson said — or about $20,000 a year.

The legislation would “move us closer to the point where we need to get, where health care is a right for all and anyone can get the care that they deserve without a speck of fear that they are going to go broke just so that they can survive,” Larson said. “The fact that that is an open question right now is shameful for our state. It’s shameful for our country.”

The bill also would allow small businesses with fewer than 50 employees to enroll in BadgerCare plans. Madison chef and restaurateur Evan Danells said some of his employees had relied on ACA plans but were also confronted with increased premiums that many would have trouble being able to afford. Danells is a member of Main Street Alliance, a small business group that has organized support for the ACA among other policies.

“One of the coolest things about having a public option is it allows people to go in and get affordable preventative care,” Danells said. As a result, “they don’t become wards of the state health care system when they’re all of a sudden broke and the problem has snowballed.”

Indiana Hauser of La Crosse said she works two part-time jobs, neither of which provides health insurance. Last year she was able to purchase health coverage for $12 a month with the enhanced subsidies. “This year it went up to $400 a month for worse coverage,” said Hauser, who is active with the advocacy group Citizens Action of Wisconsin.

Hauser said she has life-long health complications due to a traumatic brain injury when she was a teenager. Nevertheless, she said, she has had to go without insurance this year because she cannot afford it.

An affordable community clinic helps her, she added, but many communities don’t have such resources.  While rationing her medications and visits to the doctor, Hauser worries that she’s “one small accident away from a financial crisis,” she said.

“Across the state, there are people and families making life or death decisions, and it doesn’t have to be that way,” Hauser said. “The BadgerCare public option could change my life and the lives of people all across our state.”

Larson and Kraig said that due to changes made by the federal tax- and spending-cut bill that President Donald Trump signed in July 2025, the likely premiums people would pay for BadgerCare under the Public Option haven’t yet been calculated. A 2025 analysis by the Legislative Fiscal Bureau projected premiums could cost about $971 a month, but also noted that a variety of factors could increase or reduce that cost.

According to the Feb. 17, 2025, fiscal bureau memo, “It is possible that the purchase option population could be, on average, less costly, which could make the premium lower” compared with the medical needs of BadgerCare patients who qualify for Medicaid. “If, on the other hand, the purchase option attracts older individuals or individuals with more significant health conditions, the premiums may be similar to, or even higher than, the average cost of BadgerCare Plus coverage.”

With the legislation being introduced after the Assembly has already wrapped up its floor period for 2026, the proposal seems unlikely to advance this year.

“I would say it’s always a good idea to introduce good bills,” Johnson said when asked about the timing of the announcement. Gov. Tony Evers, she noted, earlier Tuesday called for a special session to pass a resolution against gerrymandering the state’s legislative maps.

“We have five days on the calendar in March. We have five days in the calendar in April, I think it’s three days in May,” Johnson said. “There’s no reason that we cannot take up this legislation.”

Then she corrected herself. “Well, there is one reason, and it’s because the speaker chooses not to call us into session,” Johnson said.

“A lot of these bills are sitting in Google Drives,” added Rep. Supreme Moore Omokunde (D-Milwaukee). “All this session, we have bills ready to go. It’s a matter of will they be heard? It’s a matter of what is the appetite to have the debate about them? We know that this is something that Wisconsinites care about. They want us to stay here. They want us to get this done.”

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

Nearly two decades ago, progressives fought to include a so-called public option — a government-run health plan — in the broad health care overhaul known as Obamacare. That effort failed, defeated by heavy lobbying from the insurance industry and opponents who decried it as a government takeover of health care.

But the final Affordable Care Act, which President Barack Obama signed in 2010, didn’t bar states from adding a public option plan to their state-run insurance marketplaces. In recent years, several states have done so — and others might follow as rising health care costs, the expiration of federal subsidies and Medicaid cuts make coverage less affordable and available for millions of Americans.

This year Nevada became the third state, after Colorado in 2023 and Washington in 2021, to add a public option plan to its marketplace. So far, 10,762 people have signed up, according to figures provided by the Nevada Health Authority.

The goal of such efforts, said Christine Monahan, an assistant research professor at the McCourt School of Public Policy at Georgetown University, is to provide an alternative to profit-driven private insurance companies, “and to give people an option that doesn’t have that kind of capitalistic incentive in place.”

The results so far have been mixed, however. It’s still too early to say whether the states’ public option plans, which are public-private partnerships rather than purely government-run, will significantly lower costs for consumers or pay enough to providers to ensure their continued participation.

Meanwhile, other states’ efforts to create public options have stalled. In 2024, Minnesota delayed the creation of a public option amid concerns about the lack of a dedicated funding source. Efforts in Maine and New Mexico also have faltered.

“It’s really too early to see what the right combination of design of a public option is,” said Andrew Shermeyer, a doctoral candidate in health policy at the University of Minnesota and the author of a study on the Colorado plan. “We don’t know what works and what doesn’t. So that’s a real challenge for policy makers.”

Different approaches

As public-private partnerships, the public option plans in Washington, Colorado and Nevada rely on the participation of private insurers as well as health care providers. And they have to compete for customers with the purely private plans offered on the exchanges.

“We all know health insurance is extremely, extremely unaffordable and expensive. So the challenge behind it is you have to find something that’s attractive to consumers,” Shermeyer said. “You have to find something that insurers will comply with, and you have to find something that providers will feel adequately compensated for.”

States have used a combination of carrots and sticks to make sure those things happen.

In Washington state, private insurers that sell plans on the state marketplace can choose to offer the public option plan, which is called Cascade Select, but they don’t have to. To keep costs down and premiums low, the state mandates that participating insurers pay providers within a certain range.

In the first two years that Cascade Select plans were available, many providers were unwilling to participate. So in 2023, Washington began requiring that hospitals contract with at least one public option plan. The change has expanded the availability of Cascade Select plans — as of last year, they were available in every county — and boosted enrollment: Last year, about 30% of Washingtonians who purchased coverage on the marketplace enrolled in a Cascade Select plan, up from 1% in 2021.

Laura Kate Zaichkin, director of market competition and affordability at the Washington Health Benefit Exchange, said that figure is up to 40% this year. In 2021, Zaichkin said, Cascade Select premiums were a bit higher than for many other plans on the exchange. This year, they are about $100 per month cheaper, she said.

Zaichkin said the public option is more important than ever, because of the recent expiration of federal tax credits that had dramatically lowered the costs of purchasing marketplace coverage, as well as looming Medicaid cuts.

“I would say that it is a really important lever,” she said. “It always has been, and it is even more so right now, when individual market coverage is under threat and when customers cannot afford their premiums.”

Unlike in Washington, every private insurer that participates in Colorado’s marketplace must offer versions of the state’s public option plan, which is called the Colorado Option, in every county where it sells its own plans. Colorado Option plans all offer the same benefits across insurance carriers, so companies compete based on premiums, their networks of providers and customer service.

To keep premiums relatively low, participating health insurers are required to negotiate with providers to keep costs down. If state regulators think premiums are getting too high, they can take charge of the negotiations and mandate that hospitals or providers lower their reimbursement rates.

About 14% of marketplace enrollees chose the Colorado Option in 2023 when the plan launched. In 2025, the public option accounted for nearly half of the roughly 282,500 enrollees on the exchange, the state said.

But Julie Lonborg, senior vice president and chief of staff of the Colorado Hospital Association, said limiting payments to providers could end up reducing services and access to care for patients.

“Overall, enrollment continues to grow in the program, so it is having some success from the purchasers,” Lonborg said in an email. “But it is built on a fundamentally flawed policy of rate setting on hospitals that will result in consequences. Hospitals have felt pressured into rate reductions at a time when threats to health care funding are escalating.”

One of the arguments for a public option is that it introduces competition that pushes down premiums for all marketplace enrollees, no matter what plan they choose. But in his study of the Colorado marketplace, researcher Shermeyer said the Colorado Option only lowered premiums for people who were receiving the federal subsidies; unsubsidized enrollees saw higher prices compared with people living in other states.

Kyla Hoskins, a deputy commissioner who oversees the Colorado Option program at the state’s division of insurance, disputes that finding. Hoskins cited other research that found premiums across the state, even for private plans, declined by more than $100 after the Colorado Option was introduced.

She said more people are buying the Colorado Option plan because it’s more affordable and because of its simplicity.

“Your deductibles, your maximum out-of-pocket costs, the amount you pay when you see your primary care [provider] or fill a prescription — that cost sharing is the same no matter which health insurance company is offering the plan,” Hoskins said.

“And I think that clarity that standardization provides, has been a value to consumers,” Hoskins said.

Slow start in Nevada

Like in Washington, insurers in Nevada don’t have to offer a public option plan, called Battle Born State Plans (after the state’s nickname). However, the state has given them a strong incentive to do so by tying it to Medicaid.

Around 75% of Nevada’s Medicaid enrollees receive coverage through managed care. In order to remain eligible for Medicaid managed care contracts, insurers have to submit a bid to offer a public option plan that meets certain requirements.

Those Medicaid contracts are worth “millions if not billions to carriers,” said Stacie Weeks, director of the Nevada Health Authority, which oversees the state’s Medicaid program and its insurance marketplace. “Essentially, this new contractual arrangement leverages the state’s purchasing power with its Medicaid carriers to get a better deal for consumers in the private market.”

To ensure the participation of providers, Nevada’s law requires them to be in-network with at least one public option plan to remain eligible for Medicaid, public employee and workers’ compensation payments, according to the Century Foundation, a liberal-leaning think tank. Instead of regulating reimbursement rates, Nevada hopes to keep premiums low by mandating that they be at least 5% below those of private plans.

Nevertheless, enrollment has been slower than expected.

State officials predicted that around 35,000 people would sign up in the first enrollment period. The actual number is less than a third of that. And so far, only three out of the state’s eight health insurance companies on the state’s exchange have picked up the plan.

“We expect to see this number grow over time as public awareness increases and as Nevadans continue to seek quality coverage options that help reduce their monthly costs, regardless of their income,” Weeks said. She added that many Nevadans automatically reenrolled in their previous health plans, and may not know about the public option yet.

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

The Milwaukee Police Department has explicitly banned officers from using masks or other facial coverings to hide their identities, Milwaukee Common Council members announced on Monday. 

“We met with the police chief, delivered the message of what our constituents were demanding, and he acted. This is about responsiveness, accountability and trust,” Alderperson JoCasta Zamarripa said in a statement that quoted four members of the council, including council president José Pérez.

The statement said the new policy is aligned with the council’s “ICE Out” public safety plan. 

Last month, officials announced a package of local ordinance proposals that aim to prepare the city for a possible surge in Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) operations. The package included a requirement for all ICE agents to be unmasked when interacting with the public in Milwaukee. 

City ordinances could be struck down in court, but people in Milwaukee want to see their local government try to protect against abuses by the federal government, Milwaukee Ald. Alex Brower said.

The department updated the uniform requirements in its standard operating procedure, effective Monday. 

The Milwaukee Police Department procedure states that facial coverings and masks are allowed in certain circumstances. These include but are not limited to the following: protection to prevent exposure to hazardous materials, protection on assignments to prevent the spread of diseases or viruses and protection from cold or extreme weather during assignments that require a staff member to be outdoors for periods of time. 

“Note: Facial coverings and masks shall not be used for the purpose of concealing identity,” the procedure states. 

In a statement to the Examiner, the police department expressed gratitude to elected officials, the Milwaukee Police Association and the Milwaukee Police Supervisors Organization, who worked in collaboration to make the modification to the operating procedure, the unsigned statement said, adding, “We are always better together.”

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

WASHINGTON — Republican lawmakers said Tuesday after classified briefings on Capitol Hill they don’t intend to limit President Donald Trump’s ability to continue the war in Iran, though some said sending in ground troops would be a step too far. 

Democrats argued that military and administration officials shared no clear objectives or exit strategy for the war, making debate and a vote in Congress more important. 

“When there is no set plan … you end up with an endless war, you end up with mission creep, you end up with all kinds of problems,” Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., said. “What’s really needed is a public debate so the American people, who already are very much against this, can see what we have seen.” 

Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., said during an afternoon press conference before the briefing that he doesn’t believe Congress needs to declare or authorize the war.  

“No, I think the president has the authority that he needs to conduct the activities and the operations that are currently underway there,” he said. “As you know, there’s a lot of controversy around, questions around the War Powers Act. But I think the president is acting in the best interest of the nation and our national security interests by ensuring that he’s protecting Americans and American bases and installations in that region, as well as those of our allies.”

Lawmakers received closed-door briefings from Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth, Chair of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. Dan Caine, Secretary of State Marco Rubio and Central Intelligence Agency Director John Ratcliffe.

Tim Kaine, Rand Paul push war powers vote

The Senate is expected to vote Wednesday on a War Powers Resolution co-sponsored by Virginia Democratic Sen. Tim Kaine and Kentucky Republican Sen. Rand Paul that would direct the administration “to remove the United States Armed Forces from hostilities within or against Iran, unless explicitly authorized by a declaration of war or a specific authorization for use of military force.” 

The House will vote later this week, likely Thursday, on a similar proposal from Kentucky Republican Rep. Thomas Massie and California Democratic Rep. Ro Khanna. Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., has said that effort doesn’t have the support to take effect. 

Senate Armed Services Committee Chairman Roger Wicker, R-Miss., said as he was walking out of the afternoon briefing that the Trump administration will not rule out boots on the ground. 

Wicker said he doesn’t believe Congress would need to authorize U.S. troops in Iran, though he declined to answer a question about why he thinks the president holds the authority for a ground war not approved by lawmakers. 

A report from the nonpartisan Congressional Research Service notes that while Article I, Section 8, Clause 11 of the Constitution grants Congress the power to declare war, that authority “has been heavily debated.” 

“The Supreme Court has observed that only Congress has the power to declare war, but the implications of this exclusive assignment are not well-settled,” the report says. “In particular, the relationship between Congress’s power to declare war and the President’s war powers granted under Article II of the Constitution is the subject of significant disagreement.”

‘This is a massive operation and rapidly changing’

Louisiana Republican Sen. Bill Cassidy said he doesn’t “think the American people want to see troops on the ground. I don’t think that’s the case. And although they left open that possibility, it seems not to be something they’re emphasizing.”

Missouri Republican Sen. Josh Hawley said he believes Congress would need to authorize U.S. troops on the ground in Iran, something he’s unlikely to support. 

“I find it difficult to imagine a scenario where I would,” he said. 

Hawley said the classified briefing left the impression the Trump administration’s war in Iran will continue for some time. 

“I think there’ll be a lot more to come, because one of the things I took away from this is, this is a massive operation and rapidly changing,” he said. 

Alaska Republican Sen. Lisa Murkowski said it “was an important briefing that we had today and it is a situation that is clearly evolving rapidly.”

North Dakota Republican Sen. John Hoeven declined to answer a question about whether he would support Trump sending U.S. troops into Iran. 

“Well, again, that’s an option, and if and when it would occur, we could deal with it at that point,” he said. “But I think at this point, there’s no indication of that.”

Oklahoma Republican Sen. Markwayne Mullin said that Hegseth is “not going to limit any options to the president” when asked about the possibility of U.S. troops on the ground in Iran.

Mullin described the role Congress plays in authorizing the administration’s offensive in Iran as “debatable.”

“We’re not going to take away the authority of the president of the United States to be able to be the commander-in-chief. … We don’t need 535 commanders,” Mullin said.

Lindsey Graham ‘never felt better about how this ends’

Arizona Democratic Sen. Mark Kelly, a retired Navy captain, said the level of interceptor stockpiles is a “big concern.”

“We do not have an unlimited supply and the Iranians do have the ability to make a lot of Shahed drones, ballistic missiles, medium-range, short-range. And they’ve got a huge stockpile,” Kelly said. “So at some point, we’re probably already in this, this becomes a math problem. And how can we resupply air defense munitions? Where are they going to come from? How does that affect other theaters?”

The Trump administration pulling from the Indo-Pacific Command, for example, Kelly said, would leave troops in that region of the world “more vulnerable.”

“We don’t have an unlimited supply. They’re shooting a lot of stuff,” he said. “Certainly, the number has gone down somewhat over time. But the math on this currently seems to be an issue.”

Senate Appropriations Committee ranking member Patty Murray, D-Wash., said the administration has yet to ask Congress to provide additional funding for the war. 

Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., exited the briefing saying he “never felt better about how this ends.”

Graham said he spoke with Arab leaders by phone earlier in the day and “they’re going to get in the fight in a more direct way.”

Graham also spoke directly to the cameras, in case Trump was watching, he said, to encourage the president to join Israel in bombing Iranian-backed Hezbollah fighters in Lebanon.

“Not only take the mothership of Iran down, also take the proxy of Hezbollah. Settle the score,” Graham said.

Mike Johnson defends Trump constitutional authority

Johnson said Trump took advantage of “a narrow and unique opportunity” to attack Iran over the weekend, and that he was “well within his constitutional authority to do what he has done.”

“We had counsel from the (Department of Justice) here tonight, who said very well, very clearly — fell just short of citing the specific case law — but explained that this has been the tradition for decades.”

Johnson said the U.S. joint war with Israel in Iran has been “very effective thus far” and described the proposed War Powers Resolution as “dangerous.”

The U.S. mission in Iran “needs to be completed,” he said. “We don’t need Congress getting in the way of that.”

Rep. Nancy Mace, R-S.C., who sits on the House Armed Services Committee, said she is a “no for now” on the Wars Powers Resolution vote later this week.

“But if this thing goes beyond a few weeks, I’m going to have a lot more concerns,” Mace said, adding that boots on the ground “would be a very different conversation.”

“That’s not where we are today. That’s not what I heard in the briefing,” Mace said, declining to provide more details from the classified meeting. “I feel very good and very confident about where we are roughly just over 100 hours into the strikes in this conflict.”

WASHINGTON — Republicans on the U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee mounted unusually blunt criticisms of Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem during a tense five-hour hearing Tuesday, with North Carolina’s Thom Tillis threatening to obstruct the chamber’s business if Noem did not answer questions from his office about immigration enforcement. 

Tillis even revisited a book written by Noem in which she famously detailed shooting a pet dog as well as a goat, comparing her actions in that instance with drawing too-hasty conclusions in the fatal shootings of two U.S. citizens by immigration agents in Minneapolis.

The oversight hearing was Noem’s first appearance on Capitol Hill since the months-long immigration enforcement surge in Minneapolis, during which agents of her department killed the two citizens and the surge was later scaled back amidst a national uproar.

Tillis, a Republican who is retiring rather than seeking reelection this year, focused his critique on Noem’s handling of immigration, while other GOP members raised separate concerns. At times, he raised his voice.

“We expect exceptional leadership and you’ve demonstrated anything but that,” Tillis said. “What we’ve seen is a disaster under your leadership. What we’ve seen is innocent people getting detained that turn out are American citizens.”

He castigated Noem for not admitting her mistake in labeling Renee Good, a poet and mother of three, and Alex Pretti, an intensive care unit nurse, as domestic terrorists. Good and Pretti both died in January from gunshots fired by federal immigration agents.

Tillis called for Noem’s resignation, and threatened that if she did not answer multiple questions submitted by his office, he would hold up en bloc nominations that come to the floor and deny quorum in Senate committees. Tillis’ absence from committee markups could grind those panels’ work to a halt, pausing nominations and party line bills.

Democrats on the panel questioned Noem about the Minneapolis operation, racial profiling by immigration officers that has led to the arrests of U.S. citizens, and whether immigration agents will be at polling locations in the midterm elections.

Noem largely stood by her decisions, and, when she was grilled by senators about the aggressive tactics by her immigration agent, she pivoted to the families behind her, known as angel families, who have had loved ones killed by an immigrant in the country without legal authorization. 

“These poor angel families behind me will never have their children again, that’s one of my motivations every day,” Noem said.

Republicans John Kennedy of Louisiana and Josh Hawley of Missouri quizzed Noem on a $220 million advertising contract and the slow response from the Federal Emergency Management Agency for reimbursements and disaster assistance.

The dog and the goat

Tillis did not ask Noem any questions. Instead, for his full 10 minutes allocated for questions, he said he was giving her a “performance review,” during which he expressed multiple frustrations.

He criticized her handling of the operation in Minnesota.

“The fact that you can’t admit to a mistake, which looks like, under investigation, is going to prove that Miss Good and Mr. Pretti probably should not have been shot in the face and in the back,” Tillis said. 

After Pretti’s death, President Donald Trump instructed Tom Homan, the White House border czar who reports directly to the president and operates outside of DHS’ chain of command, to take over operations in Minneapolis. 

Tillis told Noem that he read her book, in which she details how she shot and killed a 14-month-old dog named Cricket for bad behavior. She also revealed she killed a goat for similar reasons. 

“You decided to kill that dog because you had not invested the appropriate time and training, and then you have the audacity to go into a book and say it’s a leadership lesson about tough choices,” Tillis said.

He also took issue with the goat.

“If you don’t castrate a goat, they behave badly,” he said. 

Research indicates that neutering a goat can lead to lower testosterone levels and mellow out an aggressive goat. 

“My point is, those are bad decisions made in the heat of the moment, not unlike what happened up in Minneapolis,” he said, referring to how quick Noem was to label Pretti and Good as domestic terrorists. 

Slow FEMA relief

Tillis pointed to how a policy Noem started at FEMA, in which she must personally approve any contract that is more than $100,000, has led to delay in his state that is still reeling from Hurricane Helene in 2024.

“This is what incompetent FEMA leadership looks like,” he said. “People are hurting in western North Carolina from the most significant storm they’ve ever experienced.”

Tillis said Noem had “failed at FEMA” and that he believes she is violating the Homeland Security Act of 2002  that he said “expressly prohibits the secretary of Homeland Security from restricting or diverting FEMA resources from the agency’s mission.”

Hawley also brought up an issue with FEMA.

He said following multiple deadly tornadoes in his state, FEMA was helping fund debris removal. Local officials have estimated roughly 10,000 homes qualify for the removal aid, but “some of the conditions that have been placed on the funds by FEMA mean that only (100) or 200 homes out of those 10,000 can actually get access to FEMA debris removal funds.” 

Noem said she would work with his office to address that issue. 

Advertising contract

Kennedy questioned Noem about her decision to award a no-bid contract for her ad campaign that costs $220 million. A ProPublica investigation found that Noem awarded the contract to the husband of former DHS spokesperson Tricia McLaughlin.

“Look, we all have friends who are qualified, I’m not quibbling with that,” Kennedy said. “It troubles me, … a quarter of a billion dollars in taxpayer money when we’re scratching for every penny and we’re fighting over rescission packages, I just can’t agree with.”

Noem said she was not involved in approving the contract. 

‘They should be alive today’

Minnesota Democratic Sen. Amy Klobuchar slammed Noem for the aggressive immigration enforcement operation in her state.

“Two of my constituents, Renee Good and Alex Pretti were killed,” she said. “They should be alive today.”

Klobuchar asked Noem how many federal immigration officers are still in Minneapolis. The Trump administration sent more than 2,000 agents, dwarfing the city’s local police force that stands at roughly 600 officers.

Noem said about 650 immigration agents are still in the city. 

Klobuchar told Noem that she spoke to the parents of Pretti.

“When I spoke to Alex’s parents, they told me that you calling him a domestic terrorist… (was) one of the most hurtful things they could ever imagine was said by you about their son,” Klobuchar said. 

She asked Noem if she wanted to apologize to Pretti’s parents for calling him a domestic terrorist.

“I did not call him a domestic terrorist, I said it appeared to be an incident of domestic terrorism,” Noem said. 

Shutdown and Iran questions

Tuesday was day 17 of a partial shutdown of DHS. Senate Democrats forced the shutdown after the shootings of Good and Pretti.

The department is also now dealing with additional cybersecurity and counterterrorism risks after President Donald Trump ordered airstrikes on Iran.

Though Congress has not passed a fiscal 2026 funding bill for DHS, the department has a separate funding stream, from the tax cuts and spending package Republicans passed last year, to continue immigration enforcement. Nearly all of the department is considered essential, so its employees are continuing to work, some without pay. 

In the days following the Trump administration’s decision to launch an attack on Iran, senators pressed Noem on what security preparations the agency is taking amid the shutdown.

Judiciary Committee Chair Chuck Grassley of Iowa said he was concerned about potential terrorism due to the war in Iran. He asked Noem how she was vetting immigrants and intercepting potential acts of terrorism. 

Noem blamed the Biden administration for concerns of terrorism and said the agency was re-vetting all refugees and Afghan allies who fled to the U.S. after the Biden administration’s chaotic withdrawal from Afghanistan. 

“We are re-vetting some of the individuals and some of the programs that we may have concerns about, looking at social media, also going through those interviews that are necessary for some of our programs that the Biden administration abused and perverted under their time,” Noem said. 

Republican of South Carolina Sen. Lindsey Graham asked Noem if she thought the threat level to the U.S. was up or down when it came to terrorism from Iran. 

Noem said it was up. 

Graham has been vocal in his push for the ousting of the current Iranian government. 

“We’re engaged in military action against the mothership of terrorism, Iran, which I hope will sink pretty soon,” Graham said. 

Alabama Sen. Katie Britt, the top Republican on the appropriations panel that funds DHS, asked Noem what the implications of her agency being shut down are.

Britt raised concern about the shooting in Austin, Texas, over the weekend that is being investigated as a possible act of terrorism. 

“We’re continuing to do that work and will every single day, but we need funding to make sure that all of our law enforcement agencies have the tools they (need) to bring them to justice,” Noem said.

Elections

Ahead of November’s midterm elections, Democrats have raised concerns the administration would send immigration officers to polling locations. 

Noem said Tuesday that elections were up to the states to run, but was evasive when asked to rule out sending DHS agents to monitor polling places. 

Sen. Chris Coons asked Noem if she would issue a directive telling ICE agents to not be at election sites. 

Noem didn’t answer the Delaware Democrat’s question but asked, “Do you plan on illegal aliens voting in our elections?”

It’s already illegal for a noncitizen to vote in a federal election and has only rarely happened. 

Trump is pushing for Congress to pass a law to require proof of citizenship to register to vote in federal elections.

The U.S. Defense Department on Tuesday named four of the six U.S. soldiers killed by an Iranian drone strike, the first U.S. casualties of the war with Iran that President Donald Trump launched over the weekend.

Army Reserve soldiers Capt. Cody A. Khork, 35, of Winter Haven, Florida; Sgt. 1st Class Noah L. Tietjens, 42, of Bellevue, Nebraska; Sgt. 1st Class Nicole M. Amor, 39, of White Bear Lake, Minnesota; and Sgt. Declan J. Coady, 20, of West Des Moines, Iowa, died March 1, a Pentagon statement said.

All were assigned to the 103rd Sustainment Command in Des Moines. They were killed during a March 1 drone attack on a commercial port in Kuwait, a U.S. ally. 

The Defense Department has not released the names of the two other soldiers killed in the strike. The incident remains under investigation, the statement said.

The Pentagon did not mention Iran, but said the soldiers were supporting Operation Epic Fury, the administration’s name for the operation.

Trump and Cabinet officials have struggled since Saturday to articulate a cohesive rationale for the strikes, which U.S. forces conducted with Israel. 

Trump said Tuesday he “forced Israel’s hand” to launch the joint attack, contradicting Secretary of State Marco Rubio’s explanation a day earlier that the U.S. joined an Israeli operation.

The incident marks the second time in a matter of months that Iowa service members have been killed in the Middle East.

A lone gunman associated with ISIS killed two Iowa National Guard members, Sgt. William Nathaniel Howard of Marshalltown and Sgt. Edgar Brian Torres-Tovar of Des Moines, in Syria in December.

WASHINGTON — President Donald Trump said Tuesday he “might have forced Israel’s hand” in launching the war on Iran that has already cost the lives of six American troops. 

Trump’s statement came less than a day after Secretary of State Marco Rubio told reporters the United States joined the campaign to protect American troops after Israel’s planned strike.

“We were having negotiations with these lunatics, and it was my opinion that they were going to attack first,” Trump told reporters. “… and I didn’t want that to happen. So if anything, I might have forced Israel’s hand, but Israel was ready, and we were ready, and we’ve had a very, very powerful impact, because virtually everything they have has been knocked out.”

Trump made the comments prior to a bilateral White House meeting with German Chancellor Friedrich Merz as lawmakers on Capitol Hill scrambled to understand the sudden war. 

Merz said Germany is “on the same page in terms of getting this terrible regime in Tehran away” — though administration officials have maintained the conflict is not about regime change, but rather about destroying Iran’s conventional missile stockpiles and production, and thwarting any nuclear ambitions. 

Iran has launched numerous missiles and drones since the killing Saturday of its Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. The strikes have caused damage across the Middle East, including to the U.S. embassy in Saudi Arabia Tuesday, The Associated Press reported.

During a previously scheduled hearing Tuesday to question Undersecretary of Defense Policy Elbridge Colby on the administration’s national defense strategy, Senate Democrats pressed for the justification for war with Iran. 

Sen. Angus King, an independent of Maine who caucuses with Democrats, homed in on Rubio’s statements Monday that the U.S. joined the war to preempt retaliatory attacks on American troops in the region, following Israel’s planned strikes on Iran’s leadership compound. Earlier, administration officials said U.S. intelligence was heavily involved in planning Israel’s offensive.

“I find it very disturbing that we’re committing this nation to war based upon a decision by … a staunch ally, and I’m a supporter of Israel,” King said. “I don’t think anybody should drive our decision to go to war, but the interest of the United States.”

“The president made our decision,” Colby replied.

GOP falls in line

Congress, meanwhile, is poised to vote this week on a War Powers Act resolution that has drawn limited Republican support to stop Trump’s unilateral military actions in Iran without congressional authorization. 

Lawmakers are largely split along party lines in their support for the military action, with Republicans falling in line behind Trump.

House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., told reporters Monday the measure will likely fail in the House. Rep. Thomas Massie, R-Ky., is the lone Republican sponsor of the House version of the legislation.

Sen. Markwayne Mullin, R-Okla., defended the administration’s initiation of war in Iran and chastised “grandstanding” allegations that Trump broke the law in not first seeking congressional authorization.

“This is the first president in seven presidencies that actually did something about the thorn that constantly came after us. And now you criticize him, you say it’s illegal. It’s not,” Mullin said Tuesday during the Senate Committee on Armed Services hearing.

“How about we say, ‘thank you, Mr. President, for finally getting rid of this nuisance, this murderer, this sponsor of terror,’” Mullin said. 

Virginia’s Kaine says GOP ‘nervous about voting for a war’

Sen. Tim Kaine, D-Va., lead sponsor of the Senate’s War Powers Act bill, criticized Mullin for suggesting “that the angst on this side of the aisle is because we don’t like President Trump.”

“He has misstated that concern. I think I can speak for most of my colleagues who have concerns, and say our concern is this, have we learned nothing from 25 years of war in the Middle East?” Kaine said.

Kaine said during a brief interview that Republicans who support Trump’s war in Iran should put an Authorization for the Use of Military Force, or AUMF, on the floor to formally give it Congress’ stamp of approval. 

“And the fact that there has been a reluctance to put AUMFs on the table tells me that while Republicans don’t want to be contrary to the president, they’re also nervous about voting for a war,” Kaine said. “If you’re nervous about voting for the war, well then, think what that says to the troops who are risking their lives. That anxiety should lead you to question whether it’s a good idea or not.”

Kaine said the 2001 AUMF, which Congress wrote somewhat broadly following the 9/11 terrorist attacks and is still in effect, doesn’t cover Trump’s military actions in Iran.  

“The president has not cited that,” he said. “And we all agree that Iran was not covered by the ‘01 AUMF. It was meant to cover non-state terrorist groups, not sovereign nations.”

Lawmakers were set to receive closed-door briefings on the war from administration officials later Tuesday.

The Joint Finance Committee voted to approve releasing funds for the Department of Public Instruction’s operations after putting it off last month. 

The committee approved the release of $1.75 million, including $750,000 for 2025-26 and $1 million for 2026-27. It is about $250,000 less than what was placed in a supplemental fund during the budget cycle as a part of a deal negotiated between lawmakers and Gov. Tony Evers. Republicans on the budget committee initially were going to cut the funding from the agency, but instead made it es a supplemental appropriation, requiring the JFC to release it before it was available to the agency.

JFC was scheduled to vote on the proposal last month, but the committee delayed action after a report from the Dairyland Sentinel, a nonprofit publication published by longtime GOP strategist Brian Fraley, that the agency spent over $368,000 on its standard setting meeting held at a water park in the Wisconsin Dells in 2024. It acquired the information through open records requests.

After the report and delayed vote, JFC co-chair Rep. Mark Born (R-Beaver Dam) said that lawmakers had been having conversations and having its answers answered by the agency. 

According to information released by DPI Tuesday, the meeting costs totaled about $219,225, which included lodging, meals, travel reimbursement, meeting expenses, laptops and hotspots. The remaining cost was for the work done by Data Recognition Corporation, the vendor DPI works with each year to update the assessment and ensure it is valid, reliable and up to date. The vendor planned and facilitated the meeting and wrote a final report.

The total cost of the standards setting work equated to about $30,740 per grade and subject. Similar work done by DRC for other states has ranged from $48,500 to $94,000 per grade/subject, according to DPI.

The $2 million makes up about 10% of the DPI operating budget, and the agency had warned that it could need to delay recruitment, continue to restrict travel, conference attendance and professional development participation, modify the replacement cycle for IT equipment and lay off staff.

A Legislative Fiscal Bureau memo to the budget committee said that approving just $1.75 million would ensure that there is sufficient funding for the projected staffing costs, but limit the amount available to cover supplies, services, professional development and other costs not directly related to staff.

Chris Bucher, director of communications for DPI, said in a statement that the funding is critical for the agency to serve students, educators, schools and libraries.

“While we received slightly less in the current fiscal year than we requested, our agency will make it through the year without layoffs or additional staffing reductions,” Bucher said. 

The committee voted unanimously to release the funds, though Sen. Kelda Roys (D-Madison) criticized Republicans for not releasing the full $2 million.

“Every time we gather together as a body and there’s an opportunity to do the right thing and allocate money towards anything that helps public education, anything that helps our kids, the Republicans on this committee find a way to not do it, to offer less money than has been requested and needed, to fail once again to give our kids what they need,” Roys said.

Update: This story has been updated to include comment and additional information from DPI.

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

Gov. Tony Evers signed an executive order Tuesday to call the state Legislature into a special session to vote on a constitutional amendment proposal that would ban partisan gerrymandering.

The proposed amendment would include language to expressly prohibit drawing districts that  give a disproportionate advantage or disadvantage to any political party. 

“There are no tricks, no gimmicks, no funny politics here,” Evers said at a press conference. “Just a straight up ban on partisan gerrymandering. Nothing more. Nothing less. I could not have made this vote any easier for the Legislature. With nine months left in the calendar year and the legislative session, we’ve got work to do.”  

The executive order calls for the special session on the proposal to be held at noon on April 14. During his two terms in office, the Legislature’s Republican leaders have repeatedly spurned Evers’ special session calls on a range of issues. 

Evers announced his intention to sign the order at his State of the State address last month. Constitutional amendments must pass two sessions of the state Legislature, then go to voters for consideration. If a proposal were to pass the Legislature in April, the next state Legislature, which could look very different after this year’s November elections, would need to vote on the proposal as well. Evers, who opted against running for office, would also not be in office to advocate further for the proposal.

Wisconsin adopted new state legislative maps in 2024 after the state Supreme Court ruled that the previous maps were an unconstitutional gerrymander and ordered new maps to be implemented. 

The adoption of the new maps did not change the process that Wisconsin uses to draw its legislative maps, which is currently done by state lawmakers. Wisconsin Democrats last held a trifecta in the 2009-2010 legislative session and did not pass legislation to adopt nonpartisan redistricting. In 2011, Wisconsin Republicans, who won a trifecta and took control of the state government, drew the state’s maps to heavily favor the GOP, and the maps drawn in 2021 further entrenched the gerrymander. 

Before passing the current maps in 2024, the state Assembly passed a proposal to implement what Republicans said was an Iowa-style nonpartisan redistricting mode. That proposal led to pushback from Democratic lawmakers, who contended it allowed for too much partisan influence on the process. When it passed the Senate, the bill had been amended to implement maps that would have protected Republican incumbents. Evers vetoed the bill.

Evers said that the maps adopted in 2024 have given each party a chance at winning control and ensured that every vote matters in battleground Wisconsin. 

States must engage in redistricting every 10 years. Wisconsin lawmakers will be in charge of the process next in 2031 and could engage in partisan gerrymandering, Evers said, unless gerrymandering is banned or a new process is adopted.

“If the Legislature doesn’t act now, our maps could go right back to being rigged. Wisconsinites could go right back to living under some of the most undemocratic maps in America,” Evers said. 

Evers added that he’s been “especially worried” due to recent actions being taken at the national level. President Donald Trump has pressured Republican-led states, including Texas, to engage in explicit partisan gerrymandering to ensure Republicans keep the majority in Congress in the upcoming midterm elections. In response, some Democratic-led states, including California, have redrawn or are considering redrawing their lines to combat the impact. 

The Evers proposal does not specify what process lawmakers would need to adopt to prevent  partisan gerrymandering, but leaves that up to lawmakers.

Nick Ramos, executive director of the Wisconsin Democracy Campaign, said at the press conference that the state needs to take redistricting out of lawmakers’ hands altogether and make it a nonpartisan process.

“It’s about fairness. It’s about equity. It’s about honoring the principle that every voice in Wisconsin deserves an equal say, no matter where you live, who you are or who you vote for,” Ramos said. “Gerrymandering is bad public policy, no matter who’s doing it, what flag they wave.” 

Ramos said the constitutional amendment proposal is a “significant nod to one unifying truth that politics should stay out of redistricting from start to finish.” 

“Calling a special session is one thing. Taking meaningful action is another. If this Legislature is serious, they will take this special session and not gavel in and gavel out like they always do,” Ramos said. 

Evers, who is in his final year as governor, has called special sessions on a variety of issues over his time in office including abortion, gun violence and the state budget. The Republican-led Legislature has usually just immediately gaveled in and out of them without taking action or completely rewritten his proposals. 

Evers said that he would seek to raise public awareness of the issue and encourage people to call on their lawmakers to pressure them into not doing the same this time. 

“We’re going to work real hard in the meantime to make sure that the people of Wisconsin are talking to the legislators and making sure that they understand that this is the will of the people,” Evers said. 

Assembly Speaker Robin Vos (R-Rochester) expressed some openness to discussing a proposal to address partisan gerrymandering, but was skeptical about Evers’ proposed constitutional amendment.

“This one-sentence constitutional amendment provides no details as to how this would actually work. But we’re supportive of the governor’s concept and we would be more than happy to negotiate with him to develop a plan to be voted on by the entire Assembly,” Vos said. 

Senate Majority Leader Devin LeMahieu (R-Oostburg) said in a statement Wednesday morning after this story was published that the Senate is “still hard at work preparing for the regular session floor period in March.” The Assembly wrapped up its work for the regular legislative session last month.

“We’ll consider the governor’s special session call after the caucus decides how to handle the dozens of bills and amendments the Assembly passed last week before adjourning for the year,” LeMahieu said.

Last week, Evers said that he had heard some pushback from members of his own party “through the grapevine.” He was joined at the press conference by 10 Democratic lawmakers, though neither Democratic legislative leader was present. Evers said that he hadn’t “taken a poll” but that he is confident that Democrats feel they are in a good position with fair maps. 

In statements on Tuesday, neither Assembly Minority Leader Greta Neubauer (D-Racine) or Senate Minority leader Dianne Hesselbein (D-Middleton) expressly said that they supported Evers’ proposal.

“Many of us as Legislative Democrats served under Republicans’ gerrymandered maps for years,” Neubauer said in a social media post. “We deeply understand the importance of competitive maps and remain committed to supporting a redistricting process where the voters’ voices are heard.”

“I have served in the Legislature under gerrymandered maps created by Republicans and have seen firsthand the damage they do to democracy and to good public policy. The fair maps we passed two years ago have made a difference in Wisconsin,” Hesselbein said. “I am a fighter and my commitment is to make sure the people of Wisconsin have a strong voice in their democracy and that Democrats have the resources and tools to fully participate in whatever redistricting processes may occur in the future.”

Update: This story has been updated to include comment received Wednesday morning from Senate Majority Leader Devin LeMahieu.

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

The national average price of a gallon of regular gasoline topped $3 Tuesday for the first time this year, and is expected to keep going up.

The average price Tuesday was $3.11, up about 11 cents from Monday, according to AAA.

“The pump reaction is not only underway — it’s accelerating,” said Patrick De Haan, head of petroleum analysis for GasBuddy, which tracks prices.

Increases were already on tap even before Saturday’s U.S.-Israel strikes at Iran, as warmer weather usually means more demand and refiners start producing a summer-blend product.

But the attack adds new, powerful momentum to the price surge. The war makes it tough to forecast how long any increases will last or how big they could be. Recent experience does offer some hope that any big spike won’t last.

“While oil markets continue to react to potential tensions in the Middle East, history has shown that the price increases are temporary and quickly fall back,” said Joseph Brusuelas, chief economist and principal at the consulting firm RSM US, on his Real Economy Blog.

President Donald Trump, speaking at a news conference with German Chancellor Friedrich Merz on Tuesday, sought to justify the strikes and said any price hikes would be temporary.

“People felt it’s something that had to be done,” he said. “So if we have a little high oil prices for a little while, but as soon as this ends, those prices are going to drop, I believe, lower than even before.”

Immediate market reaction

The market reaction to the Iran war so far has been swift.

Brent crude oil, considered the global standard, topped $80 a barrel early Monday, up from the low 70s last week.

Some analysts saw prices having the potential to go as high as $100 a barrel.

“The forecasts are wide-ranging from over $100/barrel to lower prices this week on new Iraqi oil hitting the market,” said Matt McCall, founder of NXT Wave Research, an investment and market analysis firm, in a tweet. “I see a spike to start the week…and then it depends on the longevity of the war. A quick war and oil does not stay elevated. What is almost certain is volatility.”

The surge in oil prices fueled an overall slide in U.S. stock markets Tuesday, with the Dow Jones Industrial Average down nearly 2% around midday.

Prices up across states

The increases were felt in state after state Tuesday, according to the AAA gasoline price survey.

The nation’s lowest gasoline prices tend to be in the South, from roughly Mississippi to Texas.

The price of a gallon of regular in Oklahoma, the least expensive of any state, was $2.62 Tuesday, up from about $2.47 Monday.

Other changes in the lowest price states:

• Mississippi: $2.64 Tuesday, $2.55 Monday.
• Kansas: $2.70 Tuesday, $2.57 Monday.
• Arkansas: $2.70 Tuesday, $2.61 Monday.
• Louisiana: $2.72 Tuesday, $2.58 Monday.
• Tennessee: $2.72 Tuesday, $2.61 Monday.
• Kentucky: $2.73 Tuesday, $2.63 Monday.
• Texas: $2.74 Tuesday, $2.62 Monday.

The highest-priced gasoline tended to be in Western states. California has in recent years topped the price chart, and did again Tuesday at $4.67 per gallon, up about 1.7 cents a gallon from Monday.

California’s higher prices are the result of several special factors. It has tough environmental standards, and the state has more trouble compensating for refinery shutdown from interstate pipelines.

It’s more difficult for California to make up refinery shortages from interstate pipelines because of its location.

Other Western states have localized reasons prices stay high, and they tended to be less volatile because of the strikes. Some of the higher state averages Tuesday:

• Hawaii: $4.40 Tuesday, $4.38 Monday.
• Washington: $4.38 Tuesday, $4.37 Monday.
• Oregon: $3.95 Tuesday, $3.92 Monday.
• Nevada: $3.73 Tuesday, $3.70 Monday.

Future prices uncertain

The future path of prices depends on some huge unknowns. The biggest could involve the fate of the Strait of Hormuz, where the Iranians can exercise control. One-fifth of the world’s oil passed through there in 2024, according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration.

The strait is “one of the world’s most important oil chokepoints,” EIA said. Iranian officials said Tuesday the strait is closed, CNBC reported.

Most Iranian oil goes to China. Canada is the top importer of U.S. oil, followed by Mexico and Saudi Arabia, according to EIA. The U.S. sells more oil than it imports.

A prolonged change in Strait of Hormuz activity, or even the threat of change, is arguably already affecting oil prices. 

“Even without a sustained blockade, the new risk of closure is already changing behavior,” De Haan said. He listed ship rerouting, war-risk insurance premiums going up and “freight markets bracing for significant cost increases.”

Bottom line, he said: “Most drivers should prepare for gradual increases this week.”

OTTUMWA, Iowa — Leisa and Kent Walker recently received a disturbing notice: The private company managing their son’s Medicaid coverage intends to cut nearly 40% of what it spends for caregivers who help him live at home instead of in a nursing home.

Sam Walker, 35, has severe autism and other disabilities. He is deaf and cannot speak. Sometimes when he’s frustrated, he hits himself or others.

Medicaid provides about $8,500 a month for health workers who visit his apartment in the basement of his parents’ home. The staffers help him with everyday tasks, including dressing, bathing, and eating. They also take Walker on outings, such as dining at restaurants, volunteering at Goodwill, and exercising at a recreation center or on park trails. They stick to a strict routine, which soothes him.

His parents say that without the in-home services, their son would need to move to a specialized residential facility in another state. Sending him away would break their hearts and cost taxpayers much more money. They strive to keep him home because they know change makes him anxious.

“The last thing I want is to put him into some kind of care facility, where he’ll just get kicked out,” said his mother, Leisa. The Iowa Department of Health and Human Services did not respond to KFF Health News’ questions about the Walkers’ case.

Federal cuts raise pressure

Patient advocates say state administrators in Iowa appear to be reining in Medicaid spending by cutting what are known as home and community-based services for people with disabilities, and they’ve heard of multiple families facing battles like the Walkers’.

Disability rights advocates expect the pressure to intensify as states respond to reductions in federal Medicaid funding called for under the Trump administration’s signature tax and spending law, which passed last year.

June Klein-Bacon, CEO of the Brain Injury Association of Iowa, said the cuts and proposed rule changes appear to be part of a quiet attempt to save money in response to the state’s budget deficit and expected reductions in federal Medicaid funding.

Medicaid, jointly financed by the federal and state governments, covers people with low incomes or disabilities. Walker is one of nearly 2 million people served by “Medicaid waiver” programs, which pay for care that allows people with disabilities or who are at least 65 to live at home.

Unlike most parts of Medicaid, waiver programs are optional for states. Idaho’s governor noted that fact in January, when he suggested legislators consider cutting them. Disability rights groups fear other states will do the same. Leaders in Colorado, Missouri, and Nebraska have considered such cuts this year.

Leisa Walker has heard Trump administration officials claim the national Medicaid cuts are intended to reduce waste, fraud, and abuse. That’s not how it will play out, she said. “These are real people, real families, and this causes real suffering when you do this to people,” she said. “It’s a very scary time.”

Iowa Total Care, a private insurance company that manages Sam Walker’s Medicaid benefits, intends to cut his in-home care coverage by about $3,200 per month, his mother said. Company leaders told a judge they are following state officials’ direction, but they did not dispute Leisa Walker’s math.

Walker has been on the waiver program for three decades. It covers assistance from workers known as “direct service providers” — one of whom has been with him for 25 years. His parents receive no pay for the hours they spend caring for him when the aides aren’t working.

On a February morning, Leisa and Kent Walker drove an hour and a half to Des Moines for an appeal hearing. An administrative law judge sat behind a wooden desk in a conference room as the Walkers and their lawyer faced off against three representatives from Iowa Total Care, a subsidiary of the national insurer Centene Corp.

Leisa testified that her son is 6 feet tall and weighs 230 pounds. Although he knows some sign language, he has trouble communicating, she said. When he becomes frustrated or his routine is interrupted, he sometimes wails and hits himself or other people. “It’s devastating to watch,” she testified.

He’s not a bad person, she said. “He doesn’t understand how strong he is.”

She said her family would try to keep his main caregiver employed under the planned Medicaid reduction but would have to drop others who cover nights and weekends. She said no residential facility near their southern Iowa home could address her son’s complicated needs. She said a case manager told her that a Florida facility might be the closest one that could safely handle him.

Leisa Walker testified that the state’s Medicaid program would pay about $22,000 per month to put him in an institution, more than double what the program spends on his home care.

Sam Walker’s longtime psychiatrist, Christopher Okiishi, testified that Walker’s family and their support staff spent years developing a “fragile” but stable existence for him.

Lori Palm, a senior manager for Iowa Total Care, testified that Sam Walker gets about 16 hours of daily assistance financed by Medicaid. Palm said much of that time amounts to “supervision.” She said state officials recently advised her company that the program should pay mainly for “skill-building” time, not supervision.

The Walkers showed the judge a 2018 document in which a previous Iowa Medicaid director stipulated that supervision of people with disabilities is an allowable service for workers paid under the program.

Judge Rachel Morgan asked the Iowa Total Care representatives if the recent policy change was made in writing by the state Department of Health and Human Services. They said it was not and that they couldn’t specify who at the department had given them the new guidance.

The judge suggested during the hearing that for someone like Sam Walker, learning to regulate emotions could be an important form of skill-building. Three days later, the judge ruled in the Walkers’ favor, writing that the insurer’s attempt to cut care hours was improper. The insurer appealed the decision to the director of the Iowa Department of Health Human Services, who could overrule it. The dispute could eventually wind up in district court.

Iowa Total Care and the state Department of Health and Human Services did not respond to questions about the reports that many other Iowans with disabilities face reductions in care hours covered by Medicaid. Department spokesperson Danielle Sample said in an email that the agency supports home and community-based services, which, she noted, help “states save money by avoiding expensive long-term facility care.”

Spokespeople for the federal Department of Health and Human Services, which oversees Medicaid nationally, did not respond to a request for comment on the issue.

Medicaid waiver programs started in the 1980s, after President Ronald Reagan heard about an Iowa girl with a disability who was forced to live in a hospital for months because Medicaid wouldn’t pay for home care. The Republican president thought it was outrageous that the girl, Katie Beckett, had to live that way, even though home care would have been cheaper.

Members of Congress approved allowing states to use their Medicaid programs to pay for in-home care. But they made the change optional, to offer states flexibility and encourage innovation.

Designating such spending as optional “waiver programs” also made the change more politically palatable, said Kim Musheno, senior director of Medicaid policy for The Arc of the United States, which represents people with intellectual and developmental disabilities.

Prospects were much different for babies born with serious disabilities before the change, Musheno said. “Doctors instructed families to forget they existed, and to put them in an institution.”

Waivers have been cut before

All states have Medicaid waiver programs, but benefits and the number of people covered vary significantly. Applicants often wait months or years to get into the programs because of limited funding. More than 600,000 Americans were on waiting lists or “interest lists” for waiver services in 2025, according to KFF, a health information nonprofit that includes KFF Health News.

Disability rights advocates and care providers have fought for decades to maintain funding for the programs, but a national leader said the threat feels especially severe now.

“When Medicaid is cut, people with disabilities are at the center of the impact,” said Barbara Merrill, CEO of the American Network of Community Outcomes and Resources, which represents agencies that care for people with intellectual disabilities or autism.

That’s what happened after Congress reduced Medicaid funding in 2011, according to a recent paper published by Health Affairs.

States could again rein in waiver programs by limiting enrollment, reducing covered services, or cutting pay for caregivers, who already are in short supply.

However, states that try to cut the in-home care programs could face legal challenges, Musheno said. The U.S. Supreme Court declared in 1999 that people with disabilities have a right to live outside of institutions if possible. The decision, in the case of Olmstead v. L.C., has been cited in lawsuits against states that fail to provide care options apart from nursing homes and similar facilities.

Several Iowans who belong to a Facebook group for Medicaid participants have posted in recent weeks that their families were notified of impending cuts in coverage of home care services for people with disabilities.

Sam Walker’s main caregiver, Andy Koettel, has worked with him since Walker was in fourth grade. Koettel, who works full-time, knows how to keep Walker calm in most situations and soothe him during a blowup. Their relationship took years to build, and it is a key reason Walker can continue to live at home with his parents, Koettel said.

“If I was not there, it would be incredibly difficult for all of them,” he said.

Editor’s note: This article has been updated following the day’s ceremonies. 

COLUMBIA — Thousands of mourners came to South Carolina’s capital Monday to say “thank you” to the Rev. Jesse Jackson, the iconic civil rights figure whose activism helped change a nation.

Jackson died Feb. 17 at his home in Chicago at age 84. Though never an elected official himself, he inspired generations of Americans through his historic 1984 and 1988 campaigns for president. Two of his sons became congressmen: former U.S. Rep. Jesse Jackson Jr. and U.S. Rep. Jonathan Jackson of Illinois.

But it was at a segregated library in Greenville in 1960, while as a college student home from summer break, that their father’s leadership in the Civil Rights Movement began.

Both inside the Statehouse and later at a church ceremony, the audience declared “I am somebody” — the iconic phrase Jackson used to encourage and empower youth, whether with children on Sesame Street or to open a music festival in a Los Angeles coliseum.

“From the streets of South Carolina to the global stage, he carried a message rooted in faith and committed to expanding opportunity for all,” reads the program for a Statehouse ceremony “welcoming home a son of South Carolina.”

The tribute in his home state began with a mile-long procession of his casket on a horse-drawn wagon from Leevy’s Funeral Home to the Statehouse. On top of the dome the flags flew at half-mast in his honor from sunrise to sunset. His closed casket, draped with an American flag, was brought into the Statehouse shortly before 10 a.m.

By then, people had already been standing in line for nearly two hours.

They included Camden residents Shirley Stanley Gorham, 79, and Mary Stanley, 78, who attended the 1963 March on Washington, where the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. made his “I Have a Dream” speech. Jackson, also in the crowd, later marched alongside King and witnessed his 1968 assassination in Memphis.

Gorham’s daughter, Theresa Allen, said the voices of King and Jackson gave her hope and a belief in equality.

She came to the Statehouse to give him one last “ginormous ‘thank you’ for his service,” Allen, also of Camden, told the SC Daily Gazette. “Being here today is also saying to him, although you earned your wings, we’re still here to be that voice for you.”

Gentarra Williams, 30, of Columbia, watched the procession with her mother and 1-year-old nephew Jordan.

“We get to witness history,” Williams said. “I want my nephew to see a history book and see this picture and say, ‘Everybody, I was there. I saw it.’”

Jackson’s stop at the Statehouse was a “high and unusual honor,” said his eldest daughter, Santita Jackson.

He’s among only a dozen or so people to lie in honor in the Statehouse and likely the first who was not an elected official.

Santita Jackson thanked Gov. Henry McMaster for the honor. The Republican governor approved the family’s request after the office of U.S. House Speaker Mike Johnson denied a similar request that Jackson lie in state beneath the U.S. Capitol Rotunda. McMaster did not attend the morning ceremony but later stopped by the casket to pay his respects.

Monday’s events are part of a nationwide opportunity for people to say goodbye to Jackson, who learned directly from King before mentoring others and launching the Rainbow PUSH Coalition in Chicago that helped create the modern Democratic Party.

Celebrations of his life are also scheduled in Chicago and Washington, D.C.

It’s more fitting that Jackson lie in state in South Carolina anyway, said Jesse Jackson Jr.

“Our father was a South Carolina native. He began his fight for civil rights here. He brought meaningful change back to benefit his home state,” he said.

‘I am somebody’

Ahead of the doors opening to the public around noon, more than 100 people gathered inside the Statehouse to celebrate “a life well-lived and a job well-done,” said Rep. Jermaine Johnson, a Hopkins Democrat who’s running for governor.

Johnson, who emceed the hour and-a-half ceremony, was among scores of Black politicians, businessmen and activists who credited Jackson with paving the way for their successes.

Underscoring Jackson’s outsized impact was the celebrity-attendance at the invitation-only ceremony.

They included U.S. Rep. Jim Clyburn; former U.S. Rep. Andrew Young of Georgia, a close confidante of King during the Civil Rights Movement; and University of South Carolina women’s basketball coach Dawn Staley. Greg Mathis, of TV fame for the show “Judge Mathis,” credited Jackson with telling him to take his TV opportunity.

Legislators past and present attending both events included former Rep. James Felder. In 1970, he, I.S. Leevy Johnson and the late Herbert Fielding made history as the first Black South Carolinians elected to the House since 1902.

Felder said he first met Jackson when their schools took a field trip to the Statehouse. As Black students, however, they had to stay outside.

“He stood in the force of history and changed its course,” Felder said.

Clyburn said he too first met Jackson in high school. The two played for rival schools in football and basketball.

Jackson was his school’s starting quarterback, while Clyburn was “a prolific benchwarmer,” he said.

But Clyburn befriended Jackson’s mother, who supported Clyburn’s political career from the get-go. At her urging, Clyburn and Jackson became friends, and eventually their families grew so close that their children became friends, too.

“This is a friendship that spans generations,” Clyburn said.

State Rep. Chandra Dillard, a Greenville Democrat, and Greenville Mayor Knox White talked about Jackson’s work in his hometown.

That included organizing a July 1960 sit-in at the then-segregated Greenville County Public Library. The arrest of the Greenville Eight, as the group of students became known, prompted the library’s integration several months later.

Nearly half a century later, in 2005, Jackson led a march in his hometown to honor Martin Luther King Jr.’s birthday, as a way to highlight Greenville County’s status as the nation’s last to recognize MLK Day as a holiday for public workers. The County Council voted the next month to make MLK Day a holiday starting in January 2006.

That was six years after MLK Day became a permanent state holiday as part of a compromise that brought the Confederate flag off the Statehouse dome and put it on a 30-foot flagpole beside a monument along Columbia’s main thoroughfare. It was a compromise that neither Jackson nor the NAACP supported.

Jackson was back in the Statehouse in July 2015 to watch the Legislature vote to remove the battle flag from Statehouse grounds for good. He was among those who called for the flag to come down after an avowed white supremacist killed nine people at a historic Black church at the conclusion of a Wednesday night Bible study.

“He identified with the leftover, the lowdown and the mistreated,” Dillard said. “And he gave them a home by telling them that they were somebody.”

Because of him, “little boys like myself are able to say, ‘I am somebody,’” said Sen. Karl Allen, a Greenville Democrat and friend of Jackson’s.

Allen and politicians who followed his speech repeated Jackson’s mantra, declaring with the crowd: “I am somebody.”

Jackson often cited those words from a 1950s poem by an Atlanta pastor.

During a nearly three-hour memorial at Brookland Baptist in West Columbia, Jesse Jackson Jr. led the crowd of hundreds in a roaring call and response of the words he father often repeated and adapted.

“Respect me,” Jackson Jr. said, as the crowd chanted back each phrase. “Protect me. Never neglect me. I am somebody.”

Those inspirational phrases, as well as his father’s use of them, were more than political, he said.

“I believe dad’s contribution is psychological,” he said. “That ‘I am somebody’ restores the hope of a people who did not believe in themselves.”

Other civil rights leaders sharing their memories of Jackson included Cleveland Sellers, the former president of Voorhees College, a historically Black private school in Denmark.

Sellers worked as Jackson’s campaign coordinator for southeastern states. Their early activism required sacrifice, he said.

During the 1960s, peaceful protests in the South landed people in jail on trumped up charges, put them in harm’s way and often took them away from their families. But Jackson did it anyway, said Sellers, who also paid a price. He was the only person imprisoned for what became known as the 1968 Orangeburg Massacre, when state troopers killed three and injured 28 students who were protesting a whites-only bowling alley. Sellers, among the injured, received a one-year sentence for inciting a riot.

A formal apology from the state took 35 years, issued by Gov. Mark Sanford.

“It doesn’t look easy,” Sellers said. “It never was easy.”

Santita Jackson also talked about the family side of her father, who often brought her and her siblings with him on trips. He was daddy first, she said, before singing “The Blood Will Never Lose Its Power” with the church choir’s backing.

Jackson’s children urged the audience to continue working toward the dream of equality.

“We thank God for this king, this son of South Carolina, this great man who will live forever and ever and ever, as long as you call his name and as long as you don’t just remember him but resemble him,” said Santita Jackson.

“Do the work,” she finished.