Thousands of protesters marched up State Street and past the Wisconsin Forward statue at the state Capitol on Saturday. (Henry Redman | Wisconsin Examiner)

It was an encouraging week in Wisconsin. The state Supreme Court finally invalidated a cruel 1849 abortion ban, and Gov. Tony Evers declared victory after he and state legislative leaders reached a deal on the state budget he signed in the early morning hours on Thursday that adds back some badly needed support for schools and child care. The budget deal is not what a lot of Democrats and advocates wanted, but it’s better than the brutal austerity Republicans in the Legislature have imposed in the last several budget cycles. Most encouragingly, the end of gerrymandering forced Republicans to negotiate, since they needed Democratic votes in the Senate to get the budget passed.

Some Democrats still refused to vote ‘yes” on the budget. They pointed out that, while it includes a significant boost for special education, it leaves schools struggling with zero general state aid. A majority of school districts will see revenue go down, and most will have to beg local property owners to raise their own taxes. To make matters worse, the Trump administration is freezing billions in promised aid to K-12 schools. 

Child care advocates who fought for desperately needed state support got about one-quarter of the aid Evers had originally proposed. Some were relieved, but others told Examiner Deputy Editor Erik Gunn that it’s just not enough to save centers from going out of business and parents from losing access to care.

The health care outlook is also bleak. With the feds poised to make Medicaid cuts that could cause 60,000 Wisconsinites to lose health care, the state budget fails to expand Medicaid and won’t even cover postpartum care — making us one of only two states to refuse health care to low-income mothers of newborns.

The worrisome backdrop to all of this is the federal budget plan President Donald Trump and Republicans are pushing through Congress that simultaneously runs up giant deficits and takes an ax to safety net programs on a scale we’ve never before experienced. 

The massive bill that passed the U.S. Senate this week slashes health care and nutrition assistance and will lead to the closure of rural hospitals, decimate green infrastructure projects that have been a boon to Wisconsin and will make life harder and more expensive for most people — all to funnel millions of dollars in tax cuts to the richest Americans and to fund a chilling escalation of a militarized immigration police force. 

Our own U.S. Sen. Ron Johnson threatened to vote against the House version of the bill, which was projected to increase the deficit by $2.4 trillion, because, he said, the deficits it created were “mortgaging our children’s future.” But Johnson then voted for the Senate version, which ratchets up the deficit even more, to $3.3 trillion. So much for the self-described “numbers guy.” Kowtowing to Trump and making permanent the tax cuts Johnson personally benefits from was more important to him than his alleged concern about deficits.

It makes sense that much of the news about the Republican budget deal has centered around the devastating health care cuts and the ballooning federal deficit. But the $170 billion in the budget for immigration enforcement is sure to change the landscape of the United States — escalating raids, deportations without due process and a massive new system of private detention centers on the model of the detention camp in a Florida swamp that apparently thrilled Trump when he visited it during congressional budget deliberations.

Brace yourself for the impact of the supercharged ICE budget. Unlike Texas — where terrorized immigrant workers are staying home after raids, causing farmers to fear they’ll  go under as their labor force disappears — we haven’t experienced big workplace raids in Wisconsin. If ICE has a lot more manpower, that could change.

I spoke this week with a dairy farmer in the Western part of the state who reported that, despite the terrifying videos circulating online of violent arrests by masked immigration agents, his employees are carrying on as usual, coming to work, going out, not changing their plans. “We haven’t had any raids on dairy farms in Wisconsin,” he pointed out. 

It’s eerie how normal life continues to be in rural Wisconsin, where 70% of the labor on dairy farms is performed by immigrant workers, almost all of whom lack legal documents to live and work in this country, because Congress has never created a visa for year-round, low-skilled farmwork. The farmer I spoke with said he had just returned from watching a soccer match among immigrant workers and everyone was in a good mood.

He added that officials in Trump’s agriculture and labor departments have repeatedly reassured an industry group he’s part of that the administration understands how dependent employers are on their immigrant workers and that they don’t want mass deportation to harm them.

Wisconsin dairy farmers and other employers are hoping Trump continues to be influenced by the people in his administration who tell him he shouldn’t destroy the U.S. agriculture, construction and hospitality industries. They felt encouraged by Trump’s recent statement that “we’re going to take care of our farmers and hotel workers,” and his claim that he’s working on deportation exemptions for whole classes of immigrant workers who don’t have authorization, but on whom U.S. industries rely.

But the Stephen Miller wing of the administration doesn’t care about any of that. 

The whole narrative promoted by Miller, Trump’s anti-immigrant deputy chief of staff, Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem and Trump himself, that the U.S. is suffering an “invasion” by a large number of immigrants who commit violent crimes is nonsense. Immigrants commit crimes at lower rates than U.S. born citizens. They are an absolutely essential part of the U.S. economy. And they are loved and valued members of our communities. Most of the people the Trump administration has been rounding up have never been convicted of any crime, let alone violent crime. They are landscapers, roofers, farmworkers, students, parents driving home from work — just like the  people Trump claims he is going to protect. As the administration ramps up its program to incarcerate and deport them, with a militarized push on a scale our country has never seen, Trump is trying to have it both ways — reassuring employers that he won’t target the “good” immigrants who work for them, while peddling the lie that there are tons of “bad” immigrants who deserve to be kept in cages in an alligator-infested swamp. 

The idyllic, peaceful atmosphere in Wisconsin, where we feel far away from violent kidnappings by unidentified, masked federal agents, could change in a dramatically dark fashion once the ICE receives the tens of billions of new dollars in the Republicans’ federal budget plan. We saw the showy arrest of Judge Hannah Dugan and immigrants who, trusting the legal system, showed up for their court dates in Milwaukee. We saw the needlessly cruel forced departure of Milwaukee teacher’s aide Yessenia Ruano and her U.S.-born little girls back to El Salvador — the country Ruano fled after her brother was murdered there by gang members and where she felt her life was threatened.

With tens of billions of dollars in new money to spend and quotas to meet for its mass deportation program, ICE could begin rounding up the hardworking immigrants who keep our dairy industry going, in parts of the state that overwhelmingly vote for Republicans.

That spectacle, along with the hideous cuts to health care, education, food assistance and other programs that make life livable in Wisconsin, will surely provoke a backlash against the politicians who enabled it. Let’s hope it’s not too late.

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

NEW YORK, NEW YORK - JUNE 24: New York mayoral candidate, State Rep. Zohran Mamdani (D-NY) speaks to supporters during an election night gathering on June 24, 2025. Mamdani was announced as the winner of the Democratic nomination for mayor in a crowded field in the City’s mayoral primary to choose a successor to Mayor Eric Adams, who is running for re-election on an independent ticket. (Photo by Michael M. Santiago/Getty Images)

The run-away success of 33-year-old Democratic Socialist candidate Zohran Mamdani in the New York City mayor’s race shook the political establishment across the country. In Wisconsin, where Democrats are hoping to regain control of at least one legislative chamber in 2026, and where Democratic Gov. Tony Evers has not yet announced whether he’ll seek a third term, Mamdani’s overthrow of the uninspiring establishment candidate and former Gov. Andrew Cuomo should trigger some serious thinking about how Democrats win in the Donald Trump era, and who they represent.

On Wednesday, the morning after the New York City primary, the Republican Party of Wisconsin put out a press release attempting to connect Mamdani to Rebecca Cooke, the Democrat planning to run in a rematch race against U.S. Rep. Derrick Van Orden in Wisconsin’s 3rd Congressional District. The through-line between Mamdani and Cooke is that Sen. Bernie Sanders has endorsed both candidates. The Wisconsin GOP seized on what it saw as a political opportunity to defend Van Orden in a statement bashing “radical Rebecca” and asking: “Does Democrat political operative Rebecca Cooke agree with her fellow Bernie endorsed candidate on his radical positions? … Keep in mind, President Trump carried WI-03 by 8 points just last year.”

Cooke, contrary to Republican campaign propaganda, is a middle-of-the-road Democrat who earned the endorsement of the Blue Dog Coalition, the most conservative Democratic group in the U.S. House. She certainly agrees with Mamdani that the housing crisis and high prices are key issues for working class voters, but she’s unlikely to support his bolder proposals like publicly owned grocery stores. And Wisconsin Republicans are wrong to think they can easily beat Democrats by accusing them of being “radical” and tying them to Mamdani and Bernie Sanders.

The real radical in the 3rd Congressional District is Van Orden, a MAGA diehard who voted to take away medical care and nutrition assistance from his own constituents, and who likes to make a spectacle of himself, yelling at pages in the U.S. Capitol and mocking Democrats who expressed grief after the assassination of a state legislator in Minnesota.

It seems likely that by 2026, when the “big, beautiful” destruction of public goods from Medicaid to the Forest Service to infrastructure and education to pay for tax cuts for the ultra-wealthy have begun to bite, voters will have had more than enough of that brand of radicalism.

Wisconsin voters have a strong independent streak. 

Bernie Sanders beat Hillary Clinton in the 2016 presidential primary here by 13.5 percentage points. Sanders’ anti-establishment, progressive populist message resonated particularly strongly with voters in the 3rd District, in the same counties that ultimately went for Donald Trump that year and again in 2024. 

As Democrats in our swing state try to figure out how to win again, they should take a lesson from the voters in New York City who rejected the arrogant and deeply compromised Cuomo and chose an inspiring progressive populist, catapulting him to leadership of a new generation of Democrats. 

That doesn’t mean Mamdani would win in the 3rd District, or that he’s the model for Democratic candidates everywhere. But it does say something that he triumphed over his detractors from both political parties despite their money and clout, by connecting directly with voters who were worried about housing and high prices. Like both Sanders and Trump, Mamdani presented an alternative to the political establishment and listened actively to voters’ actual concerns. He bravely stood up to big money and stale conventional wisdom. He recognized the urgency of the moment. He leveraged the enthusiasm of young people and beleaguered working people who feel overlooked. He inspired people. He was a breath of fresh air.

What does that mean for Wisconsin? 

This week the latest Marquette Poll reported that 55% of voters don’t want Evers to run for a third term as governor. Various political commentators have compared Evers to ex-President Joe Biden, warning that at 73 (almost a decade younger than Biden) he might be too old to win. The poll helped fuel a new round of that sort of speculation.

But the question for Democrats is not whether Evers should run again. Presented with no alternative, 83% of Democratic voters told Marquette pollsters they want Evers. 

The real question is, what is the party’s vision for its own future and the future of our state? For a long time, Democrats in Wisconsin have lacked a bench. If Evers decides not to run, there is no obvious candidate to take his place. Meanwhile, Evers is currently engaged in backroom negotiations with Republican Assembly Speaker Robin Vos on the state budget. Embarrassingly, Democratic leaders in the Legislature are not included in those talks and appear not to know what’s being traded behind closed doors. 

Asked whether she thinks the closed door sessions are OK, Senate Minority Leader Diane Hesselbein told reporters, “I think this is probably normal. I’ve talked to other majority and minority leaders in the past, and this is kind of how it’s happened in the past.”

That’s it?

As legislative Democrats conduct what some have called a dress rehearsal for real power, preparing to step into the majority for the first time in more than 15 years, it’s not clear how they will govern. Will they still let a Democratic governor call all the shots in budget negotiations? Will they play hardball if a Republican takes Evers’ place — following the example of the current Republican majority and blocking every initiative the governor proposes and seizing his powers whenever they get a chance? What are their bottom-line issues? How will they transform the lives of the people of our state? 

We badly need a more functional government and a more cohesive Democratic Party in Wisconsin.

More than anything, we need bold, progressive leadership that articulates a strong vision for a government that serves the interests of the majority of voters, not just rich people and insiders. Mamdani showed that there is real hunger for that in the electorate. That should be an inspiration to Wisconsin’s future leaders.

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

Local advocacy organization JOSHUA held a prayer vigil outside Green Bay Correctional Institution. | Photo by Andrew Kennard for Wisconsin Examiner

Wisconsin Gov. Tony Evers included a prison accountability office in recommendations for the upcoming state budget. That proposal was tossed out by the state Legislature, along with hundreds of others made by Evers. And so far, prison reform advocates haven’t found a Republican sponsor for a separate bill. 

The proposed Office of the Ombudsperson for Corrections would conduct investigations, inspect prison facilities and make recommendations to prisons in response to complaints. The proposal would cost about $2.1 million from 2025-2027. 

Deaths of prisoners, staffing problems and lawsuits have drawn attention to serious problems in Wisconsin’s prison system. 

“How many more millions of dollars are we going to spend in fighting lawsuits, dealing with litigation?” said Susan Franzen of the Ladies of SCI. The prison reform advocacy group wants to see independent oversight of the Wisconsin Department of Corrections. 

“We’re willing to spend that money, but we’re not willing to take a million dollars to put something in place that can help start addressing these things and eventually get proactive, so we don’t have all this litigation going on against the Department of Corrections,” Franzen said.

“Unfortunately, [Evers] sends us an executive budget that’s just piles full of stuff that doesn’t make sense and spends recklessly and raises taxes and has way too much policy,” Joint Finance Committee co-chair Rep. Mark Born (R-Beaver Dam) said in May, after the committee killed more than 600 items in Evers’ budget proposal. “So, we’ll work from base and the first step of that today is to remove all that policy… and then begin the work of rebuilding the budget.”

Meanwhile, the Wisconsin Department of Corrections has already partnered with Falcon Correctional and Community Services, Inc., a consulting and management firm, for a third-party review. 

The Falcon partnership includes a comprehensive study of the Division of Adult Institutions’ health care program, behavioral health program, correctional practices and restrictive housing practices, the Examiner reported. The study was projected to take six months. 

What Republican lawmakers are saying

In February, Gov. Tony Evers laid out a plan for changes to the prison system, including closing Green Bay Correctional Institution and updating Waupun Correctional Institution.

Rep. Jerry O’Connor (R-Fond Du Lac), vice chair of the Assembly Committee on Corrections, said “our first priority” is addressing staff shortages in various areas, ranging from guards to social workers. 

For the most recent pay period, the DOC reported a vacancy rate of 16% for correctional officers and sergeants at adult facilities. Columbia Correctional Institution has the highest vacancy rate among adult facilities, at 35.4%. Waupun and Green Bay Correctional Institutions have vacancy rates over 20%. 

The second priority O’Connor listed in an email to the Examiner is the hundreds of millions of dollars needed for facility reorganization. 

“Based on the pressing financial requests for address[ing] critical staffing shortages and housing issues, I do not see [the governor’s recommendation for an ombudsperson office] getting passed or funded,” O’Connor said.

Senate President Mary Felzkowski (R-Tomahawk) criticized the potential structure of the ombudsperson’s office, Wisconsin Public Radio reported in February. 

“De facto lifetime appointments (which the ombudsperson appears to be), almost a dozen new bureaucrats, and millions of dollars are not creative solutions,” Felzkowski said, according to WPR.

Would the ombudsperson be independent? 

To Franzen, “it feels like we’re back to square one, with the original plan of trying to get a bill, and we’ll keep trying,” she said. 

Ladies of SCI Executive Director Rebecca Aubart said she is still hopeful about finding a Republican to sponsor an ombudsman office. 

Aubart said she’s heard support for oversight of the DOC, , “but it just appears that nobody’s willing to stick their neck out to be the one to sponsor it,” she said. 

The Examiner reported in October that 20 states had an independent prison oversight body. Michele Deitch, director of the Prison and Jail Innovation Lab, wrote about independent oversight in an essay published by the Brennan Center in 2021. 

“They can identify troubling practices early, and bring these concerns to administrators’ attention for remediation before the problems turn into scandals, lawsuits, or deaths,” Deitch wrote. “They can share best practices and strategies that have worked in other facilities to encourage a culture of improvement.”

The proposed Office of the Ombudsperson for Corrections was described in a summary of the governor’s corrections budget recommendations. It would be attached to the Department of Corrections. 

Officials in the Evers administration said the office would operate in a “‘functionally independent’” manner, Wisconsin Public Radio reported in February.

Franzen said she’d rather it be completely separate from the DOC, but would support any movement toward some type of oversight at this point. Aubart said independence is a “cornerstone to any ombudsman.”

What would the office do?

The proposed office’s powers include conducting investigations, having witnesses subpoenaed, inspecting facilities at any time and examining records held by the DOC.

If the ombudsperson made a recommendation to a prison regarding a complaint from a prisoner at the facility, a warden would have 30 days to reply. The warden would have to specify “what actions they have taken as a result of the recommendations and why they are taking or not taking those actions.” 

If there was reason to believe a public official or employee has broken a law or requires discipline, the ombudsperson could refer the issue to the appropriate authorities. 

The ombudsperson would report to the governor at the governor’s request. Each year, the ombudsperson would submit a report of findings and recommended improvements to policies and practices at state correctional institutions, as well as the results of investigations. 

Mark Rice, transformational justice campaign coordinator at the advocacy coalition WISDOM, said he also wants to see an additional mechanism to hold the Wisconsin Department of Corrections accountable. 

“Currently incarcerated people, and people who have loved ones who are currently incarcerated, need to really be more at the center of decision-making,” Rice said. 

The co-chairs and vice-chairs of the Joint Committee on Finance did not respond to the Examiner’s requests for comment. 

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

Children at the Growing Tree child care in New Glarus. Wisconsin is one of only six states that doesn't put any money into early childhood education. (Photo by Kate Rindy)

Children are born into this world innocent. They did not choose their parents. They did not choose to be born into poverty. They do not get to choose if a parent is addicted to drugs or alcohol. Children do not get a choice to be born into an environment of neglect. Children do not choose to grow up in a home with violence. Children do not get a choice to be abused or assaulted. Children do not choose to be born with a disability. Children do not get to choose if they can access medical care. Children do not get a choice on whether they are even wanted or loved. 

Adults do have choices. In Wisconsin, we  have chosen to have a state where children are the largest demographic living in poverty. We have chosen to allow some children to live with constant hunger. We have chosen not to support children with disabilities. We are still choosing not  to create systems to support children who have experienced adversity like abuse and neglect. We made the choice to create an education system based on the income of the people living in the community. We choose to allow children to be uncared for. We as a community have made these choices deliberately and without shame. 

Consequently, we have chosen for those children to be  less likely to graduate from high school, more likely to fail at a job, have poor health (which is connected to stress in the early years) and to be statistically more likely to be placed in the prison system. 

We, as a state, have chosen to prioritize funding for  prisons and spend nothing on early care and education, one of only six states that don’t invest a penny in early childhood programs, even though we know that when children have access to quality early education that they are more likely to graduate high school, have higher incomes, be healthier, and are less likely to enter the prison system. We have chosen to remove health care options for children by not expanding Badgercare. We are soon to be the only state that does not provide postpartum Medicaid, risking the lives of new mothers and  increasing the likelihood that children will have to grow up without them. We have decided that children with disabilities will receive services not based on their actual needs, but based on the budget  for special education, which our state keeps at the barest minimum. 

We have chosen to make the word “welfare” into a bad word. Welfare by definition is the health, happiness and fortunes of a person or group. And we have chosen to deny the health, happiness and fortune of children in our state. Referring to a bipartisan push for Medicaid expansion to cover postpartum care, Assembly Speaker Robin Vos has said he  “cannot imagine supporting an expansion of welfare.” Why is providing welfare to support the health and wellbeing of children or anyone for that matter a negative concept? Why are we so afraid that if we support people in need  that it somehow takes away from us? For example, why would providing children with free lunches at school be a bad thing to do? Why would ensuring that children have access to medical care regardless of whether their parents can afford it or not be bad to do? Why would ensuring that children have access to quality care and education in their early years, regardless of their parents’ income, be a bad thing? Why would ensuring that children with disabilities have access to the services they need be bad? Why is it wrong  to have systems in our state that ensure we are doing everything we can to give all children the best opportunities to grow, thrive and become productive members of our communities? 

Rep. Vos and Joint Finance Committee co-chairs Sen.Howard Marklein (R-Spring Green), and Rep. Mark Born (R-Beaver Dam) all disagree with creating and funding policies that support our children. Time and time again, they have voted down policies that would have provided support to children. They have continued to forgo our future by not investing in our children. Instead,  they invest in the wealthiest in our state and invest in our punitive prison systems. They invest in large businesses with expensive lobbyists who demand tax breaks and deregulation. They invest in those most likely to donate to their campaigns. These grown-up white men cannot stand the idea of anyone, even a child, getting help from the state. If they had to pay for school lunch, they figure, so should  everyone else. If they had to pay for their child’s medical visit, then so should everyone else. If they had to pay for child care, then so should everyone else. They are incapable of seeing past their privileges. They cannot appreciate what it is like to be a child born into an environment that causes  harm and the trajectory that puts the child on. However, they will certainly be there when that child becomes an adult and enters the prison system. They are more than willing to pay for incarceration and punishment. 

That’s not just financially irresponsible — we spend about four times as much to keep someone in prison as we spend on education —  it’s inhumane, and it impoverishes our state and condemns children to unnecessary suffering and a bleak future.

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE