Gov. Tony Evers said he is focusing on what can be accomplished in the final year of his term rather than what he and his wife may do once he retires from office. (Photo by Baylor Spears/Wisconsin Examiner)

Gov. Tony Evers, who is entering his final year in office, is calling on lawmakers to help him accomplish some of his priorities in 2026 including providing property tax relief and taking action to blunt the effect of cost-shifting from the federal government to states by the Trump administration.

Evers decided to not run for a third term last year, leading to the first open race for governor since 2010. During a press briefing Monday, he told reporters “nope” when asked if he had thoughts on who in the crowded Democratic primary field could best build on his work.

While he wouldn’t comment on the field, Evers said that working on affordability in Wisconsin would be one of his top priorities — and likely one of the top issues in the 2026 campaign cycle. 

Evers said he is focusing on what can be accomplished in the final year of his term rather than what he and his wife may do once he retires from office. 

“We’ve worked hard for seven years and… we have a year left and it’s not all about me. All of the things that need to be addressed, many of them can be. I feel very strongly that legacy is just doing the right thing for the people of Wisconsin,” Evers said, adding he wants to leave Wisconsin in “a better place.” 

The Wisconsin Legislature has work days scheduled through March, though Evers said work may need to go into April to get the state’s business accomplished. He said lawmakers could run for office and work at the same time. 

“I think it will help no matter who is running for reelection, both the Republicans and Democrats, actually spending some time not getting out of town as early as possible and let’s do some things for the people of Wisconsin,” Evers said. “It’s bad politics to say we’re done in February, we’re done in March and we’ll see you at the polls.” 

Evers said 2026 is starting after a year of “historic and bipartisan wins” for Wisconsinites. He highlighted actions taken in the state budget including providing state funding directly to child care centers, increasing school funding and investing in the University of Wisconsin system, and said he wants to build on that work in the rest of his term. “Our budget was a win for Wisconsin kids, families and our state’s future, but there’s no denying the final budget looked different from what I proposed,” he said. 

Evers noted that the state ended the fiscal year with nearly $4 billion in reserves and $2 billion in a rainy day fund. He said projections from the Department of Revenue that will be released soon show that the state could also bring in as much as $1 billion more than this year. 

Tax relief, school funding

Evers said one of his top priorities is taking action to soften the impact of property tax increases. He called on lawmakers, again, to pass a slate of policies he has proposed that could result in $1.3 billion in tax relief. 

Wisconsin taxpayers’ December bills included the highest increase since 2018 — the result, in part, of Evers’ controversial 400-year line-item veto, which extended a two-year increase in the amount of money districts can raise from local property taxpayers for centuries into the future, as well as lawmakers’ decision to not provide additional state aid to schools, pushing many districts to use their additional taxing authority and others to go to referendum, asking local residents to pay more.

“Look, I get it: Republicans love to blame my 400-year veto for property taxes going up,” Evers said. “The problem with that is Wiscosinites were going to referendum before increasing the number of years — long before. The question would be why? Because of a decade of Republicans consistently failing to meaningfully invest in our kids and K-12 schools. That has consequences including forcing Wisconsinites to raise their own property taxes.” 

Evers said that he wasn’t saying relief needs to be accomplished in one particular way, but that the state will be in a “world of hurt” if nothing is done about property taxes.

Proposals on the issue that he has suggested include a state program to encourage local governments to freeze property taxes, increasing state aid to public schools to help reduce tax levies and increasing the school levy tax credit. 

Assembly Speaker Robin Vos (R-Rochester) has also named lowering property taxes as one of his top priorities for the year, though he and other Republicans have focused on the school revenue limit increases that are in place due to the partial veto Evers issued on the 2023 state budget. Evers brushed off the criticism, saying school districts were seeking property tax increases through referendum way before his veto.

“Before that 400-year veto, we were going to referendum all the time, so they can use that as an excuse if they want but let’s just get this done,” Evers said. 

Evers also called on lawmakers to provide additional funding for special education. He and lawmakers put funding in the budget they calculated would bring the state’s share of special ed costs to 42% of districts’ expenses in the first year of the budget and 45% in the second year, but the Department of Public Instruction has issued revised numbers showing that the funding allocated in the budget likely won’t be enough to meet those rates.

“This has to be fixed before the Legislature goes home this year. I’m calling on the Legislature to invest the necessary funding to ensure the agreed upon percentages… are met — or better yet, make the appropriation sum sufficient,” Evers said. Sum-sufficient appropriations are not fixed amounts of money but cover costs for programs even if they fluctuate.

Evers also said lawmakers should take action to exclude certain items including diapers, toothpaste and over-the-counter medications from the state’s sales tax. 

Evers said he is also open to looking at Republican proposals to eliminate taxes on overtime and tips but wants to consider more “universal” forms of tax relief. Republican lawmakers have been working to advance proposals that would align state tax policies with the new federal policies that were adopted last year.

Dealing with the Trump administration  

In his letter to lawmakers, Evers told them they may need to take action to blunt the effects of Trump administration policies. 

“With more chaos being created every day in Washington, new challenges continue to emerge and evolve that deserve our immediate focus and attention,” Evers wrote to lawmakers. “This includes responding to President Donald Trump’s and Republicans in Congress’ ongoing efforts to shift hundreds of millions of dollars in federal program costs to Wisconsin taxpayers and our state’s future budgets.” 

A recent change to federal law means that the state could be at risk of losing more than $200 million annually in federal funds for the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) program if the benefit payment error rate climbs above a certain level.

Evers told reporters that he is in conversations with lawmakers about a potential investment to ensure that the error rate for the state’s Foodshare program remains low. The state Department of Health Services has said that $69 million would help implement quality-control measures and cover the cuts the federal government has made to administrative costs.

The Trump administration has also recently frozen funds to five Democratic-run states, including Minnesota, due to child care fraud while also increasing reporting requirements for states receiving child care funds to cover services for low-income kids. 

Evers said Wisconsin, not one of the five, is in a good position to ensure accountability in the system as the state already made significant changes after a fraud scandal like Minnesota’s was uncovered in Wisconsin more than 15 years ago.

A 2009 Pulitzer prize-winning investigation by the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel uncovered significant fraud within the state’s WisconsinShares program that led to criminal indictments and prompted the state to implement protections. 

“We’re making sure we’re doing everything and we are in a good place,” Evers said. “There’s lots of auditing going on… so I think we’re in a great place.”

ICE shooting in Minneapolis

Evers told reporters that it is a “huge mistake” by President Donald Trump to exclude Minnesota from the investigation into the death of Renee Good at the hands of an ICE agent last week.

“Should the people of Minnesota or Minneapolis be a part of that investigation? Hell yes,” Evers said. “When the federal government comes in and talks about things in terms of you’re going to do this or that… you want to be part of the conversation and there’s none of that going on.” 

Evers said in response to a question about whether ICE was welcome in Wisconsin, “We can handle ourselves, frankly. I don’t see the need for the federal government to be coming into our state and making decisions that we can make at the state level.” 

However, Evers stopped short of endorsing a proposal from Lt. Gov. Sara Rodriguez that would bar ICE from certain areas.

Rodriguez, who is running in the Democratic primary for governor, proposed on Monday that the state ban ICE from courthouses, hospitals and health clinics, licensed child-care centers and daycares, schools and institutions of higher education, domestic violence shelters and places of worship unless there is a warrant or an imminent threat to public safety.

Evers said when asked about the proposal that he would look at it, but that “banning things will absolutely ramp up the actions of the folks in Washington D.C.”

Evers on what else might get accomplished in 2026

Evers said he is “confident” there will soon be a proposal to release $125 million in state funds to fight PFAS contamination that members from both sides of the aisle can support. He said his administration has spent the last several months in conversation with Republican lawmakers on the issue to try to reach a compromise.

Evers said that he hopes they will be able to do the same for the Knowles-Nelson Stewardship program, which is set to expire this year. 

Evers said he is open to exploring options for getting WisconsinEye, the nonprofit that provided livestream coverage of state government similar to C-Span until it went dark last month, back online, but said he isn’t supportive of just giving the nonprofit state funds without a match requirement.

WisEye  went offline  Dec. 15 due to financial difficulties. There is $10 million in state funding for the organization that was set aside by lawmakers and Evers for an endowment, but the organization has to raise matching funds to access it.

“I think there has to be some skin in the game,” Evers said of WisEye. 

The organization launched a GoFundMe on Monday to help raise $250,000, which would cover its expenses for three months. By the end of the day, the organization had raised more than  $4,000.

Evers also called on lawmakers to pass legislation that would extend Medicaid coverage for new mothers from 60 days to a year. Vos has opposed the bill and stopped it from receiving a vote in the Assembly, even as it passed the Senate with only one opposing vote and has more than 70 Assembly cosponsors.

“I’m hoping 2026 will be the year that the Speaker finally decides that bill will make it to my desk,” Evers said.

Evers also outlined his hopes that lawmakers will take action to help lower the cost of health care and prescription drug prices including by capping the price of insulin at $35, passing legislation to audit insurance companies when their denial rates are high and creating new standards to increase the number of services health insurance companies must cover. 

Evers also called on lawmakers to provide funding for two sites that closed last year, one in Green Bay and the other in Chippewa Falls, that housed homeless veterans. He said ideally the Veterans Housing and Recovery Program would receive the nearly $2 million  as he proposed last year.  

Evers said he hadn’t seen the GOP-authored bills that passed the Assembly unanimously that would create a new state grant program that would go to organizations that serve homeless veterans. 

“Whatever we can do to solve that issue,” Evers said. “Any of the things I’ve talked about today, if something happens individually, great. We have to get that done, so if they come up with a plan that I feel confident it’s going to work… then I’d sign it.”

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

The Republican Party of Wisconsin mixed up former Lt. Gov. Mandela Barnes (left) and Milwaukee County Executive David Crowley (right) in a post to X on Monday.

The Republican Party of Wisconsin mixed up the two Black Democratic candidates for governor in a social media post on Monday before deleting and reposting it.

Wisconsin’s open race for governor has led to a crowded Democratic field in the primary, and the state’s Republican party sought on Monday to call out two of those candidates by name in a post on X, formerly known as Twitter. 

“[State Rep.] Francesca Hong, [former Lt. Gov.] Mandela Barnes, and other radical progressives are trying to destroy our state. From wanting to defund police, raise property taxes, and bring socialism to Wisconsin, it is clear that they are out of touch with the needs of Wisconsin families,” the post states. 

However, the initial post made by the party included a graphic of Hong and Milwaukee County Executive David Crowley, not Barnes. A screenshot of the original post was posted by Civic Media Political Editor Dan Shafer on X.

Crowley is the first Black person to serve as Milwaukee County executive and Barnes, a former candidate for the U.S. Senate, served as the first Black lieutenant governor in the state of Wisconsin. The two Democrats are the only Black candidates in Wisconsin’s race for governor. There are no Black candidates in the Republican field.

That’s not Mandela Barnes… pic.twitter.com/Rqxj1NBvZE

— Dan Shafer (@DanRShafer) January 12, 2026

The post was pulled down and reposted with a photo of Barnes in the graphic alongside Hong, who is the only Asian American in the race. 

The Wisconsin GOP and Crowley campaign did not respond to a request for comment from the Examiner. The Barnes campaign declined to comment.

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

Wisconsin lawmakers, journalists and members of the public returned to the Capitol last week for a packed slate of committee hearings and executive sessions but for the first time in nearly 20 years, WisconsinEye was not broadcasting daily legislative proceedings. Wisconsin State Capitol on a snowy day. (Baylor Spears | Wisconsin Examiner)

After WisconsinEye, the state’s version of C-Span, went off the air in December, Republican lawmakers rediscovered rules that bar members of the public from making video and audio recordings of committee hearings and decided to start enforcing them.

Wisconsin lawmakers, journalists and members of the public returned to the Capitol last week for a packed slate of committee hearings and executive sessions but for the first time in nearly 20 years, WisconsinEye was not broadcasting daily legislative proceedings.

A notice passed around Assembly committees listed two rules. Assembly rule 11, related to committee procedures, states that “insofar as applicable, the rules of the Assembly apply to the procedures of standing committees and special committees.”

Assembly rule 26, which relates to members of the public observing from visitor galleries in the Assembly chambers, states that they “may not use any audio or video device to record, photograph, film, videotape, or in any way depict the proceedings on or about the Assembly floor.” 

Senate rule 11 also states that “no persons other than members of the chief clerk’s staff, members of the staff of the sergeant at arms, members of a senator’s staff, and accredited correspondents of the news media may engage in any audio or video recording of the proceedings of the Senate or any committee without permission of the committee on Senate organization.” According to the Senate Chief Clerk Cyrus Anderson, the rule was first adopted in 2005. 

Wisconsin’s open meetings law expressly states that governmental bodies “shall make a reasonable effort to accommodate any person desiring to record, film or photograph the meeting,” but the law includes a provision that says that “no provision of this subchapter which conflicts with a rule of the senate or assembly or joint rule of the legislature shall apply to a meeting conducted in compliance with such rule.”

Rep. Jerry O’Connor (R-Fond Du Lac) told the Wisconsin Examiner that the rules were reviewed in caucus at the start of the year.

“Many of [the members], like me, I didn’t know there was a rule,” O’Connor said. “So it was a reminder.” 

Rep. David Steffen (R-Howard), who has served in the Assembly since 2015, said he couldn’t remember looking at the rule in the last decade. 

“How many times have I just kind of breezed past it? I guess I never really thought of it, primarily because I’ve always had WisconsinEye to rely on to assist with that coverage, as well as present media and in-person public,” Steffen said. 

Steffen said lawmakers, seeking to understand their options in the absences of WisconsinEye, looked over the Assembly rules.

“One of the things that immediately became apparent is that under our Assembly rules, we already have some things that are readily available — for example, credentialed media — but we also have things that have always been prohibited,” Steffen said. “It remains the rule of the day, so this isn’t a new rule… In terms of the enforcement, I think it’s more of an awareness campaign than anything.”

The rule enforcement caused some confusion throughout last week.

Notices related to the rules were passed around and posted outside committee rooms. Committee chairs issued directions at the start of meetings. Reporters in committees were asked to show their credentials as they set up cameras and stood to take photos, and others, including staff members and members of the public without credentials, were stopped from doing so.

Rep. Clinton Anderson (D-Beloit), seeking to help fill the gap left by the absence of WisconsinEye, livestreamed on Facebook the meeting of the Assembly Local Government Committee on Wednesday, writing that “we have to step up and do what we can.” Anderson said on Thursday that he sought to do the same in the Assembly Agriculture Committee but was stopped from doing so as Rep. Travis Tranel (R-Cuba City) reminded the room of the rules related to recording.

“We’re now hearing that this will become standard practice across committees. If that’s the direction Republican leadership is heading, it represents a clear move to restrict public access,” Anderson said in a statement. “After WisconsinEye went dark, the response should have been to expand transparency, not quietly close another door on the public. I am disappointed to see the Assembly GOP go after the public’s First Amendment rights.”

Testimony from two Republican lawmakers on a bill to exempt overtime from income taxes was interrupted during an Assembly Ways and Means committee meeting on Thursday afternoon by  a point of order relating to video recording.

“I don’t have a problem, video all you want,” said Rep. Mike Bare (D-Verona), the committee’s ranking member, to someone who was holding up a cellphone “You’ve got nothing to hide. These guys have nothing to hide, but if we’re going to have a rule…”

“I know that there was staff taking a photo, yes, and I gotta challenge that if you’re videoing… if you’re doing a video that you’re not allowed in the committee area,” O’Connor said. 

O’Connor told the Examiner after the meeting that he is fine with photos being taken in his committee and he believes committee chairs can use their discretion on whether to allow photos. He said video is different because of  its potential use for political purposes.

“If it’s staff taking photos of their rep, I don’t have a big problem of it,” O’Connor said. “You could have somebody, an outsider, come and testify, and their best friend is sitting in this seat and wants to take a picture, that’s not the issue.”

“Trying to capture video, quite frankly, it gets down to it can be used politically,” he added. “So WisconsinEye tapes this, you cannot use a WisconsinEye clip in political campaigns. That’s why the rules originated, and I get that… I don’t want either side to violate that or benefit from it adversely.”

Bare said he wanted to ensure that the rules were being applied evenly if they were going to be enforced. 

“We have a long, rich tradition in Wisconsin of open government, open access to government, and we shouldn’t have be limiting that access to members of the public to staff to members and to the media in any way,” Bare said, adding that the enforcement of the rules is “clearly a response to WisconsinEye being offline, being dark, which seems like a preventable problem.”

“There’s plenty of states in the country who provide funding for broadcasting… We shouldn’t be in the situation where we members or our staff have to livestream onto social media,” Bare said. “We’ve got decades now of precedent of these things being broadcast out to the public.”

WisconsinEye halted its coverage in December due to a lack of funding after failing to raise sufficient funds to meet a matching requirement for the release of $10 million in state funds.  WisconsinEye leadership has been in discussions with lawmakers about a potential solution, including releasing part of the  $10 million that is intended to build an endowment.

“We’re only going to be in session for maybe eight to 10 more weeks, and if we’re unable to get WisconsinEye back up and running in that timeframe, I’m hopeful the public isn’t going to be impacted any more than they already have been,” Steffen said. 

Bill Lueders, president of the Wisconsin Freedom of Information Council, told the Examiner that the enforcement of the rule is a bad idea.

“Regardless of the law, denying the public the ability to record and film legislative meetings, especially in the absence of a functioning WisconsinEye, is deeply undemocratic and, in my opinion, foolhardy. Nothing that goes on in these meetings is anywhere near as insidious as what people will assume is happening if the ability to film and record it is being curtailed,” Lueders said.

Lueders said the Wisconsin Freedom of Information Council (WFIC) doesn’t support anything that treats the media differently from ordinary citizens.

“Although they may legally be able to pass their own rule and enforce their own rule to deny people an opportunity, it doesn’t make it any less of a good idea,” Lueders said.  

Steffen said he would be open to having options for the public to record and photograph meetings as long as they are not obstructing the activity of a committee. “I think that this situation, this hopefully short-term downtime, has created an opportunity to discuss some of those rules that have been on the books for some time, and perhaps there’s some that need to be modified.”

In the meantime, Steffen said lawmakers are focused on finding a solution to make up for the loss of  WisconsinEye and options for the public are limited to attending in person and consuming coverage by journalists in the Capitol.

Steffen called on local reporters to “fill the gap” in a press release on Friday.

“All of them have the ability to record, maybe sometimes just audio, but they all have the ability to record a proceeding and put that on their website,” Steffen said. “That at least would provide some opportunity for transparency during this interim.”

Lueders said local media “absolutely does not have the resources to film as many legislative hearings and sessions as WisconsinEye was doing; it just doesn’t have that capacity. Cameras can come and show up for part of a hearing, but they’re not there filming entire meetings on a daily basis, and that’s not a function that can be replicated… It’s more important than ever that ordinary citizens who attend these meetings are able to film and record it.”

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

A hemp plant at a Cottage Grove farm. Hemp, used for industrial purposes and now grown legally in Wisconsin, is made from a variety of the cannabis plant that is low in THC, the active ingredient that is responsible for the intoxicating effect of marijuana. (Wisconsin Examiner photo)

Wisconsin lawmakers are backing competing visions for the future of hemp in the state. One proposal, (SB 682), was discussed during a Thursday meeting of the Senate Committee on Agriculture and Revenue. The bill would create a regulatory structure for hemp-derived cannabis products which would preserve the state’s hemp industry despite a federal ban set to take effect in November. Without state-level intervention, or the federal government choosing to reverse course, hemp growers and distributors fear that Wisconsin’s $700 million industry and about 3,500 jobs will disappear.

Sen. Patrick Testin (R-Stevens Point), chair of the  Agriculture and Revenue Committee presented the bipartisan hemp bill to his committee, which he authored with bipartisan support. Testin’s legislation would define hemp as cannabis plants with no more than 0.3% of delta-9 THC (or the maximum concentration allowable under federal law up to 1%, whichever is greater) and define “hemp-derived cannabinoids” as any such compound extracted from the hemp plant. THC concentrations would be determined using specific high-performance testing methods. 

Wisconsinites would need to be at least 21 years old to purchase hemp-derived cannabinoid products under the bill, which mandates that products undergo independent lab testing to ensure that they contain the amount and type of cannabinoids described on the product’s label. This practice, known as truth-in labeling, is something the hemp industry has called for in recent years. 

Products could not be sold under the bill without labeling including contact information for the manufacturer or brand owner, serving sizes per container of product, ingredient lists including allergens, potency labeled in milligrams, and any necessary warnings. Under the bill, hemp-derived products could not contain more than 10 milligrams of THC in a single serving. 

Testin said Thursday that globally, the industrial hemp market was valued at roughly $11 billion in 2025, and is expected to reach $48 billion by 2032. “Despite its wide availability, the regulation of [hemp-derived cannabinoid] products is essentially non-existent, leaving a patchwork of different approaches taken by states across the country,” he said. 

In Wisconsin, such products “are generally recognized as legal but unregulated,” Testin said. “There are no state laws that restrict the sale to minors, regulate the potency or content of [hemp-derived cannabinoid products], or establish labeling or packaging requirements.” Minnesota, Kentucky, Tennessee and other states have moved to enact their own regulations, Testin said. “Regulations are needed to eliminate the current uncertainty regarding the status of [hemp-derived cannabinoid products], provide stability and certainty for businesses looking to enter this segment of the economy, and enact public safety regulations.”

Both Testin and Rep. Tony Kurtz (R-Wonewoc) have worked on hemp laws for Wisconsin since the federal Farm Bill passed in 2018. “I’ve actually grown hemp,” said Kurtz, recalling that in 2019 “it was kind of a wide open market.” People that Kurtz and others called “bad actors” throughout the hearing also rode the hemp wave, seeing it as a “get rich quick scheme.” Kurtz said that today, the hemp industry is filled with people who want to do the right thing, but that “bad actors” have persisted. 

Kurtz said SB 682 is designed to ensure that Wisconsinites “get the very best product, and they know what they’re getting.” He stressed that “if we do nothing, then hemp is going to be illegal at the federal level…but it will still be legal here in the state of Wisconsin. So I think it would behoove us to work together, get a good compromise, a good common sense piece of legislation to make sure that we — in my humble opinion — protect our constituents, but also protect an industry that I think is needed.” 

Although hemp would be illegal at the federal level, a state-level industry could still operate similarly to the way some states have fully legal recreational or legalized cannabis programs, largely because the federal government has not cracked down on those industries. 

Testin added that “regardless of anyone’s thoughts as it relates to cannabis and cannabinoids, it’s here. And obviously we have a lot of different approaches as to how to best move forward.” He repeatedly took aim at the “stupidity” of what he described as “our overlords” in Washington D.C., but also criticized other hemp-related bills being pushed in Wisconsin. Whereas some Republicans are seeking to ban hemp products outright, others have differing ideas about how a legal industry should be regulated. 

A bill introduced by Sen. Eric Wimberger (R-Oconto), SB 681, would require that manufacturers and distributors of hemp-derived cannabinoid products have permits. Products would be sold under a three-tier system, and would be regulated similarly to alcohol under the Division of Alcohol Beverages, a component of the Department of Revenue, which would be renamed to the Division of Intoxicating Products. 

Although both Testin and Wimberger’s bills have gained bipartisan support, Testin described Wimberger’s bill as “the dead bill” and “deader than dead.” Testin argued that SB 681 would over-regulate the hemp industry, and even lead to a monopolization effect where a small number of entities could control who gets hemp permits, shape an otherwise competitive market, and operate in a “good ol’ boys club” manner. 

Sen. Sarah Keyeski (D-Lodi) highlighted  the divide among state Republicans over hemp and cannabis products, stressing that Democrats are not the ones holding up legalization and regulation.

The committee room was filled with people from across the hemp industry who listened to the conversation. When lawmakers questioned how to ensure that children do not acquire intoxicating hemp products, distributors and manufacturers pointed to age-verification software even for online sales, which require a photograph and image of a driver’s license to approve an order. There was also discussion about how to prevent products from being marketed to children using cartoon-like advertising and appealing candy wrappers. 

Some veterans testified, describing how hemp helped them alleviate pain, kick addictive pain killers, soothed PTSD symptoms, and calmed the body for sleep. Other testimony centered on the danger involved in crossing state lines to Michigan or Illinois to acquire cannabis to treat various medical conditions. Hemp farmers stressed that they need to know now how they will be affected by a looming federal ban as they decide when or whether to plant their crops in the spring. 

Much of the public testimony was supportive of  Testin’s bill, though some speakers said that it needed to be amended to protect farmers and growers, and also expand the kinds of products it would cover including drinks and gummies. 

“Yes, we are now in a scenario where there are intoxicating hemp products,” said Testin. “But just no different than anything like beer, wine, or alcohol, we need to have some sensible regulations put in place, which this bill aims to do just that.”

As for “concerns about getting baked or getting high from these products,” Testin added, “it’s no different than those individuals who go out and consume too many old fashioneds at fish fry on a Friday night, or have too many beers. It’s about personal choice and responsibility, but at the same time making sure that we have some regulations put in place.”

The hemp industry deserves to “thrive and grow,” Testin said, while the public deserves protection and to know “that this stuff isn’t falling into the hands of people it shouldn’t be in, like kids.”

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

Deputy State Superintendent Tom McCarthy speaks to Rep. Amanda Nedweski (R-Pleasant Prairie) after delivering testimony on AB 678. (Photo by Baylor Spears/Wisconsin Examiner)

Wisconsin school districts would be required to establish policies on appropriate communication between students and staff members before the next school year, under a bill that received a public hearing Thursday. 

The bill comes in reaction to a report from the Capital Times in November that found over 200 investigations into teacher licenses due to allegations of sexual misconduct or grooming from 2018 to 2023. Another bill coauthored by Nedweski, AB 677, making grooming a felony crime in Wisconsin received a public hearing earlier this week.

“Many of these cases begin with the erosion of professional boundaries when a school employee starts communicating with the students inappropriately often outside of school hours and without parent knowledge usually through the use of text messaging and social media,”  Nedweski told the Assembly Education Committee. “While the vast majority of school staff use these tools responsibly, a small number have exploited that access — sometimes leading to devastating consequences.”

AB 678 would require Wisconsin school boards to adopt a policy on appropriate communications between students and employees or volunteers in the school district.

“This bill preserves local control. It does not mandate a one-size-fits-all policy; instead it allows each school district to determine what communication policies work best for its own community,” Nedweski said.

The policies would need to include specific consequences for staff who violate the policy and specify that it applies to communications during and outside of school hours. The policy would need to include standards for appropriate content and methods of communication.

An amendment to the bill, which Nedweski said came at the request of the Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction (DPI) and other stakeholders, would require annual training for employees on identifying, preventing and reporting grooming and professional boundary violations. 

The Department of Public Instruction has worked with Nedweski on the legislation and supports it. 

“We think this is a good effort to get the conversation started,” Deputy State Superintendent Tom McCarthy said, noting the agency has been working on policy related to appropriate communication for over eight years. He said there are a lot of districts that are using technology for software that allows them to track communications. 

“There’s a bit of a dichotomy with this issue. We know that in order to educate kids we need to foster and build relationships with students and families, and so we do encourage appropriate communication in every school district,” McCarthy said, adding that the policy and training would be critical. “You will find some circumstances where you’re going to want communication and it might not be as neat and tidy as you’d expect it to be. There are always emergency circumstances where a teacher might need to call a student directly… so we want some policies to be flexible to address those areas.” 

Chris Kulow, director of government relations for the Wisconsin Association of School Boards (WASB), said the organization had some concerns about the language in the bill related to consequences. He testified for information only, noting the issue of communication between staff and students is not new to school districts. 

“Although recent news coverage and increased interest from state policymakers may make this appear to be a new issue, it is not new to schools. School boards have long recognized the need for policies addressing appropriate communication and professional boundaries between pupils and staff. Many districts have already adopted such policies,” Kulow said. “This bill may require some districts to update existing policies to reflect its specific language and to the extent it prompts boards to review and strengthen policies is beneficial.” 

Kulow said complying with the provision related to consequences as currently written would be challenging as violations can vary widely and require a wide range of responses. The organization wanted the provision removed, but said Nedweski wanted something related to be included in the bill. 

“Attempting to predetermine specific consequences for every specific scenario may be impractical and could complicate the disciplinary process,” Kulow said. “We suggested revising the language in the bill to read that ‘the school board shall include in the policy a range of consequences up to and including termination.’”

The bill currently only covers Wisconsin public schools, though Nedweski told Democratic lawmakers, who expressed concerns about the bill not including the state’s private voucher schools, that she is working on an amendment. 

“We need to protect all kids. This is such a growing problem. We’ve seen just an increase in inappropriate communication,” Nedweski said.

Democratic lawmakers, including Rep. Francesca Hong (D-Madison), also asked whether lawmakers would be open to including funding for school districts to support the implementation of the bill. 

Nedweski said she hasn’t had any requests for funding from schools or the DPI throughout the development of the bill.

“I think it’s a serious enough issue, a weighty enough issue, that all schools can find the resources to craft a policy and do some training to make sure they are protecting children,” Nedweski said, adding that DPI already has modules related to this type of training.

McCarthy said additional funding, including the release of $1 million set aside for the agency in the state budget, could help speed along the process. Those funds, which sit in a supplemental fund, can only be released by the Joint Finance Committee. He said without the funds the agency could potentially have to cut down on staff and other areas of its operations, which could affect how quickly work is done.

Under the bill in its current form, school boards would need to adopt a policy by July 1, 2026. 

McCarthy said DPI would like to see an amendment that would move the deadline for policy adoption to a later date, saying DPI may need a longer “runway” to ensure the agency has time to change and update policies and training if needed. He told the Wisconsin Examiner that some of the changes could be necessary if Nedweski’s grooming bill becomes law. 

Rich Judge, assistant state superintendent for the division of government and public affairs, also noted that school boards would need to have time to meet, develop and approve policies. 

Nedweski said in a written statement to the Examiner that she is taking the agency’s suggestion under consideration and is discussing potential dates. One potential date could be Sept. 1, 2026, she said. 

“If AB 678 is signed into law, the goal is for school districts to have these policies in place for the 2026–27 school year,” Nedweski said. She noted that some of the agency’s concerns are tied to her other bill. “This only underscores the importance of passing AB 677 and getting it signed into law promptly to ensure that districts across Wisconsin can take the necessary steps to better protect students in school.”

Colbey Decker, a WILL client who alleges her white son who struggles with dyslexia faced racial discrimination in the Green Bay Area School District, testified in favor of a proposed amendment to the state constitution outlawing government programs that promote diversity, equity and inclusion. (Photo by Baylor Spears/Wisconsin Examiner)

Two constitutional amendment proposals that could be on Wisconsinites’ ballots in November received public hearings on Tuesday, including one to eliminate diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) programs from state and local governments and one to bar the governor from issuing partial vetoes that increase taxes. 

Constitutional amendment proposals in Wisconsin must pass the state Legislature in two consecutive sessions and receive majority approval from voters to become law. Each proposal is on its second consideration, meaning if they pass the Senate and Assembly, each would appear on voters’ ballots in November alongside a slate of consequential races including for governor, Congress and the state Legislature.

One of the proposed constitutional amendments, SJR 94, takes aim at DEI programs throughout state and local government in Wisconsin. Republicans have been targeting DEI programs for years and have at times found success, including when they elicited concessions from the University of Wisconsin system in 2023. 

If the proposal passed the Senate and Assembly, voters will see on their ballots the question “Shall section 27 of article I of the constitution be created to prohibit governmental entities in the state from discriminating against, or granting preferential treatment to, any individual or group on the basis of race, sex, color, ethnicity, or national origin in public employment, public education, public contracting, or public administration?”

Sen. Steve Nass (R-Whitewater) told the Senate Licensing, Regulatory Reform, State and Federal Affairs Committee that the proposal would “ensure that we hire, promote, select, and admit people to our unit, public universities, schools and government agencies the same way we choose people for our Olympic team, military and sports teams — through merit, character, ability and hard work without regard to race, sex color, ethnicity or other immutable characteristics.” 

Sen. Dora Drake (D-Milwaukee) asked the authors of the proposal how they define “preferential treatment” and whether they know about the types of programs the amendment would eliminate.

“I don’t know how deep it is in hiring, contracting… I would say if the criteria for making your choice deals with race or sex, then that’s not appropriate,” Rep. Dave Murphy (R-Hortonville) said.

Drake brought up the state’s Supplier Diversity Program, which was established in the 1980s and certifies minority-owned, service-disabled veteran-owned and woman-owned businesses to provide better opportunities for them to do business with the state of Wisconsin. 

“Everyone should have access to opportunity. The reality is that our state historically has not shown that. That [program] was created because we have minority-owned businesses that were seeking opportunities for state contracting and they weren’t getting them, and that was based on relationships, it was based on race… and so this was implemented as a protective measure to ensure that people weren’t being discriminated against,” Drake said. “We’re pushing this forward when we still haven’t addressed what’s happening. If we’re doing this based on merit, then I would argue that there’s plenty of different minority-owned businesses that would be more than qualified, but they don’t get them, and you have to ask why.”

“They may be qualified, but are they the most qualified?” asked Sen. Chris Kapenga (R-Delafield). “And what this does is it takes away… the sex, the gender all of those items that the U.S. Constitution lays out as this is something that you can’t discriminate against. If you discriminate against a male because he’s a male, that’s still discrimination.” 

Dan Lennington, the Wisconsin Institute for Law and Liberty’s managing vice president and deputy counsel, said the bill would help to ensure that Wisconsin is “color blind.”

Lennington leads the conservative legal organization “Equality Under the Law Program,” and spoke to the number of lawsuits they’ve engaged in on the issue.

“We sued [former President] Joe Biden 12 times. We have five lawsuits pending against President [Donald] Trump right now based on race discrimination. We have a lot of things in the pipeline against the state of Wisconsin… We’d love to sue over the Minority Supplier Program. We haven’t gotten to it yet” Lennington said. “A constitutional amendment would, especially a new attorney general, would wipe all this clean and enforce the law as it’s already written, and would really help bring this to an abrupt end. Otherwise, there’s going to be decades more of this litigation.” 

Colbey Decker, a WILL client who alleges her white son who struggles with dyslexia faced racial discrimination in the Green Bay Area School District, testified in favor of the proposed amendment. The Trump administration launched an investigation into the school district over the allegations last year. 

Decker told the committee that her son wasn’t able to receive reading services because he is white, saying that she found that the school’s “success plan” included a policy related to “prioritizing resources to First Nations, Black and Hispanic students.”

“When an educational system’s moral compass is calibrated by a child’s skin color, the system has fundamentally failed. Our family’s story has forever changed after witnessing firsthand the casual callousness of sorting my son, color-coding him and then deprioritizing him based on his race,” Decker said. “The brutal reality of DEI is that it robs all children of the dignity and respect of individuality.” 

Curtailing executive partial veto power

SJR 116 would limit the governor’s partial veto power by prohibiting any vetoes from “creating or increasing or authorizing the creation or increase of any tax or fee.”

Lawmakers introduced the proposal last session in response to Gov. Tony Evers’ partial veto on the last state budget that extended school revenue increases for an additional 400 years. He did so by striking two digits and a dash from the years to extend the annual increases through 2425. The action was upheld by the state Supreme Court in April 2025. 

Rep. Amanda Nedweski (R-Pleasant Prairie) said the school revenue increases that are resulting from the partial veto are “unaffordable” and “unsustainable” for Wisconsinites.

“No governor, Republican or Democrat, should be able to single-handedly raise taxes on Wisconsin families with the stroke of his pen. The governor is not a king,” Nedweski said. “This constitutional amendment reigns in that power, restores the proper balance between the branches of government and ensures taxpayers are protected from runaway tax increases in the future.”

A recent Wisconsin Policy Forum report found that Wisconsin property taxpayers’ December bills included the highest increase since 2018 and warned property taxpayers could see similar increases to their property taxes in the future.

“We did all get a kick in the pants with property taxes this year… we’re gonna get another wack in 2026 in December,” Nass said during the hearing. 

Drake said the bill appeared to be a “grab for power.” 

Kapenga, one of the proposal authors, pushed back on the comment, saying if he were governor, he would sign a bill from Drake eliminating the governor’s ability to levy such a veto. 

“I do not like the power that the governor has in this state, regardless of who it is,” Kapenga said. “The power of the people should be vested in the Legislature, not in the executive branch.”

The question voters would see is: “Shall section 10 (1) (c) of article V of the constitution be amended to prohibit the governor, in exercising his or her partial veto authority, from creating or increasing or authorizing the creation or increase of any tax or fee?”

Constitutional amendments have been used to limit the partial veto power in a couple other scenarios, including in 1990 when voters approved the prohibition of the “Vanna White” veto, or eliminating single letters within words, and in 2008, when voters approved, eliminating the “Frankenstein veto” — or the ability for governors to create new sentences by combining parts of two or more sentences.

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

"What major purchase does anyone in this room make without knowing the cost before you make the purchase? It is inconceivable to me that we do not know what something is going to cost of that magnitude before we actually consent to the cost,” Sen. Mary Felzkowski said. (Photo by Baylor Spears/Wisconsin Examiner)

A bill to implement state-level enforcement of federal hospital price transparency requirements in Wisconsin, with the goal of bringing down the cost of health care, received pushback from hospital representatives and support from employers on Wednesday.

Sen. Julian Bradley (R-New Berlin) told the Senate Licensing, Regulatory Reform, State and Federal Affairs Committee that ensuring that the cost of services provided would help with health care affordability.  

“When hospitals clearly share pricing information, patients can make informed decisions. Trust in the system grows and costs come down naturally,” Bradley said, adding that the bill would ensure Wisconsin “reaps the benefits” of changes made by the Trump administration. 

During his first term, President Donald Trump’s administration implemented rules to require hospitals to post pricing information online. The effects of the changes on patients’ costs have been mixed. At the start of his second term, Trump signed an executive order intended to bolster the effort and in December, the administration proposed a new rule that aims to simplify how price data is organized and shared with people. 

SB 383 would instruct the Wisconsin Department of Health Services to enforce federal price transparency requirements for hospitals. 

Bradley and Rep. Robert Wittke (R-Caledonia), the bill coauthors, said it is needed to help ensure that federal policies are being followed.

“Sometimes we need to take action to make sure that it goes all the way through the state and all of our residents have access to the things that are expected through federal law,” Wittke said. 

Bradley said the lawmakers aren’t trying to penalize hospitals, just ensure people have access to information. 

If a hospital is found to be out of compliance under the bill, Wisconsin DHS would be able to take several actions including providing a written notice to the hospital, requesting a corrective action plan or imposing a financial penalty. DHS would also need to keep a public list of any hospitals that have violated the requirements.

Hospitals would also need to be certified as being in compliance with the requirements when seeking judgment from a court against a patient who owes a debt for services.

Lawmakers introduced a similar bill in 2023, but it failed to receive a floor vote in the Senate and advance in the Assembly.

The current version of the bill includes a provision that says that if federal laws change and are eliminated, then provisions in the bill that establish state level requirements for publishing prices will take effect.

Under those provisions, each hospital would need to make a list of “shoppable services” — ones that can be scheduled in advance such as a knee replacement — available with the standard charge for each item that would be publicly available. A hospital’s list would need to include at least 300 “shoppable services,” and if a hospital doesn’t provide that many, it must list all of its shoppable services.

The change is meant to avoid overlapping and varying requirements, though hospital representatives expressed concerns that would happen anyway.

The Wisconsin Hospital Association (WHA) opposes the bill. Christian Moran, the WHA vice president of Medicaid and payer reimbursement policy, said during the hearing that the organization’s opposition to the bill is not opposition to price transparency.

“Our opposition is to the added regulatory complexity that is created by layering on state level enforcement and state level regulations and unlimited fines on Wisconsin hospitals when robust federal regulation and enforcement already exists,” Moran said.

Moran said no Wisconsin hospitals have been fined for noncompliance since the first federal regulations went into effect. 

“Personal experience, it’s somewhat inevitable: if you pass legislation on the state level that mirrors the federal level it will eventually not match up,” John Russell, president and CEO of Prairie Ridge Health, said. 

Hospital representatives also expressed concerns that not enough attention was being given to the role of health insurance companies. 

“The solution proposed to you in [SB] 383 is to double up on existing enforcement for hospitals while ignoring the state’s current responsibility to enforce and monitor insurance compliance,” Moran said.

Brian Stephens, CEO of the Door County Medical Center, said the state should be more focused on the “middlemen” including insurance providers, saying that bolstering the transparency of hospital costs has its limitations. He spoke to the work that his medical center has done over many years to improve transparency of prices.

“There’s a disconnect in this country between the concerted efforts of health care providers to provide reasonable and transparent prices and the costs that people are paying for health insurance. Unfortunately, hospital price transparency efforts have not put a dent in that dichotomy,” Stephens said. “Perhaps we need to be asking for more transparency from health insurance companies and other middlemen to understand the real drivers of health care costs in our country. Perhaps hospitals have just become a good punching bag for folks who need an effective sound bite. The reality is that, despite our wholehearted commitment to providing reasonable upfront prices, transparency has its limitations. What are the odds that a person waking up with pain will take the time to bring out his or her phone and search the most affordable hospital or clinic prior to seeking treatment.”

Sen. Steve Nass (R-Whitewater) said the testimony focused on the insurance companies’ role sounded like “a lot of finger-pointing.” 

Several other states have adopted laws or are in the process of advancing bills to bolster price transparency including Colorado, Washington State and Ohio. 

Patrick Neville, a former Republican state representative in Colorado who helped pass a similar law in his state, testified on the Wisconsin bill, saying provisions in his home state have already helped. He told the story of one patient who was charged nearly $80,000 for a hysterectomy, but didn’t have to pay the cost.

“Because we had the consumer protections in this bill in Colorado, and they weren’t compliant with price transparency. They couldn’t actually collect that $80,000,” Neville said. “That was really important and powerful for the actual consumer in this case, and so it’s actually working in Colorado.” 

Neville added that the Colorado legislation did not codify the federal rules, but he wishes it had. 

“Any president could get rid of those rules at any point and I think the way this bill is crafted… It’s hugely important,” Neville said. “That’s a clever way to craft it.” 

Several employers testified in favor of the legislation. 

Erik Sonju, president of Fitchburg-based Power System Engineering, described the unpredictable jumps in health care costs that his company has grappled with since 2018 when he started in his position. He said that 2023 was the year the “straw broke” as they dealt with a 20% increase in insurance rates and he wasn’t able to get clear answers about the rising cost. 

Sen. Mary Felzkowski (R-Tomahawk) told the committee that the cost of health care is too high. 

“This is common sense. What major purchase does anyone in this room make without knowing the cost before you make the purchase? It is inconceivable to me that we do not know what something is going to cost of that magnitude before we actually consent to the cost,” Felzkowski said.  

Felzkowski is the lead coauthor on two of the other bills the committee took up. SB 796 would require insurers to submit information about claims to the Wisconsin Health Information Organization (WHIO), a nonprofit organization that collects health care claims data, and SB 797 would provide a $600,000 grant for the WHIO to establish an online dashboard of health care claims information and to add new payer data.

The committee also took testimony on SB 703, coauthored by Wittke and Sen. Rob Hutton (R-Brookfield), which would establish that employers who sponsor group health insurance plans have a right to data relating to the employees and dependents covered under those plans, including claims data, utilization reports and other information necessary to understand and manage health care costs.

Wittke said the bill will maintain privacy protections by requiring employers to designate a HIPAA compliance privacy officer and ensure that the Office of the Commissioner of Insurance maintains oversight. The bill also includes a provision prohibiting data from being sold to any party without the permission of the plan sponsor and the person to whom the claims data relates.

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

Wisconsin State Flag | Getty Images Creative

This week marked the fifth anniversary of the Jan. 6 insurrection, in which supporters of President Trump stormed the U.S. Capitol, demanding that then-Vice President Pence overturn the will of the people. Efforts to impose accountability for those responsible and those involved have largely ended — except in Wisconsin. This means that Wisconsin has the opportunity, and the responsibility, to re-assert the rule of law, to ensure justice, and to bolster the foundations on which American democracy has been built over the past 250 years.

As we assess the state of our democracy in light of this somber anniversary, let’s start with the bad news: 

• The U.S. Supreme Court derailed efforts by states to enforce the 14th Amendment’s prohibition against insurrectionists serving in federal office, and then it invented an ahistorical and jaw-droppingly broad doctrine of presidential immunity to derail criminal prosecutions of Trump in state and federal courts alike. 
• Federal prosecutions of the violent mob in the Capitol were upended by Trump’s Department of Justice, and Trump issued sweeping federal pardons to every individual connected with Jan. 6, effectively encouraging them to keep it up. 
• State prosecutions of the fraudulent electors — those who executed an unprecedented effort to overturn the 2020 election by submitting to Congress (and other officials) paperwork that falsely declared Trump to have won seven key states that he in fact lost and thereby laying the groundwork for the Jan. 6 rioters to violently demand Pence validate their efforts — have faltered, often for reasons unrelated to the merits of those actions. 

But here in Wisconsin there are still grounds for hope. Hope that bad actors who deliberately took aim at our democracy will be held accountable. Hope that our institutions will stand up and protect our democracy from further meddling by those most directly responsible. And hope that those institutions will act promptly to prevent further damage. Every Wisconsinite should be watching the following accountability efforts — and urging our elected officials to use their authority to advance the rule of law and protect our democracy. 

First, the Wisconsin Supreme Court will soon determine the appropriate sanction for Michael Gableman’s ethical transgressions as he spearheaded a sham “investigation” of the 2020 election. Gableman, who once served on the Wisconsin Supreme Court, accepted this job despite his own assessment that he did not understand how elections work in Wisconsin. He wasted taxpayer funds, undermined government transparency laws, dealt dishonestly with his clients and the public, lied to and insulted courts, and tried to jail the elected mayors of Green Bay and Madison. In March 2023, Law Forward filed an omnibus ethics grievance, documenting Gableman’s myriad breaches of the ethics rules that bind all Wisconsin attorneys. Last summer, Gableman stipulated that he had no viable defense of his conduct and agreed with the Office of Lawyer Regulation to jointly recommend his law license be suspended for three years. (He is now trying to wriggle out of accountability by serially pushing justice after justice to recuse.) 

Wisconsin precedent is clear that, where a lawyer is charged with multiple ethical breaches, the proper sanction is determined by adding the sanctions for each breach together. The Court should apply established law, which demands revoking Gableman’s law license. Then the Office of Lawyer Regulation and the Court should act on our requests to hold Andrew Hitt (chairman of the Wisconsin fraudulent electors) and Jim Troupis (chief Wisconsin counsel to Trump’s 2020 campaign and ringleader of the fraudulent-elector scheme) accountable as well.

Second, the primary architects of the fraudulent-elector scheme, detailed in records  obtained through Law Forward’s groundbreaking civil suit, are also facing criminal prosecution in Dane County. Attorney General Josh Kaul’s case is narrowly focused only on three lawyers — two who were based here in Wisconsin, and one working for the Trump campaign in DC — who conceived and designed the scheme to overturn Wisconsin’s results and then convinced six other states to follow suit. Troupis, who himself was appointed to the Wisconsin bench by former-Gov. Scott Walker as a reward for his key role in the 2011 partisan gerrymander, has gone to great lengths to slow down this prosecution, which Kaul initiated in June 2024. He filed nine separate motions to dismiss the case. He accused the judge hearing preliminary motions of misconduct and insisted that the entire Dane County bench should be recused. And now he has appealed the denial of his misconduct allegations. This case, since assigned to a different Dane County judge, will proceed, and it is the best hope anywhere in the country to achieve accountability for the fraudulent-elector scheme. 

Third, on behalf of the Wisconsin Democracy Campaign and two individual voters, Law Forward is suing Elon Musk and two advocacy organizations he controls for their brazen scheme of million-dollar giveaways to influence the 2025 Wisconsin Supreme Court election. This case is about ensuring that Wisconsin elections are decided by Wisconsin voters, not by out-of-state efforts to buy the results they want for us. We’re waiting for the trial court to decide preliminary motions, but, with another Wisconsin Supreme Court election imminently approaching, there is urgency to clarify that Wisconsin law forbids the shenanigans we saw last year, which contributed to the most expensive judicial race in American history. 

Beginning in 2011, Wisconsin became the country’s primary testing ground for the most radical anti-democratic ideas. From Act 10 to one of the strictest voter ID laws in the country, from subverting the separation of powers and steamrolling local control over local issues to hobbling the regulatory state and starving our public schools, Wisconsin’s gerrymandered Legislature adopted idea after idea hostile to democracy. With the end of the nation’s most extreme and durable partisan gerrymander in 2023 and a change in the makeup of the state Supreme Court, however, the tide in Wisconsin has ebbed somewhat. 

Now, improbably, Wisconsin is the place that democracy can best hold the line. We can create accountability for those who have abused power, have undermined elections, and have diminished the ideals and institutions of our self-government. That, in conjunction with Law Forward’s broad docket of work to defend free elections and to strengthen our democracy, sustains my hope.

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

Smoke is seen over buildings after explosions and low-flying aircraft were heard on Jan. 3, 2026 in Caracas, Venezuela. According to some reports, explosions were heard in Caracas and other cities near airports and military bases around 2 a.m. (Photo by Jesus Vargas/Getty Images)

The U.S. military action to capture Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro Saturday night has divided the candidates running for Wisconsin’s 3rd Congressional District. 

The swing district is set to be among the most high profile congressional races in the 2026 midterm elections as Democrats try for a third time to unseat incumbent Republican Rep. Derrick Van Orden. President Donald Trump won the district in 2024 with 53% of the vote. 

Since Trump’s inauguration, Van Orden has positioned himself as a vocal supporter of the president, often appearing at White House events and loudly defending Trump on social media. 

That defense extended to the Venezuelan raid, of which Van Orden, a former U.S. Navy SEAL, described on X as “perfect.”

“I would like to commend @realDonaldTrump, @SecWar, and the members of our glorious military that conducted the raid in Venezuela to capture the narcoterrorist Maduro,” Van Orden wrote on X shortly after the news of the action was announced. “Perfect operational security and execution.”

Despite regularly criticising American “forever wars,” Van Orden has praised the Venezuela attack as part of an effort to prevent the flow of drugs into the U.S. 

“This operation sends a clear message to America’s adversaries: harming U.S. citizens carries consequences,” Van Orden said in a statement. Nicolás Maduro operated as a narco-terrorist under the false cover of political authority. His criminal network helped fuel the drug trafficking that has killed thousands of Americans. He is now detained and no longer in a position to threaten American lives. President Trump’s decisive leadership made this possible. His administration has made it clear that America will no longer tolerate narco-terrorists who profit from the deaths of our citizens.”

While Van Orden’s defense of the president is expected, two of the Democrats running in the primary to challenge him have diverged on the issue. 

Rebecca Cooke, who ran against Van Orden in 2024 and is widely seen as the frontrunner, criticized the lack of a long term plan in Venezuela and the break from Trump’s campaign promise to stay out of foreign wars, but celebrated the unseating of Maduro despite the lack of congressional involvement in the decision to approve military action on a foreign country. 

“Donald Trump and I don’t agree on much, but one thing we used to agree on is ending American involvement in endless foreign wars,” Cooke said in a statement. “I applaud the excellent work of the CIA and Delta teams in capturing a ruthless dictator in Nicolas Maduro — but where is the concrete plan for stability in the region? We haven’t seen one yet. Without it, our nation involves itself in another foreign conflict. I am disappointed — as I’m sure many Wisconsinites are disappointed — to see this administration betray a central promise when communities across Western Wisconsin are struggling.”

Cooke also said she thinks the president should be more focused on domestic issues.

Emily Berge, the president of the Eau Claire City Council who is running against Cooke in the Democratic primary, criticized the military action without any laudatory comments about deposing Maduro. 

“Derrick Van Orden and Donald Trump promised to be ‘America First’ and to end the longstanding waste of our tax dollars bombing other countries based on fabricated stories all in the pursuit of foreign oil,” Berge said in a statement. “They are both breaking their promises to the American people.”

Across the country, criticism of the attack has focused on the president’s decision to go into Venezuela without approval from Congress — which under the U.S. Constitution retains the authority to approve the use of military force. 

On X, Van Orden supported the lack of congressional notification before the operation, agreeing with a post that stated telling Congress would have resulted in details being leaked to the press. 

However, U.S. Sen. Tammy Baldwin has co-sponsored legislation prohibiting the use of military force in Venezuela without authorization by Congress. 

“President Trump stormed into Venezuela and is drawing the U.S. into another forever war just to take Venezuela’s oil and enrich his big oil buddies,” Baldwin said in a statement. “Simply put, this is not what Wisconsin families signed up for. This puts all the men and women who don the uniform at risk, reeks of corruption, and just shows the President is focused on everything except lowering costs and the issues that keep Wisconsin families up at night. The President cannot just start wars at a whim; he needs to get the people’s approval – and that means Congress signing off.”

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

A child receives a COVID-19 shot. A reduction in the list of federally recommended childhood immunization has sparked alarm among public health experts. (Photo by Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images)

A federal government announcement this week dropping some vaccines from the list recommended for routine childhood immunization has drawn opposition from medical professionals nationwide and concern from the Wisconsin health department.

The Wisconsin Department of Health Services is reviewing information from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) about the change in vaccine recommendations “and is doing so with great concern for the health of children in our state,” Jennifer Miller, a DHS communications specialist, told the Wisconsin Examiner in an email message Tuesday.

“Health professionals and parents deserve accurate, credible information,” Miller wrote. “We have not yet seen new scientific evidence that would justify changes to longstanding recommendations that have and continue to protect the health of children in the United States.”

The decision to stop recommending certain vaccines is “dangerous and unnecessary,” the president of the American Academy of Pediatrics said in a statement posted Monday at the professional association’s website.

What does the new childhood vaccine schedule actually mean for your family?

Among the diseases dropped from those recommended for routine immunization are hepatitis A and B, rotavirus, respiratory syncytial virus (RSV), flu, and meningococcal disease.

“AAP continues to recommend that children be immunized against these diseases, and for good reason; thanks to widespread childhood immunizations, the United States has fewer pediatric hospitalizations and fewer children facing serious health challenges than we would without this community protection,” said Dr. Andrew Racine, AAP president, in the statement.

Miller said that DHS will continue its assessment of the CDC’s recommendation changes as well as those from “other trusted medical and public health agencies.” The department plans to issue more information on Thursday, she said.

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

Sen. André Jacque (R-New Franken) and Rep. Barbara Dittrich (R-Oconomowoc) argued that a measure regulating the use of student names and pronouns was needed to standardize policies across the state. (Photo by Baylor Spears/Wisconsin Examiner)

A bill that would require school districts to inform parents when students want to use pronouns and names that differ from the ones given to them at birth received significant pushback Tuesday during a Senate Education Committee hearing.

The committee also took testimony on a bill to add video requirements to human growth and development curriculum as well as to opt the state into a federal school choice tax credit program.

Under SB 120, Wisconsin schools would be required to adopt a policy on name and pronoun changes by July 1, 2026. Policies would not require written authorization if school staff are using a shortened version of a student’s first or middle name.

Sen. André Jacque (R-New Franken) and Rep. Barbara Dittrich (R-Oconomowoc) argued that the measure was needed to standardize policies across the state and ensure parents are involved in conversations related to pronoun and name changes for students. Many testified in opposition to the bill, saying it would do harm to students and infringe on local decision making. 

“It is deeply troubling to me that school staff are being encouraged to keep parents out of major life decisions concerning their children, while at the same time these same officials cannot give them aspirin without parental approval. Why would schools promote secrecy in such a way?” Jacque said. “Something has gone terribly wrong in our education system if officials inherently perceive parents as harmful to their own children. Parents are legally accountable for the health and welfare of their own children… Hiding from us important things that are going on in their lives is not only disrespectful to parents, it is harmful to our children.” 

Jacque said the legislation would be consistent with a 2023 ruling by a Waukesha County Circuit Court judge, which found that a policy that allowed students in the Kettle Moraine School District to change their names and pronouns in school violated the rights of parents to make medical decisions for their children. The school district now has a policy that requires express parental consent for staff to use different names and pronouns. 

“To me, if there’s going to be a name and pronoun change the school should be working together with parents and students to advance that together,” Dittrich said. 

Sen. Chris Larson (D-Milwaukee) pushed back on the Republican bill, saying it would infringe on local communities’ ability to make decisions about policies and would harm students.

“You could sub out the words ‘parental decision making’ and say that the Legislature is going to have the best authority of what should happen — instead of parents, instead of local governments, instead of local school boards. You’re saying that you guys know better,” Larson said. 

“That’s a total distortion of what the bill does,” Dittrich said.

Larson asked the bill authors to consider a situation where parents may not be accepting of a student who wants to use a different name and pronouns. 

“You are expediting that situation by making it come to a head when there are parents who are less than understanding, who are brought up under a very strict and very incorrect… and you are forcing the question in a vulnerable population that is already overly targeted with transphobia with this, which is already overly targeted for bullying, which is already higher than the average rates of suicide and mental health. You are bullying them by bringing this bill forward,” Larson said.

“You are saying we should hide information and not facilitate those conversations,” Jacque replied. Dittrich added that Larson was “trampling all over parental rights.”

Paul Bartlett, a father of two transgender children, said the bill works to “prioritize the unfounded fears of conservative parents over the well-being of children.” 

“Like any parent, I want my children to thrive and be happy. They are well supported against these continued legislative attacks, but many trans and nonbinary kids are not,” Bartlett said. He said that school should be a refuge for unsupported students, “not a place where teachers are obligated to out and humiliate them.” 

Bartlett pointed out that lawmakers recently approved a law, known as Bradyn’s Law, that seeks to protect young people from being sexually extorted online. 

“That everyone agreed on [that bill] was important because what we were doing was preventing teenagers from killing themselves basically from humiliation… and yet these bills, they do the opposite,” Bartlett said. 

Bartlett noted that anti-trans laws have a negative effect on young transgender people. 

According to a 2024 survey by the Trevor Project, 45% of transgender and nonbinary youth have reported that they or their family have considered moving to a different state due to anti-LGBTQ+ politics and laws, and about 90% have said that their wellbeing was negatively affected by  recent politics. 

The Trevor Project survey, which pulled from the experiences of over 18,000 LGBTQ+ youth, also found that 39% of LGBTQ+ young people, including 46% of transgender and nonbinary young people, had seriously considered attempting suicide. 

“I just don’t understand, like, why do we keep doing this?” Bartlett said.

Abigail Swetz, executive director of FAIR Wisconsin, said bills that target transgender youth contribute to the mental health struggles they face. 

The bill is part of a slate of bills that Wisconsin Republicans introduced related to transgender people, including children, last year. According to the 2025 anti-trans bills tracker, there were over 1,020 bills introduced across the country including 20 in Wisconsin. 

“Inclusive policies, like making it possible for students to use an affirming name and the pronouns that best represent their identity in school in an easily accessible way — those policies are a pressure valve making it possible for [youth] to live fully and healthily,” Swetz said. 

Swetz said when she previously worked as a teacher she helped support students that were preparing to share information about themselves with their family and said it was important to follow the child’s lead. 

“The youth themselves are the experts in their own experience and have a better understanding than anyone about the challenges they might face when it comes to acceptance and safety at home. I have witnessed that conversation go well, and I have seen it go badly,” Swetz said. She said the bill that lawmakers were pushing “aims to traffic in distrust while a process like this, one that is directed by a well-supported young person, is actually how we can build trust between parents, children and school staff.” 

Peggy Wirtz-Olson, president of the Wisconsin Education Association Council (WEAC), said she was speaking out against the bill on behalf of the students who would be “devastated” by the bill. 

“All students deserve safe and welcoming schools, not only some of them, every single one of them, and that includes our trans students,” Wirtz-Olsen said. “The simple use of preferred names and pronouns is associated with a large decrease in depressive symptoms, suicidal thoughts and even suicidal attempts. Respecting preferred names and pronouns is a proven measure to show respect, earn trust, affirm our students, so they can feel safe, and they can focus on learning.”

Requiring videos of fetal development

Lawmakers also took testimony on a bill to add requirements for schools that offer human growth and development education. 

Human growth and development is optional for Wisconsin school districts, but for those that do opt in, state law includes some requirements including encouraging abstinence for students who are unmarried. 

SB 371 would add requirements that explanations of pregnancy, prenatal development and childbirth include a high definition video that shows the development of the brain, heart, sex organs and other organs, a rendering of the fertilization process and fetal development as well as a presentation on each trimester of pregnancy and the physical and emotional health of the mother. 

The bill would also require that instruction on parental responsibility include information on the importance of secure interpersonal relationships for infant mental health and on the value of reading to young children. 

Bill coauthors Sen. Mary Felzkowski (R-Tomahawk) and Rep. Amanda Nedweski (R-Pleasant Prairie) rejected the assertion that the bill is a mandate, noting that school districts do not have to teach human growth and development. 

“Today’s youth are technologically and visually inclined learners. We should lean into this to better convey this important information,” Felzkowski said. She also added that there should be bipartisan agreement around “preparing the young women of today with all the knowledge they could need to prepare for motherhood and young men for fatherhood.” 

“Being able to actually see the real life process of fetal development in action will be more tangible to students than textbooks or seeing it in a still diagram or a drawing. We have a resource at our disposal to bring science into our classroom and we should use it to our advantage to give students a stronger educational experience,” Nedweski said.

Nedweski also said it “might not be obvious to some people that using an iPad as a babysitter is not healthy” and that it is “far more important for their health to read to children and to bond with them.”

Larson asked the lawmakers what type of research they had to back up the change to state law.

“There’s not one specific scientific research that we’re relating this to,” Felzkowski said. “Just Google it and numerous things will pop up, or we can have our staff do that for you.”

No one spoke against the bill. 

The Wisconsin Public Health Association (WPHA) and the Wisconsin Association of Local Health Departments and Boards are registered against the bill, according to the Wisconsin Lobbying website. The organizations outlined their concerns with the Assembly version of the bill in a statement to the Wisconsin Examiner. 

The organizations said they opposed the legislation in part because it doesn’t do anything to restore the educational standards that were in place under the Healthy Youth Act. The former state law, which included a more comprehensive policy that required providing age-appropriate instruction in human growth and development, was adopted in 2010 but was later repealed in 2012 during a special session under former Gov. Scott Walker, who reestablished abstinence-only education. 

“Evidence-based, comprehensive instruction is essential to equip students with accurate information and skills necessary to make informed decisions about their sexual health, reducing rates of unintended pregnancies and sexually transmitted infections. It also promotes healthy relationships, consent, and emotional well-being, contributing to overall public health and safety,” the organizations said in the statement.

DPI spokesperson Chris Bucher told the Examiner in an email that the state already has similar guidelines for human development instruction in state law and said the bill is an example of infringing on local control. 

“It is up to districts to determine human development curriculum for what best fits their community. This is also another unfunded mandate for districts choosing to offer human development. District budgets are already stretched thin,” Bucher said. “If the Legislature wants to mandate specific instruction, they should provide funding for curriculum.”

Federal choice tax credit program 

SB 600 would instruct Gov. Tony Evers to opt Wisconsin into a federal school choice tax credit program.

Gov. Tony Evers has previously said he will not opt Wisconsin into the program, and if the bill were passed by the Senate and Assembly instructing Evers to take action, he could veto the legislation. 

A provision in the federal law signed by President Donald Trump in July, which goes into effect in 2027, will provide a dollar-for-dollar tax credit of up to $1,700 to people who donate to a qualifying “scholarship granting program” to support certain educational expenses including tuition and board at private schools, tutoring and books. 

However, governors in each state must decide whether to opt in and have until Jan. 1, 2027 to do so.

Felzkowski said it would be “shortsighted and self-defeating” to not opt into the tax credit, noting that other states including North Carolina, Tennessee, Nebraska, Texas, South Dakota and Iowa, are already opting in. 

If Wisconsinites opt into the federal tax credit, the money will be directed to private schools outside the state if the law does not pass, Felzkowski said. “Our dollars will be going to those states… instead of our students here in the state of Wisconsin.”

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

Job centers help people who are looking for work, including people who must conduct work searches each week to receive unemployment benefits. A bill to change the unemployment insurance rules has divided lawmakers despite being offered by the joint labor-management Unemployment Insurance Advisory Council. (Wisconsin Examiner photo)

This report has been updated

A bill that would boost Wisconsin’s top weekly jobless pay while penalizing people who receive federal disability pay is heading to the Assembly floor — so far with only GOP support. 

On Wednesday, Gov. Tony Evers’ communications director said the governor will veto the measure if it reaches his desk.

The legislation, AB 652, would also impose several previously vetoed changes to the state’s unemployment insurance (UI) law. It passed the Assembly’s labor committee Tuesday on a 6-3 vote, with all committee Democrats voting no.

The bill came from the Unemployment Insurance Advisory Council. With equal participation of labor and management, the council negotiates changes to the state’s unemployment insurance law every two years.

The council historically has been credited with giving neither side a lopsided advantage in revisions to the unemployment insurance system. The bill that the body offered for the current legislative session, however, has become problematic for some of the council’s staunchest advocates.

“I simply cannot vote for this particular bill as written,” said Rep. Christine Sinicki (D-Milwaukee) at Tuesday’s vote by the Assembly Committee on Workforce Development, Labor and Integrated Employment.

The measure would increase the maximum jobless pay for the first time in 12 years — to $395 a week from $370.

It would also formally repeal a 12-year-old ban on unemployment benefits for people who receive federal Social Security Disability Income. At the same time, however, it would cut an SSDI recipient’s jobless payments by the equivalent of half their weekly disability income.

A federal judge ruled in July 2024 that Wisconsin’s ban violated federal laws protecting people with disabilities.

In 2025 the judge ordered the Wisconsin Department of Workforce Development to stop denying jobless pay for SSDI recipients. The department was also ordered to review the cases going back to 2015 of people denied unemployment insurance due to the ban and make payments to those who were otherwise eligible.

Sinicki has long championed the role of the UI advisory council in revising the state’s UI laws, criticizing changes Republicans have proposed that didn’t go through the joint labor-management body.

Despite that, she’s been an outspoken critic of the UI advisory council’s current bill since it was introduced in November, and reiterated her opposition Tuesday because of the SSDI penalty.

Sinicki described an autistic constituent who works “a few hours a day” at a library. “She counts on that money. If she loses that job, she’s out that money,” Sinicki said. “We’re talking about a very small amount of money. It’s not saving the state millions and millions of dollars” to claw it back.

She predicted the bill would run afoul of the court order blocking the SSDI ban.

Sinicki also criticized “the paltry $25 increase” in the maximum weekly benefit.

“When you look around at the states around us, most of them are paying out twice as much as we do here,” she said. “And I just think it’s a slap in the face.”

State Rep. Paul Melotik (R-Grafton), the committee chair, defended the legislation.

“This is increasing what people are getting when they claim [unemployment],” Melotik said. “And it also is legal based on what the agreed-upon deal has been.”

In addition to its SSDI penalty, AB 652 would write into the state’s UI law changes that were in previous bills Evers has vetoed — two of them in the current legislative session.

Those provisions would penalize unemployment insurance recipients accused of “ghosting” job interviews or failing to show up for an offered job; increase the scrutiny of recipients’ work searches; impose new requirements for applicants to prove their identities; and require DWD to follow specific steps, including checking databases that track death records, employment records, citizenship and immigration records, to confirm the identity of a UI applicant.

In vetoing previous UI-related bills, Evers has cited in part the failure to put them through the advisory council process. Asked via email Tuesday whether Evers would veto the bill if it passes both houses, Evers’ communications director, Britt Cudaback, replied Wednesday morning: “Yes.”

DWD “has a number of concerns with the UIAC agreed upon bill package,” according to written testimony the department filed with the committee at a November public hearing on the bill.

Rachel Harvey, DWD’s legislative director, wrote that the bill’s $25 increase in the top weekly benefit from the maximum set in 2013 amounts to less than 7%. The increase “remains far below the maximum weekly benefit rate in neighboring states,” she wrote.

Harvey wrote that the testimony was provided “for information only,” but showed no enthusiasm for the legislation.

“The bill package includes reductions of Ul benefits for recipients of SSDI, multiple provisions previously vetoed by Gov. Evers, costly work search audit requirements, redundant measures already in effect at DWD to ensure program integrity, and new barriers for individuals receiving benefits,” she wrote

It makes those changes, she added, “all while failing to provide adequate resources for the department to implement these provisions in their entirety.”

This report has been updated at 1/7/2026, 9:38 a.m.

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

Gov. Tim Walz announces he will step down from the 2026 gubernatorial election Monday, Jan. 5, 2026 at the Minnesota State Capitol. (Photo by Nicole Neri/Minnesota Reformer)

The moment Gov. Tim Walz was cooked was little remarked upon at the time, but in retrospect illustrates how he and his administration were sleeping through an enveloping crisis.

At the late 2024 budget forecast, he said disability and autism services were driving state government spending beyond expectations. When he was asked about potential fraud in the autism program — about which we’d reported an FBI investigation six months prior — he seemed unfamiliar. I traded texts with an incredulous reporter who was there and wound up publishing a column called, “Minnesota: an easy mark.” 

More recently, Walz faced the full force of the right-wing propaganda machine in the past two months. It was a frightening sight to behold, and a healthier democracy would never be host to such a parasitical malignancy.

Although restoring American democratic habits of mind to eviscerate that propaganda machine should be on our lengthy, long-term to-do list, the lesson here for me is that the most underrated tool in the political toolbox is … governing.

Deadly dull, I know, but the word governor even has the word “govern” in it: competently administering programs to help people who need it; ensuring Minnesota’s children are learning literacy and numeracy; and managing the state’s vast infrastructure assets. That’s the job.

Former St. Paul Mayor Melvin Carter, another one-time rising star in Minnesota politics, recently faced the same sort of governing reckoning as Walz, when Mayor Kaohly Her pulled off an upset November victory promising to make stuff work again. May Democratic elected officials everywhere take notice.

We live in perilous times, no question, but Minnesotans are right to expect a minimum level of competency in these matters of public administration. It’s especially important for the party of government, i.e., the Democratic-Farmer-Labor Party, to pay attention to details, like whether a 3,000% increase in spending on the autism program is reasonable, especially when some of the providers had ties to Feeding Our Future.

Tim Walz is at heart a decent man, and he doesn’t deserve what’s been thrown at him in recent weeks — especially a despicable allegation leveled by the president of the United States and the odious propagandist Nick Shirley that Walz was involved in the assassination of former House Speaker Melissa Hortman.

He made some mistakes, but he’s not evil, unlike some of the loudest and most influential voices in American politics today, whose greed and lust for power are boundless.

Walz’s first term was marked by almost constant crisis, none of it his doing. He was a mostly steady hand, even as Republicans came to despise him during the pandemic and the aftermath of the police murder of George Floyd.

His second term comprised major legislative accomplishments — for which the credit mostly belongs to Hortman and the late Sen. Kari Dziedzic — as well as his (again, in retrospect) disastrous candidacy for vice president. All the while, thieves were stealing the people’s money with gusto.

Walz has served the community of Mankato, the people of Minnesota and his country.

And now he has saved us from what would have been a deeply divisive campaign, and which would have put the state of Minnesota under federal siege.

Unlike former President Joe Biden, who doomed his party and the country with his insistence on running for a second term, Walz is stepping aside before any more damage is done to his state and the DFL. He says he’ll focus all his energies on cleaning up the mess.

He deserves our thanks for that service and for making this decision.

Minnesota Reformer is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Minnesota Reformer maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor J. Patrick Coolican for questions: info@minnesotareformer.com.

The return of the sandhill crane to Wisconsin is a conservation success, but now the state needs to manage the population and the crop damage the birds can cause. (Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources)

A Wisconsin Assembly committee held a public hearing Tuesday on a bill that would require the state to hold an annual hunt of sandhill cranes. 

The sandhill crane was once nearly extinct and its recovery is seen as a conservation success story. Similar to the return of the wolf, the growth of the sandhill crane population has caused a long running political debate in Wisconsin. For years, Republicans in the Legislature have been pushing for a sandhill crane hunt — arguing the opening of recreational opportunities would benefit the state’s hunting industry and advocating for eating the birds’ meat. 

The proposal this session stems from a legislative study committee commissioned last summer which examined how to mitigate damage caused by the birds to the state’s farm fields and the possibility of holding a hunt. Estimates say that each year the birds cause almost $2 million in crop damage, mostly to corn seeds that are eaten before they can sprout. 

In the initial version of the bill proposed by the study committee, a number of provisions were included that would have directly addressed the crop damage. If a sandhill crane hunt is authorized, that would allow farmers to access money through an existing Department of Natural Resources damage abatement program, but otherwise all the farm-specific provisions have been removed from the version of the bill now being considered by the Assembly. 

If a bird is frequently damaging a farmer’s crops, a depredation permit is obtainable from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, however federal law requires that the bird’s carcass not be consumed. 

Rep. Paul Tittl (R-Manitowoc), the bill’s author, said the bill is a “well thought out proposal to relieve farmers and promote new opportunities for hunters.” 

But Democrats on the committee and critics of the bill questioned why the specific farmer assistance programs were cut out, how a hunt would affect the crane population and how much establishing a hunt would cost the DNR. 

Rep. Vincent Miresse (D-Stevens Point) noted that the Republicans were simultaneously arguing that holding a hunt wouldn’t significantly impact the state’s crane population and that holding a hunt would help mitigate the crop damage caused by the birds. 

“If it’s not going to impact the population very much, then how do we protect farmers’ investment in seed and corn sprouts and potatoes and cranberries, if we’re not going to actually impact the population to the benefit of the farmer,” Miresse said. 

Taylor Finger, the DNR’s game bird specialist, said in his testimony that opening the existing crop damage abatement program up to sandhill crane damage without adding additional funds to the program would result in “worse outcomes for farmers seeking assistance.” 

Republicans on the committee largely questioned the testimony of sandhill crane researchers. Anne Lacy, director of eastern flyway programs at the Baraboo-based International Crane Foundation, said she is concerned about holding a hunt in Wisconsin because it is one of the few places on the continent where sandhill cranes breed. 

“I don’t think there is a [population] number that justifies a hunt,” Lacy said. “There are many states that hunt sandhill cranes, and they do it successfully. They’ve been managed for years, including this population. But Wisconsin is a breeding state, so that puts a different spin on a hunting season … So it’s not so much a number. It is how a hunt affects this bird because of its ecology.”

In an extended back and forth in which he raised his voice, Rep. Shae Sortwell (R-Two Rivers) pushed Lacy to say she is supportive of sandhill crane hunts elsewhere. 

“All right, so I catch you dodging me, so therefore you do not personally support a hunt in any other state,” Sortwell said.

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

“The strong penalties in AB 677 serve as a stern warning and deterrent to bad actors," Rep. Amanda Nedweski said. (Photo by Baylor Spears/Wisconsin Examiner)

A bill that would establish child grooming as a felony crime in Wisconsin received a public hearing Tuesday.

Rep. Amanda Nedweski (R-Pleasant Prairie) and Sen. Jesse James (R-Thorp) introduced the bill late last year after a report from the Capital Times found that there were over 200 investigations into teacher licenses stemming from allegations of sexual misconduct or grooming from 2018 to 2023. 

Nedweski spoke about the case of Christian Enwright, a former Kenosha teacher who pleaded guilty last year to over a dozen misdemeanor counts of disorderly conduct after he had an inappropriate relationship with a 14-year-old student, during the Assembly Criminal Justice and Public Safety Committee hearing. 

“Unfortunately, the Christian Enwright story is all too common. For too long, these cases have been swept under the rug and child victims were put through a lifetime trauma, often knowing that the person who preyed upon them is likely out there doing it to another child,” Nedweski said. “The strong penalties in AB 677 serve as a stern warning and deterrent to bad actors. The bill ensures that adults who exploit positions of trust to manipulate and prey upon children can no longer hide behind misdemeanor charges or technical gaps in state law.” 

Under the AB 677, grooming would be defined as “a course of conduct, pattern of behavior, or series of acts with the intention to condition, seduce, solicit, lure, or entice a child for the purpose of producing distributing or possessing depictions of the child engaged in sexually explicit conduct.” 

Examples of behavior that would constitute grooming include verbal comments or conversations of a sexual nature directed at a child, inappropriate or sexualized physical contact; communication over text and social media to lure or entice a child; promising gifts, privileges, or special attention to lower a child’s inhibitions or create emotional dependence; and acts intended to isolate a child from family or peers.

While the bill was spurred in part due to cases involving teachers, the bill authors told the Assembly Criminal Justice and Public Safety Committee that the bill would not just address grooming happening in the school arena. 

“It is important to remember that grooming can happen anywhere — grooming can happen anywhere, not just in our schools. This bill is not targeted at schools, but at grooming whenever and wherever it might happen,” James said. “I believe that it will have a strong deterrence effect. Clear criminalization of grooming behavior sends a strong message that predatory conduct will not be tolerated in Wisconsin.” 

A person convicted of a grooming charge, under the bill, would be guilty of a Class G felony. The charge would increase to a Class F felony if the person is in a position of trust or authority, and to a Class E felony if the child has a disability and to a Class D felony if the violation involves two or more children. A convicted person would need to register as a sex offender.

During the hearing, Rep. Jodi Emerson (D-Eau Claire) said she thinks the bill is important, but expressed some concerns about whether it could result in a “chilling effect” that would discourage people from taking on mentorship roles or interacting with children. She said she wanted to ensure that lawmakers got the definition of grooming correct.  

“I think that this is a bill that if we get it right, we are going to protect so many kids and if we get it wrong, we are going to put a lot of people at risk,” Emerson said. 

Nedweski said legislators should remember that the bill would be related to a pattern of behavior, not a one-time occurrence, that there would need to be the intention to “entice” a child and it would be up to a prosecutor to decide whether a person’s behavior fits the crime. 

“That’s why we work so hard to get the definition as right as we can,” Nedweski said, adding that she and her colleagues  have worked with law enforcement and prosecutors to develop the bill and looked at what other states have done. “Nothing is ever going to be 100% perfect, but I think we’re pretty darn close.” 

Rich Judge, DPI assistant state superintendent for the division of government and public affairs, registered in favor of the bill on behalf of the agency, though he did not provide testimony. DPI Superintendent Jill Underly has previously said defining grooming is one of the top steps the state can take to work to address the issue.

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

Milwaukee's King Park surrounded by yellow tape after Sam Sharpe, a resident of a temporary encampment there, was shot by Ohio police officers during the 2024 Republican National Convention. (Henry Redman | Wisconsin Examiner)

The Wisconsin Assembly Committee on Criminal Justice and Public Safety on Tuesday held a public hearing on a pair of bills that would require homeless people on the state’s sex offender registry to wear ankle monitors and increase the penalty for selling drugs close to homeless shelters. 

Under the first bill, authored by Rep. Dave Maxey (R-New Berlin), people required to sign up for the sex offender registry and unable to provide a permanent address must be placed under GPS monitoring. An estimated 16% of Wisconsin’s homeless population is on the sex offender registry, according to Maxey, who said he wanted to make sure this population was not a blind spot for Department of Corrections monitoring of people on the list. 

“This bill is a clear and common-sense public safety measure that applies one uniform standard so every registrant is monitored at the same level, regardless of housing status,” Maxey said. “This is a straightforward way to protect every member of our society.”

A number of Democrats on the committee had concerns about putting the proposal into practice. 

Rep. Jodi Emerson (D-Eau Claire) wondered if the cost of the monitoring would end up being paid for by the state. 

“Most times, the GPS monitoring is paid for by the person who needs to wear it eventually,” Emerson said. “And if they don’t have the resources to afford a home, I don’t know if they’re going to have the resources to pay the state back for this. And is this something that we’re just going to end up incurring extra costs on? I’m trying to balance the cost versus safety factor.”

Rep. Sequanna Taylor (D-Milwaukee) noted that the ankle monitors need to be regularly charged, which might pose a challenge for people without a home. 

“When we talk about the GPS, I know even the people that are not in this situation, who may be on it, there are sometimes tweaks or glitches with them, and also the everyday charging, if we’re talking about someone who’s homeless, is not staying anywhere, I guess I’m just trying to see, how can we encompass or ensure that it will be charged, because once it’s not able to be charged and it’s off, are they meant to go report somewhere or is that a process we haven’t thought about yet?”

Another bill heard by the committee Tuesday, authored by Rep. Bob Donovan (R-Greenfield), would add homeless shelters to the list of places including schools, government buildings and public parks that are considered drug-free zones. Convictions for selling drugs within these zones carry harsher penalties. 

“Drug-related crimes pose a severe threat to community safety, particularly in areas where at-risk populations are located, current law wisely imposes enhanced penalties for distributing illegal drugs within 1,000 feet of sensitive locations like schools and parks, adding up to five years to the maximum sentence,” Donovan said. “These Drug Free Zones deter illegal activity and safeguard those who are most vulnerable. However, homeless shelters are not included in these protections. Many, many homeless individuals face profound challenges, including addiction and mental health issues. Extending these zones is about punishing malicious drug dealers who prey upon the homeless while providing basic security for them as they attempt to reenter society.”

But advocates for addiction treatment and criminal justice reform questioned the wisdom of the proposal. 

Dr. Charles Schauberger, an Onalaska resident and president of the Wisconsin Society of Addiction Medicine, said making homeless shelters a drug-free zone could increase police presence around a shelter, which might push homeless drug users away from the area and into more dangerous situations. 

“This legislation is not only ineffective in helping homeless people, but potentially worsens the situation,” Schauberger said. “Increasing criminal penalties for substance-related offenses near shelters may lead to increased law enforcement presence around these facilities for people who use substances they may carry, or may even carry a small amount for personal use, which creates a great deal of fear, fear of harassment, fear of incarceration, fear of losing the only safe place they have yet to go.”

He added that when people are afraid to use shelters, “they don’t disappear. They move further into unsafe spaces. They sleep outside. They use substances alone. They disengage from services. They increase risk of overdose. Medical emergencies, deaths make it much harder for clinicians like me to reach them.”

Amanda Merkwae, advocacy director of the ACLU of Wisconsin, said that while the proposal has an “admirable goal” it comes with unintended consequences. She said that in the state’s larger, denser cities, so much of the land is covered by various drug-free zones that lots of drug-related activity is punished there more harshly than in rural parts of the state. 

“In densely populated urban areas, that radius around each of these integrated locations overlaps to the point where sometimes an entire city can become functionally a drug-free zone,” she said, noting that the city of Milwaukee contains 156 public schools, 101 private schools, 12 multi-unit public housing facilities, four public swimming pools, dozens of youth and community centers, hundreds of child care facilities, six correctional facilities and more than 130 public parks. 

“So studies have shown that these zones don’t necessarily track where drug activity is most prevalent, but rather where certain populations are concentrated,” she said. “So we create this kind of two-tiered justice system based on geography rather than the nature of the crime. So residents in cities can face greater exposure to enhanced maximum penalties than those in rural or suburban areas for the exact same conduct.”

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

Protesters supporting U.S. President Donald Trump break into the U.S. Capitol on January 6, 2021, in Washington, D.C. (Photo by Win McNamee/Getty Images)

Five years ago today we were transfixed by the surreal spectacle of the attack on the U.S. Capitol. The violence and horror of that day was made more bearable when the insurrectionists were arrested and the election results they tried to overturn were certified.

But now they’re back, pardoned by President Donald Trump, released from prison and planning to parade triumphantly today through the streets of Washington, D.C. 

Among the people convicted and later pardoned by Trump, at least 33 have been arrested and charged with new crimes, according to the watchdog group Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington. Their alleged continuing criminal behaviors include rape, illegal possession of weapons, firing on police officers, and, in the case of Chrisopher Moynihan, threatening to murder House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries. 

Some of the most violent offenders are back behind bars. But the most powerful proponents of the Big Lie, including Trump himself, the enablers who staff his administration and the Wisconsin Republicans who hatched the fake electors scheme to try to overturn the results of the 2020 election, continue to work to undermine our democracy. 

“We must continue to defeat election deniers and the threats they pose,” the Wisconsin-based progressive firm Law Forward declares on its website, in a section devoted to a timeline of the fake electors scheme. Law Forward brought the first class-action lawsuit against the fake electors, and forced the release of documents, text messages and other evidence showing how the plot unfolded, starting in Wisconsin. They present the timeline “as a call to action for every American to see how close our democracy came to toppling and how the freedom to vote must continue to be protected, not taken for granted.” 

For a few years it seemed as though we had dispelled the nightmare of Jan. 6. But the lawless, emboldened second Trump administration has dragged us back to that scary, dangerous time.

The brave work of people like Jeff Mandell, founder of Law Forward, and the other lawyers, judges and investigators who continue to struggle against the agents of authoritarianism trying to destroy American democracy is still making a difference. 

Last month, Dane County Judge John Hyland found probable cause to continue the trial of Wisconsin attorney James Troupis and Trump campaign aide Mike Roman, charged with felony forgery by Wisconsin Attorney General Josh Kaul in connection with the fake electors scheme. Hyland  rejected Troupis’ desperate effort to scuttle the case by claiming another judge had a personal bias against him.

Wisconsin attorney Ken Cheseboro, the originator of the fake electors plot, is also facing felony charges.

As Trump and his gang openly defy the U.S. Constitution, pursue baseless, vindictive prosecutions of their political enemies, launch military actions without the consent of Congress, threaten to seize other countries and use their positions to enrich themselves while destroying the public welfare, it feels as through that dark moment on Jan. 6 when American democracy was under physical attack was just the beginning.

But as Mandell told me last year, a few months after Trump took office, “I think building a stronger, more resilient democracy in Wisconsin is its own form of resistance.”

“When things feel most shocking and unstable at the federal level,” at the state and local level, Mandell said, “we can show our institutions still work and provide some reassurance.” 

We need that reassurance today more than ever.

“We are slow to realize that democracy is a life and involves continual struggle,” said Robert M. La Follette, the great governor and senator from Wisconsin and founder of the Progressive movement. I’m grateful for the Wisconsinites today who, like La Follette, are committed to that life and willing to continue the struggle.

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

Milwaukee County Circuit Judge Hannah Dugan leaves the Milwaukee Federal Courthouse on May 15, 2025. Judge Dugan appeared in federal court to answer charges that she helped Eduardo Flores-Ruiz, an undocumented immigrant, elude federal arrest while he was making an appearance in her courtroom on April 18. (Photo by Scott Olson/Getty Images)

Milwaukee County Judge Hannah Dugan is resigning after she was convicted last month of a felony for helping a man avoid immigration enforcement agents in the county courthouse. 

Dugan submitted her letter of resignation to Gov. Tony Evers on Saturday, writing that serving as a judge has been “the honor of my life.” 

“Behind the bench, I have presided over thousands and thousands of cases — with a commitment to treat all persons with dignity and respect, to act justly, deliberatively, and consistently, and to maintain a courtroom with the decorum and safety the public deserves,” Dugan wrote.

Dugan was convicted last month of felony obstruction of justice following a four-day federal trial. The split jury also found she was not guilty of a related misdemeanor. 

The case against her stemmed from an incident at the courthouse April 18 in which she directed an immigrant appearing before her who was in the U.S. without legal authorization through a side door out of her courtroom while federal agents waited in the hallway outside to arrest him. Agents later apprehended the man outside the building. 

Since her April arrest, Dugan’s case has drawn national political attention as an illustration of the Trump administration’s efforts to increase immigration enforcement in ways that many critics say are heavy handed.  

Following the verdict, Wisconsin Republicans demanded that Dugan resign immediately, citing state law that forbids anyone who has been convicted of a felony from serving as a judge. She has been suspended from duty since her arrest. 

Dugan has not yet been sentenced and her legal team has signaled they’ll make a broad and lengthy appeal effort. But Dugan wrote in her letter that the people of Milwaukee County need a permanent judge on the bench. 

“I am the subject of unprecedented federal legal proceedings, which are far from concluded but which present immense and complex challenges that threaten the independence of our judiciary,” Dugan wrote. “I am pursuing this fight for myself and for our independent judiciary. However, the Wisconsin citizens that I cherish deserve to start the year with a judge on the bench in Milwaukee County Branch 31 rather than have the fate of that Court rest in a partisan fight in the state Legislature.”

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

Gov. Tim Walz speaks after the end of the special session in June Tuesday, June 10, 2025 at the Minnesota State Capitol. (Photo by Nicole Neri/Minnesota Reformer)

Gov. Tim Walz ended his campaign for a historic third term on Monday amid mounting pressure from members of his own party and intense attacks from Republicans over widespread fraud in state-run social services programs.

Walz defended his record in a statement and said he was certain he could win a third term, but couldn’t give his entire attention to rooting out fraud while running a campaign.

“I’ve decided to step out of the race and let others worry about the election while I focus on the work,” Walz said in a statement.

Some Democratic-Farmer-Labor elected officials have quietly worried for months that Walz’s name at the top of the ticket would hand Republicans the governorship for the first time in 15 years and sink Democrats’ prospects down the ballot.

Walz met on Sunday with U.S. Sen. Amy Klobuchar, who expressed her interest in running for governor, The New York Times reported. Other possible Democratic candidates include Attorney General Keith Ellison and Secretary of State Steve Simon

A slew of Republicans have already entered the race including House Speaker Lisa Demuth, MyPillow CEO Mike Lindell and former congressional candidate Kendall Qualls.

Walz spent 12 years in Congress before winning the governor’s race in 2018. After the DFL won control of both chambers of the Legislature in 2022, Walz signed in the law the most significant progressive agenda in at least a generation, including free school meals for all students; paid family and medical leave; and the legalization of marijuana.

He burst onto the national political stage in 2024 after former President Joe Biden abandoned his campaign for re-election and then-Vice President Kamala Harris selected Walz as her running mate. Walz became a frequent target of President Donald Trump, whose attacks continued even after Trump won the presidential election.

Walz announced in September that he would run for an unprecedented third, four-year term, after deliberating for months. The assassination of Walz’s friend and close ally, House Speaker Emerita Melissa Hortman in June, forced Walz and his family to weigh the potential costs of another four years in office.

Trump’s attacks on Walz ratcheted up in recent months as national Republicans learned about the wide-scale fraud that has taken place in Minnesota’s social services programs during his tenure, including the highly-publicized Feeding Our Future scandal, in which fraudsters pocketed hundreds of millions in taxpayer dollars intended to feed children during the pandemic.

In December, Assistant U.S. Attorney Joe Thompson announced new fraud charges in state-administered Medicaid programs, estimating that fraudsters have stolen as much as $9 billion in government funds. Walz disputed Thompson’s estimate, painting it as a political attack.

Minnesota Reformer is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Minnesota Reformer maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor J. Patrick Coolican for questions: info@minnesotareformer.com.

Enrique Casiano addresses a rally at the Wisconsin State Capitol on Sept. 4, 2025, during a strike by UAW-represented employees against Mercyhealth East Clinic in Janesville. (Photo courtesy of Enrique Casiano)

Among the Democrats running for the chance to challenge the Republican incumbent in Wisconsin’s 1st Congressional District are a nurse, a union leader, a working class activist and a Hispanic professional.

A fifth candidate, Enrique Casiano of Janesville, happens to check all four of those boxes. A 47-year-old registered nurse, Casiano said his decision to join the Democratic field of hopefuls for the 1st District seat arose during a four-month strike at the Mercyhealth East Clinic in Janesville, where he is a leader in United Auto Workers Local 95.

The walkout of UAW-represented nurses, physical therapists, medical assistants and maintenance employees at the clinic started July 2, centered on health care costs, wages and security for employees.

“When September came around we were still on strike,” Casiano recalled. “I was thinking to myself, What in the world is going on? Why would a company do this to their employees? Why would this even be allowed?”

He and fellow union members blamed federal labor laws. Casiano said they have “no teeth” and don’t hold employers accountable.

“That has to be changed at a national level,” Casiano said. “That’s what motivated me to get out there and run for Congress.”

The strike ended Nov. 3, when the clinic management and the union ratified a new contract. The agreement led to raises that were higher than nonunion employees received elsewhere in the Mercyhealth system, Casiano said, although still less than what the union had originally sought. Health care costs for employees will be “basically three times” what they were previously, he added.

“This was a big concession,” Casiano said. “Something I told the membership, this should be a wake-up call for everybody to vote for someone who’s going to do something about the health care crisis in our nation.”

Casiano argues that health care is a human right and government should do more to prevent health care costs from leaving people in debt or sending them into bankruptcy.

“If you have the money, you’ll get care,” he said. “If you don’t have the money, I’ve seen how many people end up being homeless or go into great debt because of their health.”

He supports Medicare for All, but also favors giving states greater freedom to regulate the health care systems. He opposes consolidation among health care groups and favors breaking up large hospital and health care systems, as well as keeping for-profit businesses, including private equity and venture capital firms, out of health care.

“The current system rewards profiting from people’s health care crisis,” Casiano said. “It is not a system of prevention and rewarding the best health care outcomes and practices.”

Casiano said that updating the 1930s-era National Labor Relations Act with laws that would strengthen the rights of workers to union representation is a top priority of his. If elected he would also seek to enact stronger federal laws against wage theft and against misclassifying workers as independent contractors with fewer protections. He said that he also wants “real tax relief to the working class” instead of the wealthy.

Casiano is one of five Democrats vying for the chance to challenge U.S. Rep. Bryan Steil, the Republican incumbent in the 1st District now in his fourth term.

“I’m part of the working class. I’m not a lawyer. I’m not a politician,” Casiano said — although he readily acknowledged that every other Democrat competing for the nomination could make the same claim.

“Pretty much everybody running this time around, we’re all just working class people who want to see a change in the 1st District,” he said.

The rest of the Democratic field includes ironworker Randy Bryce, emergency room nurse Mitchell Berman, Racine community activist Gage Stills and university administrator Miguel Aranda.

As he shapes his campaign, Casiano is leaning into his background as a health care professional, a union activist and also a member of the Hispanic community.

He said the Trump administration’s round-ups of immigrants — which has caught up U.S. citizens in addition to people without legal immigration status — has a personal dimension.

“It’s sad that I, when I go to Milwaukee, can be stopped [by police] just because of the way I look and the way I talk,” he said. “At the national level, we’re attacking specific [ethnic groups of] people, which we’ve never done before.”

The 1st Congressional District has been solidly Republican since the mid-1990s. Steil succeeded Paul Ryan in the office when Ryan stepped aside  in 2018 after a 20-year tenure. A corporate lawyer and former Ryan aide, Steil won with margins of 9 to 10 points in 2022 and 2024.

The Cook Political Report has rated the district as likely Republican in 2026, and gives the GOP a 2-point advantage based on past presidential elections.

Casiano contends political apathy accounts for Steil’s success. “In the last election, many of my coworkers, they just did not go out to vote,” he said. “It’s not winnable, somebody told me [because] it’s all about the money.”

He contends that 2026 can be different.

“What’s changed now is the Trump administration and how messed up everything is going,” Casiano said. “Only people that have blinders on will say everything is OK, because it’s not.”

Casiano said he knows he’s a long-shot candidate, but he believes Steil is vulnerable and that people can be motivated to vote if candidates reach out to them.

“I know he has let down a lot of his constituents,” Casiano said. “We know he’s not out there for the farmers, or some of the small businesses” in the district, he added. “That’s the big message we’ve got to bring forward.”

He believes enough people have stayed away from the polls in the past to make a difference in the outcome for 2026.

“We have to go and start talking to Black and brown people in our community and get them out to vote,” Casiano said. “This is what I’m going to be fighting for.”

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE