When a student experiencing homelessness moves in the middle of the night, how quickly can your district get them a ride to school the next morning? When a student with an IEP can’t be adequately served by a traditional bus route, who do you call — and what happens if they don’t show up?

For most transportation directors, solving for the most complex student needs consumes 95% of your time. McKinney-Vento compliance, IEP mandates, chronic absenteeism, driver shortages, and the everyday scramble of last-minute changes don’t slow down — and neither can you.

Join School Transportation News and HopSkipDrive for a candid, peer-led conversation on how districts are rethinking their transportation mix to serve every student — not just the ones the yellow bus can reach. You’ll hear directly from a McKinney-Vento Coordinator and a Director of Pupil Transportation and Fleet Management who have navigated these challenges firsthand, alongside a HopSkipDrive transportation analyst who has sat on both sides of the table.

We’ll dig into the real costs and tradeoffs of different transportation operating models — Transportation Network Companies (TNCs), brokers, and taxis — and explore what a smarter, multimodal approach can mean for attendance, compliance, and the students who need you most. You’ll leave this webinar with:

• A clearer framework for evaluating transportation operating models and where each fits in your district’s plan
• A practical look at what McKinney-Vento transportation can and should look like
• Real-world strategies for using supplemental transportation to reduce chronic absenteeism
• A comparison of TNCs, brokers, taxis, and white fleets: what each model actually delivers in terms of safety, speed, visibility, cost effectiveness, and compliance

This content is brought to you by HopSkipDrive

REGISTER BELOW

Featured speakers:

Claire Bergman
McKinney-Vento Coordinator
Sun Prairie Area School District (WI)

Claire Bergman currently serves as the McKinney-Vento Coordinator for the Sun Prairie Area School District, where she is dedicated to removing barriers to education for students experiencing housing instability. With a deep passion for policy reform and systems-level change, focuses on strengthening districtwide support frameworks to ensure equitable outcomes for vulnerable students and their families. Ms. Bergman holds a Master’s in Social Work from Loyola University Chicago.

 

MeChale’ Johnson
Director, Office of Pupil Transportation and Fleet Management
Alexandria City Public Schools (VA)

MeChale’ Johnson is the Director of Pupil Transportation and Fleet Management for Alexandria City Public Schools (ACPS). For the past four years, she has overseen a fleet of 124 school buses and more than 85 passenger vehicles, ensuring the safe and reliable transportation of students to and from school each day. Her operation also provides specialized transportation services for students with unique needs through partnerships with contracted public carrier vendors. Prior to joining ACPS, Ms. Johnson served as the Director of Transportation for Falls Church City Public Schools. She possesses more than 15 years of experience in transportation management, beginning her career at the University of Maryland (UMD), where she supervised transportation services that supported university students commuting to campus from surrounding counties and local communities. She also spent several years in public mass transit leadership with the Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority (WMATA). Ms. Johnson holds a bachelor’s degree in Criminology and Criminal Justice from the University of Maryland and a Master of Business Administration (MBA).

Greg Dutton
Senior Transportation Analyst
HopSkipDrive
Former Director of Transportation
Renton School District (WA)

Greg Dutton is a Senior Transportation Analyst at HopSkipDrive with nearly three decades of experience spanning transportation operations and technology leadership. Greg brings a uniquely informed perspective to his role — having first engaged with HopSkipDrive on the client side as Director of Transportation at Renton School District in Washington State, he has a deep understanding of the daily struggles and tough decisions facing school transportation professionals, including issues related to the national school bus driver shortage. In that role, Greg led all aspects of the district’s transportation department — from personnel management and route planning to budget administration, safety, and fleet operations. Prior to that, Greg held the role of Assistant Director of Transportation, overseeing daily operations, accident investigations, and coordination with law enforcement and community stakeholders. He holds an MBA in Telecommunications Management from Alaska Pacific University, a BA in Telecommunications from Texas Tech University, and an AA in Mass Communications from Amarillo College.

The post (Free Webinar) Beyond the Bus: Comparing Transportation Models for Serving Today’s Most Complex Student Needs appeared first on School Transportation News.

During a nearly four-hour hearing Thursday at the Bayfield County Courthouse in the city of Washburn, Wisconsin, Iron County Circuit Judge John Anderson consistently pressed lawyers petitioning for and against a stay or stoppage of work to reroute the Enbridge Line 5 pipeline in northern Wisconsin on the standard he should use in determining the likelihood of success of a judicial review.

Environmental groups and the Bad River Band of Lake Superior Chippewa Indians have applied for a stay of the Enbridge project based on their petition for review of an administrative court judge’s decision in February to approve permits to go forward with a 41-mile pipeline project. The plan is to reroute the pipeline around the Bad River reservation, after a court finding that the existing pipeline is illegally trespassing on tribal land.

Pipeline opponents argued that the judicial review would ultimately be successful, in part because the Department of Natural Resources (DNR) had inappropriately applied a state statute governing navigable waterways, and that ongoing pipeline work before the review is completed would result in irreversible harm. Even though the new route does not cross the reservation, it endangers water that the tribe depends on, Bad River representatives and environmental groups argue.

The legal counsel for the DNR and Enbridge pushed back, noting that there had been extensive work and public scrutiny of Enbridge’s permit application, and that there wasn’t a high likelihood of the judicial review succeeding.

Judge Anderson said after he received briefs from all parties by April 27, he will decide on the stay, depending on whether he is “convinced” the judicial review would “not go further.”

He framed his future decision on the negative chances of the review.

Arguments for the stay

“The Band has a significant interest,” said John Petoskey, an Earthjustice attorney representing Bad River. “It has an interdependent relationship, and it’s the only homeland it has ever had. The natural landscape is far more than a resource. It’s a way of life. That way of life requires a sustainable environment. It’s undisputed that the project will cause an impact.”

Judge Anderson questioned how to determine “irreparable” or “irreversible” damage.

Petoskey responded that destroying a wetland that has not been damaged in 100 years would mean the area will never be the same.

“When wetlands are destroyed, they don’t clean water or control floods and no longer provide services that help the tribe,” he said.

Petoskey also said the reroute will create a “belt” of restricted area around the reservation, where if tribal members go, they could be charged with a felony. However, later, Enbridge lawyer Eric Maassen, said Enbridge would recognize the rights of all tribal members who had a legal right to be on the land.

Robert Lee, representing the Sierra Club, League of Women Voters and 350 Wisconsin, expressed concern about at least 72 waterways the pipeline is supposed to cross.

He argued that under statute 30.12, only the riparian owners (landowners whose property adjoins or contains a natural waterway, and who therefore have the right to reasonable use of the water) can apply for permits for the waterways, and noted that Enbridge is not the riparian owner but a “co-applicant” with the riparian owners.

“Enbridge has the ability to acquire land,” he said, adding that all the company had obtained were easements with property owners.

“Under our view, that is unlawful if they are not the riparian owner,” he said.

Lee also noted that Enbridge had not been specific about what and where it would remove substances from navigable waters, and said under statute 30.20 the DNR had to know specifically what is to be removed to make a decision on a permit. He also noted that Enbridge said some bedrock would be destroyed but wasn’t specific where that would occur.

“If they don’t know the waters where blasting is to take place then public interest is not met,” he said.

Representing Clean Wisconsin, Evan Feinauer said, “They can’t build a pipeline and not do irreparable harm.”

Judge Anderson responded, “Can’t you say that about any project? Where is the line?

Feinauer responded, “Environmental resources will never be the same, even under the best-case scenario.”

Feinauer claimed the DNR didn’t have all the information in front of it when it issued permits, and Judge Anderson asked, “Whose fault was that?” Feinauer said Enbridge didn’t provide needed information on all the potential waterway crossings, including wetlands Enbridge had failed to include in its project proposal.

“I can’t think of a more important question than which wetlands,” said Feinauer.

Arguments against the stay

DNR counsel Gabe Johnson-Karp  said the factors Judge Anderson should consider in issuing a stay are “irrevocable harm” and “success on the merits” of winning the judicial review.  

“I have to consider the likelihood of success,” said Judge Anderson. “How do I do that if I don’t have the record yet?”  Anderson added that he does not intend to read all 113,000 pages of submitted documents.

Johnson-Karp also said the petitioners had failed to provide a “factual showing” of harm and had only addressed a “generalized harm.”

Anderson asked why the parties were even in court if four major waterway permits had not yet been issued. Johnson-Karp acknowledged a lot more work on the pipeline could be done before the four permits are issued.

Regarding the right to cross a navigable waterway and whether the application is solely the riparian owner’s responsibility, Johnson-Karp said the DNR has had a consistent practice of using a “co-applicant approach,” such as Enbridge is using, where Enbridge has an easement with owners.

Maassen also noted there were only four permits being pursued on the project, and he anticipated that they would be opposed.

Maassen said Enbridge has a “high confidence” it could lawfully work on the permit sites, and added, “Just because there are wetlands and forest doesn’t mean you don’t do infrastructure.”

If a three-month stay were issued, Maassen said, in actuality, it would be more likely to delay the project by six months as workers who had been assigned to the project would have left and more time would be needed to hire others.

Maassen also argued that Enbridge didn’t need to be the riparian owner on property it would only be working on in some cases for 24-48 hours.

And he contested the characterization that the blasting of bedrock is not in the public interest as a “woeful miscategorization.”

“If they can’t convince me there is a likelihood on the merits, does it end there?” Judge Anderson asked Maassen about the success of the judicial review and the request for a stay, and Maassen responded, “It does.”

Maassen added that if the pipeline didn’t proceed, it would increase the “threat to energy security” and place up to 700 union jobs at risk.

He also noted that there is a stay of a judgment in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit for Enbridge to stop using the existing Line 5 on the reservation by June 16. If  that judgement does not remain stayed, he said, it could negatively impact 10 refineries and cut off most of the propane supply for Michigan.

“There are no alternatives to this line,” said Maassen. “Some refineries will have to shut down, resulting in hundreds of millions of losses.

Lastly, Maassen said Enbridge is also requesting that the petitioners post a $49 million bond if a stay is ordered and Enbridge incurs a loss from the delay.

Petoskey, the Bad River lawyer, said the court did not have to consider economic factors when making decisions about wetlands, and he also noted courts have rejected requests for a bond when the litigants are seeking to protect environmental resources.

Lee, arguing for the Sierra Club, said the court has a responsibility to follow the “letter of the law to have riparian ownership,” and challenged the DNR’s use of “co-applicants” as a “made-up” application of the statute.

Asked by Anderson on the standard of success to be used in issuing a stay, Lee responded, “50-50 probability of success; that is sufficient.”

“I don’t think there is a reasonable likelihood of success,” countered Johnson-Karp on the chance the judicial appeal would succeed.

Anderson asked why Enbridge shouldn’t be the riparian owner or require Enbridge to buy the land? Maassen responded, “The whole notion that being a co-applicant is inappropriate I think is a bad argument.”

Anderson asked all the lawyers to submit briefs within 10 days, with specific attention on the issues he had raised during the hearing.

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

The Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources held a public hearing Tuesday on a request from the AI data center company Vantage for an air quality permit to operate 45 diesel backup generators at the company’s proposed hyperscale data center in Port Washington.

The department has already granted a preliminary approval to the permit request. Members of the public complained at the virtual hearing that the DNR chose not to conduct a full environmental impact assessment — despite southeastern Wisconsin’s existing classification as a high air pollution region. 

Michael Greif, an attorney with Midwest Environmental Advocates, said that all 45 generators operating at once for one hour would emit the same amount of nitrogen oxides as more than 5 million cars driving over one mile of nearby Interstate 43 — or seven times the hourly nitrogen oxide emissions for all of Ozaukee County. Exposure to nitrogen oxides have been tied to respiratory issues such as asthma. 

“It is also one of the first hyper scale AI data centers proposed in Wisconsin,” Grief said. “So it raises new and unreserved questions about energy use, climate impacts, air pollution and public health, and for all those reasons and more, DNR is legally required to prepare an EIS for the Vantage data center.”

Residents of the area put it more simply, complaining about the air pollution they’re already dealing with every day. 

“Our lakeshore is at capacity,” Sheboygan resident Rebecca Clarke said. 

Many speakers also expressed frustration at their lack of a voice in the state’s surge in data center development and proposals. 

“This community has not been given a fair process,” Port Washington resident Carri Prom said. “We’ve been speaking about this process for months. We’ve largely been ignored, and yet, here we are.”

The air pollution permit is one of the DNR’s few chances to weigh in on a data center proposal that has drawn widespread opposition in Port Washington and across the state. The Public Service Commission, the agency that regulates utility companies in Wisconsin, has given the public little confidence it will do enough to prevent electric bills from increasing.

Local zoning boards and city councils, enticed by the promise of property tax revenue, have often signed off on data centers after agreeing to non-disclosure agreements to keep the details away from their constituents. 

“I think things are very backwards, and that we’re proceeding with all of these projects before we even have any idea of how to protect residents,” said Sarah Zarling, an environmental organizer who’s been involved in the data center fight. 

Over the past year, as the number of data centers operating, under construction or proposed has continued to increase, public opposition has grown. Multiple pieces of legislation for regulating data centers were proposed by lawmakers of both parties, yet none passed  before legislators adjourned for the year. Data centers have become a big issue in the Democratic primary for governor and a number of environmental groups have called for a moratorium on data center development until stricter regulations can be put into law. 

Brett Korte, a staff attorney at Clean Wisconsin, told the Wisconsin Examiner in a statement after Tuesday’s hearing that the disconnected government approval process only highlights Wisconsin’s lack of a coherent plan.

“One of the pressing issues related to the data center boom currently underway in Wisconsin is that there is no overarching plan to ensure they don’t harm communities in our state,” he said. “Nor is there even an effort to fully understand the harm they will cause. Local governments make zoning decisions, the PSC approves the construction of power plants and transmission lines, and the DNR implements water regulations and issues air permits.” Yet no state office is responsible for looking at all of the issues raised by data centers at once.

Korte added that a better process for planning future renewable energy sources, stronger carbon emission standards and a more concrete plan for achieving Gov. Tony Evers’ goal of powering the state with 100% clean energy by 2050 would help the state better manage data center growth. 

“No one is asking: Do the benefits of data centers outweigh their environmental harm?” he continued. “That is why Clean Wisconsin continues to call for a pause on data center construction until the state has a comprehensive plan to regulate their development.”

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

A legal brief filed late last week seeks to have a Dane County judge declare that an 1897 law banning the practice of fusion voting is unconstitutional because it restricts the rights to a “free government,” equal protection and freedom of speech through a law that was passed to explicitly create a partisan electoral advantage. 

The motion was filed on Friday in a lawsuit brought last year by United Wisconsin, a nascent centrist political party hoping to offer voters an alternative to the “duopoly” of the Democratic and Republican parties. The group is represented by the voting rights focused firm Law Forward. 

Fusion voting is a practice through which multiple political parties can nominate the same candidate to the ticket. Under the system, a minor party such as United could choose to nominate its own candidate, but more often the party would endorse one of the major party candidates. Voters would be able to cast their votes for the same preferred candidate under either party line. 

At a conference on fusion voting hosted at UW-Madison last year, political scientists and proponents of the system said that in theory it can give minor parties more influence. A third party candidate under the current system is unlikely to win, but a minor party’s policy preferences are harder to ignore if the party has just enough sway to swing an election result in either direction.

The brief describes a hypothetical congressional race in which United cross-endorses the Democratic candidate, given the name Olson. After the hypothetical votes are counted, the Republican candidate has earned 48.2% of the vote on the Republican ticket while Olson has earned 45.9% of the vote on the Democratic ticket and 4.9% on the United line. When added together, this gives Olson the win with 50.8% of the total vote. 

In Wisconsin, where elections are often decided by single digit margins, this could result in meaningful considerations of the desires of the minor party voters — rather than the current system under which third party candidates, such as Ralph Nader in the 2000 presidential election, are seen as spoilers who can pull enough support away from the closest ideological major party candidate to help the other side win. 

“That is fusion voting in action. United Wisconsin will claim, with merit, to have helped her over the finish line,” the brief states. “No doubt Olson will be more attentive to her ‘home’ party, but if she’s a competent politician, she won’t ignore the priorities of the moderates and centrists in the United Wisconsin Party. If she does, United Wisconsin, and its key bloc of voters, might cross-nominate her opponent in the next election.”

Fusion voting is often considered alongside ideas such as ranked choice voting and multi-member congressional districts as a reform proposal that could help prevent the country from sliding into an authoritarian government. 

“Fusion offers the opportunity to create meaningful new political identities,” the legal brief states. “It allows voters of all ideological stripes to vote for their values without having to support a rival or opposing party with a mostly intolerable program.”

In the 19th century, fusion voting was used across the country. The practice was phased out in most of the country but exists currently in New York and Connecticut. The brief, which includes as many examples from history and political science as it does legal citations, states that Wisconsin’s fusion voting ban was enacted by the Republican Party in 1897 as it surged to become the state’s dominant political force in a direct effort to limit the ability of the Democratic Party and other minor parties to win. 

“History shows the ban was enacted as a form of invidious political discrimination,” the brief states.

The lawsuit argues the state has no direct interest in maintaining the power of the Democratic and Republican parties, so the law must be put under “strict scrutiny” for fundamentally restricting the speech of Wisconsinites. 

“When political parties cannot nominate their candidates of choice, they cannot effectively organize, campaign, advance priorities, or exercise political power,” the brief states. “They are relegated for perpetuity to a spoiler role, whereby any electoral effort they make is not only futile in advancing their own candidate and platform, but also seriously risks helping their least-favored major-party candidate win the race and get to govern. While the ban still allows political parties to nominate most candidates, it prohibits them from nominating the only candidates who can win; and while it allows political parties some degree of speech, it constrains their speech in the context for which political parties exist — the ballot.”

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

Reading Time: < 1 minute

Twenty-four states provide a constitutional right to hunt and fish, according to a November 2025 count by the National Conference of State Legislatures.

Nearly all 24, including Wisconsin and Minnesota, did so with constitutional amendments approved by voters since 1996. 

Illinois, Iowa and Michigan do not have the constitutional protection.

Nationally, “well-organized animal rights groups and limitations on methods, seasons and bag limits for certain game species” spurred the amendments, according to NCSL.

Wisconsin’s 2003 amendment passed with 82% of the vote. 

It reads: “The people have the right to fish, hunt, trap and take game subject only to reasonable restrictions as prescribed by law.”

The measure was among a wave of Wisconsin constitutional amendments led by Republicans.

About 800,000 licenses are sold annually in Wisconsin for both deer hunting and fishing.

This fact brief is responsive to conversations such as this one.

Sources

• National Conference of State Legislatures: State Constitutional Right to Hunt and Fish
• Ballotpedia: Wisconsin Question 1, Right to Hunt and Fish Amendment (April 2003)
• Wisconsin.gov: Wisconsin Constitution
• Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources: 2025 Preliminary Gun Deer Hunt License Sales And Harvest Totals Now Available
• WPR: As anglers gear up for Wisconsin’s fishing opener, annual license sales are down
• Ballotpedia: History of right to hunt and fish constitutional amendments

Do about half the states, including Wisconsin, have a constitutional right to hunt and fish? is a post from Wisconsin Watch, a non-profit investigative news site covering Wisconsin since 2009. Please consider making a contribution to support our journalism.

Gov. Tony Evers signed bills into law this week that will legalize sports betting, provide funding to the University of Wisconsin system to help student athletes get paid for the use of their name, image and likeness as well as measures that address internet crimes against children. 

AB 601, now 2025 Wisconsin Act 247, will legalize online sports betting in the state. This will be an expansion of access to sports betting, which has been legal in Wisconsin since 2021, but only in person at tribal casinos. 

Following a legal framework first used in Florida, the law will allow for the servers that manage the bets to be housed on tribal land. The law was designed this way because the Wisconsin constitution requires that any legal gambling be managed by the state’s federally recognized Native American tribes.

The bill faced a complicated path through the state Legislature. At first it sped through the hearing process, only to be pulled from the Assembly floor calendar. It finally received  a vote about three months after it passed committee. When it passed the Senate in a 21-12 vote, with some opposition from both Democrats and Republicans, one Republican senator said the bill would be the reason Republicans lose their majority in this year’s midterm elections. The bill also faced opposition from lobbying groups representing the country’s largest online sportsbooks. 

Evers said he signed the bill because it is his obligation to “always to respect the sovereignty of Tribal Nations in Wisconsin,” and because it will provide an opportunity to put revenue paid into the state into mental health programs and efforts to combat the opioid crisis. However, he said, he also had “reservations” about signing the bill. 

“This legislation is the beginning of a conversation, not the end of one,” Evers said in a statement. “The real work begins today.” 

Online sports betting will not become immediately available since  the tribes and the state will need to renegotiate their gaming compacts. The governor is tasked with the responsibility of negotiating compacts with the tribes under the Wisconsin Constitution. A new agreement would then need approval from the U.S. Bureau of Indian Affairs. 

Before the bill passed the Legislature, Evers had expressed concerns about getting support from all of the tribes. 

All 11 tribes then signed a letter saying that each was on board with the legislation, according to WisPolitics.

“Each of the 11 Tribes must now work diligently — and together — to shape the future of sports betting in Wisconsin,” Evers said. “What I will not accept is a plan that fractures this opportunity into unequal pieces, allowing some Tribes to reap great benefits while leaving only crumbs for others. An approach that exacerbates long-standing inequalities among Tribal Nations is not good for Wisconsinites or Wisconsin.” 

Wisconsin is the 33rd state to legalize online or mobile sports betting since a 2018 decision by the U.S. Supreme Court struck down a 1992 federal law that had barred betting on football, basketball, baseball and other sports in most states.

“A joint venture — with each Tribe contributing, and each Tribe benefiting in equal shares — is gaining traction in these discussions, and I strongly support pursuing this or a similar model,” Evers said in his statement. “This is an opportunity to avoid the mistakes of past compact amendments that left some Tribes and their members in poverty while only lifting up a few.”

Student athlete name, image and likeness

Evers also signed a bill this week to help University of Wisconsin student athletes in getting paid for the use of their name, image and likeness (NIL) and to provide the UW system with funds so it can help provide NIL opportunities to those athletes.

AB 1034, now 2025 Wisconsin Act 203, provides $14.6 million annually in state funds to go towards debt service for the costs of UW-Madison’s athletic facilities, $200,000 for the UW–Milwaukee Klotsche Center and $200,000 for the UW-Green Bay soccer complex. Providing the state funds is meant to free up other funds so the UW can provide students with opportunities for NIL agreements. The bill passed with nearly unanimous support in the Assembly with a 95-1 vote, but in the Senate the margin was much closer with a 17-16 vote. 

Evers partially vetoed the bill to remove language related to the funds going to “maintenance costs” saying he wanted to allow greater flexibility in how the UW system can use the funds. 

“I object to the potential confusion created by referring to ‘maintenance,’ and my partial veto will better reflect the intent that the funding alleviate existing debt service. I also object to how this bill unnecessarily restricts the use of funds appropriated for athletic facilities within the University of Wisconsin System,” Evers wrote in his veto message. “I believe that greater flexibility is necessary to ensure this funding can be used effectively and allow the system to maximize the state’s investment.” 

The law codifies some policies that UW-Madison and other campuses already have in state law, including prohibiting NIL contracts that conflict with school policies and providing money in exchange for athletic performance, as well as those that require student athletes to endorse alcoholic beverages, gambling, banned athletic substances or illegal activities or substances. It also includes a requirement that student athletes disclose third-party NIL deals they enter. 

UW schools are also going to be able to contract with organizations that can help student athletes find NIL opportunities.

The law also includes language exempting records related to the “generation, deployment, or allocation of revenue generated by an intercollegiate athletic program” from the state’s open records law in an effort to “protect competitive interests and student privacy.” Open records advocates expressed concerns about the provision as the bill was debated. UW representatives said the provision would only be used to clarify what is already the UW’s existing practice of denying access to student athlete NIL agreements and certain university records that are related to NIL strategy, allocation, revenue generation. 

Addressing internet crimes against children

Evers signed four bills into law to help combat internet crimes against children.

The laws build on previous efforts to address online crimes affecting children. Last year Wisconsin passed a law that defined  “sextortion” as a crime. Lawmakers started working on that legislation after 15-year-old Bradyn Bohn from Kronenwetter, a village outside of Wausau, died by suicide after being targeted online by a perpetrator who convinced him to share nude photos of himself and told him that he needed to send money or face major consequences. He suffered through hours of threats and was coerced into sending money before his death.

AB 923, now 2025 Wisconsin Act 215, will allow for victims of a sexual extortion to sue their perpetrator for damages including for emotional distress, punitive damages, attorneys’ fees and investigation costs. In the case that someone died by suicide due to sexual extortion, a victim’s family would be able to file a wrongful death suit. 

Sexual extortion has become a growing threat in the U.S. in recent years. From October 2021 to March 2023, the FBI and Homeland Security Investigations received over 13,000 reports of online financial sextortion of minors that included at least 12,600 victims, mostly boys, and led to at least 20 suicides.

The other bills give the DOJ additional resources and tools to address internet crimes against children. 

AB 957, now 2025 Wisconsin Act 216, provides $400,000 in each year of the 2025-27 state budget to the state Department of Justice (DOJ) to enforce laws against internet crimes against children and AB 958, now 2025 Wisconsin Act 217, provides four new DOJ positions that will focus on internet crimes against children. 

AB 964, now 2025 Wisconsin Act 21, gives the attorney general administrative subpoena authority in the case of a sextortion crime if the victim was a child at the time of the violation.

AB 966, now 2025 Wisconsin Act 219, will require the DOJ to conduct a children’s online digital safety awareness campaign and provide materials on digital safety awareness to schools for free.

Other bills Evers took action on 

• AB 1027 was vetoed. It would have instructed the Wisconsin Department of Health Services to turn over data related to SNAP to the Department of Health Services to provide to the U.S. Department of Agriculture information. Evers said in his veto message that he objected “to sharing Wisconsinites’ most sensitive personal data, including their Social Security numbers, without the federal government having to meaningfully demonstrate how Wisconsinites’ personal data will be appropriately secured, will not be able to be accessed by broad swaths of federal employees, and will not be shared inappropriately both within and outside of the federal government.”
• AB 759, now 2025 Wisconsin Act 240, was signed into law. It will make Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) status holders in Wisconsin eligible to apply for occupational licenses.
• AB 373, now 2025 Wisconsin Act 241, was signed into law. It creates a $2,000 nonrefundable income tax credit for parents of a stillborn child. The credit is meant to provide financial relief to help parents with expenses associated with the stillbirth.
• AB 918, now 2025 Wisconsin Act 202, makes adoption a required topic to be covered for school districts that choose to offer human growth and development instruction, also known as sex education. Wisconsin school districts are not required to offer human growth and development instruction.
• SB 782, now 2025 Wisconsin Act 245, extends a penalty for falsely texting 911 to report an emergency. Violators could face fines between $100 and $600 and/or up to 90 days in jail for a first offense. A subsequent offense committed within four years of the first would be a Class H felony.

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

A state Senate committee put off taking action despite threats from lawmakers to fire unconfirmed members of the University of Wisconsin Board of Regents after two regents shared more details Thursday about the decision to fire former UW President Jay Rothman. 

While the regents were legally prevented from sharing specific details about the firing, they said, they described their sense that Rothman moved too slowly to act on pressing issues including developing a UW policy on artificial intelligence.

The UW Board of Regents voted unanimously in a virtual meeting Tuesday to fire Rothman, who had refused to leave his position voluntarily. The decision took effect immediately and the the search for the next leader has already begun. Rothman, who will get six months of severance pay, told the Associated Press after the vote that he was “blindsided” by the ousting but wasn’t going to challenge it.

Republican lawmakers had come to the defense of Rothman after the news broke about the effort to oust him. Sen. Patrick Testin (R-Stevens Point) said lawmakers should reject the regents’ nomination if they fired Rothman without cause. The Senate Technical Colleges and Universities committee quickly scheduled Thursday’s public hearing and executive session on the consideration of the nominations of the ten unconfirmed Gov. Tony Evers’ appointees, including Bogost and Nixon. 

Sen. Rob Hutton (R-Brookfield) said at the start of Thursday’s meeting that the decision required an explanation.

“Transparency is the foundation of public trust, and when decisions are made without explained justification, it further erodes confidence, not just to the Board of Regents, but in the institution itself,” Hutton said, adding that lawmakers could provide oversight of state entities. “We are faced with a sudden leadership shake-up at risk, creating instability at a time when the chancellor turnover is high and our flagship university is losing its CEO.”

Regent President Amy Bogost and Regent Timothy Nixon said that Rothman had been told about the changes the regents wanted to see. Their decision to let him go, they said, was not made lightly and came after he failed to make those changes. They also said that his decision to take his complaints public was harmful to the UW system.

Bogost has served on the Board for the last six years, including as president since 2024. Nixon has served as a regent for the last two years. Neither has received a confirmation hearing, which has become standard procedure for the Republican-led Senate, which has left most Evers appointees unconfirmed. 

Until the meeting, the regents hadn’t given any additional details about the decision to fire Rothman, other than that the decision came after an annual review was conducted by Bogost and that Rothman was “not without notice” and the process was not “sudden.”

Evers stood behind the regents’ decision in a statement released during the meeting, saying the choice was their and that they decided to make a leadership change, “nothing more, nothing less.” 

“Republican lawmakers should resist their temptation to turn this into a political conversation, because it isn’t one,” Evers said. “The UW Board of Regents is not supposed to be an extension of any politician or political party. The Regents are responsible for doing what’s best for our UW System, and they should be able to do their jobs without political interference from elected officials.” 

Evers also warned it would be a “mistake” if the lawmakers used it as an opportunity to fire people and that that would “jeopardize our continued bipartisan work this session.” 

“It’s pretty simple: I trust that the Regents are doing what is best for students, faculty, staff, and our UW System — lawmakers should, too.”

At the start of the hearing, Bogost told lawmakers that she would be as transparent with them as she legally could. 

“President Rothman knows exactly what he is doing. He is a sophisticated professional who understands that personnel matters are confidential,” Bogost said. “The confidentiality surrounding his evaluation was not arbitrary… It is what law requires and is what our obligation is to these universities, and yet, President Rothman, who understands all of this, has chosen to use that constraint as a shield — making public statements, he knows I cannot deny, and framing a narrative he knows I cannot correct.” 

Rothman was a Milwaukee lawyer and CEO of the law firm Foley and Lardner before being chosen to serve as the UW president in 2022.

Bogost told lawmakers that she would also be willing to walk the committee through the details of the conversations held in closed session with Rothman and the decision to fire Rothman if he waived his confidentiality.

Sen. Brad Pfaff (D-Onalaska) asked why Bogost thought he hadn’t waived his confidentiality. 

“I believe that his objective is to be able to get his narrative out and be one-sided…He knows the truth, and he understands what this is all about, and we were hoping that he would move on,” Bogost said. “To do the media circuit that he’s on denigrates our wonderful universities, and that makes me really sad, because I know that he worked tirelessly for the universities, and I really was hoping to celebrate his past accomplishments… it’s unfortunate that he’s taking that path.”

Before firing Rothman, the regents had offered him the opportunity to resign. Rothman refused, saying he hadn’t been given clear reasoning for his firing and that he thought he had accomplished a lot during his tenure as president.

Nixon also said offering at-will employees the option to leave voluntarily is standard procedure within the UW system and in private businesses. As an example, he noted former Gov. Tommy Thompson, who served as interim president of the system between 2020 and 2022 and voluntarily stepped down from the position. He also noted James Langdon, who, according to WisPolitics, wrote in an email that Rothman fired him in a similar way from his position as vice president of administration. 

Nixon added that the same practice applies to corporate CEOs, who are routinely let go by companies that don’t want to harm their brands. “You try not to have these public blow-ups, alright,  and so nothing here in my mind [is] unusual, and not only that, it follows UW practice.”

In a statement, Rothman said his recent evaluation from Bogost was “overwhelmingly positive.” However, during the hearing, Bogost said that when giving reviews it is typical to “give at least four positives to every negative,” which is what happened with Rothman. 

“He was very disheartened by those… I was surprised. These were things that we tried to work on. It was not sudden,” Bogost said. “Mr. Rothman knows that it was ongoing situations that we had many discussions with him about.”

Bogost said there is not an evaluation document, but that she took notes and delivered the evaluation in person to Rothman.

Bogost said Rothman was the right person to lead the UW system as it sought to deal with a tough financial and operational situation. During his time as president, Rothman oversaw the “right-sizing” of campus budgets and the closure of campuses. Nixon said when it comes to other accomplishments Rothman has touted, he is “a bit like the rooster crowing and then taking credit for the sunrise after.”

As the UW system is addressing other pressing issues, the regents said Rothman was too slow to act. 

Nixon noted that U.S. News and World Report ranked the 50 most innovative universities in the U.S., and the only Wisconsin school on the list was Marquette University. 

“Thank God, one higher education institution in the state has made the list,” Nixon said. “Change is not Mr. Rothman’s strong suit, yet change is what we desperately need.”

Nixon said there was a “lack of urgency” coming from Rothman, adding that coming from a law background he tends to move deliberately to ensure that every i is dotted and every t is crossed. 

As an example, Nixon said the regents started asking for a system-wide policy on artificial intelligence in November, but they still had not received one. 

“We can’t take a year and six months to decide and think about every single issue. This is no different than moving on to a new quarterback — no matter what you thought of the previous quarterback or what they did,” Nixon said. 

Nixon said he had also spoken with Rothman about reassigning some of the over 500 employees who work for the UW system administration to campuses, but there had not been changes. 

Sen. Rachael Cabral Guevara (R-Fox Crossing) thanked Nixon for giving the committee some concrete reasons for its decision  rather than staying in the “gray zone.”

The regents said that the timing of the decision was partly the result of state budget negotiations and the implementation of the state budget. In the most recent state budget, the UW system received a boost in state funding, which came as a result of negotiations between Evers, Democratic and Republican lawmakers and advocacy efforts from UW stakeholders. Republican lawmakers had initially sought a cut to the UW budget. 

At the end of Thursday’s hearing, the committee delayed its vote on whether to recommend confirming the nominees.

Hutton told reporters afterwards that there was more information the senators needed to consider and it would have been “premature” to vote. He said that he wants to see more documents related to Rothman’s evaluation and hear from more of the regents. 

“Based on some of the information we requested from the board president, really thought that was beneficial to receive that information, let the committee go through that a little bit more, maybe ask some additional questions before we go to exec[utive session],” Hutton said, adding that Bogost was “very willing” and “cooperative” when it came to providing information. 

Hutton said that there would need to be a conversation with the Republican caucus leadership on whether the full Senate, which has adjourned for regular session work, will come back to take a long-delayed vote on the regents’ nominations.

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

The hotel ballroom in downtown Madison was packed with cheering supporters as Chris Taylor gave her victory speech Tuesday night after her huge, 20-point win over her conservative opponent Maria Lazar, cementing a 5-2 liberal majority on the Wisconsin Supreme Court. The four other liberal women on the Court high-fived Taylor as she took the stage. The deliriously joyful crowd repeatedly interrupted Taylor’s remarks with shouting and applause, including to chant the name of her dog when she mentioned it during a lengthy list of thank-yous: “Ollie! Ollie!” 

Democrats are so hungry for success they are ready to throw their arms around any champion, including canines — yellow, blue, whatever. 

Eager to catch that wave of enthusiasm, many of the seven gubernatorial hopefuls in the Democratic primary field hovered around the ballroom. After the results were tabulated, party operatives began circulating statistics showing Taylor’s big margins of victory in Republican-leaning counties, using those results to forecast a crushing blue wave in November. Democratic Party Chair Devin Remiker called Taylor’s win “an indictment of Trump and Tom Tiffany,” the GOP candidate for governor.

Without question, Taylor’s 60-40 percentage point drubbing of Lazar is good news for Democrats, who poured money and organizing energy into the nominally nonpartisan race. And it’s a serious loss for Republicans, who backed Lazar, an anti-abortion election skeptic. But Taylor’s lopsided victory does not mean that Wisconsin has turned, overnight, from a 50-50 purple state that narrowly elected both Presidents Joe Biden and Donald Trump into a liberal stronghold where Democrats can expect to run the table in November. 

The reality is that Republicans gave up. After repeated, double-digit losses in the last three Supreme Court elections in a row, including the 2025 record-breaking $100 million race — when Elon Musk proved that all the money in the world and even outright bribery couldn’t convince Wisconsin voters to embrace the Republican-backed candidate Brad Schimel — they threw in the towel. This year, the state Republican party gave $64,000 to Lazar, compared to the $775,000 the Democratic party gave to Taylor. Republican donors also held onto their wallets. Final fundraising reports ahead of the election showed Taylor had raised more than $2 million while Lazar reported about $472,000. 

The Wisconsin GOP has concluded that spring judicial elections are a lousy bet, especially in the Trump era. Democratic voters are energized for these races, while Republican voters, especially the MAGA base, turn out in low numbers. The voters who care about April judicial races are disproportionately college educated liberals, as political analyst Craig Gilbert explains. 

All of these are reasons to take Democratic optimism pegged to Tuesday’s results with a grain of salt. After all, liberal Justices Jill Karofsky and Janet Protasiewicz posted big wins in the Wisconsin Supreme Court elections of 2020 and 2023, followed by Trump’s 2024 Wisconsin victory. 

Still, Taylor’s 20-point triumph matters. For one thing, the failure of the Republicans to put up much of a fight for Lazar comes at the same time that the GOP leaders of both chambers of the Legislature have announced they are calling it quits, along with several key members of those bodies who would face tough reelection battles now that the state’s voting maps are no longer rigged in their favor. The whole Wisconsin Republican Party seems to be in retreat. 

The only thing that got legislative Republicans off the couch recently was the UW Regents’ decision to fire their ally, University of Wisconsin President Jay Rothman. They are so outraged they’re planning to hold long-delayed confirmation hearings this week just to fire the regents. Nothing motivates Wisconsin Republicans like spite, and the defense of their own diminishing power. 

After steadfastly refusing to confirm most of Gov. Tony Evers’ appointees during his entire two terms in office, they are coming back into special session, not to strike a deal to fund schools or lower property taxes or address any of the other issues that matter to voters they didn’t get around to by the end of the session, but to take revenge on the regents and showcase their own pettiness. It’s their last power grab before they lose their gerrymandered power altogether. The regents were apparently willing to take the risk to get rid of Rothman, who is no longer needed to make nice with a soon-to-depart Republican majority.

Taylor’s huge win on Tuesday bolsters the growing sense among Wisconsinites that the Republicans are about to lose more than one judicial race. By not fighting harder, the Republicans showed their own lack of confidence. And who can blame them? As Taylor’s victory party kicked off, the news was all about whether Trump would make good on his pledge to annihilate an entire civilization in Iran — a threat so unhinged even Sen. Ron Johnson felt compelled to renounce it. 

Trump’s approval numbers are in the toilet. He is, as investigative reporter Ken Kippenstein points out on Substack, the first president in U.S. history to get no public approval bump at all for going to war. Members of Congress and even some former Trump supporters are openly discussing the need to invoke the 25th Amendment to put the Republican Party’s national leader in a straitjacket.

Add to that the cost of gas, groceries, and the deliberate destruction of affordable health care and you have a recipe for a massive midterm rebellion. The Wisconsin Supreme Court race is part of that picture, even if it’s a lopsided measure of Democratic energy and Republican depression.

Plus, the new, now locked-in majority on the Wisconsin Supreme Court will be a bulwark against GOP efforts to limit voting rights and interfere with fair elections.

All in all, it’s pretty terrible news for Republicans. That barking dog that’s chasing them might have a nasty bite.

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

Reading Time: < 1 minute

Doula services aren’t covered by Wisconsin Medicaid – known as BadgerCare – as of April 2026.

Doulas provide emotional support and education around childbirth. Unlike midwives (which are covered), they don’t perform medical tasks.

A Wisconsin Department of Health Services spokesperson confirmed doulas aren’t covered as a stand-alone benefit for Medicaid recipients. 

State law requires the health department to get legislative approval before making changes to Medicaid. Doula coverage has been proposed by Gov. Tony Evers and Democratic lawmakers but has not come to pass.

According to the National Health Law Program, 26 states and Washington, D.C., are actively reimbursing for Medicaid coverage of doula care. Seven more are in the process of doing so.

A 2024 study from the American Journal of Public Health found Medicaid recipients with doulas had a 47% lower risk of cesarean delivery and a 29% lower risk of preterm birth than those without.

This fact brief is responsive to conversations such as this one.

Sources

• DONA International: What is a doula?
• Harvard Medical School: What does a doula do?
• Wisconsin Department of Health Services: Email with Elizabeth Goodsitt, communications specialist
• Wisconsin Legislature: 2017 Wisconsin Act 370
• Department of Administration: State of Wisconsin Executive Budget, February 2025
• Wisconsin Legislature: 2025 Assembly Bill 1085
• National Health Law Program: Doula Medicaid Project
• American Journal of Public Health: Role of Doulas in Improving Maternal Health and Health Equity Among Medicaid Enrollees, 2014‒2023

Are doula services covered under Wisconsin Medicaid? is a post from Wisconsin Watch, a non-profit investigative news site covering Wisconsin since 2009. Please consider making a contribution to support our journalism.

Reading Time: 3 minutes

The board that runs the Universities of Wisconsin voted unanimously Tuesday to fire the system’s president, drawing the ire of Republican lawmakers who called it a “partisan hatchet job.”

Jay Rothman had refused an offer from the board of regents to quietly resign, saying it never gave a clear reason why he should. Rothman has led the system that oversees the state’s four-year universities, including the flagship Madison campus, for nearly four years.

Rothman has had to tread carefully dealing with a Republican-controlled Legislature and a board of regents where all current members were appointed by Democratic Gov. Tony Evers. When Rothman was hired, the board also had a majority of Evers appointees.

Asked Monday about the move to oust Rothman, Evers didn’t take a side. “It’s their call,” he said of the board.

But Republican lawmakers were furious and threatened to fire regents who have yet to be confirmed by the state Senate.

“Make no mistake about it, the firing of UW President Rothman is a blatant partisan hatchet job,” Republican Senate President Patrick Testing said in a statement.

He said Rothman was fired for “not being liberal enough.”

“His only crime was his willingness to work with lawmakers on both sides of the aisle to get things done,” Testin said.

The vote to fire Rothman came just five days after The Associated Press first reported that the regents asked Rothman to either resign or be fired. Rothman said in two letters to the regents that he would not leave voluntarily without knowing what he did wrong.

Regent President Amy Bogost said in a statement Monday that the board has shared results of a performance review with Rothman, with “direct conversations and clear feedback regarding leadership expectations.” She said the system needs “a clear vision” but did not elaborate on the review’s findings.

She repeated the statement Tuesday following a roughly 30-minute closed session regents meeting. No other regents spoke before the vote to fire Rothman, effective immediately.

Rothman said in an earlier statement Tuesday that regents repeatedly declined to cite a specific reason for finding no confidence in his leadership. No one ever indicated to him that an evaluation could lead to termination, he said, adding that Bogost called his review “overwhelmingly positive.”

“It is disappointing that the first I heard any sort of defense of their position was when they communicated with the media,” Rothman said. “I am left to conclude that, at best, this reflects an after-the-fact rationalization of a decision that was previously made.”

Rothman declined to comment after the vote.

The state Senate’s committee that oversees higher education scheduled a hearing for Thursday for 10 regents whose appointments by Evers have yet to be confirmed. Testin called for the Senate to reject all 10, which would mean they could no longer serve as regents.

However, the Senate is not scheduled to be in session again this year.

Rothman has served as president of the 165,000-student, multicampus system since June 2022. The former chair and CEO of the Milwaukee-based Foley & Lardner law firm, Rothman had no prior experience administering higher education.

He has spent his tenure lobbying Republican legislators to increase state aid for the system in the face of federal cuts, navigating free speech issues surrounding pro-Palestinian protests, and grappling with declining enrollment that has forced eight branch campuses to close. Overall enrollment across the system has remained steady under his leadership.

Rothman brokered a deal with Republicans in 2023 that called for freezing diversity hires and creating a position at UW-Madison focused on conservative thought in exchange for the Legislature releasing money for UW employee raises and tens of millions of dollars for construction projects across the system.

The regents initially rejected the deal only to approve it in a second vote held just days later. Evers said at the time the deal left him disappointed and frustrated.

The fight over Rothman’s future comes as the flagship Madison campus is losing its chancellor. Jennifer Mnookin is leaving in May at the end of the current academic year to take the job as president of Columbia University.

Rothman makes $600,943 annually as UW president. He can be fired for no stated reason and he has no appeal rights, said Wisconsin employment law attorney Tamara Packard, who reviewed Rothman’s contract at the AP’s request.

Wisconsin Watch is a nonprofit and nonpartisan newsroom. Subscribe to our newsletters to get our investigative stories and Friday news roundup. This story is published in partnership with The Associated Press.

Universities of Wisconsin board votes to fire system president is a post from Wisconsin Watch, a non-profit investigative news site covering Wisconsin since 2009. Please consider making a contribution to support our journalism.

Update: This story has been updated with new information. 

The University of Wisconsin system Board of Regents is planning to meet on Tuesday to consider terminating UW President Jay Rothman, who has refused to resign under pressure from regents.

In a statement on Monday provided by a UW spokesperson, Regent President Amy Bogost said the decision is “about the future.” She noted that the regent president is responsible for an annual performance review of the system president and over the last several months she met with UW stakeholders including, regents, chancellors and other members of UW communities. She said the results were shared with Rothman. 

“President Rothman was not without notice, nor was this process sudden. The Board has engaged with President Rothman in good-faith discussions over the past several months,” Bogost said. “At a time of profound change in higher education, this decision is about the future. The Universities of Wisconsin must be led with a clear vision that both protects and strengthens our flagship, supports our comprehensive universities and ensures we are meeting the evolving needs of our students, workforce and communities across all 72 counties.”

The Board of Regents plans to meet on April 7 at 5 p.m. to consider terminating Rothman, according to a meeting notice. The regents will first meet in closed session and may then reconvene in open session regarding matters taken up in closed session, including voting where applicable.

Bogost said they would be meeting “to consider next steps with that responsibility firmly in mind.”

Rothman wrote in letters, first reported by the Associated Press last week, that the regents had lost confidence in his leadership and were telling him he needed to resign or be fired. He said he hasn’t been given any clear reasons for why they are pushing him out, but just that “each Regent has his or her own perspective on the matter.”

The Board last met in closed session on April 1 to discuss “ongoing personnel matters.” In a statement, Bogost said the Board “is responsible for the leadership of the Universities of Wisconsin and is having discussions about its future” and that they “don’t comment on personnel matters.”

State leaders have responded to the news that the University of Wisconsin Board of Regents is seeking to oust Rothman. 

Gov. Tony Evers, who previously sat on the Board when he served as state schools superintendent, did not take a position Monday morning on whether Rothman should be ousted.

“[Rothman] works for the board and if the board is dissatisfied, they have the right to do this,” he told reporters. “It’s their call.” 

Republican lawmakers, meanwhile, have been critical of the lack of clarity around the effort.

Rep. Dave Murphy (R-Hortonville), who chairs the Assembly Colleges and Universities Committee, said in a statement on April 2 that he was troubled by the reports, saying that the “lack of transparency is unacceptable.”

“President Rothman deserves to know exactly why the Board has lost confidence in his leadership,” Murphy said. “I am concerned that the push to oust him may actually stem from his strong support for free speech and open inquiry on our campuses — core principles that must be defended in higher education. The Board owes Wisconsin taxpayers, students and families a full explanation. They should provide specific reasons or stand down from this effort.”

Sen. Rob Hutton (R-Brookfield) and Sen. Rachael Cabral-Guevera (R-Fox Crossing), who lead the Senate Universities and Technical Colleges committee, said in a statement on April 3 they were concerned the regents were trying to avoid public scrutiny and noted the news broke heading into the holiday weekend.

“If the Regents will not tell the public why they are making such a significant move, the public will be left to assume this is the latest example of backroom politics dictating how the Board of Regents is overseeing the UW System,” Hutton said. “Instead of secretive maneuvering, they should be focusing on reducing their bureaucracy, consolidating more of the struggling two-year campuses, instituting reforms that align with the needs of Wisconsin employers, and making higher education more affordable for all Wisconsin students.”

Rothman, who was an attorney in Milwaukee and CEO of the law firm Foley and Lardner, was selected by the UW Board of Regents in January 2022 to be president. He was chosen after the UW system did not have a permanent leader for two years. In the position, he is responsible for overseeing the vice presidents and chancellors who run the systems campuses, including flagship UW-Madison. 

While it’s unclear what prompted the push to pressure Rothman to resign, he has once floated the idea of resigning in 2023 while working on a deal with Republican lawmakers. 

Rothman agreed to an anti-diversity deal lawmakers demanded in exchange for releasing previously allocated funds for building projects and staff cost-of-living adjustments. Under the terms of the deal, the UW system schools changed their approach to diversity, equity and inclusion programs (DEI). Regents initially rejected the deal, then reversed their decision. 

During his tenure, Rothman has worked to secure funding from the state Legislature, which has often been hostile to the UW system, worked to bring pro-Palestinian protests on campuses to an end, implemented a direct admissions program for eligible in-state high school students and has overseen the closure of campuses and brought in third-party advisors to address financial pressures facing campuses as well as rebranding the system from the UW System to the Universities of Wisconsin.

Rothman argued in his letter that there are also to-do list items that make it a bad time for him to leave, including finding new chancellors for UW-Madison and UW-Eau Claire as well as establishing priorities for the next state budget.

“I understand that, as you indicated on Saturday, the Board may act to terminate my employment, which the Board is empowered to do,” Rothman wrote. “If, however, the full Board would like to discuss this matter with me in either an open or closed session, I would welcome the opportunity to participate in such a meeting.”

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

Late last month, Interior Secretary Doug Burgum announced the federal government will pay a French energy company nearly $1 billion — not to build clean energy here in the U.S., but to kill it.

The developer, which was set to invest private dollars in two offshore wind projects that could have powered more than a million American homes, will be paid off by our government to simply walk away. In exchange for this extraordinary payment of taxpayer dollars, the company will use the government payoff to expand fracking and drilling operations in the U.S. 

“The era of taxpayers subsidizing unreliable, unaffordable and unsecure energy is officially over,” declared the secretary as he unveiled the deal. 

The comment is laughable in the face of skyrocketing energy prices caused by — no surprise — unsecure, unreliable oil and gas. The price of gas has risen more than a dollar per gallon in a matter of weeks as the war with Iran upends global oil markets.

Fossil fuels always come with volatility. Even American oil is sold on a global market influenced by geopolitics, supply shocks and other events outside our control. Wind and solar, on the other hand, can be paired with battery storage to offer reliable American power at the lowest cost.

That was the plan in 2022 when Congress passed the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA), a historic investment in domestic clean energy like wind, solar, and battery storage. The idea was simple: generate more energy here, reduce dependence on global fuel markets and give families more control over their energy bills. It was a hedge against exactly the kind of volatility we’re seeing right now.

But that strategy was dismantled through the so-called “Big Beautiful Bill.” That law repealed the IRA’s clean energy tax credits, ripped away help for families to install better insulation and rooftop solar and rolled back pollution protections. Now, energy costs are on the rise as the federal government chokes the supply of wind and solar, the cheapest forms of energy. In states like Wisconsin, where more than $140 million in clean energy grants have been canceled, the ugly side of that “beautiful bill” is showing. 

Over the next decade, projections show that Wisconsin could miss out on about 17 gigawatts of generation capacity due to measures in the bill. That’s more energy than current peak demand for the entire state. Meanwhile, Wisconsin is spending about $14 billion to bring in oil, coal and gas from out of state — money that could be kept in Wisconsin if we prioritized capturing abundant and free energy resources like wind and solar. Despite this, state energy regulators have approved expensive new gas-burning power plants to power the surge of energy-hungry data centers. Wisconsinites will pay more for electricity and breathe dirtier air as a result.

As these long-term consequences take shape, utilities are moving ahead with rate hikes that will cost Wisconsinites even more. In 2025 alone, Wisconsin utilities proposed or enacted more than $2.7 billion in increases, affecting millions of customers.

So, Mr. Burgum, where is this “affordable energy” and who is benefiting from it?

There’s a deep contradiction in turning away from clean energy in this moment. At a time when electricity demand is rising dramatically from data centers, why are we choosing to build fewer of the resources that can be deployed most quickly, scaled most affordably and insulated most effectively from unstable global markets?

There is simply no path to American energy independence that relies heavily on fossil fuels. Wisconsin families and businesses could be enjoying lower bills and cleaner air instead of bracing for the next geopolitical shock. 

The good news is that none of this is set in stone. Congress could restore clean energy tax credits and invest in energy sources that are built here, priced here, and controlled here. But they need to hear from their constituents to understand how important this is. If the past few weeks have shown us anything, it’s that the most unreliable and unaffordable energy system is the one we don’t control.

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

Madison West High School brought Democratic candidates seeking the governor’s office to town halls last week where they answered questions from students. 

While Jackson Thomas and Clark Schrager, members of the school’s civics club, will not be old enough to vote in the upcoming election, they said students started hosting events with candidates a few years ago, seeking to give young people a voice and a way to participate in the electoral process. In 2024, West students hosted U.S. Sen. Tammy Baldwin for a town hall during her reelection bid. 

Thomas said not all of their peers, especially freshmen and sophomores, are necessarily paying attention to politics unless they are already interested in it, but they hope the events can bring more awareness. Many seniors heard from the candidates, Schrager said, and some will be 18 and eligible to vote in the August primary and in the November general elections.

“There’s a lot of passion in our school about issues,” Schrager said. “I think if you ask people if they cared about politics, they may say, no, but if you ask them if they cared about education or health care or gun reform, any of those issues, they would say yes. It’s kind of a generational thing for us that there’s a lot of disillusionment with the system as it is, but there’s not a movement away from participating in the political process. There are still people that care about a lot of the issues and want their voices to be heard.”

The students asked the candidates about some of the key issues that the next governor will shape, including affordability, the state’s stewardship program, health care accessibility, abortion, and funding for K-12 schools and the University of Wisconsin system.

Thomas, who is a member of March For Our Lives, said gun violence is among the issues he cares most about, and he hopes to see candidates take a stand on it and propose solutions. 

“It’s unfortunately an issue that I have to think about every day when I go to school,” Thomas said. “That’s something that’s normalized because many people feel it, but it’s a really terrifying thing to have to think about.” He said it’s an issue he wants to see elected officials “not just take a stand on, but put legislation towards changing.” 

Schrager said many students are also thinking about democracy and freedom. 

The students also asked candidates to name one thing that they agreed with Republicans on. 

“Digging into issues has kind of always been something that’s been taught to me, and I think seeing both sides is something really important to me,” said Schrager, whose parents are both journalists. “There’s been a lot of polarization that I think has moved us away from real policies that actually help everybody, and there’s been a lot of focus on hate and bigotry that I think drive us away from making actual changes that could help people.”

The race to succeed Gov. Tony Evers, who opted not to run for a third term, has become crowded on the Democratic side. Candidates who participated in the forums included Lt. Gov. Sara Rodriguez, state Sen. Kelda Roys (D-Madison), state Rep. Francesca Hong (D-Madison), former Wisconsin Department of Administration Secretary Joel Brennan, Milwaukee County Executive David Crowley, former Wisconsin Economic Development Corporation CEO Missy Hughes, former Lt. Gov. Mandela Barnes and former state Rep. Brett Hulsey. 

Schrager said something that gave him hope is “the fact that all these candidates came here and they seem genuinely curious about what students had to say.”

Wisconsin U.S. Rep. Tom Tiffany, the Trump-endorsed Republican candidate for governor, was not one of the participants last week, but the students said they hope to host him in the future. 

“We’re really committed to getting everybody’s viewpoint on all sides,” Schrager said. “We know Madison is a blue bubble. We know West High School is part of that blue bubble, but there are a lot of students here who will vote for him in the fall and will vote along Republican lines and they deserve to have their voices heard as well and hear somebody who aligns with them,” Schrager said. 

Thomas said he thinks that is especially important when they are “trying to bridge the gap between political polarization.”

Schrager agreed, adding that there are “students who will be voting for Democrats who will still fully benefit from hearing the other side.”

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

Gov. Tony Evers announced Friday that he had signed two executive orders to begin offering commutations, a reduction of a criminal sentence by the governor’s authority to grant clemency.

Even though Evers has granted a record number of pardons, a form of forgiveness that reinstates some rights, during his tenure — over 2,000 — he has not granted any commutations. The last Wisconsin governor to offer a commutation was Republican Tommy Thompson,  who issued seven commutations in addition to 202 pardons. Thompson was governor from 1987 to 2001, 

“It’s time for Wisconsin to join red and blue states across our country and finally move our justice system into the 21st Century by reforming our criminal justice and corrections systems to improve public safety, reduce the likelihood that individuals will reoffend when they enter our communities, and save taxpayer dollars in the long run,” Evers said in a statement. “Issuing official grants of forgiveness through pardons has been one of the most rewarding parts of my job as governor, and I’m looking forward to restoring the commutations process in Wisconsin for the first time since Tommy Thompson was governor.”. 

Members of WISDOM, a non-profit faith-based organization that works to end mass incarceration, say Evers told them in 2023 that he would begin issuing commutations. Subsequently, the organization and other criminal justice advocates have been pressing Evers’ administration to offer commutations and to create a structure to process applications.

Prior to Evers’ announcement, there was no process in place for those in the criminal justice system, either in prison or community supervision (parole, probation or extended supervision), to apply for a commutation. There was only a process to apply for a pardon, but to be eligible for a pardon the applicant had to complete an entire sentence,  including incarceration and community supervision, and avoid any criminal charges for  five years. 

Evers ran for office in 2018 on a commitment to reduce the prison population in Wisconsin, but after a dip during COVID, the number of people in prison population has remained steady at over 23,000. Advocates have said commutations would enable Evers to address the high prison population by offering it to worthy residents, especially those who committed crimes as youth, have been incarcerated for  a considerable number of years, and are good candidates to return to society.

In his announcement, Evers called on lawmakers to take more steps to reduce the prison population.

“Wisconsin cannot wait for criminal justice reforms,” Evers said. “As our prison population continues to skyrocket, increasing costs to taxpayers on overtime and other resource needs, the Legislature must start working toward making long-term justice and corrections reforms a priority, including efforts to help stabilize our state’s prison population that our institutions already are struggling to accommodate. For years, I’ve asked the Legislature to work with me to invest in behavioral and mental health services, treatment and diversion, and reentry programming—these are evidence-based and data-driven policies we know will help keep our communities safer while continuing to ensure dangerous individuals remain in our institutions. My administration will continue doing what we can as long as I am governor, but we cannot do it alone—the Legislature must get serious about this issue.” 

The governor noted in his order, Executive Order 287, that commutation “promotes rehabilitation by providing a system that rewards the positive efforts of incarcerated individuals who demonstrate personal growth and a commitment to change with the possibility of a second chance to contribute to society, become productive members of their communities, make amends, and improve their lives and those of the people around them.”

Additionally, the order noted, “the granting of commutations can also encourage incarcerated individuals to be accountable, take responsibility, make amends, and seek forgiveness for their actions that have harmed other individuals and the community.” 

Advocates have said the possibility of a commutation is an incentive for those incarcerated to be model residents, to strive to improve themselves with job skills, and address behavioral issues to be better prepared for life outside of prison.   

Evers said there will be categories of individuals  ineligible for commutation, including those who have committed sexual assault, physical abuse of a child, sexual exploitation of a child, trafficking of a child, incest and soliciting a child for prostitution.

Executive Order 287 will create a Commutation Advisory Board comprised of 14 members, including the Governor’s chief legal counsel or a designee and others who “have experience or expertise in the fields of reentry services, victim rights, corrections, and related areas and who are otherwise able to provide a valuable perspective on reduction of criminal sentences.”

The governor’s second  executive order, 288, creates a juvenile life sentence commutation process for individuals who were “tried as adults and sentenced to life imprisonment for a crime committed in their youth.”

“A growing body of neuroscientific and psychological research has demonstrated that an individual’s brain, behavior, and personality undergo significant changes throughout their teen years and into their twenties,” said the governor. He noted in a press release the U.S. Supreme Court decision Miller v. Alabama, which found that a mandatory life sentence without parole for juveniles is unconstitutional, in part because they are not fully accountable for their actions due to brain development and maturity.

“Individuals who commit a crime in their youth therefore possess increased potential for rehabilitation, a diminished degree of culpability, and a lower chance of reoffending once they have reached maturity,” said Evers.

Since 2022, there has been legislation offering adjustments of life sentences for people who were sentenced as adults when they were under age 18, but that legislation has failed to gain traction. With SB 882, the most recent example, one  issue has been apparent confusion over the number of those eligible, with the number cited by Sen. Jesse James (R-Altoona), the legislation’s sponsor, reportedly differing from the number advocacy groups were reporting.

Advocacy groups welcome order

Beverly Walker, an official with WISDOM and also with Integrity Center who led the organization’s advocacy for commutation, and Sherry Reames, a WISDOM volunteer who also worked on commutations, said in statements that Evers’ order would address conditions created by Wisconsin’s sentencing policies, including prison overcrowding, that especially affect Black, brown, indigenous and poor communities.

“Today, Gov. Evers took action to advance justice in Wisconsin,” said Walker. “This marks a significant shift forward.”

“Gov. Evers’ decision to restore the commutations process will promote redemption and provide hope for people who have made great strides with their personal growth and development.” said Reames. “This is an important first step, but much work remains to be done.”

Reames, who is also a member of the group MOSES, said WISDOM would “closely monitor the implementation of the commutation process” and help ensure it is inclusive.

“If Governor Evers and future Wisconsin governors boldly move the commutations process forward in the coming months and years, this would begin to reverse the harm caused by decades of over-incarceration and provide hope and opportunities for many people,” she said.  

Marianne Olesson, co-executive director of EXPO of Wisconsin, one of the advocacy groups that has been pressing for commutations, called Evers’ orders Friday “an important and long-overdue step toward a more just, humane, and credible legal system.” 

“By signing Executive Orders 287 and 288, Governor Evers has reopened a pathway for review, redemption, and second chances for people currently serving sentences, including a process specifically recognizing the unique potential for growth and rehabilitation among youth sentenced to life in prison,” Olesson said. “The new process includes eligibility criteria, review by a Commutation Advisory Board, consideration of institutional conduct and rehabilitation, and opportunities for survivor and victim input.”

Olesson said opportunities for people in the justice system to demonstrate they’ve changed are important. 

 “A justice system that allows no meaningful path for review, even in the face of growth, accountability, and years of demonstrated change, is not a system rooted in true public safety or human dignity,” she said. “Restoring commutations acknowledges that people can evolve and that redemption must be more than just a talking point. We applaud his commitment and we are grateful.”

The Wisconsin State Public Defenders office also praised the orders.

 “For the first time in a generation, thousands of Wisconsinites written off by the state’s legal system will have a clear path to returning home,” Public Defender Jennifer Bias said in a statement.  “For the many Wisconsinites who have done the hard work of redemption and are ready to come home, this is a chance to start anew. For our state, this is an opportunity to heal the scars left by decades of over-incarceration. Governor Evers is taking a bold and necessary step forward.”

This report has been updated with additional comments received after publication from leaders of  WISDOM.

About 100 Wisconsinites joined a virtual town hall hosted by Citizen Action of Wisconsin Wednesday evening to share how data center developments across the state are harming local residents through the increased use of energy. 

Over the past year, data centers have become an increasingly potent issue in the state as the number of data center facilities in Wisconsin has risen to about 50. Data center proposals are currently pending in communities including Beaver Dam and Janesville. The Democratic and Republican candidates for governor have frequently been asked about the issue and lawmakers of both parties introduced legislation to manage data center growth — yet both chambers of the Legislature adjourned for the year without the bills being signed into law. 

The Legislature’s lack of action, and the 10 month wait before the body is back in session in January 2027, was a big concern for data center opponents at the event Wednesday who are worried about how many data center projects can be planned and started before then. 

“These are happening fast. A lot of these decisions are being made in the next six to 18 months, which is especially concerning because, as mentioned earlier, the state Legislature went home on a 10 month long vacation without helping us with many of these important decisions,” Kat Klawes, Citizen Action of Wisconsin’s climate policy coordinator, said. “There are data centers and power plants being built 24/7, so there are people out at construction sites across the state, still working late at night. And there’s local projects that are being approved.

“And this is a big issue, because Wisconsin does not have a statewide plan,” Klawes said “These projects are being approved on a case-by-case basis. Local towns are coming up against billion dollar companies and teams of lawyers who are demanding things. There’s no consistent framework for cost, water use, energy demand, community impact or community say. There is none of that. Wisconsin is the wild, wild west.”

Among the biggest concerns shared by attendees were the pressure that data centers’ massive energy use will put on regular Wisconsinites’ energy bills and the effect that increased energy use will have on the climate. 

Keviea Guiden, who works on energy burden issues on Milwaukee’s north side, noted that Wisconsin is two weeks away from the end of the winter moratorium on utilities shutting off people’s power. She said that with so many Wisconsin families already struggling to pay their bills, the state needs to do something to prevent data centers from further increasing the cost of energy. 

“We will be burdened with having to pay for those facilities being built,” she said. “Families are already being forced between if they should pay for health care, day cares, diapers, if they should figure out if the dog could even eat as well.” 

Attendees complained about the large amount of water data centers use to cool their systems and the effect that could have on local water supplies — especially the Great Lakes. But the bigger climate concern is the emissions caused by increasing the amount of electricity Wisconsin’s utility companies generate. Green Bay resident Arden Kozlow connected the fight against data centers to the fight against oil pipelines such as the activism against the Line 5 pipeline across northern Wisconsin. 

“We’re just fast tracking a process that is already happening with absolutely no regulation and no care for how it’s happening, and that, frankly, this only adds to the problem that we’ve already had with oil pipelines,” Kozlow said. “So it’s all just sort of feeding into itself and creating a bigger and bigger problem.”

Attendees still suggested a number of statewide solutions for managing the effects of data centers. 

One proposal is capping the state’s utility rates at 2% of household income, which advocates said would encourage the state’s utilities to invest in lower cost renewable energy. Attendees also supported legislation proposed by Democratic lawmakers that would put a moratorium on data center construction until many of the questions about their impacts can be answered.

State Rep. Angelito Tenorio (D-West Allis) joined the town hall to tout his proposed legislation that would require Wisconsin get 100% of its energy from carbon free sources by 2050. 

“We have a moral imperative to move towards clean energy, renewable energy,” he said, noting that Wisconsin lags behind its neighbors in Iowa, Illinois, Michigan and Minnesota on the issue. 

With the Legislature out for the year, local government approvals will remain the only lever Wisconsin residents have to push back against data center developments.

Reading Time: 2 minutes

The president of the 25-campus Universities of Wisconsin said in a letter obtained by The Associated Press on Thursday that he’s been told to either resign or be fired, but has been given no reason and won’t step aside from the 165,000-student system.

Jay Rothman, president of the university system since 2022, said in the letter addressed to the head of the Board of Regents dated March 26 that he’s been given no reason why regents want him to leave.

Rothman said he’s been told that his options are to resign or retire and that if he doesn’t then the board “was prepared to terminate my employment despite all that has been accomplished.”

The Board of Regents held a closed emergency meeting on Wednesday night to discuss personnel matters.

“The Board is responsible for the leadership of the Universities of Wisconsin and is having discussions about its future,” Amy Bogost, board president, said in a statement to AP. “We don’t comment on personnel matters.”

Rothman declined to comment when reached via email on Thursday.

“I believe my letter speaks for itself,” he said.

Rothman’s tenure has been marked by his efforts to increase state funding amid federal cuts, debates over free speech on campus amid pro-Palestinian protests and declining enrollment leading to eight branch campus closures.

“Since to date you have not provided any substantive reason or reasons for the Board’s finding of no confidence in my leadership, I am not prepared, as a matter of principle, to submit my resignation,” Rothman said in the letter addressed to Bogost.

Rothman notes in the letter that “among so many other things,” the university will need to replace the chancellor of the flagship Madison campus this year. Chancellor Jennifer Mnookin is leaving to take the job as president of Columbia University.

“I do not believe my resignation at this time is in the best interests of either the Universities of Wisconsin or the state of Wisconsin,” Rothman said.

Rothman said in the letter that he has devoted his “heart and soul to the mission of the Universities of Wisconsin” and that he was surprised when told “an unidentified majority of the Board of Regents had lost confidence” in his leadership.

“When I asked you to articulate reasons for the Board’s conclusion and apparent lack of confidence in me, you merely noted that each Regent has his or her own perspective on the matter,” Rothman wrote. “You did not provide any tangible reasons for the Board’s determination.”

Rothman, the former chair and CEO of the Milwaukee-based Foley & Lardner law firm, was chosen as UW president in 2022. He had no prior experience administering higher education.

Wisconsin Watch is a nonprofit and nonpartisan newsroom. Subscribe to our newsletters to get our investigative stories and Friday news roundup. This story is published in partnership with The Associated Press.

Universities of Wisconsin president refuses to leave after being told to resign or be fired is a post from Wisconsin Watch, a non-profit investigative news site covering Wisconsin since 2009. Please consider making a contribution to support our journalism.

Reading Time: < 1 minute

Betting on an election one is voting in is illegal in Wisconsin.

Politics betting has become popular on platforms like Kalshi and Polymarket. Just this year, people have placed lucrative bets on the capture of the Venezuelan leader Nicolás Maduro and on the war with Iran, among other events. 

On Kalshi, people have placed bets worth tens of thousands of dollars on Wisconsin’s Supreme Court election on April 7 and the governor’s primary election on Aug. 11.

Ann Jacobs, Wisconsin’s Elections Commission chair, noted on X that voters’ ballots can be disqualified and thrown out if they were found to have bet on the election. 

Wisconsin Statute 6.03(2) specifies that no one is allowed to vote in any election in which the person has placed “any bet or wager depending upon the result of the election.” The idea behind the law has existed since 1849.

This fact brief is responsive to conversations such as this one.

Sources

• Kalshi: Wisconsin bets
• Wisconsin state statute: 6.03

Is it illegal for Wisconsin voters to bet on election results? is a post from Wisconsin Watch, a non-profit investigative news site covering Wisconsin since 2009. Please consider making a contribution to support our journalism.

Gov. Tony Evers vetoed Republican bills Tuesday that would have placed new prohibitions in state statute related to transgender children, including banning them from sports teams that align with their gender identity, barring them from choosing the name and pronouns used for them in school and from accessing gender affirming medical care. 

Evers said in a statement that the legislation “stirs harmful rhetoric, negatively affects Wisconsinites’ and kids’ mental health, emboldens anti-LGBTQ harassment, bullying, and violence, and threatens the safety and dignity of LGBTQ Wisconsinites, especially our trans and nonbinary kids.”

A 2024 survey by The Trevor Project found that 91% of LGBTQ+ young people in Wisconsin said that recent politics negatively impacted their well-being. 

AB 100  and AB 102 would have barred transgender girls in K-12 schools and transgender women at Wisconsin’s higher education institutions from participating on sports teams and using locker rooms that align with their gender identity.

AB 103 would have required that school districts adopt policies requiring consent from  students’ parents or guardians before using  names or pronouns that differ from their birth certificates.

AB 104 would have prohibited health care professionals from providing medical gender affirming care for those under 18.

SB 405 would have created a civil cause of action against health care providers who perform gender transition procedures on someone under the age of 18 if they claim to be injured.

Republican lawmakers had pushed the bills to Evers’ desk, arguing they would protect Wisconsin students and ensure parents are informed of what’s happening in schools. They did so despite hourslong public hearings where many parents, students and advocates spoke in opposition to the bills and previous promises by Evers to block “any bill making Wisconsin less safe, less inclusive, and less welcoming for LGBTQ people and kids.” 

Evers vetoed the bills on International Transgender Day of Visibility while surrounded by advocates for LGBTQ kids and their families as well as other community members.

“Especially in the wake of continued attacks against LGBTQ communities, particularly targeting the trans community, our work to fight this hatred and bigotry is more important than ever,” Evers said in his statement. “I’m proud to stand with LGBTQ kids and Wisconsinites today and every day.”

According to the American Civil Liberties Union, there have been about 500 anti-LGBTQ bills introduced throughout the country so far in 2026. 

The federal government has continued to target transgender Americans in the start of President Donald Trump’s second year of his second term and as Wisconsin Republicans running for office are seeking to bring the issue to the forefront of their campaigns. Earlier this month, the administration launched an investigation into the New Richmond School District for its policies that allow students to use bathrooms that align with their gender identity. Moms for Liberty, U.S. Rep. Tom Tiffany and Michael Alfonso, a Republican candidate for the open 8th Congressional District seat and son-in-law of Transportation Sec. Sean Duffy, have been criticizing the school district online for weeks.

In his veto messages, Evers said the bills did not comport with “our Wisconsin values.” 

“We teach our kids to treat each other with kindness, respect, empathy and compassion — and we expect adults to lead by example. LGBTQ Wisconsinites and Americans should be able to be safe, be treated with dignity and respect, and be welcomed and accepted for who they are without fear of violence, harassment or persecution,” Evers said. “While the federal government and other states across this country may give way to anti-LGBTQ hate, here in Wisconsin, we will continue to decline to do the same.” 

Abigail Swetz, executive director of Fair Wisconsin, thanked Evers in a statement for rejecting the bills and supporting transgender kids. 

“These bills were always about more than health care or the makeup of a sports team or the use of pronouns in a classroom  — they were about excluding trans people from public life, and we cannot allow that, especially when our trans community is being attacked by so many levels of government,” Swetz said.

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

Reading Time: < 1 minute

Nine of Wisconsin’s 72 counties are “maternity care deserts”: no hospitals and birth centers offering obstetric care and no obstetric providers such as obstetricians.

The nine, according to the latest March of Dimes report (2024), are largely rural: 

Adams, Douglas, Forest, Kewaunee, Lafayette, Marquette, Oconto, Pepin and Rusk.

Maternal care deserts drive maternal mortality rates, which generally are higher for Black women and women in rural areas, according to a 2025 study by Brown University researchers.

Individuals in states with a high prevalence of maternity care deserts had 34.2% greater risk of maternal mortality and 18.3% greater risk of infant mortality, Yale University researchers found in 2025.

The Wisconsin Office of Rural Health at the University of Wisconsin-Madison recommended extending pregnant women’s Medicaid coverage to 12 months postpartum, from two months, to improve care and hospital finances.

Gov. Tony Evers recently signed legislation for that extension.

This fact brief is responsive to conversations such as this one.

Sources

• March of Dimes: Maternity Care Desert
• Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine: Maternity Care Deserts: Key Drivers of the National Maternal Health Crisis
• AJPM Focus: State-Level Prevalence of Maternity Care Deserts: Association With Healthcare Access, Utilization, and Outcomes Among Medicaid Recipients
• Wisconsin Office of Rural Health: Obstetric Delivery Services and Workforce in Rural Wisconsin Hospitals 2024
• Milwaukee Journal Sentinel: Lawmakers vote to extend postpartum Medicaid coverage to a full year
• The Commonwealth Fund: Positive Outliers: How Some Rural Communities Maintain Access to Labor and Delivery Services
• National Rural Health Association: Maternal health in rural America
• University of Wisconsin-Madison Collaborative for Reproductive Equity: New CORE brief explores Dobbs decision’s impact on the ob-gyn workforce in Wisconsin
• PBS Wisconsin: Maternal health care in Wisconsin and the future of Medicaid

Do some Wisconsin counties have no maternal health care providers? is a post from Wisconsin Watch, a non-profit investigative news site covering Wisconsin since 2009. Please consider making a contribution to support our journalism.

Reading Time: < 1 minute

Cannabis isn’t legal in Wisconsin, so residents are purchasing it in states where it is, generating tax money for those states. 

Wisconsin borders three states with legal recreational cannabis: Michigan, which legalized it in 2018; Illinois, which legalized it in 2019; and Minnesota, which legalized it in 2023. 

Illinois tracks cannabis sales by in-state versus out-of-state purchasers. A 2023 analysis from Wisconsin’s nonpartisan Legislative Fiscal Bureau found Illinois collected $36.1 million in tax revenue in 2022 from out-of-state residents who purchased cannabis in counties bordering Wisconsin.

About half of cannabis sales in 2022 at dispensaries in Illinois counties that border Wisconsin were to out-of-state residents, the analysis found. 

Michigan and Minnesota do not track nonresident cannabis purchases. 
In Michigan, marijuana tax revenue is shared with local governments and tribes, as well as the state’s School Aid and Transportation funds.

This fact brief is responsive to conversations such as this one.

Sources

• Ballotpedia Michigan Proposal 1, Marijuana Legalization Initiative (2018)
• National Public Radio Illinois Governor Signs Law Legalizing Recreational Use Of Marijuana
• Minnesota Office of Cannabis Management Cannabis law
• Illinois Department of Financial and Professional Regulation Illinois adult use cannabis monthly sales figures
• Legislative Fiscal Bureau Illinois Marijuana Tax Collections on Sales and Estimated Wisconsin Residents
• Jim Walker email Public information officer, Minnesota Office of Cannabis Management
• David Harns Email Public relations manager, Michigan Cannabis Regulatory Agency
• Michigan Department of Treasury Adult-Use Marijuana Distributions Based on Marijuana Revenues Collected in Fiscal Year 2025 February 2026
• Michigan Legislature Michigan Regulation and Taxation of Marihuana Act (excerpt)

Is Wisconsin losing millions in tax revenue to states where cannabis is legal? is a post from Wisconsin Watch, a non-profit investigative news site covering Wisconsin since 2009. Please consider making a contribution to support our journalism.