Green Bay Correctional Institution. (Photo by Andrew Kennard/Wisconsin Examiner)

When a prison built in the 1800s is still housing people in 2025 with the same aging infrastructure, we have to be honest, the system is broken. Wisconsin’s prisons have been in crisis for years, and for the first time in a long time, we’re seeing a small but important step toward change. 

Gov. Tony Evers recently received bipartisan approval to overhaul Wisconsin’s aging prison system and close the outdated Green Bay and Waupun prisons. The overhaul strategy includes a $15 million project investment and outlines a four-year process to reduce the number of beds, modernize facilities, and shift the focus toward rehabilitation and safety. That’s progress, but 2029 is too far away, and Evers’ plan lacks the kind of decarceration measures needed to actually reduce the prison population and make Wisconsin safer. 

The reality inside our prisons doesn’t have four years to wait. People are dying. Staff are exhausted. Families are breaking under the weight of a system that punishes more than it prepares people to come home. Every delay costs lives and wastes taxpayer dollars that could be used to help people rebuild instead of being locked away. 

I know this firsthand because I lived it. I spent part of my incarceration inside Green Bay Correctional Facility, one of the oldest and most overcrowded prisons in Wisconsin. The facility was built in 1898 with a design capacity of about 17,000 people statewide, yet Wisconsin’s prison population has hovered above 22,000 for years. That means thousands of people crammed into cells meant for far fewer. Walking those halls, you can feel the age of the place, the air thick with humidity, the bitter cold in winter, and the lack of ventilation that makes it hard to breathe. The walls are cracking, the infrastructure is failing, and the environment itself strips people of their dignity. 

Those conditions don’t make anyone safer. They don’t prepare people for reentry. They create desperation, both for both the incarcerated and the staff working inside. The best way to ensure a safer Wisconsin is to get the people who are ready to reenter society out of our prisons and into reentry. Overcrowded and understaffed prisons overtax our correctional officers and make prisons unsafe for officers and incarcerated people. In addition, understaffing makes it harder to ensure that everyone gets the programming that they need. The Federal First Step Act and CARES Act Home Confinement have both proved that bringing the right people back early can result in lower recidivism, better public safety and safer and more effective prisons. 

I was one of the many people affected by Wisconsin’s Truth in Sentencing law, which eliminated parole and early release. That law has kept countless people behind bars longer than necessary, removing the hope and incentive that parole once provided.

If Wisconsin wants to lead on justice reform, this can’t just be a construction project. Real reform means reducing the number of people behind bars, ending excessive revocations, expanding reentry programs, and investing in housing, treatment, and mental health care. It means giving people a path forward, not just warehousing. 

According to the Prison Policy Initiative, Wisconsin imprisons about 663 people per 100,000 residents, far more than Minnesota (173) or Illinois (341). Despite years of promises to reform, the state’s prison population has remained between 21,000 and 23,000 people for nearly two decades. 

Nearly 40% of new admissions each year come from revocations, not new crimes, meaning thousands are sent back to prison for breaking supervision rules like missing curfew, losing housing, or failing a drug test. That’s roughly 4,000 to 5,000 people every year, based on Department of Corrections data. I lead a statewide Smart Justice campaign focused on ending these excessive revocations, because it’s one of the biggest drivers of mass incarceration in Wisconsin. 

Add to that the worst racial disparity in the country. Black residents are imprisoned at 11 times the rate of white residents, according to the Sentencing Project, and it’s clear that our problem isn’t just old buildings. It’s old thinking. Reducing prison beds without changing these policies is like draining a bathtub while leaving the faucet running. Until we reform supervision, expand early release and invest in reentry and community support, the system will keep refilling itself. 

Closing prisons built in the 1800s is a step in the right direction, but it has to come with urgency and intention. We can’t keep reacting; we have to start transforming. The same energy that went into passing this plan must go into implementing it quickly and with input from the people most affected by it, those who have lived behind those walls, their families and the communities most affected by incarceration. 

As we head into a new election season, this issue must be front and center for every candidate running for governor. Wisconsin deserves leaders who will move us forward, not just talk about reform, but act on it. The next administration should be judged on whether it has the courage to close outdated prisons, expand second chances, and build a system rooted in rehabilitation, dignity, and justice. 

Gov. Evers was right when he said, “We’ve got to get this damned thing done.” But getting it done means more than moving money; it means moving with purpose. Justice reform isn’t about buildings; it’s about people. 

Wisconsin’s motto is Forward. It’s time for our justice system and our next governor to finally live up to that.

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

Surveillance cameras monitor traffic on a clear day | Getty Images Creative

The Greenfield Police Department has been engulfed in controversy since its chief was charged with felony misconduct in public office earlier this month. Chief Jay Johnson is accused of having a pole camera, owned and operated by the police department, installed at his Racine County home in late 2024. A 15-page criminal complaint states that Johnson put up the camera for personal use while he was in the process of divorcing his wife. 

The complaint also states that Johnson’s alleged personal use of the camera  violated the wishes and advice of Greenfield’s mayor, city attorney and members of the police department. In July, special agents from the Wisconsin Department of Justice (DOJ) Division of Criminal Investigation (DCI) attended a meeting held at Greenfield City Hall to discuss a months-long investigation with city officials. 

According to the complaint, the special agents “were advised that during an internal investigation of Chief Johnson, which was conducted earlier in 2025, investigators uncovered actions they deemed as possibly criminal in nature. Outside agencies were later contacted to investigate potentially criminal violations committed by Chief Johnson.” 

Interviews with Greenfield’s human resources director, mayor, city attorney and police department staff turned up statements  that Johnson wanted to use a tax-payer funded, police department-owned pole camera at his home in Wind Lake because of  “safety concerns stemming from his divorce,” according to the complaint. Mayor Michael Neitzke said Johnson claimed to have been attempting to get a retraining order against his wife “in part because she was dating a felon,” the complaint states. Johnson claimed to have experienced harassment including a white rose being left in his driveway. The chief’s restraining order was denied, the complaint states, after which he asked the mayor about installing a pole camera. “Mayor Neitzke advised agents that he did not understand the type of camera Chief Johnson was talking about and believed it was equivalent to a trail camera or Verizon-type camera,” the complaint states. 

The mayor gave Johnson the go-ahead to install the camera, but later began to reconsider the decision. Neitzke contacted city attorney Christopher Geary, who said Johnson shouldn’t install the camera “citing legal issues with its use for personal reasons.” Geary then contacted Johnson stating that “his divorce is not related to his job,” the criminal complaint states. Johnson’s reaction was reputedly bombastic, “‘I think it’s f-ing ludicrous,’ was the exact quote,” Geary wrote in an email to the mayor. 

Johnson tried to argue that what he wanted was no different from the security former Gov. Scott Walker received during the Act 10 protests, and that a prior Greenfield police chief also had home security. “I tried to explain the difference is that the threats in those situations stemmed from the person’s public employment and/or public policy positions, whereas this is, as I understand it, an entirely personal situation,” Geary wrote in the same email, which is featured in the criminal complaint. “He didn’t appreciate the distinction.” 

The mayor said he thought that was where the issue ended, and that Johnson hadn’t installed the camera. In December 2024, however, Greenfield Police Department  Captain Chuck Fletcher was asked by Johnson about installing the pole cameras, according to the complaint. Fletcher told the DCI special agents that he had known Johnson his entire career and “considers him a close friend.” Fletcher stated that he also knew Johnson’s wife, and didn’t consider her to be an angry or violent person. Johnson allegedly told Fletcher that he wanted to keep the camera installation “low key” and discrete. Fletcher then assigned Detective Scott Simons to handle the installation, and told investigators that he did not know that the city attorney had advised against it. 

The complaint states that Fletcher communicated the chief’s desire to be “low key” and quick about things to Simons. The detective said he was asked to “change the password for logging onto the camera, as all pole cameras have a general username and password,” according to the complaint. “The camera that was to be installed at the Defendant’s residence would have a unique username and password.” Although Greenfield’s pole cameras are owned and monitored by the police department, they are installed by We Energies technicians. A camera was taken down “from a closed drug investigation,” according to the complaint. Simons told another detective that it was “being installed in another county for another investigation.” The camera was eventually installed across the street from the chief’s home. 

Some time later, Greenfield Police Association president and detective Aaron Busche “found out by accident” about the chief’s personal camera. Busche keeps track of the department’s four pole cameras, which are listed on a whiteboard by number and location. Busche realized that the camera at Johnson’s home had no documented location. “Detective Busche was told by Detective Scott Simons that the camera was loaned to an outside agency for their investigation,” the complaint states. “Detective Busche was not told what agency the camera was loaned to.”

 

Criminal Complaint_1 - Johnson, Jay A_ 2025CF005150_ Johnson, Jay A._28099053_1

 

In the spring of 2025, Busche heard that there was video feed from the mystery camera, but then realized he couldn’t log in because the password had been changed. Busche then used a “backdoor process” to access the camera feed, and realized it was the chief’s home. During a meeting with acting chief Eric Lindstrom, Simons was asked to take the camera down. 

Johnson is accused of violating Greenfield PD’s standards of conduct by using department equipment for personal gain, and omitting or even falsifying information given to staff who carried out the camera’s installation. The criminal complaint also accuses Johnson of threatening behavior towards law enforcement. In late August, it states, a person attempting to disguise their voice called the police department saying, “Hello you f-ing pigs, revenge is sweet!” The dispatcher and Busche both recognized the voice as Johnson’s. 

Acting Chief Lindstrom had also filed a complaint against Johnson with the Oak Creek Police Department, accusing Johnson of threats and harassment over Facebook, LinkedIn, and Instagram. One email copy says: “He’s on board, hold on tight!!!! Idiot and the ice princess will pay dearly. JJ DOJ is the man! Boom. God is good.” Another message says: “KL is on board. Friday meet with us. Ughhh. So unnecessary but he’s all in for me rn. HR and MN GOING DOWN!!!! EL is dirty so stay tuned. TY owe you!!!!” The criminal complaint states that “EL” is a reference to Eric Lindstrom who, like Busche, has also served on the Milwaukee-area team which investigates civilian deaths by police. 

The controversy raises questions about oversight of police surveillance technology, accountability for officers, and how problematic police officers climb the ranks. Community members in Milwaukee County have pushed for Community Control Over Police Surveillance (CCOPS) local ordinances, which would provide more oversight and control of police surveillance tools.

Fox6 reported that a string of disciplinary issues going back to 2013 followed Chief Johnson. The news outlet obtained documents which described Johnson, who was a captain at the time, as having issues with “failing to own decisions and initiatives by administrative staff” or “engaging in inappropriate conversations with officers.” Johnson had been accused of sharing management-level discussions or information related to subordinates, and planning a “booze cruise” and other organized parties. 

A 2015 memo stated that “he can’t be allowed to supervise,” and in 2017 he signed a settlement to become Greenfield’s emergency management coordinator with the fire department, before becoming chief. Asked by Fox6 how Johnson became chief, Mayor Neitske redirected blame to the city’s Police and Fire Commission.

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

The U.S. Supreme Court on Oct. 9, 2024. (Photo by Jane Norman/States Newsroom)

The U.S. Supreme Court has extended through Thursday a pause on lower courts’ orders that the Trump administration authorize a full month of benefits for a food assistance program that 1 in 8 Americans use to buy groceries.

A brief, unsigned order published Tuesday evening also said the full court would decide on the administration’s request to block court orders that the U.S. Department of Agriculture release full November benefits for the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or SNAP. 

The case was presented to Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, who said she would have dismissed the case and denied the request for an administrative stay. Jackson was appointed to the high court by President Joe Biden.

The order adds another wrinkle to a case that was already the object of a weekslong tug-of-war over how the program should operate during the government shutdown.

The shutdown could end before the stay expires. The U.S. Senate passed a bill Monday to reopen the government, and the House is expected to pass it Wednesday. President Donald Trump has said he supports the measure and will likely sign it before the end of the day Thursday.

Trump and administration officials have maintained they were not authorized to release November SNAP benefits during the shutdown.

A Rhode Island federal judge ordered the USDA on Thursday to release full benefits for November. The department sent states a memo authorizing those payments Friday morning, then appealed to the Supreme Court on Friday evening to have the district court’s order overturned.

At the same time, the 1st U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the lower court’s order.

In the face of often contradicting administrative guidance and court orders, some states began processing full benefits for November, while others have yet to release them.

Workers and volunteers help distribute food boxes to those in need at a large-scale drive-through food distribution, in response to the federal government shutdown and SNAP/CalFresh food benefits delays, on Nov. 5, 2025 in City of Industry, California. (Photo by Mario Tama/Getty Images)

Payments for November for the nation’s main food assistance program have been delayed during the government shutdown, amid a confusing mess of contradicting guidance from the Trump administration and a flurry of court orders in two cases at every level of the federal judiciary.

The off-and-on freeze of benefits for the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or SNAP, that serves about 42 million people, was among the most consequential effects of the record-setting shutdown. Roughly 1 in 8 Americans use SNAP to help buy groceries.

Lawmakers, advocates and judges all repeatedly called for urgency to restore the program to keep Americans from going hungry. Yet the dizzying back-and-forth continued, often leaving both states and families at a loss.

While the shutdown is likely to end this week, the legal fight continues over the responsibilities of the federal government, which funds SNAP, and the states that administer the program.

Here’s a timeline of events over 42 days since Congress failed to appropriate new funding for the fiscal year that began Oct. 1:

Sept. 30, 2025: On the brink of the current shutdown, the Trump U.S. Department of Agriculture publishes a plan for how its various programs will be affected. It says SNAP benefits will continue to flow from a $6 billion contingency fund during a shutdown.

“Congressional intent is evident that SNAP’s operations should continue since the program has been provided with multi-year contingency funds,” the document reads in part.

States Newsroom discloses the document is later removed from USDA’s website.

Oct. 1: Congress fails to appropriate any money for discretionary government programs. The federal government shuts down. USDA pays October SNAP benefits.

Oct. 10: USDA sends a letter to states telling them not to pay SNAP benefits for November, a reversal from its Sept. 30 plan.

Oct. 24: USDA tells states in a memo that it will not pay November SNAP benefits, even though it held billions in a contingency fund.  

Oct. 28: Democratic states sue USDA in Massachusetts federal court, seeking to force the department to pay for November benefits.

Oct. 30: Nonprofits, religious groups and municipal governments bring a similar suit in Rhode Island federal court. 

Oct. 31: In an initial hearing in the Rhode Island case, U.S. District Chief Judge John J. McConnell Jr. says he is ordering USDA to continue SNAP benefits in November.

In the Massachusetts case, U.S. District Judge Indira Talwani rules that withholding November benefits is illegal, but gives the administration until Nov. 3 to respond.

Nov. 1: McConnell issues a written ruling laying out two options for USDA: pay full benefits for November by Nov. 3 or partial benefits by Nov. 5.

Some SNAP recipients begin to miss benefit payments. The program administers benefits on a rolling basis throughout each month, so more people are affected every day the department is not authorizing benefits.

Nov. 3: In a filing in McConnell’s court, USDA says it will pay about half of November benefits. But it says the administrative difficulties of calculating partial benefits could take weeks or even months.

Nov. 4, just after 11 a.m. Eastern: President Donald Trump posts to Truth Social that SNAP benefits will not be paid until Democrats agree to reopen the government. At the White House press briefing in the afternoon, press secretary Karoline Leavitt walks back that post and says Trump was referring to future benefits.

Nov. 5, late: In a memo to states, USDA corrects a table for the amount of partial benefits households should receive based on income, size of household and other factors. USDA says the table fulfills its duty under McConnell’s Nov. 1 order to pay partial benefits by this date. 

Nov. 6: McConnell orders the USDA to pay full November benefits by the next day. His earlier order was clear that partial benefits must be paid by Nov. 5, he said. Because recipients did not receive their benefits, the government missed that deadline, and it must pay for the whole month, he says. He also notes Trump’s Truth Social post appeared to defy the order.

States, including Wisconsin, Michigan and Oregon, begin to authorize full November benefits. 

Nov. 7, 8:53 a.m. Eastern: The department appeals McConnell’s order the day before to the 1st U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.

Nov. 7, midday: Despite its morning appeal, the USDA issues guidance to states greenlighting full November benefits. A USDA spokesperson says the department must comply with McConnell’s order.

Consistent with the USDA guidance, more states begin to authorize full November benefits.

Nov. 7, evening: The Trump administration asks the U.S. Supreme Court to issue an emergency stay of the 1st Circuit and district court orders that it provide full November benefits that day.

Nov. 7, just before 10 p.m. Eastern: U.S. Supreme Court Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson orders an administrative stay while the 1st Circuit appeal is pending. The order temporarily halts the lower courts’ order to provide benefits.

Nov. 8, late: Following the Supreme Court stay, USDA sends states a letter demanding they “immediately undo” any moves to provide full SNAP benefits. The letter threatens to cancel other federal funding for states that don’t comply. 

Nov. 9, late night: A 1st Circuit panel affirms McConnell’s order. The trial judge was within his right to order USDA pay full November benefits, the three-judge panel says.

Nov. 10: The Trump administration continues its Supreme Court appeal, even as the shutdown nears its end and the 1st Circuit has ruled on the appeal.

Talwani issues a restraining order on the Nov. 8 letter asking states to “undo” November benefit payments. At a hearing, she says USDA has created the confusion and that states were acting in line with court orders and the department’s own guidance.

The U.S. Senate approves a bill to reopen the government and fund SNAP, sending the measure to the House. 

Later this week: The U.S. House is expected to clear the Senate bill; Trump is expected to sign it. The Supreme Court could rule on the administration’s request to freeze the lower court orders. 

It is not clear when full November benefits will flow to households.

Text by Jacob Fischler/timeline graphic by Ashley Murray/States Newsroom.

Jeff Garland, right, gives a tour of Papa G’s Organic Hemp Farm in Crawford County, Indiana, on June 23, 2022. Jeff and his son started the farm in 2020.  At left is Lee Schnell of the U.S. Natural Resources Conservation Service, which is part of the U.S. Department of Agriculture.  (NRCS photo by Brandon O’Connor)

WASHINGTON — Kentucky’s two U.S. senators sparred this week over the future of the country’s hemp industry — one arguing that a provision attached to the package that will reopen the government will close a problematic loophole and the other contending the language will regulate the industry “to death.”

Sen. Mitch McConnell ultimately prevailed and was able to keep the section in the Agriculture appropriations bill cracking down on hemp that Sen. Rand Paul tried to remove during floor debate. Both are Republicans.

The appropriations bill is riding along with a stopgap spending bill that will end the government shutdown and is expected to be voted on by the House as soon as Wednesday. The hemp measure has raised alarm in farm states benefiting from a robust hemp growing industry.

Hemp plants have 0.3% or less of tetrahydrocannabinol, or THC, while cannabis or marijuana plants have higher concentrations of that substance, which is what gives users the “high or stoned” feeling. 

A summary of the bill put together by Senate Appropriations Chairwoman Susan Collins’ staff says the new language would prevent “the unregulated sale of intoxicating hemp-based or hemp-derived products, including Delta-8, from being sold online, in gas stations, and corner stores, while preserving non-intoxicating CBD and industrial hemp products.”

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration has a warning page on its website cautioning “that delta-8 THC products have not been evaluated or approved by the FDA for safe use in any context.”

Farm Bill origins

McConnell explained he is targeting hemp because its uses have expanded beyond what was intended. 

“I led the effort to legalize industrial hemp through the 2014 pilot program and the 2018 Farm Bill,” McConnell said. “Unfortunately, companies have exploited a loophole in the 2018 legislation by taking legal amounts of THC from hemp and turning it into intoxicating substances, and then marketing it to children in candy-like packaging and selling it in easily accessible places, like gas stations and convenience stores all across our country.”

McConnell said the new provision, which won’t take effect until a year after the bill becomes law, would “keep these dangerous products out of the hands of children while preserving the hemp industry for farmers.”

Paul and Oregon Democratic Sen. Jeff Merkley urged their colleagues to remove that McConnell provision from the larger spending package, but were unsuccessful. 

“This is the most thoughtless, ignorant proposal to an industry that I’ve seen in a long, long time,” Paul said. 

The new language would change the definition of what makes a hemp plant legal, a move Paul said would mean “every plant in the country will have to be destroyed.” 

“This bill’s per-serving THC content limit would make illegal any hemp product that contains more than point four milligrams,” Paul said. “That would be nearly 100% of the existing market. That amounts to an effective ban, because the limit is so low that the products intended to manage pain or anxiety will lose their effect.”

State laws said to be nullified

The legislation, Paul added, will negatively impact the nearly two dozen states that have set higher limits on hemp production.

“Currently, Maine limits THC to three milligrams per serving. That will be overruled. My home state limits THC to five milligrams in beverages; that will be overruled. Minnesota, Utah, Louisiana also have five milligrams per serving. Alabama and Georgia have 10 milligrams. Tennessee has 15 milligrams,” Paul said. “The bill before us nullifies all these state laws.”

Merkley said the new provision in the larger spending package would eliminate the hemp industry, which Congress took steps to establish more than a decade ago.

“I support my other colleague from Kentucky who doesn’t want intoxicated products produced from hemp,” Merkley said. “But the definition that is in this bill does far more than that, and it has to be fixed. So for now, it needs to be stripped out.”

The Senate voted 76-24 to table, or set aside, Paul’s amendment after McConnell moved to block it from being taken up directly. 

The Agriculture funding bill is one of three full-year government spending bills included in the stopgap spending package that will end the government shutdown once the House approves the measure later this week and President Donald Trump signs the bill. 

Trade group warns of hundreds of thousands of jobs affected

Hemp Industry & Farmers of America Executive Director Brian Swensen wrote in a statement released last week that McConnell’s provision would have a devastating impact on the industry and its workers. 

“Congress legalized hemp, Americans built an industry, and now Washington wants to pull the rug out from under hardworking farmers and small business owners. The industry wants a solid regulatory package that protects kids, but instead, Congress wants to place industry-killing caps on cannabinoids. Congress is not listening to the industry they created — they’re dismantling an industry with over 325,000 jobs and driving consumers to an unregulated, unsafe, and untaxed black market.”

John and Kara Grady, owners of Slappyhappy Hemp Company, said during an interview with the Missouri Independent the new language could hinder their business, possibly forcing them to close down.

“You’re sick to your stomach all day long,” said Kara Grady, “knowing your hard work is for not.”

Zack Kobrin, a Fort Lauderdale attorney with the firm of Saul Ewing who works in the hemp and cannabis industry, told the Florida Phoenix that many in the industry “are surprised it was such a sudden and sweeping measure.”

“I think for those that are cowboys, they will just maximize on making as much as they can until they can’t,” Kobrin said. “I think for those hemp operators that were trying to work with regulators and trying to follow the rules, this will be a real blow.”

Gov. Tony Evers and Veterans Affairs Sec. James Bond spoke an event for veterans in the state Capitol on April 22, 2025. (Photo via Wisconsin Department of Veterans Affairs Facebook page)

As Wisconsin policymakers honor Veterans Day Tuesday, the state continues to grapple with diminished resources for its most vulnerable veterans, those who are struggling with homelessness.

Debate in the state Capitol continues over the closure of sites in Green Bay and Chippewa Falls for the Veterans Housing and Recovery Program (VHRP), which provided support to veterans on the verge of or experiencing homelessness, including those who have been incarcerated, unemployed or suffered physical and mental health problems. 

Republican lawmakers recently proposed that the state create a new grant match program to help support homeless veterans. But some are expressing doubt that the bill would fill the gaps left by the recent closures, especially since it would rely on nonprofit organizations to start their own programs. 

Coauthored by Rep. Benjamin Franklin (R-De Pere) and Sen. Eric Wimberger (R-Oconto), AB 596 and AB 597 would direct $1.9 million to be used for a state grant match program. 

To receive the funds, a nonprofit group would need to be participating in the federal per diem program, which currently provides about $82 per day per veteran housed to groups that offer wraparound supportive services to homeless veterans. The bill would offer state matching funds of $25 per day per veteran.

Finger pointing over funding continues 

The closures of the Green Bay and Chippewa Falls facilities were announced in July after lawmakers chose not to provide additional funding in the state budget for the programs. Both sites closed their doors in September. By that point, the Wisconsin Department of Veterans Affairs said it was able to find new places for each resident, including some who moved to a Union Grove site and others who were transferred out of state. 

The Legislative Fiscal Bureau had warned in a memo that without funding the sites would be at risk of closing, though the recent reaction of lawmakers who sit on the budget committee gave the appearance that they missed that warning. Gov. Tony Evers and Democratic lawmakers had called for additional funding and the Department of Veterans Affairs said staff had discussed the issue with the chairs of the Joint Finance Committee. Still, one member of the committee, Rep. Karen Hurd (R-Withee), said at a recent public hearing on the new bill that she was “absolutely blindsided” by the announcement of the closures.

While a handful of lawmakers have advocated for giving the department the additional funding to reopen the sites, the new Republican proposal takes a different approach that would limit the department’s direct involvement in the program.

Since the announced closures, some Republican lawmakers have blamed the Evers administration for not using money in the Veterans Trust Fund to keep the sites open and instead sending that money back to the general fund, even as the agency has said it can’t spend funds without the Legislature directing it to.

“There’s money in the account. It’s fully funded in the exact same way that it was funded last year. [Evers] just suddenly declared… he wasn’t going to use the trust account anymore,” Wimberger told the Wisconsin Examiner after he introduced the new proposal.

The Veterans Trust Fund receives general purpose revenue allocations from the state, though it doesn’t function as a big pot of money that can be used for anything. The funds have specific purposes, such as to be used for administrative costs and the Veterans Housing and Recovery Program. 

According to Joseph Hoey, assistant deputy secretary of the Department of Veterans Affairs, the agency did use money from the trust fund to pay for administrative expenses to keep the buildings used for veterans’ housing in “good working order.” He said it was a legitimate use since the buildings are owned by the department and could be considered administrative purposes, but that wouldn’t be the case for other costs related to the program. 

“We cannot use that money to pay [Lutheran Social Services] or to run the VHRP [Veterans Housing Recovery Program] because there is a separate appropriation for VHRP,” Hoey said.

Wimberger and Republican lawmakers have also noted a 15% increase for veterans housing in the recent budget. The Department of Veterans Affairs noted that amount fell short of the $1.95 million that was requested by Evers to keep the sites open.

Unclear whether new proposal would fill gaps

Wimberger told the Examiner that a grant program would be “a lot simpler” and require “less of a direct monitoring” by the Department of Veterans Affairs. 

Hoey said he sees the proposal as “the first step in leaving this up to nonprofits and ultimately spending less state resources on homeless veterans.” He also expressed concern about whether the approach would fill the gaps left by the closures of the two sites in Green Bay and Chippewa Falls.

There are currently four entities that would be eligible to apply for the new grant program: Porchlight Inc. in Madison, Rock Valley Community Programs, Inc. in Janesville, as well as Center For Veterans Issues Ltd. and Guest House Of Milwaukee, Inc., which are both in Milwaukee.

“As you see from the locations of those organizations that are providing these services, they’re not meeting the need in other parts of the state, and WDVA was,” Hoey said. “I think we as a state have a commitment when people sign up to protect our freedom, I think we have an obligation to care for them, especially when they’re struggling.”

Hoey told lawmakers on the Assembly Veterans and Military Affairs committee at a hearing on the bill that the additional $25 per veteran likely wouldn’t be enough to encourage outside groups to open up new programs. He said it is estimated that it costs about $139 per day to house each participating veteran. 

“$83 is barely enough to house a veteran, let alone feed them, provide them with counseling and training that they need to get back on their feet, and it’s not enough to make the programs work,” Hoey said. “That’s why we asked for such a large amount in the last budget because these programs are just slowly getting harder and harder to operate.”

Lutheran Social Services, which was helping to operate the now closed sites in Green Bay and Chippewa Falls, could not do that work with $25 from the state, Hoey added. 

“We provide the facilities for them, so they’re not suddenly going to, in Green Bay, open up their own homeless shelter, because they don’t have the facility,” Hoey told the Examiner. “They have no way to pay for it, and the [grant and per diem payment], even with the bonus, probably wouldn’t cover their costs. It’s wishful thinking.”

Hoey also told lawmakers that it is possible the money would not actually lead to additional funding for participating nonprofit organizations. 

“Based on our preliminary analysis, we believe it is possible that all or part of the $25 state payment would be clawed back or offset by the federal VA,” Hoey said. “It’s the way the program is written at the federal level. It penalizes the programs for getting other state or government money.” 

Rep. Rob Summerfield (R-Bloomer) said it is a good bill and pushed back on the idea that only four organizations would be eligible.

“We have one entity in Eau Claire that would be eligible for this, but there’s no money,” Summerfield said. “They’re not going to commit til we actually put this in the statute, get the funding into it, so just to say it’s just going to be four entities — that is incorrect. It, maybe, is correct, but you cannot say that it’s going to be. It could be 10 more. We could have ones in Superior, Lacrosse, Eau Claire, Green Bay, including Milwaukee.”

Hoey told the Examiner that the proposal is at best an incentive for private organizations to apply for the federal grant and start a program from scratch. 

“It would be years before this could result in homeless transition services being provided for veterans anywhere other than in the Milwaukee and Madison areas,” Hoey said. 

The agency had previously said it could get the VHRP sites restarted within a year if the state provided the funding for the programs. 

Asked in an interview whether he is concerned about the prospect of nonprofit groups not opting into the program and being able to fill the present gaps, Wimberger said, “Oh sure, of course.”

“I wish DVA would have used the money we gave them, but this is, this is in response to the executive — Gov. Evers and his administration — just simply refusing to spend the money,” he said. 

Other proposals in limbo

Two proposals that would provide the Department of Veterans Affairs with funds to restart the closed sites remain in limbo.

A Democratic bill, coauthored by Sen. Jamie Wall (D-Green Bay) , Rep. Jodi Emerson (D-Eau Claire) and Sen. Jeff Smith (D-Brunswick), would provide $2.6 million for veterans’ housing.

Another bill authored by Sen. André Jacque (R-New Franken) would provide $1.9 million.

Jacque’s bill passed committee on Oct. 8 and is available to be scheduled for a floor vote in the Senate. It has not received a public hearing in the Assembly. 

Democratic lawmakers have also expressed concerns about whether the new bill will be effective in filling the existing gaps. 

“If your objective is to fix the problem that we’re now lacking services for homeless veterans in northern Wisconsin” either a bill drafted by Republican Sen. André Jacque (R-New Franken) or a Democratic bill, both of which provide funds to the now-closed facilities, “does the trick,” Sen. Jamie Wall (D-Green Bay) said in an interview. “[Wimberger’s] bill does not.” 

Rep. Jodi Emerson (D-Eau Claire) said at a press conference that Republican lawmakers had “walked away” from the solutions that would actually fix the problem and were trying to “rewrite history.” 

“Our veterans deserve better than political games. They gave everything for our country, and the least we can do is make sure that they have a safe place to live, recover and rebuild their lives,” Emerson said. “It’s time to stop pointing fingers and actually fix this problem.” 

Wimberger said he didn’t sign on to Jacque’s bill at the time because it was “premature” when it was introduced. 

“It’s not like I’m opposed to it… It’s not like a bad thing, but I don’t, I don’t feel like I want to be extorted to pay for a program twice this. This method just solves the problem without playing this politics with homeless veterans,” Wimberger said of his own proposal. 

As for Wimberger’s proposal, Jacque said in October that he was still “gathering information on what the likeliest real world effect would be” if it were adopted. He also said he was waiting to hear back from the Department of Veterans Affairs on their plans to submit a emergency supplemental funding request to the Joint Finance Committee to address the situation. He said that “could be the quickest option for a positive resolution.”

Hoey said the agency is thankful for Jacque’s work on the issue. 

“We greatly appreciate [Jacque’s] willingness to keep going — to keep trying to get the funding for this program,” Hoey said. “This is something that he believes in and it’s not lip service.”

However, Hoey told the Examiner that the agency is not sure the funding request would meet statutory requirements and be an appropriate avenue for providing the funding given that the Legislature purposefully didn’t include the funding in the budget. 

He said the agency is unsure the current situation would constitute an emergency as it would be used to restart a program, not keep one going, and the agency is also currently grappling with a deficit. The agency’s last such request related to the veterans’ housing and recovery program, submitted to the Joint Finance Committee in March, was never taken up by lawmakers.

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

Lawmakers and community organizers gather outside the Milwaukee County Courthouse to announce a package of bills related to conditions inside prisons and jails. (Photo by Isiah Holmes/Wisconsin Examiner)

On Monday, a group of state and local lawmakers expected to see firsthand the conditions within the Milwaukee Secure Detention Facility (MSDF), a state-run facility imprisoning people for things like probation and parole violations. Lawmakers said the Department of Corrections (DOC) approved the tour, only to back out. It wasn’t the first time that elected officials have reported being denied tours of prisons and jails around the state, many of which continue to produce troubling accounts of the conditions inside their walls. 

“Let me be clear, the conditions in Wisconsin’s correctional facilities are not simply unfortunate,” said Rep. Darrin Madison (D-Milwaukee), standing with other elected officials and community organizers on the steps of the Milwaukee County Courthouse on Monday. “They are unacceptable…We are not going to normalize inhumanity.” 

Madison said that in some incarceration facilities, people may be locked in their cells for 20-23 hours a day for months. “They are denied sunlight,” said Madison. “They’re denied movement. They’re denied programming. They’re denied medical care. They’re denied basic human contact. There are facilities where people can’t even get consistent access to quality hygiene products. Where food is so poor, it does not meet the nutritional needs of grown adults…Where communication with family, the very thing that reduces recidivism, is treated like a privilege instead of a right.” 

Inhumane conditions in Wisconsin’s  jails and prisons, Madison said, is “state-sanctioned violence, and it’s being done in our name and disguised as justice.” Rather than creating spaces where rehabilitation can occur, Madison said, the Legislature has favored “choices related to punishment over rehabilitation, control over care, silence over accountability.” He stressed that “when you run a system on punishment and silence, abuse becomes the operating procedure.” 

That’s why Madison, alongside other elected officials and organizers from Ex-Incarcerated People Organizing (EXPO) and the Milwaukee Alliance Against Racist and Political Repression, gathered outside the courthouse in Milwaukee to announce a package of bills aimed at improving conditions in prisons and jails. The bills would accomplish a number of things including:

• Guaranteeing 180 free minutes of telephone access, 60 minutes of free video calling, and 100 free messages per week to incarcerated people. In-person visits would also not be replaced with video or phone calls, 
• Increase wages to incarcerated people to at least $2.33 per hour. In  Wisconsin most incarcerated people are paid anywhere from nothing to 40 cents per hour, 
• Guaranteeing at least four bathing periods for people incarcerated in  state and county facilities, 
• Providing culturally sensitive products and a $25 a month stipend to help pay for them, female hygiene supplies, and other grooming and hygiene products, 
• Guaranteeing up to two in-person visits a week, and allowing incarcerated people to have up to 25 registered visitors who may embrace them for up to 20 seconds before and after visits, 
• Requiring that all state and county correctional facilities provide recreational activities, as well as organized and structured programming,
• Ensuring that people placed in solitary confinement are given a book, pen or pencil, paper, envelopes, hygiene products, a personal address book, and other supplies within two hours of being placed in restrictive housing, requiring structured programming while in solitary confinement, guaranteeing access to case managers, and providing three 25-minute video visitation periods per week, 
• Ensuring that housing units are kept at 68-76 degrees Fahrenheit, 
• Granting incarcerated people the ability to see the outdoors at least three hours daily, and the ability to be outside and up to three hours a week, 
• Creating a public dashboard with status on solitary confinement, prison lockdowns, and complaints, 
• Ensuring that lawmakers are able to access prisons and jails for oversight purposes, 
• Allowing counties to oversee control of a jail if lawmakers vote to do so, 
• And requiring jails and prisons to provide written documents to incarcerated people detailing their rights, and ensuring the document can be viewed and accessed throughout any correctional facility. 

Justin Bielinski, a Milwaukee County supervisor and chair of the Judiciary, Law Enforcement, and General Services Committee, quoted the adage that with great power comes great responsibility and added, “our carceral system is the ultimate power, depriving people of their freedom.” Bielinski said she  fears that “we’re not holding up our end of the bargain and our responsibility to keep people safe and free from harm.” 

Meanwhile, Milwaukee County is running out of space in the jail and Community Reintegration Center (CRC). “So it’s more important than ever that the conditions inside these facilities are the best that we can make them so that when people come out, they are not worse, that they are at least the same, if not better.” Bielinksi said. She added, “The Sheriff’s Office has been resistant to every attempt that we’ve made to offer change, offer oversight within the jail.” Rep. Ryan Clancy (D-Milwaukee), who was also in attendance on Monday, said he has also battled the Milwaukee County Sheriff’s Office to visit the jail and improve conditions there.

Although the county board can pass resolutions, they are not binding and do not usurp the authority the sheriff has over the jail. “We cannot force change inside of that facility,” said Bielinski. “And so we do need state legislation to help us out with that…We know these things are going to cost money, but we cannot let money be the excuse for treating people in a way that is less than human. And if we can’t find the money, then we shouldn’t be locking this many people up.” 

Bielinksi recalled the string of deaths inside the Milwaukee County Jail from 2021 to 2022, which led to a third-party audit of the jail. Yet in that audit, Bielinksi said, the county didn’t address the specific circumstances that led to the deaths. Among the people who died were 21-year-old Brieon Green and 20-year-old Cilivea Thyrion, whose deaths were both ruled suicides despite  their families’ insistence that jail staff were at the very least negligent in their care. Green and Thyrion’s loved ones joined local activists in calling for reform to the jail and sheriff’s office. 

December will mark three years since Thyrion died. Kayla Patterson, a member of the Milwaukee Alliance Against Racist and Political Repression, highlighted the deaths and riots at the jail in recent years. “And we will continue to see that until the sheriff and her office are held accountable,” said Patterson. “This legislative pack should represent one of the first steps in standing with the people of Milwaukee for jail oversight that works with them, and not against them. For real transparency input into how our loved ones are kept while in custody. In the Alliance there’s a slogan we use: ‘In your custody, in your care.’ These are not just inmates, but community members that deserve dignity 24-7 during their time in the jail.” 

Conditions within state prisons have also been under the microscope. Last year, the warden of Waupun Correctional and eight other staff members were charged with crimes related to the treatment and neglect of people within the prison, which may have contributed to a string of four deaths from 2023 to 2024. 

The deaths included Dean Hoffmann, ruled suicide by hanging, Tyshun Lemons who overdosed on a substance containing fentanyl, Cameron Williams who complained of breathing issues and was found unresponsive in his bed, and Donald Maier, who died while in solitary confinement of dehydration and malnutrition. Water to his cell had been shut off, and correctional officers allegedly knew that Maier’s mental condition was worsening, that he had not eaten for days, and had begun drinking sewage water. In 2025, Waupun warden Randall Hepp was convicted of a misdemeanor in Maier’s death, and fined $500. Hepp pleaded no contest. 

The DOC didn’t respond to a request for comment, and the story will be updated with any reply from them. 

Sen. Chris Larson (D-Milwaukee) said at the press conference, “We invest, as a state, millions of dollars in folks who are in our care. And they should be coming out on a trajectory of success to make sure that they are finding a job, finding a community, and the only time they think about their time incarcerated is in the rear view mirror, in the past tense. Unfortunately, the way that we have this set up is a broken ‘tough on crime’ idea that once you touch the criminal justice system it is cruel to you, it diminishes you, and it never lets you go.” 

Androne Lane has experienced the struggles Larson described. He came home in 2018 after spending time in several prisons including Waupun, Green Bay, Red Granite and  Fox Lake. “I think it was important for me to come out and speak today because being a returning citizen, this bill or this movement that these guys are pushing to me is like a basic, like our own constitution for returning citizens,” Lane told the Wisconsin Examiner. “We’re not asking for a lot, we’re asking for dignity. We’re asking for humanity.” 

The priorities outlined in the bill package cover things that would help incarcerated people heal and become whole, Lane said. When people return home from prison, Lane continued, “How do you get a community to accept them coming back in there? And what does that look like for encouraging the community or an individual coming back to recover something that wasn’t replaced?” 

Lane and other advocates say there needs to be a “community care plan” for people returning home from incarceration. When Lane returned home, he told the  Examiner, it took a while for him to accept that he needed mental health therapy. “I think one of the hardest things for individuals is to ask for help, not knowing what help you need,” he said. “When I came home there was a lot of things that was on the surface that I had to deal with. But there was a lot of things inside that I didn’t know I was dealing with.” On the surface, Lane was unemployed and deeply stressed, but on the inside he was struggling with the trauma of being molested as a child, and he didn’t know how he’d be accepted in the community. “What does mental health look like for us? What does wellness look like …and what is this ‘whole’ that everybody is working for?” 

Rep. Margaret Arney (D-Wauwatosa), said the bills embody important work for Wisconsin to take on. “I hate living in a state where we lock up so many people and have so little regard for how those people live their lives,” Arney told the Examiner. “It’s a heartbreaking, enraging type of situation…When I look around and say, ‘What’s as bad as slavery was?’ And I think of the conditions of incarceration in the state of Wisconsin. That us as the United States, we’re addicted to locking people up, and in Wisconsin we do it even more so and even worse than in other states. And even though it costs a tremendous amount of resources, there’s so little willingness to engage in what those resources are here for, what we’re doing. Why does it cost so much to treat people so badly? Why do we, everyday, just put up with the fact that we’re somewhere on the order of 5,000 people over capacity?” 

Although “conditions of confinement” sounds like a “sterile” term to Arney, she said,  it’s not. “It’s human beings that are being treated at torture-level conditions, and I just can’t stand that.” 

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

A bipartisan bill in the Wisconsin legislature would impose mandatory minimum sentences on people convicted of human trafficking. Advocates worry the penalty could be applied to victims.Close up shot of fingerprint paper | Getty Images

A bill that would require judges to sentence people convicted of human trafficking to at least 10 years in prison, or at least 15 years for trafficking a child, is advancing through the Wisconsin Legislature.  

Human trafficking involves the use of force, fraud or coercion for labor, services or commercial sex acts. Trafficking of a child includes knowingly attempting to recruit a child for commercial sex acts. The bill would also increase the maximum prison time a person can receive for trafficking. 

Sen. Van Wanggaard (R-Racine) wrote that the bill “will continue to put a dent in human trafficking in Wisconsin.” Rep. Jerry O’Connor (R-Fond Du Lac) listed five cases in which, he wrote, a person convicted of sex trafficking received between six and eight years in prison. It appeared that the cases took place in states other than Wisconsin. 

“AB 265 ensures that these soft-on-trafficking policies never happen in Wisconsin,” O’Connor wrote. He argued that the bill’s mandatory minimums ensure adequate punishment and prevent offenders from doing further harm. 

The criminal justice advocacy group Ex-Incarcerated People Organizing (EXPO) and the president of the Wisconsin Justice Initiative oppose the mandatory minimums, arguing that there is a lack of evidence they will be effective at reducing trafficking. EXPO argues in an email to the Wisconsin Examiner that mandatory minimums risk unintended harmful consequences and resources are better spent on areas such as prevention and victim services.  

The LOTUS Legal Clinic in Milwaukee, which works with survivors of human trafficking, expressed concern in a written comment submitted on the Senate version of the bill in September. Executive Director Erika Petty wrote that many of LOTUS’s clients might support the mandatory minimum in principle, but expressed concern about unintended consequences for trafficking victims. 

“Traffickers commonly shield themselves from criminal accountability by forcing their victims — often at a very young age — to post ads, recruit new trafficking victims, and facilitate encounters,” Petty wrote in her comment, which was brought up in the Senate Committee on Judiciary and Public Safety. “Thus, the victims themselves become vulnerable to criminal prosecution for human trafficking.”

The bill’s mandatory minimums would apply if a person is convicted of human or child trafficking in adult court, Amber Otis, senior staff attorney with the Wisconsin Legislative Council, wrote in a message to lawmakers on the committee.

Petty argued that under the bill, a victim forced to participate in trafficking of others would fall under the mandatory minimum, just like their trafficker. She provided language for lawmakers to consider; if added to the bill, it would create exceptions to the mandatory minimums that would give judges the ability to hand down lighter sentences or probation to people who offer evidence that their offense is the direct result of a violation of the trafficking statutes.

A 2017 Northwestern University Law Review article made a suggestion in the same vein as Petty’s, proposing that Congress create a “safety valve” for “lead prostitutes,” or “bottoms,” who are both victims and perpetrators of trafficking, to allow them to receive a sentence lighter than a mandatory minimum if certain criteria were met. An article in Anti-Trafficking Review describes a case where a woman named Keosha Jones was both perpetrator and victim of sex trafficking.

Petty wrote that LOTUS attorneys currently had multiple cases involving convicted survivors. The clinic doesn’t handle criminal defense, but LOTUS can work with survivors on their rights as crime victims and see if they can alleviate a survivor’s criminal record, Petty told the Examiner in an interview. A survivor may have a criminal record as a result of trafficking that creates barriers to gainful employment and safe housing. 

While the bill was introduced by Republicans, the Assembly Committee on Criminal Justice and Public Safety approved it unanimously, and Minority Caucus Chair Lisa Subeck (D-Madison) and Rep. Shelia Stubbs (D-Madison) have been added as coauthors. It has since passed the Assembly. 

The Senate Committee on Judiciary and Public Safety approved the Senate bill along party lines, with the committee’s three Democrats voting against. 

People convicted of benefiting from human trafficking or receiving compensation from the earnings of debt bondage, the prostitution of others or a commercial sex act would also receive a mandatory minimum sentence of 10 years, or 15 years for benefiting from child trafficking. 

The bill would also increase the amount of prison time a judge could hand down for trafficking and give prosecutors a longer window to charge someone with human trafficking. 

Victims have a defense in court, but concerns remain

The Examiner reached out to Sen. Wanggaard in September about LOTUS’s comment and suggested amendment. Wanggaard aide Scott Kelly said that “we do not believe an amendment is necessary.” 

If a trafficking victim commits a crime as a “direct result” of a violation of human trafficking law, the victim can use an affirmative defense in court. Kelly referenced the affirmative defense and the 2022 Wisconsin Supreme Court ruling in State v. Kizer, which involved a woman who killed a man prosecutors admitted had sexually abused her. 

The court held that an offense is committed as a direct result of a violation of the human trafficking statutes if there is “a logical, causal connection” between the offense and the trafficking. Other events or considerations must not have played a significant role in causing the offense. 

If a victim is charged and convicted of trafficking, that would mean the victim did not successfully assert the defense, Otis wrote. This could occur if the prosecutor proved beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant did not meet the elements of the defense. 

Even with the affirmative defense, Assistant State Public Defender Katie York of the Wisconsin State Public Defenders Office told the Examiner that she thinks the bill puts trafficking survivors at risk. 

York opposes the human trafficking mandatory minimum in general, and said it takes away the opportunity for prosecutors, defense attorneys and judges to evaluate each case based on individual circumstances. York said she thinks judges are well equipped to make decisions and she doesn’t believe that this area of the law needs more specific parameters. 

York said how well the defense can be used to protect a trafficking victim is “largely untested at this point.” 

Also, if there is a situation where a jury doesn’t think the defendant meets the “direct result” standard for the affirmative defense, the trafficking still might have been a contributing factor to the defendant’s involvement in the offense, York said. A judge could take that into account. 

“So they could be found guilty of trafficking, even if they tried the affirmative defense,” York said. “But, if the judge is looking at the full picture when they’re sentencing someone, which is what judges do, they would want to take into consideration how that person got involved in the trafficking.”

If a person got involved in trafficking because they were originally trafficked themselves, that would be an important factor for the sentencing judge, York said. 

A person might have some culpability, without having as much culpability as whoever drew them in or forced them into human trafficking, said Sarah Schmeiser, president of the Wisconsin Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers. 

Schmeiser said prosecutors use mandatory minimums to force plea deals, as someone charged with a crime that carries a mandatory minimum sentence has an incentive to plead guilty to a lower charge with a lower penalty instead of risking the mandatory minimum sentence at trial. 

York thinks traffickers could use the mandatory minimum as a tool to further coerce their victims.

“So if… they say, ‘Hey, I need you to post this on Backpage,’ or ‘I need you to talk to this girl for me,’ or whatever it is to bring them into the trafficking, they’re putting that person at risk of criminal liability,” York said. “And then the trafficker can say, ‘And, now you better be careful and listen to what I have to say, because otherwise, you’re going to get in trouble with law enforcement and you’re going to go to prison for 10 years,’ or whatever the mandatory minimum is.”

Increased penalties 

Under the bill, someone convicted of committing or benefitting from human trafficking would be guilty of a Class C felony, which carries up to 25 years in prison. Receiving compensation from the earnings of debt bondage, a prostitute or a commercial sex act would become a Class E felony, which carries up to 10 years in prison. The mandatory minimum of 10 years in prison would apply to all human trafficking offenses.

Committing or benefitting from child trafficking would become a Class B felony, which carries up to 40 years in prison. Child trafficking offenses would carry the 15-year mandatory minimum. 

More time to prosecute

The bill would also increase the statute of limitations for human trafficking from six years to 10 years, allowing more time for prosecution. During an Assembly hearing, Investigator Luke Johnson of the Racine County Sheriff’s Office said many human trafficking victims struggle to leave their traffickers. 

“It is very easy for victims to be trapped in a life for many years before having a chance to get out or feeling comfortable enough to disclose to law enforcement or anyone else,” Johnson said. 

Of the human trafficking charges filed under the state law between 2018 and 2023, so far 14 charges have led to convictions, according to Wisconsin Court System data. For trafficking of a child, so far, 32 charges have led to convictions. This does not represent the number of people convicted, as a person can be charged more than once in a case. Charges of benefiting from human or child trafficking were less frequent. 

The National Human Trafficking Hotline reports it has identified 1,117 cases of human trafficking in Wisconsin since 2007, with 2,212 victims identified in those cases. There were 445 allegations of child sex trafficking across Wisconsin in 2021.

“It is imperative to note that in this underworld of crime, there are far more cases that are not reported to law enforcement,” Rep. Jerry O’Connor wrote in a comment on the bill. 

Burden of proof 

Senators discussed LOTUS’s comment during a hearing of the Senate Committee on Judiciary and Public Safety in September, with Sen. Dora Drake (D-Milwaukee) raising concern about charging and criminalizing victims. 

Committee chair and Sen. Van Wanggaard said he thinks investigators understand that a person might be coerced to participate in human trafficking. 

Otis’s email to the Senate committee noted that the district attorney has discretion over whether and how to charge someone with trafficking depending on the situation. 

It’s difficult to prove whether someone is a victim of human trafficking, York said. She added that the victim may not identify as a victim of trafficking, and may view their trafficker as a boyfriend or someone they relied on. 

“It’s a challenge to kind of go back and unpack years worth of trauma and history to say, ‘OK, this is what originally happened, and this is how we got to where we are,” York said. 

At times, a plea deal may work out better for the individual than using the affirmative defense, York said, due to the mental toll the defendant would experience from going in front of a jury and speaking about what happened to them. A mandatory minimum limits the ability to negotiate for the client, she said. 

Erika Petty of LOTUS suggested there could be a situation where someone is not ready to identify as a victim of trafficking at the trial stage, but the situation changes by the time of sentencing. 

Petty referenced a law that allows a person convicted of prostitution to submit a motion for a court to overturn their conviction if certain criteria are met, including that the person was a victim of trafficking for the purposes of a commercial sex act. Human trafficking convictions aren’t covered. 

Potentially, a survivor could appeal a decision, Petty said, but “those are all very specific, and have to align with timing and whatever underlying issue wanted to be appealed.”

Whose expertise informed the bill? 

Shortly before the Assembly voted on the bill, Rep. Robert Wittke (R-Caledonia) said the bill came to lawmakers from Investigator Luke Johnson. Johnson’s comments state that from 2023 to earlier this year, he had an opportunity to serve on a task force specifically targeting human trafficking and internet crimes against children. 

“I urge any of you that have any trepidation with this bill to sit down with those in the front line that actually do this work and actually see this firsthand,” Wittke said. 

During the hearing in the Senate in September, Drake asked Wanggaard and Wittke if they had reached out to any groups or partners that work with victims of human trafficking outside of law enforcement for input. 

Wanggaard said he didn’t know of any group recently that they talked with specifically about this draft, but said that “we have [done so] for most of the content in this draft.” He said he thinks law enforcement was probably the most vocal “because they’re seeing the same people out there, continuing to reoffend.”

Wittke said he didn’t go to any other groups and that “this came specifically from sitting down with Inspector Johnson.” 

Sen. LaTonya Johnson (D-Milwaukee) expressed concern about “only talking to one entity, and that is law enforcement, and we know that not all of our law enforcement officers have the tools necessary to decipher who those victims are.” 

The bill received support from the Wisconsin Sheriffs and Deputy Sheriffs Association and other law enforcement groups, as well as the nonprofit United Migrant Opportunity Services (UMOS). UMOS’s Latina Resource Center operates the Wisconsin Regional Anti-Human Trafficking Program, which helps victims of labor and sex trafficking. UMOS did not respond to requests for comment. 

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

The post Buyer Beware: Solar Tax Credits appeared first on RENEW Wisconsin.

The post PSC Approves Rate Case Settlement with Alliant appeared first on RENEW Wisconsin.

(The Center Square) — Chris Lindner knows the possibility of his Loyal School District consolidating with Greenwood in Clark County has plenty of people paying attention.

(The Center Square) — Wisconsin's revised grading system of its schools shows most received a passing score, but criticism of the process remains.

Reading Time: 2 minutes

Veterans Day always holds a special place for me. It’s a moment to honor two very special men, my grandfathers, who shaped my life and values and whom I was named after. 

My paternal grandfather, Richard Franklin Brown, served in the Marines, and my maternal grandfather, Eugene Preston, served in the Air Force. Every year, this day reminds me that freedom is something precious that we’ve inherited because it was earned, protected and preserved by those who came before us. 

Each Veterans Day is a time to pause and think about what they endured and fought for, not only for their families but for the ideals that define our country. It also reminds me how easily those freedoms can fade when we forget the cost of protecting them.

One story that always stands out to me is the Gulf of Tonkin incident of Aug. 2, 1964. That day, the USS Maddox exchanged fire with North Vietnamese torpedo boats in the Gulf of Tonkin. Two days later, on Aug. 4, reports claimed that a second attack had taken place against U.S. ships. That second attack, as we now know, never happened, yet the reports swayed public opinion and led Congress to pass what became known as the Gulf of Tonkin Resolution, granting President Lyndon B. Johnson broad authority to use military force in Southeast Asia without a formal declaration of war.

That decision marked a major escalation of U.S. involvement in Vietnam, costing millions of lives and reshaping American politics, culture and public trust in institutions. The consequences were especially devastating for young Black men, who were recruited and drafted at disproportionate rates and, in many cases, returned home carrying trauma, addiction and lifelong hardship. It remains one of history’s clearest reminders that misinformation, when left unchallenged, can alter the course of a nation and define generations.

For me, that lesson reinforces the purpose and responsibility of a free and accurate press. Truth and trust are not only journalistic values. They are civic obligations that uphold our democracy and protect our shared future.

Wisconsin Watch takes that responsibility seriously. Our mission is to provide clear, factual and accessible information that helps people navigate their lives and strengthen their communities. Veterans and their families are one of many groups whose needs have informed our journalism. Earlier this year, our newsroom looked at how federal workforce and funding cuts could affect veterans here in Wisconsin, how homeless veterans would be affected by the closure of Klein Hall and whether the state Legislature would take steps to help. And yesterday, we published a list of 12 veteran-related bills that are currently in front of Wisconsin lawmakers. 

Much like my grandfathers’ service, our work is guided by endurance, care and the belief that truth matters in even the most trying times. 

To all who have served and to everyone who stands for accuracy, transparency and fairness, thank you! Your courage and commitment make freedom a reality and a treasured gift for us all.

A double legacy: Reflections on my grandfathers’ service and sacrifice 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.

Wisconsin environmental regulators and Republican lawmakers don’t agree on much when it comes to addressing PFAS contamination, but both acknowledge it will likely cost the state billions of dollars.

The post Cleanup of PFAS could cost Wisconsin billions, regulators and lawmakers say appeared first on WPR.

“Community fridges” have been a hunger-fighting trend around the world, and Wisconsin organizers have followed suit as a means to offer free, fresh produce to anyone in the area in need.

The post Community fridges in Wisconsin fill growing need for fresh produce  appeared first on WPR.

Legislative Republicans want to incentivize Wisconsin school districts that agree to merge or consolidate grades.

The post Wisconsin GOP introduces series of school district consolidation bills appeared first on WPR.

It was the first time the state’s annual, mandatory school report cards have been released since standards shifted.

The post Almost all Wisconsin schools meet or exceed expectations, under new report cards appeared first on WPR.

On Veterans Day, as Wisconsin honors the more than 360,000 veterans across the state, former service members now working in the state Capitol say support for veterans is needed more than ever.

The post On Veterans Day, Wisconsin lawmakers urge more support appeared first on WPR.

A group of Wisconsin veterans were greeted by former President Barack Obama on Saturday when their Honor Flight plane touched down in Washington, D.C.

The post Wisconsin veterans welcomed to DC by former president Obama appeared first on WPR.

Since 2014, the number of fatal crashes in Milwaukee County has increased at a higher rate than the rest of the country.

The post Milwaukee police may seize any vehicle involved in reckless driving under new law appeared first on WPR.