Yahara House is a community mental health program focused on building relationships and job opportunities. The clubhouse model reduces hospitalizations and boosts employment in adults with serious mental illnesses, experts and advocates say.
The man in charge of overseeing facilities amid the lead crisis at Milwaukee Public Schools is being reprimanded by the state for misrepresenting himself after he didn't renew his architect license.
“Demographics are a giant problem in this state,” said Mark O'Connell, executive director of the Wisconsin Counties Association. “The last time we had as few births as we have today was in 1943. We are not creating enough young people. We don’t attract them, we don’t grow them, we don’t keep them.”
Frank Bisignano, Social Security commissioner nominee, at his Senate Finance Committee confirmation hearing on March 25, 2025. (Senate webcast)
WASHINGTON — A Senate panel voted Wednesday to send Frank Bisignano’s nomination as Social Security commissioner to the floor, despite allegations from Democrats that he was dishonest in his testimony before the committee about his relationship with Elon Musk’s DOGE cost-cutting operation.
The 14-13 party-line vote took place one day later than originally scheduled in an ornate room just steps from the Senate floor, instead of the committee hearing room.
Finance Committee Chairman Mike Crapo, R-Idaho, said Tuesday morning that he supported Bisignano’s commitment to improve customer service and reduce improper payments.
Crapo also committed to looking into an anonymous whistleblower letter that was sent to the committee’s Democrats, though he declined to delay the panel’s vote until after that process concluded.
“Even though the timing of the anonymous letter suggests a political effort to delay the committee vote on this nominee, my staff have told Sen. Wyden’s staff — and we have discussed this just now — we are open to meeting with the author of the letter and keeping the individual anonymous,” Crapo said. “However, any information provided by the individual must be thoroughly vetted, including allowing the nominee the opportunity to respond.”
Oregon Democratic Sen. Ron Wyden, ranking member on the panel, urged Crapo to delay the vote until after a committee investigation, alleging Bisignano was untruthful during his testimony.
“This nominee lied multiple times to every member of this committee, including the bipartisan Finance staff and the nominee’s actions and communications with DOGE remain very much at the heart of my objection here,” Wyden said. “My office received an account from a whistleblower about the ways the nominee was deeply involved in and aware of DOGE’s activities at the agency.”
Wyden said that Bisignano, though not confirmed and with no official role yet at the agency, intervened at the Social Security Administration to ensure that staff from U.S. DOGE Services had “immediate access to Social Security systems.” DOGE, or Department of Government Efficiency, is a temporary Trump administration entity aimed at slashing the federal workforce and spending.
Wyden also argued that Bisignano’s history in corporate America wasn’t a good fit for running the Social Security Administration, saying he “has made a career of swooping in, firing workers, selling off pieces of the company and merging with a competitor.”
“These practices may be good for shareholders, but they hurt American families,” Wyden said. “So we, Senate Democrats, are not going to stand by idly while Trump’s cronies take a sledgehammer to Social Security and deprive seniors of their earned benefits under the false manner of fighting fraud.”
Bisignano hearing
Bisignano, of New Jersey, testified before the committee for nearly three hours in late March, fielding questions on several issues, including overpayments and customer service.
He pledged to reduce the 1% overpayment rate significantly and said he could bring down the average wait time for customer service phone calls from about 20 minutes to less than one minute.
“If you look at the Social Security website, and you look at the statistics, taking 20-plus minutes to answer the phone is not really acceptable,” Bisignano said during his confirmation hearing. “And that’s the reason why only 46% of the phone calls get answered, because people get discouraged and hang up.”
Bisignano promised senators he would ensure Americans’ personal information would be kept secure.
If confirmed by the full Senate, Bisignano testified he would “ensure that every beneficiary receives their payments on time, that disability claims are processed in the manner they should be.”
“So my first actions are going to be to get organized around delivering the services,” Bisignano said. “And I’ve only been given one order, which is to run the agency in the right fashion.”
He also rejected the possibility of privatizing Social Security.
“I’ve never thought about privatizing. It’s not a word that anybody’s ever talked to me about,” Bisignano said. “And I don’t see this institution as anything other than a government agency that gets run to the benefit of the American public.”
Bisignano works as chairman of the board and chief executive officer at Fiserv, Inc., which “enables money movement for thousands of financial institutions and millions of people and businesses,” according to its website. The company is based in Wisconsin.
He previously worked as co-chief operating officer and chief executive officer of Mortgage Banking at JPMorgan Chase & Co.
From left, U.S. Reps. Frederica Wilson of Florida and Gwen Moore of Wisconsin, U.S. Education Secretary Linda McMahon and U.S. Rep. Mark Takano of California, at a press conference outside the U.S. Department of Education organized by House Democrats. (Photo by Shauneen Miranda/States Newsroom)
WASHINGTON — A press conference by a dozen U.S. House Democrats outside the U.S. Department of Education took an unusual turn on Wednesday when the subject of their criticism — Education Secretary Linda McMahon — unexpectedly joined them.
The Democrats had met with the Trump administration appointee a few minutes earlier to press her about the sweeping shifts at the U.S. Department of Education, where she and President Donald Trump are seeking to dismantle the agency.
The lawmakers told reporters that at the scheduled meeting, they questioned McMahon on how the department could carry out its primary responsibilities when the agency continues to see dramatic changes. That includes mass layoffs that hit core units and an executive order from Trump calling on the secretary to “take all necessary steps to facilitate the closure” of the department to the maximum extent she legally can.
Only Congress, which established the 45-year-old department, has the power to abolish it.
The Democrats said they were grateful that McMahon met with them but dissatisfied with and even alarmed by the secretary’s responses, especially on a timeline for closing the agency.
“It’s very apparent that the secretary is treating this as a corporate restructuring, and we want to be clear that the education of our children is not a corporate enterprise — it is how we move this country forward,” Rep. Melanie Stansbury of New Mexico said.
“It’s very clear that the (reduction in force), the firing of probationary staff, the so-called restructuring that’s happening — when we asked for a plan multiple times in this meeting, we were told there is not a plan yet,” she added.
The secretary arrives, and leaves
As the Democrats spoke, McMahon emerged from the building, accompanied by aides, and joined them at their lectern emblazoned with a U.S. House of Representatives logo.
She reiterated that “funding from the United States government will continue through the programs that have already been established” and said she looked forward to continuing to work with members of Congress on both sides of the aisle.
After her remarks, Rep. Mark Takano pressed McMahon on when she would close the department.
“Well, we’ve had our discussions already, so thank you all very, very much for coming,” McMahon replied, proceeding to walk back into the building.
“You see, she’s not answering the question when she’s going to shut down the department,” Takano, of California, said as the secretary walked away.
Barred from building
Wednesday’s meeting came after Takano and other Democratic lawmakers were blocked from entering the building in February while trying to meet with Denise Carter, acting Education secretary at the time, over Trump’s plans to dismantle the agency.
The California Democrat had led dozens of others in writing a letter to Carter and requesting a meeting over those efforts.
A day after Trump signed the executive order surrounding the department, he announced that special education services would be transferred to the Department of Health and Human Services and that the Small Business Administration would be handling the student loan portfolio.
The department has not taken any steps to move either — both of which would require acts of Congress and raise a slew of logistical questions.
U.S. Rep. Mark Takano, a California Democrat, speaks at a press conference outside the U.S. Department of Education headquarters on Wednesday, April 2, 2025, in Washington, D.C. (Photo by Shauneen Miranda/States Newsroom)
Rep. Jamie Raskin of Maryland said “the idea of dismembering the department and then parceling it out to other agencies and departments does not give us a lot of confidence or hope in what’s happening.”
The lawmakers said McMahon repeatedly stressed during the meeting that she plans to abide by federal law and would look carefully at what she’s legally allowed to do before moving any functions of the department.
Yet Rep. Greg Casar of Texas said he and the group “became more and more alarmed as the meeting went on,” noting that “current law won by so many Americans in this democracy, is that all kids deserve a decent education, that the money goes to your kid if they’re in need, the money goes to your kid no matter their race or their background or their neighborhood, and they want to change that.”
The lawmakers who met with McMahon included: U.S. Reps. Terri Sewell of Alabama; Takano; Frederica Wilson of Florida; Raskin and Sarah Elfreth of Maryland; Maggie Goodlander of New Hampshire; Stansbury; Casar, Julie Johnson and Veronica Escobar of Texas; Don Beyer of Virginia; and Gwen Moore of Wisconsin.
Opponents of President Donald Trump’s executive order indefinitely halting refugee resettlement in the U.S. rally on the steps of the federal courthouse in Seattle on Feb. 25, 2025, after a judge issued a ruling blocking the president’s order. (Photo by Jake Goldstein-Street/Washington State Standard)
WASHINGTON — Amid dozens of injunctions placed against the Trump administration, Republicans on the U.S. Senate Committee on the Judiciary discussed a bill Wednesday to curb the nationwide effects of those orders from federal judges.
The bill, sponsored by GOP Iowa Sen. Chuck Grassley, who leads the committee, would prohibit district court judges from issuing injunctions that have nationwide effects.
“We all have to agree to give up the universal injunction as a weapon against policies we disagree with,” Grassley said. “The damage it causes to the judicial system and to our democracy is too great.”
As of Friday, 39 judges who were appointed across “five different presidents and sitting in 11 different district courts across seven circuits” have ruled against the Trump administration, said one of the witnesses, Stephen Vladeck of Georgetown University Law Center.
President Donald Trump and Republican allies in Congress have complained that such injunctions give judges in single districts too much power to stymie the administration’s agenda.
Trump has also taken to social media to attack the judges, especially one who temporarily barred use of the Alien Enemies Act of 1798 to quickly deport Venezuelan nationals.
Senate Majority Leader John Thune of South Dakota said Tuesday that Republicans are considering Grassley’s bill, but did not commit to bringing it to the floor for a vote.
House Republicans have introduced a similar bill.
Senate Democrats criticized the hearing and argued that the reason there are so many injunctions against the president’s executive orders is because they are unconstitutional.
The top Democrat on the committee, Sen. Dick Durbin of Illinois, pointed to the several nationwide injunctions against Trump’s executive order to end the constitutional right to birthright citizenship, which the administration has asked the U.S. Supreme Court in an emergency request to reverse.
Republicans see abuse
Republicans characterized the flurry of injunctions against administration actions as judicial activism.
Republican Sen. Josh Hawley of Missouri said the injunctions were unprecedented.
Hawley called the rulings from district courts a “pattern of abuse.” He added that it’s not only being done with nationwide injunctions, but with temporary restraining orders.
Florida Sen. Ashley Moody also took issue with temporary restraining orders, which generally are not appealable.
“There is keen interest in making sure our judiciary system remains impartial and that it is making rulings only in terms of relief to the parties before it and that we are encouraging expeditious resolution of these extraordinary important matters,” Moody said.
Criticism sparks threats, Dems say
Sens. Amy Klobuchar of Minnesota and Sheldon Whitehouse of Rhode Island raised concerns about the increased threats of violence aimed at judges.
Whitehouse said the reaction from Republicans about preliminary injunctions against the Trump administration puts those judges and their families at risk.
“The discomfort to fury…about decisions against the Trump administration may actually have a lot to do with the unprecedented lawlessness and lawbreaking of the Trump administration rather than a weird cabal of judges trying to intrude,” Whitehouse said.
Klobuchar said that Trump has attacked judges on social media and has posted images of himself wearing a crown.
“We do not live in a kingdom,” she said. “It is important that we not lose sight of the underlying cause of these injunctions. It is not that these judges are ‘crooked’ or ‘lunatics’ or ‘evil.’ Those are words used by the president, it is because the administration is violating the constitution.
Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts on March 18 issued a rare statement, pushing back against Trump’s suggestion that a judge who issued an injunction against an administration order face impeachment.
“For more than two centuries, it has been established that impeachment is not an appropriate response to disagreement concerning a judicial decision,” Roberts said. “The normal appellate review process exists for that purpose.”
(The Center Square) – Elon Musk is viewed unfavorably by 60% of U.S. adults while his work with the Department of Government Efficiency is disapproved by 58%, according to a new poll from Marquette Law School.
(The Center Square) – Democrats across Wisconsin and beyond celebrated Susan Crawford’s victory over Brad Schimel to maintain an advantage for liberals on the Wisconsin Supreme Court.
(The Center Square) – One of the two Republicans in charge of writing Wisconsin’s next state budget says it will be a while before there’s anything to take back to voters or the governor.
Minutes later Tuesday night, the conservative-backed Brad Schimel took the stage at his watch party to acknowledge the loss. Angry yells broke out. One woman began to chant about his opponent: “Cheater.”
Schimel didn’t hesitate. “No,” he responded. “You’ve got to accept the results.” Later, he returned to the stage with his classic rock cover band to jam on his bass.
In any other American era, Schimel’s concession wouldn’t be considered unusual – except maybe the guitar part. But it stands out at a time when the nation’s politics have opened a fissure between those who trust election results and those who don’t.
“It shouldn’t be super laudable,” said Jeff Mandell, general counsel of the Madison-based liberal law firm Law Forward. “But given where we are and given what we’ve seen over the past few years nationwide and in Wisconsin, it is laudable.”
Schimel’s concession of that very same court to a liberal majority, though in line with what generations of candidates have done in the past, was not a given in today’s divisive atmosphere.
Onstage, as his supporters yelled, Schimel shook his head and left no uncertainty he’d lost — a result that would become even clearer later in the night as Crawford’s lead grew to around 10 percentage points.
“The numbers aren’t going to — aren’t going to turn around,” he told the crowd. “They’re too bad, and we’re not going to pull this off.”
By acknowledging his loss quickly, Schimel curtailed the kind of explanation-seeking and digital digging that erupted online after Trump, a Republican, lost the 2020 presidential election, with citizen journalists falsely accusing innocent election workers and voters of fraud.
Schimel also avoided the impulses to which many in his party have defaulted in recent elections across the country, as they’ve dragged their feet to avoid accepting defeat.
Last fall, Wisconsin Republican Eric Hovde spent days sowing doubt in the results after he lost a Senate race to Democrat Tammy Baldwin. He conceded nearly two weeks after Election Day, saying he did not want to “add to political strife through a contentious recount” even as he raised debunked election conspiracies.
In a 2024 state Supreme Court race in North Carolina, two recounts have affirmed Democrat Allison Riggs narrowly won the election, but her Republican opponent, Jefferson Griffin, is still seeking to reverse the outcome by having ballots thrown out.
Trump also has continued to falsely claim he won the 2020 presidential election, even though there was no evidence of widespread fraud and the results were confirmed through multiple recounts, reviews and audits. His close adviser, billionaire Elon Musk, has also spread a flurry of unfounded claims about voter fraud involving noncitizens.
Musk and his affiliated groups sank at least $21 million into the Wisconsin Supreme Court race, and he personally paid three voters $1 million each for signing a petition to boost turnout. He had said the race was central to the “future of America and Western civilization.”
But after the results came in, he said he “expected to lose” and touted the successful passage of a voter ID amendment in Wisconsin’s Constitution. Trump, who had endorsed Schimel, didn’t post about the loss but used his Truth Social platform to celebrate the voter ID win.
An assessment: ‘That’s democracy’
Not all Republicans watching the race were in a magnanimous mood as they processed the results. Peter Bernegger, the head of an election integrity organization who has brought numerous lawsuits against Wisconsin election clerks and offices, raised the specter that an “algorithm” was behind Crawford’s win. InfoWars founder and conspiracy theorist Alex Jones reacted to the results on X, saying, “Election fraud should be investigated.”
But at Schimel’s watch party, several supporters applauded his high road.
“He was all class,” said Russell Jones, a 51-year-old attorney. “That’s how you lose.”
Adam Manka, of the La Crosse County Republican Party, said he worries about how a liberal court could redraw the state’s congressional districts. “But you can’t exactly change it,” Manka said, calling Schimel “very graceful” in his defeat. “This is democracy.”
Crawford, in an interview Wednesday, said Schimel’s phone call was “the way elections should conclude” and said she would have done the same thing if she had lost.
The moment is a good example for future candidates, said Ari Mittleman, executive director of the Wisconsin-based nonprofit Keep Our Republic, which aims to rebuild trust and confidence in elections. He compared elections to a Green Bay Packers football game: “We know who won, we know who lost.” He said he thinks Schimel, a lifelong Wisconsin resident, understands that.
“It’s transparent, and we accept the final score,” Mittleman said. “That’s democracy.”
Schimel and his band, performing for a thinning crowd Tuesday night, took the loss in stride.
“Can you ask them at the bar to get me a Coors Light please?” Schimel said between songs. “Put it on my tab.”
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.
Official proof of three things — identity, age and citizenship or qualifying immigration status — is required to obtain a Social Security number.
For U.S.-born adults, required documents include a U.S. birth certificate or a U.S. passport, though most U.S.-born citizens are issued a Social Security number at birth.
Noncitizens can apply if they have U.S. permission to work in the U.S. or permanent resident status (U.S.-issued green card). Less common are nonworking immigrants, such as those issued a student visa, who need a Social Security number.
“Merely showing a bill or a school ID is not sufficient,” Kathleen Romig, a former senior adviser at the Social Security Administration, told Wisconsin Watch.
Elon Musk claimed March 30 in Green Bay, Wisconsin, that “basically, you can show … a medical bill and a school ID and get a Social Security number.”
Trump administration officials did not reply to emails seeking comment.
This fact brief is responsive to conversations such as this one.
In September, California adopted a law that prohibits local governments from requiring voters to present identification to vote.
The law states that voter ID laws “have historically been used to disenfranchise” certain voters, including those of color or low-income.
The law says California ensures election integrity by requiring a driver’s license number or Social Security number at registration and verifying the voter’s signature with the voter’s registration form.
Voter ID supporters say requiring a photo ID helps prevent voter fraud and increases public confidence in elections.
California is among 14 states that don’t use voter ID. They verify voter identity in other ways, usually signature verification, according to the nonpartisan National Conference of State Legislatures.
Wisconsin has required photo ID since 2016. On April 1, voters approved a referendum adding that requirement to the state constitution.
Elon Musk alluded to the California law during remarks March 30 in Green Bay, Wisconsin.
This fact brief is responsive to conversations such as this one.
At issue is a six-year-old state law which gives the Legislature's Joint Committee on Finance the final say about whether to approval settlements in civil lawsuits prosecuted by state's attorney general.
The state superintendent and education officials in northeast Wisconsin are calling on the Legislature’s Republican-controlled budget committee to boost funding to K-12 schools in the next two-year state budget.
In March, the Department of Public Instruction announced its first planning grants to four Wisconsin districts to start recovery schools, specifically designed to help students with substance use disorders.
Login
