Amanda Zurawski, Josh Zurawski, Kaitlyn Joshua and Hadley Duvall speak at the Democratic National Convention in Chicago, Ill., on Aug. 19, 2024.  (Andrew Roth for Michigan Advance)

Galvanized by a pivotal election almost two years after the U.S. Supreme Court overturned federal abortion protections, patients, doctors, and activists in 2024 fought for renewed and expanded reproductive rights, while others pushed for more restrictions. These are some of the people and organizations that had an impact on reproductive health law and abortion access this year.

Women with wanted pregnancies affected by abortion bans

In state legislatures, before Congress, in court, in presidential campaign ads, and on stage at the Democratic National Convention, women all over the country have been reliving some of the worst moments of their lives in an effort to roll back abortion restrictions that have changed reproductive health care in America.

The year after Kentucky banned abortion, Hadley Duvall started talking publicly about how she was raped at 12 by her stepdad, who got her pregnant. She advocated for abortion rights in re-election campaign ads for Democratic Gov. Andy Beshear in 2023 and this year appeared in national campaign ads for Democrats.

Kaitlyn Joshua, of Baton Rouge, represented many Louisiana women at this year’s Democratic National Convention, telling what’s becoming an increasingly common story of not being able to access miscarriage treatment after the state passed a strict abortion ban. Louisiana Attorney General Liz Murrill subsequently challenged Joshua’s story on social media.

Kristin Lyerly, an OB-GYN from Wisconsin, is one of many doctors across the country who have sued over state abortion bans they say have changed medical practice. Lyerly this year participated in a civic engagement experiment in Madison, where strangers came together and shared the life experiences that inform their abortion views. Even when abortion rights were protected under Roe v. Wade, Lyerly said she was almost forced to give birth to a stillborn, in lieu of a less invasive abortion procedure. She also ran a reproductive-rights-focused campaign as a Democrat in a conservative-leaning congressional district, a race she lost.

Allie Phillips ran as a Democrat for a seat in the Tennessee legislature after the state’s abortion ban kept her from terminating a nonviable pregnancy in her home state, leading her to travel to New York City for care. She lost the race but said in November that she plans to continue fighting for reproductive rights, and announced her new pregnancy. Phillips is a plaintiff in an ongoing lawsuit with other affected women and physicians to clarify the state’s medical health exceptions. A three-judge panel ruled in October that doctors cannot be penalized for performing an emergency abortion to save a patient’s life.

Amanda Zurawski developed sepsis in Texas after her water broke at 18 weeks and doctors waited for days to terminate her pregnancy, fearing prosecution under the state’s strict abortion ban. She’s since become an outspoken abortion-rights advocate. She campaigned heavily for abortion-rights candidates this year and said she wants to continue working in politics.

The Charlotte Lozier Institute

The high-profile federal lawsuit over medication abortion was made possible in part by the Charlotte Lozier Institute, the research arm of the anti-abortion political powerhouse Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life America. Data from the institute featured prominently in the plaintiffs’ case for revoking the federal drug approval of mifepristone and was directly used as part of U.S. District Judge Matthew Kacsmaryk’s reasoning for granting the doctor-plaintiffs’ standing. The researchers found a significant jump in Medicaid-funded emergency room visits following a medication abortion over two decades, which also corresponds with an increase in access to medication abortion overtime. Public health experts told States Newsroom that the researchers inflated their findings, and appeared to conflate all emergency department visits with serious adverse events like sepsis. Their conclusions contradicted a large body of research showing a low rate of serious adverse events after taking mifepristone, prompting further scrutiny from curious scientists, as well as the academic publishing house that published it.

In February, Sage retracted three studies produced by Charlotte Lozier researchers and published in the journal Health Services Research and Managerial Epidemiology between 2019 and 2022, after a reader-prompted investigation found flaws in the studies’ methodology and data representation. The team behind the studies included Charlotte Lozier vice president and director of data analytics James Studnicki and longtime anti-abortion researchers, including the then-CEO of one of the plaintiff groups in the medication abortion lawsuit. They sued Sage, saying the retractions were unjustified and politically motivated.

The U.S. Supreme Court unanimously rejected the abortion medication lawsuit this past summer — not on the merits of the case, but on the issue of the doctor-plaintiffs’ standing. Anti-abortion activists vowed to find a different plaintiff who could potentially persuade the court that abortion pills are too dangerous. After the Supreme Court remanded the case to the lower court, in October, intervening states Idaho, Kansas and Missouri amended their complaint, which no longer cites the retracted studies papers but instead cites a new paper from Studnicki and fellow Charlotte Lozier researchers, making similar claims.

The Alabama Supreme Court

A common fertility treatment, in vitro fertilization, was thrust into the national spotlight in February after the Alabama Supreme Court decided, 8-1, that frozen embryos should be considered children, in a wrongful death lawsuit over the embryos’ accidental destruction.

A lower court had dismissed the claim, ruling that embryos do not meet the legal definition of children. But in the majority opinion siding with the couples who sued the Mobile fertility clinic, Justice Jay Mitchell cited a 2018 state constitutional amendment ensuring “the protection of the rights of the unborn child.” He also cited an 1872 law allowing for civil lawsuits for the wrongful death of children, and argued that it does not explicitly include an exception for frozen embryos. Mitchell reasoned that the law “applies to all children, born and unborn, without limitation.” Chief Justice Tom Parker, an influential conservative Christian activist, cited biblical texts in his concurring opinion, writing, “even before birth, all human beings bear the image of God, and their lives cannot be destroyed without effacing his glory.”

Soon after, many IVF clinics in Alabama shut down until the state legislature passed a bill in March that extended criminal and civil immunity to IVF clinics for operations. This created major issues for families spending tens of thousands of dollars on a time-sensitive treatment. Alabama’s ruling also created a fear among families struggling to conceive in other states with abortion bans and showed that the fertility treatment is broadly supported by voters from both political parties. Republicans updated their national party platform to include support for IVF access. During his presidential campaign, President-elect Donald Trump promised: “your government will pay or your insurance company will be mandated to pay for all costs associated with I.V.F. treatment” — something he likely couldn’t do without congressional action. Meanwhile, GOP members of Congress have largely opposed IVF protections and access bills.

Mark Lee Dickson and Jonathan Mitchell

This year, attorney Jonathan Mitchell and pastor Mark Lee Dickson together experimented with ways to prevent out-of-state abortions, using their home state of Texas as the primary testing ground. Mitchell, a former solicitor general of Texas, used a little known state rule to depose abortion funds, doctors, and women who left the state for an abortion. As the Texas Tribune reported, the actions created fear and confusion but have not resulted in charges. Mitchell previously filed a wrongful death lawsuit against women who allegedly helped their friend obtain medication to terminate a pregnancy, which has since been dropped.

Through their Sanctuary Cities for the Unborn project, Dickson and Mitchell helped pass approximately 80 ordinances in cities and counties, mostly in Texas, but also in strategically located cities in abortion-access states, like Illinois and New Mexico. Some of the ordinances say a doctor in a state where abortion is legal cannot perform an abortion on a resident who lives in a town that has passed one of these laws. Some of the ordinances ban the use of that town’s highways to drive someone to an out-of-state abortion clinic. And some invoke a dormant federal anti-obscenity law known as the Comstock Act, which they say the federal government should enforce to mean that abortion pills cannot be transported through the mail.

Just like Texas’s 2021 six-week abortion ban that Mitchell and Dickson helped design, many of these ordinances are unenforceable by the governments that pass them, instead allowing for private citizens to sue other residents or medical professionals for “aiding and abetting” an abortion. The activists experienced a major loss on Election Day with the majority of voters in conservative Amarillo, Texas, voting down a ballot measure blocking abortion-related travel on its highly trafficked roads. But just before the end of the year, Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton sued a New York doctor for prescribing abortion drugs to a Texas resident, which Dickson told States Newsroom is a win for the anti-abortion movement. He said that in 2025 he plans to push for local anti-abortion ordinances in Arizona and Missouri, which reversed their abortion bans in November.

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

Donald Trump, then the GOP candidate for president, gave a keynote speech on the third day of the Bitcoin 2024 conference at Music City Center on July 27, 2024 in Nashville, Tennessee. He had previously dismissed cryptocurrency as a “scam” but embraced it in his latest bid for a second term in the White House. (Jon Cherry | Getty Images)

President-elect Donald Trump’s recent appointments and cabinet nominees are pointing to a four-year stint of deregulation in the tech industry, and lots of potential for competitive growth within the industry and globally, tech executives predict.

Trump has made a handful of recent selections, both to existing positions, like chair of the Federal Trade Commission and chair of the Securities and Exchange Commission, and he has created new positions for his term, like the “AI and crypto czar.”

“There appears to be much more cohesion and support from within his camp to support a range of geopolitical, technology and innovation issues that were relegated in importance during his first term,” software founder Yashin Manraj said.

Trump has chosen FTC Commissioner Andrew Ferguson to be the agency’s next chairman, replacing Lina Khan, who fought Big Tech overreach during her tenure. He’s slated to be joined by antitrust specialist Mark Meador in his former position. Together, the pair will likely continue to scrutinize Big Tech agencies, but for issues of “censorship” which was a Republican talking point during the election.

Earlier this month, Trump named cryptocurrency advocate and former SEC commissioner Paul Atkins as his pick for chair of the SEC, and appointed former PayPal executive David Sacks to a new role of “AI and crypto czar,” PBS reported.

The move comes as Trump’s view on digital currencies has evolved. During his first presidency, Trump called it “highly volatile and based on thin air,” but has since changed his tune. In September, he rolled out a new venture to trade crypto, called World Liberty Financial, and said during his 2024 campaign, that he aims to make the U.S. the “crypto capital of the planet.”

And on Dec. 16, Trump met with Japanese-based investment firm SoftBank CEO Masayoshi Son, who announced a $100 billion investment into U.S. projects over the course of Trump’s term, many of which will focus on artificial intelligence.

Appointees setting the tone

These tech industry appointees and connections lean toward “traditional Republican deregulatory instincts,” said Dev Nag, Bay Area-based founder and CEO of AI automation company QueryPal.

It’s a shift toward something Nag calls “techno-pragmatic nationalism,” or a mixture of these Republican deregulation instincts with industry policy that focuses on maintaining the U.S.’ status in the global tech economy.

Ferguson’s appointment to the FTC will likely result in policies that continue to allow large U.S. tech companies to thrive while addressing specific competitive issues.

We’ll also probably see harder barriers against foreign tech competitors, especially China, Nag said.

Manraj, the Eagle Point, Oregon-based founder and CEO of software company Pvotal Technologies, also sees Trump’s appointments as an attempt to focus on growing the local tech economies, rather than the global one.

“These policies will weaken the tech industries of the European Union and many emerging countries, which were hoping for the heightened regulation under Harris to prevent further brain drains and promote [foreign direct investment] in their startup ecosystems,” Manraj said.

There was a lot of technical advancement during President Joe Biden’s term, but stronger tech regulations created some “confusion and hesitation” within the industry, Manraj said.

“Based on the track record of these appointees, we’re likely to see a significant rollback of AI safeguards implemented under the Biden administration, replaced with a framework emphasizing rapid deployment and commercialization,” Nag said.

SoftBank’s investment is a sign that the industry is feeling ready to develop, and that investment dollars are more likely to flow under a Trump administration, Manraj said.

Differences from Trump’s first term

The appointments and tech-industry relationships Trump has developed for his second term appear to make him more prepared to be supportive of tech innovation and growth than his first term, Manraj said.

He’s relying on “a new generation of technocrats,” to enact change, Manraj said, rather than politically driven cabinet advisors from his first time in office.

“The crypto world is reacting positively to it, and many projects treading water for years are finally ramping up hiring and growth locally in the U.S.,” Manraj said.

Nag predicted several potential technological advancements we may see under Trump’s second term, including the relaxation of AI restrictions paired with lots of investments into tech. That may allow for AI to integrate across lots of industries and infrastructures faster than it would have under a Kamala Harris administration.

Nag also noted Trump’s change in attitude toward crypto, saying a friendlier regulatory environment for the digital currencies may position the U.S. as a global leader in the space. We may also see more advancement in semiconductor manufacturing and computing capabilities under more relaxed regulations.

All of these advancements come with important governance considerations, though, Nag said. AI advancements that go so far without safety frameworks can create future problems that we can’t come back from.

“The key challenge for this administration will be maintaining the delicate balance between fostering rapid innovation and ensuring long-term technological resilience,” he said.

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

Adolphe Duperly’s painting depicting the destruction of the Roehampton Estate in Jamaica during the Baptist War in January 1832. Wikimedia Commons

The debate over the debt limit will likely flare tensions between centrist and far-right Republicans the closer the country gets to the real deadline sometime later in the year. (Photo by Getty Images)

WASHINGTON — When Republicans won unified control of government during the November elections, they also won the responsibility to address the country’s debt limit after the current suspension expires on Jan. 1.

Lawmakers will have a few months of wiggle room thanks to accounting maneuvers to broker a deal before the country would default for the first time in history — which most economists believe would kick-start a global financial crisis.

How long the Treasury Department will be able to use what’s known as extraordinary measures to give Congress more time to find agreement will lead to a high-stakes guessing game on Capitol Hill.

The debate will also likely flare tensions between centrist and far-right Republicans the closer the country gets to the real deadline sometime later in the year.

“That is always a tortured path,” West Virginia Republican Sen. Shelley Moore Capito said during a brief interview. “A lot of people that are here probably never voted for a debt limit increase, so I think it’s probably going to be a negotiated settlement with some, maybe constraints on spending and other things that would go along with that.”

Capito, who will become the Republican Policy Committee chair next year, said she doesn’t anticipate Congress will simply raise or suspend the debt limit without caveats.

President-elect Donald Trump threw a curve ball into those negotiations in late December when he publicly announced he wanted the party to suspend the debt limit for at least four years or eliminate it entirely before he takes office.

GOP leadership tried to suspend the debt limit for two years as part of a larger spending package, but ultimately withdrew that provision to avoid a government shutdown.

The 48-hour fiasco set the stage for considerable Republican disagreement next year.

“Congress must get rid of, or extend out to, perhaps, 2029, the ridiculous Debt Ceiling,” Trump posted on social media. “Without this, we should never make a deal. Remember, the pressure is on whoever is President.”

What is the debt limit, and why does it matter?

The debt limit allows the Treasury Department to borrow money to pay all the country’s bills in full and on time.

That borrowing authority is necessary because Congress has established a tax code that brings in far less revenue than the federal government spends on hundreds of programs.

During fiscal year 2023, the federal government brought in $4.4 trillion in revenue and spent $6.1 trillion, leading to an annual deficit of $1.7 trillion, according to data from the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office.

When the difference between taxes and spending, or the deficit, is added up over decades, it accounts for the country’s $36 trillion-plus debt.

Congress requires itself to regularly give the Treasury Department more borrowing authority to pay for all the spending not covered by revenue. Lawmakers failing to take action to raise or suspend that debt limit would lead to a default.

How to reduce the deficit?

There are several ways for lawmakers to reduce the annual deficit of nearly $2 trillion, though most experts agree it will take a combination of tax increases and spending cuts.

Congress would also need to take a look at the major drivers of government spending — Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid.

At the moment, Republicans are talking about using their unified control of government to pass two major packages on their own.

The first would focus on border security, defense and energy policy. The second package the GOP plans to move through the complex budget reconciliation process is aimed at cutting taxes.

One of the biggest questions GOP leaders will face in the new year is whether to go at it alone, relying solely on their members to raise the debt limit, or to negotiate with Democrats, which would require major concessions.

The debt limit has become something of a political hot potato for GOP lawmakers during the past couple decades, with many in the party viewing it as an inflection point to press for spending cuts. 

That’s not likely to change next year, though Republicans won’t be able to rely on Democratic votes to carry the bill across the finish line like they have in the past, if they choose to move it through the budget reconciliation process.

If, alternatively, the GOP moves a debt limit bill through the regular process, they’ll need the support of Democrats to get past the Senate’s legislative filibuster, which requires at least 60 senators to move bills toward a final passage vote.

Tax increases and spending cuts

Douglas Elmendorf, professor of public policy at the Harvard Kennedy School of Government, told the House Budget Committee during a hearing in December that getting the country’s borrowing under control in the long term will require both tax increases and spending cuts.

Elmendorf testified that stabilizing the country’s deficit over the next three decades would “require policy changes totaling a little more than 2% of (gross domestic product), which amounts to about $600 billion per year today.”

“Cutting spending that much would require large cuts to popular and important government programs and raising taxes that much would require large tax increases for many people,” Elmendorf said. “So the only realistic way forward is through a combination of those changes.”

California Republican Rep. Tom McClintock rebuked his own party during the hearing for not approaching reconciliation as a genuine way to reduce the deficit by bringing revenue and spending into alignment.

He argued that Republicans misused budget reconciliation when they had unified control of government during 2017 and 2018, the first two years of Trump’s last presidency.

McClintock said GOP leaders at the time “squandered this authority to chase shiny political objects — repealing Obamacare, then tax reform.”

“And because of the fiscal constraints of reconciliation, Obamacare ended up in this mangled mess that collapsed in the Senate and the tax cuts had to be made temporary,” McClintock said. “And we seem to be poised to repeat the same mistakes that got us here and that would be an immense national tragedy.”

Instead, McClintock said the Budget Committee should focus its attention next year on making the types of tough choices that would begin to reduce the annual deficit and then use the reconciliation process to put those in place.

Drivers of debt

Reconciliation is typically used only when one party controls the House, Senate and White House as a way to implement policy changes without getting the bipartisan support required to get past the Senate’s 60-vote legislative filibuster.

When Republicans hold that power, they typically use it to cut taxes, but don’t always pay for those reductions in revenue, further exacerbating the deficit.

Georgia Republican Rep. Buddy Carter said during the same Budget Committee hearing that Congress must address the largest drivers of government spending, like Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid, if it wants to bring spending closer to revenue. 

“If we don’t address that, we can do away with everything else and still not balance our budget,” Carter said. 

He also cautioned his party against going at it alone, saying “it would be political suicide for one party to try to do it by themselves.” That would mean the GOP needs to negotiate with Democrats, likely eroding some of the party’s goals.

‘Mortgaging our children’s future’

Wisconsin Republican Sen. Ron Johnson said during a brief interview the debt limit is “supposed to concentrate everybody’s minds on the fact that we are mortgaging our children’s future and that we ought to stop the madness.”

Johnson said Republicans could use the reconciliation process they’re planning to use to address defense priorities, border security, energy policy and taxes to cut spending, but he said deficit hawks will be constrained by the rules that govern the special legislative process.

“I’m completely supportive of doing two separate reconciliations — do something pretty simple, primarily focused on the border with real spending cuts. I don’t want to see any gimmicks in this thing. So, you know, I’ll approach it that way,” Johnson said.

Iowa Republican Sen. Chuck Grassley said in an interview before Trump’s announcements that GOP lawmakers have begun to discuss how exactly to address the debt limit next year, though he said no agreements have been reached.

“Some people want a separate debate on it and some people want to put it in reconciliation,” Grassley said. “I prefer reconciliation, but I guess whatever we decide to do, we’re going to have to do it.”

Then-U.S. Rep. Matt Gaetz, a Florida Republican, speaks at the Republican National Convention at the Fiserv Forum on July 17, 2024 in Milwaukee. The U.S. House Ethics Committee released a report Monday finding "substantial evidence" of misconduct by Gaetz. (Photo by Scott Olson/Getty Images)

President-elect Donald Trump’s first choice for attorney general in his second presidency, former Florida Congressman Matt Gaetz, paid for sex, including with a minor, used illegal drugs and sought to obstruct investigators, according to a U.S. House Committee on Ethics report released Monday.

The 42-page report, the culmination of a years-long committee investigation, found that Gaetz, who denies the allegations, “regularly paid women for engaging in sexual activity with him,” used cocaine and ecstasy on multiple occasions between 2017 and 2019, accepted gifts including a 2018 trip to the Bahamas, and lied to the Department of State to obtain a passport for a woman he was sexually involved with and who he falsely claimed was his constituent.

“Representative Gaetz took advantage of the economic vulnerability of young women to lure them into sexual activity for which they received an average of a few hundred dollars after each encounter. Such behavior is not ‘generosity to ex-girlfriends,’ and it does not reflect creditably upon the House,” the report stated, noting the former congressman violated Florida prostitution and statutory rape laws.

Gaetz has not been criminally charged.

But the panel cited “substantial evidence” that Gaetz had sex with a 17-year-old girl whom they refer to as “Victim A.” Evidence included “credible testimony from Victim A herself, as well as multiple individuals corroborating the allegation.”

“Several of those witnesses have also testified under oath before a federal grand jury and in a civil litigation,” the report continued.

“Representative Gaetz denied the allegation but refused to testify under oath. He has publicly stated that Victim A ‘doesn’t exist’ and that he has not ‘had sex with a 17-year-old since I was 17.’ The Committee found that to be untrue and determined that there is substantial evidence that Representative Gaetz had sex with Victim A in July 2017, when she was 17 years old, and he was 35. Representative Gaetz’s actions were in violation of Florida’s statutory rape law,” according to the report.

Gaetz was chosen by Trump in November as his nominee to run the U.S. Department of Justice, even though Gaetz was previously the target of a department sex trafficking investigation that never yielded charges. Gaetz resigned from the House hours after Trump named him for the position.

After criticism from lawmakers and a spotlight on the House Ethics Committee’s probe, ongoing since April 2021, Gaetz bowed out of the running for attorney general.

Gaetz continues to deny the allegations outlined in the committee report and sued the panel Monday. In the complaint, filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, Gaetz calls the committee’s decision to release the report “unconstitutional” because it does not have jurisdiction over a private citizen.

“There is a reason they did this to me in a Christmas Eve-Eve report and not in a courtroom of any kind where I could present evidence and challenge witnesses,” Gaetz wrote on X Monday.

Gaetz declined an opportunity to present his version of events to the committee, refusing an invitation to sit for a voluntary interview, the report said.

Debate over release

The committee wrestled with the decision to release the report, blocking the decision after meeting on Nov. 20 before reversing course in a Dec. 10 vote.

Committee Chair Michael Guest said in a statement Monday that he opposed the report’s release.

“I believe, have publicly stated, and remain steadfast in the position that the House Committee on Ethics lost jurisdiction to release to the public any substantive work product regarding Mr. Gaetz after his resignation from the House on November 14, 2024,” Guest, a Mississippi Republican, said.

“While I do not challenge the Committee’s findings, I did not vote to support the release of the report and I take great exception that the majority deviated from the Committee’s well-established standards and voted to release a report on an individual no longer under the Committee’s jurisdiction, an action the Committee has not taken since 2006,” Guest’s statement continued.

Dr. Karen Hyun will be the next secretary of the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources. (Office of Gov. Tony Evers)

Gov. Tony Evers announced Monday that Dr. Karen Hyun will be appointed as the next Secretary of the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources. Hyun currently serves as chief of staff of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). 

The DNR secretary position has been unfilled for more than a year after the resignation of former Secretary Adam Payne in October 2023. In a news release, Evers said that Hyun’s career working on environmental issues makes her “a great asset.” 

“Dr. Hyun’s extensive science background and expertise working in fish and wildlife, shoreline restoration, and coastal management and resilience will make her a great asset to the Department of Natural Resources and to our administration,” Evers said. “Having spent most of her career working in environmental policy, Dr. Hyun brings a wealth of experience navigating many of the issues the department is charged with managing every day, and I’m so excited for her to get started.”

Hyun, who lives in Madison, earned bachelor’s and master’s degrees in Earth Systems from Stanford University before getting her doctorate from the University of Rhode Island in marine science. 

Before joining NOAA, the federal agency that forecasts weather and tracks oceanic and atmospheric conditions — including on the Great Lakes — Hyun worked at the National Audubon Society as director of water and coastal policy before becoming the vice president of coastal conservation in 2018. 

She started her career in 2009 working as a staff member of the U.S. House of Representatives Natural Resources Committee. She then worked in the administration of former President Barack Obama as senior policy advisor to the secretary of Commerce and deputy assistant secretary of fish, wildlife, and parks at the Department of the Interior in 2015. 

“I’m honored to accept this appointment from Gov. Evers to lead the DNR,” Hyun said. “Wisconsin is known for its abundance of natural resources, wildlife, and outdoor recreation opportunities, and I have spent much of my life dedicated to understanding, conserving, and promoting the natural resources and spaces that we all know and love. I look forward to working alongside the dedicated DNR staff to ensure that Wisconsin’s ecosystems, wildlife, natural spaces, and resources remain accessible, safe, and available for generations of Wisconsinites to come.”

Hyun’s appointment is effective Jan. 27.

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

President Joe Biden delivers remarks at the White House Rose Garden Nov. 7. Biden on Monday commuted the sentences of 37 federal death row inmates. (Photo by Andrew Harnik/Getty Images)

President Joe Biden commuted the sentences on Monday of 37 death row inmates, citing his conscience as a force behind the decision. He also left the death sentences unchanged for three men charged with hate-motivated mass shootings and terrorism.

Biden, who imposed a moratorium on federal executions during his administration, commuted the death sentences to life sentences without the possibility of parole, saying in a statement that he’s dedicated his career “to reducing violent crime and ensuring a fair and effective justice system.”

“Make no mistake: I condemn these murderers, grieve for the victims of their despicable acts, and ache for all the families who have suffered unimaginable and irreparable loss,” Biden said.

“But guided by my conscience and my experience as a public defender, chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, Vice President, and now President, I am more convinced than ever that we must stop the use of the death penalty at the federal level. In good conscience, I cannot stand back and let a new administration resume executions that I halted.”

The three men Biden left on death row Monday include Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, sentenced in 2015 of bombing the Boston Marathon in 2013; Dylann Roof, sentenced in 2017 of fatally shooting nine members of Emanuel African Methodist Episcopal Church in 2015 in Charleston, South Carolina; and Robert Bowers, sentenced in 2023 for the deadly shooting in 2018 that killed 11 worshippers at the Tree of Life synagogue in Pittsburgh.

The president’s commutations Monday come after he commuted the sentences on Dec. 12 of 1,500 people who were placed in home confinement during the coronavirus pandemic. He also granted pardons for 39 individuals convicted of nonviolent crimes.

Biden received criticism from Pennsylvania Gov. Josh Shapiro and others for including among the mass commutations a Pennsylvania judge convicted in 2011 of sending children to prison in exchange for millions of dollars in kickbacks from a private jail — a crime that became known in the commonwealth as the “Cash for Kids” scheme.

Advocates for abolishing the death penalty and some U.S. House Democrats had pressured Biden to commute death penalty sentences ahead of President-elect Donald Trump’s return to the White House. Trump expedited some executions during his first term.

In a statement, Trump transition spokesman Steven Cheung blasted the commutations.

“These are among the worst killers in the world and this abhorrent decision by Joe Biden is a slap in the face to the victims, their families, and their loved ones,” Cheung wrote. “President Trump stands for the rule of law, which will return when he is back in the White House after he was elected with a massive mandate from the American people.”

According to the White House, the names of the death row inmates whose sentences were commuted Monday are:

• Shannon Wayne Agofsky

• Billie Jerome Allen

• Aquilia Marcivicci Barnette

• Brandon Leon Basham

• Anthony George Battle

• Meier Jason Brown

• Carlos David Caro

• Wesley Paul Coonce, Jr.

• Brandon Michael Council

• Christopher Emory Cramer

• Len Davis

• Joseph Ebron

• Ricky Allen Fackrell

• Edward Leon Fields, Jr.

• Chadrick Evan Fulks

• Marvin Charles Gabrion, II

• Edgar Baltazar Garcia

• Thomas Morocco Hager

• Charles Michael Hall

• Norris G. Holder

• Richard Allen Jackson

• Jurijus Kadamovas

• Daryl Lawrence

• Iouri Mikhel

• Ronald Mikos

• James H. Roane, Jr.

• Julius Omar Robinson

• David Anthony Runyon

• Ricardo Sanchez, Jr.

• Thomas Steven Sanders

• Kaboni Savage

• Mark Isaac Snarr

• Rejon Taylor

• Richard Tipton

• Jorge Avila Torrez

• Daniel Troya

• Alejandro Enrique Ramirez Umaña

Tesla CEO Elon Musk , right, co-chair of the newly announced Department of Government Efficiency, carries his son on his shoulders at the U.S. Capitol following a meeting with businessman Vivek Ramaswamy, left, the other co-chair of the Department of Government Efficiency, Rep. Kat Cammack, center, and other members of Congress on Dec. 5, 2024 in Washington, D.C. Musk and Ramaswamy met with lawmakers about DOGE, a planned presidential advisory commission with the goal of cutting government spending and increasing efficiency in the federal workforce. (Photo by Anna Moneymaker/Getty Images)

WASHINGTON — President-elect Donald Trump enlisted Washington outsiders Elon Musk and Vivek Ramaswamy to tell members of Congress how they should run things.

But Musk and Ramaswamy as they build their Department of Government Efficiency, or DOGE, don’t actually hold any elected or bureaucratic positions in the federal government — giving two hard-driving businessmen far less authority than they’re used to having in the private sector.

The duo will need to garner support from hundreds of members of Congress for any of their suggested spending cuts to become law, even with Republicans in control of the White House and both chambers of Congress. That is an uphill slog many have failed at before.

The mix of personalities, differing committee jurisdictions and separation of powers laid out in the Constitution could create tension, to say the least, when powerful Republican lawmakers disagree with or outright ignore Musk and Ramaswamy. Several Republicans indicated in interviews with States Newsroom that they intend to listen to the DOGE duo but will not back down from their roles as elected representatives of the people.

Maine Republican Sen. Susan Collins, the incoming chairwoman of the Appropriations Committee, said during a brief interview she believes the two men can offer lawmakers “valuable insights” and advice, but cautioned the power of the purse rests with Congress.

“It doesn’t mean that we will take all of these issues, but it’s always helpful to have additional oversight,” Collins said. “And so I look forward to seeing what they come up with.”

Rhode Island Democratic Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse, chairman of the Budget Committee, summed up Democrats’ views on the Musk-Ramaswamy entity in a social media post.

“What does Doggie (“DOGE”) do? Maybe think of it this way: you have to watch a couple of precocious toddlers for the day,” Whitehouse wrote. “They need activities, but you don’t want them near stoves, cars, electrical equipment, or anything operational.”

Meet the appropriators

In Congress, the Appropriations Committee is tasked with drafting the dozen annual government funding bills that total about $1.7 trillion. The legislation funds the vast majority of federal departments and agencies, including Agriculture, Defense, Energy, Interior, Justice, State and Transportation.

The other two-thirds of federal spending covers interest payments on the debt, Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid.

Idaho GOP Rep. Mike Simpson, chairman of the Interior-Environment Subcommittee, told States Newsroom he expects there will be “conflict” between Congress and the Musk-Ramaswamy group, in part, because they don’t have the years, or even decades, of experience learning the ins and outs of federal spending that appropriators hold.

“I noticed that they’ve said that they want to defund public television. I think they might get some kickback on that,” Simpson said. “To me, that’s a policy decision, not an efficiency issue.”

When GOP lawmakers met with Musk and Ramaswamy behind closed doors in early December to talk about government spending, Simpson said, the two pressed the idea that Trump should be able to cancel spending he deems “waste.”

But what Trump might consider unnecessary could be an essential program to a GOP lawmaker or a rural community, Simpson said.

There’s also a federal law called the Impoundment Control Act that prevents presidents from halting funding that Congress has approved and a Supreme Court ruling that bars the president from using line-item vetoes.

Arkansas Republican Rep. Steve Womack, chairman of the Transportation-HUD Subcommittee, told States Newsroom he expects there will need to be some “deconfliction” once Musk and Ramaswamy release their proposals.

“There will be a lot of different, competing interests and ideas, and we’ll just have to see what those are,” Womack said. “It’s a little premature, but, yeah, I’m sure there’ll be some deconfliction, there’ll be some negotiating. Some of this will be leveraged with other significant emotional events up here like debt ceiling, or funding the government.”

Floor votes could also be a hurdle for the various DOGE groups if they don’t gain Democratic support. Republicans will hold just 220 seats in the House at the start of the 119th Congress before a few of their members depart for other opportunities. That razor-thin margin means proposals from Musk and Ramaswamy will need support from the full spectrum of GOP lawmakers to pass.

Then they’ll need to gain the support of nearly all 53 GOP senators if they expect any spending cuts proposals to become law through the complex budget reconciliation process. 

Proving their value

One of the many challenges for Musk and Ramaswamy will be showcasing how their efforts differ from those of the White House budget office.

Bipartisan Policy Center Managing Director for Economic Policy Rachel Snyderman said in an interview with States Newsroom she’ll be watching closely to see whether Musk and Ramaswamy integrate their proposals with the president’s budget request, which the White House will likely release sometime in the spring.

That massive document tells Congress how the president wants lawmakers to change tax and spending policy. Congress, however, rarely follows it to the letter and often ignores large swaths of it.

If Musk and Ramaswamy’s proposals go a completely different route, it could create confusion about what exactly it is the Trump administration wants lawmakers to do and could bog down any support they might get on Capitol Hill.

But simply mirroring what’s already in the budget request would lead to a question about whether or not Musk and Ramaswamy serve any real purpose.

“If you go back and look at the budgets from Trump’s first term … they averaged about $1.6 trillion in cuts over a 10-year budget window,” Snyderman said. “And at least for the first two years, those were presented to a GOP trifecta as well and not implemented as policy.”

Snyderman said Musk and Ramaswamy will likely want to do something other than reinvent the wheel by simply republishing the hundreds of government efficiency and spending cuts proposed over the years by the Congressional Budget Office, the Government Accountability Office and inspectors general.

Those groups have given lawmakers and presidents plenty of recommendations to reduce waste, fraud and abuse. But government officials don’t always act on their suggestions.

“There have been so many resources over the years doing just this — proposing smart, sensible, but tough pills to swallow when it comes to government efficiency,” Snyderman said. “What I think it’s going to really boil down to is what’s politically palatable through legislative or executive action. And where as a nation we’re willing to make those trade-offs in service to improve our fiscal outlook and trying to get a handle on the national debt.”

One of the more recent examples, she said, was the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office’s release of a detailed, 116-page report on ways that lawmakers could reduce the deficit in mid-December.

Impoundment law

If Republicans disagree with Musk and Ramaswamy’s suggestions or only put a few of them in place, it could lead Trump to try to cut spending unilaterally.

Such a decision would create considerable issues for Republicans, since it would violate the Impoundment Control Act and potentially set a new precedent that future Democratic presidents could use to ignore Congress on conservative spending priorities.

That Impoundment Control Act, enacted after then-President Richard Nixon refused to spend billions approved by lawmakers, essentially says a president must distribute money Congress has approved for various federal departments and agencies. It also gives the president a couple of paths to ask lawmakers to cut spending they’ve already approved, but they must agree.

Russ Vought, who has been nominated as director of the Office of Management and Budget, is likely to press the belief that presidents can unilaterally cancel spending, often called “impoundment.”

The Center for Renewing America, the think tank Vought established following his stint as OMB director during the first Trump administration, has repeatedly argued the Impoundment Control Act is unconstitutional and published a detailed history of how presidents canceled spending before the 1974 law took effect.

The Trump administration ignoring the ICA would likely lead to legal challenges and eventually a Supreme Court ruling.

Checks and balances

North Dakota Sen. John Hoeven, the top Republican on the Agriculture Appropriations Subcommittee, told States Newsroom some of the government efficiency proposals that Musk and Ramaswamy pursue will be able to move through executive action, but said any spending cuts must go through Congress.

“This is a country of 320 million people that all have a different point of view about all these different issues, which is why you’ve got to have the kind of process we have, the checks and balances and all that — to figure out where is there enough support to implement these recommendations,” Hoeven said. “That’s how the system works because you’re talking about something that’s very far-reaching and it’s going to affect people throughout the country.”

Arkansas Sen. John Boozman, the top Republican on the Military Construction-VA spending subcommittee, said he expects there will be a lot of communication between lawmakers, Musk and Ramaswamy about constitutional authority to try to avoid public disagreements, though he didn’t rule that out.

“I think as long as the communication lines are open, we should hopefully end most of that,” he said.

Incoming Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., said during a press conference he expects it will take some time for Musk and Ramaswamy to “scrutinize government operations and figure out where we can achieve savings and efficiencies” before Congress reviews those recommendations and puts them in a bill.

Thune said he would like to see some of those move through the budget reconciliation process that Republicans are planning to use to get around the Senate’s 60-vote legislative filibuster; essentially allowing the GOP to move sweeping policy changes without Democratic input.  

More cooks in Congress

Republicans have talked about cutting government spending for decades, but haven’t used unified control of government to make significant structural reforms in quite some time.

Newly formed groups in the House and Senate will likely provide some support for Musk and Ramaswamy’s proposals, but they may disagree with them as well, or come up with completely separate ideas.

The combination of Musk and Ramaswamy’s DOGE, a soon-to-be-formed House Oversight subcommittee on government efficiency chaired by Georgia Republican Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene and the government efficiency caucus could become a too-many-cooks scenario.

The Delivering Outstanding Government Efficiency Caucus already holds several Republican lawmakers among its ranks, but it doesn’t have the jurisdiction that the Appropriations Committee holds. Neither does the Oversight subcommittee.

Iowa Republican Sen. Joni Ernst established the caucus alongside Florida Rep. Aaron Bean and Texas Rep. Pete Sessions

North Carolina’s Ted Budd, Texans John Cornyn and Ted Cruz, Oklahoma’s James Lankford, Utah’s Mike Lee, Kansan Roger Marshall, Ohio’s Bernie Moreno, Missouri’s Eric Schmitt, Florida’s Rick Scott and Alaska’s Dan Sullivan have all joined the group on the Senate side.

House members include Rick Allen of Georgia, Jim Baird of Indiana, Andy Barr of Kentucky, Stephanie Bice of Oklahoma, Josh Brecheen of Oklahoma, Ben Cline of Virginia, Jeff Duncan of South Carolina, Ron Estes of Kansas, Pat Fallon of Texas, Randy Feenstra of Iowa, Scott Franklin of Florida, Carlos Giménez of Florida, Glenn Grothman of Wisconsin, Diana Harshbarger of Tennessee, Doug LaMalfa of California, Nick Langworthy of New York, Debbie Lesko of Arizona, Barry Loudermilk of Georgia, Anna Paulina Luna of Florida, Celeste Maloy of Utah, Tom McClintock of California, Cory Mills of Florida, Dan Newhouse of Washington, Ralph Norman of South Carolina, Gary Palmer of Alabama, David Rouzer of North Carolina, Mike Rulli of Ohio, Maria Elvira Salazar of Florida, Jeff Van Drew of New Jersey, Beth Van Duyne of Texas, Derrick Van Orden of Wisconsin, Tim Walberg of Michigan, Randy Weber of Texas, Daniel Webster of Florida, Roger Williams of Texas and Joe Wilson of South Carolina. 

Social Security legislation passed by the U.S. Senate, which would cost more than $195 billion over 10 years, now goes to President Joe Biden for his signature. (Photo by Getty Images).

WASHINGTON — The U.S. Senate approved a broadly bipartisan bill early Saturday that would increase Social Security benefits for millions of Americans with pensions by ending two of the program’s policies in place for decades — the windfall elimination provision and government pension offset.

The legislation, which would cost more than $195 billion over 10 years, now goes to President Joe Biden for his signature. While he hasn’t released a public endorsement of the bill, extensive support in the House and Senate could signal he’s likely to support the measure becoming law.

The Senate vote was 76-20 and the House vote in November was 327-75.

Maine Republican Sen. Susan Collins said during floor debate Wednesday that a fix for the two provisions has been decades in the making, noting she held the first hearing on the issue in the upper chamber in 2003.

Collins later partnered with the late California Democratic Sen. Dianne Feinstein to introduce the first version of the bill in 2005, before working with former Maryland Democratic Sen. Barbara Mikulski in 2007 on another version.

“Social Security is the foundation of retirement income for most Americans, yet many teachers, firefighters, police officers and other public servants often see their earned Social Security benefits unfairly reduced by two provisions,” Collins said. 

The windfall elimination provision, she said, “affects public servants who receive a pension from a job not covered by Social Security, but who also worked long enough in another job to qualify for Social Security benefits.”

The government pension offset affects people who worked in jobs that weren’t eligible for Social Security, but were eligible for a spousal benefit. That pension offset, Collins said, can reduce a spouse’s Social Security benefit by two-thirds of the non-covered pension, leading to 70% of those affected by the GPO to lose the entire Social Security benefit.

“This issue is extraordinarily important in my state of Maine because the state’s pension system does not include a Social Security component,” Collins said. “And among those most affected are Maine school teachers.”

Collins called the WEP and the GPO “an unfair, inequitable penalty.” 

Hit to trust fund

North Carolina Republican Sen. Thom Tillis said the bill’s title made it sound like “motherhood and apple pie,” but argued it wasn’t the right approach to address the problem.

He expressed concern the bill would reduce the Social Security trust fund by an additional $200 billion during the next decade, moving up the insolvency date by six months.

“This chamber needs courage and needs to say what needs to be said — we are about to pass an unfunded $200 billion spending package for a trust fund that is likely to go insolvent over the next nine to ten years and we’re going to pretend like somebody else has to fix it,” Tillis said. “Well, when you’re a U.S. senator and you have your election certificate, that falls on us.”

Tillis said he agreed with Collins and others who support the bill that the WEP and the GPO must be fixed, but said that should be part of a larger conversation about addressing Social Security’s upcoming insolvency.

“We do not disagree with what we ultimately need to do,” Tillis said. “This is a disagreement in how to get here and how to have something that assesses the downstream risk. So it is with some trepidation that I come to the floor and criticize the good work of Sen. Collins. But I do it because there is so much riding on us getting this right and having the courage to fix Social Security over the next few years.”

Ohio Democratic Sen. Sherrod Brown said during floor debate Wednesday that people who paid into Social Security for the required amount of time should receive their full benefits. 

“Social Security we know is a bedrock of our middle class — it’s retirement security that Americans pay into and earn over a lifetime,” Brown said. “You pay in for 40 quarters, you pay in essentially for 10 years. You’ve earned it. It should be there when you retire.”

Brown said it “makes no sense” that workers in certain public service jobs, like teachers, police officers and firefighters, cannot draw their full benefits. 

“They protect our communities, they teach our kids, they pay into Social Security just like everyone else,” Brown said.

How do these provisions work?

The pension offset reduces a “spousal or widow(er)’s benefits of most people who also receive pensions based on federal, state, or local government employment not covered by Social Security,” according to a report from the nonpartisan Congressional Research Service.

The windfall elimination provision changes the formula to reduce Social Security benefits for people “who are also entitled to pension benefits based on earnings from jobs that were not covered by Social Security,” the report said.

The pension offset affects about 746,000 Americans while the windfall provision affects 2.1 million.

“The share of Social Security beneficiaries affected by the GPO varies widely by state,” the CRS report says. “States with a relatively larger share of GPO-affected beneficiaries are usually those with a larger share of state and local government employees not covered by Social Security or those with more (Civil Service Retirement System) retirees.”

The pension offset has a disproportionate impact on Social Security beneficiaries in Alaska, Arizona, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Florida, Georgia, Hawaii, Idaho, Illinois, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Missouri, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Mexico, Ohio, Rhode Island, Texas and Utah. 

The windfall elimination provision affects a larger percentage of residents in Arizona, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Florida, Georgia, Hawaii, Idaho, Illinois, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Missouri, Montana, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Mexico, Ohio, Oklahoma, Oregon, Rhode Island, Texas, Utah, Virginia and Washington, Wyoming. 

“Similar to the GPO, the share of Social Security beneficiaries affected by the WEP varies by state,” CRS wrote. “Typically, states that have a larger share of state and local government employees not covered by Social Security or more CSRS retirees have a relatively larger share of Social Security beneficiaries affected by the WEP.”

Bipartisan House support

The U.S. House voted 327-75 in November to approve the four-page bill, sponsored by Louisiana Republican Rep. Garret Graves and Virginia Democratic Rep. Abigail Spanberger.

Graves said during floor debate that for 40 years, Social Security worked by “treating people differently, discriminating against a certain set of workers.”

“These are police officers, teachers, firefighters, and other public servants,” Graves said at the time. “I worked side by side with these folks. They are not people who are overpaid. They are not people who are underworked.”

Spanberger called the windfall elimination provision and the government pension offset “two misguided provisions that were added to the Social Security Act in 1983 (and) have denied Americans the retirement security they worked for and expected to receive.”

“For more than 40 years, public servants have tirelessly implored their representatives in Congress to listen to their stories and to correct this glaring injustice,” Spanberger said. “Today, for the first time, Congress will vote on the Social Security Fairness Act, to repeal the WEP and the GPO, and to finally put an end to this theft.”

Opposition to bill

Missouri Republican Rep. Jason Smith, chairman of the Ways and Means Committee, said the two provisions affect around 4% of all Social Security beneficiaries, more than 60% of whom are concentrated in 10 states.

The two provisions, he said, “were put in place more than four decades ago to prevent workers with earnings that were exempt from Social Security payroll taxes from getting more generous treatment from Social Security than workers who spent their whole careers contributing to Social Security.”

“Unfortunately, these policies still result in overly generous benefits for some while unfairly penalizing others,” Smith said, before arguing the bill wasn’t the right way to address the two provisions. 

Smith said that getting rid of the two provisions “without a replacement potentially trades unfair treatment for preferential treatment.”

He also expressed concern about how pulling more money from the Social Security trust fund would impact solvency. 

The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office estimated the bill would cost $195.65 billion during the next 10 years and wrote in a letter to Iowa Republican Sen. Chuck Grassley that it would likely move up the Social Security insolvency date by six months.

“If H.R. 82 was enacted, the balance of the (Old-Age and Survivors Insurance) trust fund would, CBO projects, be exhausted roughly half a year earlier than it would be under current law,” CBO Director Phillip L. Swagel wrote. “The agency estimates that under current law, the balance of the OASI trust fund would be exhausted during fiscal year 2033.”

The Social Security trustees report for 2024 says that the program will be able to pay full benefits until 2035. After that, if Congress hasn’t brokered a solution, Social Security would be able to pay about 83% of benefits. 

President-elect Donald Trump will face significant hurdles to enacting his campaign pledge to ban transgender youth from participating in school sports that align with their gender identity. (Photo by Getty Images)

WASHINGTON — President-elect Donald Trump repeatedly said during the campaign that, if elected back to the White House, he would pursue a ban on transgender youth participating in school sports that align with their gender identity.

As he prepares to take office in January, experts and LGBTQ+ advocates told States Newsroom the effort would face significant delays and challenges as legal pushback from LGBTQ+ advocacy groups can be expected every step of the way.

Trump’s repeated vow to “keep men out of women’s sports” reflects his broader anti-trans agenda. Administration efforts would come as an increasing number of states have passed laws banning trans students from participating in sports that align with their gender identity.

The Trump-Vance transition team did not offer any concrete details when asked about specifics but shared a statement from spokesperson Karoline Leavitt.

“The American people re-elected President Trump by a resounding margin giving him a mandate to implement the promises he made on the campaign trail,” Leavitt wrote. “He will deliver.”

Reversing the final rule for Title IX

The U.S. Education Department, under President Joe Biden, released updated regulations to Title IX in April that strengthen federal protections for LGBTQ+ students. The final rule does not explicitly reference trans athletes’ sports participation — a separate decision the administration put on hold.

The Education Department said Dec. 20 it was withdrawing a proposed rule that would have allowed schools to block some transgender athletes from competing on sports teams that match their gender identities while also preventing across-the-board bans.

Title IX is a landmark federal civil rights law that bars schools that receive federal funding from sex-based discrimination.

The president-elect has pledged, while speaking about trans students’ sports participation, to reverse the Biden administration’s final rule for Title IX on his first day back in office.

The Biden administration’s final rule was met with forceful pushback from GOP attorneys general. A series of legal challenges in states across the country have created a policy patchwork of the final rule and weakened the Biden administration’s vision for enforcement. 

But if Trump were to try to reverse the final rule, experts say the effort would take an extended period and require adherence to the rulemaking process outlined in the Administrative Procedure Act, or APA.

The APA rules how federal agencies propose and roll out regulations. That process can take months, creating a barrier for a president seeking to undo a prior administration’s rule.

Cathryn Oakley, senior director of legal policy at the Human Rights Campaign, an LGBTQ+ advocacy group, said that while a subsequent administration can undo the current Title IX regulations, it would take “a tremendous amount of work because a regulation has the force of law … so long as the administration has complied with the APA.”

For the Trump administration to undo those regulations, it would need to start at the beginning, propose its own rules and go through the entire process.

“I think it seems fairly likely that that’s something that they’re going to pursue, but that’s not something that the president has the capability to do on day one,” she said.

Oakley noted that the updated regulations also have the force of law because they interpret a law that already exists — Title IX.

The Trump administration is “bound by Title IX, which in fact has these protections related to gender identity,” she said.

Preparing to push back

But any action from the Trump administration regarding trans athletes’ sports participation is sure to be met with legal challenges from LGBTQ+ advocacy groups.

Oakley said though “we have many real reasons to be concerned” about what the Trump administration would do when it comes to Title IX protections and in general for LGBTQ+ people, “we also need to be cautious that we do not concede anything either.”

“We need to be trying to ground ourselves in the actual legal reality that the president-elect will be facing when he comes into office and be able to fight with the tools that we have and not concede anything in advance.”

Biden rule does not address athletics

The U.S. Education Department under Biden never decided on a separate rule establishing new criteria regarding trans athletes.

Shiwali Patel, a Title IX lawyer and senior director of safe and inclusive schools at the National Women’s Law Center, said “we could see some sort of announcement about changing the Title IX rule to address athletics” under the Trump administration. 

“Given the rhetoric that has come out of the Trump administration and this continued focus on trans athletes, I think we very well should and could expect to see something from the Trump administration on this, which is very harmful,” Patel told States Newsroom.

The Trump administration could also try to pursue a national ban via legislation in Congress.

The U.S. House approved a bill last year that would prohibit trans athletes from competing in sports that align with their gender identity. And in July, the chamber passed a measure that would reverse Biden’s final rule for Title IX.

But Patel said she could not see how any measure in Congress could get through the U.S. Senate’s filibuster, which requires at least 60 votes to pass most legislation. There will be 45 Democratic senators in the incoming Congress, though independent Sens. Angus King of Maine and Bernie Sanders of Vermont caucus with the Democrats.

Despite Washington soon entering a GOP trifecta in the U.S. House, Senate and White House, narrow margins could hinder any potential anti-trans legislation from the Trump administration. 

Broader anti-trans legislation

Across the country, 25 states have enacted a law that bans trans students from participating in sports that align with their gender identity, according to the Movement Advancement Project, or MAP, an independent think tank.

Logan Casey, director of policy research at MAP, said proponents of these sports bans are using them as a starting point to enact a broader anti-trans agenda.

“In many cases, these sports bans have been one of the first anti-trans laws enacted in recent years in many states, but then states that enact one of these sports bans then go on to enact additional anti-trans or anti-LGBTQ laws,” Casey told States Newsroom.

Casey described any controversy around trans people playing sports as “entirely manufactured.”

“In just five years, we’ve gone from zero states to more than half the country having one of these bans on the books, and that’s really, really fast in the policy world,” he said.

In March 2020, Idaho became the first state to enact this type of ban. 

Madison, Wisconsin high school students march on the Capitol on Friday, Dec. 20 | Photo by Daphne Cooper

It was a brilliant, snowy Friday, the last day of school before winter break, as more than 100 students from high schools across Madison converged inside the Capitol. They gathered around the 30-foot balsam fir festooned with handmade ornaments, a model train chugging around the track at the base of the tree. At first it looked like a festive scene, but as the students poured into the first floor of the rotunda, then filled the second- and third-floor balconies, their shouting drowned out a group of Christmas carolers, who retreated, their songs giving way to chants of “No more silence! End gun violence!”

The Madison teens showed up to express their grief and outrage over the deaths this week of a 14-year-old student, her teacher and a gun-wielding 15-year-old girl who opened fire Monday in a classroom at the small private Abundant Life Christian School on Madison’s east side. It was the city’s first school shooting but, incredibly, the 323rd in the nation this year.

Gun violence is the leading cause of death of children and teens in the U.S. Shouting, chanting, demanding to be heard, the crowd of children came to the Capitol Friday demanding that we wake up and do something about this appalling fact. 

Our nation is an outlier, with a rate of gun violence that dwarfs other large, high-income countries. Firearm homicides here are 33 times higher than in Australia and 77 times higher than in Germany, according to a report from the Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation at the University of Washington medical school. Not surprisingly, firearm injuries tend to be more frequent in places where people have easy access to firearms, according to a 2018 study published in the Journal of the American Medical Association.

What other country in the world could live with the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting, where 20 little children between 6 and 7 years old and six adult staff were gunned down, and respond by making no significant restrictions on firearms? 

“My parents constantly talk about how, when Sandy Hook happened, they thought that would be the end of it,” said Danny Johnson, a first-year student at Madison West High School who joined the 3-mile march to the Capitol on Friday, carrying a sign scrawled on a sheet of notebook paper that said, “Thoughts and prayers until it’s your own child.” 

“To constantly have to go through it — we shouldn’t have to be here. We should be in school not having to worry about it at all,” Johnson added.

Hanging over balconies and leaning against marble pillars, teens held up handmade signs that said; “Enough!” “You write your policies on a carpet of our dead bodies,” and “Graduations not funerals.”

In Wisconsin, the rate of gun deaths increased 45% from 2013 to 2022, compared to a 36% increase nationwide, according to the Giffords Law Center.

Every year since he was elected in 2018, Gov. Tony Evers and Democrats in the state Legislature have tried in vain to get Republican cooperation on ending the state’s current exemption from background checks for private gun sales. A proposed “red flag” law that would allow police or family members to seek an extreme risk protection order in court to take guns from gun owners who are found to be a danger to themselves or others has also gone nowhere. Both of these measures are broadly popular with voters across the political spectrum. Somehow that doesn’t seem to matter.

After this week’s school shooting. Assembly Speaker Robin Vos released a statement saying, “Today’s tragedy is shocking, senseless and heartbreaking. My thoughts and prayers are with the students, parents and faculty who will have to live with the trauma and grief of this day for the rest of their lives.” But Vos stopped short of saying he would make any effort whatsoever to protect kids and teachers from being shot to death at school. That phrase “thoughts and prayers,” rightly derided by the students who protested at the Capitol on Friday, is a pathetic substitute for action. 

“Last year it was 12 years since Sandy Hook, 25 years since Columbine, and all our politicians can say from their cushy seats is that they’re sending out their thoughts and prayers about the leading cause of death for children in America!”  yelled Ian Malash, a senior at Vel Phillips Memorial High School in Madison, pacing around the tree in the center of the rotunda. “We’re showing them right now and we are going to continue to show them that we are done with thoughts and prayers. We will make change happen because our lives depend on it.”

Vos, apparently recovered from his heartbreak over Monday’s tragedy and back to his old snarky self by Wednesday, mounted a robust defense of the status quo on X, retweeting a post from Wisconsin Right Now that mocked Democrats who “politicize this tragedy with cheap talking points.” The post claimed that, since it’s already illegal for a 15-year-old to possess a handgun, it’s ridiculous to connect the recent shooting to any effort to change gun laws.

But, as state Sen. Kelda Roys told the crowd on Friday, “We know that states that have passed gun safety laws like background checks, like red flag laws … they see gun deaths and firearm injuries go down. We can do that here in Wisconsin, too.  We just need to change the minds or change the legislators — and the judges, too, by the way.” 

“My generation and the people in this building have let you down,” Rick Abegglen, the parent of a West High School daughter who helped organize the protest, told the crowd in the Capitol. “I am so proud of each and every one of you for standing up for yourselves. A few moments ago I saw somebody close the doors of the Senate because they did not want to hear your voices. Think about it.”

As he spoke, the students yelled louder, their voices bouncing off the marble walls, becoming harder and harder to ignore.

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

Wisconsin Gov. Tony Evers address the Legislature in his 2024 State of the State message. (Baylor Spears | Wisconsin Examiner)

Gov. Tony Evers announced Friday that Wisconsin’s Annual Comprehensive Financial Report, which is published by the Department of Administration, recorded a $4.5 billion positive balance in the state’s general fund at the end of the 2023-24 fiscal year. 

In addition to the general fund, the state’s Budget Stabilization Fund — or “rainy day” fund — ended the fiscal year at the highest level in state history with a balance of $1.9 billion. The rainy day fund has set a new record every year since Evers took office in 2019.  

“For thirty consecutive years, our state’s checking account ran at a deficit. Thanks to our efforts to pay down our state’s debt and work across the aisle to be good stewards of taxpayer dollars, Wisconsin has never had a deficit since I took office,” Evers said in a statement. “This is great news for the people of Wisconsin and our state’s economy.” 

The balance in the general fund — a budget surplus — will likely be a major point of discussion next year as Evers and lawmakers begin work on the state’s next two-year budget.

Writing the state budget is a process that will take several months as Evers first gets to present his budget proposal to lawmakers, then the state’s Joint Finance Committee will write its own version. The budget bill will need to pass the Senate and Assembly before going to Evers to be signed.

“As we begin the important work of deliberating our state’s next two-year budget, we have a responsibility to keep staying well within our means while still investing in needs that have long been neglected,” Evers said. “We must continue to make the smart, strategic investments we have for the last five years to maintain our economic momentum and ensure Wisconsin’s continued stability and success.”

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, seen at an April 2022 White House event celebrating her Senate confirmation, was President Joe Biden’s sole U.S. Supreme Court nominee. The 235 federal judges confirmed during Biden’s presidency set records for racial and gender diversity. (Photo by Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images)

WASHINGTON — President Joe Biden’s number of lifetime appointments to the federal bench surpassed the first Trump administration’s Friday and set records as the most diverse selection of judges by any president in U.S. history, according to federal judiciary observers.

The U.S. Senate, late in its final session of the year, confirmed what are expected to be the final two of Biden’s nominations, bringing his total number of judicial confirmations to 235, just one more than President-elect Donald Trump’s first-term total.

Senators voted along party lines to confirm Benjamin J. Cheeks to be U.S. district judge for the Southern District of California, in a vote of 49-47, and Serena Raquel Murillo to be U.S. district Judge for the Central District of California, in the same vote breakdown.

Cheeks marks the 63rd Senate-confirmed Black judge appointed by Biden, and Murillo the 150th woman.

Four senators did not vote, including Vice President-elect J.D. Vance of Ohio, Trump’s secretary of State nominee, Sen. Marco Rubio of Florida, newly sworn Sen. Adam Schiff of California, and the outgoing Sen. Joe Manchin of West Virginia.

Senate control will be in Republican hands after the new Congress is sworn in Jan. 3, almost certainly shutting the door on any Biden nominations before Trump’s Jan. 20 inauguration.

Among Biden’s appointments, 187 were seated on district courts, 45 on federal appeals courts, and one, Ketanji Brown Jackson, on the U.S. Supreme Court, as well as two to the Court of International Trade.

Biden issued a statement Friday night marking the “major milestone.”

“When I ran for President, I promised to build a bench that looks like America and reflects the promise of our nation. And I’m proud I kept my commitment to bolstering confidence in judicial decision-making and outcomes,” Biden said.

“I am proud of the legacy I will leave with our nation’s judges,” Biden said, closing out his statement.

Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer touted the “historic” accomplishment on the Senate floor following the vote.

“We’ve confirmed more judges than under the Trump administration, more judges than any administration in this century, more judges than any administration going back decades. One out of every four active judges on the bench has been appointed by this majority,” Schumer said.

He and members of the Senate Committee on the Judiciary delivered a press conference immediately after.

Historic racial and gender diversity

Observers who monitor the demographics and professional backgrounds represented on the federal bench celebrated the “remarkable and historic progress” made under Biden, according to a Friday memo from The Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights.

Biden set records for appointing the most women and more Black, Native American, Latino and Latina, Asian American, Native Hawaiian and Pacific Islander judges than during any other presidency of any length, according to the organization’s analysis.

The Senate confirmed 15 Black judges to the federal appeals courts during Biden’s term, 13 of them women. Only eight Black women had ever served at this level of the federal judiciary, according to the analysis.

On the district court level, Biden appointed the first lifetime judges of color to four districts that had only ever been represented by white judges. They include districts in Louisiana, New York, Rhode Island and Virginia.

Biden also appointed, and the Senate confirmed, 12 openly LGBTQ judges, three of them women; the first four Muslim judges ever to reach the federal bench; and two judges currently living with disabilities.

“Our federal court system has historically failed to live up to its promise of equal justice under the law,” the Leadership Conference’s Friday memo stated. “For far too long, our judges have disproportionately been white, cisgender, heterosexual men who have possessed very narrow legal experiences as corporate attorneys or government prosecutors. Judges decide cases that impact all of our rights and freedoms, and it is vital that our judges come from more varied backgrounds both personally and professionally.”

Nearly 100 of Biden’s appointments previously worked as civil rights lawyers or public defenders, according to the leadership conference, including Jackson who was the first former public defender elevated to the Supreme Court.

Biden’s confirmed judges stood in contrast to Trump’s picks who, the American Constitution Society noted, lacked gender and racial diversity.

According to data published by the Pew Research Center at the close of Trump’s first term, the now president-elect was more likely than previous Republican presidents to nominate women but still lagged behind recent Democratic administrations.

Pew also found that Trump had appointed fewer non-white federal judges than other recent presidents.

Blocked nominee faults Islamophobia

But not everyone praised the Senate’s advice-and-consent role in evaluating federal nominees. Adeel Mangi, the first Muslim American to be nominated for the appeals court level, criticized Republican members of the Senate Judiciary Committee for asking Islamophobic questions.

In a letter to Biden, published by the New York Times and other outlets, Mangi slammed the process as “fundamentally broken” and questioned the reasoning behind three Democratic senators who joined Republicans in opposing him.

“This is no longer a system for evaluating fitness for judicial office. It is now a channel for the raising of money based on performative McCarthyism before video cameras, and for the dissemination of dark-money-funded attacks that especially target minorities,” wrote Mangi, of New Jersey, whom Biden nominated for a position on the Philadelphia-based Third Circuit Court of Appeals.

Other blocked nominations included Julia M. Lipez of Maine, nominated for the First Circuit, Karla M. Campbell of Tennessee for the Sixth Circuit, and Ryan Young Park of North Carolina for the Fourth Circuit. 

U.S. Speaker of the House Rep. Mike Johnson, R-La., speaks to members of the press at the U.S. Capitol on Dec. 20, 2024 in Washington, D.C.  (Photo by Alex Wong/Getty Images)

WASHINGTON — Congress finally approved a stopgap spending bill early Saturday that will keep the government open for a few more months, after a raucous 48 hours that served as a preview of what President-elect Donald Trump’s second term in office might look like.

The short-term spending package, the third version of a bill to be released this week, will give lawmakers until mid-March to negotiate agreement on the dozen full-year government funding measures and provide about $100 billion in natural disaster assistance. 

Although it technically was passed by the Senate after the midnight deadline for a shutdown, deputy White House press secretary Emilie Simons said on X that agencies would continue normal operations. 

The House passed the bill Friday evening following a 366-34 vote with one Democrat voting “present.” The Senate voted 85-11 shortly after midnight Saturday. President Joe Biden signed the bill Saturday morning. 

The legislation did not include any language either raising or suspending the debt limit, rejecting a demand by Trump that it be addressed. Congress and Trump will have to deal with that next year when they control the House, Senate and the White House.

The 118-page bill will extend programs in the five-year farm bill through September, giving the House and Senate more time to broker a deal, even though they are already more than a year late.

The package would not block members of Congress from their first cost-of-living salary adjustment since January 2009, boosting lawmakers’ pay next year from $174,000 to a maximum of $180,600.

It does not include a provision considered earlier this week that would have allowed the year-round sale of E15 blended gasoline nationwide in what would have been a win for corn growers and biofuels.

The White House announced during the House vote that Biden supports the legislation.

“While it does not include everything we sought, it includes disaster relief that the President requested for the communities recovering from the storm, eliminates the accelerated pathway to a tax cut for billionaires, and would ensure that the government can continue to operate at full capacity,” press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre wrote. “President Biden supports moving this legislation forward and ensuring that the vital services the government provides for hardworking Americans – from issuing Social Security checks to processing benefits for veterans — can continue as well as to grant assistance for communities that were impacted by devastating hurricanes.”

Appropriators at odds

House Appropriations Chairman Tom Cole, R-Okla., urged support for the bill during floor debate, saying it would avoid a partial government shutdown, provide disaster aid and send economic assistance to farmers.

“Governing by continuing resolution is never ideal, but Congress has a responsibility to keep the government open and operating for the American people,” Cole said. “The alternative, a government shutdown, would be devastating to our national defense and for our constituents and would be a grave mistake.”

Connecticut Democratic Rep. Rosa DeLauro, ranking member on the Appropriations Committee, spoke against the bill and criticized GOP negotiators from walking away from the original, bipartisan version released Tuesday.

She rejected billionaire Elon Musk, a close Trump ally, seemingly calling the shots as if he were an elected lawmaker, though she ultimately voted for passage. 

“The United States Congress has been thrown into pandemonium,” DeLauro said. “It leads you to the question of who is in charge?”

Trump, Musk objections

Democrats and Republicans reached an agreement earlier this week to fund the government, provide disaster aid, extend the agriculture and nutrition programs in the farm bill, extend various health care programs and complete dozens of other items. But Trump intervened, preventing House GOP leaders from putting that bill on the floor for an up-or-down vote. 

Trump and Musk were unsupportive of some of the extraneous provisions in the original bill and Trump began pressing for lawmakers to address the debt limit now rather than during his second term.

House Republicans tried to pass their first GOP-only stopgap bill on Thursday night, but failed following a 174-235 vote, with 38 GOP lawmakers voting against the bill. That bill included a two-year debt limit suspension, but that was dropped from the version passed Friday. 

Speaker Mike Johnson, a Louisiana Republican, said Friday before the vote that the GOP was united on its plan forward.

“We have a unified Republican Conference. There is a unanimous agreement in the room that we need to move forward,” Johnson said following a 90-minute closed-door meeting. “I expect that we will be proceeding forward. We will not have a government shutdown. And we will meet our obligations for our farmers, for the disaster victims all over the country, and for marking sure the military and essential services and everyone who relies on the federal government for a paycheck is paid over the holidays.”

A total of 34 House Republicans voted against the bill. No House Democrats voted against passage.

No shutdown, for now

The House and Senate not agreeing on some sort of stopgap spending bill before the Friday midnight deadline would have led to a funding lapse that would likely have led to a partial government shutdown just as the holidays begin.

During a shutdown, essential government functions that cover the protection of life and property continue, though no federal workers would have received their paychecks until after the shutdown ends. That loss of income would have extended to U.S. troops as well.

“If there is going to be a shutdown of government, let it begin now, under the Biden Administration, not after January 20th, under “TRUMP,” the president-elect posted on social media Friday morning. “This is a Biden problem to solve, but if Republicans can help solve it, they will!”

In a separate post that went up just after 1 a.m. Eastern, Trump doubled down on his insistence that any short-term spending bill suspend the debt limit for another four years or eliminate the borrowing ceiling entirely.

“Congress must get rid of, or extend out to, perhaps, 2029, the ridiculous Debt Ceiling,” Trump wrote. “Without this, we should never make a deal. Remember, the pressure is on whoever is President.”

Madison Police Chief Shon Barnes delivers updates about the Dec. 16, 2024 school shooting at Abundant Life Christian School on Madison's east side. (Henry Redman | Wisconsin Examiner)

Just days after he was thrust into the national spotlight following the shooting at Abundant Life Christian School that killed two people, Madison Police Chief Shon Barnes was announced as the new chief of the Seattle Police Department. 

Barnes’ acceptance of the job in Seattle comes as the Madison police are still investigating the shooting on Monday and the motives behind the 15-year-old girl’s attack. Authorities have discovered that the girl was in contact with a 20-year-old California man who was planning his own attack on a government building. 

Since the shooting, Barnes has been an outspoken critic of hardening the defenses of community schools. At his first press conference after the shooting, he was asked if the school had metal detectors and responded that schools shouldn’t have such measures installed. 

“I’m not aware that the school had metal detectors, nor should schools have metal detectors,” he said. “It’s a school. It’s a safe space.”

Prior to the shooting, Barnes had been named a finalist for the Seattle job. 

Seattle Mayor Bruce Harrell noted in a statement that Barnes has successfully brought crime down in Madison and promised to continue to work to combat gun violence.

“Earlier this week, under tragic circumstances, the nation received its introduction to Chief Shon Barnes. We all saw firsthand what our team has known since we began this recruitment process — that Chief Barnes possesses the impressive leadership capabilities, compassionate approach, and dedication to effective police work needed to continue moving our Police Department forward,” Harrell said. “I’ve spoken with Madison Mayor Satya Rhodes-Conway to express my condolences and support as they process this week’s tragedy and to share my continued commitment to fighting for solutions to the gun violence epidemic that impacts every corner of our country through our shared work with the U.S. Conference of Mayors.”

Barnes took over as chief in Madison in early 2021 as the city responded to an increase in violent crime and the protests against police violence that occurred across the country in 2020. During his tenure, Barnes has overseen the department’s effort to equip officers with body cameras. 

He was also named a finalist for the chief jobs in Chicago and San Jose, California, despite telling Isthmus in 2021 that he was committed to Madison “for the long haul.” 

Rhodes-Conway said in a statement that Barnes’ collaborative approach was important to the establishment of Dane County’s Public Health Violence Prevention Unit and the Madison Fire Department’s CARES program, noting that the city is “safer and more resilient” because of his work. 

“I would like to congratulate Chief Shon Barnes on his new opportunity in Seattle and thank him for his service to Madison,” Rhodes-Conway said. “The Chief has been a steady, forward-thinking leader throughout his tenure and he will be greatly missed.”

She also commended his work this week responding to the school shooting.

“The tragedy this week has been all-consuming, and we still have much healing to do as a community,” she said. “I’m grateful that the Madison Police Department responded to this unthinkable crisis with the utmost professionalism and compassion. Chief Barnes was at the center of coordinating local, state, and federal law enforcement agencies during an unprecedented moment. He did so admirably.”

The Madison Police and Fire Commission is responsible for finding Barnes’ replacement. Rhodes-Conway said in the coming weeks the commission will outline a search plan and during the recruitment process an interim chief will be named.

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

The infection of a farm worker in Wisconsin with avian flu has been confirmed by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). (Stephen Ausmus | Agricultural Research Service, USDA)

A Barron County farm worker has been confirmed to have been infected with avian influenza, the state health department reported Friday. The confirmation was made by the federal Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).

With the CDC analysis in hand, “the case will now be reported as a confirmed human case” of the highly pathogenic avian influenza H5N1, the Wisconsin Department of Health Services (DHS) announced. It is the first reported case of the virus in a human in Wisconsin. 

The presumed infection was first reported Wednesday in a farm worker who was one of 19 people exposed to a poultry flock in Barron County where the avian flu virus was detected. The flock has been destroyed to prevent the spread of the virus. 

The individual has been treated with antiviral drugs and is recovering, according to DHS. 

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

 

Sen. LaTonya Johnson (D-Milwaukee) during a press conference in March 2023. (Baylor Spears | Wisconsin Examiner)

Sen. LaTonya Johnson (D-Milwaukee) and Sen. Kelda Roys (D-Madison) both serve on one of the most powerful committees in the Wisconsin State Legislature, yet as members of the minority they’ve often been frustrated by the way Republicans on the committee have excluded them from conversations. The lawmakers say they hope some of this changes next year.

The 16-person Joint Finance Committee is responsible for writing the state’s two-year budget — deciding which policy priorities get funding and which don’t — and reviewing all state appropriations and revenues. Republican lawmakers will continue to hold 12 seats next session with Sen. Howard Marklein (R-Spring Green) and Rep. Mark Born (R-Beaver Dam) serving as co-chairs.

In previous sessions, when Democrats held a smaller minority in the Senate and Assembly, the lawmakers said Republicans often excluded them from the budget negotiation process.

“The Republican party didn’t just treat us badly because we were in the minority, they treated us as though we did not exist on Joint Finance,” Johnson said. “Some of their motions we didn’t find out about until they were actually passing them out on paper. That means we had very little input.” 

Roys said it’s been “very easy for the Republicans to just go in a little room, figure out what they’re going to do, and then they come out and they all vote in lockstep.” 

“There’s no discussion, there’s no transparency, and there’s certainly no opportunity for Democrats to have our priorities reflected in the budget,” Roys said. 

Beyond budget writing discussions, Republican lawmakers on the committee have also often rejected calls from Democrats on the committee to release money that was already dedicated to certain issues.

Johnson called the practice of withholding of money a “tremendous problem.” She noted that $50 million that was meant to help support the implementation of new literacy curricula in schools across the state haven’t been released despite being included in the 2023-25 budget.

“Not only are they holding those funds up, but the cost is continuing to rise, so that $50 million that was promised in 2024 isn’t going to go as far in 2025,” Johnson said. “We’ve seen that.” 

Johnson also pointed out that funding to help expand the number of beds at Mendota Juvenile Treatment Center, a facility in Madison that provides specialized treatment services for juveniles transferred from the Department of Corrections, was withheld for about six months. It was only released after the death of a youth counselor for the Wisconsin Department of Corrections at Lincoln Hills School for Boys at the hands of a 16-year-old boy. 

Other funds that have been withheld by the committee in the recent session include $10 million to support hospitals in the Chippewa Valley and $125 million to combat PFAS contamination.

“What is the purpose of us allocating these funds if the agencies can’t access them the way that they need to to make these programs work, to get what they need to get?” Johnson said. 

Johnson said she thinks that new legislative maps could help change the dynamic. Roys also said it could have an impact that the state Supreme Court found it unconstitutional for the committee to block state spending on land conservation projects after the money has been budgeted. 

“That dynamic is at play, and I wonder if it will chasten the Republicans. It doesn’t seem to have done so yet,” Roys said. 

Elections under new legislative maps increased Democrats’ presence in the state Legislature by 14 seats. In the upcoming session about 45% of the Legislature will be Democrats, but they will only make up one-quarter of the finance committee with four seats. Despite this, Democrats hope that Republicans will allow for more communication. 

Whether there is more bipartisan collaboration in JFC next session given the closer margins in the Senate and Assembly is an open question, Roys said. 

“There’s always an opportunity,” Roys said. “Our doors are open, and we are very willing to collaborate. I think we’ve shown that in previous sessions by supporting legislation that would not have passed without Democratic votes, even though Republicans had these crazy outsized majorities.”

Johnson said that she hopes that Republicans learned a lesson from the recent elections, and warned that if Republicans don’t change their ways it could hurt their election chances in two years, when Democrats will aim to flip the Senate.

Republicans in the Senate lost four members in recent elections, including two who were members of the committee — Sens. Joan Ballweg and Duey Stroebel. Three new Republican Senators are joining the committee next session —  Sen. Romaine Quinn, Julian Bradley and Rob Stafsholt — to replace the outgoing lawmakers and newly elected Senate President Mary Felzkowski (R-Tomahawk).

Johnson said that, while she’s glad to have Sen.-elect. Sarah Keyeski of Lodi, who ousted Ballweg, joining the Senate Democrats, she thought Ballweg was a good lawmaker, who faced the consequences of gerrymandering.

“That’s the hard part of when maps are gerrymandered … when it’s corrected, sometimes the people that you lose are the moderates who are willing to do the right thing simply because it’s the right thing,” Johnson said. “That doesn’t mean that she never voted with her side. Of course she did. But she stepped away from that sometimes when she needed things for her community, too. She wasn’t opposed to doing the right thing.” 

Johnson said she hopes the writing is on the wall for lawmakers that want to ostracize the minority. 

“If they don’t take this as a wake-up call, then that’s better for us,” Johnson said. “Continue to operate the way that you have been operating for these last 11 years or so that I’ve been in the building, continue to do that, and it should most definitely be best for us next election cycle.” 

Priorities for the lawmakers

Johnson, who has served on the committee since 2017, says she continues to because of the opportunity it presents.

“The quickest way to help some of the people that I know that need help the most — like the working poor in Milwaukee, Milwaukee County — is through JFC,” Johnson says. “That’s where all of the important decisions are made because if you’re going to get anything passed in that building that requires one dollar amount, then that money has to be set aside through JFC to make sure that the appropriate appropriations are there.”

Johnson said lawmakers have been preparing for the next budget cycle by reading agency requests.

The Democratic senators said they want to see next year’s budget invest in a variety of priorities, including K-12 and higher education, local government funding, child care, health care and public safety. 

Johnson said that investing in some of these priorities could help bring down costs down the road. 

Johnson noted the high costs of housing youth at Lincoln Hills and Copper Lake schools. Currently, the state budgets $463,000 annually to house each juvenile in those facilities, and the Wisconsin Department of Corrections has requested that be increased to about $862,000 per year by 2026. 

investing in human needs and public education instead could help prevent children from ending up at the facility, Johnson said.

“It drives me crazy,” Johnson said. “I would much rather see my tax dollars being spent on higher educational tuition reimbursements, more housing assistance, more Foodshare, more whatever, to keep these families stable, to keep these kids in the home, than to pay [over] $860,000 for one child that may or may not correct that behavior.”

The Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction has requested an additional $4 billion in funding, the UW System has requested an additional $855 million and the state’s technical colleges have requested an additional $45 million.

Roys mentioned increasing funding for education and local governments as some of her top priorities. 

“We’ve been asking our schools and local governments to continually do more with less under these harsh levy limits and inadequate funding from the state. That compounds over time,” Roys said. “We have got to make sure that our schools and our local governments have the money they need to continue providing the service that every single Wisconsinite deserves.” 

When it comes to K-12 education, Roys said securing a 90% special education reimbursement for public schools would be her top priority. Private schools that participate in the school choice program already receive that rate of reimbursement, while public schools currently receive about a 33% reimbursement. 

“We have a moral and a legal obligation to educate all kids, and that means meeting the needs of students with disabilities, but when the state only pays for a third of the cost of educating what that means is that school districts have to take away things for all students,” Roys said. “All kids are being harmed by the state failing to meet this unfunded mandate, failing to fund this obligation.”

Roys said investing in child care is another big priority for her. 

Wisconsin’s Child Care Counts program was launched in March 2020 using federal money and has provided funding assistance to eligible child care providers to help support operating expenses, investments in program quality, tuition relief for families, staff compensation and professional development. The program is set to end in June 2025, however, as federal funds will run out. 

“We cannot have a vibrant economy and have the workforce participation that we need for a strong economy if we don’t have affordable, accessible child care in every corner of the state,” Roys said. “The Legislature’s decision to go from, you know, $300 million Child Care Counts program that kept the doors open to $0 for child care in the last budget has had devastating consequences in every community across the state.” 

Lawmakers on what people should know

When asked about what people should know going into next year, Johnson said people need to stay aware of what the committee is doing. She pointed out that people who closely watch Wisconsin politics probably already know about the importance of JFC. 

“For those people who are not politically savvy and who don’t pay attention to those types of things, they really need to pay attention to JFC,” Johnson said. 

“JFC is where those priorities are manifested, or they go to die,” Johnson said. “It doesn’t matter how good a piece of legislation is, if the funding isn’t there for it and it requests dollar amounts, it’s gonna die.” 

Roys said people should make their voices and priorities known, saying that people could send emails to every member of the committee. 

“Public input tells us what’s important,” Roys said. “We can’t guarantee, obviously, what the Republicans are going to choose and be funded, but it does send a strong message. That is how we know without a shadow of a doubt that public education and affordable child care were key priorities, but Republicans chose to ignore that.”

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

U.S. House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, D-N.Y., left, and U.S. Speaker of the House Mike Johnson, R-La.,  look on during a menorah lighting ceremony during a Hanukkah reception at the U.S. Capitol Building on Dec. 17, 2024, in Washington, D.C. (Photo by Anna Moneymaker/Getty Images)

WASHINGTON — The U.S. House failed to pass a Republican stopgap spending package Thursday, sharply increasing the odds a partial government shutdown will begin after the current funding bill expires Friday at midnight. 

The 174-235 House vote came less than three hours after GOP leaders released a second stopgap spending bill this week. The first version, released just two days ago, was widely rejected by President-elect Donald Trump as well as his allies on and off Capitol Hill.

A total of 38 GOP lawmakers and 197 Democrats voted against passage. Only two Democrats voted in support of the measure. One Democrat voted “present.”

House Republicans tried to approve the new measure under a process called suspension of the rules, which required at least two-thirds of lawmakers to support the legislation for passage, including Democrats. Trump endorsed this new version, which included a two-year suspension of the debt limit.

GOP leaders could next try to put the failed bill up for a vote under a rule, which requires a simple majority vote to approve, but that path takes a few more steps and isn’t a guarantee this legislation could pass.

House Appropriations Chairman Tom Cole, R-Okla., said during floor debate the bill was necessary to avoid a shutdown and provide disaster aid to states throughout the country.

“We need to provide the necessary disaster recovery aid for states and communities as our fellow citizens rebuild and restore. The relief efforts are ongoing — it will be months, if not years, before life returns to normal,” Cole said.

No input from Democrats

Connecticut Rep. Rosa DeLauro, the top Democrat on the Appropriations Committee, rebuked GOP lawmakers for walking away from the deal both parties reached on the first stopgap package.

“There were things in it that Democrats liked and Republicans did not, and there were things in it that Republicans liked and Democrats would have preferred to leave out. But that is the nature of government funding bills,” DeLauro said. “They require compromise and the support of Democrats and Republicans.”

The legislation House lawmakers were about to vote on had no input from Democrats, she said.

While Republicans have a narrow majority in the House, Democrats control the Senate and the White House, making bipartisan agreement on legislation essential to it becoming law.

White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre wrote in a statement released Thursday just before the vote that the GOP was “doing the bidding of their billionaire benefactors at the expense of hardworking Americans.”

“Republicans are breaking their word to support a bipartisan agreement that would lower prescription drug costs and make it harder to offshore jobs to China — and instead putting forward a bill that paves the way for tax breaks for billionaires while cutting critical programs working families count on, from Social Security to Head Start,” she wrote. “President Biden supports the bipartisan agreement to keep the government open, help communities recovering from disasters, and lower costs — not this giveaway for billionaires that Republicans are proposing at the 11th hour.”

Trump calls new bill ‘a very good deal’

The stopgap spending package that failed Thursday night would have kept the government funded through mid-March while boosting disaster aid by about $100 billion.

The legislation would have suspended the nation’s debt limit for an additional two years through January 2027 and given Congress until September to finish the much overdue farm bill.

Trump cheered the new version of the stopgap spending bill before the vote after rejecting the first version released just two days ago.

“Speaker Mike Johnson and the House have come to a very good Deal for the American People,” Trump wrote on social media. “The newly agreed to American Relief Act of 2024 will keep the Government open, fund our Great Farmers and others, and provide relief for those severely impacted by the devastating hurricanes.”

“A VERY important piece, VITAL to the America First Agenda, was added as well – The date of the very unnecessary Debt Ceiling will be pushed out two years, to January 30, 2027,” Trump added. “Now we can Make America Great Again, very quickly, which is what the People gave us a mandate to accomplish.”

Two days of tension

The second stopgap bill came after a dramatic 48 hours that began with the Tuesday night release of a different stopgap spending package before Trump’s ally Elon Musk called on GOP lawmakers to reject the bill their leadership team on Capitol Hill had negotiated over weeks.

Trump then told Republicans to address the debt limit in the package or get rid of it entirely, throwing another complex issue into the mix at the last minute.

The core elements of the stopgap spending package House Republicans released Thursday afternoon were similar to the Tuesday night package, though it dropped dozens of measures, including a provision allowing the nationwide sale of 15% ethanol blended gasoline year round.

The new package, same as the old package, doesn’t include a long-standing provision that prevents members of Congress from receiving a cost of living adjustment. Unless that’s changed, lawmakers would receive a 3.8% raise next year increasing their annual salary from $174,000 to $180,600.

“It removed key provisions to limit the power of pharmaceutical companies, and abandons our bipartisan efforts to ensure American dollars and intellectual property are reinvested in American businesses and workers; instead of fueling the Chinese Communist Party’s technology and capabilities,” DeLauro said during debate.

The new 116-page stopgap spending bill was considerably shorter than the 1,547-page version released Tuesday.

Several new deadlines

The spending package would have given Congress until March 14 to complete work on the dozen annual government funding bills that were supposed to become law by the start of the new fiscal year on Oct. 1.

It would have given the House and Senate until Sept. 30, 2025, to reach agreement on the five-year farm bill, which lawmakers were supposed to negotiate a new version of more than a year ago.

The legislation would suspend the debt limit through Jan. 30, 2027.

The bill includes tens of billions in emergency spending to help communities throughout the country recover from various natural disasters, including wildfires, tornadoes and hurricanes.

A summary of the bill, released by House Democrats on Tuesday, showed the Federal Emergency Management Agency and Department of Agriculture would receive the bulk of the natural disaster recovery funding. House Republicans didn’t appear to have altered any of the original funding levels for disaster aid in the updated Thursday version.

The USDA would get $33.5 billion in funding, with $21 billion of that designated for disaster assistance and another $10 billion for economic assistance to farmers and producers.

Other agriculture assistance funding would go toward the Agriculture Research Service, Emergency Watershed Protection Program, Emergency Forest Restoration Program and Rural Development Disaster Assistance Fund, among several others.

The Department of Homeland Security would receive $30.8 billion in funding, with $29 billion for the Federal Emergency Management Agency’s disaster relief fund.

An additional $1.5 billion would go to the Hermit’s Peak and Calf Canyon Fire fund “to continue efforts to support families who suffered damages due to the April 2022 wildfire,” according to the summary. 

The wildfire was the largest in New Mexico’s history and caused about $5.14 billion in damages, according to a report released this week.

The Department of Housing and Urban Development’s Community Development Block Grant program for disaster recovery would receive $12 billion in additional funding.

Another $8 billion would go to the Transportation Department to “reimburse states and territories for damage from natural disasters to roads and bridges in the National Highway System, including 100 percent of costs associated with rebuilding the Francis Scott Key Bridge in Baltimore,” according to Democrats’ summary.

The Forest Service would get $6.4 billion for ongoing recovery efforts from natural disasters that took place in 2022, 2023 and this year. The National Park Service would receive $2.3 billion as part of the Department of the Interior’s $3 billion total.

The Defense Department would get $3.4 billion to repair damages related to natural disasters. The Army Corps of Engineers would receive $1.5 billion for repairs and to increase resiliency.

The Small Business Administration would receive $2.25 billion for disaster loans.

Filibuster threat

Shortly before House GOP leaders announced their second stopgap package, North Carolina Sen. Thom Tillis and South Carolina Sen. Lindsey Graham committed to holding a talking filibuster to delay passage of any stopgap funding measures if that bill doesn’t include substantial disaster aid.

The two, along with North Carolina Sen. Ted Budd, all of whom are Republicans, held a press conference Thursday afternoon to urge GOP leaders in the House to keep the roughly $100 billion in emergency disaster aid in any short-term spending package.

They also rejected calls from some members of their own party to find ways to pay for the new emergency spending, saying that’s not how disaster aid packages have traditionally been handled.

“When you’re in the middle of a crisis, I don’t think anybody’s going to want to hear somebody come to the floor and talk about the fiscal responsibility of giving these people a home again, or giving them an opportunity to open up a business again and employ people,” Tillis said. “So, no I don’t think $10 billion or $20 billion, and ‘I promise we’ll do something more in March’ is an acceptable solution. We know what the need is today. It was negotiated in a package and it needs to be in a package to get my support to get out of here.” 

Graham sought to explain the realities of divided government and pointed out that even when Republicans control the House and Senate next year, they’ll still need Democratic support on spending bills.

“We need 60 votes to get it done in the Senate,” Graham said, referring to the chamber’s legislative filibuster, which requires at least 60 lawmakers vote to advance bills toward final passage.

“Mike Johnson is going to have to pick up a handful, at least, of Democrats, because there’s some Republicans who will never vote for anything,” Graham added.

Tillis was unable to answer a question about whether a partial government shutdown beginning Saturday at 12:01 a.m. would affect the federal government’s ongoing natural disaster response in his home state.

The Federal Emergency Management Agency, Department of Agriculture, Department of Transportation and numerous federal departments would be required to follow their shutdown guidance if Congress doesn’t fund the government on time.

Those departments and agencies divide up their staffs into excepted employees, whose jobs address the protection of life or property, and non-excepted employees, who don’t.

Neither category of federal employee gets paid until after the shutdown ends.

American Federation of Government Employees National President Everett Kelley released a written statement Thursday that a shutdown would harm federal workers who “inspect our food, protect our borders, ensure safe travel during the holidays, and provide relief to disaster victims.”

“Over 642,000 of them are veterans of our armed services,” Kelley wrote. “Allowing them to go without a paycheck over the holidays is unacceptable.”

Secretary of State Sarah Godlewski and state Treasurer John Lieber present a large check to educators to represent the $70 million disbursement from the Common School Fund to public school libraries across state. (Courtesy of Secretary of State Sarah Godlewski)

Wisconsin school libraries and media resources will receive a record $70 million in funding from the Board of Commissioners of Public Land, Secretary of State Sarah Godlewski announced Thursday. 

The agency’s contribution from the Common School Fund breaks the record for largest ever provided, which was set last year when the BCPL provided $65 million from the fund. 

“I’m proud of our record-breaking distribution. It comes at a time when schools are being asked to do more with less, and our strategic investments and collaborative efforts are making a difference to ensure that every student—no matter where they live—has access to the books, technology, and tools they need to succeed,” Godlewski said in a statement.

The BCPL manages state trust funds created as Wisconsin sold off millions of acres of land granted to the state government in the 19th century. The agency also manages timber sales for 77,000 acres of land still under state control. 

The Common School Fund is the “only dedicated funding source for many of Wisconsin’s public school libraries,” according to a news release. The amount of funds provided to school libraries through the fund has substantially increased in recent years. In 2020, libraries received $38.2 million through the fund. 

“Today’s milestone reflects the dedication of our team and the strategic investments we’ve made to ensure the fund continues to grow for future generations,” Godlewski said. “We’ve diversified hundreds of millions of dollars to include Wisconsin-based venture funds that support new and growing businesses. This is a win-win for our state: the Common School Fund bolsters Wisconsin’s economy, and the financial returns directly support our schools and libraries, reinforcing our commitment to educational excellence and opportunity.”

At an event in Brown Deer Thursday afternoon, Godlewski, state Treasurer John Leiber and educators celebrated the learning resources the money will be able to provide. 

“Without the support from the common school funds, many school libraries would not have the necessary resources to stay up-to-date and provide the digital resources necessary for our students’ continued learning. The BCPL work ensures that these schools are not left behind, and that all students in Wisconsin, no matter their background, have access to the educational opportunities they deserve,” said Wisconsin Educational Media and Technology Association President Jennifer Griffith.

Funds disbursed through the BCPL have been criticized in recent years because the land provided to the state by the federal government in the 1800s was taken from the state’s Native American tribes. 

In February, data collected by the non-profit media outlet Grist showed that funds disbursed through the BCPL’s Normal School Fund to the state’s public universities came from profits made from land taken largely from the Ojibwe tribe, the Wisconsin Examiner reported.

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

Eric Lee Peterson, of Kansas City, Missouri, pleaded guilty to knowingly and unlawfully entering the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021. In this Department of Justice photo, he is shown during the U.S. Capitol attack. (Photo from U.S. Department of Justice court filing)

WASHINGTON — A Kansas City, Missouri, man who pleaded guilty to entering the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021, and expects a pardon from President-elect Donald Trump will be allowed to attend Trump’s inauguration, a federal judge ordered Thursday.

U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan, who presided over Trump’s election subversion case in the District of Columbia, granted Eric Lee Peterson’s request to attend the president-elect’s swearing-in ceremony on Jan. 20 in Washington, D.C., as well as a request to expand his local travel restrictions while on bond.

Peterson’s attorney Michael Bullotta argued in a motion filed Tuesday that his client deserved the exceptions because he does not have a criminal record and “(h)is offense was entering and remaining in the Capitol for about 8 minutes without proper authorization.”

“Apart from being reasonable on their face, these two modification requests are even more appropriate in light of the incoming Trump administration’s confirmations that President Trump will fully pardon those in Mr. Peterson’s position on his first day in office on January 20, 2025. Thus, his scheduled sentencing hearing before this Court on January 27, 2025 will likely be rendered moot,” Bullotta wrote.

Trump repeatedly promised on the campaign trail to pardon the Jan. 6 defendants, whom he exalted as “patriots,” “warriors” and “hostages.”

The president-elect said during a Dec. 8 interview on NBC News’ “Meet the Press with Kristen Welker” that he’s “going to be acting very quickly” to pardon the defendants on day one — though he indicated he might make exceptions “if somebody was radical, crazy.”

During that interview, Trump also threatened imprisonment for former GOP Rep. Liz Cheney of Wyoming and current Democratic Rep. Bennie Thompson of Mississippi, who together oversaw the congressional committee to investigate the Jan. 6 attack.

Peterson pleaded guilty to knowingly and unlawfully entering and remaining in a restricted building or grounds, for which he faces up to one year in prison, plus a fine.

As part of the plea, he agreed to pay $500 in restitution toward the estimated $2.8 million in damages to the Capitol, according to court filings. Peterson also agreed to hand over to authorities access to all of his social media communication on and around the date of the riot.

Approximately 1,572 people faced federal charges following the attack on the Capitol that stopped Congress for hours from certifying the 2020 presidential election victory for Joe Biden.

Lawmakers and Vice President Mike Pence evacuated to secured locations within the Capitol as rioters assaulted roughly 140 police officers and vandalized several parts of the building, including lawmakers’ offices.

Peterson is among the 996 defendants who pleaded guilty to charges, according to the latest Department of Justice data.

Peterson appeared on both surveillance video from inside the Capitol and publicly available third-party video taken outside the building during the riot, according to a statement of offense signed by Peterson on Oct. 29.

Peterson, in a pink t-shirt over a dark hooded sweatshirt, stood among the crowd of rioters outside the locked Rotunda doors “as the building alarm audibly blared from within the Capitol building,” according to the statement.

Further, the court filing states Peterson entered the building at 3:03 p.m. Eastern and “walked right by a police officer posted at the doors.”

While inside the Rotunda, where several U.S. Capitol Police were present, Peterson took cell phone photos. He exited the building at 3:11 p.m., but remained on the Capitol’s restricted Upper West Terrace afterward, according to the statement.

Peterson was arrested in early August and originally faced a total of four charges that included disorderly conduct and parading, picketing and demonstrating inside the Capitol.