Democracy in the United States is in trouble. According to the 2026 Democracy Report, produced by thousands of scholars and experts around the world for the Varieties of Democracy Institute (V-DEM), “The speed with which American democracy is currently dismantled is unprecedented in modern history.”  Civil rights, equality before the law and freedom of expression and the media in the U.S. are at their lowest level in 60 years, the report finds.

The press is under tremendous pressure from the Trump administration, which is cutting off access to journalists, suing media organizations that produce critical stories, and demanding that national news organizations toe the administration’s line.

Meanwhile, at the state and local level, news coverage is shrinking. 

In Wisconsin, which has a proud tradition of public access to government and open records, we’re experiencing a contraction in local news coverage and, recently, the temporary shutdown and uncertain future of WisconsinEye, which offers CSPAN-like video coverage of the state Legislature.

A bill banning Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation (SLAAP) that passed the Wisconsin Assembly died on Tuesday in the Wisconsin Senate, leaving media organizations vulnerable to lawsuits designed to discourage news coverage and silence free speech. Now-state Sen. Cory Tomczyk filed a SLAPP suit against the Wasau Pilot & Review back in 2021, after the news outlet reported he was overheard using an anti-gay slur. Although the news outlet prevailed, legal expenses took a heavy toll, driving the publisher to the brink of bankruptcy.

The fight to keep government open and accountable to the public is never-ending. Just this week, a bill that awards $14.6 million in taxpayer funds annually to the University of Wisconsin athletic department and sets rules for sponsorship deals by UW athletes also creates a sweeping exemption for UW athletics from the state’s open records law — shielding all revenue, spending and financial records within the UW athletic department from public view.

That kind of secrecy about the use of public funds violates public trust. So does the exemption from public records law the Legislature drafted for itself, allowing state lawmakers to delete emails to avoid turning them over to journalists and members of the public who want to know whose interests their representatives are serving.

This week is Sunshine Week, the annual collaboration among journalists and civic groups around the country to highlight the importance of public records and open government. 

Here at the Examiner, we sent out a few special newsletters this week on our reporters’ use of open records requests to investigate government activities, from Isiah Holmes’ reporting on police officers who misused surveillance technology to spy on their romantic partners to an award-winning story by Andrew Kennard and Frank Zufall about the policy of shredding mail from attorneys to their clients in Wisconsin prisons.

The Kennard-Zufall story was one of 12 by Examiner staff that the Milwaukee Press Club announced this week won top-three journalism honors, with gold, silver and bronze winners to be announced in May.

We have encountered high fees and long delays in some of our records requests, but our reporters persist. Just this week, Zufall, a Criminal Justice Project fellow, finally received a response from the Bureau of Indian Affairs to a Freedom of Information request he made in February 2025. The request was part of his reporting on a new public defender service the Lac Courte Oreilles Band of Lake Superior Chippewa is creating, citing unspecified complaints about the Wisconsin Public Defender. Stay tuned for more on that story.

We don’t do this work in a vacuum.

On Thursday night, journalists and engaged citizens gathered to honor this year’s recipients of the Wisconsin Freedom of Information Council Openness in Government Awards.Wisconsin Watch reporter Tom Kerscher and the group Midwest Environmental Advocates were each honored for their work exposing the secrecy surrounding the development of massive data centers.

“The idea that tech companies whose goal is to learn everything about us are coming into the state and trying to prevent us from learning anything about them, it really has become a politically toxic issue for them,” said Michael Grief, an attorney for Midwest Environmental Advocates. MEA received  its award for lawsuits the group filed challenging the secrecy surrounding a data center project in Racine and against the state Public Service Commission, contesting the “trade secret” status of energy demand data for Meta’s proposed data center in Beaver Dam. 

Kertscher’s investigation exposed four projects in which local officials signed nondisclosure agreements with companies, much to the consternation of their constituents.

Data centers are a growing concern for the public, and we need to know about the deals to build these giant facilities.

Here at the Examiner we are proud to stand with other Wisconsin journalists and nonprofits fighting for open records and public access to government.

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

With a controversial bill to stipulate a definition of antisemitism in Wisconsin law now heading to the desk of Gov. Tony Evers, opponents have stepped up a campaign against the legislation.

The measure, AB 446, would incorporate in state law a definition of antisemitism that was adopted by the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance in May 2016.

If enacted, it would require agencies to apply the alliance’s definition when evaluating claims of racial, religious or ethnic discrimination. The definition also would be used in decisions on enhanced penalties for crimes that target people or property based on race, religion, color or national origin.

The Assembly passed the bill Feb. 17 on a vote of 66-33 that split the body’s Democratic caucus.

The state Senate concurred Tuesday in a voice vote with no debate, a day after more than 40 organizations published an open letter urging the body to reject the bill and Evers to veto it. The letter was endorsed by organizations including Citizen Action of Wisconsin, the immigrant rights group Voces de la Frontera, the faith-based social justice group WISDOM and many more, including Muslim groups, Jewish peace groups and an assortment of other organizations.

Proponents have said the legislation is needed to draw a line against an increase in antisemitic incidents. Opponents argued that the bill infringed on free speech by conflating prejudice against Jews with criticism of Israel’s government.

Public hearings in both the Senate and the Assembly drew impassioned testimony both for and against the bill, and critics as well as supporters included prominent Jewish leaders.

The coalition letter sent Monday asserted that “there is overwhelming evidence that codifying IHRA is unconstitutional, reproduces anti-Palestinian racism, and is unnecessary and harmful to public institutions.” Its citations included a brief published by the Center for Security, Race and Rights at Rutgers University Law School in New Jersey.

Both supporters and critics have made their arguments in the context of the attack on Oct. 7, 2023, by the Palestinian political and military organization Hamas and the subsequent Israeli military attacks on the Palestinian territory of Gaza.

Proponents have cited statistics showing a sharp increase in antisemitic incidents across the country, including what they described as antisemitic actions on college campuses during demonstrations opposing Israel’s actions in Gaza.

Opponents have warned that the IHRA definition could be used to criminalize protesters who publicly criticize the Israeli government, and said that examples incorporated in the IHRA definition omit major forms and sources of antisemitism.

Supporters have highlighted language in the bill stating that it may not be construed to infringe on First Amendment rights or to conflict with federal or state antidiscrimination laws. Opponents have dismissed that disclaimer as meaningless and ineffectual, however.

On the day that the Assembly voted on the legislation, its author, Rep. Ron Tusler (R-Harrison), amended it with a declaration that “nothing in [the measure] may be construed to create any additional civil or criminal penalty, including for activity protected under the first amendment to the U.S. Constitution at any public school in this state or at any University of Wisconsin System institution or technical college.”

The opposition coalition’s letter also dismissed that provision. “When legislation requires an emergency disclaimer clarifying that it is not meant to criminalize students, that alone reveals the inherent danger embedded in the bill’s structure,” the letter declared. “The need for this language underscores what critics have warned all along: the bills were designed to invite punitive enforcement and chill protected speech.”

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

In Milwaukee, the family of a woman detained by Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) joined local activists in pleading for her release. Elvira Benitez, who was born in Mexico, has never been in trouble with the law since she came to the United States 36 years ago. But Benitez was taken into custody earlier this month after a routine check-in, and transported out of state to a detention facility in Kentucky. 

“I’m asking all of you to put aside your biases and put aside preconceived notions, and simply look at the facts of Elvira’s case,” said attorney Marc Christopher during a press conference Thursday. “And I think that if you look at it not through a political lens, not through a preconceived lens but through a lens of justice, integrity, and fairness…These are values our country has traditionally upheld, I think you’ll find her to be an extremely sympathetic case.”

Christopher, hoping to reach people both in and outside of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), recounted the story of what led Benitez to America. “I want you to imagine a 15-year-old girl whose mother has died. She’s living in poverty in Mexico, and she’s facing the most extreme and terrible abuse at the hands of her own family. She then takes her 9-year-old sister and together they flee, crossing a desert with no guarantee of safety, no certainty, and nowhere to turn. It’s not a calculated decision that that 15-year-old child made. It was a decision of survival. That girl is Elvira, 36 years ago.”

When she arrived in the United States, said Christopher, “she did what we say we all value.” Benitez worked, paid her taxes, learned English, and raised four children. She became active in her church, started a small cleaning business, and never crossed paths with the law for over three decades. “Not a jaywalking ticket, not even for anything minor,” said Christopher. 

Benitez’s world turned upside down last July. During a family trip to Niagara Falls, GPS led the family on a wrong turn towards Canada. After they turned around, both Benitez and her husband were detained at the border. Husband and wife were separated, one sent to northern Michigan and the other to Ohio. “The extended family was then required to travel to Michigan to pick up the two youngest children,” said Christopher. “For the next six months they had to endure something that you hope no family would have to endure — absolute separation from each other.”

Benitez was incarcerated with  people who had committed  serious criminal offenses. When her case was finally reviewed by an immigration judge, the judge found that Benitez was a good candidate for permanent residency. Benitez was able to go home in December, a week before Christmas, to spend time with her family. Then, on March 10, when Benitez went for a routine check-in at the ICE office. As she walked out, she was detained. The federal government had decided to appeal Benitez’s release, on the very last day they were able to do so. 

Stressing that the law does not require that she  be detained, Christopher asked, “What  purpose does this really serve? What does it say about us as a county, and us as a society?” Benitez was shackled and shipped to Chicago, then transported to Kentucky. Christopher added that people who question why Benitez did get her citizenship after 36 years do not understand the immigration system. He said that it is not fair or practical to expect a traumatized, desperate 15-year-old girl to understand immigration laws, and that Benitez integrated into American society and followed all the rules. 

Benitez’s husband and children sat beside Christopher during the press conference. “My wife is not a criminal but she is being treated that way,” her husband said, calling her detention physical and emotional abuse. Her oldest daughter, Kristal, said her mother’s case is not about politics.  “it’s about being a human.” Benitez’s two youngest children, ages 11 and 12, said they miss their mother, and the 12-year-old broke down and cried.  

A family friend of Benitez spoke about Benitez’s participation in church and community events, and said that she’s “ashamed of what’s going on in our country right now.” Kristal said that Benitez is having a hard time, having just endured an extended time in immigration detention last year. “She’s literally in despair,” said Kristal. “She’s having a hard time remaining strong this time around. She was getting her freedom again, and then taken again…And she’s scared. She is with the general population…So she’s terrified, scared that something might happen to her and she just wants to be home and she doesn’t see any hope.” 

The federal government’s appeal of Benitez’s case could take up to 18 months, meaning she’ll likely be detained for more than a year. Christine Neumann-Ortiz, executive director of Voces de la Frontera, said that using ICE detention to crush people’s hopes is an intentional strategy of the Trump administration. Neumann-Ortiz praised the Benitez family’s bravery, saying  people are often fearful of speaking out about their experiences with ICE. 

Voces de la Frontera has been collecting and verifying  reports of ICE arrests in Milwaukee. 

In early May, the group is planning a  march to Milwaukee’s federal building, calling for an end to Trump’s deportation campaign and to call for reform to the immigration system.  

In an emailed statement, a DHS spokesperson described Benitez in bold black text as “an illegal alien from Mexico” and said “she will receive full due process.” The spokesperson stated, “being in detention is a choice. We encourage all illegal aliens to take control of their departure with the [Customs and Border Protection] Home app. The United States is offering illegal aliens $2,600 and a free flight to self-deport now. We encourage every person here illegally to take advantage of this offer and reserve the chance to come back to the U.S. the right legal way to live the American dream. If not, you will be arrested and deported without a chance to return.”

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

Senate Majority Leader Devin LeMahieu (R-Oostburg) announced Thursday that he will not seek another term in the state Senate this year — marking the departure of yet another top leader in Wisconsin state politics. 

LeMahieu, 53, was first elected to the state Senate in 2015. He has served as the Senate majority leader since 2020, when he was chosen by his caucus to succeed former Senate Majority Leader and now-U.S. Rep. Scott Fitzgerald. 

LeMahieu said in a statement that he made the “difficult” decision after “careful reflection and prayer.” He said that serving in the body was “the privilege of a lifetime” and said he was proud of the work that he’s done, including passing the REINS Act, a 2017 law that limited agencies’ rulemaking power, and income tax cuts.

“The time has come for a new chapter in my life,” LeMahieu said. “I am looking forward to spending more time with my wife in our new Madison-area home and, for the first time since 2006, rooting for bold conservative reform from the sidelines.”

During his first two terms as Senate leader, LeMahieu led an increasingly large Senate Republican caucus which at one time had 23 out of 33 members. Those margins allowed the Senate to reject Gov. Tony Evers’ nominees and also at times override vetoes, though those votes did not lead to any vetoes being blocked as Assembly Republicans never held a supermajority.

New legislative maps adopted in 2024 led to slimmer margins in the body, which currently has 18 Republicans and 15 Democrats. 

LeMahieu has not always been able to gather a majority of his caucus members to support legislation and has at times turned to Democrats to get bills across the finish line, especially after the Republican majority shrank.

During the Senate’s recently concluded final floor session, LeMahieu faced criticism from some of his caucus members for passing bills to legalize sports betting and help the University of Wisconsin pay student athletes for their name, image and likeness without majority support from  Republicans and with the help of Democrats. Sen. Steve Nass (R-Whitewater), who is also retiring this year, said that the passage of the “unpopular bills will help pave the way to minority status for Republicans come November.”

Prior to his election to the state Senate, LeMahieu served on the Sheboygan County Board for nine years. His time in the Legislature followed the path of his father, former Republican Rep. Daniel LeMahieu, who served in the state Assembly from 2003 until 2015.

LeMahieu joins three other Senate Republicans who recently announced their retirements including Sen. Van Wanggaard (R-Racine), Sen. Rob Hutton (R-Brookfield) and Nass.

LeMahieu’s decision means there will be completely new leadership in the state government when lawmakers return in January 2026 after the fall elections. Evers announced his retirement last year and Assembly Speaker Robin Vos (R-Rochester), the state’s longest serving speaker, announced his retirement last month. Vos has said he thinks Assembly Majority Leader Tyler August (R-Walworth) would be a good person to succeed him. 

Evers said in a statement that he appreciated working with LeMahieu and his “quiet and polite but frank approach.” 

“While we haven’t always seen eye to eye on every issue all of the time, I’ve never doubted his commitment to doing what he believes is best for the folks and families in Sheboygan County and across our state,” he said. “For the past five years he’s served as majority leader, we’ve navigated difficult issues facing the state of Wisconsin, and we’ve gotten good work done together by putting politics aside and staying focused on doing the right thing.” 

Evers noted their work together on tax cuts for working families and retirees, investments in the state’s child care industry, investments in shared revenue and an investment in the Milwaukee Brewers’ stadium.

“We’re not done yet, and I look forward to getting more good bipartisan work accomplished before our time together in office comes to an end,” Evers said. 

While lawmakers have wrapped their regular session work, leaders are still discussing ways to use the state’s $4.6 billion budget surplus to provide tax relief to Wisconsinites and additional funding to the state’s public schools. 

Negotiations were stalled on that effort last month after LeMahieu said he was cut out of negotiations between Vos and Evers, then his caucus proposed providing tax rebates to Wisconsinites instead of property tax relief or school funding. Vos and LeMahieu then came up with a compromise, but Evers rejected that. 

Vos said in a statement that he has enjoyed working with LeMahieu and repeated his assessment that “being Senate Majority Leader is the hardest job in the Capitol.”

“Devin approached each challenge deliberately and with the goal to move our state forward. We accomplished a lot during our time leading our respective chambers that I am proud of and — even when it was difficult —he always wanted to do what was right and best for the people of Wisconsin,” Vos said.

Control of the Assembly and Senate will be at stake in the November election. Democrats would need to win two additional seats in the Senate and five additional seats in the Assembly to flip the chambers for the first time since 2009. 

Senate Minority Leader Dianne Hesselbein (D-Middleton) said in a statement that LeMahieu was “a dedicated public servant” who has provided “tireless service to his constituents.” She has expressed confidence that her party will be able to win a majority in the Senate, which would open a path for her to become the top Senate leader. 

“I have found him to be a man of his word and I wish him and his family the best as he begins this next chapter,” Hesselbein said.

Assembly Speaker Pro Tempore Kevin Petersen (R-Waupaca) and Rep. Rick Gundrum (R-Slinger) also announced their retirements on Thursday. Rep. Dave Murphy (R-Hortonville) is also retiring.

Brian Schimming, chairman of the Republican Party of Wisconsin, called LeMahieu in a statement a “tireless advocate for our shared conservative values and a key force in maintaining Republican majorities.” He said that they “look forward to continuing the fight and keeping a majority in the Senate this November.”

Devin Remiker, the chair of the Democratic Party of Wisconsin, said in a statement about LeMahieu’s retirement that other Republicans should “consider retiring alongside your colleagues before you are voted out in November.”

“All potential Republican candidates should take note: Both of your leaders have abandoned you. Your policies are causing working people to turn against you in droves as the Trump administration crashes and burns,” Remiker said.

Update: This story has been updated to include comment from Assembly Speaker Robin Vos and Brian Schimming. 

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

Wisconsin will now require additional coverage of breast cancer screenings for women with dense breast tissue, which puts them at a higher risk for cancer. 

Gov. Tony Evers signed SB 264, now Wisconsin Act 103, in the state Capitol Thursday while surrounded by the family of Gail Zeemer, a Neenah woman who advocated for the measure before she died in June 2024 at the age of 56 and for whom the law is named.

“The system failed Gail. However, in the face of adversity and unimaginable struggle, she chose to persevere,” Evers said. “Now, thanks to Gail, Wisconsin will have not one, but two laws on the books to protect women’s health.” He added that the bill would ensure that women at higher risk won’t “be left behind.”

Zeamer was diagnosed with Stage 3 breast cancer in 2016. According to WPR, she had been getting annual mammograms, but she was never told she had dense breast tissue or of the increased risks associated with breast density. According to the Breast Cancer Research Foundation, nearly half of women over 40 have dense breast tissue.

Zeamer headed up an advocacy effort for a measure that became law in 2017 that requires health care facilities to notify women if they have dense breast tissue. When they are notified, women are also encouraged to follow up to discuss risk and the potential need for further screening. 

According to a 2019 study from Susan G. Komen, the average out-of-pocket cost of a diagnostic mammogram was $234 on average and the average cost for a breast MRI was $1,021 on average. 

“Despite its prevalence, roughly a quarter of women with breast cancer are not diagnosed until the cancer has progressed to stage three. As a cancer survivor myself, my family and I were blessed to have caught it, but anyone who has faced this terrible disease knows that the key is getting as far ahead of it as you can,” said Evers, who was diagnosed with esophageal cancer and  underwent treatment for it in 2008. “Breast cancer is already one of the costliest cancers to treat. With these changes today, we’re ensuring no woman slips through the cracks because they weren’t able to afford additional tests that were covered by insurers.”

The law will require health insurance policies to provide coverage for diagnostic breast examinations and for supplemental breast screening examinations for women with dense breast tissue with no patient cost-sharing requirements.

The bill received unanimous support in the Assembly despite having previously been held up due to opposition from Assembly Speaker Robin Vos (R-Rochester). Vos had said recent federal changes made changes in breast cancer screening coverage unnecessary. Advocates disagreed.

Zeamer’s daughters, Claudia and Sophie, spoke about their mother’s strength in advocating for changes even as she battled cancer. 

“I feel very lucky knowing that my mom is now part of history, and I miss her more than ever, but I also know that she’s looking down on all of us with that big, beautiful smile of hers, knowing that we finished this for her,” Claudia said. “I wish more than anything that she could be here to see what she started and to see how many lives she’s going to help in the future.”

The American Cancer Society estimates that more than 6,000 women in Wisconsin will be diagnosed with breast cancer this year, and more than 600 lose their lives to cancer annually. Women with dense breast tissue are at higher risk and dense breast tissue can make it harder for radiologists to see cancer on mammograms, meaning that additional screening could help catch cancer earlier. 

“There was no doubt after she lost her battle, we would finish this for her,” Claudia said.  “She wasn’t doing it for attention or recognition. She did it because she cared so deeply about other people.” 

“My mom taught me what it really means to be selfless to do something,” she added, “not because you’ll get anything out of it, but because, you know, it might make someone else’s life better.” 

Sophie thanked the lawmakers, including bill coauthors Sen. Rachael Cabral-Guevara (R-Appleton) and Rep. Cindi Duchow (R-Town of Delafield), and advocacy groups including the American Cancer Society and Susan G. Komen.

“My family would like to extend our most heartfelt gratitude to everyone who helped make my mom’s final life’s work come to fruition,” she said. “This has been an emotional roller coaster for our family and for all involved, but persistence and the determination to make Wisconsin better for everyone has gotten us to this point today.”

The Early Detection Saves Lives Coalition, which advocated for the legislation, celebrated the signing in a statement. 

“Gail’s Law is a decisive step toward closing a critical gap in women’s health,” said Jyoti Gupta, who is the president and CEO of women’s health and X-ray for GE HealthCare. “No woman should face delays in breast cancer diagnosis because she cannot afford the imaging needed to complete her screening. By removing cost barriers to medically necessary exams, Wisconsin is helping ensure breast cancers are detected earlier, when treatment is most effective and survival rates are highest.”

As Evers signed the bill, Zeamer’s husband, Steve, wiped away tears. The crowd of advocates and lawmakers cheered.

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

WASHINGTON — The U.S. Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Thursday voted to move forward Oklahoma Sen. Markwayne Mullin’s nomination to lead the Department of Homeland Security. 

After the 8-7 vote, Mullin’s nomination will head to the Senate floor. 

Thursday’s vote comes a day after Mullin, a Republican, appeared before the committee in a contentious nomination hearing in which the GOP chair, Sen. Rand Paul, questioned whether Mullin should lead the department given his “anger issues.”

Paul, of Kentucky, voted against advancing Mullin’s nomination, the only Republican on the panel to oppose a fellow senator.

But because Democratic Sen. John Fetterman of Pennsylvania voted with the rest of the Republicans, Mullin’s nomination advanced.

In a statement, Fetterman said his vote to approve Mullin was “rooted in a strong, committed, constructive working relationship with Senator Mullin for our nation’s security.”

Paul at the Wednesday hearing took issue with Mullin referring to him as a “freaking snake” and expressing sympathy for a neighbor who assaulted Paul in 2017, breaking six ribs and injuring a lung.

Mullin told senators in the hearing that he aims to lead DHS differently than Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem, the former South Dakota governor whom the president removed from the post earlier this month and reassigned to another position within the administration. 

Mullin said he would do away with several policies that Noem implemented, such as a requirement for disaster grants to be personally approved by the secretary of Homeland Security. 

He added that he wants DHS to “not be in the news every day,” referencing the aggressive enforcement tactics by immigration agents that have been caught on camera, including their involvement in the deaths of two Minneapolis residents. 

Mullin will likely leave his Senate seat after he votes for his own nomination to lead DHS. It’s similar to a move by Secretary of State Marco Rubio last year, when he left his U.S. Senate seat representing Florida after voting to confirm his nomination to lead the State Department. 

The top Democrat on the committee, Sen. Gary Peters of Michigan, said Thursday that DHS “needs a leader who can restore the trust that DHS has broken with the American people,” and that he did not have confidence that Mullin could tackle that challenge. 

Peters, like Paul, raised concerns about Mullin’s “temperament to lead this critical department.”

”There will be no shortage of political disagreements facing the new DHS secretary,” Peters said. “The department and the American people deserve a leader who is steady and proven under pressure, not just someone better than the very low bar set by his predecessor.”

WASHINGTON — President Donald Trump on Thursday didn’t rule out asking Congress for an additional $200 billion to cover the cost of his war in Iran, a substantial sum that will likely be difficult to move through both chambers. 

“It’s a small price to pay to make sure that we stay tippy top,” he said when asked about the number, first reported Wednesday evening by the Washington Post and since confirmed by several other news organizations.

The White House deferred questions from States Newsroom about a possible supplemental spending request to the Office of Management and Budget, which did not immediately respond to an email. 

Trump, when asked specifically about the $200 billion figure, didn’t rebuff the reporter’s question or say the number was incorrect. Earlier news reports expected the request to total about $50 billion, a significantly smaller sum. 

Trump also indicated he may need the additional money for other military operations. And while he didn’t specifically mention Cuba, he has talked repeatedly about “taking” the island nation in recent days. 

“We’re asking for a lot of reasons beyond even what we’re talking about in Iran,” Trump said. “This is a very volatile world and the military equipment, the power of some of this weaponry is unthinkable. You don’t even want to know about it. Oh, you could end this thing in two seconds if you wanted to. But we are being very judicious.”

Any request for emergency funding would need to move through the House, where Republicans hold an especially thin majority, and the Senate, where the GOP has a majority but legislation cannot advance past a 60-vote legislative hurdle without bipartisan support. 

‘Preposterous’

Democrats have been overwhelmingly opposed to Trump’s war in Iran since it began and are unlikely to give Republicans the votes needed to move such a large emergency spending request through the upper chamber. 

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., said shortly after Trump’s remarks in a floor speech that such a request would be “preposterous.”

“Even a fraction of that is unacceptable for a war without a plan, without a goal, without the support of the American people,” he said. “Let’s be very clear, if Trump wants $200 billion, that means he believes we might be in a war with Iran for a very, very long time.”

Schumer said that funding could instead be spent on lowering health care premiums, education, helping people afford the rising costs of groceries and improving infrastructure. 

“It’s an indefensible number, one of the most wasteful and unthought-out budget requests I have ever heard in my time in the Senate,” he said. 

Defense spending already provided

No path forward in Congress would leave the Trump administration with the spending lawmakers have already approved. 

Congress approved $838.7 billion for the Department of Defense in January as part of its annual government funding process. Republicans approved another $150 billion for the Pentagon to spend on specific programs, like air and missile defense, as well as shipbuilding, in their “big, beautiful” law enacted in 2025.

The funding in the GOP tax and spending cuts package was intended to be spread out over the next few years. 

Ashley Murray contributed to this report. 

For the third state Supreme Court election in a row, the conservative supported candidate is running a campaign based largely on accusations that the liberal candidate will be a partisan actor on the bench. But this year, the target of that accusation, who is running to secure a 5-2 liberal majority on the Court, served as a Democrat in the Wisconsin Assembly for nine years  and previously worked as the state policy director for Planned Parenthood of Wisconsin. 

“I don’t come with a political agenda to the bench,” says Appeals Court Judge Chris Taylor, who, after serving in the Assembly, was appointed to the Dane County Circuit Court by Democratic Gov. Tony Evers and then elected to the District IV Court of Appeals.  “My agenda is to make sure every person has justice under the law, to make sure that everyone’s held accountable when they violate the law, regardless of how powerful or privileged they are and to be independent. And I saw in the Legislature how important it was to have an independent court. You don’t want a court to be a rubber stamp for any party or the Legislature or the federal government.” 

Taylor’s opponent, Appeals Court Judge Maria Lazar, has spent more time as a judge and throughout the campaign has accused Taylor of being a partisan actor. 

Lazar’s initial race for the Court of Appeals and her race this year have involved the support of some of the state’s most prominent election deniers. Taylor said that support and Lazar’s ruling in favor of the Wisconsin Voter Alliance are important signals for a race whose winner will likely be involved in deciding election law challenges in the 2028 presidential race. 

“I certainly don’t have confidence that she would act to protect our elections if it didn’t go the way that the right wing wants it to go,” she told the Examiner. “So yes, I would be very worried about that, and people should with her record, and they should have no such worry with me, because I will make sure that unmeritorious attacks on our elections are struck down or are rejected.” 

After the 2023 and 2025 campaigns for the Court set national records for judicial campaign fundraising, the 2026 race between Taylor and Lazar is comparatively sleepy. Taylor said at a forum hosted by Marquette Law School Wednesday that it’s probably a good thing that the temperature has been brought down a bit on the Wisconsin Supreme Court. 

But with less money involved — and the ideological lean of the Court not at stake — less attention has been paid to the race. A Marquette Law poll released last month found that Taylor had a slight lead in the race, but that most people had not yet started paying attention or learned who either candidate was. 

Taylor said she believes her campaign’s work over the past month has changed that, and that Wisconsin voters are “overwhelmed” by the state of the country. 

“The people [of Wisconsin] are so engaged in government. They are hungry for a government that works for them. They are hungry for a court that stands up for them and protects their rights,” Taylor said at the Marquette event. “Now I will say I think people are overwhelmed. I really do. I think they’re overwhelmed because it’s hard right now. I think working families are struggling with high costs, gas prices have gone up so much. You know, there’s a lot going on in the world. Sometimes it feels very overwhelming. It’s very hard to see sometimes where you can make a difference and what you should be doing. But I tell people, this is a way to make a difference, is show up and vote.” 

She said that if elected, she wants the Court to be better at engaging with regular Wisconsinites, pointing to oral arguments the Court held recently in Richland County rather than its Madison chambers as an example of something that should happen more. She also said that the Court needs to take more cases — a regular critique of the liberal-majority Court is that its caseload has dropped significantly. 

“I have a duty to be independent, but I do not want to be isolated from the public,” she said. “I’m part of the community, and I want to be out in the community, doing what I can to do my part to make sure people know what we do in the judiciary, we have confidence in what we do. I think the more we can talk about it and invite people in, the more confidence people will have in our process.” 

Both candidates in this year’s race for an open seat on the Wisconsin Supreme Court have served as circuit and appeals court judges. But Taylor says the difference between them is that she’s “never been reversed” by a higher court. 

But Taylor points to the instances in which Lazar’s decisions have been overturned as evidence that the former Waukesha County judge is more likely to tilt her rulings toward one side. 

“The only person, though, who has brought politics to the bench is my opponent,” Taylor told the Wisconsin Examiner. “And you look at the cases she has decided and thankfully been reversed on and you can see it.” 

Last year, the Supreme Court overturned Lazar’s decision in a lawsuit filed by the Wisconsin Voter Alliance, a group that has been heavily involved in the effort to discredit Wisconsin’s election administration system since the 2020 election. The group had sued to force the release of voter registration files for people who had been declared incompetent to vote by a judge. 

A previous appeals court decision had ruled the records weren’t able to be released, yet in a second lawsuit Lazar ruled otherwise — even though Wisconsin’s appeals courts don’t have the authority to overturn precedent. 

“I have never seen that be done on the Court of Appeals. My colleagues, who’ve been there, some of them, over a decade, have never seen such a blatant disregard of precedent,” Taylor said. “Maria Lazar put her thumb on the scale. She didn’t like the result. She has brought politics to this bench.” 

Taylor told the Examiner that in an era in which people across Wisconsin are worried about the Trump administration’s effects on their livelihoods and safety, the exact ideological swing of the Court is less important than having a Court that isn’t afraid to stand up on behalf of the Wisconsin people.

“People don’t care about what the ideology is on the court, they want justices who are going to protect their rights, who are going to stand up for our democracy and our elections, stand up to the federal government and make sure people get justice,” she said. “That’s what they want. That’s what my opponent does not understand. People want justices that are going to be fair and are going to protect them and have their back. My opponent has not ever done that in her life. That is not her priority like it is for me, it’s not ever been her priority.”

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

WASHINGTON — U.S. Senate Republicans and one Democrat blocked another War Powers Resolution Wednesday night to stop President Donald Trump from further military action in Iran without authorization from Congress.

The resolution failed to advance, 47-53. Sen. John Fetterman, D-Pa., broke with Democrats to join Republicans in opposing the measure. Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., voted in favor.

The vote came two weeks after a similar effort to rein in Trump’s executive war powers failed in the Senate, and a day later in the U.S. House. 

The vote also occurred hours after congressional Democrats, including Sen. Chris Van Hollen, D-Md., protested on the Capitol lawn against the war, calling attention to a U.S. strike on the war’s first day that killed more than 100 elementary school children.

Booker leads opposition to war

Sen. Cory Booker, D-N.J., one of the resolution’s lead sponsors, said “Americans are paying the price” for the U.S.-Israeli war in Iran.

Booker said Trump, whom he described as “cocky” about the conflict, should send Cabinet members before the Senate to testify under oath.

“Thousands of people have died in this war. In barely two weeks, 200 Americans have been injured in this war. Thirteen Americans have paid the ultimate price for a war that we have gone into on the decision made by one man. The American people at large are paying costs in the billions of dollars a week,” Booker said on the floor ahead of the vote.

Booker was joined by Sens. Tim Kaine, D-Va., Adam Schiff, D-Calif., and Chris Murphy, D-Conn, in sponsoring the measure. One Republican, Paul, co-sponsored the previous War Powers Resolution aimed at curtailing Trump’s actions in Iran.

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., said “ there’s no end in sight” to the war. 

“No more senseless wars in the Middle East. No more gas prices shooting through the roof. No more US service members fighting and dying in endless wars,” he said on the floor just before the vote.

Graham defends war

Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., a vocal proponent of Trump’s war in Iran, said he knows the economy is “tough” for Americans.

“I know the economy on the gas front is hurting, but I do believe this with every ounce of my being — if we had not done this, they would be on the path, the Iranian regime, to a nuclear capability, and they would use it. Eventually, they would use it or give it to somebody who would,” Graham said.

Oil shot up to nearly $111 a barrel on the global market Wednesday as Iran continues to block a major shipping route.

Sen. Jim Risch, R-Idaho, dismissed the Democrats’ “dangerous, obstructive resolutions.” 

“Fellow senators, I urge you tonight to join me in defeating this resolution, as we have done over and over again,” said Risch, Senate Foreign Relations Committee chair, on the floor ahead of the vote. 

A War Powers Resolution to cut off Trump’s military power in Venezuela narrowly failed in the Senate in January when Vice President JD Vance had to break a tie.

War Powers Resolutions require a simple majority to advance.

The 1973 War Powers Resolution law mandates the president report to Congress within 48 hours of deploying troops. If after 60 days from first notice Congress has not authorized a war or passed legislation related to the military action, the president’s use of armed forces is automatically terminated. 

Congress passed the act to rein in presidential war powers, despite a veto from President Richard Nixon amid the ongoing Vietnam War. Congress overrode the veto.

WASHINGTON — Against a backdrop of children’s backpacks and shoes Wednesday, congressional Democrats protested President Donald Trump’s war with Iran, specifically denouncing an early U.S. strike that killed more than 100 elementary school students in the country’s southern city of Minab.

The lawmakers attended the installation organized by peace advocacy group Win Without War nearly 20 days into the U.S.-Israeli campaign in Iran that has claimed the lives of 13 U.S. service members, nearly 2,000 civilians and military personnel in Iran, just under 1,000 civilians in Lebanon, and dozens of civilians across the Persian Gulf nations and Israel, according to state officials and human rights organizations.

The conflict, which Trump and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu have vowed to continue unabated, is “illegal” and a “war of choice,” the Democratic lawmakers said on the lawn just outside the U.S. House of Representatives.

Rep. Yassamin Ansari, D-Ariz., said Trump launched the war “without a clear case made to the American people and without any strategy or plan.”

“And that lack of planning has had devastating consequences. One of the very first strikes of this illegal war hit a girls elementary school in Iran, killing at least 175 people, most of them children,” said Ansari, who added she is the only Iranian-American member of Congress.

News reports citing Iranian authorities and human rights organization Amnesty International say 168 children were killed when the U.S. struck the Shajareh Tayyebeh Elementary School in Hormozgan province on Feb. 28, the first day of the war.

Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth told reporters on March 4 that the Pentagon is investigating the strike and that the U.S. does not target civilians.

Reporters then pressed Hegseth days after a March 11 News York Times report revealed an ongoing military investigation determined a U.S. Tomahawk missile had hit the school.

“We’re not going to let reporting lead us or force our hand into indicating what happened in a particular situation, because the truth matters,” Hegseth responded during a March 13 briefing. “So I can report that (U.S. Central Command) has designated an investigating officer to complete a command investigation.”

Nearly every Senate Democrat demanded in a March 11 letter that the Pentagon swiftly reveal the investigation’s findings.

 

Hearings sought

Congressional Democrats are also urging Republican colleagues to hold open hearings where administration officials would be tasked with publicly testifying under oath.

“The administration refuses to send their decisionmakers up to Capitol Hill to explain why they dragged America into this war, and the reason they don’t want to show up is they don’t have good answers for the American people,” Sen. Chris Van Hollen said at the Wednesday event.

“We have lost 13 of our service members (and) over 2000 civilians have been killed throughout the Middle East. And of course, those are the greatest losses, the loss of life, but it’s also costing the American people $1 billion a day,” the Maryland Democrat continued.

The cost to the federal government of funding the war is substantial, reaching $5.2 billion after just two days, according to one estimate. Other estimates have put the cost at closer to $11.3 billion after two weeks.

Ansari, Van Hollen and several other Democratic members at the protest assured they would vote ‘no’ should the White House ask Congress for extra money to fund the war.

The majority of House and Senate Republicans, and a handful of Democrats, have so far blocked attempts to rein in Trump’s executive war powers in Iran.

Senate Democrats are expected to force another War Powers Resolution vote as early as Wednesday evening.

Gabbard testifies to Senate

Senators tasked with overseeing federal intelligence had the opportunity to question Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard and other top national security officials Wednesday at a previously scheduled annual hearing on the worldwide threat assessment.

Sen. Jon Ossoff, D-Ga., pressed Gabbard during the nearly three-hour hearing on Trump’s reasoning for attacking Iran last month when the administration claimed Iran’s nuclear weapons program had been “obliterated” in joint air strikes with Israel in June.

“Was it the intelligence community’s assessment that, nevertheless, despite this obliteration, there was a quote ‘imminent nuclear threat’ posed by the Iranian regime? Yes or no?” Ossoff asked.

“It is not the intelligence community’s responsibility to determine what is and is not an imminent threat,” Gabbard responded. “That is up to the president based on a volume of information that he receives.”

On Tuesday, Gabbard’s deputy, Joe Kent, director of the National Counterterrorism Center, publicly resigned in a letter stating “Iran posed no imminent threat to our nation.”

Milwaukee reacted to a the New York Times investigation published Wednesday that details sexual misconduct allegations against  influential civil rights and labor activist Cesar Chavez. Ald. JoCasta Zamarripa, who represents parts of Milwaukee’s predominantly Latino south side, announced that an annual celebration of Chavez’s life will be canceled this year. 

Milwaukee is also considering renaming a street that honors Chavez, who is accused of assaulting girls as young as 13. Images of Chavez appear on  murals and statues around  Milwaukee. All of these sites are being re-evaluated as the community processes the impact the allegations have on the labor and Latino civil rights movements Chavez led.

In a statement, Zamarippa said that Chavez’s contributions “are a matter of historical record”  but so are the “devastating” accounts of his accusers, including Dolores Huerta, Ana Murguia and Debra Rojas.  Zamarippa said that “both things are true, and our community deserves leaders who will say so clearly rather than ask survivors to wait until we process our own grief.” 

The Times investigation focused on Ana Murguia who, alongside Debra Rojas, say that Chavez — then in his 40s — abused them for years when they were  young girls. Murguia decided to come forward after she  heard that a street near where she lives in California was being renamed after Chavez, who died in 1993 at the age of 66. 

Neither Murguia nor Rojas had publicly shared their stories before. The Times investigation found “extensive evidence to support their accusations and those raised by several other women” against Chavez. Both women were the daughters of longtime organizers who marched and rallied alongside Chavez. According to the Times, Chavez had known Murguia since she was 8 years old, and the repeated abuse she endured in his office traumatized her so much that she  attempted to take her life multiple times at the age of 15. 

The pattern of abuse extended beyond Murguia and Rojas. Dolores Huerta, an icon of the farmworkers movement, said that Chavez also sexually assaulted her. The Times’ findings are based on interviews with over 60 people, including Chavez’s top aides, relatives and former members of the United Farm Workers movement. The Times also reviewed hundreds of pages of union records, confidential emails, photographs and hours of audio recordings from the movement’s board meetings. 

Many of the women who say they were abused by Chavez waited decades to tell their stories due to the shame they felt and fear of going against a man who’d become a cultural icon. 

Zamarripa said in her statement,  “the farmworker movement was never one man. It was built by thousands of workers, organizers, and families who gave their lives to the fight for dignity and justice.” 

Darryl Morin, president of Forward Latino, like Zamarripa, said, “this movement has never been about any one individual; it has always been about the people. It is grounded in the dignity of all, for farmworkers in the fields to students in our schools, and in the ongoing pursuit of justice. Upholding these values requires recognizing that no one is above accountability, whether they lead a movement, major corporation, or a government.”

Mayor Cavalier Johnson called the accusations “extremely troubling” and added that “the victims, those who have come forward and those who are unnamed, deserve our compassion,” Milwaukee Journal Sentinel reported. 

Milwaukee County Supv. Juan Miguel Martinez, a labor organizer, said that South Cesar E. Chavez Drive will be renamed “Dolores Huerta Way.” Martinez said in a statement that “too often, men of status abuse their power and use it for heinous acts towards women, and especially toward defenseless children…A union is built by people, not one person.”

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

WASHINGTON — U.S. senators debated Wednesday whether the federal government should change how Americans register to vote and cast a ballot, with Republicans maintaining alterations are necessary to safeguard elections and Democrats arguing a new law would add unnecessary obstacles.

Tensions over the issue were on full display when Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., said GOP lawmakers describing the bill as a simple voter identification requirement is “bullshit,” shortly before Utah Republican Sen. Mike Lee contended it would be “a suicidal move” for his party’s leaders not to find a way forward. 

The legislation, dubbed the Safeguard American Voter Eligibility Act, or the SAVE America Act, is unlikely to become law without bipartisan backing from at least 60 senators, who would be needed to move past a procedural vote. 

Democrats are not expected to help Republicans with that, especially after Schumer called the legislation “Jim Crow 2.0” and “evil” during a morning press conference with voting rights advocates. 

Georgia Democratic Sen. Raphael Warnock said during that event GOP lawmakers are acting out of concern they will lose control of Congress following the November midterm elections, due to President Donald Trump’s actions during his second term.  

“The American people have had it with him and with his policies,” Warnock said. “He ran as someone who was going to lower costs, who was going to stay out of endless wars in the Middle East and he is failing. But instead of changing his policies, he’s trying to change the shape of the electorate.”

Problems with lack of birth certificate

New Mexico Democratic Sen. Ben Ray Luján said if the bill becomes law, it would create difficulties for anyone who doesn’t have access to their birth certificate or a passport, to prove U.S. citizenship when they try to register to vote. 

“What about my Native American brothers and sisters?” he said. “All my brothers and sisters from the First Nations that I’m proud to represent across New Mexico, who may have been born in their home generationally with other family members. They didn’t have a birth certificate.”

New Jersey Democratic Sen. Andy Kim said GOP lawmakers trying to change the voting process during an election year creates a pattern when combined with several Republican state legislatures redrawing U.S. House maps to benefit their candidates. 

“We see this being about having politicians choose the voters instead of voters choosing the politicians,” he said. 

Several Democratic state legislatures have responded to GOP redistricting efforts by redrawing their maps as well. 

Schumer, D-N.Y., said it’s unacceptable that Republicans want every state in the country to submit a list of registered voters to the Department of Homeland Security to run through a database, which he believes is flawed. 

“They’re trying to dupe America. They say, ‘Oh, this is just a voter ID law.’ Bullshit. It is not a voter ID law,” Schumer said. “It is a law that will kick millions of Americans off the voting rolls.”

‘Debate this as long as it takes to get it done’

Utah’s Lee said Republican leaders shouldn’t schedule the procedural vote that requires at least 60 senators to end debate on the bill until they have found some way to move past that step.  

“I think it would be a suicidal move for us as Senate Republicans, for Republicans in general, if we don’t put everything we’ve got into this,” he said. “I think we need to debate this as long as it takes to get it done. And if we’re not there yet, we need to continue debating.”

Lee contended that prolonged debate on the bill would give Republicans time to sway holdouts to their side. 

“This is going to become popular enough that a lot of our colleagues who currently oppose it, I believe, will start to get on board,” he said. 

Every Senate Democrat, along with Alaska Republican Sen. Lisa Murkowski, voted against formally beginning debate on Tuesday. North Carolina Republican Sen. Thom Tillis didn’t vote.

Trump wants national limits on voting by mail

Senate debate on the bill dragging out in the days or possibly weeks ahead won’t be confined to what’s currently in the legislation, which the House passed last month.

Trump has asked senators to make three alterations, which they will attempt to incorporate through amendments. 

Missouri Republican Sen. Eric Schmitt said he plans to call for a vote to add nationwide restrictions on mail-in voting instead of leaving the issue to state governments. 

“If you have a hardship because of a disability, or an illness, or because of travel, or you’re a caregiver, or some other hardship the state can identify, you can vote by absentee,” he said. “You have to request it. Then you can vote by absentee.”

Schmitt said the carve-out would also include members of the military. 

Tennessee Republican Sen. Marsha Blackburn said she plans to call up an amendment that could create a nationwide prohibition on gender-affirming surgeries for transgender youth. 

Alabama Republican Sen. Tommy Tuberville, she said, would push for an amendment to block transgender women from competing in women’s sports.

Gov. Tony Evers signed SB 23, now 2025 Wisconsin Act 102 on Wednesday, officially making Wisconsin the 49th state to provide a year of coverage for postpartum mothers on Medicaid. 

“It’s been a long time coming, but I’m darn proud we got it done,” Evers, who signed the bill at Children’s Hospital in Milwaukee, said in a statement. 

Evers first proposed Wisconsin submit a waiver to the federal government to extend Medicaid coverage from 60 days to 12 months in his 2019 state budget, but years of legislative gridlock on the issue made Wisconsin the second to last state to make the change. 

According to KFF, the Medicaid program pays for about four in 10 births in the U.S. and federal law had required states to provide Medicaid coverage for postpartum mothers through 60 days. The American Rescue Plan Act gave states the option to extend Medicaid postpartum coverage to 12 months, and most states took steps towards expansion.

“We knew from the get-go that getting this passed was an uphill battle, but we also weren’t going to let partisanship or politics stop us from continuing our work to build support for this important proposal, because we know just how high the stakes are,” Evers said in a statement. 

Assembly Speaker Robin Vos (R-Rochester), who is retiring, was the main reason for the hold up. Articulating his opposition to the expansion, which he previously refused to bring to the floor, he said he was opposed to expanding “welfare.” A group of Republican lawmakers, including lead authors Sen. Jesse James (R-Thorp) and Rep. Patrick Snyder (R-Weston), lobbied for Vos to let the bill through as Democratic lawmakers applied pressure through procedural moves to try and force votes on the legislation. A breakthrough came the night before Assembly lawmakers’ final regular floor session this year. 

The bill passed in the Assembly 95-1. It passed the Senate 32-1. Rep. Shae Sortwell (R-Two Rivers) and Sen. Chris Kapenga (Delafield) were the sole opposing votes.

The expanded coverage, which will be available starting on July 1, means low-income mothers on Medicaid and their babies, who automatically get a year of coverage, will have Medicaid coverage for the same length of time. The only state in the U.S. left that has not implemented the expansion is Arkansas. 

According to the Wisconsin Department of Health Services, about half of pregnancy-related deaths occur in the postpartum period and 95% of those deaths are preventable. Black mothers are more than twice as likely as their white, non-Hispanic peers to die from complications of pregnancy and childbirth.

“Research has shown us that expanding postpartum coverage leads to improved maternal and birth outcomes, thanks to more folks being able to access the care they need when they need it — and without breaking the bank,” Evers said. “Now more than ever, we should be working to make healthcare more affordable and more accessible, not making it more expensive and harder for folks — including new moms and families — to get the care they need.”

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

A bill barring Wisconsin’s nearly 700,000 Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) recipients from buying candy and soda with their benefits, while providing additional funding and positions to the Wisconsin Department of Health Services (DHS) is on its way to Gov. Tony Evers.

A provision in the federal tax and spending law signed by President Donald Trump last year penalizes states that have a SNAP payment error rate above 6%. The Evers administration has sought additional funding to increase staffing to keep Wisconsin’s error rate low. Evers estimates Wisconsin could lose up to $205 million annually from a penalty.

Evers had been requesting lawmakers to take action since August, just a month after the federal law was signed. After negotiations with Evers, lawmakers attached the money to AB 180, coauthored by Rep. Clint Moses (R-Menomonie) and Sen. Chris Kapenga (R-Delafield), that would prohibit recipients from using their benefits to buy candy and soda. 

The money will go towards a FoodShare employment and training program as well as covering administrative costs that have been shifted from the federal government to the state and creating quality control initiatives to help keep FoodShare error rates low. 

Evers did not mention the ban on candy and soda in his statement on the legislation, instead focusing on the new money and positions. 

“Unfortunately, thanks to changes under President Trump and Republicans’ so-called ‘Big Beautiful Bill,’ things could get a whole lot worse for folks across Wisconsin — and our state’s bottom line,” Evers said in his statement. “Wisconsin taxpayers are already on the hook for over $284 million in future state budgets because of the ‘Big Beautiful Bill,’ so it was important that we get this bill done to help make sure Wisconsinites don’t have to fork over hundreds of millions of dollars more in penalty fees to the Trump Administration every year.” 

Evers told reporters on Wednesday that he disagrees with the candy and soda ban and thinks “people should have the ability to make those choices when they’re getting their food,” but the other provisions were “really important.”

“It’s one of those things called compromise,” Evers said. “This definitely takes precedence, so it’s all good.”

The Trump administration’s Department of Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. has been encouraging states to institute candy and soda bans for SNAP recipients  with the stated goal of helping improve health and address chronic illness rates.

It is unclear whether the bill will have a demonstrable effect on people’s health.

UW-Madison food insecurity expert Judith Bartfeld told the Examiner in May 2025, as lawmakers were debating the bill, that the SNAP program was “intended to provide extra resources to support buying food at the store — and its effectiveness in reducing food insecurity is well documented,” but that there “have long been concerns that restricting how benefits can be used would make things more complicated for retailers, more stigmatizing for participants, unlikely to translate into meaningful health improvements, and would risk reducing participation and jeopardizing the well documented benefits of SNAP on food security.”

Another change to SNAP under the federal tax and spending law included the elimination of funding in September 2025 for the SNAP education program SNAP-Ed, which provided cooking classes and information on healthy eating to beneficiaries. According to FoodBank News, food banks, including the Hunger Task Force in Wisconsin which lost about $467,000 in federal funds, had to rethink educating their clients on nutrition.

According to the U.S. Department of Agriculture, there are 22 states that have submitted waivers to the federal government to implement a prohibition on purchasing soda, candy and/or energy drinks using SNAP benefits. Colorado and Hawaii are the only other states with a Democratic governor that have approved a version of a ban.

In addition to the $69 million and 70 positions for the Wisconsin DHS to help ensure quality control of SNAP, the bill included $3 million in 2025-26 for the development of a FoodShare platform for product eligibility as well as $250,000 in each 2025-26 and 2026-27 to help with the administration of the platform.

The bill passed the Senate in a 25-8 vote. Sen. Jodi Habush (D-Whitefish Bay), Sen. Sarah Keyeski (D-Lodi), Sen. Brad Pfaff (D-Onalaska), Sen. Melissa Ratcliff (D-Cottage Grove), Jeff Smith (D-Brunswick) and Sen. Bob Wirch (D-Pleasant Prairie) joined Republicans in favor of the legislation. 

Some Democratic lawmakers criticized the provision during floor debate.

“Fundamentally, I have a problem with the idea that we need to be here, the Legislature, telling people who need money on their Quest card to put food on their table, that we need to micromanage what food they buy for themselves and their families,” Sen. Mark Spreitzer (D-Beloit) said. “You know what, kids from families that qualify for FoodShare might deserve a little candy and soda now and then, too. And ultimately, I think we all want to support health… but micromanaging the grocery purchases of low-income folks is not the way to accomplish that.” 

Spreitzer said many in the Senate Democratic caucus, whether they supported or opposed the legislation, were voting from “a place of frustration” due to the money being tied to the ban. 

“This is ugly, ugly politics in this building, and I wish it had not come to this,” he said. “I wish we could’ve all come together and said, ‘Let’s provide the money to the staff that is needed to run FoodShare, and then let’s debate separately this other bill.’”

During a Joint Finance Committee meeting on March 11 when the bill was discussed, Sen. LaTonya Johnson (D-Milwaukee) recalled her 10 years working as a child care provider in Milwaukee, serving “some of the state’s poorest kids” who were “also extremely bright, extremely talented and extremely resilient.” She said the bill should have focused on ensuring  that vulnerable people have resources to feed their families instead of monitoring the type of food in their carts. 

“Some of these kids, the vast majority of them don’t get to have these luxuries all the time at home. Their parents, regardless of what this body may believe, aren’t constantly supplying kids with soda and with candy,” Johnson said.

A 2016 USDA study found that “there were no major differences in the expenditure patterns of SNAP and non-SNAP households, no matter how the data were categorized,” and that SNAP recipients, similar to non-SNAP recipients, spent about 20 cents of every dollar on sweetened drinks, desserts, salty snacks, candy and sugar.

Johnson said she had an experience in 2013 that highlighted to her the decisions that some families were making when the daycare ran out of milk during the day. She said she went to the nearby gas station where a gallon of milk cost $5, a stark difference from a local grocery store in Wauwatosa where she would buy two gallons of milk for $5.

“After I bought that gallon of milk and I walked out, I realized why, in some cases, our poorer families were buying two liters of sodas versus a gallon of milk,” Johnson said. “Back then, a two liter of soda was $1.19 all day long. A gallon of milk was $5. It wasn’t about choosing unhealthy food. It was about making those food stamp dollars stretch as long as possible, so those kids could continue to eat.”

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

WASHINGTON — U.S. Sen. Markwayne Mullin of Oklahoma, the president’s pick to lead the Department of Homeland Security, on Wednesday in his confirmation hearing was challenged with questions about his “anger issues” by the fellow Republican who heads the Senate committee that oversees the department.

Kentucky Republican Sen. Rand Paul, chair of the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs, at the outset of the hearing recalled how Mullin called him a “freaking snake” and expressed sympathy for a neighbor who assaulted Paul in a 2017 dispute, breaking six of his ribs and damaging a lung.

“You have never had the courage to look me in the eye and tell me that the assault was justified,” Paul said to Mullin, nominated by President Donald Trump to replace Kristi Noem as secretary of the 260,000-employee agency. “Tell it to my face, if that’s what you believe.”

In a tense back-and-forth, Mullin defended himself and said he never “supported” that Paul was assaulted, but that he “understood” why the neighbor attacked Paul.

“I think everybody in this room knows that I’m very blunt,” Mullin, a former MMA fighter who physically challenged a witness testifying before Congress in 2023, said. 

Paul criticized him and “this machismo that you have” and raised concerns about how Mullin could lead a department and “why (the American public) should trust a man with anger issues to set the proper example for ICE and Border Patrol agents.” 

Noem was ousted from the job after a national uproar over the killing of two U.S. citizens in Minneapolis in January by immigration agents and public disapproval of aggressive enforcement tactics there and in Los Angeles and Chicago.

“I just wonder if someone who applauds violence against their political opponents is the right person to lead an agency that has struggled to accept limits to the proper use of force,” Paul said. 

Mullin did not apologize for his comments regarding Paul’s assault, and said that leading DHS is “bigger than the political differences we have.”

Mullin detailed his plans to senators, pledging to reverse several policies of his predecessor, including making sure “DHS isn’t on the news every day.” 

Mullin also promised to get DHS fully funded and continue to carry out the president’s mass deportation agenda. 

If confirmed, he will have access to a special funding stream of $175 billion for DHS included in 2025’s “one big, beautiful” tax and spending cut package, which Mullin backed as a senator. 

Post-Noem era

Trump shifted Noem, the former governor of South Dakota, into another administration position earlier this month. 

Her tenure drew bipartisan ire over her quick judgment to label the two U.S. citizens killed by immigration agents as domestic terrorists, her stalling of disaster relief grants for states, and the award of a $220 million no-bid contract for an ad campaign to a firm owned by a subordinate’s spouse. 

Paul said the committee plans to vote Thursday on whether to advance Mullin’s nomination to the Senate floor. Trump has said he wants Mullin on the job by the end of the month.

If the Senate confirms Mullin, he would be the first Native American to lead DHS. He is an enrolled member of the Cherokee Nation. 

Senate Majority Leader John Thune, Republican of South Dakota, told reporters Wednesday that he was confident Mullin could be confirmed as Homeland Security secretary. 

“Rand and Markwayne have some personal history which they’re going to have to work through,” Thune said. “But this is about the job, and it’s about who ought to fill that job. We all believe … that Markwayne is the right guy for the job.”

One Democrat already a yes

The junior senator from Oklahoma, who was elected to the Senate in a 2022 special election, does not need any Democratic support to be confirmed to lead the agency, since Republicans control the chamber with 53 seats.

And even without Paul’s support, one Democrat, Sen. John Fetterman of Pennsylvania, who sits on the committee, has already pledged his vote. 

Mullin, if confirmed, will take over a department shut down since early February, after Democrats refused to vote for fiscal year 2026 funding unless changes to immigration enforcement are made following the deaths of the two U.S. citizens in Minneapolis, Renee Good and Alex Pretti. 

The top Democrat on Homeland Security, Gary Peters, pressed Mullin about his previous comments about Good and Pretti. Mullin joined top Trump officials in accusing both of being agitators. 

Mullin admitted his mistake and said he was too quick to judge. 

“I shouldn’t have said that,” Mullin said. “I went out there too fast. I was responding immediately without the facts. That’s my fault. That won’t happen as (Homeland Security) secretary.”

Noem has never admitted she was wrong to label Good, a mother of three and poet, and Pretti, an intensive care unit nurse who specialized in care for veterans, as domestic terrorists. She was criticized by both Democrats and Republicans for her comments.

On Wednesday, Republicans on the panel largely praised Mullin, except for Paul, and criticized Democrats for not approving government funding for DHS.

House Democrats are trying to force a legislative procedure to bring a funding bill for DHS that does not include any appropriations for U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement and Customs and Border Protection.

ICE questions

Michigan Democratic Sen. Elissa Slotkin pressed Mullin on reforms he would make to ICE. 

Sen. Richard Blumenthal, Democrat of Connecticut, asked Mullin about an arrest quota of 3,000 immigrants daily that White House senior advisor Stephen Miller, the main architect of the Trump administration’s immigration policy, has set for ICE officers.

“I can’t speak for Stephen Miller,” Mullin said. “No quota has been set for me.”

Blumenthal also pressed Mullin about concerns over violations of the 4th Amendment of the Constitution by federal immigration agents entering homes and businesses without a judicial warrant. 

He asked Mullin if he would “commit that ICE will no longer instruct agents to break into people’s homes without a judicial warrant?”

“Sir, you’re using the word ‘break into’ people’s houses loosely,” Mullin said. “We will not enter a home or place of business without a judicial warrant unless we’re pursuing an individual that runs into a business or resident.”

Blumenthal also addressed Noem’s award of the $220 million no-bid contract, which she was grilled about by unhappy Republicans in a congressional hearing shortly before Trump removed her as secretary of DHS.

Mullin said that he would let the inspector general, an independent agency within DHS, continue with an investigation. 

“I’ll leave that to the (Inspector General),” Mullin said.  

Detention warehouse purchases

Democrats pressed Mullin if he would keep certain policies in place made by Noem, whose last day is March 31, and questioned recent moves by DHS to purchase warehouses across the country for mass detention of immigrants in the country without legal status. 

New Jersey Sen. Andy Kim said a policy from Noem has led to a backlog in Federal Emergency Management Agency relief. Noem instituted a requirement that she had to personally sign off on any FEMA award totaling more than $100,000. 

Kim asked Mullin if he would consider getting rid of that policy.

“Absolutely,” Mullin said. “That is micromanaging.”

Kim also brought up a warehouse recently purchased by DHS in Roxbury, New Jersey, to detain up to 1,500 immigrants that has concerned local community leaders.

“Most municipalities don’t have the capacity and their infrastructure for waste and water” to handle a warehouse that is meant to detain people, Kim said. 

“This town has only 42 foot police officers, a volunteer fire department. Does that sound like the kind of town that has resources to take on a warehouse?” he asked Mullin.

Mullin did not say DHS would stop its warehouse initiative, but said he wanted to make sure that the local communities were on board, and pledged to personally visit that location with Kim to meet with leaders. 

New Hampshire’s Democratic Sen. Maggie Hassan also raised the issue of a warehouse location in her state. DHS initially planned to purchase a warehouse in Merrimack to retrofit the facility to detain immigrants, but backed off.

She asked Mullin if he would “ensure that the plan remains off the table?” 

Mullin said he wasn’t caught up on that specific facility, but that he would work to get the local community’s input.  

More FEMA questions

Fellow Oklahoma Republican Sen. James Lankford asked Mullin how he sees the future of FEMA. The president has expressed his desire to dismantle the agency, and a FEMA review council was formed to issue a report on its findings. 

Mullin said that FEMA should not be considered a first response agency, and that when natural disasters strike, it’s the state response that is first. 

“We can be more effective and be more direct and speed it up,” he said. 

Mullin added that he doesn’t believe FEMA should be dismantled, but that it could be restructured. 

Mullin’s overseas ventures

The top Republican and Democrat on the committee, Paul and Peters, grilled Mullin on his past comments on a 2016 international trip taken while he served in the House. During a Fox News interview, Mullin implied he had been on military missions and could “smell war.” Mullin has not served in the military.

Mullin declined to discuss those comments, arguing that the travel was while he was on official duty and classified. He described those trips as for training purposes.

Peters asked why the trip wasn’t included in his disclosure records to the committee, and Mullin argued that because it was considered official travel, he didn’t need to disclose it.

Paul said he would consider postponing the committee’s vote unless Mullin would agree to visit a secure facility where classified matters are discussed, known as a SCIF, to detail his international travel. 

Mullin said he would go to a SCIF with lawmakers ahead of the committee vote Thursday. 

Jennifer Shutt contributed to this report.

 

WASHINGTON — Two top Democrats on a U.S. House panel Tuesday pushed back against “unprecedented” Trump administration guidance that they said essentially encourages states to try to bypass requirements on how they spend federal money intended to help people find job training and support — potentially opening states up to lawsuits.

The Democrats, in a letter provided exclusively to States Newsroom, said the U.S. Department of Labor is urging states to use waivers provided under the main federal workforce development law to disregard statutory requirements on how they spend money for employment activities.

Reps. Bobby Scott of Virginia and Alma Adams of North Carolina — the respective ranking members of the House Committee on Education and Workforce and its Subcommittee on Higher Education and Workforce Development — urged Labor Secretary Lori Chavez-DeRemer to “immediately revoke” the agency’s guidance, issued to state workforce agencies, administrators and other entities back in November. 

One of the main purposes of the workforce law, they observed, is to increase access to jobs for people with disabilities, older people and people who are homeless. The waivers suggested by the department would let states reel back their efforts to serve those groups of people, the Democrats said.

“We are deeply concerned that waiving these requirements under the guise of ‘innovation’ and ‘modernization’ will only incentivize the workforce system to stop doing what it is legally required to do: serve those with barriers to employment,” they wrote.

Five ‘strategic pillars’

The guidance from the department’s Employment and Training Administration calls on states to “request waivers of existing (Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act) statutory or regulatory requirements that can help overcome specific barriers to innovation and align with the five strategic pillars for workforce investment.” 

The 2014 law, known as WIOA, aims to boost the public workforce system and help those seeking jobs — particularly people who face barriers to employment — access training, employment and support services. The Labor secretary has the authority to waive certain statutory requirements under WIOA, though with certain limitations. 

Scott and Adams argued that many of the suggested waivers in the guidance “would allow states to reduce their efforts to serve individuals with barriers to employment, directly contradicting WIOA’s purpose.” 

President Donald Trump’s administration in August 2025 unveiled a workforce development strategy, through the departments of Labor, Commerce and Education, consisting of five “strategic pillars.”

The strategy stemmed from Trump’s April 2025 executive order, part of which sought to “consolidate and streamline fragmented Federal workforce development programs that are too disconnected from propelling workers into secure, well-paying, and high-need American jobs.” 

But the Democrats said the use of WIOA’s general waiver authority as a method for achieving the administration’s policy goals surrounding workforce development is without precedent.

“Upon review of all past approved waivers, it is clear that waivers were only used in response to discrete challenges that states or local areas faced in meeting some of the requirements stipulated under WIOA, either because of extenuating circumstances or for individual state efforts at reforms, not to achieve the Administration’s policy goals,” they wrote. 

Scott and Adams instead called on Chavez-DeRemer to work with Congress to pass a bipartisan bill that seeks to modernize WIOA. 

That measure would need to be reintroduced. The House passed it in April 2024, during the previous session of Congress, but the Senate did not.

The Department of Labor confirmed receipt of the letter Wednesday, but did not respond to a message seeking comment on its contents.

WASHINGTON — Arizona coffee roaster Gabe Hagen is wondering if he’ll ever recoup the tens of thousands of dollars he paid in tariffs to import beans from the world’s major coffee-growing regions in South America, Africa and the Indo-Pacific.

Weeks after the U.S. Supreme Court struck down President Donald Trump’s emergency tariffs as illegal, Hagen is among an army of small business owners who are unsure if they’ll be made whole after a year of increasing costs and uncertainty.

“I’m in the process right now trying to consolidate all of my invoices … because I need the money back — if they’re going to give it back,” Hagen told States Newsroom in an interview.

“A pallet of coffee would cost us 5 to 6 to $7,000 if we had a bag or two of really high-grade in there. Post tariffs, our cheapest pallet was around $8,000, and it went anywhere from 8 to $10,000 or $11,000 per pallet of coffee,” he said. 

How the government will refund the roughly $166 billion in tariffs Trump triggered under a 1970s emergency economic powers statute is slowly coming to light in court documents. 

Nearly 2,000 companies filed suit for tariff refunds in the U.S. Court of International Trade, with many lining up even before the highly anticipated 6-3 Supreme Court decision.

U.S. Customs and Border Protection’s four-step refund process for businesses is anywhere from 40% to 80% complete, depending on the step, according to a court-mandated update filed March 12 with the Court of International Trade. 

Justices leave it to the lower courts

The justices, not giving guidance on refunds, left the matter to the lower courts in their Feb. 20 ruling that invalidated the sweeping tariffs Trump unilaterally imposed under the 1977 International Emergency Economic Powers Act, or IEEPA. 

The president declared various emergencies under the statute during his first year in office. 

From fentanyl smuggling, to trade imbalances, to political disputes, he used each declared crisis to impose steep taxes on imports. 

Shifting sometimes day to day, tariffs reached as high as 50% on Brazilian and Indian goods after Trump declared emergencies over the prosecution of a political ally and over the use of Russian oil, respectively.

U.S. importers saw tariffs spike as high as 145% on Chinese goods during a tit-for-tat trade war sparked by Trump’s declaration of a trade imbalance emergency. The duties largely settled at a roughly 50% effective rate on several products after the trade war and negotiations with the world’s second-largest economy. 

The Trump administration has since sought different pathways to collect tariffs, including almost immediately instituting temporary import taxes under a different 1970s trade statute. 

The Office of the U.S. Trade Representative has also commenced widespread investigations into dozens of the largest U.S. trading partners that could trigger new tariffs, depending on findings.

‘Survived, but barely’

The rollercoaster ride was enough to almost bring down Busy Baby, a Minnesota-based baby product company that manufactures several patented designs in China.

Busy Baby owner Beth Benike, who shared her experience with States Newsroom in February, is now suing U.S. Customs and Border Protection Commissioner Rodney Scott and U.S. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent to recoup money lost.

Matthew Platkin, former New Jersey attorney general and Benike’s lawyer, said Benike’s business “survived, but barely.” 

“She had to keep merchandise overseas because she couldn’t afford to pay to bring them here. And when she didn’t get product, she wasn’t getting paid, she wasn’t making money,” Platkin said in an interview with States Newsroom.  

“She had opportunities lined up for expansion. She was going to hire new folks. That didn’t happen, and that was because of one thing: the president’s illegal tariffs,” he said.

Benike’s complaint does not specify a dollar amount, but Platkin said, “It’s substantial, especially for a business of her size.”

“We’re still going through and assessing the full impact of the tariffs on her, but rest assured, even for a small business, it’s tens of thousands of dollars at a minimum,” Platkin said.

“The federal government should just refund these folks their money with interest, period. Like, this shouldn’t even require litigation. They were caught taking illegal tariffs from millions of businesses,” he said.

$166 billion collected

Federal Judge Richard Eaton, who sits on the bench for the Court of International Trade, ordered administration customs officials in early March to stop collecting the tariffs deemed illegal under IEEPA, and to recalculate any past duties that included them.

Eaton granted the March 5 order in the tariff refund lawsuit brought by Atmus Filtration, a Nashville, Tennessee-based company. 

The judge, however, outlined that orders in the Court of International Trade are “universal” for all tariff refunds owed — meaning the trade cases are not subject to the Supreme Court’s 2025 finding in a separate immigration case that universal rulings are impermissible.

Businesses the size of Busy Baby to behemoths like Costco and FedEx have paid tariffs to the U.S. government. Many, but not all, have sued.

Customs officials, in a March 6 court filing, declared any refund process would take at least 45 days to be functional. According to the filing, as of early March the agency had collected approximately $166 billion in IEEPA tariffs from 330,000 American importers.

Alfredo Carrillo Obregon, research associate for trade policy at the libertarian Cato Institute, said as the clock ticks on tariff refunds, interest is accruing.

“The refunds are not necessarily coming soon and that has big implications, obviously, for taxpayers, but I think most importantly for the companies that are relying on this money to literally keep their doors open,” Obregon said.

He and colleagues calculated the government’s interest payments on the refunds owed totals about $700 million more with each passing month.

Barton O’Brien, who told States Newsroom last month his dog apparel company ate the tariff costs rather than raise prices, said he’s “certainly not counting on a refund anytime soon” as the administration “seems pretty dead set” on not giving them.

“I expect they will drag out the process in the courts for as long as they can,” he said in a written response to States Newsroom on March 9. “If we get one, great… It’s a bonus. But still won’t cover the hole left by the tariffs.” 

“Also, as a small business we’re not in a position to fight the administration, so I’m happy to sit back and let … other Fortune 500 companies with an army of lawyers fight this one out on our behalf.  If they win, we’ll all get refunds,” said O’Brien, who works with manufacturers in China and India.

‘Do the right thing’

Shawn Phetteplace, national campaigns director for the advocacy group Main Street Alliance, said his organization will continue to apply legal and public pressure to ensure small businesses recoup the money.

“I would just say that the administration should do the right thing and return the money, and they also should stop trying to find cute, creative ways to institute new tariffs that are also going to be illegal and struck down,” he said.

Two dozen Democratic-led states have already sued the administration in the Court of International Trade over the new tariffs Trump announced immediately after his Supreme Court loss. 

The lawsuit, led by Oregon, also includes Arizona, Colorado, Maine, Maryland, Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Virginia, Washington and Wisconsin.

Small businesses and Democratic-led states were instrumental in the Supreme Court’s February decision striking down Trump’s IEEPA tariffs.

States Newsroom reached out to the Trump administration for comment but did not receive a reply.

The potential for Republicans to lose the Senate majority in the next election cycle cast a shadow over the Wisconsin State Senate’s last regular day of work this legislative session. Senate Majority Leader Devin LeMahieu (R-Oostburg) faced criticism from his members for bringing bills to a vote without a majority of support from his caucus and one longtime Republican announced his retirement.

Wisconsin Republicans currently hold an 18-seat majority in the 33-seat state Senate. The 17 odd-numbered seats will be up for election this year for the first time under the new maps adopted in 2024, which puts the majority in play this November. Democrats have not been in the Senate or Assembly majority since the 2009-10 session. 

LeMahieu drew fire from members of his own party for allowing votes on bills supported by Democrats to legalize sports betting in Wisconsin and to provide funding to the University of Wisconsin to help pay student athletes for their name, image and likeness. Some Republicans who opposed the bills said it would lead to LeMahieu losing his leadership position and to Republicans losing their Senate majority in November.

Sen. Steve Nass (R-Whitewater), who is one of the most conservative lawmakers in the state Senate and is retiring at the end of his term, said voters will hold Republican lawmakers “to account for selling out their interests” in November.

“The passage of these two unpopular bills will help pave the way to minority status for Republicans come November,” Nass, who has served in the Legislature since 1991, said in a statement.

Over the weekend, Sen. Chris Kapenga (R-Delafield) suggested to WISN 12 that LeMahieu could lose his leadership position if the Senate passed the bills by relying on Democratic votes. He said it was “shameful” that the Senate planned to take up the bills and that he was concerned by the lack of a “coalescence of the Republican votes.”

“Historically, usually a majority leader does not come back if he breaks the rule of 17,” Kapenga said, referring to an unwritten rule that requires obtaining the votes of 17 Republicans or an all-GOP majority to pass any bill through the Senate. “So, I hope the majority leader takes that into account.”

Last month at a WisPolitics lunch, LeMahieu said that the “rule of 17” was just “essentially what members use to try to kill bills that they don’t like.” He previously broke that informal rule to pass the 2025-27 state budget with Democratic votes.

Assembly Speaker Robin Vos (R-Rochester), the longest-serving Assembly speaker  in state history, who is retiring at the end of his term, defended LeMahieu’s work as leader including his decision to bring the NIL and sports-betting bills to the floor. He told reporters at a Tuesday WisPolitics event that those suggesting that LeMahieu would lose his job over it don’t “really know how the world works.”

“Sometimes you have to have things pass because it’s in the best interest of the state, and sometimes if you can’t convince people, you gotta find out how to get there,” Vos said. “I feel like the members in our chamber are sometimes a little bit more open to being persuaded than some of the Senate Republicans are. I have said the hardest job in the Capitol is being the Senate majority leader. It was under [now-U.S. Rep.] Scott Fitzgerald. It was under Devin LeMahieu, so I hope that people will respect the fact that he’s doing what he thinks is right.”

Vos also said during the event that a lack of action on data centers could affect the Senate’s chances to win a majority. 

“I learned long ago, after many years of frustration, no matter how hard the Assembly tries, the Senate is its own body and we have to accept that they’re going to do what they’re going to do and it’s nothing we can do about it,” Vos said. He added that it is sad the Senate wouldn’t be doing anything to regulate data centers because they are a huge area of concern. He described data centers as “valuable” because of the rise of artificial intelligence but that people should be protected from higher energy costs that could result from their rapid growth. 

“The state Senate should vote on the bill, especially if they want to get back in the majority,” Vos said. “The only other thing that I worry about — and our members have already taken a look so you could say we thought as hard as we could at data centers — but for people who don’t have that vote, I think they’re going to regret it come October.”

Recent polling by Marquette Law School on data centers found that 70% of Wisconsinites say the costs of large data centers are greater than the benefits they provide, while 29% say the benefits outweigh the costs. 

The data center bill passed by the Assembly would have implemented some state regulations on data centers built in Wisconsin, though Democrats criticized the bill, saying it wouldn’t effectively hold companies accountable, hold down electric rates for Wisconsinites or protect the environment. The bill did not make it onto the Senate’s final regular session floor calendar.

Vos is hopeful that state leaders will be able to find a compromise on property tax relief and school funding before the upcoming elections. Legislative leaders and Gov. Tony Evers have been discussing finding a way to use the $4.6 billion budget surplus, though Vos said an actual proposal is still up in the air. Discussions prior to the Assembly adjourning for the final time last month included talk of rebates, investments in the school levy tax credit by Republicans and investments in special education aid and school general aid by Evers.

Vos said that “nothing is off the table” but that the bill will not become a “mini budget.”

“It’s a negotiation, so we have to say what does the Senate need to have enough votes to be able to pass it? What does the governor need to be able to sign it? And what do we need in the Assembly?” Vos said, adding that the Legislature would likely try to have an extraordinary session “on something that’s just on tax relief or something that’s just on property taxes.” 

Vos also rejected a proposal from Democratic lawmakers over the weekend to spend about $1.3 billion on special education and general aid to schools. 

“The challenge that the Assembly Democrats have is that it’s been so long since any of them have been involved in governing that they are only about one-sentence press releases, and that’s what their proposal was yesterday,” Vos said. “It wasn’t serious in my mind.”

Asked about the greatest challenge to Republicans’ ability to win in November, Vos named President Donald Trump. He said Trump is motivating for “40 to 45%” of voters who are dedicated Republicans, but state-level Republicans’ chances will rely on the other 10% of voters who will need to be persuaded. He said Republicans need to show them that they can listen to the other side and get things done, adding that lawmakers have been able to pass tax breaks for seniors and utility bills and make some investments in priority areas while remaining conservative.

“We have to be able to tell that story and make sure people understand that what goes on in Washington, where it seems like a whole lot of arguing and not a lot of doing, isn’t where we’re at,” Vos said. “Sometimes because Donald Trump is so all-present in every single news cycle, it makes it very hard for us to get our message through.”

Vos said this will also apply to U.S. Rep. Tom Tiffany, who is the only Republican currently in the primary for governor. With Trump’s endorsement and other challengers having dropped out, the 7th CD U.S. representative will likely make it to the November general election. 

Vos also took a shot at the seven Democrats running for governor, saying they are all “minor” and collectively calling them the “seven dwarves.”

“You have Tom Tiffany, who is better known in about half of the state but the other half from basically Green Bay to Madison… and that’s the election schedule you want, so he’s got to figure out how to spend enough time and get well known enough to be able to win,” Vos said.

Another Republican retirement 

The departure of longtime lawmakers will also shape the election chances for Senate Republicans. Wisconsin Democrats need to win two additional seats in November to secure a majority, and incumbency carries significant weight, meaning that seats that have long been represented by Republicans becoming open could help Democrats’ chances. 

Sen. Van Wanggaard (R-Racine) announced his retirement on Tuesday, marking the departure of a second incumbent in a district that will be key in determining control of the state Senate. 

Senate District 21 covers parts of Racine County, including the northern part of the city, and parts of Milwaukee County, including Franklin, Hales Corner, Greendale and Greenfield. According to an analysis by Marquette Law School fellow John Johnson, the district voted for former Vice President Kamala Harris, who lost the state of Wisconsin, by 1.2 percentage points and for U.S. Sen. Tammy Baldwin by 2.2 percentage points in 2024.

Wanggaard said in a statement he thought he would win in a reelection campaign and his heart “desperately” wants to run again, but his head is telling him “it’s time to retire.” He noted that he would be 78 at the end of the next term.

“My staff and colleagues worked with me to try to make something workable for the campaign and the next four years, but my health, and the health of my family will not allow me to put my all into this campaign, or serving the 21st District,” Wanggaard said. He said since his last election in 2022 he has lost three siblings, his daughter was diagnosed with Stage 4 cancer and his brother had a heart attack and has dementia. “That weighs on me more than you can know.”

Sen. Rob Hutton (R-Brookfield), who represents one of the Democrats’ other top targets this fall, announced his retirement last month, as did Nass.

Will Karcz, communications director for the State Senate Democratic Campaign Committee, which is the fundraising arm of the Democratic Senate caucus, said in a statement about Wanggaard’s departure that it is “clear that members of the Republican caucus would rather retire than risk losing their seats or serving in a Republican minority.”

Ahead of Tuesday’s floor session, Senate Minority Leader Dianne Hesselbein (D-Middleton) criticized Republicans for planning to wrap up their work without taking action to address the rising cost of groceries, medications, rents or health insurance.

“Today is the last gasp of what has been a failed and dysfunctional Republican majority in this state Senate,” Hesselbein said. “We know that Wisconsin Democrats can win a majority of seats, and when we do, we will roll up our sleeves, get to work and focus like a laser on the issues that Wisconsinites and Wisconsin families care about.” 

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

Communities are recovering after a major weekend blizzard, dropping record-breaking amounts of snow in some parts of Wisconsin. From the Northwoods to Milwaukee, snowfall shut down roads, caused power outages and challenged plow trucks and public services.

The National Weather Service, calling the snowstorm “historic,” said that in central Wisconsin, snow fell at a rate of 4 inches per hour. “Near-blizzard conditions developed Sunday afternoon, fueled by northeast winds gusting between 35 and 50 mph,” the weather service stated in an update. Windspeeds reached 59 miles per hour  at the Green Bay Airport, and 60 miles per hour in De Pere. “This combination of heavy falling snow and high winds created whiteout conditions and massive drifting,” the National Weather Service stated.

Historic amounts of snow reached approximately 30 inches in communities from Wausau to Marinette and Door County. In Green Bay, where 26.1 inches of snow fell as of Monday, the storm was the area’s largest in 136 years. By Sunday Green Bay had seen 17.1 inches accumulate, making it the city’s third-snowiest day and its heaviest day of snowfall since 1889. Over 11,000 people were reported to have lost power as well.

A “No Travel Advised” notice was posted on the Department of Transportation’s webpage as the storm loomed. “The heavy snow load and high winds caused widespread power outages, most notably in Door and Marinette Counties, and building collapses were reported in Sturgeon Bay and Kewaunee County,” the National Weather Services noted. “Many schools and businesses remained closed through Monday.” The snow was so overwhelming that snow plow operations halted in Marinette County, forcing the sheriff’s office to warn that emergency responses might also slow. That was an acute concern for people stranded in cars along the roadways.

Milwaukee Journal Sentinel reported that Sturgeon Bay in Dane County saw 33 inches of snow blanketing roads and neighborhoods over three days. The city of Madison recorded 5.6 inches on Monday. The state capital’s previous record was set in 2006 when 3.5 inches of snow fell. In western Wisconsin, the town of Montana received 26.5 inches of snow, more than any other area in the region. The city of Mondovi also may have broken a record with 16.5 inches the city’s unofficial record was 16 inches, according to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. 

Over the three-day snowfall event, Madison was covered in nearly eight inches. Some residents reported they were unable to open their front doors. 

Fallen trees and other damage was also reported as far south as Racine.

Waukesha County also struggled with the storm, after strong winds uprooted trees as early as Friday. The winds heralded an all-day rain storm which then turned into a blizzard. The shifting weather patterns meant that the county had to adapt rapidly. About seven inches of snow fell in Waukesha from Sunday to Monday. Crews with the Waukesha County Department of Public Works pulled 16-hour shifts. 

“In severe weather government services matter most,” Waukesha County Executive Paul Farrow said in a statement. “Waukesha County’s teams were out early, stayed out late, and worked around the clock so residents could reach essential services safely. Thank you to our crews and to the public for slowing down and giving plows the space they needed to do their jobs.” 

From 2 a.m. to 9 p.m. Monday, Waukesha County’s 911 communications center received 47 calls for disabled vehicles, 25 for vehicles in ditches, nine reports of property damage, and three for traffic hazards. In many areas people struggled to dig their cars out, with Wausau residents reporting having literally not seen their cars for days until they were uncovered from the snow. Although temperatures were below freezing on Tuesday, the weather is expected to warm as the week continues. By the weekend, temperatures are expected to reach 70 degrees before tapering off again.

Researchers have long warned that extreme weather events would become more common due to climate change. Some of the communities recovering from the blizzard have yet to fully recover from record-breaking floods that occurred in August. In January 2025, extreme arctic cold enveloped the region, challenging communities with large numbers of people living unhoused on the street. This most recent snowstorm came as other parts of the United States dealt with rashes of tornadoes, heatwaves, and flooding. 

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

In two narrow votes, the Wisconsin Senate on Tuesday passed bills to legalize online sports betting in the state and create a set of rules for managing name, image and likeness deals for University of Wisconsin athletes. 

Both bills were passed and sent to the desk of Gov. Tony Evers despite opposition within both party caucuses. 

Sports betting

After initially appearing to be on the legislative fast track upon its introduction last fall, the sports betting bill faced strenuous opposition and only  passed on the last day of normal floor of activity in both the Assembly and Senate. 

The bill passed the Senate 21-12 but divided both Democrats and Republicans. Only nine Senate Republicans voted in favor of the bill. Three Democrats joined nine Republicans in voting against the bill. The Republicans who opposed the bill said they were concerned about the consequences of the availability of frictionless sports betting in people’s pockets. 

Sen. Steve Nass (R-Whitewater) said that the bill would be responsible for “family disintegration” across the state. Nass, who is not running for re-election, said in a statement that the passage of the sports betting bill was one of the reasons why he believes Republicans will not have a Senate majority in the next session. 

“Lost productivity, addiction treatment, bankruptcy, increased demand for social services, criminal justice costs and diminishing household savings far exceed any revenue benefit in the state,” Nass said. 

Under the Wisconsin Constitution, gambling is only allowed on the property of the state’s Native American tribes. It’s been legal to place bets on sports in person at tribal casinos in Wisconsin since 2021. 

The sports betting bill models Wisconsin’s program after Florida’s online sports betting law, which allows online gambling if the servers hosting the bets are located on tribal land. 

The state’s tribes have been supportive of the bill, arguing that it allows them to keep pace with the expansion of sports betting in neighboring Illinois and the emergence of quasi-sports betting prediction sites such as Kalshi and Polymarket. 

Several Democrats said Tuesday they were supporting the bill because it would help the tribes. 

“I really think that this moment is about a collective assertion of tribal sovereignty and the preservation of exclusivity that the tribes have fought for decades to protect,” Senate Minority Leader Diane Hesselbein (D-Middleton) said. 

Name, Image and Likeness 

Just days before the start of the 2025 NCAA men’s and women’s basketball tournaments, the Senate passed a bill that would establish rules for managing name, image and likeness deals for collegiate athletes. 

The bill passed with no debate in a 17-16 vote with six Democrats joining 11 Republicans to vote in favor of the bill. 

College athletes have been eligible for NIL payments since a 2021 U.S. Supreme Court decision. NIL has upended college sports, with major programs such as UW-Madison’s football team being pushed to line up large amounts of money to attract recruits. 

UW-Madison Athletic Director Chris McIntosh said at a public hearing on the bill last week that its passage is necessary to retain the school’s athletics competitiveness. 

The bill would provide $14.6 million annually in state funds to go towards debt service for the maintenance costs of UW-Madison’s athletic facilities. It also includes $200,000 annually in state funds for debt service for maintenance costs of the UW–Milwaukee Klotsche Center as well as $200,000 for the UW-Green Bay soccer complex. The purpose is to free up funds that the UW can use to provide students with opportunities for NIL agreements.

The bill also prohibits NIL contracts that conflict with school policies or provide money in exchange for athletic performance, as well as those that require student athletes to endorse alcoholic beverages, gambling, banned athletic substances or illegal activities or substances. It also includes a requirement that student athletes disclose third-party NIL deals they enter. 

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

A controversial provision of the bill creates a sweeping exemption for UW NIL agreements from the state’s open records law. The provision has raised concerns among open government advocates in the state. 

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE