Reading Time: 7 minutes

This story was produced in partnership with the University of Wisconsin-Madison’s Investigative Journalism class taught in the School of Journalism and Mass Communication.

Click here to read highlights from the story

• Wisconsin still allows 16- and 17-year-olds to marry with parental consent even though they aren’t legally adults.
• The number of child marriages has gone down significantly over the past 30 years, but there are still a couple dozen per year.
• A Democratic bill that would ban the practice hasn’t moved out of committees controlled by Republicans, who say the current law respects parental rights.
• Whether the bill passes next session will likely depend on who controls the Legislature after the November election.

Last month deep red Oklahoma became the 17th state to ban child marriage — the practice of allowing minors, typically 16- and 17-year-olds, to marry with parental consent.

“Oklahoma has a responsibility to protect children and make sure they have the opportunity to reach adulthood before making decisions that will shape the rest of their lives,” Republican state Rep. Nicole Miller said in a press release.

Most states that have banned child marriage to date are led by Democrats. Wisconsin, where Republicans control the Legislature, is not following their lead.

In Wisconsin 16- and 17-year-olds can still be married with written parental permission submitted to a county clerk along with a standard marriage license. Between 2015 and 2024, 297 minors were married in Wisconsin, according to the Legislative Reference Bureau.

Notably, these teenagers can be married not just to other minors, but also to adults. State law also provides an exception to its rules on statutory rape: Sexual relations between an adult and a teenager are not a crime as long as they are married.

“These are marriages between a minor woman and an older man,” said state Rep. Ann Roe, D-Janesville, a co-author of recent legislation to ban the practice. “The behavior outside of marriage would be a felony. … Using this old law that’s still on the books that allows for child marriage is incredibly disturbing and incredibly dangerous for young women.”

In the 2025-26 legislative session, Roe joined Sen. Mark Spreitzer, D-Beloit, in his yearslong campaign to end child marriage in Wisconsin. Each time, the legislation has died in committee. It has never received a public hearing, much less reached a floor vote. Republican leadership has refused to move it, saying the proposed law infringes on the rights of parents to decide what’s best for their children.

Incremental changes

The rules for child marriage in Wisconsin have changed throughout history. The 1849 Wisconsin statutes set the minimum marital age for males at 18, and 15 for females. Males under the age of 21 and girls under the age of 18 still needed parental consent. By 1959, the minimum age for females was raised to 16. The law was amended again in 1971 to allow all men 18 or older to marry without parental consent, and girls under 18 but at least 16 to marry with parental consent.

A change to the law in 1959 allowed a man under 18 to obtain permission from a judge to be married if it would prevent a child he fathered from being born out of wedlock. That allowance was quickly repealed in 1961.

The distinction between sexes was eliminated in 1975, and no changes have happened since.

In 2018, as the #MeToo movement against powerful, abusive men was gaining momentum, Delaware and New Jersey became the first states to ban child marriage. Fifteen more states have since followed suit, including Minnesota and Michigan. Bans on child marriage have been introduced multiple times since 2019 in Wisconsin.

Numbers decline, but not to zero

Statistics paint a picture of how this practice has declined over time in the state.

According to the nonpartisan Wisconsin Legislative Reference Bureau, 27 minors were married in Wisconsin in 2024: eight 16-year-olds and 19 17-year-olds. That figure represents a steep drop from a peak of 421 child marriages in 1995.

Between 2010 and 2022, the vast majority of minors who married did so with adult spouses. From 2017 through 2019, every single minor who married in Wisconsin did so with an adult.

And from 1995 through 2013 (the last year for which gender data is available) girls made up the overwhelming majority of minors who married. In 2013, 23 16-year-old girls married, compared to just two boys the same age. Among 17-year-olds that year, the ratio was 39 girls to eight boys.

According to advocacy group Unchained At Last, those numbers are consistent with nationwide trends. The vast majority of minors married in the country are girls. Most of those girls married an adult male with the man on average being four years older.

“One of the things we wanted to look at is that, you know, is this young love? Is this two teenagers getting married?” Spreitzer said. “The answer seems to be primarily no. Primarily this is men over the age of 18, marrying girls under the age of 18. So that really heightened the concern.”

The law also includes a surprising twist: You can get married under 18, but you can’t get divorced.

Current law gives some provisions for minors to get an annulment, but there is no explicit statutory right for a married minor to file for divorce. Spreitzer and Roe’s proposed legislation would allow any minors married before their proposal takes effect to get a divorce.

Republicans oppose ban based on parental rights

Spreitzer and Roe’s legislation would prohibit marriage under 18 in all circumstances. More than a dozen states have passed similar outright bans over the years.

The Wisconsin effort was once bipartisan. Republican Reps. Ken Skowronski, R-Franklin, and Chuck Wichgers, R-Muskego, were co-sponsors of the bill as recently as 2020. That support has since evaporated.

In February 2024, former state Rep. John Macco, R-Ledgeview, sent a 2:59 a.m. reply-all email to fellow legislators linking the child marriage ban with restrictions on gender-affirming care for minors — a conflation that bill authors and advocates rejected.

“If you’re really serious about protecting minors I’ll add an amendment to also protect them from sex altering drugs and surgery and then cosponsor with you,” Macco’s email read.

Wichgers declined to comment on his previous support.

For a bill to pass into law, identical versions must pass the Assembly and Senate. After a bill is introduced, leadership in both chambers refers their respective versions to a relevant committee where it may receive a hearing and vote. If a committee chair never schedules a bill hearing, it can wallow until the legislative session ends.

During the most recent legislative session, the Senate and Assembly child marriage bills sat in committees led by state Sen. Chris Kapenga, R-Delafield, and state Rep. Patrick Snyder, R-Weston. The bills died without a committee hearing, just like in past sessions.

Kapenga said he sees no reason to act.

“I cannot recall one constituent phone call or interaction where this issue has come up. I don’t have a problem with the current law that allows a 16- and 17-year-old to marry in the state of Wisconsin as long as there is consent from the parent or guardian. Parents know what’s best for their child — not the government,” he said.

Kapenga’s staff confirmed he has not received constituent contacts opposing child marriage, but other Wisconsin legislators, both Republicans and Democrats, have been contacted, according to public records.

Kapenga invoked a broader political philosophy to explain his position. “Frankly, we’ve seen an erosion of parents’ rights over the years by those on the left who believe that it’s the job of government to parent children,” he said. “Given the very low numbers of minors impacted, I do not believe this warrants the passage of this legislation.”

Cathy Myers, a spokesperson for Zonta of Janesville, a women’s advocacy group that worked with Spreitzer on the bill, said the decline in child marriage over time doesn’t justify ignoring the issue.

“We believe this is a pretty easy issue to wrap your head around,” she said. “One child married is one too many.” 

Snyder didn’t respond to a request for comment. Senate President Mary Felzkowski, R-Tomahawk, deferred to Kapenga’s comments. Assembly Speaker Robin Vos, R-Rochester, did not respond to requests for comment.

Advocates say they hear from supportive Republicans

Spreitzer and Roe said they have heard privately from Republican colleagues who agree

with the goal of ending child marriage, but will not say so publicly.

“I think there are many people across the aisle on several different issues, this being one of them …they nod their heads, they look at me, they’re like, ‘We get it, this is an issue,'” Roe said. “And I think when hopefully they feel less obligated to fall into lockstep with their current leadership, I think that offers us an opportunity to have better conversations and figure out how we can work together.”

Spreitzer said he hopes that some of the Republicans who believe in banning child marriage “would start moving that conversation forward within their own party. That’s how we build progress.”

Myers said her organization heard from supportive Republicans during a lobby day at the Capitol this year.

“Several legislators said they didn’t know that children could be married until we met with them,” Myers said. “However, several also said that until they get the green light from their leadership, the bill would not get to the floor and would not become law.”

Child marriage has long-term consequences

Advocates say the consequences for girls are lasting. Roe described a possible trajectory: a teenage girl, newly married to an older man, denied the normal social activities of a 16-year-old and cut off from educational and career opportunities.

“The intentions of that older man are not to establish more freedoms for this young woman,” Roe said. “This is a form of potentially trafficking. This is a form of dominance. That’s just not healthy.”

Studies have linked child marriage among girls to poor mental health outcomes, diminished educational opportunity and higher rates of poverty.

Lauren Papp, a University of Wisconsin-Madison professor of human development and family studies who studies intimate relationships and family dynamics, said adolescence is the wrong time to make a permanent legal commitment to another person — not because teenagers are incapable, but because they are still becoming who they will be.

Papp disagreed that parental consent provides a safeguard because parents may not be privy to all of the relationship dynamics. She, Roe and Spreitzer all noted there can be an imbalance in power dynamics between a child spouse and an older partner who is legally an adult.

“That is certainly just an extra layer of dependence on others,” she said. “There’s a whole host of ways that the younger person could be disadvantaged.”

Child marriage with parental consent is still legal in Wisconsin. Republicans have blocked Democratic efforts to change that. is a post from Wisconsin Watch, a non-profit investigative news site covering Wisconsin since 2009. Please consider making a contribution to support our journalism.

Reading Time: 5 minutes

Some of the top speakers at the Republican Party of Wisconsin’s annual convention in the Wisconsin Dells Saturday included 84-year-old former Gov. Tommy Thompson, 77-year-old U.S. Education Secretary Linda McMahon, 71-year-old U.S. Sen. Ron Johnson and 68-year-old U.S. Rep. Tom Tiffany, now officially the party’s endorsed candidate in this year’s governor’s race. 

As the old guard GOP leaders championed unity and warned of the dangers of “radical” Democrats, some took the stage to remind the party faithful they needed to look to the next generation of voters in Wisconsin to win in November.

“Welcome these young people,” said Waukesha County Republican Party chair Terry Dittrich, pointing to the Wisconsin Young Republicans, Turning Point USA and Americans for Prosperity —  groups that had speaking roles or tables with materials in the hallway outside the convention hall. “They are the future. They’re smart, they’re tech savvy and they just need guidance, and in some cases they need us to just listen to their ideas. …We’re all a bit older, but the bottom line is there’s a really nice fledgling group of young people who want to be involved in this process, and they’re the future.” 

Young people could be the key for Republicans hoping to win back the governor’s office and hang on to the Legislature this fall. Support from young men in particular helped President Donald Trump win in 2024, but that support has softened as the national mood has turned against the party that controls the White House and Congress. 

As Republicans attempt to connect with young people in 2026, they do so without Charlie Kirk, the 31-year-old conservative activist and founder of Turning Point USA who was assassinated last year during an event on a college campus. Speakers and candidates on Saturday recognized the need to engage with young voters like Kirk did. 

Conservatives are still reeling from Kirk’s death and haven’t found someone like him to connect with young people, said Michael Alfonso, the 26-year-old Trump-endorsed candidate and son-in-law of U.S. Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy who is among four Republicans and three Democrats running to replace Tiffany in the 7th Congressional District.

“I think having young voices that are brave enough to step up is going to make a huge difference,” Alfonso said. “Because I don’t think one person could ever fill Charlie’s shoes, but I think maybe a thousand could.” 

A CBS exit poll from the 2024 presidential election shows that while voters under age 30 were overall more likely to vote for former Vice President Kamala Harris, Trump made inroads with that age group. In 2020, 60% of under-30 voters favored former President Joe Biden and 39% voted for Trump. In 2024, Harris received 54% of the under-30 vote and Trump won 43%.

A recent Harvard Youth Poll conducted by the university’s Institute of Politics found Democrats leading Republicans 45% to 26% in a generic ballot of registered voters ages 18 to 29. Just 35% of young people surveyed said they will “definitely” vote in this year’s midterm elections, but the Harvard poll found a political enthusiasm gap, with 55% of young Democrats saying they will vote this year compared with 35% of young Republicans and 25% of young independents. 

Former Gov. Scott Walker, who turned 43 the day he was first elected in 2010 and now runs the conservative group Young America’s Foundation, encouraged the mostly middle-aged and older crowd to reach out to young people and build enthusiasm as the country prepares to celebrate the 250th anniversary of the signing of the Declaration of Independence. Walker noted many of the Founding Fathers were younger than 40 when they signed the document. 

“I tell you all those stories here this afternoon, not for a history lesson, although I love history, but to remind you and to remind those that we work with and serve with and live next to that you’re never too old or too young to fight for freedom,” Walker said on Saturday. 

The Republican Party of Wisconsin plans to visit college campuses across Wisconsin and tap campus resources to reach young voters and make the case for conservative candidates, state party chair Brian Schimming said. It’s important for Republicans to connect with young people early, when they’re more likely to stick with a political party throughout their lives, Schimming said. 

“We’re going to have a very active presence on the campuses and our coalition groups, who do campuses as well, AFP, Turning Point, all the other groups,” Schimming said. “We are not leaving the campuses alone.”

Republican U.S. Rep. Derrick Van Orden, who faces a nationally watched tight reelection race for the 3rd Congressional District this November, said Wisconsin Republicans should take young people seriously and engage them with facts about Republican priorities. He noted a lot of people in Saturday’s crowd had white hair matching his beard.

“I didn’t bleach this, so we got to make sure that we have more people with your color hair than mine,” he told reporters on Saturday.

He noted his youngest child is 27.

“These are the young people that were locked in their homes. They were forced to wear masks, they were forced to get an injection that they didn’t agree with or they would not be able to go to college. They were told if they write something wrong on the internet that they would be banned from everything,” Van Orden said. “They saw their hero, Charlie Kirk, assassinated live on television, so the younger generation is completely motivated because they want freedom and they look at the Republican Party as the party of freedom.” 

Tiffany emphasizes affordability as top issue

In the Wisconsin governor’s race, Republicans young and old have rallied around Tiffany as their best chance to retake the governor’s mansion. Wisconsin College Republicans endorsed Tiffany in September, before the party coalesced around his candidacy in late January after the Trump endorsement.

It’s Tiffany’s vision on affordability, from freezing property taxes to lowering utility costs, that has resonated with young Republicans and should connect with young voters across Wisconsin this fall, said Kyle Schroeder, the 29-year-old chair of Wisconsin Young Republicans, who spoke on stage at the convention Saturday.

“Even though that is a broad stance for everyone, it resonates so much with the younger generation,” Schroeder said about affordability. “We’re starting families and we are trying to plant our roots in a community post-college. We have great universities around Wisconsin. Whether we want people staying here in Wisconsin or moving to another state, we need to attract those workers and young workers, too.” 

Tiffany is about a decade older than the oldest top Democratic gubernatorial candidates. The current top-polling candidates, Madison state Rep. Francesca Hong and former Lt. Gov. Mandela Barnes, are in their late 30s. Tiffany joined the state Assembly in the 2010 Republican wave that now risks losing legislative control for the first time in 16 years.

Tiffany told reporters Saturday he believes young people are pessimistic about economic opportunities in Wisconsin during Democratic Gov. Tony Evers’ eight years in office, but emphasizing affordability will help him make inroads with young voters. 

“I want them to be optimistic about Wisconsin, and how you do that is you make the state more affordable,” Tiffany said. “We reduce property taxes, then freeze them. We reduce utility rates.” 

Emily Stuckey, a Democratic Party of Wisconsin spokesperson, described Tiffany in a statement Saturday as the “GOP’s most expensive choice for governor.”

“From his unfettered commitment to Washington Republicans’ MAGA agenda that drives up healthcare premiums and guts coverage, to his support for tariffs that devastate farmers and policies that continue to drive gas and grocery prices higher by the day,” Stuckey said. “The Republican Party of Wisconsin endorsed a candidate who is ready and willing to squeeze every last dollar he can out of working Wisconsinites.”

At annual convention, Wisconsin GOP’s old guard urges party to engage young voters is a post from Wisconsin Watch, a non-profit investigative news site covering Wisconsin since 2009. Please consider making a contribution to support our journalism.

Reading Time: 5 minutes

Click here to read highlights from the story

• Oshkosh resident Nikolas DeGroot started Groundfloor Democracy after seeking an informal place where community members could gather to discuss politics and local issues. 

• Run entirely by volunteers, Groundfloor Democracy hosts Politics in the Park events several times per month. 

• Organizers focus on fostering respectful discussions in person, which they say helps people connect with their neighbors and find what they have in common. 

• However, it’s been a struggle to attract participants to their gatherings. 

• The group plans to become a nonprofit organization and hopes to eventually host events in more Wisconsin cities.

On a late April evening, in an Oshkosh park bordering the shores of Lake Winnebago, Nikolas DeGroot and Elaine Koch arranged four fabric lawn chairs in a circle. They unfolded a small table and used it to prop up posterboard reading “POLITICS IN THE PARK” in bubble letters. Then they sat down and waited for curious passersby to notice. 

During a time when Americans are increasingly polarized and politics can feel too tense a topic to broach in conversation, Oshkosh resident DeGroot wants to inspire his neighbors to tackle the topic head on — and handle disagreements thoughtfully. 

“There’s a disconnect in the way that we relate to one another, on many different levels. I think that the internet has kind of become the public commons, and it does it really badly,” DeGroot said. “We all know it’s terrible. We all hate it, and yet that’s still like the place where the most discussion is happening.”

The antidote, he thinks, is simple: bring conversation about shared issues back in the flesh, in a public place neighbors frequent, and make sure it stays respectful. 

That’s the gist of “Politics in the Park,” an event series where DeGroot and several helpers invite people to have civil conversations about politics and local issues at a public park. Through this, he hopes his neighbors can learn to connect again and chip away at the polarization driving people away from each other. 

Perhaps unsurprisingly, getting people to take part in the initiative has proven difficult. Still in its infancy, the twice-weekly events this spring mark the series’ second year. Turnout has been sparse — typically, a handful of people stop by each event. The group, dubbed Groundfloor Democracy, hosted about 10 attendees at once at its peak. 

But the conversations they’ve had have been encouraging, and they hope it’ll catch on soon. 

“I want people to see that there is a big difference between debate and just regular conversation, and that we can get back to conversation,” said Emmy Carrick, who helps put on the events. “We want people to take away that regular conversation without yelling, without debate, without cameras — it’s possible.”

‘We’ll pull up some chairs, and we’ll just see’

As a political science student at the University of Wisconsin-Oshkosh, DeGroot was eager to attend political and academic events on campus. But when he looked around the room at donors, university administrators, professors or students required to be present for a class, he felt out of place. 

“As somebody who comes from a working-class background, I don’t see any people like me at events like this,” said DeGroot, who works two part-time jobs.  

He started looking for other community organizations he’d be more aligned with. But he didn’t see any addressing his biggest concern: “How do we get people off of their devices and speaking in person again?” 

He decided to take matters into his own hands. 

“I was taking my son to the park every day after school anyway, for like two hours. So I was like, … ‘We’ll just set up a sign, we’ll pull up some chairs, and we’ll just see. We’ll just see what happens,’” he said. 

He made Facebook posts to tell people when he was going to be outside and wanted to facilitate conversation. He let people talk about what was on their minds. A few visitors came the first couple times, but they sometimes struggled with what to discuss. 

He started asking questions to guide discussion: 

“If you could change one thing about your government (local, state or federal), what would it be?”

“What’s something you think we could fix if we just talked about it more honestly?”

“What’s one thing you’d like politicians to stop doing?”

“What gives you hope when it comes to politics or your community?”

“What do you think people get wrong about folks who vote differently than them?”

Meanwhile, DeGroot posted a callout for people to help him with the endeavor. Four board members now help him organize events, post on social media and try to grow Groundfloor Democracy’s turnout. 

That includes Carrick, who discovered the project while surfing Reddit. She wanted to get involved because she feels like “we’ve never been more disconnected from our neighbors.”

“I like the premise of it because it was just something so low-stakes,” Carrick said. “With how polarized things are, it feels like any political conversation that you have is very high-stakes. I liked that this was just informal and welcoming.” 

By the end of last spring, they’d had enough turnout to feel encouraged to continue. This year, the events are guided by a one-word prompt, such as “local,” “education” or “justice.” They ask participants what topics the words bring to mind and let attendees steer the conversation.

Continuing the conversation

Carrick’s favorite Politics in the Park event took place on an early April evening, when about 10 people attended. Two teens on their way to the bus stopped briefly to learn about the initiative. Another man wanted to discuss the Trump administration’s policies — an exchange that ended with him and Koch praying together. 

“Nobody ever said whether they were a Democrat or Republican. We just talked,” Carrick said. “That was so refreshing to me. We didn’t talk about parties at all. We just talked about us and our lives and local issues and more of what brought us together.”

While discussion at the events has stayed civil to date, conversations about politics can often slide off the rails. 

Their goal isn’t to avoid debate, but to encourage handling disagreements respectfully. For that reason, DeGroot took a 40-hour mediation training at the Winnebago Conflict Resolution Center to learn how to handle and dissolve conflict. 

“A big part of that training was getting from the thing that somebody is saying to the underlying feeling that’s connected to what they’re saying,” DeGroot said. “It’s just trying to get to that little crumb at the center of like, why does this person feel so strongly about this particular thing?”

If needed, he will intervene to help the person see how those “big feelings” at the root of their argument overlap with the values of the people sitting with them, to help them see the similarities they share. Though he’s prepared, he hasn’t yet needed to interrupt a conversation.

Since it is a nonpartisan organization, DeGroot and other members are careful not to advocate for specific candidates, parties or policy positions. That’ll become especially important as they look to become an official nonprofit. The federal government prohibits these types of organizations from engaging in political campaign activity. 

As time goes on, they also want to grow the initiative by hosting conversations in more Wisconsin cities or partnering with other local civic organizations. 

They also want to find ways to raise funds — right now, everyone who helps out is a volunteer. 

Mostly, though, they want more people to come talk about politics with them in the park. 

“We can’t delete social media from the world, heal our nation’s politics overnight or anything like that,” Carrick said. “But we can set up some lawn chairs in a park and have a couple neighbors come out and just chat and get to know each other more.”

Learn about Groundfloor Democracy’s upcoming events here.

These Oshkosh residents want you to log off and talk politics — in real life is a post from Wisconsin Watch, a non-profit investigative news site covering Wisconsin since 2009. Please consider making a contribution to support our journalism.

Reading Time: < 1 minute

Rebecca Cooke, a Democrat running for Wisconsin’s 3rd Congressional District, did political consultation for Kirk Bangstad during his bid for Congress in 2016. 

Bangstad, now the owner of Minocqua Brewing Co., ran a short campaign in 2015 against then-U.S. Rep. Sean Duffy, currently the secretary of transportation under President Donald Trump.

According to Federal Election Commission reports, Bangstad paid Cooke and her consulting company, Cooke Strategy, about $12,300 for her services. 

Cooke listed Bangstad’s campaign on her company’s now-deactivated website, according to the WayBack Machine website.

Cooke recently criticized Bangstad for a social media post promoting the idea of assassinating Trump, by saying his brewery would provide free beer on the day of his death. Bangstad, who said on May 2 he was launching a run for governor, has endorsed Cooke’s Democratic challenger in the race for the 3rd Congressional District, Emily Berge.

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

Sources

• Wayback Machine: Web archive
• Federal Election Commission: Campaign finance report
• Wausau Daily Herald: Duffy challenger drops out; now what?

Did Rebecca Cooke serve as a political consultant for Kirk Bangstad? is a post from Wisconsin Watch, a non-profit investigative news site covering Wisconsin since 2009. Please consider making a contribution to support our journalism.

Reading Time: 7 minutes

This story was originally published by ProPublica, a nonprofit newsroom that investigates abuses of power. Sign up to receive its biggest stories as soon as they’re published.

The $16 billion Hudson Tunnel Project, under construction between Manhattan and New Jersey, will improve passenger rail service, an important issue for New York City commuters. It would seem to have nothing to do with what’s happening in northern Wisconsin. 

But after the White House froze federal grant funding for the project in the fall, citing concerns about diversity and equity measures, lobbyists with an interest in the tunnel donated $2,500 to a political novice running in the Republican primary in Wisconsin’s 7th Congressional District. 

The young candidate, Michael Alfonso, has no sway over the matter. However, his father-in-law does: Sean Duffy is secretary of the U.S. Department of Transportation.

The contributions are among dozens to Alfonso’s campaign from lobbyists, business executives and political action committees tied to industries — from rails and highways to shipping and air travel — that Duffy’s department funds and regulates. His department also oversees the Federal Aviation Administration.

Duffy held the 7th Congressional District seat for nearly a decade before resigning in 2019. He was succeeded by Tom Tiffany, who is now running for Wisconsin governor, leaving the seat open again. Alfonso, 26, who has worked in construction and podcasting, has been endorsed by  President Donald Trump. 

A ProPublica analysis found that many of the Alfonso donors with transportation interests had never given to Duffy or Tiffany. While legal, such donations set up the appearance that helping Alfonso might assist the donors with issues influenced by Duffy. (Politico has reported on some of these contributions.)

“The law, as it stands, provides very little constraint,” said Daniel Weiner, director of the Elections and Government Program at the Brennan Center for Justice, a law and policy institute based in New York. “There’s a very large gulf between what is legal and what is ethical. Obviously, this raises numerous ethical questions.”

This is not the first time a Cabinet secretary’s relative has created thorny ethical issues. During the first Trump administration, Transportation Secretary Elaine Chao made headlines for appearing to give preferential treatment to Kentucky officials for millions of dollars in infrastructure grants. Kentucky is the home state of her husband, Mitch McConnell, then Senate majority leader. At the time, Chao’s office denied showing any favoritism, saying that Kentucky’s share was not out of the ordinary.

And in 2012, under President Barack Obama, Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack, an Iowa Democrat, fielded questions about the separation between U.S. Department of Agriculture business and the campaign of his wife, Christie, who was running for Congress. Christie Vilsack told ProPublica in an interview that the couple was careful about making sure her husband was not involved in the campaign, other than to support her at some debates and on election night. He “never did any fundraising at all,” she said.

An influential member of Trump’s Cabinet, Duffy has been openly assisting his son-in-law’s campaign. The notice for a November “meet and greet” with Alfonso in Wausau, Wisconsin, mentioned that Duffy would be a special guest, as did an invitation for another December fundraiser. 

Among the sponsors for the December event was the political action committee for Delta Air Lines. The invitation included a caveat: “Sean Duffy is not soliciting funds in connection with this event.” 

Alfonso’s campaign did not respond to requests from ProPublica for an interview or for comment. A spokesperson for Duffy, Nathaniel Sizemore, provided a written statement saying: “The Secretary attends fundraising events in his personal capacity. Regulatory decisions are guided by career safety professionals, the law, and the facts.”

Nothing in law bars Duffy from campaigning for his son-in-law, so long as he goes about it on his personal time, does not use government resources and does not promise to take some official action in exchange for a contribution. 

Alfonso is using the same fundraising consultant, Kirstin Hopkins, that Duffy employed, Federal Election Commission records show. In addition, Alfonso has received help with ads and mailers from a super PAC, the Northwoods Future PAC, that is funded with $1 million from Duffy’s former campaign committee. Alfonso’s familial advantage has irked some Wisconsin Republicans who don’t want the newcomer to glide into such an important position.

Through his own campaign committee, Alfonso had raised a little over $305,000 as of the end of 2025, the latest filing available. By law, contributions for each election are limited to $3,500 from individuals and $5,000 from political action committees. Donors can contribute to more than one election at the same time, such as a primary race and a general.

Alfonso’s donors include lobbyist Jeffrey Miller, a finance chair of Trump’s most recent inaugural committee. In December, Miller and his company’s chief operating officer donated separately to Alfonso, for a combined $8,500. No one listing their firm, Miller Strategies, as an employer had donated to either Duffy or Tiffany in the past, according to FEC records. 

Lobbyist disclosure reports show that Miller lobbied the Transportation Department in 2025 on behalf of at least nine companies, one New York county and one Native American tribe. The issues included airport signage regulation, aviation permitting for the developer of a supersonic airliner and advancements in GPS technology. Miller reported advocating for Archer Aviation regarding electric vertical takeoff and landing aircraft technology, known as eVTOL — the basis for future flying cars.

Earlier this month, Duffy announced a first-of-its-kind FAA pilot program to test eVTOL technology in eight demonstration projects across 26 states. Archer was among the companies selected to participate, according to the Transportation Department. In a video accompanying the announcement, Duffy spoke enthusiastically about the technology, envisioning “Ubers in the air” taking people from one airport to the next and beyond. He said, “eVTOLs are going to make the airspace far more interesting and far more fun, and we have to be prepared for that.” 

Miller did not return calls or emails seeking comment. 

Alfonso graduated in 2022 from the University of Wisconsin with a math degree. He moved to Florida for a time to help produce a popular podcast hosted by Dan Bongino, a Trump supporter who later served a brief stint as deputy director of the FBI. (Bongino is back podcasting again.) 

By Alfonso’s account, he and Trump first met in 2022 at Alfonso’s wedding to Duffy’s daughter, Evita. The reception took place at one of Trump’s New Jersey golf courses.

Alfonso has said that in an Oval Office meeting after he decided to run for Congress, he pledged loyalty to the president. “I promised him that I would always be America first, I would always fight for his agenda and that nobody would ever outwork me,” Alfonso told Mark Halperin, another podcaster.

On social media in November, Alfonso thanked Duffy for coming to his first campaign event in Wausau, the city where the candidate met his future wife while they were in middle school.

The following month, the transportation secretary appeared at a campaign fundraiser for Alfonso at a hotel in Green Bay, near the storied Lambeau Field. The donors in attendance included Sharad Tak of Bethesda, Maryland, the CEO of ST LNG, a company seeking a DOT-issued license to construct and operate a deep-water port offshore of Matagorda, Texas, to load liquefied natural gas onto carriers. 

Tak gave $500 to the campaign, and his wife, Mahinder, who did not attend the function, gave $7,000. Neither had donated to Duffy or Tiffany. 

Tak did not reply to ProPublica’s request for an interview but asked a longtime friend of his, Ann Murphy of Green Bay, who works as a consultant for him, to respond. Tak owns a paper mill in Oconto Falls, north of Green Bay. It is not in the 7th Congressional District. But Murphy said Tak was visiting the state and agreed, at her request, to attend the fundraiser for Alfonso. 

She said in an interview that the Texas liquefied natural gas project had no bearing on Tak’s campaign contribution. “Absolutely not.” 

It’s typical, she said, for Tak and his wife to support causes, both political and philanthropic, that Murphy and her husband find worthwhile — and vice versa.

“We were very excited about Michael,” Murphy said of Alfonso, likening him to Charlie Kirk, the founder of Turning Point USA who inspired many young people before being killed last year. “And he does have the endorsement of President Trump.”

Others donating to Alfonso’s candidacy include political action committees for employees of the military jetmaker Lockheed Martin, which is subject to FAA safety regulations and has lucrative government contracts, and for T-Mobile, which is working on a DOT project to enhance the resilience of critical 5G infrastructure. PACs for unions and trade associations for heavy equipment operators, engineers, aeronautical services and the travel industry have also pitched in. 

The PAC for Brightline, a high-speed train service in Florida, also donated, giving $2,500 in December. Brightline trains have struck and killed more than 180 pedestrians or drivers at crossings since 2017, according to an investigation by the Miami Herald and WLRN. Duffy promised at a congressional committee hearing in July to work to “drive down the number of deaths.” In September, he announced that his department would distribute $42 million to improve safety along the line. In a statement to the Florida news organizations, Brightline officials blamed the deaths on suicides and the “reckless” behavior of people who put themselves in harm’s way. 

Brightline, T-Mobile and Lockheed Martin did not respond to ProPublica’s requests for comment. On its website, Lockheed notes that it complies with all applicable laws and regulations with regard to its political and public policy activities. 

Alfonso’s campaign has drawn donations from others in the heavily regulated railroad sector. They include Peter Bartek, founder of FTS Rail, which manufactures battery-powered railroad repair tools and sensors that detect rail breaks caused by extreme heat or cold. He gave $3,644  in November. Duffy appointed Bartek last July to serve on a DOT advisory committee. 

Bartek had never given to a candidate in the district before. In an interview, he said he read a news article about Alfonso’s campaign and decided to donate. “I like Secretary Duffy very much,” he said, “and I thought very simply, boy, if he’s anything like his father-in-law, it would be nice to support him as well.”

He said in a text that he didn’t know Duffy personally and was not involved in Alfonso’s campaign or fundraising.

In New York, construction on the Hudson Tunnel Project to improve commuter rail service came to a screeching halt in early February after the federal government cut off funds. A court intervened, ordering the money released, and work resumed. A bistate commission overseeing the project warned this month that it could face disruptions again in upcoming months if federal disbursements do not continue.

In response to outreach from ProPublica, an executive at Venture Government Strategies, whose lobbyists for the tunnel project gave a combined $2,500 to Alfonso, said in an email the company had no comment. 

On his campaign website, Alfonso lists a dozen issues “that matter to us” — ranging from education and health care to immigration. He wants to “make farms and families strong,” “give Gen Z a voice” and work against access to abortion. 

Transportation issues are not among those priorities, but he still is getting support from General Motors, which regularly lobbies DOT on various issues, including fuel economy, vehicle safety and emissions standards, and other mandates. The giant car manufacturer also gave to Duffy when he was running for the congressional seat, and the transportation secretary has become a booster. (GM did not respond to ProPublica’s request for comment.)

In mid-December, viewers of social media saw Duffy slide behind the wheel of a sleek, black, limited-edition Corvette, imbued with patriotic insignia to celebrate the nation’s upcoming 250th birthday. 

“Over 1,000 horsepower,” Duffy said in a promotional video, emphasizing the dynamic features of the $200,000 supercar. “We’re going to take this bad boy on a little test drive to the Army-Navy game.” Off he went. 

The video, uploaded to the social media platform X, highlighted a travel app the carmaker made in partnership with the Department of Transportation, while also showcasing Chevrolet’s automotive series dubbed Stars and Steel. 

The post received over 130,000 views: valuable advertisement for the storied carmaker, General Motors. A couple of weeks later, GM’s political action committee donated $1,000 to Alfonso.

Transportation lobbyists have donated thousands to Sean Duffy’s son-in-law as he runs for Congress is a post from Wisconsin Watch, a non-profit investigative news site covering Wisconsin since 2009. Please consider making a contribution to support our journalism.

Reading Time: 3 minutes

All public employees in Wisconsin must retain records, per the state’s open records law. Except one group. The ones who wrote that law.

State legislators have exempted themselves from the retention portion of the law. Some want to change that.

“The public should not have to worry about legislators having secret conversations or deleting emails,” said state Rep. Clinton Anderson, D-Beloit, who is introducing a bill that would close this loophole despite the fact that the state Assembly adjourned last month for the rest of the year.

Anderson released the bill Monday because it is the start of Sunshine Week, a nonpartisan collaboration among groups in the journalism, civic, education, government and private sectors that shines a light on the importance of public records and open government.

In Wisconsin, state legislators must comply with a records request, but if they have destroyed the record, they have nothing to send.

“Obviously, it’s troubling,” said Bill Lueders, president of the Wisconsin Freedom of Information Council. “It allows legislators to make things go away that they would rather not see the light of day.”

State Rep. Rob Brooks, R-Saukville, told the Wisconsin Examiner in 2021 that his office “frequently deletes emails during the normal course of business each day.”

And he’s not the only one.

“My office does not delete records on principle, and we should make sure every elected official is held to that same standard,” Anderson said.

In 2025, Gov. Tony Evers stepped in to close this loophole – his 2025 budget proposal included a measure to “remove the Legislature’s exemption from open records law by requiring that records and correspondence of any member of the Legislature be included in a definition of a public record to provide greater transparency for the people of Wisconsin.” The proposal also would have allocated funds and opened a full-time position with the Legislative Technology Services Bureau to carry out this new requirement. But the Republican-controlled Joint Finance Committee removed it from the final budget.

State Sen. Chris Larson, a Democrat from Milwaukee, has introduced bills to close that exemption for state legislators multiple times and is doing so again in the Senate this week in tandem with Anderson.

Before his election to the state Senate in 2010, Larson served on the Milwaukee County Board of Supervisors. As a public official, he had to maintain all his records there and assumed the same when he arrived in the Legislature.

But as his email inbox filled up and ran low on space, Larson said he was told by IT staff to simply delete old messages.

“People often wonder why so many wildly popular policies go session after session without a vote or even a public hearing, while special interest slop rises to the top of the agenda,” said Justin Bielinski, Larson’s spokesman. “The Wisconsin Legislature’s exemption from record retention requirements creates a perverse incentive to do the people’s business in secret. If lawmakers aren’t going to be responsive to their constituents’ needs, the least we can do is allow people to find out who they are listening to, and whose voices they choose to ignore.”

Larson’s bills to close the loophole have been ignored by Republicans who control the Legislature, he said. The majority party generally pays little attention to bills from the minority.

But the fact the Wisconsin Legislature is even subject to the open records law, albeit with a caveat, makes it one of the more transparent states. Nearly a quarter of all states — 12 in total — do not even allow records from the Legislature to be accessed by the public, according to a study from The Journal of Civic Information. Congress has also excluded itself from open records requests under the Freedom of Information Act.

The exemption for legislators here “completely undermines Wisconsin’s public records law and the ability for citizens to trust their Legislature,” said David Cuillier, director of the University of Florida’s Brechner Freedom of Information Project. “It’s really quite bizarre and an outlier in the United States. The right thing to do is remove it and restore accountability and credibility to the institution.”

The Badger Project is an independent, reader-supported newsroom in Wisconsin.

This article first appeared on The Badger Project and is republished here under a Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.

A loophole lets Wisconsin lawmakers delete public records is a post from Wisconsin Watch, a non-profit investigative news site covering Wisconsin since 2009. Please consider making a contribution to support our journalism.