Reading Time: 6 minutes

When Larry Jones arrived at the Wisconsin State Capitol on March 12, he didn’t know what he was getting into — let alone that he would be a viral internet sensation the next day. 

The 85-year-old self-described conservative had been invited by his grandson to a public hearing on a Republican-authored bill that would ban gender-affirming medical care for transgender youth in the state. He decided to make the short drive from his home in Milwaukee. 

“I thought, ‘OK, I’ll go up there and listen to a couple people moaning about some kind of problems and be there for a couple hours and be long gone,’” Jones told Wisconsin Watch. “I got into something that I really didn’t know a heck of a lot about.” 

The hearing was packed with speakers there to testify either for or against the bill. Most people were limited to two minutes, but the hearing lasted more than eight hours. Jones was there in support of the bill, but wasn’t intending to get up and speak. But after listening to nearly seven hours of testimony, he put his name down. 

“I have very little knowledge of gay people and things like that there, so when I came here, my eyes were opened,” he told the state Assembly’s Health, Aging and Long-Term Care Committee just after 9 p.m. “I was one of the critics that sat on the side and made the decision there was only two genders, so I got an education that was unbelievable. And I don’t know just exactly how to say this, but my perspective for people has changed. … I’d like to apologize for being here, and I learned a very lot about this group of people.”

After he spoke, several attendees applauded.

Shortly after, his grandkids told him about a video of his testimony going viral online — as of Sunday the video had nearly 1 million views on YouTube. They called him a hero.

“Thank you for the compliment, but what the heck are you talking about?” he recalled responding. 

Jones told Wisconsin Watch he doesn’t think he did anything out of the ordinary and spoke because he felt like he owed it to the people there protesting the bill. He never thought a few sentences would garner such attention. 

“After a day or two, my 15 minutes of fame were long gone, and I went back to who I am, just plain old Larry,” Jones told Wisconsin Watch. 

Others saw an act of courage.

“Listening to his testimony was incredible,” one user commented under the viral video of Jones on Instagram. “It is powerful and brave to admit that you were wrong and have learned. I wish many of our legislators had that same strength.”

The bill

Republican politicians in recent years have frequently targeted transgender rights. One of President Donald Trump’s first executive orders the day he took office disregarded biological nuance in declaring there are only two sexes, male and female, which can’t be changed, and that gender identity “does not provide a meaningful basis for identification and cannot be recognized as a replacement for sex.” A later order declared the country wouldn’t fund transition of youth from one sex to another or medical institutions that provide such health care.

Wisconsin Assembly Bill 104 would ban gender-affirming health care, including puberty-blocking drugs, hormone replacement therapy or surgery, for those under the age of 18. Under the bill, medical providers found to be providing this care could have their licenses revoked. The legislation faces a certain veto by Democratic Gov. Tony Evers, who has vetoed a similar bill before. 

The authors of the bill — Sen. Cory Tomczyk, R-Mosinee, and Rep. Scott Allen, R-Waukesha — say it would “protect minors from making life-altering, irreversible decisions that cause mental and bodily harm.”

“They’re not voting on this bill as a person, they’re voting Republican party lines,” Jones told Wisconsin Watch. “That shouldn’t be that way. … Party line is a bunch of garbage.” 

It was just one of four bills raised in the Legislature in recent weeks targeting transgender youth in Wisconsin. Two others are aimed at banning transgender girls and women from participating in high school and collegiate women’s sports. Another would prohibit school employees from using a student’s preferred name and pronouns without parental consent. 

For hours, Jones listened to the stories of kids who wanted to transition and said it seemed like “their brain was tearing them apart.” He now believes the decision to receive gender-affirming care should involve a child, a qualified doctor and a parent — not lawmakers. He likened the issue to lawmakers banning doctors from providing abortions.

Just the introduction of such bills can have negative effects on LGBTQ+ kids, research shows. The Trevor Project, a nonprofit that works to end LGBTQ+ youth suicide, found in a 2024 national survey that 90% of LGBTQ+ young people said their well-being was negatively impacted due to recent politics. Research also shows that transgender youth who are called by their preferred names and pronouns are happier and healthier.

Jones said a 14-year-old transgender teen — one of the youngest speakers who advocated for their right to go on hormones — helped to change his perspective at the hearing. In their testimony, they shared that they had recently contemplated suicide.

“I started to listen to this kid, and it wasn’t some kind of whim or something like that. This kid was actually suffering,” Jones said. “And I thought to myself, nobody has to do that. You’re only a kid.”

The GOP-controlled committee voted to advance the bill. Republican lawmakers in the Assembly passed it last week. 

“Children are not allowed to get tattoos, sign contracts, get married, or smoke — so why would we allow them to physically change their gender?” Rep. Tyler August, R-Walworth, said in a statement. 

Jones had a different take. 

“All of these kids, they deserve a chance to see where they belong,” he said. 

Who is Larry?

Jones grew up in a small, rural unincorporated town in northern Michigan before moving to Milwaukee when he was 19 years old. 

“When I moved to the city, it was like I was a kid in a candy store. I discovered books, and once I discovered books, I discovered the world,” he said. 

For most of his life, he worked in the maintenance department at the Milwaukee County Community Reintegration Center  — a prison formerly known as the House of Corrections. There, he encountered gay men and women, but said he had never met someone who was transgender. 

“If there’s something you don’t understand or don’t know anything about, it kind of frightens you a little bit,” Jones said. 

When he was younger, he said LGBTQ+ people were “hidden.” 

“In the area where I grew up … men were men,” Jones said. “I was taught by men who had their own visions of what gay people were like. They were called ‘queers’ and ‘fairies’ and off-the-wall, ungodly names back in the day. As I grew older … the whole world changed.” 

Jones calls himself conservative, but said he’s willing to look at both sides of an issue. He mostly tunes into Fox News and local TV stations. He said he still has a lot to learn about the transgender community, and he’s made that his mission for the next six months or so. 

Prior to the hearing, he said he believed that someone who was transgender was “play acting” and simply changed their name and clothes along with a few other cosmetic things. 

“It’s through no fault of their own. I don’t think there’s a medical problem. I think these kids were born this way,” Jones said. “I looked at it through a different perspective, from a different set of eyes, and I promised myself that I would look into this with a clearer sense of understanding.”

After his testimony, a young woman handed him a note that read, “Thank you for being open to hearing all this and being open to changing your mind. That’s brave.” Jones kept it. 

His advice to others? “Don’t wear a pair of blinders and walk down the road. Keep an open mind.”

Wisconsin Watch reporter Jack Kelly contributed to this report.

‘Just plain old Larry’: A Wisconsin man’s testimony about gender-affirming care went viral. Here’s his story. 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.

The Wisconsin Assembly voted along party lines Tuesday to pass legislation penalizing counties with sheriff's departments that don't cooperate with ICE, the federal Immigration Customers and Enforcement agency. (Photo via ICE)

Legislation passed the Assembly Tuesday that would claw back state aid from counties where the sheriff doesn’t cooperate with the federal Immigration and Customs Enforcement service (ICE).

The legislation would require sheriffs to check the citizenship status of people being held in jail on felony charges and notify federal immigration enforcement officials if citizenship cannot be verified.

The state Senate, meanwhile, approved a bill that would block a judicial investigation of a police officer involved in the death of a person unless there’s new evidence or evidence that has not been previously addressed in court.

The immigration-related bill, AB 24, passed the Assembly on a straight party-line vote.

In addition to requiring citizenship checks, the bill would also require sheriffs to comply with detainers and administrative warrants received from the federal Department of Homeland Security for people in jail. Counties would be required to certify annually that they were following the law and would lose 15% of their shared revenue payments from the state if they were not.

Proponents described the measure as enhancing safety.

“We have the opportunity to emulate in many ways the best practices that are already happening across our country,” Assembly Speaker Robin Vos (R-Rochester), the bill’s author, said at a news conference before the floor session. “We have seen since [President] Donald Trump took office that we have had a dramatic reduction in the number of illegal crossings that are happening at the southern border.”

Opponents said the bill would divert local law enforcement resources while driving up mistrust and fear among immigrants, regardless of their legal status.

Rep. Ryan Clancy (D-Milwaukee) said the legislation was “big government” and interferes with local counties’ policy decisions. It also undermines the presumption of innocence for a person charged with a crime, potentially strains resources for local jails, and could lead to holding people “longer than is necessary,” he said.

But he added that those weren’t his top reasons for opposing the bill.

“I’m voting against this because it’s wrong, because this legislation rips people from our communities and families based on the mere accusation of a crime, because our Republicans colleagues’ eagerness to make themselves tools in Trump’s attacks on immigrants, refugees, visitors and those who oppose him is vile,” Clancy said.

On the floor, Vos replied that he agreed with Clancy about the presumption of innocence, and that he also agreed with other lawmakers who said the vast majority of immigrants are not guilty of any crime.

“But I would also say that there is a burden of proof on both sides,” Vos said. “It’s not entirely on just the side of the government to ensure that you follow the law.”

Claiming broad bipartisan support for the measure, Vos said Democratic opposition was “clearly out of step, even with your base.”

Rep. Christian Phelps (D-Eau Claire) responded that  he hasn’t heard constituents ask for the legislation or anything like it.

“They are asking us explicitly to make life tangibly easier for working class Wisconsinites,” he said, “and they have not been asking me to engage in redundant acts of political theater to satisfy the whims of a rogue president engaging in a campaign of intimidation and mass deportation that includes constituents in western Wisconsin.”

Senate approves John Doe exemption

The state Senate voted Tuesday to pass a bill that makes an exemption to the state’s John Doe law for police officers involved in a civilian’s death.

In Wisconsin, if a district attorney chooses not  to file criminal charges,  a judge may hold a hearing — known as a John Doe investigation — on the matter and file a complaint based on the findings of that hearing.

The legislation, SB 25, “simply says, if that case goes before a DA, and then the DA  justifies their actions and they are deemed to be innocent of any wrongdoing … that case is closed and it is in a file never to be seen again,” said the bill’s  author, Sen. Rob Hutton (R-Brookfield), on the Senate floor.

Hutton said the legislation allows a judicial investigation to proceed, however, “if a new piece of evidence is presented that wasn’t known before, or an unused piece of evidence is found.”

But Sen. Dora Drake (D-Milwaukee) questioned carving out an exemption to the state’s John Doe law. “This bill does not apply to any other crime in Wisconsin,” she said.

Lawmakers, Drake added, should do more to address “the environment and the situations” that have led to officer-involved deaths. 

Sen. LaTonya Johnson (D-Milwaukee), said testimony at the bill’s public hearing discussed only two attempts to invoke the John Doe proceeding after a prosecutor declined to file charges in an officer-involved death — and one of them involved former Wauwatosa police officer Joseph Mensah, who killed three people in five years.

Allowing for a John Doe investigation in an officer-involved death “protects the public,” Johnson said. “What it does is put a second eye on those cases that deserve a second look.”

The Senate passed the bill 19-13. Two Democrats, Sens. Kristin Dassler-Alfheim (D-Appleton) and Sarah Keyeski (D-Lodi), voted in favor along with 17 Republicans. Sen. Eric Wimberger (R-Oconto), who also opposed the bill in committee, joined the remaining Democrats who voted against the measure.

Reversing DPI testing standards: On a vote of 18-14 along party lines, the Senate concurred in an Assembly bill that would reverse a change that the Department of Public Instruction (DPI) made last year to testing standards.

AB 1 would revert the state’s testing standards to what they were in 2019 and link standards to the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP).

Republicans voting for the bill said that the DPI change “lowered” standards — a claim DPI and Democrats rejected.

Direct primary care passes — but Democrats object: The Senate also voted 18-14 on party lines to pass SB 4, legislation that would clear the way for health care providers who participate in direct primary care arrangements. Under direct primary care, doctors treat patients who subscribe to their services for a monthly fee as an alternative to health insurance for primary care.

An amendment Democrats offered would have added a list of enumerated civil rights protections for direct primary care patients. That list was in a direct primary care bill in the 2023-24 legislative session that passed the Assembly but stalled in the Senate when two organizations protested language protecting “gender identity.”

After the amendment was rejected, also on a party-line vote, Democrats voted against the final bill.

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

Reading Time: 3 minutes

For months, Republican lawmakers on the powerful Joint Finance Committee have cast doubt on the reauthorization of Wisconsin’s land stewardship program following a July state Supreme Court ruling that prohibited the legislative committee from blocking projects after the funds have been budgeted. 

A 2023 Wisconsin Watch investigation found that the GOP-controlled committee had increasingly used a secretive “pocket veto” power since Democratic Gov. Tony Evers was elected to block conservation projects under the Knowles-Nelson Stewardship Program. Lawmakers refused to take action on some projects, preventing them from moving forward.

The program has been funded at roughly $33 million annually since 2015 and is currently funded through 2026. But only $20.1 million of those funds were spent in fiscal year 2023-24, according to the Legislative Fiscal Bureau.

That $33 million allotment hardly stacks up to the amount the program used to be funded. In 2007, the program was reauthorized for another decade and allocated $86 million annually for land purchases, though that was reduced to $60 million a year in the 2011 budget, then $50 million in the 2013 budget before bottoming out at $33 million in the 2015 budget.

Since the 6-1 ruling — with two conservative justices joining the liberal majority — GOP lawmakers have seemed poised to let a popular, bipartisan program die because they don’t have final say over spending on the projects. 

“It’s unfortunate that Gov. Evers’ lawsuit (which resulted in the Supreme Court ruling) removed all accountability of the stewardship program, which helped ensure local voices were heard and that taxpayer resources were spent wisely,” Rep. Mark Born, R-Beaver Dam, co-chair of the JFC, said in a statement. “The entire program is now in jeopardy.”

In an interview with the Cap Times, Assembly Speaker Robin Vos, R-Rochester, said the odds that Republicans would renew the program were less than 50%. 

But JFC vice chair Rep. Tony Kurtz, R-Wonewoc, told Wisconsin Watch that he is hopeful the program can continue and that nobody in his caucus wants the program to end. 

“I’m going to do everything in my power to make sure the program is sustainable for the future,” Kurtz said in an interview.

Since 1989, when the program began, the state has spent more than $23 million in stewardship funds in Kurtz’s 41st Assembly District. The program has funded nearly 330 projects in the district ranging from trail developments and campground upgrades to habitat protection and boat launch construction. 

In his executive budget proposal last month, Evers proposed a 10-year renewal of the program with a $1 billion price tag. Kurtz said the budget committee isn’t going to adopt that proposal, but he’s committed to seeing the program reauthorized for “the next couple of years.” He said every lawmaker has a Knowles-Nelson project “in their backyard” that they might not even know about.

“It is a large price tag,” Kurtz said. “But we do need to make the investments. The investments are valuable for the long-term conservation of Wisconsin.” 

Following a series of listening sessions held in his district, state Sen. Howard Marklein, R-Spring Green, said attendees spoke in support of the program. 

“I am supportive of the program and hope to see it continue, but many of my colleagues in the legislature have reservations,” Marklein, co-chair of the JFC, said in a statement. 

Kurtz said it’s unfortunate the program has become a partisan fight in the Capitol and that some lawmakers are “negative” toward the program, adding that Knowles-Nelson is “more than just one project.” 

Conservation advocacy groups like Gathering Waters have pushed back against the JFC’s threats to kill the program, which provides millions of dollars in grants to local governments and nonprofits.

“I think legislative leaders were certainly unhappy about losing that Supreme Court case in such an unambiguous way,” Charles Carlin, director of strategic initiatives for Gathering Waters, told Wisconsin Watch. “There is constantly a temptation for lawmakers to get pulled into partisan battles where politics becomes more about winning than it does about good policy.”

When asked if he would veto a state budget that eliminates funding for Knowles-Nelson, Evers said he would use his partial veto power to reject “that part of it.”

Republican lawmakers diverge on future of conservation stewardship program 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: 4 minutes

An Assembly Republican is using the authority of the Elon Musk-inspired GOAT Committee to investigate the diversity, equity and inclusion initiatives of local governments across the state before the committee has even met.

Rep. Shae Sortwell, R-Two Rivers, the committee’s vice chair, confirmed Thursday he sent or plans to send information requests to all 72 counties and the state’s 50 largest cities. Wisconsin Watch first reported Thursday that Sortwell had sent requests on Feb. 20 to multiple cities and counties. 

The requests state that GOAT “has been charged with undertaking a review of county use of taxpayer dollars for positions, policies, and activities related to diversity, equity, and inclusion.” Sortwell’s emails ask for “documentation” from January 2019 to the present relating to the following items:

• DEI-related grants the communities may have received.
• the communities’ “adopted/enacted” DEI policies. 
• any DEI training programs the communities might be involved with.
• the titles and salaries of employees with DEI-related positions. 
• and the “estimated associated costs” of DEI-related policies and trainings.

Officials for Fitchburg, Manitowoc, Oshkosh and Racine told Wisconsin Watch their respective cities plan to treat and fulfill Sortewll’s request like any other public records request they receive.

Sortwell did not respond to questions for Wisconsin Watch about his information requests and the committee’s work.

The committee is new to the Assembly this legislative session. It is inspired by the so-called federal Department of Government Efficiency — which has bulldozed through federal agencies in the early days of the second Trump administration — and is similarly named after a pop culture meme (GOAT is shorthand for greatest of all time; DOGE is named after a meme turned cryptocurrency).

The committee’s chair, Rep. Amanda Nedweski, R-Pleasant Prairie, recently told Wisconsin Watch the body was created “to identify opportunities to increase state government efficiency and to decrease spending.” Nedweski did not respond to questions about the committee’s work for this story.

The move to investigate DEI policies was made without the knowledge of the committee’s Democratic members, according to a Tuesday letter the three lawmakers sent to Nedweski, a copy of which was obtained by Wisconsin Watch.

“One member sending a request implying the participation of the entirety of the Committee’s membership violates the spirit of bipartisanship and cooperation you have shared with us as your intent for the Committee,” Reps. Mike Bare, Francesca Hong and Angelina Cruz wrote. “Empowering one Committee member to act in the interest of an entire Committee’s membership without their prior knowledge or consent is a dangerous precedent.”

The three Democrats also questioned the committee’s authority to seek the information. Sortwell’s request cites a little-known statute that states “departments, officers and employees of Wisconsin state government, and the governing bodies of the political subdivisions of this state, shall assist legislative committees in the completion of their tasks.” “Political subdivisions” include counties, cities, villages and towns.

“They shall provide legislative committees with ready access to any books, records or other information relating to such tasks,” the law continues.

But, the Democratic lawmakers argue, the committee “does not have any discernible ‘task’ before it.” They noted the committee has not met and no bills have been referred to it.

“The committee has nothing but a name,” Bare told Wisconsin Watch in an interview. “That’s all we know about it.”

Speaking to reporters on Wednesday, Assembly Speaker Robin Vos, R-Rochester, said GOP lawmakers are searching for “grants that are going to local governments that have requirements in them that add extra cost or extra burden that we could look to say we’re not going to allow that to happen.”

Lawmakers are requesting information from local governments because Democratic Gov. Tony Evers has not granted GOP legislators access to state agencies, Vos said.

The speaker added that the goal is “to make sure that whatever we are rooting out for waste, fraud and abuse, we have data to be able to utilize, and it’s just hard to get from an administration that’s uncooperative.”

Vos also rejected Democrats’ concerns that Sortwell is operating without notifying his colleagues first.

“It’s pretty normal to do fact gathering before you have a hearing,” Vos said. “I don’t know why anybody would be concerned. I am the subject of open requests at least weekly. It’s not always the (most fun) part of your job, but it’s part of what makes Wisconsin’s government open.”

In a social media post on Thursday, Sortwell affirmed he sent the requests and said he plans to request information from state agencies as well.

“Just because you don’t like it and whine about it, doesn’t mean I can’t do it,” he wrote in response to concerns from his Democratic colleagues, pointing to a memo issued Thursday by the Wisconsin Legislative Council, the Legislature’s nonpartisan attorneys.

The memo concludes there is “no reason why a committee vice chairperson would not be able to” request information with the blessing of the committee’s chair — which Sortwell said he has.

Numerous counties have also received communication from the GOAT Committee, according to a legal memo crafted for the Wisconsin Counties Association.

The memo questions whether the committee’s requests were submitted to the correct bodies of government and outlines concerns that responding to the request for five years of information “may involve a significant undertaking requiring expenditure of county staff resources.”

“There are concerns surrounding the validity of the request and a county’s legal obligation to respond,” the memo states, adding “we understand there may be legitimate concerns the GOAT Committee is attempting to address.”

Bare expressed concerns GOP lawmakers would try to hold up resources for local governments unless they cut back on DEI initiatives, which was a piece of a larger deal in 2023 that reworked how the state sends aid to local governments.

Part of that bill allowed the city of Milwaukee and Milwaukee County, both of which were facing financial headwinds, to increase the sales tax in their jurisdictions to raise additional revenue. But the legislation also mandated that both Milwaukee governments “may not use moneys raised by levying taxes for funding any position for which the principal duties consist of promoting individuals on the basis of their race, color, ancestry, national origin, or sexual orientation.”

Vos deployed a similar playbook to target DEI efforts on UW System campuses during the last budget cycle.

Republican uses GOAT Committee authority to investigate local government diversity efforts 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: 4 minutes

The fate of postpartum Medicaid expansion, a bipartisan effort in the state Legislature, yet again falls in the hands of Assembly Speaker Robin Vos, who said Tuesday that it’s “unlikely” his chamber will get to vote on it.

Congress previously gave states a permanent option to accept federal funds for 12-month extensions of postpartum Medicaid coverage. Wisconsin and Arkansas are now the only two states that have turned down the federal extension. Wisconsin’s coverage currently lasts 60 days after birth, far shorter than what health experts recommend. 

Extending the coverage has emerged as a way for states to fight maternal mortality rates. Though pregnancy-related deaths are rare,  a third of them in Wisconsin occur beyond the 60-day coverage window, according to the Department of Health Services. 

Rep. Patrick Snyder, R-Weston, on Tuesday reintroduced a bill that would expand coverage to 12 months. The legislation mirrors the extensions that have been introduced in previous sessions, yet have failed to pass the Legislature. That same day, Vos, R-Rochester, said a vote on the 12-month extension would be “unlikely.” 

“Our caucus has taken a position that expanding welfare is not a wise idea for anyone involved,” Vos told reporters. 

Republican lawmakers previously agreed to a three-month coverage period. Democratic Gov. Tony Evers’ 2021-23 state budget proposal asked for a 12-month extension, but Republican lawmakers on the powerful Joint Finance Committee amended it to instead require DHS to request federal approval to extend postpartum Medicaid eligibility to 90 days instead of the 60 mandated by federal law. 

Vos accused the Evers administration of not applying for the 90-day extension the Legislature already granted, which isn’t true — something Vos acknowledged in response to a follow-up question to his office. DHS submitted the application for the extension, but the federal Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services last year said it would not approve a waiver request for coverage shorter than one year. 

“I’m glad that I was wrong and it has been submitted,” Vos responded. “The waiver request should be resubmitted to the Trump administration.”

“Going from the 60 to 90 days is pretty negligible,” said Rep. Clint Moses, R-Menomonie, chair of the Assembly Committee on Health, Aging and Long-Term Care.  

During the last legislative session, the Republican-controlled Senate passed a bipartisan bill in a 32-1 vote that would have extended postpartum coverage to 12 months. The lone opponent was Duey Stroebel, who lost his re-election bid in November. In total, 73 lawmakers cosponsored the bill — over half of the state Legislature. The bill authored by Snyder this session is currently circulating for cosponsors. 

Interest groups from both sides of the aisle came out in support of the previous legislation, including Pro-Life Wisconsin, the Wisconsin Catholic Conference, the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, and Kids Forward.

“It made sense to me because if I am pro-life and I don’t want people to abort their babies, why would I not do everything I could to support those mothers to have the babies,” former Republican Rep. Donna Rozar, who authored the bill last session, told Wisconsin Watch. 

But despite bipartisan support, the Assembly never scheduled it for a hearing before adjourning for the rest of the session in February last year. 

Rozar said she and other lawmakers couldn’t get Vos on board. “He dug his heel in, there was no doubt about it,” she said.

Moses put the bill on the agenda for a hearing. But in addition to Vos blocking it, the committee was jammed near the end of the session and didn’t have time to schedule it, he said. 

“There’s 132 people in this building. I don’t think we should legislate by one,” Sen. Mary Felzkowski, R-Tomahawk, said of Vos. “It’s up to his caucus to elect a different speaker or change his mind. So his members have to put enough pressure on him to get it done.” 

‘There’s 132 people in this building. I don’t think we should legislate by one.’

Sen. Mary Felzkowski, R-Tomahawk

Without Vos’ approval, Moses said it’s not likely that lawmakers will secure a 12-month extension, but he’s hopeful that an extension of at least six or nine months can be agreed to in this year’s state budget, despite the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services’ indication that anything less than 12 months would not be approved. Moses is willing to schedule a hearing for the upcoming bill, but if Vos remains opposed, it may not get referred to him, he said. 

“When it comes to the budget, if there’s something that we want that would be attractive to negotiate this out with, I think that’s a possibility,” Moses said. 

A fiscal estimate last session estimated the bill expansion would cost $21.4 million per year, including $8.4 million in state taxpayer funds with the rest coming from federal taxpayers. It would increase monthly Medicaid enrollment by 5,290 members. Felzkowski, who sponsored the Senate version, said it’s an extension for those who are already covered rather than an expansion that puts more people on Medicaid. She also said it’s good for taxpayers. 

“The reason states have done this — blue states, red states, purple states — is it’s a return on investment for the taxpayers and it makes sense to do it,” Felzkowski told Wisconsin Watch. “We see the number of complications that happen in that first year, and those complications, by not being covered, cost money — cost a lot of money.” 

Wisconsin’s 306% Medicaid income eligibility limit for the 60 days of postpartum coverage is one of the highest in the country — something Vos has pointed to. 

“When you make a choice to have a child, which I’m glad that people do, it’s not the taxpayers’ responsibility to pay for the delivery of that child,” Vos said in 2023. “We do it for people who are in poverty. We’ve made the decision to go to 300%, that’s the law. But to now say beyond 60 days, we’re going to give you free coverage, no copayment, no deductible, until a year out, absolutely not.”

A 2021 version of the bill failed to get a floor vote in both the Senate and the Assembly, yet had only one lobbying group registered against it.

That group was Opportunity Solutions Project, the lobbying arm of the Florida-based Foundation for Government Accountability. The conservative advocacy group did not respond to Wisconsin Watch’s requests for comment. FGA has a track record of lobbying against Medicaid expansion and other bills in Wisconsin. 

“I think it’s a little premature to have any discussions about the Medicaid budget right now. We have a brand new administration coming into D.C.,” Rep. Tyler August, R-Walworth, said in a Tuesday press conference with Vos. “I think the Trump administration is actually going to put some common sense into some of these programs federally.”

Republicans and Democrats agree on postpartum Medicaid expansion — Robin Vos says it’s unlikely 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

Wisconsin’s photo ID requirement for voting would be elevated from a state law to a constitutional amendment under a proposal approved Tuesday in the Republican-controlled Assembly with no support from Democrats.

The proposed constitutional amendment will appear on the April 1 ballot for voter consideration. It would need to be approved by voters before the constitution would be amended. Even if voters reject it, the voter ID requirement that has been in state law since 2011 will remain in place.

Republicans, citing Wisconsin polls that showed broad support for voter ID requirements, hailed the measure as a way to bolster election security and protect the law from being overturned in court.

But Democrats said photo ID requirements are often enforced unfairly, making it more difficult for people of color, people with disabilities and poor people to vote. Democrats argued that lawmakers should focus instead on other issues such as gun control, clean water, affordable housing, and expanding access to child care.

If voters agree to place the photo ID requirement in the constitution, it would make it more difficult for a future Legislature controlled by Democrats to change a law they’ve long opposed. Any constitutional amendment must be approved in two consecutive legislative sessions and by a statewide vote of the people.

Wisconsin is one of nine states where voters must present a photo ID to cast a ballot, and its requirement is the strictest in the country, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures. Thirty-six states have laws requiring or requesting that voters show some sort of identification at the polls, according to NCSL.

Other states have taken similar steps in recent years to put voter ID requirements in their constitutions, with mixed success. Voters approved it in Mississippi in 2011 and North Carolina voters in 2018, while Minnesota voters rejected it in 2012.

The Republican-controlled Wisconsin Legislature first passed the state’s voter ID law in 2011. It took effect briefly in 2012, but courts that year put it on hold until 2016 after state and federal courts allowed it to take effect.

The Legislature last session approved the voter ID constitutional amendment for the first time. The measure was the first proposal considered by the Legislature this year. The state Senate passed it last week along a party line vote, with all Republicans in support and Democrats against.

The Assembly on Tuesday gave it the final approval needed, also on a party line vote, sending it to the ballot for voter consideration.

It will be the sixth ballot measure the Legislature has placed on the ballot over the past year. Amending the constitution puts questions before voters and avoids potential vetoes by Democratic Gov. Tony Evers.

Evers this month proposed giving citizens the ability to put measures on the ballot through a referendum process. Evers on Tuesday renewed that call, which Republicans oppose.

“If Republican lawmakers are going to continue ignoring the will of the people and legislating by constitutional amendment, then they should give the people of Wisconsin the power to pass the policies they want to see at the ballot box,” Evers said in a statement.

Lawmakers moved quickly because of a Jan. 21 deadline to get the issue on the April 1 ballot.

Control of the state Supreme Court also hangs in the balance in that April election. The race for an open seat will determine whether liberals maintain control for at least the next three years. The Democratic-backed candidate, Dane County Circuit Judge Susan Crawford, was the lead attorney in a 2011 lawsuit challenging the voter ID law.

There are no pending legal challenges to voter ID.

Even if the amendment is approved, lawmakers could still decide what types of photo IDs are acceptable. Voters without a photo ID could still cast a provisional ballot, as they can now. The ballot is counted if the voter returns later with a photo ID.

Wisconsin Watch is a nonprofit and nonpartisan newsroom. Subscribe to our newsletter to get our investigative stories and Friday news roundup. This story is published in partnership with The Associated Press.

Wisconsin Legislature puts photo ID requirement on ballot for voter approval 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.