In the eight years that Cindy Veeser has operated her childcare center in the Green Bay suburb of Bellevue, Forever Young, she has provided an essential service — but she has also faced almost constant challenges.

At the height of the COVID-19 pandemic a few years ago, things got a little easier. Federal pandemic relief funds gave childcare providers like Veeser a new safety net — support and stability that they hadn’t known previously.

In Wisconsin the money went to thousands of providers, including Veeser, through Child Care Counts, a $20 million-a-month childcare stabilization fund that paid providers a monthly stipend.

The money helped childcare centers stay open and increase pay for childcare teachers, all without increasing costs for the parents depending on childcare so they could work.

“Federal stabilization funding prevented system collapse, supporting 5,762 programs, 75,740 educators, and more than 430,000 children, while helping reverse a decade long decline in licensed child care,” the Wisconsin Early Childhood Association states in a report issued in May.

“It made everything possible,” Veeser says of Child Care Counts. “My teachers were getting paid a little bit closer to what they should have been making at that time.”

The money didn’t just go to wages. “There wasn’t one thing that it didn’t help cover,” Veeser says.

At the end of this month, however, providers will lose the last vestige of that support. One year of “bridge” funding from the 2025-27 Wisconsin state budget ends June 30, and childcare providers across Wisconsin are unsure what happens next.

“We’re holding things together the best we can now,” Veeser says. “I just see us falling behind.”

One in four centers could close

More than a year ago one out of four Wisconsin provides told researchers that without Child Care Counts funding they could close down entirely.

More than one in three said they would probably reduce the number of hours they could provide child care. And nearly three out of four said they would have to increase the fees they charge parents.

The survey results were reported in March 2025 by the University of Wisconsin Institute for Research on Poverty. At the time, Wisconsin child care experts were looking ahead to June 2025, when the federal funds that paid for Child Care Counts would run out.

Providers, advocates, Gov. Tony Evers and Democrats in the Legislature had hoped for $480 million in the 2025-27 state budget to continue the stabilization program. What they got was less than 25% of that: $110 million for one year of stabilization funds that ends June 30.

WECA’s May report looked to the 2025 UW survey to forecast what could follow, and solicited new comments from providers.

“I believe that the numbers we reported on, which are the most recent data we have, are going to be much higher in reality,” says Paula Drew, WECA’s director of early care and education policy and research.

“Every provider is talking about the cost of what they’re paying for everything.” in comments submitted to WECA, Drew says. “Many, many, many of them said, ‘I will price parents out and I will likely close,’ or ‘I’m planning on closing because there’s no way I can pay my teachers less.’”

Increased fees and families dropping out

As fees rise, some families drop out of childcare programs. “There’s a huge, growing trend of under-enrollment due to parents not being able to afford the increases that they already have in tuition,” Drew says.

In The Beginning Child Care and Preschool operates centers in Boscobel, Prairie du Chien and Dodgeville, each licensed for 50 children.

“Child Care Counts was a huge difference in our operations,” says director and owner Beth Markut. “We were able to give the staff a minimum of a $2-an-hour raise. We were able to afford new supplies. It was a game changer for us.”

It also helped Markut and her husband, Patrick, open the center in Dodgeville, where they live, in 2023.  “I don’t know if we would have done that if we hadn’t had Child Care Counts, but my guess is probably not,” Markut says.

When Wisconsin cut Child Care Counts payments in half in 2023, In The Beginning increased tuition by 2.5% to 3%, Markut says, and she expects a similar increase after the bridge payments end.

In The Beginning’s increases have been modest compared with those in a state survey, which reported increases for infant care ranging from 11% to 14%, according to WECA.

Nevertheless, Markut says, “I’ve had four families leave our Dodgeville center because it’s cheaper for them just to stay at home” instead of both parents working.

Markut says she’s confident that In The Beginning can keep operating, but she also hopes that lawmakers will come around to the need for ongoing childcare support.

“I don’t think they understand what our profession does through day in and day out,” she says. “If they really understood they would support us, but they don’t. It doesn’t just affect us, it affects the broader economy.”

Shelly Boelter has operated a family child care program in the community of Hager City in northwestern Wisconsin for 23 years.

The family care license is limited to eight children at a time. Boelter built her home with the lower level as childcare space designed into it from the start. “When I was 12, this was what I dreamed of doing,” she says.

Child Care Counts enabled her to take a better wage, cover expenses and put some money away for retirement. That ended when the stabilization stipend was reduced.

To keep going, “I’ll be spending less on things that we could use, to try to just keep it affordable,” Boelter says.

She says she tries to avoid raising rates for families who already have children enrolled, however, because “I don’t want money to be an issue for them to leave.”

As a result, fees vary from one family to another. In the coming months, she expects to raise her rates for new clients, however. “Probably a 25% increase would not be unrealistic,” Boelter says.

She would need even higher increases to fully cover escalating costs, “but families would not be able to afford it,” she says. “I have some families with three children here. They can’t afford that cost for themselves and actually make a living, either.”

‘It’s going to get worse’

With the bridge funding ending and a significant number of programs at risk of  shutting down, advocates say their focus now is on the 2027 state budget, which will be hammered out by  a new governor and a new  state Legislature.

And the childcare economy is likely to become even more precarious.

“The stabilization funding in Wisconsin did some really remarkable things, and it’s really, really sad that we’re just going to see those things roll back,” Drew says.

“There’s a lot of different ways to approach the next budget,” says Ruth Schmidt, WECA executive director — from a new system of direct payments like Child Care Counts to new tax policies or tapping a revenue source, such as legalizing cannabis and then taxing it as a dedicated childcare funding stream.

“The bottom line is, this all is revenue. There’s no way to fix childcare to make it affordable for families, to make it stable within an economy without paying for it,” Schmidt says.

“So, is it going to get worse? We anticipate it’s going to get worse,” she says. “We anticipate it getting significantly worse. And every possible strategy needs money. We can’t just rely on providers to continue to sort of take this on their backs, and it’s not good for them, and it’s not good for kids and families.”

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

Wisconsin healthcare advocates have been worrying for months that new work requirements for some people on Medicaid that will take effect next year will make it harder for people who are eligible to get on, or stay on, the health insurance program.

Those worries increased this week now that the federal government has issued its rules for states to implement the new requirements.

“More people are going to have a harder time complying with the bureaucracy, and they’re going to get caught up in that,” William Parke-Sutherland, government affairs director at Kids Forward, told the Wisconsin Examiner Tuesday. Kids Forward is a Wisconsin research and advocacy organization for children and families of color and facing barriers to opportunity.

Medicaid — known as BadgerCare in Wisconsin — provides health insurance primarily for people with incomes below the federal poverty guideline: $15,960 for one person and $33,000 for a household of four. Medicaid is regulated and partially funded by the federal government, with the states administering the program and sharing responsibility for its costs.

Work requirements were among changes to Medicaid included in HR 1, the tax and spending megabill that congressional Republicans passed a year ago and President Donald Trump signed July 4, 2025. HR 1’s cuts to Medicaid will total more than $900 billion over 10 years, according to KFF, a health policy research and news nonprofit.

The new Medicaid work requirements apply to people who were added to the program as a result of Medicaid expansion under the Affordable Care Act, the federal health insurance law enacted in 2010.

Under the ACA, states were able to get additional federal funds by expanding Medicaid to cover families with incomes up to 138% of the federal poverty guideline — $45,540 for a family of four.

Wisconsin didn’t adopt the full ACA expansion, however. Instead, under former Gov. Scott Walker, the state extended Medicaid healthcare coverage to childless adults with annual incomes up to $15,960, the  federal poverty guideline.  

About 190,000 childless adults in Wisconsin were covered by BadgerCare in April, according to the state Department of Health Services. Nationally at least two-thirds of people under Medicaid expansion are already working, Parke-Sutherland said. 

Starting in 2027 those additional Medicaid recipients must show they are working or engaged in community service at least 80 hours a month, or enrolled in an education program at least part time. The 2025 tax-cut law provided exemptions for people with disabilities or in frail health, as well as for pregnant women and caregivers for other people with disabilities.

The federal rule that the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services issued Monday outlines how states must implement those requirements.

“We have been preparing to implement the requirement for almost a year based on limited verbal guidance we received from CMS as well as information we learned by collaborating with other states and learning from their approaches,” Elizabeth Goodsit, spokesperson for the Department of Health Services, said Wednesday.

DHS has spent months developing policies, procedures and system changes to implement the requirement, Goodsit said. “Our goal is to reduce the administrative burden on current and future Medicaid members to meet the new federal red-tape work requirements.”

Healthcare advocates contend that stringent terms in the newly released federal rule will make it more difficult for people to remain covered by Medicaid, even if they fully qualify.

For example, the rule presents “a much more restrictive definition of ‘medically frail’ than what appears to be in the statute of HR 1, and what people had been hearing from CMS,” Parke-Sutherland said.

Advocates said the rule also makes qualifying for an exemption more complicated for people with disabilities.

“We’re looking at how many people with disabilities aren’t going to be qualifying for an exemption and are at risk for losing their healthcare,” said Tamara Jackson, public policy analyst for the Wisconsin Board for People with Developmental Disabilities.

Unpaid family caregivers are supposed to be exempt, but Jackson said the relevant language in the federal rule “is, I think, really confusing and really difficult for unpaid family caregivers [to navigate].”

Jackson said the state will face “a tremendous amount of problem-solving that has to be done in a very short amount of time.” 

It appears the federal rule doesn’t permit states to automatically declare a person exempt from the work requirement on the basis of a particular illness or diagnosis — such as Parkinson’s Disease, multiple sclerosis, HIV-AIDS or cancer.

Many of those conditions are cyclical, with patients alternating between times when symptoms seem mild and times when they’re deeply debilitating, Parke-Sutherland said.

Patients “[are] going to have to prove that they can’t work in order to qualify” for coverage, he said. “That’s a big change, and it’s going to make it harder for individuals and it’s going to make it harder and more costly for the state.”

In a statement issued earlier this week, Lisa Lacasse, president of the American Cancer Society Action Network, said the new restrictions collide with cancer patients’ essential need for health coverage.

“Knowing 1 in 3 children diagnosed with the disease and 1 in 10 people with a history of cancer currently count on Medicaid for their health insurance, this coverage is a matter of life or death for millions of people nationwide,” Lacasse said.

The restrictions in the new federal rule “link the definition of medical frailty to a person’s ability to work,” Lacasse said. The “debilitating side effects of the disease or treatment” complicate the task of fulfilling a work requirement or proving they can’t work, however.

Many cancer patients want to work between rounds of chemotherapy, she said, but instead, they “will have to choose between losing their Medicaid coverage, working the required 80 hours per month, or giving up working altogether to qualify for an exemption.”

Parke-Sutherland said the work requirements alone are expected to cut Medicaid nationwide by $326 billion over 10 years.

“That will not make people healthier and will not make people more likely to work,” he said. “The only way it reduces costs is because people who are currently eligible are not going to be eligible any more, not able to prove they’re working, not able to prove they have a condition [that makes them exempt], or they’re going to get caught up in the bureaucratic red tape of trying to prove those things.”

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

The Wisconsin Legislature’s budget committee authorized $7 million in state funds Tuesday so that a state agency that supports Wisconsinites with disabilities entering the workforce can draw down a waiting list of more than 7,000 people.

The Joint Finance Committee voted unanimously for the funding, but members first argued over why the panel didn’t act sooner to provide the money.

The Division of Vocational Rehabilitation in the Wisconsin Department of Workforce Development reported in November that it faced a shortfall under the current state budget.

For people with disabilities who are seeking work, DVR provides career services including training as well as technical assistance for employers. The agency typically works with about 19,000 clients at a time, according to DWD. DVR receives federal funds to cover 78.7% of its annual costs, with the state required to cover the remaining 21.3% under federal law.

The 2025-27 state budget added $3.8 million for the agency, bringing state funding to $21.3 million, according to the Legislative Fiscal Bureau.

In November, the agency announced it was $4.6 million short of what was needed for the 2025-26 fiscal year. Because of that shortfall, the agency instituted a waiting list for people needing the DVR’s services.

“While we’ve been able to support existing program participants, all new applicants have been forced to wait for services, leaving over 7,600 Wisconsinites with disabilities currently on the waitlist to receive career services,” said DWD Secretary-designee Amy Pechacek in a statement Tuesday from the department. About 1,000 people seeking services are added to the waitlist each month, according to DWD.

DWD asked the finance committee for $4.6 million for the budget’s first 12 months, 2025-26, and another $6.4 million for the second 12 months, 2026-27.

Tuesday, the budget committee’s Republican majority on a 4-11 vote rejected a bid by the committee’s four Democrats to honor that request.

“It just stuns me that this committee wouldn’t take every opportunity to make sure that we have a zero waitlist opportunity so that people with disabilities can enter the workforce, pay taxes, and contribute to our economy,” said state Rep. Deb Andraca (D-Whitefish Bay) after the vote. “Are we really saving money by preventing people from working and not doing everything we can so that there’s no waitlist for this program?”

Instead, the majority proposed a $600,000 appropriation for the first year, which ends June 30, and the full $6.4 million sought for the second year. The Legislative Fiscal Bureau projected the appropriation would enable the waitlist to be closed by the end of June 2027. The proposal passed 15-0.

The funds were made possible in part because a $20 million appropriation for dairy farm aid that passed the Senate died in the Assembly, said Sen. Rob Stafsholt (R-New Richmond).

DWD will draw down the waitlist by first giving priority to people with the most serious disabilities, followed by people with less severe but significant disabilities and finally people whose disabilities do not seriously limit their functional capacity or require people with multiple services.

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

In the 2024 election, Republican messaging that marginalized transgender Americans and attacked Democrats got widespread attention.

Opinion is divided among political analysts about whether anti-trans messaging contributed to Democratic presidential candidate Kamala Harris’s narrow loss — about 29,000 votes in Wisconsin and about a 1.5% margin nationwide — or was irrelevant. 

A 2023 Marquette University Law School poll found that a majority of respondents favored protecting trans people against workplace discrimination, but 70% also believed athletes should be required to play sports on teams that match the sex they were assigned at birth. 

But whether or not the strategy helped seal Donald Trump’s victory two years ago, Republican candidates in Wisconsin have been leaning into messaging that targets transgender and nonbinary people.

Sen. Melissa Ratcliff (D-Cottage Grove), whose adult son is transgender, sees little reason to “rehash” the 2024 election. “I think it’s always important to make sure that we are advocating for our trans community and for kids and speaking out against hate,” she said. “I think the bigger concern is why a party feels the need to attack our trans kids and use that as an issue to rile up part of their base ultimately.”

Transgender individuals account for less than 1% of the adult Wisconsin population, about 36,000 people, and 3.3% of teenagers between the ages of 13 and 17, fewer than 13,000 people — or 180 per county. The Williams Institute at the University of California Los Angeles Law School calculated those estimates based on survey data the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) collected between 2021 and 2023.

The Republican majority in the state Legislature has passed bills that would bar gender-affirming care for young people and ban kids from playing on sports teams that didn’t match the gender they were assigned at birth or their biological sex. Gov. Tony Evers has repeatedly vetoed those measures.

“We’ve seen this in the Legislature, that by somehow going after children and bullying them is something that they see as a winning issue,” Ratcliff said. “It just doesn’t make any sense to me. And that grown adults think it’s OK to bully kids is just gross.”

Meanwhile, with Trump’s inauguration to a second term, federal policy has turned against transgender people and also against a more expansive understanding of gender.

During the Wisconsin Republican convention in Wisconsin Dells on May 16, speakers attacked the transgender population, particularly youth, sounding the alarm about the possibility of trans girls playing high school sports, mocking the use of inclusive language and promoting the  policing of bathrooms. 

Republican nominee for governor Tom Tiffany opened his speech by asking the delegates, “Are you ready for a governor that’s going to protect girls’ sports?”

Sen. Ron Johnson inveighed against “Biological males competing against our little girls in sports. Biological males invading their locker rooms, their showers, their bathrooms.” He as well as former Gov. Scott Walker falsely claimed that minors identified as transgender can be subjected to surgical procedures.

And a May 19 press release by Republican press secretary Zach Bannon falsely claimed that more than 90 lawmakers were “emphasizing their support of sex-change surgeries for minors” in an open letter to two leading Wisconsin hospital systems.

The false claim was repeated three times in the press release, which attacked Democrats in Wisconsin’s 3rd Congressional District who are running in the party’s primary to challenge Republican U.S. Rep. Derrick Van Orden. 

The letter called on the healthcare providers, Children’s Wisconsin in Wauwatosa and UW Health in Madison, to resume gender-affirming care for minors, which both suspended early this year following threats to federal medical dollars from the Trump administration.

That form of care does not include surgery, however. A Children’s Wisconsin spokesperson said medical treatment prior to the suspension of care involved medication, and that Children’s still provides mental health and behavioral care. 

“UW Health does not offer gender-affirming surgery to minors,” said Sara Benzel, a spokesperson for the Madison-based system.

Abigail Swetz, executive director of Fair Wisconsin, a statewide LGBTQ+ advocacy group, said that for the youngest children who have been diagnosed with gender dysphoria — a deep-seated sense that their gender identity doesn’t match their biological sex — the first step is extensive counseling with a therapist.

Gender-affirming care “is also age-appropriate, and this is the part that I think people miss all the time,” Swetz said in a recent interview.  “There are no medical interventions until puberty for gender-affirming care.”

Interventions at puberty can involve medication but not surgery, Swetz said. Those can include hormone treatment to delay puberty and to redirect the body’s development.

“But that is all age-appropriate, and highly individualized, just like all good medical care is with the doctor,” Swetz said. “And always with full consent of parents and guardians. When we are talking about gender-affirming care for trans youth, that’s what we’re talking about. Not what the other side would like to pretend.”

Bannon did not respond to a Wisconsin Examiner email message seeking an explanation for the false statements in his press release.

A federal judge in April blocked the Trump administration from cutting off federal funds to hospitals that provide gender-affirming care. The judge’s order said the Department of Health and Human Services lacked the authority to override professional standards of care or to deny funding to healthcare providers following those standards.

Since then some health providers in other states, including Children’s Minnesota hospital, have resumed providing gender-affirming care for minors.

Both UW Health and Children’s Wisconsin said they sympathized with patients who had been undergoing that care and their families, but that they believe they would remain in legal jeopardy if they resume care involving medication.

Ratcliff said that as someone whose family has gone through the experience of addressing the needs of a transgender child, it was important to her “to make sure that all trans kids and the trans community know that there are people in the Capitol that care about our trans community, that see them, that are fighting for them, and that we can push back again and fight back against all the hateful rhetoric toward our trans community.”

She said she believes Republicans are ramping up  attacks on trans people as a deflection from the economic squeeze voters are feeling.

“We know that everyday costs are going up and they aren’t putting forward policies that actually help everyday lives of Americans or Wisconsinites,” Ratcliff said. “My child being trans is not causing these prices to go up. My child’s healthcare is not causing any difference in people’s lives except for my child’s life.”

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

Five Wisconsinites have been reported infected with mpox this year, and state health officials are recommending that people who might be at risk for the illness get vaccinated.

Mpox — previously known as monkeypox — is a viral illness that produces a rash, skin lesions, and fevers, aches or chills.

The virus isn’t common but can be serious, and is spread through intimate, face-to-face contact that includes talking or breathing closely, or through sustained skin-to-skin contact, according to the Wisconsin Department of Health Services. It can also be spread through items that have been contaminated with fluids or sores from someone with mpox.

Since 2022 mpox has been circulating in the U.S. at low levels, according to DHS. For 2026, through May 26, 535 cases of mpox have been confirmed in the U.S, including the five people diagnosed in Wisconsin.  

The risk is low for the general public, DHS reported, but people who may be at higher risk for exposure to mpox should talk to healthcare providers about vaccination. DHS has recommended the mpox vaccine for higher risk people, including men who have had sex with men and who have had more than one sex partner in the last six months. 

Travel and sexual exposure elsewhere in the world are other risk factors, according to DHS. People who are in close contact with someone with mpox, including healthcare workers who are exposed, also are at higher risk.

To prevent mpox infection, DHS has recommended that people learn the symptoms of mpox, watch their own and their partners’ bodies for changes such as rashes or skin lesions, and have “open and honest conversations” with partners about mpox as well as about sexually transmitted infections and HIV, the virus responsible for Acquired Immunodeficiency Syndrome, or AIDS.

“Anyone who thinks they were recently exposed to mpox should contact a health care provider to talk about whether they should get vaccinated,” DHS said in an announcement. “Monitor health for fever, chills, swollen lymph nodes and new, unexplained rashes and contact a health care provider if one occurs. People who become ill should avoid contact with others until receiving health care.”

More information on the virus can be found at the DHS web page for mpox or by contacting https://211wisconsin.communityos.org/.

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

More than 800 nurses at a Madison hospital owned by a national nonprofit group will vote in the coming weeks on whether to join a union.

The organizing campaign at St. Mary’s Hospital is one of the largest in recent memory in Wisconsin.

In a statement earlier this month, a spokesperson said the hospital’s parent organization, SSM Health, “respects the right of its employees” to freely choose union representation. Nurses and the Service Employees International Union say the hospital’s management has responded with stiff opposition.

Union supporters are planning a rally Thursday afternoon in front of the hospital, with U.S. Rep. Mark Pocan (D-Black Earth) among the featured speakers.

“There’s a national crisis facing both our healthcare system and the nursing workforce,” Pocan said in a statement issued Tuesday announcing the event. “St. Mary’s nurses are trying to address this crisis right here in our community by having a strong voice for better staffing and retention. SSM should respect their freedom to vote in a fair union election without any pressure campaign.”

The union election, supervised by the National Labor Relations Board, will be the largest such vote in recent memory in Wisconsin. A date for the election hasn’t yet been set, but it could be announced as early as this week.

It comes amid a rising interest in unions among healthcare workers — one that coincides with the growth of increasingly concentrated multistate healthcare networks, including nonprofit organizations.

“We’re seeing more union elections, we’re seeing more petitions for recognition of unions as well,” said Dr. Ahmed Ahmed, a research fellow at Brigham and Women’s Hospital in Boston and Harvard Medical School, in a panel discussion earlier this month conducted by Wisconsin Health News.

With mergers and consolidations, hospitals and health systems have grown larger and larger. Labor costs are their biggest expense, and in trying to trim those costs, they’re increasing caseloads and reducing the time patients have with their providers, Ahmed said. Healthcare workers are turning to unions in search of “one collective voice that is able to govern and be able to bargain for those things.”

Centralized decision-making

Supporters of the St. Mary’s union campaign say that concentration is one of the reasons they’re organizing. Centralized decision-making at the Missouri headquarters of the parent organization have felt to some like a corporate takeover.

“There have been a lot more directives from corporate headquarters in St. Louis,” said Josh Taylor, a nurse in the hospital’s inpatient behavioral health unit.

St. Mary’s was one of several hospitals and healthcare facilities established by nuns from Europe and sponsored by Roman Catholic congregations in the 19th century. The facilities were only loosely connected until 1986 when the corporate structure changed with the creation of SSM Health, according to the SSM Health website.

SSM Health had been sponsored by the Franciscan Sisters of Mary until 2013, when sponsorship shifted to a new corporate entity, SSM Health Ministries, while remaining part of the Roman Catholic church.

SSM Health is headquartered in St. Louis and operates in four states — Wisconsin, Illinois, Missouri and Oklahoma — where it runs 24 hospitals and more than 540 other facilities, including doctor’s offices, outpatient services, home care and hospice programs.

According to SSM’s annual financial statements, SSM Health had $12.7 billion in revenues in 2025 and ended the year with a balance of $484 million in net revenue over expenses.

In 2014 SSM Health began applying its name to all of the healthcare facilities in its network.  It also consolidated its business operations including human resources, finance, strategy and planning and marketing and communications.

With those changes, nurses who are supporting unionizing say that decision-making on day-to-day policies and practices has moved farther away.

“We watched our personalized policies for our hospital disappear,” said Lynette Willsey-Schmidt, a labor and delivery nurse who has worked at St. Mary’s for more than 11 years.

Employee councils called ineffective

Willsey-Schmidt said labor and delivery nurses along with the doctors in the department had developed a series of practices to reduce intervention during births where risks and complications were lower. Those practices were welcomed by patients, she said.

But as SSM Health took charge of policymaking, “we were told we can’t do that anymore,” Willsey-Schmidt said, because those policies didn’t exist elsewhere in the SSM Health system.

Taylor said that while employee councils are supposed to relay feedback from the floor to upper management, they haven’t been effective.

“I’ve been on the unit councils,” he said. “We have tried the normal routes to bring our concerns to the table. We are heard, but nothing is acted on.”

When employees have raised concerns, “We’re told, ‘This is how it is. This is how all the hospitals have to do it,’” Taylor said.

Morgan Espich, an inpatient medical and surgical nurse, said the hospital recently purchased and began requiring nurses to use a new brand of intravenous pumps, different from what they had been using. She and her coworkers had been happy with the previous models, Espich said, and no one explained the reason for the change. “We just had to get new ones that no one asked for,” she recalled.

In addition, the hospital staff has to keep some of the older IV pumps on hand, said Carrie Schrank, an intermediate care trauma nurse, to substitute for the new pumps when they malfunction.

Nurses contend staffing levels have left employees straining to cover all their responsibilities, while nurses have been told to improve productivity.

“Productivity should be about patients’ outcomes,” Willsey-Schmidt said.

Consultants who visited earlier this year recommended ways to reduce staffing, but Schrank said their recommendations didn’t address how acutely ill some patients are.

“The days we’re busy, we go home and wonder, did I do enough?” Espich said.

Hospital stance — respect or intimidation?

SSM Health released a statement earlier this month in response to the Wisconsin Examiner’s submission of specific questions about the union campaign as well as a request for an interview.

“At SSM Health, we work hard to cultivate a supportive and collaborative work environment where every employee is treated with respect and compassion,” said the statement, delivered by Kim Sveum, SSM Health regional director of communications.

“We value our high-quality patient-centered care and place of healing.  We strive to ensure that our team thrives so that they can do their best work in realizing our Mission to provide exceptional patient care.”

The statement concluded, “SSM Health respects the right of its employees to make a free and informed choice as to whether or not they wish to be represented by a union.”

Union organizers say that there have been extensive messages posted on employee bulletin boards disparaging unions and the SEIU and emphasizing employees’ right to decline to sign a union authorization card.

“They have been constantly intimidating staff,” Schrank said.

Employees typically attach their work badges to a retractable line coiled up in a holder called a badge reel that can be clipped to a lapel or pocket. When they made their campaign public, pro-union nurses began using a customized badge reel with an emblem, “St. Mary’s Nurses United.”

Supervisors have ordered employees to remove those badge reels. Espich and other nurses said they have been told that “this is soliciting” against hospital policy, and that nurses who don’t remove the badge reel would be sent home without pay for the day.

“With this union-busting, though, we’re all fired up even more,” Espich said.

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

A group of more than 60 nonprofits, advocacy organizations and businesses wrote to two Wisconsin health systems Thursday, urging them to resume gender-affirming care for minors that they halted five months ago.

The hospital organizations — UW Health in Madison and Children’s Wisconsin in Wauwatosa — stopped providing hormone medication and puberty-blocking medication to minors with gender dysphoria following Trump administration actions targeting such healthcare.

Thursday’s letter, led by the LGBTQ+ rights groups Fair Wisconsin and GSAFE, cites a federal judge’s ruling in April that threw out the administration’s order blocking gender-affirming care.

“Gender-affirming care is legal in Wisconsin, but it is increasingly more and more difficult to access due to decisions made to pause the provision of this care at your institutions,” states the letter. “These decisions must be reversed and care restarted immediately.”

Thursday’s letter was the second this week to UW Health and Children’s Wisconsin. On Tuesday, more than 90 elected officials from around the state released a letter urging both hospitals to restore the suspended services, “reaffirm [their] commitment to evidence-based care, and rebuild trust with the transgender and gender diverse community.”

“The most important thing for people to understand is that the support for this care is so much broader and deeper than people realize,” Abigail Swetz, executive director of Fair Wisconsin, told the Wisconsin Examiner Thursday. “I hope the leadership of these hospitals are seeing that in this letter and the others that are coming through.”

She said local groups, Madison TRAC and Reproductive Justice Action Milwaukee, are organizing petitions in their communities as well for the general public to sign.

Both hospitals released statements Thursday that acknowledged the concerns of families and their children seeking gender-affirming healthcare, but cited legal risks of providing such care.

“We know this issue matters deeply to many in our community, especially the patients and families we serve,” Children’s Wisconsin said.

“Due to ongoing legal and regulatory uncertainty affecting organizations and providers across the country, we are not currently providing gender-affirming pharmacologic care,” it said. “We recognize the impact this has on patients and families.”

Children’s said it continued to provide related mental and behavioral healthcare.

UW Health said it paused gender-affirming medication therapy for minors “due to ongoing federal actions that threaten health systems that provide this care.”

“While we continue to believe this is evidence-based care, threats from those federal actions are not fully resolved,” UW Health said. “Therefore, the current risk is too great to resume this care. We recognize the challenges faced by impacted patients and families and remain committed to providing patient-centered care and supporting their health and well-being throughout this critical time.”

Gender-affirming care is a response to gender dysphoria, which the American Psychiatric Association has defined as  “psychological distress that results from an incongruence between one’s sex assigned at birth and one’s gender identity.”

Based on survey data collected by the federal Centers for Disease Control and Prevention between 2021 and 2023, the Williams Institute at the University of California at Los Angeles Law School estimated in an August 2025 report that 3% of adolescents ages 13 to 17 and 1% of adults 18 or older identify as transgender or nonbinary.

Swetz said that when health professionals provide gender-affirming healthcare, they do so because it is medically necessary.

“I think it is sometimes seen as something that is not essential, but it absolutely is medically necessary, because we know that when gender dysphoria is treated then the mental health of our trans youth just drastically improves,” she said.

Gender-affirming care is also provided based on what is appropriate for the person’s age, “and always, with the full consent of parents and guardians,” Swetz said.

For a child who hasn’t yet reached puberty, it entails counseling and other forms of behavioral therapy — not medication, she said. At the start of puberty, medication may be used to pause that process, along with hormone treatment, but it’s also “highly individualized,” she added.

“We’re talking about high quality care that is respectful and meets a trans youth exactly where they’re at, in the age appropriateness of the kind of care that will help move them forward in their lives and make it possible for them to live in a body that really feels like home,” Swetz said.

The two hospitals paused their use of gender-affirming care medication after a Dec. 18, 2025 declaration from Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. that threatened to withhold federal health dollars, such as Medicaid reimbursement, from providers offering gender-affirming healthcare for minors.

Wisconsin was one of 21 states and the District of Columbia that sued to block the federal rule. In late March, a federal judge in Oregon ruled for the states on summary judgment, and in April issued a written order that vacated Kennedy’s declaration.

The judge ruled that the declaration violated the Administrative Procedures Act; that Kennedy and HHS officials lacked the authority to override professional standards for gender-affirming care; and lacked the authority to exclude providers from federal programs for providing gender-affirming care that meets professional standards.

The order also includes an injunction forbidding “any materially similar policy which supersedes or purports to supersede the professionally recognized standards of care for gender-affirming care that exist” in the 21 states and D.C. that filed the lawsuit.

“They’re trying to make sure that the federal government can’t go around and just, like, do something in another name,” Swetz said. “And I think it’s important for people to know that Wisconsin specifically is one of the states.”

This report was updated to correct the organizers of local petitions in Madison and Milwaukee.

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

The legal group that demanded Wisconsin rescind a professional standard for therapists that bars attempts to change sexual orientation or gender identity is now suing Gov. Tony Evers and the counselors’ professional board to kill the standard.

The Wisconsin Institute for Law & Liberty filed the lawsuit Tuesday in federal court in Milwaukee on behalf of two licensed therapists, charging that the standard is unconstitutional because it prescribes “what views [the therapists] may express.”

In April 2024 the examining board for licensed counselors and therapists added to its definitions of unprofessional conduct “sexual orientation change efforts,” commonly referred to as conversion therapy.

Conversion therapy has included electric shock, physical violence and “personal degradation and humiliation,” according to a 2015 statement opposing  the practice from the American Academy of Nursing.

The Wisconsin board standard barring conversion therapy includes “any intervention or method that has the purpose of attempting to change a person’s sexual orientation or gender identity, including attempting to change behaviors or expressions of self or to reduce sexual or romantic attractions or feelings toward individuals of the same gender.”

The board’s guidance document calls such practices “harmful, ineffective, non-evidence based, and not in line with current standards of professional practice.”

In March, the U.S. Supreme Court sent a lawsuit against a Colorado law banning conversion therapy back to lower courts. The high court said that applying the Colorado law to talk therapy required “strict scrutiny” for impinging on the First Amendment right of free speech.

Two weeks later, WILL and Wisconsin Family Action wrote to Gov. Tony Evers, demanding that the state repeal the professional standard barring conversion therapy.

The demand letter asserted that the court “struck down the law,” a claim WILL has repeated in publicizing its lawsuit.

Evers rejected the demand and stated in his letter to WILL that the organizations were “misreading” the U.S. Supreme Court ruling in the Colorado case. Rather than striking down the Colorado law, the high court sent a lawsuit back to lower courts, directing them to apply “strict scrutiny” on First Amendment grounds to how the law is applied to talk therapy.

The lawsuit WILL filed against Wisconsin’s standard names as defendants Evers; Dan Hereth, secretary of the state Department of Safety and Professional Services, which administers the licensing boards for a wide range of professional disciplines; and all the members of the Wisconsin Marriage and Family Therapy, Professional Counseling, and Social Work Examining Board.

WILL argues that the therapists it represents practice only talk therapy, conducting their counseling practice as “an exercise of their faith,” and that clients have voluntarily sought their “faith-based counseling, including obtaining advice on issues of sexual orientation and gender identity.”

The professional standard “prevents Plaintiffs from providing verbal advice in accordance with their sincerely-held religious beliefs in helping these patients specifically seeking to align their gender identity with their biological sex or to make changes relating to their sexual orientation or expression,” the lawsuit states.

A DSPS spokesperson said the agency doesn’t comment on pending litigation. A spokesperson for Evers referred to the letter Evers wrote rejecting WILL’s demand.

“I do not believe this lawsuit will succeed,” said Marc Herstand, executive director for the National Association of Social Workers Wisconsin chapter. “Wisconsin law clearly gives professions the authority to set their own Conduct Codes.”

The conversion therapy ban’s adoption in 2024 marked the third attempt by the professional board to bar the practice. Previous efforts were blocked by the Legislature’s Joint Committee for the Review of Administrative Rules. In 2025, the state Supreme Court ruled that state statutes giving the committee the power to block rules indefinitely were unconstitutional.

WILL since its founding has pursued legal actions against measures and policies respecting LGBTQ+ people, programs aimed at redressing systemic racial discrimination, and local election administration practices intended to increase voter access to the ballot box.

The organization has sued to block public health measures that were taken during the COVID-19 pandemic; argued that government efforts to encourage diversity, equity and inclusion in the workplace are unconstitutional; and defended laws such as Wisconsin’s 2011 Act 10, which stripped most public employees of most union rights.

Wisconsin Family Action has opposed LGBTQ+ rights and has lobbied against the inclusion of gender identity in civil rights protections under Wisconsin law.

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

With Republicans touting it as a bipartisan deal, the $1.8 billion special education funding and tax cut bill negotiated by a pair of GOP leaders and outgoing Democratic Gov. Tony Evers passed the Legislature’s budget committee on a 12-4 vote Tuesday, with no Democratic support.

The Joint Finance Committee’s Democrats charged the bill didn’t do enough for schools or taxpayers while spending down the state surplus for short-term benefits.

About 20 minutes after the committee vote, Evers’ office sent out a press release in which the governor called on the Legislature to swiftly pass the measure he’s been calling a “blockbuster” since it was unveiled Monday. The Legislature is scheduled to meet Wednesday in a special session to debate and vote on the measure.

Attached to the email was a table listing more than 50 Wisconsin school districts and the additional special education money they’ll receive from the state if the deal passes.

The legislation will add $85 million to reimburse local school districts for the cost of special education in the current school year and $230 million for the 2026-27 school year. A Legislative Fiscal Bureau memo estimates the additional funding will raise the state’s reimbursement rate this year to 42.7% and for 2026-27 to 50%, but added that the actual rate “could be higher or lower, depending on final prior year aidable costs.”

When Wisconsin’s 2025-27 budget was signed in July schools were told they would get 42% of their special education costs reimbursed for the current year and 45% in 2026-27. But in November the Department of Public Instruction announced that special ed costs and enrollment had both increased, so the first round of payments would cover 35%.

Along with the additional special ed funding, the new bill will spend $302.5 million on state aid to public schools. Because of state revenue limits on school districts, the new state aid “would provide property tax relief but not additional resources for school districts,” according to the Legislative Fiscal Bureau memo.

The bill gives the state technical college system an additional $50 million in state aid starting in the 2026-27 school year, also to replace property tax revenue, not increase trade school budgets.

The legislation includes a $300 state income tax rebate for individual taxpayers whose state tax bill was at least that much in 2024.

It also would make tip income as well as overtime pay exempt from state income taxes, mirroring federal tax policies that have been enacted under President Donald Trump. While the federal exemptions expire at the end of 2028, the state exemptions don’t have a sunset.

So far, lawmakers in Evers’ own party have greeted the measure coolly. Finance committee Democrats on Tuesday welcomed the increase in special education money but said it wasn’t sufficient to meet the needs school districts have for more resources.

“I’m a no on this plan, not because I don’t appreciate education funding,” said Rep. Deb Andraca (D-Whitefish Bay), a former teacher, during the JFC’s hour-long discussion before the committee vote.

“I want our schools to get the predictable, reliable, education funding, indexed to inflation that they deserve without having to sue all of us,” Andraca said, referring to a pending lawsuit challenging the state’s school funding formula.

But State Rep. Mark Born, the JFC Assembly cochair, said the measure deserves to be enacted.

“There’s really nothing negative in the bill,” Born told the committee. “The bill gives money to special education, right? The bill gives lasting property tax relief to taxpayers of Wisconsin. The bill gives lasting income tax relief to the taxpayers of Wisconsin. And yes, the bill also gives a one-time immediate rebate check to taxpayers in Wisconsin. The bill actually helps people now.”

Rep. Tip McGuire (D-Kenosha) and Sen. Kelda Roys (D-Madison) both made  pointed references to the bill as the product of three retiring elected officials — “three lame ducks,” in McGuire’s words. Along with Evers, a Democrat, Assembly Speaker Robin Vos and Senate Majority Leader Devin LeMahieu, both Republicans, are leaving office at the end of 2026.

None of the Democrats named Evers in their criticism of the bill, while Republicans touting the legislation invoked the governor several times.

“I think what we have before us is really balanced governing,” said Rep. Shannon Zimmerman (R-River Falls). “Gov Evers, working with majority party leadership, came together. Nobody got everything they wanted, but there’s a lot of good in this bill.”

Democrats emphasized what they said were the bill’s inadequacies, such as not guaranteeing “sum-sufficient” special ed funding that would fully meet the actual cost. Instead it designates a “sum-certain” amount, meaning there is a limited pot of money available, regardless of expanding need.

“It fails our schools,” said McGuire. “Our schools aren’t going to be getting the resources fully that they need. They’ve been struggling for 15 years under legislative Republican leadership.”

Roys — who is seeking the Democratic nomination to run for governor — referred to the presumptive Republican gubernatorial nominee’s opposition to the deal, although in support of a contrasting policy agenda.

“I find myself shocked to be with Republican Tom Tiffany,” Roys said. “Shocked to be agreeing with Republican [Sen.] Steve Nass, that this is a deal that does not help us fix the significant long-term structural problems we have — namely the way that we have robbed our children of their futures in defunding public education.”

Roys and McGuire both predicted a coming economic shakeup. 

“There’s a presumption that this bill has, and that is that Donald Trump’s economy will succeed,” McGuire said. “And I think that I am among the 70% of Americans right now who do not believe that that’s true.”

Wisconsin, he argued, should prepare for a future that includes an economic downturn in the next six or nine months rather than spending too much of the state’s projected $2.37 billion surplus.

Born mocked those concerns. “We cut taxes again and you say, ‘Oh, you’re going to break us. You’re going to be bankrupt. Structural deficit. Oh my goodness. The sky is falling,’” he said. “Oh, next budget. More surplus, more Republican leadership on the budget, more partnering with our private sector partners to grow Wisconsin’s economy.”

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

The Trump administration announced a series of changes in federal childcare funding Monday that Wisconsin advocates say will amount to less regulation and undermine attempts to support childcare providers and workers.

The policies announced include a rollback of Biden administration programs that supported higher wages for childcare workers and put a ceiling on childcare costs for low-income families.

The Administration for Children and Families in the federal Department of Health and Human Services said in a press release the revisions in administrative rules would “lower costs, expand access, and better serve families who rely on federally-funded child care programs.”

Two Wisconsin childcare advocates said the proposals seem unlikely to live up to those expectations.

“There’s nothing saying there’s going to be more money,” said Corrine Hendrickson, a former New Glarus home childcare provider. “They’re just allowing [states] to move the money around in different ways.”

Hendrickson, who is the cofounder of a childcare advocacy coalition that includes providers and parents, closed her childcare business in August because she said she would have been forced to increase rates more than her families were willing to pay. She is campaigning for the Democratic nomination for a state Senate seat.

Ruth Schmidt, executive director for the Wisconsin Early Childhood Association, said the proposals are reversing support for policies aimed at addressing longstanding childcare challenges.

“Instead of investing in making a robust system of care that can pay a living wage to people doing this work, the same as our public education system does,”  Schmidt said, the administration is “saying,  ‘let’s roll back the ways we’ve been funding this. Let’s make it harder to work, have your child in care and get subsidized for doing that.’”

The actions announced Monday affect the federal Child Care and Development Fund, which states use to cover the cost of subsidized childcare for low-income families, as well as the federal government’s funding for Head Start childcare and preschool programs. They include direct guidance to states as well as federal rulemaking. 

• A guidance memo encourages states to direct more funds from the federal government’s Temporary Assistance to Needy Families (TANF) to Child Care and Development Fund uses. It also states that states can use TANF money to “support needy married two-parent families in which one parent works and the other cares for a child at home.”
• A “Dear Colleague” letter highlights that under existing federal law, states are permitted to allow church childcare programs, other faith-based providers and family, friend and neighborhood caregivers to receive federal subsidies for children in their care.
• A final federal rule rescinds Biden administration policies that required states to pay providers in subsidized programs in advance for the month, limited low-income families’ copayments for subsidized care to 7% of their income, and allowed direct grants to providers
• A proposed federal rule rescinds Biden administration rules that tied wage and benefit requirements to Head Start grants.

The agency also sent governors a letter promoting the changes and calling the rescinded requirements “one-size fits all federal mandates that raise costs, limit supply, and crowd out providers.”

According to the First Five Years Fund, a nonprofit that advocates for strong federal support for quality childcare and early learning programs, 11% of children 5 or younger who are eligible receive subsidized childcare, and 35% of those eligible for the federal Head Start preschool program for low-income children are enrolled.

Hendrickson said with subsidized parents having to pay more out of pocket, some are more likely to forgo childcare and possibly leave the workforce.

“Just because you’re eligible doesn’t mean you can still afford to use the subsidy,” she said. “Unless the dollars go up significantly, this isn’t going to help any of these parents that are on a waitlist or aren’t able to access [care].”

Schmidt said the Biden administration changes guaranteed  providers would receive subsidy payments based on enrollment at the beginning of the month, which offers childcare operators greater stability. The final rule change would allow states to shift payments to the end of the month based on attendance.

She said she thought Wisconsin might not make that change, however, because the state has seen that paying ahead rather than after the fact “helps stabilize the workforce.”

With the advice to states to spend more of their TANF funds on childcare, however, “then what else is getting cut?” Schmidt asked.

Schmidt said that the changes won’t improve childcare quality and won’t help support a system that would encourage professional childcare educators to stay in the field.

The state, or the nation as a whole, could invest revenue “and have a really robust system of care, which is what states are all already working towards,” Schmidt said. “I think it’s just really unfortunate that we have a federal government that is wanting to go down a path of deregulation and loosening of standards.”

The publisher of the Cap Times said Thursday that the news organization’s management will voluntarily recognize the eight-member newsroom staff’s union. 

The employees formally announced their union campaign in a meeting with Publisher Paul Fanlund and other Cap Times managers a week ago. They have affiliated with the NewsGuild-CWA, which also represents employees at Wisconsin Watch and at the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel. 

“The Capital Times Co. has decided to voluntarily recognize the labor union being formed by Capital Times reporters and we hope to work towards an amicable outcome,” Fanlund said in a statement Thursday. “In the meantime, we will continue the excellent reporting and opinion journalism that the community has come to depend upon.”

The Capital Times newspaper was founded in 1917 by William T. Evjue and throughout its history has been known in Madison as a staunch voice for liberal and progressive values, including its support for labor unions.

Since 2008, what was once a daily evening newspaper has published online with a weekly print tabloid edition. While retaining its original name as a business entity, the newspaper adopted its longstanding nickname among readers as its moniker.

In making their case for a union, the employees primarily focused on the paper’s progressive heritage as well as their interest in greater involvement in its operation.

“I’m proud of all the work we put into forming a union,” said Erin Gretzinger, the K-12 reporter at the Cap Times. “Management’s decision to voluntarily recognize us aligns with the Cap Times’ longstanding values, and it is reflective of our value to the newsroom and the broader Madison community. I look forward to the next steps in this process and working collaboratively to ensure a strong future for our newsroom.”

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

A new report forecasts that changes to Medicaid enacted in 2025 will cut $7 billion from the program in Wisconsin alone over the next 10 years, according to the advocacy group Protect Our Care.

Calculations last year from KFF, a nonprofit, nonpartisan healthcare policy and news organization, indicate that at least 57,000 more people in Wisconsin will become uninsured by 2034.

“Wisconsinites and people everywhere have either lost coverage or they’re living with the ongoing fear of not knowing whether or not they’ll have health coverage in the next month,” said state Rep. Deb Andraca (D-Whitefish Bay) in a media call conducted Thursday by Protect Our Care.

The organization has issued a new report on the impact on Medicaid across the country from the 2025 tax cut and spending bill that passed with only Republican votes and was signed by President Donald Trump July 4. The legislation’s tax cuts primarily went to the wealthiest Americans, said Protect Our Care’s Joe Zepecki.

“Every single state in the United States is going to see these cuts and it’s going to have all kinds of consequences,” said U.S. Rep. Gwen Moore (D-Milwaukee), who also took part in the call Thursday.

The legislation included new requirements for some Medicaid recipients to prove they are working or are exempt from a work requirement. It also included requirements that those recipients submit paperwork showing they qualify for Medicaid twice a year instead of once a year.

Those requirements will take effect in 2027. The work-reporting requirements, however, have been broadly criticized by healthcare experts.

“We have also consistently seen in our research and everybody’s research that work requirement policies often do not meaningfully increase employment or access to inclusive, competitive employment,” said Dr. Kiley McLean, a social work professor, researcher and advocate for people with disabilities.

“Instead, they create paperwork barriers that cause eligible people to lose coverage, not because they are ineligible because but because the system becomes too difficult for them to navigate,” McLean said.

McLean said she has heard from people with disabilities and their families who are concerned that they could lose access to Medicaid for healthcare and personal care in their homes and communities.

“For decades, disability advocates like myself have fought to move away from unnecessary institutionalization and toward community living and inclusion,” she said. “Medicaid is what made that possible.”

States can apply waivers to cover those home and community based services — referred to as HCBS for short. But while federal law requires Medicaid coverage for people in institutions, it’s optional for home and community-based care, McLean said.

“That means when states face budget pressure or major Medicaid cuts, community services, HCBS services are among the first at risk,” McLean said.

Another call participant, Dr. Chris Ford, said he has seen the consequences on the job as an emergency room specialist in Milwaukee.

“When access to primary care disappears, when those clinics close, and when people lose that insurance, the emergency department becomes a safety net for an entire — albeit collapsing — system,” Ford said. “We are already seeing the warning signs happening now.”

Ford said he’s seen longer wait times in the emergency room, more patients who, lacking insurance, are “delaying care until they’re critically ill.”

“These cuts disproportionately hurt the very people  who already face the greatest barriers to care to begin with,” Ford said. “This is not something that is a potential. This is something that is happening already.”

This report has been updated.

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

Three weeks after two right-wing groups demanded the repeal of a professional licensing board’s ban on conversion therapy for LGBTQ+ clients of social workers and other therapists, Gov. Tony Evers sent a sharply worded reply.

In a Tuesday letter to the Wisconsin Institute for Law & Liberty and Wisconsin Family Action, Evers declared, “my administration has no intention of repealing Wisconsin’s conversion therapy ban.”

Evers asserted that the April 14 demand letter from the two groups was based on “a significant misreading” of a U.S. Supreme Court ruling earlier this year that threw parts of a Colorado ban on conversion therapy into question. 

Evers wrote that it was “disappointing” that the organizations support “a long-disavowed and outdated practice” that extensive research has shown to be ineffective and responsible for harms including depression, suicide, substance misuse, posttraumatic stress and anxiety.

“On the other hand, this should come as no surprise,” Evers wrote. “After all, bullying LGBTQ kids and Wisconsinites seems to be an important goal for Wisconsin Institute for Law & Liberty and Wisconsin Family Action.”

Purported to dissuade people from same-sex attractions and from gender dysphoria — which the American Psychiatric Association has defined as  “psychological distress that results from an incongruence between one’s sex assigned at birth and one’s gender identity” — conversion therapy, also known as reparative therapy, has been widely discredited.

Conversion therapy is not limited to talk therapy. “Aversive techniques used in reparative therapies have included electric shock, physical violence, administration of emetics, and personal degradation and humiliation,” the American Academy of Nursing wrote in a 2015 statement opposing the practice.

The Wisconsin Marriage and Family Therapy, Professional Counseling, and Social Work Examining Board published an updated professional code in April 2024 that declared “any intervention or method” used or promoted to change a person’s sexual orientation or gender identity to be “unprofessional conduct” that could subject a practitioner to professional discipline.

The U.S. Supreme Court, in a March 31 ruling, sent a lawsuit challenging a Colorado law against conversion therapy back to lower federal courts. The ruling instructed the lower courts to apply “strict scrutiny” on First Amendment grounds to the Colorado law because it seeks to “regulate speech based on viewpoint.”

In their demand letter, WILL and Wisconsin Family Action called on the Evers administration to repeal the ban in the Wisconsin therapists’ code. The letter declared that it was similar to the Colorado law and claimed that “the Supreme Court held that Colorado’s substantively identical statute was unconstitutional.”

Evers wrote that the demand “relies on a significant misreading of the U.S. Supreme Court’s recent decision” and had “erroneously” characterized its findings. 

“First, the Court intentionally — and specifically — stopped short of striking down any applications of Colorado’s law,” Evers wrote. The high court instead remanded the case to the lower court to apply a “more searching scrutiny” to the law, he added. “Repeal before that occurs would be premature.”

Evers also wrote that the ruling “expressly held that heightened scrutiny applies only to certain applications of Colorado’s law, not the entire provision. Specifically, the case concerned only Colorado’s conversion therapy prohibition as it applied to talk therapy — not to other treatment, such as physical or medication interventions.”

Quoting the Court’s ruling, Evers wrote that the Colorado plaintiff, therapist Kaley Chiles, stated that “the statute has many valid applications. Indeed, [she] did not take issue with Colorado’s effort to ban what she herself calls ‘long-abandoned, aversive’ physical interventions. Instead, Ms. Chiles objected to Colorado’s law only as it applies to her talk therapy, therapy that involves no physical interventions or medications, only the spoken word.”

Wisconsin’s professional rule also covers more than talk therapy, Evers wrote, and the therapy, counseling and social work board “will maintain the rule and continue to enforce its valid applications, in order to protect Wisconsinites from harmful and offensive practices by Board licensees.”

WILL’s initial response Thursday to a request for comment was a two-word email message from WILL Deputy Counsel Rebecca Furdek: “Lawsuit incoming.”

In a follow up statement, Furdek said that Evers was “resorting to personal, baseless attacks on WILL and its mission.” Contrary to the distinctions Evers made about the U.S. Supreme Court ruling, the statement reiterated WILL’s characterization that the Court found Colorado’s “substantively identical law amounted to unconstitutional viewpoint discrimination.”

Making no reference to other conversion therapy tactics, the statement concluded: “Government shouldn’t be deciding which viewpoints are ‘acceptable’ for Christian counselors to express when providing talk therapy to the individuals who voluntarily seek out faith-based counseling.”

In his letter, Evers wrote that because the Colorado case remains active in lower federal courts, the Department of Safety and Professional Services will attach a note to the conversion therapy rule stating that “certain instances of the unprofessional conduct” it refers to “are the subject of ongoing litigation.”

Wisconsin’s conversion therapy ban was enacted after several previous attempts were blocked by the Legislature’s Joint Committee for the Review of Administrative Rules. A Wisconsin Supreme Court ruling in July 2025 found that state laws the committee’s Republican majority used to review and suspend administrative rules were unconstitutional and encroached on the examining board’s legal authority.

Marc Herstand, executive director of the National Association of Social Workers Wisconsin chapter, praised Evers’ letter Thursday. The association was among the groups that urged the counseling board to add conversion therapy to practices considered unprofessional conduct. 

Wisconsin state law “clearly gives professions the authority to establish their own Conduct Code as the social work profession, along with the marriage and family therapy and professional counseling professions,  have done in classifying Conversion Therapy as unprofessional conduct,” Herstand said in an email message. 

“I applaud Governor Evers for his recognition of the severe harm that Conversion Therapy inflicts on LGBTQ children and his commitment to retain the ban on Conversion Therapy [in the professional code] to the maximum extent possible.”

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

A Milwaukee provider of personal care services has been charged with bilking Wisconsin’s Medicaid program of almost $2.2 million, the state Department of Justice announced Wednesday.

Debbie Long, 44, was charged with billing Medicaid for services that didn’t take place, according to the criminal complaint filed Tuesday.

The complaint also charges Long inflated the size of the payroll and workforce at her home health business to obtain a $219,072 loan under the Paycheck Protection Program enacted to help businesses that had to temporarily shut down early in the COVID-19 pandemic.

In addition, the complaint alleges she purchased businesses and a luxury car with proceeds, using a series of shell companies to conceal where some of the funds came from.

Long’s business, Pinnacle Home Health Care LLC, submitted reimbursement claims for services purportedly provided to Medicaid members between March 2017 and August 2022, according to the complaint. DOJ investigators reviewing those submissions found at least $2.1 million in Medicaid reimbursements to Pinnacle for services that weren’t performed, the complaint charges.

The complaint says the allegedly fraudulent billings included “impossible or improbable hours of service,” such as a personal care worker who reportedly worked more than 12 hours on a single day for one Medicaid member.

There were also reimbursements for services that were never provided, according to the complaint, for services that were more than workers provided, for services in which the Medicaid member’s need was “misrepresented,” and for services when the Medicaid member was in the hospital or incarcerated — situations in which members weren’t eligible for Medicaid reimbursement.

The investigation included interviews with Medicaid recipients as well as personal care workers employed by the business who helped investigators uncover some of the allegedly false information provided, according to the complaint.

Long is charged with five felony counts: theft by false representation greater than $10,000, fraud against a financial institution greater than $100,000, wire fraud against a financial institution, and two counts of money laundering greater than $100,000.

Court records reviewed Wednesday did not list an attorney for Long.

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

A new legal battle is underway between Democratic Gov. Tony Evers and Republican leaders in the Legislature.

Evers and Attorney General Josh Kaul are suing the co-chairs of the Legislature’s powerful Joint Finance Committee to overturn a 2018 law that requires JFC approval of legal settlements involving the Wisconsin Department of Justice.

The law was passed by the Republican majority in the Legislature and signed by outgoing Gov. Scott Walker in December 2018 just before Evers and Kaul took office. It was among a group of laws that gave lawmakers increased power over executive branch actions, including control over aspects of the DOJ’s civil litigation.

In June 2025, the Wisconsin Supreme Court in a unanimous ruling held that the law was unconstitutional as applied to two categories of DOJ lawsuits.

The ruling stripped the JFC of the authority to intervene in DOJ settlements in suits on behalf of state agencies that enforce civil penalties, and settlements in other suits the DOJ files at the request of state agencies.

The new suit was filed April 7 in Dane County Circuit Court. Its existence was first reported Tuesday by Wisconsin Public Radio.

The lawsuit argues that it is unconstitutional for the Legislature to insert itself in settlements when the state itself, not just a state agency, is a plaintiff — for example, if DOJ sues a federal agency on behalf of the state to challenge a federal regulation.

In addition it argues that lawmakers don’t have the right to intervene when the state is a defendant in a lawsuit and the settlement would not require the appropriation of additional funds. An example could be representing the Department of Corrections in a lawsuit brought by a prisoner charging a civil rights violation.

The suit names the Joint Finance Committee as well as co-chairs Sen. Howard Marklein (R-Spring Green) and Rep. Mark Born (R-Beaver Dam). The lawmakers did not immediately respond to requests for comment Wednesday.

Citing the 2025 ruling, the lawsuit argues that the Legislature only has a potential role in resolving a civil suit if the resolution requires lawmakers to enact a new law or the Legislature is a client in the litigation.

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

Nearly 50 years after a strike that ended union representation at the Madison Capital Times, the newspaper’s eight newsroom employees announced last week they have joined a  union and are seeking a contract.

Ashley Rodriguez, a features writer and spokesperson for the union drive, said in an interview that the staffers have asked Publisher and President Paul Fanlund, Editor Mark Treinen and other newsroom managers to voluntarily recognize The NewsGuild-CWA as their union.

“We were received very professionally and cordially,” Rodriguez said.

Asked Tuesday about his response to the union petition, Fanlund said in an email message, “No comment at this time. Will let you know when we have something to say.”

Rodriguez said the union organizing campaign wasn’t in reaction to any particular developments at the newspaper.

“This isn’t about one thing, this isn’t about one person. This is about exercising our rights and knowing that we’re stronger together,” she said.

Since its conversion in 2008 from a daily evening paper to a digital outlet with a weekly free tabloid edition, the Capital Times now has formally adopted its longstanding nickname, the Cap Times.

Rodriguez said the union effort was in keeping with the news organization’s heritage as a champion of progressive values in Madison since the Capital Times was founded in 1917 by William T. Evjue, a former managing editor and business manager for the Wisconsin State Journal.

“He was angered by the State Journal’s editorials attacking Robert M. ‘Fighting Bob’ LaFollette, who he considered a hero,” states a history the Capital Times posted that was archived in 2007.

“The history of the Cap Times is to be a progressive voice — the voice of Madison, representing the voices of people who aren’t heard,” said Rodriguez. On its editorial pages, the paper has been a strong supporter of labor unions.

“I think this has been like a desire to embody how we see our role as reporters within our own system,” she said. “If we’re going to embody the mission of William Evjue, championing people’s rights and being the voice of the community, that has to exist internally as well.”

Rodriguez joined the staff in January 2025, but she said reporters had been interested in joining a union for years before she arrived, and helped produce the energy that led her and her colleagues to formally organize in the last year. Staff support for the union has been unanimous, she said.

“For us just the biggest thing is that local journalism is so vital to a healthy democracy and strong communities and the reporters that deliver that news just want to live in their communities and feel like their work is being valued as well,” Rodriguez said.

Since the 1940s, the Capital Times and the Wisconsin State Journal have shared business operations, forming a partnership, Madison Newspapers Inc., which owned the presses and conducted other business operations for both papers.

In 1977, MNI installed new printing technology, laying off typesetting employees and cutting wages of the remaining printing staff. The printing unions struck, joined by the newsroom unions of both newspapers.

The striking employees put out an independent paper, first weekly and later daily, the Madison Press Connection, which lasted until 1980, and the strike was settled in 1982 with a $1.5 million payment to the strikers. The unions were all decertified.

Editorially, the Capital Times “had always supported the labor movement,” said Phil Haslanger, one of the reporters who joined the strike. Up to that point, when the Newspaper Guild represented newsroom employees, “there had always been spirited negotiations between the Guild and, at that time, William Evjue, but they found a way to make it work.”

That made the dispute especially controversial. “Here you had a paper that was progressive, liberal, involved in this very complicated labor situation,” Haslanger said.

Haslanger was one of five employees who went back to the paper as part of the settlement agreement. Under the editor, Elliott Maraniss, “There was a real effort on the part of the Cap Times at the end of the strike to gracefully reintegrate those of us who had been in the strike,” he said.

In 2008, the Capital Times went from being a daily evening paper to a primarily online outlet, first with two free weekly tabloid editions, later reduced to one.

The union campaign also echoes the success of campaigns that have led to unions at several digital news organizations, including Wisconsin Watch and ProPublica. 

Both the Cap Times and the State Journal work out of the same building on Madison’s Southwest Side. Rodriguez said the unionizing effort involves only the staff of the Cap Times, owned by the Evjue Foundation, and not the employees of the State Journal, which is part of Lee Enterprises.

“We hope that management voluntarily recognizes us,” she said. “We think that recognizing the union would be in line with carrying out the values of the Cap Times.”

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

While the latest entry to seek the Democratic nomination in Wisconsin’s crowded 1st Congressional District primary contest is highlighting a promise to raise more money than his rivals, another candidate is making the opposite case for his own campaign.

Adam Follmer, a suburban Milwaukee speech pathologist, has set a $10,000 cap his campaign spending.

“I’m playing to win in this campaign, but I think more than anything I’m playing to shift the Overton window a little bit more to things that we can talk about,” Follmer said in an interview. “We can actually think about what are our elections going to look like when we do get money out of politics.”

His campaign website stands apart from those of other Democrats in the race because it doesn’t have an opening splash screen soliciting donations.

It’s different in other ways as well. He said he’s trying to use his website to model “sustainable politics” — there’s even a page with that name — and in presenting the issues that he is campaigning on, Follmer has a series of videos that he’s encouraging visitors on the site to share.

“I’m hoping to appeal to people that are just tired of the endless attacks, the endless calls, the door knocking of people that they don’t even know, and instead change the way we engage in politics, and have that message come from people we know and trust,” Follmer said.

The winner of the Democratic primary will face incumbent U.S. Rep. Bryan Steil, who has a campaign fund exceeding $5 million and remains the favorite in the race, according to political oddsmakers.

Follmer’s platform in the campaign includes getting money completely out of politics, banning corporate political action committee donations and donations from lobbyists. He also favors ranked-choice voting and term limits in the U.S. House and Senate.

Some have criticized term limits for increasing the power and influence of lobbyists as the lawmakers in office turn over more often. Follmer, however, argues that the federal government should increase the employment of researchers and experts who “are supposed to help [lawmakers] understand the issues,” and severely restrict or eliminate paid lobbyists in return.

“The idea that a corporation can have the same voice as an actual voter is something that’s never sat right with me, and I don’t understand why that’s the norm,” he said.

Follmer also favors a wealth tax on fortunes over $50 million along with closing corporate tax loopholes; single-payer health care available to all; expanded public and affordable housing and rental assistance; and a series of worker supports including guaranteed universal child care, paid parental leave and a shift to a 32-hour work week without reducing weekly incomes.

Workforce training, fully funded public education, well-paid teachers, modernizing of infrastructure with a focus on addressing climate change and ensuring that publicly funded research is made open access round out his platform.

Follmer says his goal is to connect with 20,000 people in the district of more than 700,000 voters, either face-to-face or through his website, where he has installed a platform that visitors can use to communicate directly with him.  

The way politics is practiced currently, “we don’t have any infrastructure for us to actually communicate with our elected representatives in a meaningful way,” Follmer said.

He hopes that by reaching people more directly, they’ll in turn share his information with their friends and neighbors, building support for his campaign.

While Follmer said that he has often lined up with groups such as the progressive Justice Democrats and the Working Families Party on many of his policy proposals, he  initially launched his campaign in mid-2025 as an independent candidate, planning to skip the primary in August and wind up on the 1st CD ballot in November.

“What I was hoping for with the independent candidacy was that I could get people that voted for Trump in 2024 to realize there actually are candidates representing working class values, and that we could get those people to change,” he said. 

But in talking to voters, “I got a lot of feedback from the community that they didn’t want to see an independent candidate,” Follmer said, because they worried that the vote against Steil would wind up being divided, returning the incumbent to office even if there’s a majority in opposition.

“I want to be the kind of candidate that listens to the constituents,” he said. “And so I made that decision recently to change to the Democratic side and ride out the primary that way.”

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

The high-profile beer brand owner and political fundraiser Kirk Bangstad is entering the race for Wisconsin governor — a move he hinted at last year before putting it off.

Bangstad, who has been an outspoken critic of President Donald Trump and state Republican politicians, announced his intention to seek the Democratic nomination over the weekend at a rally outside his Minocqua craft beer brewery.

In an email newsletter Sunday from a Substack account he operates, Bangstad told subscribers he was running “because I believe Wisconsin needs a battle-hardened fighter to join the rest of America to save our Democracy from Trump’s regime, and that person doesn’t exist in the crowded field of Democrats currently running in Wisconsin’s Gubernatorial primary.”

The newsletter included a screenshot from the Wisconsin Ethics Commission’s website showing an account registered for his campaign for governor. The account was not visible at the commission’s website Monday. Commission administrator Daniel Carlton Jr. said in an email message that campaign accounts do not become publicly visible until they have been reviewed by the commission’s staff.

Bangstad, who ran for Congress in 2016, has sold a variety of beers bearing politically themed names honoring Gov. Tony Evers, Sen. Tammy Baldwin and others. He’s also promoted a promise of free beer when Trump dies.

He operates a SuperPAC that has funded advertising promoting Democratic candidates and attacking Republicans, as well lawsuits against Wisconsin’s school choice program and accusing congressional Republicans of enabling the Jan. 6, 2021 U.S. Capitol attack that delayed certification of the 2020 presidential election that Joe Biden won. He also sued unsuccessfully to keep Trump off of the Wisconsin ballot in 2024.

Bangstad said in his newsletter that Democrats already running didn’t take seriously his demand for “an election protection plan, because I believed deep in my heart that Trump’s regime would unleash an ‘October surprise’ that would try to steal elections across the country and keep his goons in control of Congress.”

The Saturday rally was initially billed as a free speech event in response to Bangstad’s interview by Secret Service and FBI agents Thursday.

The interview followed a  social media post Bangstad made on April 25, shortly after the shooting upstairs from the White House correspondents dinner that Trump attended. Cole Tomas Allen, accused of crashing a security checkpoint with a shotgun, is being held on charges that included attempting to assassinate Trump. On Facebook that night, Bangstad declared, “Well, we almost got #freebeerday. Either a brother or sister in the Resistance needs to work on their marksmanship or he faked another assassination to get a positive news cycle.”

Republican campaigns jumped on the post, accusing Bangstad of calling for Trump’s assassination. The Democratic Party of Wisconsin issued a statement condemning the comment as well.

In a newsletter May 1 promoting his rally, Bangstad described the post as “satirical” and suggested federal authorities targeted him for “wondering publicly whether Trump’s assassination attempt was staged.”

In October, Bangstad floated the possibility of running for governor. He argued that “fascism is already here in America and must be stopped” in an Oct. 12 Substack post. “I’ve not heard a single candidate talk about what he or she will do to protect us.”

Bangstad wrote then that he was tempted to run on his history of battling conservative Republicans in court. “But that’s just narcissism rearing its ugly head,” he added. He vowed instead to compile a list of “most egregious votes” in Congress by U.S. Rep. Tom Tiffany, the expected Republican nominee in the governor’s race, and spend money from his Super PAC on ads about “all the lies he’s told in service to Trump, and the harm he’s done to Wisconsinites.”

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

In the contest for the Democratic nomination for governor, “affordability” might be the most frequently used campaign watchword. Side-by-side with it is another word: Healthcare.

Healthcare “is one of the most broken systems in the whole of government,” says former Lt. Gov. Mandela Barnes. It’s “working as it was designed to,” says state Rep. Francesca Hong — in what is decidedly not a compliment to the system.

Among voters, it is “a top issue if not the top issue,” says Milwaukee County Executive David Crowley. Former Wisconsin Economic Development Corp. CEO Missy Hughes calls healthcare one of the “foundational pieces of our economy” — but one that is under strain and not working well.

For Lt. Gov. Sara Rodriguez, it’s “a complicated system” in which she made a career as an  emergency room nurse, a CDC infectious disease officer and finally a health system executive — “which means that I know the levers that we can pull to try to reduce costs across the state of Wisconsin.”

Former Department of Administration Secretary Joel Brennan considers healthcare a leading Wisconsin asset, innovator and employer, but one that’s been hobbled by “the healthcare management that we are allowing to go on in this county — and it’s not helping.”

State Sen. Kelda Roys describes the healthcare system  as imbued with “the worst aspects of capitalism in that we’ve injected profits before patients at every step, but none of the benefits of capitalism — there’s no free market, there’s no real competition.”

Those remarks come from three forums in April at which the seven leading Democratic hopefuls fielded questions about their healthcare policies and priorities.

Four of them — Rodriguez, Barnes, Roys and Hong — took part in a forum hosted by HealthWatch Wisconsin that focused entirely on healthcare issues. (All seven were invited, according to HealthWatch, which is affiliated with the nonprofit public interest law firm ABC for Health).

All seven joined a Wisconsin Health News event focused entirely on healthcare as well as a Wisconsin Citizen Action online forum, where healthcare led off a discussion that covered a cross-section of other issues as well.

Many of the Democratic Party rivals’ policies and priorities overlap. They all agree that healthcare costs and access are among the most important priorities for the state.

All of them say they favor a public option for health insurance — a plan that would be available for people to purchase health coverage on the Affordable Care Act health insurance marketplace if they don’t have coverage through work and their incomes are too high to qualify them for Medicaid.

All but one of the seven propose to expand Medicaid, referred to as BadgerCare in Wisconsin, under the Affordable Care Act. Expansion would open the health insurance plan for low-income Wisconsinites with incomes above the current limit (100% of the federal poverty guideline) up to 138% of the guideline.

Roys is the exception, arguing that Medicaid expansion is no longer feasible in Wisconsin because of federal changes enacted after President Donald Trump took office.

Instead, Roys proposes a public option that would allow the public to buy into the state health insurance plan for public employees. Brennan also proposes using the public employees’ plan as a public option, but he favors Medicaid expansion as well.

Four of the other five Democrats would tie the public option to Medicaid expansion, making it possible for people whose incomes don’t qualify them for BadgerCare to pay a monthly health insurance premium for BadgerCare coverage. Rodriguez proposes a public option plan called “BadgerChoice,” which would be a state-based insurance plan but would not be connected to BadgerCare, according to her campaign. 

Four years after the U.S. Supreme Court overturned a national right to abortion, all seven Democrats have vowed to protect reproductive healthcare and to firmly back abortion rights in Wisconsin.

All of them speak of the importance of ensuring that mental health is treated on a par with physical health. And all of them at least nod to the need to improve healthcare access in rural Wisconsin.

At the same time, each candidate’s proposals differ, sometimes in fine details, sometimes in broad priorities, and sometimes mostly rhetorically.

Federal relations

Another point of general agreement is on the need for stronger support for public health measures. All of the Democratic candidates have criticized the Trump administration and Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. for undermining longstanding support for vaccination against communicable diseases.

But they take different directions in their expectations for federal-state relations in healthcare. Roys, for example, writes off federal assistance during the current administration, which is why she considers expanding Medicaid a dead issue for now. Crowley’s Medicaid expansion proposal explicitly refers to federal matching funds to cover some of the costs.

None have laid out the level of detail that will be required for turning their ideas into legislation or incorporating them into the next state budget.

This report has been updated to clarify that the “BadgerChoice” proposal from Sara Rodriguez is not connected with Medicaid Expansion. 

In the gallery below, click on the caption of each candidate’s picture to read a summary of what that candidate has said and published about their approach to healthcare policy and links to relevant pages on the candidate’s campaign website. 

Wisconsin’s economic growth is continuing to slow down, with job numbers down from a year ago and unemployment up slightly, the state labor department reported Thursday.

“The Wisconsin labor market has cooled a bit along with the national economy,” said Scott Hodek, section chief in the office of economic advisors at the Wisconsin Department of Workforce Development. “But unemployment remains historically low.”

Jobs and employment data are collected through two separate surveys conducted by the federal government.

The number of jobs reported each month is projected based on a federal survey of employers’ payrolls. The number of people listed as employed or unemployed is projected based on a survey of U.S. households each month.

With the release of data for March on Thursday, Wisconsin now has the jobs and employment picture for the full first quarter of 2026. The release of January and February data was delayed until earlier in April while DWD adjusted its data calculations in comparison with unemployment insurance tax collections. That annual benchmarking process was delayed further due to the October 2025 federal government shutdown.

“Through 2025 and now into ‘26, we are seeing continued growth still, but it does seem to be decelerating some,” Hodek said.

The number of jobs reported each month is projected based on a federal survey of employers’ payrolls. The number of people listed as employed or unemployed is projected based on a survey of U.S. households each month.

The household survey results projected 109,500 people were unemployed in March, an increase of 2,200 from February  and an increase of 8,400 from March 2025. The unemployment rate — the percentage of people who report they are actively seeking work — went up to 3.5% in March. It has increased by a tenth of a percentage point each month for the last three months.

Wisconsin had a projected 3,021,600 jobs in March, about 1,200 more than February of this year but  a loss of more than 17,000 since March 2025. Hodek said that echoed an increase in the number of jobs nationally from February to March.

The construction industry, which has been doing well in Wisconsin, showed a projected 151,800 jobs in March, 1,800 fewer than in February, but a gain of 6,600 jobs from March 2025.

“There are a lot of jobs there still, and if anything, the employment trend over the last year has likely accelerated,” Hodek said.

A challenge has been a continued shortage of workers. “What we’re seeing is demand still outstripping supply,” Hodek said. “There’s not enough crews to go around.”

The number of jobs in manufacturing was projected at 453,600 in March, 1,800 more than in February but a loss of 5,200 jobs from March 2025.

There were a projected 437,500 jobs in healthcare and social assistance in March, a gain of 300 from February and a gain of 4,900 from March 2025.

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE