A Wisconsin Watch reader asks: The state expungement statute seems very strict. Does anyone actually get their record expunged?Is it easier to get a pardon or commutation from the governor? Why is it so difficult?
While it is certainly possible for people to get their records expunged, the laws and conditions surrounding expungement remain nuanced.
Expungement seals a person’s criminal records, meaning the public can no longer access them through court databases, such as Consolidated Court Automation Programs, or CCAP.
Oftentimes, employers and landlords use court databases, such as CCAP, to review someone’s criminal records. State law prohibits discrimination unless the crime is materially related, like someone convicted of bank fraud applying to work at a bank. By removing a public criminal record, it removes the stigma that could lead to discrimination in housing and job opportunities. Employers are not allowed to use an expunged record against an applicant, even if the crime is materially related.
But obtaining expungement in Wisconsin is much more difficult than it appears. First, anyone requesting expungement must have been under 25 years old at the time of sentencing and not convicted of a violent felony. Only misdemeanors and Class H and I felonies qualify. The attorney must also request expungement at the time of sentencing; it cannot be requested after the fact.
“I’ve seen judges just disagree with expungement as a concept and never order it,” said Natalie Lewandowski, senior clinic supervisor at the Milwaukee Justice Center. “I think some judges don’t believe that people can be rehabilitated enough to deserve to be back in society and have that not be counted against them.”
Even district attorneys can take expungement off the table. In some cases, defense attorneys may not even know expungement exists and therefore won’t know to bring it up during a person’s trial.
As a new attorney, Lewandowski wasn’t aware of expungement until she was told minutes before the trial. It is not something that is often taught, and there is no handbook, she said.
If the judge recommends expungement, a person must then meet all conditions of probation, including paying all financial obligations and supervision fees in full. The person cannot be convicted of a subsequent offense or violate any Department of Corrections rules.
But even with the expungement conditions laid out, the process is nuanced, and the success rate is low.
For those who were found eligible for expungement at the time of sentencing, Lewandowski said a shocking number of them fail to get their case successfully expunged.
In general, people believe that if they complete probation, they will have their case expunged. But they also must meet all the requirements of probation before they are discharged.
“I’ve had to tell too many people that they can never get their case expunged because at the time of their discharge, they still owed $10 in supervision fees,” Lewandowski said.
A probation office has to submit a form either notifying that the person completed conditions for expungement or failed to meet the conditions, with each condition laid out directly on the form.
It’s unclear how many people have their record expunged each year. The DOC does not keep data on how many cases meet the requirements for expungement, and court data is unreliable and not readily aggregated. Wisconsin Policy Forum estimates that around 2,000 people have their record expunged each year.
Pardons, on the other hand, have a more clearly defined process.
Requirements for a pardon include an old felony conviction and at least five years since the individual completed a sentence. To be granted a pardon, a person either applies to the Pardon Advisory Board, where a hearing is held on the pardon application, or the person can qualify for the expedited process in which the application is forwarded directly to the governor without a hearing.
The applicants have to include certified court documents. The cost of copies of court documents is $1.25 per page and an additional $5 to get the document certified.
“The kicker is the application processing times, the time it takes from when you submit your application to get a hearing in front of the pardon board, where they’ll decide, is like two years right now,” Lewandowski said. “If you’re eligible for a pardon, it’s still something that you have to prove to the pardon board that you’re deserving of, so a lot of people don’t get pardoned.”
Most of the pardoned cases are low-level, non-violent offenses. Pardoning does not expunge the record or indicate innocence, but instead symbolizes forgiveness from the governor and restores certain rights — such as the right to serve on a jury, possess a firearm or hold a state or local office.
Unlike expungement, pardons also depend on who is governor at the time of the request.
For example, Gov. Tony Evers has granted over 1,436 pardons as of April 2025 — the most ever — while former Gov. Scott Walker was adamantly against pardons during his time in office.
For individuals seeking expungement or pardons, there are resources available.
There have been attempts by lawmakers to decrease the barriers to expungement, such as eliminating the age requirement and allowing a person to petition the court for expungement after sentencing.
Evers most recently requested these changes in the 2025-27 budget, but it was removed from discussion by Republicans in early May.
A Wisconsin Watch reader asks: How much funding do the University of Wisconsin-Madison and Madison College receive from the U.S. military?
The University of Wisconsin-Madison has 198 active Department of Defense awards, totaling $221.3 million in funding, according to UW-Madison’s declaration from the Association of American Universities lawsuit against the Department of Defense.
Defense-funded research aims to expand “warfighter capabilities” and the U.S. “strategic and tactical advantage.” President Donald Trump’s Department of Defense tried to cap indirect costs at 15%.
Defense awards support research in fields directly related to the military, such as “cybersecurity, maritime navigation, materials science, injury prevention and recovery and military flight technology,” said UW-Madison Vice Chancellor for Research Dorota A. Grejner-Brzezinska in the lawsuit challenging the Defense Department’s attempt to limit indirect costs.
The Department of Defense awarded $67.4 million in grants to UW-Madison in 2023-24, making up 8% of total agency funding, the fourth-highest source after the National Institutes of Health, the National Science Foundation and the Department of Energy. UW-Madison ranked sixth in national research expenditures with over $1.7 billion in the latest annual review.
UW-Madison also has 81 pending Defense grant proposals, as of June 13, 2025, with a requested total budget of $70.5 million, according to Grejner-Brzezinska’s declaration.
Indirect costs are costs that support research but are not directed to a specific award and include “costs for building maintenance, utilities, procurement of shared equipment, administrative services, information technology, libraries and compliance with federal regulations,” said Grejner-Brzezinska in the declaration.
On June 17, 2025, a federal judge in Boston temporarily granted universities a temporary restraining order, meaning they will temporarily operate with the previously negotiated indirect cost reimbursement rates of 55.5%. This follows an NIH cap of 15% on indirect costs, also blocked by a federal judge.
“The 15% rate cap will make most, if not all, of UW-Madison’s proposed and ongoing research projects infeasible,” Grejner-Brzezinska said.
Defense-funded studies at UW-Madison include a group of 30 scientists who study traumatic brain injuries, satellite data systems and artificial intelligence infrastructure and research.
Wisconsin incarcerates more people per capita than the majority of countries in the world, including the United States.
Wisconsin Watch and other newsrooms in recent years have reported on criminal charges against staff following prison deaths, medical errors and delayed health care and lengthy prison lockdowns linked to staffing shortages in Wisconsin prisons.
The state prison population has surged past 23,000 people, with nearly triple that number on probation or parole. Meanwhile, staff vacancies are increasing again across the Department of Corrections.
A reader called this situation a “mess” and asked how we got here and what can be done to fix it.
The road to mass incarceration
The first U.S. prison was founded as a “more humane alternative” to public and capital punishment, prison reform advocate and ex-incarceree Baron Walker told Wisconsin Watch. Two years after Wisconsin built its first prison at Waupun in 1851, the state abolished the death penalty.
For the next century, Wisconsin’s prison population rarely climbed above 3,000, even as the state population grew. But as America declared the “War on Drugs” in the 1970s and set laws cracking down on crime in the ‘80s and ‘90s, Wisconsin’s prison population began to explode.
“In the early 1970s … the rise in incarceration corresponded fairly closely with increases in crime,” said Michael O’Hear, a Marquette University criminal law professor. “The interesting thing that happened in both Wisconsin and the nation as a whole in the ‘90s is that crime rates started to fall, but imprisonment rates kept going up and up.”
According to O’Hear, Wisconsin was late to adopt the “tough-on-crime” laws popular in other states during that era. But by the mid-1990s, the state began to target drug-related crime and reverse leniency policies like parole.
Green Bay Correctional Institution’s front door reads “WISCONSIN STATE REFORMATORY,” a nod to its original name, in Allouez, Wis., on June 23, 2024. Many have pushed for the closure of the prison, constructed in 1898, due to overcrowding, poor conditions and staffing issues. (Julius Shieh / Wisconsin Watch)
“There was a period of time in which Milwaukee was just shipping bazillions of people into prison on … the presumption of being a dealer with the possession of very small amounts of crack cocaine,” UW-Madison sociology Professor Emerita Pamela Oliver said. She cited this practice as one of the reasons Wisconsin’s racial disparities in imprisonment are the worst in the nation.
Starting in the late 1990s and 2000s, Wisconsin’s “truth-in-sentencing” law, which requires people convicted of crimes to serve their full prison sentences with longer paroles, resulted in both a cycle of reincarceration and a large prison population full of aging inmates with low risk of reoffending.
Then in 2011, the anti-public union law known as Act 10 caused a mass exodus of correctional officers as working conditions in the state’s aging prisons continued to deteriorate.
Extended supervision
Along with mandating judges impose fixed prison sentences on people convicted of crimes, truth-in-sentencing requires sentences to include an inflexible period of “extended supervision” after a prison term ends. This is different from parole, which is a flexible, early release for good behavior and rehabilitation.
Judges often give out “extraordinarily long periods of extended supervision,” according to Oliver, at least 25% of the incarceration itself by law and often multiple times that in practice. To her, it is simply a “huge engine in reincarceration.”
According to DOC data, of the 8,000 people admitted to Wisconsin prisons in 2024 more than 60% involved some kind of extended supervision violation, known as a “revocation.” Half of those cases involved only revocation.
Extended periods of supervision after release from prison do little to improve public safety, research suggests. The long terms “may interfere with the ability of those on supervision to sustain work, family life and other pro-social connections to their communities,” Cecelia Klingele, a University of Wisconsin-Madison Law School professor of criminal law, wrote in a 2019 study examining 200 revocation cases.
Substance abuse problems contributed to technical revocations in an “overwhelming majority” of cases, Klingele wrote, because “agents have few options to impose meaningful sanctions other than imprisonment.”
“Fewer, more safety-focused conditions will lead to fewer unnecessary revocations and more consistency in revocation for people whose behavior poses a serious threat to public safety,” Klingele added.
Streamlining the standard supervision rules would require the Legislature to act.
Oliver attributes Wisconsin’s high rates of revocations to parole officers failing to reintegrate people into society in favor of playing “catch-somebody-offending.”
“You get reincarcerated, (and) all that time (in prison) doesn’t count,” Oliver said. “You can stay on a revolving door of incarceration and extended supervision for five times longer than your original sentence.”
People behind the statistics
The factors behind both crime and incarceration are complex, with socioeconomic factors relating to poverty, race, location and more increasing the chances of contact with the judicial system.
According to O’Hear, overall crime rates began increasing in the ‘90s during the War on Drugs in part due to prosecutors “charging cases and plea bargaining more aggressively.”
A study by the Equal Justice Initiative found that plea bargaining perpetuates racial inequality in Wisconsin prisons. White defendants are 25% more likely than Black defendants to have charges dropped or reduced during plea bargaining, and Black defendants are more likely than whites to be convicted of their “highest initial charge(s).”
Prison reform advocate Beverly Walker, whose husband, Baron, was formerly incarcerated and is now a reform advocate, speaks in 2016 at a gathering organized by the faith-based advocacy group WISDOM to raise awareness about poor water quality at Fox Lake Correctional Institution. (Gilman Halsted / WPR)
In the 53206 Milwaukee ZIP code where Baron Walker grew up, nearly two-thirds of Black men are incarcerated before they turn 34. Recalling his youth, Walker said “it seemed like almost all the males in my family were incarcerated at one point in time.”
During his time in the prison system, which included stints at Waupun, Columbia and Fox Lake correctional institutions, Walker struggled with accessing his basic needs.
“Their water came out black, dirty. It had a stench,” Walker said. “It sinks into your clothing, even when you wash them … you consume this water, it’s what they cook the food with.”
Water quality in Wisconsin prisons has been a consistent concern of inmates and activists in the past 15 years. Despite multiple investigations into lead, copper and radium contamination at these maximum- and medium-security prisons, recent reports found unhealthy radium levels in the drinking water — with no free alternatives.
“They would microwave the water (at Fox Lake) and the microwaves would spark up and blow out,” WISDOM advocate Beverly Walker, Baron’s wife, told Wisconsin Watch. “The water at the time was $16 to just get a case of six bottles of water … it so ridiculously high.”
EX-incarcerated People Organizing (EXPO) of Wisconsin peer support specialist Vernell Cauley’s issues within Wisconsin prisons were more personal. His daughter died during his intake into Dodge Correctional Institution, and Cauley wasn’t allowed a temporary release to attend her funeral.
“It had some deep effects on me,” he said. “Some of the things I didn’t realize I had until I was actually released, when you understand that you didn’t get the proper time to grieve.”
Cauley was put in solitary confinement during that time, and for three months total over the course of his prison stay. According to DOC data, the average stay in solitary confinement across Wisconsin prisons is 28 days, though that’s down from 40 days in 2019.
Furthermore, inmates who struggle with mental illness are overrepresented in solitary confinement across U.S. prisons. Multiple inmates have committed suicide due to long stints of solitary, particularly during recent prison lockdowns.
Working conditions
A Wisconsin Department of Corrections advertisement of open prison staffing positions is seen near Green Bay Correctional Institution in Allouez, Wis., on June 23, 2024. Chronic staffing shortages have played a role in lengthy lockdowns and deteriorating conditions within Wisconsin prisons. (Julius Shieh / Wisconsin Watch)
Joe Verdegan, a former Green Bay correctional officer of nearly 27 years, said he and most of his coworkers “conducted (them)selves pretty professionally” and “always had a lot of respect” for inmates. This respect went both ways, he said, because guards built relationships with inmates for decades at their post.
According to Verdegan, being a correctional officer used to be a “career job” where “nobody left.” Despite the dangers and odd work hours of the post, the guards had a strong union and good benefits and could climb up the ladder as they gained seniority.
But it “all went to hell” after Act 10 was passed.
Senior staff left in droves, leaving remaining guards with 16-hour shifts and “bad attitudes” that perpetuated the worsening work culture, Verdegan said. Religious, medical and recreational time was cut for inmates due to staffing shortages, and the respect between correctional officers and prisoners dwindled.
“When you’re not getting out for chapel passes or any of that kind of stuff, it just builds that hostility,” he said.
The changes caused Verdegan to retire from corrections at 51, earlier than planned. He and many of his friends took financial penalties by retiring from the Department of Corrections early and ended up working other jobs at bars, grocery stores and factories.
They also went to funerals. Many former coworkers “drank themselves to death” due to their experiences within corrections, Verdegan said.
Coming home
In 1996, when Walker was sentenced to 60 years in prison for his role in two bank robberies, no one expected him to serve more than a third of his sentence — not even the victims.
But when truth-in-sentencing passed, mandating judges to impose definite, inflexible imprisonment lengths on people convicted of crimes, Walker’s hopes for an early release quickly disintegrated.
Walker was released from prison in 2018 on probation, an alternative to incarceration offered on condition of following specific court orders. He was released after being denied parole six times in the seven years since he first became eligible.
In the aftermath of Walker’s imprisonment, he and Beverly have had their “most beautiful days,” along with some trials. Walker said he has struggled to adjust to independent living, and he would have been at a “complete loss” for adapting to 20 years of technological change if he hadn’t studied it in prison.
“You are programmed and reprogrammed to depend on someone for your anything and everything, whether it be your hygiene products, the time you shower, your mail, your bed, your bedding, your food,” Baron said. “Now, suddenly, you cross out in(to) society … and you’re told now as an adult you’re responsible for your independence, your bills, your clothing, your hygiene, your everything.”
Walker has also struggled with finding employment, despite earning “a litany of certifications and degrees” in food service, plumbing, welding, forklift operating and more while incarcerated. He said the DOC’s reentry programs need “overhaul” and more companies should be encouraged to hire formerly incarcerated people.
As of 2021, Wisconsin spent $1.35 billion per year on corrections, but only $30 million on re-entry programs. Less than a third of the re-entry funding is allocated for helping ex-prisoners find jobs — even though studies show employment significantly decreases the likelihood of reoffending.
Looking ahead
To Oliver, a significant barrier to solving issues within the prison system is changing sociopolitical attitudes.
“People imagine that if you’re punitive enough, you will have no crime,” Oliver said. “It’s really hard to get the general public to realize you ultimately reduce crime more by creating the social conditions that help people live productive lives without committing crime.”
O’Hear believes a key solution to problems within Wisconsin prisons is addressing the “mismatch” between large prison populations and available resources. He argues that “for a couple generations now, there’s been more of a focus on cutting taxes than on adequately funding public agencies” like the DOC.
O’Hear also said that judges should consider shorter prison sentences because “most people age out of their tendency to commit crimes” and that there should be “more robust mechanisms,” such as more compassionate release and parole laws for elderly inmates.
“We have people in prison in their 50s and their 60s and their 70s and even older who are really past the time when they pose a real threat to public safety,” O’Hear said. “Health care costs alone for older prisoners are a tremendous burden on the system, and they’re contributing to overcrowding.”
The Walkers are continuing their advocacy for prison reform by opening up the Integrity Center, which supports incarcerated and formerly incarcerated individuals with navigation, re-entry, employment assistance and more. They also advocate permanently shutting down aging prisons such as Green Bay and Waupun correctional institutions.
“All of our people who are eligible for release should be released, and people who are eligible to move into minimum facilities should be moved,” Beverly Walker said. “We don’t need any new prisons if we just utilize what we have.”
Verdegan said that he doesn’t believe the Legislature will ever pass a bill closing Green Bay in his lifetime and that “both political parties are to blame for this mess they’ve created with the Wisconsin DOC.” “Throwing money” at corrections officer positions will not fix staffing vacancies, he said, without the guarantee of eight-hour workdays and adequate job training.
He and Cauley both said supporting the mental health of prisoners before and after incarceration is key. Verdegan supports training staff to work with mentally ill prisoners. Cauley would rather see prison abolished altogether.
“Most people who end up in prisons, they have things going on mentally, these issues not getting met,” Cauley said. “Prison only makes people bitter, more angry … you know, it traumatizes them.”
Correction: This story was updated to reflect the average stay in solitary confinement is 28 days. Also 60% of the more than 8,000 people entering prison in 2024 involved a revocation, but half of those cases also involved a new crime.
Police agencies across the country have different requirements for surveilling officers on the job. While eight states require police to wear body cameras, all but one of them since the 2020 murder of George Floyd while in Minneapolis police custody, Wisconsin leaves the decision up to individual agencies.
Most agencies in the state use either body cameras or dashboard cameras, according to a 2021 survey conducted by the Wisconsin Department of Justice. Of the 436 agencies surveyed, 88% said they used one or the other, and 48% said they used both.
To request the body-worn or dash camera footage from a police shooting in Wisconsin, you must submit what’s known as a “public records request” to the police agency involved in the shooting. Bodycam footage must be maintained for at least 120 days after being recorded and, for serious incidents, until an investigation or case is resolved.
This can be done with a web search for the agency’s name and “public records” or “records request.” Many agencies have a page with a phone number, email and/or mailing address alongside a form to fill out. General open records letter templates and advice are available at websites such as the Wisconsin Freedom of Information Council.
When filling out the form or submitting the written request for a police shooting video, it’s important to be as detailed as possible about the information you are looking to receive. Ask for body-worn camera and/or dash camera audio-video recordings, and write a detailed summary of the shooting in question. Relevant information can include the date, location and time of the shooting, the people involved and any other case knowledge you have.
How quickly an agency fulfills your request depends on whether your record is “simple” or “complex,” or where it is chronologically in the police agency’s record requests log, depending on the records custodian. At many agencies, the more precise you are with your request, the more likely it is to be categorized as “simple” and completed quickly. Wisconsin law only requires that agencies provide or deny records “as soon as practicable and without delay,” but for simple requests the attorney general has suggested it should be no more than 10 days.
Under a 2024 Wisconsin law, police agencies are allowed to require payment before providing video to cover the cost of redacting, pixelating and/or editing it for privacy. Individual requesters must attest that they do not plan to use the footage for financial gain, or face a flat $10,000 fine.
In at least one case, a police agency has threatened to fine a reporter for sharing requested footage with a news publication though ultimately apologized and never went through with it. WFIC President Bill Lueders said he has never heard of a police agency actually levying fines against requesters.
“If push comes to shove, I think (the issue) would probably end up in the courts and maybe (the law) would be struck down. But push has not come to shove,” Lueders said.
Finally, though anyone can request police bodycam footage under the public records law, the state allows police agencies to deny the request if they demonstrate how “harm done to the public interest by disclosure outweighs the right of access to public records.”
Should this occur with your request, you may go to court and ask for the record’s release. Wisconsin law stipulates that you may also request the attorney general or district attorney of the county where the record took place to go to court on your behalf, but Lueders said he could “probably count on one hand” the amount of times this has been done in the past 20 years.
Wisconsin Watch readers have submitted questions to our statehouse team, and we’ll answer them in our series, Ask Wisconsin Watch. Have a question about state government? Ask it here.
A common idea in recent years among the information-hungry public is “doing your own research.” People have lost trust in traditional news sources, so they scour the dark, fact-lacking corners of the internet to find out what’s really going on.
I call this the bucket brigade approach to information gathering. It can work, but it doesn’t make much sense in other areas of modern life.
For the most part, people don’t make their own shoes, they don’t build their own cars, and when their house is on fire, they don’t rouse the neighborhood to form a line to the nearest watering hole.
At Wisconsin Watch, our driving purpose is to provide a small brigade of nonpartisan, fact-focused journalists to research topics on behalf of our readers — with transparency surrounding where we find information. One way you can take full advantage of that free service is to submit questions via Ask Wisconsin Watch.
It’s a question that is widely misunderstood, but yes, unauthorized immigrants do pay taxes.
While many immigrants are still paid “under the table” for their work, the majority pay income and payroll taxes on their wages, according to the nonpartisan Tax Policy Center. While an exact number is difficult to determine, a 2013 estimate from the Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy suggested at least half of all unauthorized workers in the United States pay income taxes.
An estimated 70,000 unauthorized immigrants live in Wisconsin, about 47,000 of whom are employed, according to the nonpartisan Migration Policy Institute. About two-thirds of those had lived in the U.S. for 10 years or more. But that information, while the most recent available, is now over five years old. The Department of Homeland Security estimated that there were 11 million unauthorized immigrants in the country as of 2022.
In 2018, unauthorized immigrants in Wisconsin paid an estimated $157 million in federal taxes and $101 million in state and local taxes, totaling nearly $258 million, according to the American Immigration Council. That estimate dropped slightly to a total of $240 million in federal, state and local taxes as of 2022.
Unauthorized immigrant workers nationwide paid an estimated $97 billion in federal, state and local taxes in 2022, according to a July 2024 report from the Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy.
But how do they pay taxes without being identified by authorities?
Unauthorized workers who lack a Social Security number can instead apply for an individual taxpayer identification number through the Internal Revenue Service — a system created in 1996 — to file their income taxes. As of December 2022, there were an estimated 5.8 million active ITINs in the United States, according to the Administration of the Individual Taxpayer Identification Number Program.
Taxpayer ID numbers allow unauthorized workers to file tax returns. All that is required to obtain an ITIN is an application that does not require proof of work authorization or proof that you reside in the United States legally.
ITIN holders’ tax information has historically been legally protected and could not be shared with the Department of Homeland Security or Immigration and Customs Enforcement. Unauthorized immigrant workers had been able to get one without threat of the information being shared with authorities who may find and deport them.
But on April 7, the IRS and the Department of Homeland Security struck a deal on behalf of the Trump administration to share taxpayer data on unauthorized individuals under final removal orders. The agreement faces legal challenges.
Some unauthorized immigrants provide employers with fake Social Security numbers, someone else’s number or a previously valid number. When they’re hired, most employers do not and are not required to verify the identification numbers with any government entity, according to the Bipartisan Policy Center.
But when tax return season comes around, the IRS will not accept filings that include a fake, stolen or invalid Social Security number. If unauthorized workers want to file their taxes and create a paper trail, then they will often obtain an ITIN.
The Social Security Administration may alert an employer when an employee’s name and Social Security number on a W-2 form do not match, but it cannot enforce any penalties. The IRS rarely ever investigates employers with a high number of W-2 forms that don’t match. According to the Bipartisan Policy Center, this is due to limited resources and employers’ ability to simply claim they asked an employee for the correct number, which is all that is required of them by law.
The financial penalty for each W-2 discrepancy is so small that the federal government often will not investigate it. Legally, a mismatched name and number cannot be considered proof that a worker is in the country illegally.
Why would unauthorized workers decide to pay and file taxes?
According to the Bipartisan Policy Center,many unauthorized workers choose to pay taxes in the hopes that it will eventually help them gain citizenship. Should a pathway to citizenship ever be established through a comprehensive immigration bill, a history of paying taxes can be viewed as a way to show “good faith.”
While many unauthorized immigrants pay taxes, they do not qualify for many benefits like Social Security retirement, Medicare coverage and the federal earned income tax credit — despite contributing billions of dollars in federal payroll taxes that help fund these programs.
If they purchase goods and services in a community, unauthorized immigrants pay sales taxes just like others do. When buying a home, they will pay state and local property taxes as well.
Wisconsin Watch readers have submitted questions to our statehouse team, and we’ll answer them in our series, Ask Wisconsin Watch. Have a question about state government? Ask it here.
A reader asked: “I’m wondering how the federal freeze and mass federal firings are affecting veterans’ employment and services through VA in Wisconsin. Thank you!”
Recent changes to the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs have left some Wisconsin veterans uncertain about what the future means for their employment, health care and resources offered through the VA.
On Feb. 11, President Donald Trump issued an executive order to implement the Department of Government Efficiency’s Workforce Optimization Initiative. In the order, Trump called for a DOGE team to collaborate with the highest-ranking officials of each government agency to reduce the federal workforce through hiring approvals, job cuts and reorganization plans.
While the order stated the plans exclude military personnel, recent layoffs have proved troubling for veterans working for the federal government.
Andrew McKinney, a veteran from Cottage Grove and cashier for the Veterans Health Administration who ran for state Assembly in 2022 as a Republican, was alerted of his layoff Feb. 24, before his supervisor learned about the decision.
McKinney, a probationary employee, said the email came from the Office of Personnel Management, citing his “performance” as the reason he was let go. But later his supervisor was informed via email the dismissal was a result of Trump’s Feb. 11 executive order.
McKinney’s layoff was part of a wave of VA dismissals, removing over 1,000 probationary employees from their positions.
“Those dismissed today include non-bargaining unit probationary employees who have served less than a year in a competitive service appointment or who have served less than two years in an excepted service appointment,” according to a VA press release.
While McKinney was given his job back the week of March 23, he says the unexpected removal and uncertainty have made him rethink his current situation.
“People have families, and they have to take care of their bills, and they have to take care of things, you know,” McKinney said. “I was kind of concerned a little bit, but I had faith that I was going to come back. But it also shows that, you know, I’m gonna have to start really saving and putting stuff aside for things that happen like this.”
The VA said the personnel reorganization would save the department over $98 million a year, funds that could be redirected toward health care, benefits and services, according to the Feb. 18 press release.
But the American Federation of Government Employees (AFGE) — a union representing federal employees — said further dismissals could make the already understaffed organization worse. Specifically, removals could threaten mental health resources and health care services, leading to longer wait times and threatening benefits promised to veterans.
For example, the PACT Act was passed to expand VA health care eligibility for veterans exposed to toxic substances, such as burn pits and Agent Orange. The union argues further cuts, such as the proposed 83,000 dismissals by the end of 2025, could harm the VA’s ability to provide those promised services.
In the first year following the approval of the PACT Act, Democratic Sen. Tammy Baldwin reported around 15,000 Wisconsin veterans filed PACT Act claims, with about 6,600 receiving approval in the first year.
The VA did not respond with comment on the federal layoffs’ impact on VA clinics or the PACT Act in Wisconsin.
Currently, there have been no reports or claims of longer wait times or delayed services at VA clinics in Wisconsin since the first round of layoffs, according to Veterans of Foreign Wars State Adjutant Adam Wallace and American Wisconsin Legion Adjutant Julie Muhle. But these advocacy groups are preparing for the potential consequences future changes could bring.
“We’re kind of laying the groundwork now, getting the word out there to be vigilant about it,” Wallace said. “But we haven’t … gotten any specific complaints regarding interrupted services at the VA.”
A memo published by the VA chief of staff said its reorganization plan will be published June 25, with the reduction in workforce to be carried out by the end of the fiscal year.
“We don’t suspect that we’ll see any sort of impact in health care, probably until it’s enacted, maybe in July or later,” Wallace said.
As of now, the biggest issue veterans face in Wisconsin is uncertainty.
Because the cuts are coming from the White House, local advocacy organizations worry VA offices will not have the adequate time and resources to prepare for further reductions in the workforce.
“The uncertainty is causing anxiety in the employees working there, that it’s distracting from their mission, which is a very important one, and that’s serving our veterans and their health care needs and their benefit needs,” Wallace said.
Wisconsin Watch readers have submitted questions to our statehouse team, and we’ll answer them in our series, Ask Wisconsin Watch. Have a question about state government? Ask it here.
A reader asked: Was Elon Musk’s endorsement of Brad Schimel a violation of lobbying laws because of Musk’s status as a federal employee?
We’ll get to that question in a second, but we also wondered about the answer to a related question: Are the cash giveaways from Musk’s America PAC ahead of the April 1 Wisconsin Supreme Court election legal?
Musk, the centibillionaire tech CEO turned efficiency czar for President Donald Trump, has dominated the Wisconsin Supreme Court race in recent weeks. Musk and affiliated groups have poured cash into the race between liberal candidate Susan Crawford and conservative candidate Brad Schimel, which will determine ideological control of the high court and could have national ramifications.
America PAC and Building America’s Future, two groups that are funded by Musk, have spent more than $16.7 million on advertising and voter mobilization efforts meant to aid Schimel’s candidacy. Musk has also donated $3 million to the Republican Party of Wisconsin, which can transfer the money to Schimel’s campaign.
Musk’s super PAC, America PAC, is offering registered Wisconsin voters $100 if they sign a petition opposing “activist judges.”
“Judges should interpret laws as written, not rewrite them to fit their personal or political agendas,” the petition reads. “By signing below, I’m rejecting the actions of activist judges who impose their own views and demanding a judiciary that respects its role — interpreting, not legislating.”
Participants can also get $100 for referring another petition signer.
Late on Wednesday the super PAC announced that “Scott A.” from Green Bay had been selected to win $1 million after filling out the petition. That mirrors a move America PAC deployed in last year’s presidential race.
It’s less clear whether America PAC’s “special offer” violates Wisconsin’s election bribery statute, according to Bryna Godar, a staff attorney with the University of Wisconsin Law School’s State Democracy Research Initiative.
(1m) Any person who does any of the following violates this chapter:
a. Offers, gives, lends or promises to give or lend, or endeavors to procure, anything of value, or any office or employment or any privilege or immunity to, or for, any elector, or to or for any other person, in order to induce any elector to:
i. Go to or refrain from going to the polls.
ii. Vote or refrain from voting.
iii.Vote or refrain from voting for or against a particular person.
iv. Vote or refrain from voting for or against a particular referendum; or on account of any elector having done any of the above.
The $100 reward for signing the petition “definitely falls into a gray area because (America PAC) is paying people to sign the petition,” Godar said. “The question is whether the payment is being given in order to induce anyone to vote or refrain from voting.”
“These payments kind of walk an uncertain line on whether they are amounting to that or not,” Godar added.
Godar also noted that you have to be a registered Wisconsin voter to receive the payment, “so it does seem like it is inducing people to register to vote.” That violates federal law for federal elections, she said, but “federal law doesn’t apply to this election because there aren’t any federal offices on the ballot.”
“Under the state law, that’s not specifically one of the listed prohibitions,” Godar said. “It’s definitely in a gray area and sort of walks the line.”
Elon Musk posted on X, the social media platform he owns, that he would incentivize voting in Wisconsin with $1 million checks. The post appears to have been taken down. An X user asked the platform’s AI chatbot, Grok, whether Musk’s plan was election fraud. The bot responded that the plan likely violates Wisconsin election law.
Late on Thursday, Musk announced he would “give a talk in Wisconsin” in a social media post that has since been taken down.
“Entrance is limited to those who have voted in the Supreme Court election,” he wrote. “I will also personally hand over two checks for a million dollars each in appreciation for you taking the time to vote.”
An AI chatbot on Musk’s own social media site flagged the activity in the post as potentially illegal. “Though aimed at boosting participation, this could be seen as election bribery,” the AI profile @grok replied to someone asking if the post was legal.
In a follow-up email, Godar said giving “the payment for voting instead of for signing the petition much more clearly violates Wisconsin law.”
On Friday afternoon, Musk posted again: “To clarify a previous post, entrance is limited to those who have signed the petition in opposition to activist judges.”
“I will also hand over checks for a million dollars to 2 people to be spokesmen for the petition,” he wrote.
UPDATE (March 31, 2025, 9:00 a.m.): On Friday afternoon, Wisconsin Attorney General Josh Kaul filed a lawsuit to bar Musk and America PAC from promoting the “million-dollar gifts.” The suit also sought to prohibit Musk and America PAC “from making any payments to Wisconsin electors to vote.” The case was randomly assigned to Crawford, who immediately recused, and then reassigned to Columbia County Circuit Court Judge W. Andrew Voigt. Voigt declined to hear the petition prior to Sunday’s event, so Kaul went to the Court of Appeals and subsequently the Wisconsin Supreme Court. Both turned down his request to stop Musk from giving away two $1 million checks, which he did on Sunday evening.
Violating the statute is a Class I felony, which can carry a fine of up to $10,000, imprisonment of up to three-and-a-half years, or both.
A county district attorney or the Wisconsin attorney general would be responsible for filing criminal charges for violations of the statute, Godar said. It’s also possible someone could try to bring a civil claim to have a judge halt the payments. So far that hasn’t happened.
Now back to our reader question about Musk’s political activities as a federal employee.
Musk, in his role as a “special government employee” leading the so-called Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), is bound by the Hatch Act, a law prohibiting “political activity while you’re on duty, while you’re in the workplace, and the use of your official position to influence the outcome of an election,” said Delaney Marsco, the director of ethics at the Campaign Legal Center.
But special government employees like Musk are only bound by the Hatch Act while they’re on duty representing the federal government, Marsco said, so the world’s wealthiest man “is allowed to engage in political activity that might otherwise be prohibited as long as he’s not on duty when he’s doing it.”
The Hatch Act is intended to “maintain a federal workforce that is free from partisan political influence or coercion,” according to a memo from the U.S. Office of Special Counsel.
Wisconsin Watch readers have submitted questions to our statehouse team, and we’ll answer them in our series, Ask Wisconsin Watch. Have a question about state government? Ask it here.
Login
