Sen. Jeff Smith holding up a printout of President Donald Trump's post telling people to buy, which went out just hours before he paused most tariffs. (Photo by Baylor Spears/Wisconsin Examiner)

Wisconsin Democrats are resurrecting a resolution that would allow voters to weigh in on whether the U.S. Supreme Court’s landmark Citizens United ruling should stand — an effort that comes just a week after historic spending in Wisconsin’s state Supreme Court election.

The U.S. Supreme Court’s 2010 decision in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission found that corporations and unions have a First Amendment right to speech and laws preventing them from spending were unconstitutional. The decision has enabled corporations and other outside groups to spend virtually unlimited amounts of money on elections. 

Lawmakers said the decision is the core of why spending has gotten so out of hand in the last decade and a half. According to the Wisconsin Democracy Campaign, preliminary data shows that nearly $100 million was spent during the April race between Justice-elect Susan Crawford and Brad Schimel.

At a press conference, Sen. Jeff Smith (D-Brunswick) called billionaire Elon Musk — who has directed efforts in the Trump administration to slash federal programs and fire federal employees and spent millions trying to influence the outcome of the Wisconsin  Supreme Court — a “carpetbagger.” He criticized Musk for giving money to voters, saying Wisconsinites shouldn’t get accustomed to being paid to vote, but should be voting to make their voices heard.

Smith said money in elections is making voters feel like billionaires are outweighing their voices. He then called specific attention to President Donald Trump telling investors to ‘buy’ on social media — as the stock market was wavering — just hours before he announced that for 90 days he would be lowering U.S. tariffs to 10% on most countries and raising them on China to 125%. The move caused the stock market to rise and, then led to accusations of market manipulation and insider trading. 

“The man in the White House sent this message — ‘A great time to buy! A great time to buy.’ He sent his message to his rich donors and friends,” Smith said. 

“It pays off to put millions of dollars in campaigns because they’re going to make money in the end if they win,” Smith continued. “We need Congress to reevaluate this role of corporations and billionaires and their role in money and politics.”

The advisory referendum would seek an answer from voters on whether Wisconsin’s Congressional delegation should support a constitutional amendment to overturn the Supreme Court’s decision. Specifically it would ask voters the question whether “only human beings are endowed with constitutional rights — not corporations, unions, nonprofit organizations, or other artificial entities” and whether “money is not speech, and therefore limiting political contributions and spending is not equivalent to limiting political speech.”

Smith said voters sent a message that they won’t be bought last week by rejecting Musk’s preferred candidate.

“We don’t want that money coming in here in Wisconsin to buy our elections and our freedom,” Smith said. “Let’s put this referendum on the ballots, so voters can make their voices heard directly to Congress.

Wisconsin Democracy Campaign Operations and Policy Director Beverly Speer emphasized at the press conference that the issue goes beyond Musk, saying that spending by independent expenditures —  totaling about $51.5 million in April — are often backed by billionaires and operated in shady ways.

“Don’t be mistaken, Musk is just one of a handful of billionaires who contributed to this bipartisan arms race,” Speer said. “Things will continue to escalate… Unless we want to see a $150 million race, and then maybe a $200 million race, we need to cut off this free-for-all.”  

Speer said that voters are mostly opposed to the vast spending in campaigns. 

The Wisconsin Democracy Campaign conducted a survey in February that found about 88% of Wisconsin voters statewide are “extremely concerned” or “very concerned” about the influence of money in politics. The survey also found that 86% of respondents said people and groups shouldn’t be able to spend “unlimited amounts of money” to support political campaigns and 83% of respondents said there should be limits on how much campaigns can spend.

“While working Wisconsinites stretch to pay rent, feed their families, and make ends meet, billionaires treat our elections like a game — pouring millions into a state that they don’t even normally live in, hoping to tip the scales in favor of their special interests,” Speer said. 

A statewide referendum would need to pass the Republican-led Legislature, and Rep. Lisa Subeck (D-Madison) acknowledged that previous attempts have been unsuccessful. She said she welcomes more conversation about the issue and proposal.

“Not once has it even gotten a hearing, and you know, why? Because politicians who are beholden to big money in politics don’t want to hear what the people have to say about it, but we are calling on… our colleagues to join us in this resolution,” Subeck said. 

Subeck said lawmakers were starting with the referendum because any changes in state law are “neutered” by the Citizens United decision. She said Democrats would be introducing more bills to address the issue in the near future, including on disclosure of money in campaigns and on public financing. However, she said pushing Congress for a constitutional amendment will be key to changing the state of money in elections. 

“We cannot fundamentally make wholesale change in this through any state law as long as Citizens United is still law of the land,” Subeck said. “We need to amend our federal Constitution and we need to send that message clear and simple.”

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

Gov. Tony Evers speaks at a round table discussion on the state budget in February. On Friday, Evers' office said the state will lose $210 million in federal funds for health care previously approved by Congress but part of $12 billion cut this week by the Trump administration. (Photo by Erik Gunn/Wisconsin Examiner)

Wisconsin will lose more than $210 million in federal funds that were to be used for mental health, substance abuse prevention and bolstering emergency medical services, state officials said Friday.

The money involved is Wisconsin’s share of $12 billion to combat infectious disease and other serious health problems that the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services has summarily cut off, NBC News and the New York Times reported this week.

In Wisconsin, the funds were to be used for suicide prevention; substance abuse prevention; public health departments, programs and laboratories, including EMS services; and the Wisconsin Immunization Registry, the office of Gov. Tony Evers said Friday.

The governor’s office discussed the health funds cutback along with  other programs targeted for reductions or considered vulnerable under the Trump administration, including education funding, farm programs and in the Department of Veterans Affairs. On Thursday, the Trump administration announced it will cut 10,000 employees from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.

“Reckless cuts by President Trump and Elon Musk to help pay for tax cuts for millionaires and billionaires are causing devastating consequences for Wisconsin’s kids, families, and communities and services they depend on every day,” Evers said in a statement released Friday.

“With threats to Medicaid and Medicare, cuts to researching cures for Alzheimer’s disease and cancer, efforts to undermine food and drug safety, and continued attacks on the Affordable Care Act, the Trump Administration is jeopardizing health and access to health care in Wisconsin and across our country,” Evers said.

State Rep. Greta Neubauer (D-Racine), the Assembly minority leader, said Friday that the cuts “will be devastating for Wisconsinites who rely on these essential programs.”

“President Trump and Elon Musk are selling out Wisconsin families and communities, threatening our health and safety just to pay for unnecessary tax cuts for their billionaire friends,” said state Rep. Lisa Subeck (D-Madison), the ranking Democrat on the Assembly Health, Aging and Long-Term Care Committee and chair of the Assembly’s Democratic caucus.

“This reckless move by the Trump Administration, coupled with cuts to vital medical research and threats to the future of Medicaid and Medicare, will have a devastating impact on the health of our state,” Subeck said.

Evers said his administration will explore “every legal option available to us” to fight the cuts.

The $12 billion that HHS cut this week was authorized by Congress through COVID-19 relief bills enacted in the first two years of the pandemic. The funds were later allowed for public health needs outside the pandemic, the New York Times reported this week.

The World Health Organization reports that “COVID-19 continues to circulate widely . . . presenting significant challenges to health systems worldwide. Tens of thousands of people are infected or re-infected with SARS-CoV-2 each week.”

The UN-affiliated public health agency emphasizes continued surveillance of the viral pandemic. “It is vital that countries sustain the public health response to COVID-19 amid ongoing illness and death and the emergence of SARS-CoV-2 variants, adapting it to the requirements based on the current COVID-19 situation and risk,” WHO says. 

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

The late Jonathan Brostoff, photographed during his time as a state representative in the Wisconsin Assembly. The Assembly and state Senate approved a resolution in Brostoff's memory March 18, 2025. (Photo by Greg Anderson)

Editor’s note: If you or someone you know is contemplating suicide, call or text 988 or chat 988lifeline.org.

On a day of contentious legislative debates and an annual ceremonial custom to recognize Wisconsin’s tribal communities, members of the Wisconsin Legislature united to remember a former colleague this week.

More than one lawmaker made clear it was an event they fervently wished would not have been necessary.

Former State Rep. Jonathan Brostoff took his own life on Nov. 4, 2024, with a gun he had purchased just an hour earlier. He was 41 years old. Brostoff served in the Assembly for eight years, leaving in 2022 after he was elected to the Milwaukee Common Council. 

Tuesday, the Wisconsin Assembly and Senate each voted unanimously to pass a resolution in Brostoff’s memory. The votes were cast in each chamber in a two-part secular memorial service of sorts, with heartfelt eulogies from Brostoff’s former colleagues. Many wore green ribbons in recognition of mental health awareness.

“Jonathan was well known for his honesty,” said Assembly Minority Leader Greta Neubauer. “He never held back if he thought we were heading in the wrong direction or missing something important — often crossing his eyes and staring you down. With Jonathan, you always knew where you stood, and he helped us grow as a caucus and as individual legislators.”

Sign language bill

One story was told repeatedly: Brostoff’s campaign to pass a bill that would tighten state standards for American Sign Language interpreters. The legislation established a tiered licensing system to ensure that people interpreting between doctors and patients or lawyers and clients had a higher level of skill, Brostoff said at the time.

Frustrated when the legislation stalled, he vowed not to cut his hair until it was signed into law. In an April 2019 Wisconsin Public Television interview, Brostoff — who normally favored a close-cropped cut — sported a curly afro that surrounded his face.

It wasn’t a protest, exactly, he told interviewer Frederica Freyberg. “Especially for the deaf community, it’s a visual indicator saying I’m with you and we’re not going to stop until we get this done,” Brostoff said.

“I would send him pictures of Richard Simmons,” Rep. Lisa Subeck said on the Assembly floor Tuesday. “He sent me back pictures of Bob Ross.”

Gov. Tony Evers signed the bill in July 2019. Sen. Dianne Hesselbein was a member of the Assembly at the time. In the Senate Tuesday, she recalled Brostoff’s Assembly floor speech on the day the measure finally passed.

“He signed the entire thing, and it was long, and he could do sign language of the entire thing without looking at notes,” Hesselbein said. “He knew what he wanted to say, and he was careful, and there was silence, absolute silence and respect.”

Colleagues described the diminutive Brostoff as intense, funny, passionate about causes and smitten with his four children.

In the Assembly, Rep. Jodi Emerson recalled hearing Brostoff break into the “Itsy bitsy spider” song while changing a diaper in the midst of one of their phone calls discussing their work in the Capitol.

Those phone calls were a regular feature of her drives home to Eau Claire from Madison at the end of a busy week in the Capitol. She said she spoke before Tuesday’s session with Brostoff’s father about those calls.

“I was thinking about that last week, and really wish I would have been able to talk to Jonathan last week,” Emerson said. “I had my own version of a conversation with him,” she added wistfully, “but the reception wasn’t clear from wherever he was.”

Passion and compassion

Brostoff was first elected to the Assembly in 2014. Rep. Christine Sinicki related a memory from Brostoff’s campaign that year. She had not endorsed him in the four-way Democratic primary, and at a neighborhood parade both attended that summer, a Brostoff volunteer sidled up to her and made a “snide remark,” she said.

“I went over to Jonathan and I said, ‘I really did not appreciate that.’ The next day, that volunteer was at my door, apologizing,” Sinicki recalled. “That was the kind of man that Jonathan was. He had so much integrity.”

Rep. Supreme Moore Omokunde, who met Brostoff when both were at the University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee, nicknamed him “JoBro.” But Brostoff had his own self-applied nickname: Honey Badger, after a viral YouTube video and internet meme — “Honey Badger Don’t Care.”

“He’s getting into like, messing with bees and snakes and all types of things, because Honey Badger don’t care and he’s gonna do what he wants to do anyway. That’s Jonathan Brostoff,” Omokunde said.

Brostoff was passionate about the causes he adopted, his colleagues agreed.

Omokunde referred to a comment moments earlier, when Subeck “called him tenacious.” He paused. “However, let’s be honest,” he continued. “Jonathan was annoying … and everybody in this body who ever came across him knows he was annoying.”

Affectionate laughter greeted his candor.

“Sometimes he could make me crazy,” Sinicki said. “That’s only because he had such passion and such conviction for the things that he wanted that nothing was going to change his mind, nothing at all.”

For all his fervor as a Democratic lawmaker, Brostoff endeared himself to Republican colleagues.

GOP Rep. Paul Tittl found Brostoff, who was Jewish, to be “a deeply spiritual person” who asked to attend a regular Capitol Bible study that Republican lawmakers, all Christian, organized. “He always added to the  conversation.”

In the Senate, Sen. Andre Jacque recalled both Brostoff’s participation in the Bible study program as well as his enthusiasm for the gaming community. “One thing that always struck me about Jonathan is that he was somebody who was unafraid to put himself out there and have conversations,” Jacque said. “I’m going to miss him.”

Vetting candidates and repairing the world

Brostoff took it upon himself to vet prospective candidates.

One was Rep. Robyn Vining, ahead of her first election to the Assembly in 2018. At a Colectivo Coffee near UWM, “Jonathan grilled me with questions, and was very clear on his priorities,” Vining said. “He was also very clear that he would not be supporting me if I did not pass his test.”

They talked. “What I didn’t realize was that after I did pass that test, Jonathan was going to jump on board and fight for me, which is exactly what he did,” Vining said. “We finished my vetting, and he said, ‘OK, let’s go knock some doors.’”

First-term Rep. Sequanna Taylor was another such candidate. Friends from before she decided to run for the Assembly, she and Brostoff and their families were dining together early in her campaign.  

“In the middle of him eating, he was like, ‘Give me your spiel,’” Taylor said. She was caught off guard, but he persisted.

“And so, you know, I went into my little spiel, and he took a moment and he looked at me. He was like, ‘You’ll be good,’” she said. “Then he was like, ‘Next time somebody asks you this, though, I want you to be able to say this in 30 seconds flat.’”

Brostoff was always straightforward, Taylor said. “You never had to worry about a gray area with JoBro, because there was no gray area with him.”

Sen. LaTonya Johnson recalled a riot in Milwaukee’s Sherman Park neighborhood, part of her district, after an officer-involved shooting 10 years ago. She was visiting the scene the second night of unrest — “I was not brave enough to go that first night,” she confessed — when Brostoff showed up with big packs of chewing gum.

“This is de-escalation gum,” Johnson recalled him saying. She was skeptical, “but lo and behold the longer we were out there, when things became confrontational, Jonathan would walk up and he said, ‘You want gum?’ And people would stop, and they would take it.” And, she said, it helped redirect people’s attention.

Subeck said she and Brostoff were two of three Jewish members of the Assembly when they both took office in 2015. She described the Jewish value of Tikkun Olam, to repair the world.

“This is a concept that is built on our guiding principles of social justice, of making the world a better place, of taking care of our world and taking care of its people,” Subeck said. “And Jonathan, more than just about anybody else I know, lived up to that principle.”

Acknowledging struggles, seeking change

Brostoff was candid about his own mental health history, Subeck added. “He brought his own struggles, and he shared his very personal struggles with all of us here in the Legislature, and I believe that they made me, and hopefully made many of you, a better legislator.”

There were also calls to address directly how Brostoff’s life had ended.

“I hope that we will recommit ourselves to preventing needless deaths in this state and to doing what Jonathan would want us to do, and enacting policies that will save other lives, even though we are too late to save his,” said Sen. Mark Spreitzer. “I will miss my friend Jonathan Brostoff, may his memory be a blessing.”

“Jonathan’s story is one that too many Wisconsin families know the pain of,” said Sen. Jodi Habush Sinykin. “In 2022 alone, 530 Wisconsinites died by suicide with firearms.”

Habush Sinykin read to her colleagues a statement from Brostoff’s widow, Diana Vang-Brostoff, and his parents, Alan and Phyllis Brostoff. Earlier, Rep. Deb Andraca read the same statement in the Assembly.

“Once again, we want to thank the Wisconsin Legislature for today honoring the memory of our husband and son,” the statement began.

Their statement recounted the circumstances of Brostoff’s death as well as a commentary Brostoff wrote in October 2019 that was published in the Wisconsin State Journal and Urban Milwaukee about his failed suicide attempts as a teenager. Brostoff had just served on a Legislature task force on suicide prevention. 

They quoted Brostoff’s column, in which he wrote that access to a firearm for someone contemplating suicide “is like having your own personal permanent delete button.” In the essay he had acknowledged that if had had access to a gun at the time of those teenage attempts to kill himself, “I would not be here today.”

“Our family believes that had Jonathan been required to wait perhaps a day or two or any amount of time after entering that gun store last November to make that purchase, his life may have been spared,” their statement concluded.

“And so now, in the interest of saving other lives at risk for mental health issues, domestic violence or other circumstances, it is our hope that you find the collective will to reinstate a reasonable waiting period for finalizing gun purchases. Doing that would enhance your thoughtful and kind honoring of his memory today.”

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

Lawmakers on the Assembly Health, Aging and Long-Term Care committee weighed what happened during a tense hearing on a bill to ban gender affirming medical care and then voted along party lines to advance the bill. Rep. Lisa Subeck became emotional while speaking to her colleagues. Photo by Baylor Spears/Wisconsin Examiner.

A little over 12 hours after a tense public hearing on a resurrected bill to ban gender affirming medical care for children, lawmakers on the Assembly Health, Aging and Long-Term Care committee weighed what happened and then voted along party lines to advance the bill.

AB 104 would ban gender affirming care, including prescribing puberty-blocking drugs or gender-affirming surgery, for those under 18. It would also require revocation of a medical provider’s license found to be providing the care. It is the fourth bill focused on transgender youth in Wisconsin to receive a hearing over the last two weeks. 

“After sitting through the hearing on this bill yesterday, I would hope some people are taking a step back and saying, wait a minute, maybe this isn’t the route that we should go,” Rep. Lisa Subeck (D-Madison) said during Thursday’s executive session. She noted that one person at the hearing even had a “change of heart.”

Larry Jones of Milwaukee spoke about seven hours into the hearing. Sitting in front of lawmakers, he began apologizing for being there and said he was invited to the hearing to show his support for the bill.

“I have very little knowledge of gay people and things like that there, so when I came here, my eyes were opened,” he said Wednesday at around 9:12 p.m. “I was one of the critics that sat on the side and made the decisions there was only two genders, so I got an education that was unbelievable and I don’t know just exactly how to say this but my perspective for people have changed. I’d like to apologize for being here and I learned a very lot about this group of people.”

Subeck, talking to her colleagues the next day, became emotional as she spoke about the committee’s upcoming vote on the bill.

“The governor is going to veto [the bill]. I feel really good about that,” Subeck said. “I don’t feel so good about the fact that we’re gonna have a vote here where people are gonna vote to support this.” 

Gov. Tony Evers vetoed a similar bill last session, and vowed to LGBTQ+ youth in January to continue vetoing any bill that “makes Wisconsin a less safe, less inclusive, and less welcoming place.”

Subeck said the bill causes harm. It is the latest in a slate of bills focused on LGBTQ+ youth introduced by Republican lawmakers in Wisconsin. The bills come as President Donald Trump has also made targeting transgender people a key point in the first couple months of his term. In a recent survey of Wisconsin LGBTQ+ youth by the Trevor Project, 91% of respondents reported that recent politics negatively impacted their well-being.

Subeck pointed to the emotional testimony lawmakers heard into the night, including from Charlie Werner, a teen, who testified with his parents, Allison and Dan Werner, around 8 p.m. The family was also present in 2023 at a bill hearing and when Gov. Tony Evers vetoed the bill. 

Werner told lawmakers that he was dealing with depression before realizing he was dealing with gender dysphoria. He said that therapy and finding community, especially among other queer and trans people, has “lifted” him.

Werner said the gender affirming care he has received, including puberty blockers and later receiving testosterone, has helped him go “from being so uncomfortable in my body to finally feeling a bit of clarity.” He said the care has allowed him to experience similar traits as his cisgender peers, including a lower voice.

“I finally feel like myself,” Werner said. “Gender affirming care saved my life… I don’t believe you are bad people. I simply think this is what you have been taught, but you still have the opportunity to change and make better decisions for the people that you serve.” 

Subeck had a similar message for her colleagues during the executive session. 

“Many of you I’ve known for a very long time, some of us came into this Legislature together. I know that you’re good people who care. I know that,” Subeck, who has served since 2014, said. “That is why it’s so bothersome to me to think … you can sit in this room and vote for this bill… We’re better than that as a body. This isn’t about doing what’s right.”

Rep. Adam Neylon (R-Pewaukee) said that he used the hearing time to listen and to learn, and pushed back on the idea that the bill is a “judgment on trans people.” Rather, he said, the bill comes from a “conservative approach to medical care that may be irreversible.”

“If you’re accusing us of wanting to be conservative when it comes to the medical care of minors, then that is true…,” Neylon said. “That doesn’t mean we want them dead, right? That doesn’t mean we don’t recognize their right to exist.”

However, Neylon also acknowledged that the bill may not be the exact right approach. 

“It might not be hitting directly where it should and it might come across political and I understand the pain and I wanted to stay [at the hearing] to make sure that people had an opportunity to share their things…,” Neylon said. “I would be angry if I was young too, but it’s not coming from a place of saying, like trying to other them or saying, like, you don’t belong in our society.”

Committee Chair Rep. Clint Moses said that the hearing was beginning to become unproductive because of “political theater” as some members were being yelled at. He had two people removed by officers from the committee room for yelling during the hearing. 

Throughout the hearing, there were moments of frustration for both lawmakers and members of the public who came to speak.

One of those moments came a little over 6 hours and 18 minutes into the hearing when FAIR Wisconsin Executive Director Abigail Swetz finally got her opportunity to speak to lawmakers. She used her time to tell transgender youth in the state that there are “many of us in this state who love you exactly as you are and exactly as you are becoming.” She reached the time limit before finishing her comments.

Rep. Tara Johnson (D-Town of Shelby) asked if Swetz had anything she wanted to add. Moses stopped this, saying it wasn’t allowed. Johnson replied that others had done the same earlier. 

Swetz started finishing her comments as the lawmakers went back and forth and others in the room started to clap. Moses then began banging his gavel and threatened to adjourn the meeting if the clapping continued.

Moses told the committee on Thursday that he “was ready to adjourn and just walk out because it was not productive.” He then suggested that members look at the Assembly rules again. 

“The chairman of the committee has a lot of power the way it’s set up, so I try not to abuse it — be a tyrant,” Moses said. “I want to hear from everybody. I don’t care if you agree with me or not. I want all perspectives in there, so I’m doing my best to do it, but yesterday it got a little much, a little much, so I think maybe dial it back on some of these with the theater.” 

Moses said he had to start cutting time because of the number of people who came to speak and how late the hearing was running. 

Johnson said the tension in the room was partially because people had been waiting so long to be heard by lawmakers. 

“Some of the escalation came because they felt disenfranchised,” Johnson said. “They felt like it was very lopsided that the pro-voices were heard at greater length, including when my colleagues also asked questions that extended testimony for very long stretches of time.” 

Hearings on bills focused on transgender youth have often been lengthy and emotional. Last week, a hearing on bills that would mandate how schools deal with transgender athletes and name changes lasted over 10 hours. In 2023, many showed up in opposition to a gender affirming care ban bill.

The hearing Wednesday lasted nearly nine hours, but mostly supporters spoke during the first three hours of the hearing despite being vastly outnumbered by opponents.

According to the record of committee proceedings, there were 79 people who appeared against the bill and 18 who appeared for, including the two bill authors. There were also 17 people who registered in favor of the bill, but didn’t speak and 103 people who registered against, but didn’t speak at the hearing. 

At one point during the hearing, Subeck asked Moses to begin alternating between supporters and opponents of the bill, but he responded by saying that was up to him.

Some opponents to the bill spoke about their frustration with this when they finally got their chance to speak.

“We sit here for all this time, all these people, you’re allowing the anti-trans voices to go first. It feels like the world is stacked against us and we’re getting tired of it,” Cory Neeley said. “My voice is cracking because I’m literally fuming at the fact that I’ve sat here all day long listening to people call me a groomer. People calling me a person who doesn’t care about their children… I’m a good parent.”

Subeck told the Wisconsin Examiner in a call Friday that she has seen chairs put certain voices first before, but the degree to which it was done was “unusual” and “pretty unprecedented.” The first three hours of the hearing were mostly supporters of the bill, aside from Sens. Mark Spreitzer (D-Beloit) and Melissa Ratcliff (D-Cottage Grove).

“Committee chairs often try to, if they can, literally go back and forth, one to one,” Subeck said. “But even if you’re not literally going one for, one against, certainly front loading it so heavily when you have a room full of people there to testify against, including families with children who are going to be impacted by the bill, it certainly felt more like a tactic than a simple oversight.” 

Subeck noted there was some disruption during the hearing and there can be consequences for that.

“I also can’t help but wonder how it could have been different if the chair had actually let some of the folks who were there to testify against the bill testify before we were already a couple of hours into the bill,” Subeck said. “Some of the hateful rhetoric of those early testifiers was directed directly at some of those young people who were coming to testify about how this bill impacted them.”

Moses told lawmakers Thursday he would take the criticism into consideration

“If there’s any issues anyone has, you know, how they’re running? Please come and see me,” Moses said. “We’ll try and work it out privately if I’m still doing it.”

Rep. Rob Brooks (R-Saukville) acknowledged that the conversation about the issue was painful for everyone involved, but he said he thinks the conversation does need to be had. He and Rep. Patrick Snyder (R-Weston) said that an informational hearing, rather than a hearing on a bill, may have been a more “prudent” approach for lawmakers to learn more. 

“You’re right, it’s not going to become law,” Brooks said. “I do think yesterday was beneficial from an educational standpoint for a lot of us, regardless of how you vote. I don’t know how you can’t come out of there a little richer with your knowledge on both sides. I’m going to support the bill.”

The committee voted 10-5 with Republicans for and Democrats against to advance the bill, setting it up to go to the Assembly floor.

Subeck told the Examiner that she was “disappointed and frustrated and upset” Republicans voted for it, saying “they are still putting what is truly partisan motivation… political agenda ahead of the kids and families who came and testified to us.”

However, she said the conversation during the Thursday executive session did give her some hope. 

“In private, legislators have a lot of conversations that don’t reflect the votes that are taken on the floor, and I think the tenor of the conversation in that room was a little bit closer to the conversations that we often have when we are sitting one on one, talking to each other,” Subeck told the Wisconsin Examiner. “It makes me a little bit hopeful, because while my Republican colleagues continue down the path of voting their party line — even when they have said they have things to learn and it gives them pause — the fact that they were willing to even sit in that room, in sort of a public sphere, and have a conversation means that there is room for change.”

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

Correction: This story has been updated to correct the number of people that spoke for and against the bill.

Transgender flags being held by people during a demonstration. (Getty Images)

Republican and Democratic lawmakers engaged in heated back and forth during a Wednesday hearing on a bill that would ban gender-affirming medical care for Wisconsin youth.

The bill is among an increasing number of anti-trans bills being introduced across the country, and it’s the fourth bill related to transgender youth to get a hearing in the Wisconsin Assembly in the last two weeks.

According to the Trans Legislation Tracker, 738 bills have been introduced across the country in 2025. The increase in bills comes as President Donald Trump has signed a series of executive orders that target transgender people as well as gender-affirming care. 

Bill authors Sen. Cory Tomczyk (R-Mosinee) and Rep. Scott Allen (R-Waukesha) said they just want to “protect” children.  

“I am not here to tell any adult what he or she should do with his or her own body,” Tomczyk said. “A person who is 18 years of age or older has the ability to get a tattoo, get married, buy a gun, serve his or her country… without receiving permission from someone else. Getting irreversible gender reassignment surgery is another one of those things.”

The bill — AB 104 — would ban gender-affirming care for people under the age of 18. It would prohibit health care providers from engaging in or making referrals for medical intervention “if done for the purpose of changing the minor’s body to correspond to a sex that is discordant with the minor’s biological sex,” including prescribing puberty-blocking drugs or gender-affirming surgery for minors.

The bill includes a handful of exceptions — including if a “health care provider is providing a service in accordance with a good faith medical decision of a parent or guardian of a minor born with a medically verifiable genetic disorder of sex development” — but is otherwise a general ban on the care.

Under the bill, health care providers could be investigated if there are allegations that they have provided this type of care to a minor and could have their licenses revoked by the Board of Nursing, the Medical Examining Board or the Physician Assistant Affiliated Credentialing Board if the investigation finds that they did. 

Tomczyk said he wasn’t introducing the bill to “demonize” the transgender community — a comment that received groans and pushback from others at the hearing. “But as you can hear from the reaction from the gallery, I’m going to be accused of that.”

“Boo! Ridiculous!” one person called out after his testimony.

Committee chair Rep. Clint Moses (R-Menomonie) tried to keep the room calm — telling people not to jeer or boo or hold up signs. Throughout the hearing, he had a couple of people removed from the room by police.

Democratic lawmakers sharply criticized the bill, saying lawmakers did not have the experience or medical knowledge to interfere with decisions being made by families and medical providers and were causing harm by introducing the legislation.

“Do any of you have any training or background in the medical field, practitioners or have other training that I might not be aware of?” Rep. Lisa Subeck (D-Madison) asked the authors.

“I find the question irrelevant,” Allen said. 

“I just have a degree in common sense,” Tomczyk quipped. 

“Knowing that physicians follow what is considered the standard of care and that is set forth by organizations like the American Academy of Pediatrics … why is it that on this particular issue we should substitute the judgment of legislators for the judgement of physicians and families?” Subeck asked. 

“Did you listen to my testimony?” Tomczyck said. “I think we have a responsibility to protect these children under 18 and let them get to 18 to the point where legally they can then make that decision.”

According to KFF, receiving gender-affirming care is a lengthy, meticulous process, and for those under 18, decisions in the process are made with the input of the child, their families and health care providers, including mental health providers. Gender-affirming medical care before 18 mostly focuses on pubertal suppression or hormone therapy.

Surgeries are rare for those under 18. UW Health does not perform genital surgery on transgender girls or boys under 18. UW Health may consider performing chest masculinization, or “top,” surgery for patients under 18 “only after multidisciplinary evaluation, a letter of support from your mental health provider and with informed consent from all legal guardians,” according to a Wisconsin Watch report. 

A 2024 study published by JAMA Network found that transgender teenagers who have pursued medical interventions, including puberty blockers and hormones, have high levels of satisfaction and low levels of regret, with an overwhelming majority — 97% — continuing to access gender-affirming medical care.

Rep. Renuka Mayadev (D-Madison) asked lawmakers why they aren’t trying to solve any real problems and noted that the bill could contribute to increased hate towards transgender people. She pointed to  the case of Sam Nordquist, a 24-year-old transgender man from Minnesota recently killed in New York. 

“There’s a transgender man, who was tortured and assaulted and beaten to death. He was beaten because of the hate that people have, and I want to know why aren’t we protecting people like Sam?” Mayadev asked. “[The bill] is not solving any problems. It’s meddling in the patient, doctor relationship.” 

The lawmakers asked if the crime happened in Wisconsin and noted that it happened to an adult and they are focused on children. 

This is the third time the legislation has been introduced. Last session, a similar bill was vetoed by Gov. Tony Evers, who then vowed to reject any further legislation targeting LGBTQ+ youth.

Allen said he expects “victory” for the bill, saying that public opinion can change over time. 

“I’ve seen bills in the body — session after session after session after session — where the author refuses to give up because they believe that it’s a good idea,” Allen said. “I think that’s our responsibility as legislators, to represent our constituency and advocate for what we think is the right thing. We may not have popular opinion on our side, not at some point in time maybe we will.”

Allen said that the idea for the policy came from the Family Policy Alliance, a conservative Christian organization that has advocated for anti-trans legislation across the country.

Some of those that testified in favor of the bill included Do No Harm, a lobbying group that opposes gender-affirming medical care as well as diversity, equity and inclusion, Moms For Liberty, Wisconsin Family Action and Gays Against Groomers.

Groups registered against the bill include the American Civil Liberties Union of Wisconsin Inc, Children’s Hospital of Wisconsin, Fair Wisconsin Inc., Medical College of Wisconsin, Pharmacy Society of Wisconsin, Planned Parenthood Advocates of Wisconsin, Wisconsin Chapter of the American Academy of Pediatrics, Wisconsin Coalition Against Sexual Assault, Wisconsin Council of Churches and the Wisconsin Medical Society.

Sen. Mark Spreitzer (D-Beloit) and Sen. Melissa Ratcliff (D-Cottage Grove) called the bill “cruel” and said it would take the state backwards in time. Ratcliff, whose son is trans, said that he “would not be the thriving adult he is today without having the access to the care that allowed him to live his life as his authentic self.” 

“Why we would want to take away a parent’s ability to provide their children with life-saving care and also restrict their ability to access information to help their child be healthy and happy — it’s beyond me,” Ratcliff said. 

Spreitzer noted that the bill is part of a package of bills that have received hearings this week and last that are “attempting to roll back that progress to make it harder for transgender young people to grow into flourishing transgender adults.” 

Spreitzer said the bill is not going to become law, but just talking about the bill will have negative effects for some people’s mental health.

In a recent survey of 358 Wisconsin LGBTQ+ youths by the Trevor Project, participants reported significant mental health struggles. About 39% of LGBTQ+ youth surveyed reporting seriously considering suicide, including 44% of transgender and nonbinary youth, and 12% reporting a suicide attempt. In addition, 63% of LGBTQ+ surveyed reported experiencing symptoms of anxiety.

“Not everybody’s going to get that message [that the bill won’t become law],” Spreitzer said. “People are going to be afraid that they are going to lose access to care.” He added that Children’s Wisconsin in Milwaukee recently canceled and then rescheduled some appointments after Trump’s executive order. “This bill only adds to that… It creates a climate of fear.”

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE