Reading view

There are new articles available, click to refresh the page.

Ram Just Killed Their F-150 Lightning And Silverado EV Challenger

  • The fully electric Ram 1500 REV has been killed before ever being launched.
  • It was originally slated to arrive in 2024, but was delayed over weak demand.
  • Range-extended 1500 Ramcharger is still coming, but will be renamed the REV.

In a surprising turn of events, Ram has killed the 1500 REV. The electric truck debuted at the 2023 New York Auto Show and was originally slated to be launched in late 2024.

It was eventually delayed, but the brand was adamant the truck was still coming. Just a few months ago, Ram CEO Tim Kuniskis told us electrification is happening despite the Hemi’s return. The executive also noted the company had the ‘luxury of timing’ and the benefit of being late to the EV game. This enabled them to delay their offering after seeing weak demand for the Chevrolet Silverado EV, Ford F-150 Lightning, and Tesla Cybertruck.

First Look: The Ram 1500 REV Is A Classy, Conservative, 500 Mile Electric Juggernaut

In today’s announcement, Ram hammered home the latter point as they highlighted slowing demand for full-size battery electric trucks in North America. The company said this forced them to reassess their product strategy and decide to “discontinue development of a full-size BEV pickup.”

\\\\\\\\\\

Michael Gauthier / Carscoops

The move is surprising as work on the truck appears to have been largely completed. As we’ve previously reported, it was originally slated to be offered with 168 and 229 kWh battery packs. These promised to deliver ranges of up to 500 miles (805 km) on a single charge. The truck was also supposed to have a dual-motor all-wheel drive system producing 654 hp (448 kW / 663 PS) and 620 lb-ft (840 Nm) of torque, which would allow for a 0-60 mph (0-96 km/h) time of 4.4 seconds.

The REV Isn’t Really Dead, But It’s A Ramcharger Now

\\\\\\\\

Despite the shocking death in the third act, the 1500 REV isn’t really dead. Quite the opposite as Ram has decided to rename the Ramcharger as the REV.

As a result, the ‘new’ 1500 REV will be a range-extended electric vehicle. Its “projected availability” is now 2026 and Ram has, once again, updated the truck’s performance specs.

 Ram Just Killed Their F-150 Lightning And Silverado EV Challenger

They’ve lowered the output of the dual-motor all-wheel drive system for a second time and they’re now saying it produces 647 hp (482 kW / 656 PS). That’s down from the original estimate of 663 hp (494 kW / 672 PS), and also a drop from February’s revision of 654 hp (488 kW / 663 PS). The torque rating has also fallen from 615 lb-ft (833 Nm) to 610 lb-ft (826 Nm).

The claimed range of 690 miles (1,110 km) remains as does the updated 0-60 mph (0-96 km/h) time of 4.5 seconds. Of course, with multiple revisions, a name change, and the elimination of the electric variant, nothing is written in stone.

\\\\\

Veterans’ housing sites are set to close in a month. A bipartisan fix appears out of reach. 

At a press conference outside the state Capitol Wednesday, Sens. Jamie Wall, Jeff Smith and Senate Minority Leader Dianne Hesselbein urged Republicans to schedule a hearing for their bill expeditiously. (Photo by Baylor Spears/Wisconsin Examiner)

Less than a month before the planned closure of two Wisconsin veterans’ housing sites, a handful of Democratic and Republican lawmakers are seeking a way to save the sites. But bipartisan work on a solution appears out of reach as lawmakers bicker over who is to blame for the lack of funding and over whether to take up Democratic- or Republican-authored bills.

Gov. Tony Evers’ administration announced, shortly after the state budget was completed in July, that two Veterans Housing and Recovery Program (VHRP) sites, one in Chippewa Falls and one in Green Bay, would be closing on Sept. 30 due to a lack of funding in the state budget. One facility in Union Grove will remain open. 

The program, which is run under the Wisconsin Department of Veterans Affairs, serves veterans who are on the verge of or are already experiencing homelessness, including those who have been incarcerated, unemployed or have physical and mental health problems. Participants get access to transitional housing, referrals to service providers, financial assistance, assistance with seeking vocational opportunities and access to a room at a reduced rent for working veterans.

Participants can stay for a maximum of 24 months, but the average length is six to 10 months.

The program has been funded with a combination of an appropriation from the Veterans Trust Fund, payments made by program participants and per diem payments, which are made to the agency by the federal government at a current rate of about $71 per resident per day. However, growing staffing and maintenance costs at the facilities led to the need for additional state support. Evers had included a funding proposal in his budget but that was removed by Republican lawmakers.

Following the news of the closures, Sens. Jeff Smith (D-Brunswick) and Jaime Wall (D-Green Bay) introduced a bill that would dedicate $1.9 million to the sites.

At a press conference outside the state Capitol Wednesday, the bill authors and Senate Minority Leader Dianne Hesselbein (D-Middleton) urged Republicans to schedule a hearing for their bill expeditiously.

Citing the upcoming closure date, Hesselbein said the Senate and Assembly must meet. She said committees could meet this week or next to hear the legislation and pass it out of committee this month and have the bill on the floor in October.

“It’s a cool day out here today. The weather is going to get worse. We need to take care of our veterans,” Hesselbein said.

According to the Associated Press, the state Senate is not planning to meet for a floor session this month. 

“It’s way past time to take action to keep these facilities open so they can continue to provide vital services to our veterans,” Hesselbein said, adding that “when Democrats have the power of majority which we believe is coming in just a few years, we will always have your backs.” Democrats are seeking to flip control of the state Senate in the 2026 election cycle. 

Smith called Republicans’ lack of action on the issue “callous,” noting that Democrats tried months ago to include the funding in the budget. When Democrats proposed an amendment to  fund the veterans’ housing sites in the state budget, every Republican voted against it except for Sen. André Jacque (R-New Franken). 

It is unlikely that the Republican-led Legislature will allow Democrats’ bill to advance. 

“[Republicans] have ignored our pleas. As far as we know, we’re not going to see these bills on the floor this month, and this is the final chapter. This is when it ends. No hope for the veterans that they like to pretend that they care about,” Smith said. 

Jacque, meanwhile, began circulating his own bill last month to provide the needed funding for the facilities. 

The Republican bill, coauthored by Jacque and Rep. Benjamin Franklin (R-De Pere), includes $1.9 million for the VHRP program as well as two other policy changes related to veterans. 

One would require the Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin system to provide funding to the UW Missing-in-Action Recovery and Identification Project to support missions to recover and identify Wisconsin veterans who are missing. The other would lower the eligibility threshold for veterans and surviving spouses to claim the veterans and surviving spouses property tax credit.

Jacque said the two policies were also left out of the budget and are critical to helping veterans.

“Every budget has missed opportunities, and I am hopeful that the rest of the session will provide openings to address those challenges in a number of areas, particularly providing for our veterans who have done so much in service to our country and communities,” Jacque told the Wisconsin Examiner in an email.

Jacque said he has “found a lot of support” from his Republican colleagues and is “hopeful that the bill will be referred to the Senate Committee on Natural Resources, Veterans and Military Affairs,” which he chairs.

In response to a question about Jacque’s bill and whether Democrats are working with any Republicans to advance funding for the facilities, Hesselbein brushed off the GOP bill saying it simply pulled from Democrats’ ideas. 

“What Sen. Jacque did is he took three Democratic bills and pushed them all into one omnibus. We’ll be interested if he gets a hearing. I’m not sure…,” Hesselbein said. “I like to have clean legislation when we try to have committee hearings so you can hear exactly what’s going on with those bills, so we are supporting the bill that Sen. Wall and Sen. Smith put forth.”

Smith said Democrats separated the VHRP funding from other policies purposefully. Wall added that their bill is a “smaller, cleaner ask” than a bill with multiple items. 

Jacque told the Wisconsin Examiner in an email that he is “extremely disappointed by Sen. Hesselbein’s comments and her unwillingness to put partisanship aside for the sake of working to support veterans — as I did when I voted for the omnibus veterans motion her caucus introduced during the budget. I am rather surprised at her comments due to her longstanding penchant for putting forward omnibus bills and amendments.” 

Jacque noted that he has supported and authored legislation to expand the property tax credit for veterans and surviving spouses in previous years “going all the way back to my service in the State Assembly,” and has also supported previous UW MIA legislation. 

“I supported VHRP within the budget and it was not introduced as standalone legislation by any legislator previously to that, at least to my knowledge,” Jacque added. “I didn’t think Sen. Hesselbein was that unaware of the history of these initiatives.”

Not every Republican lawmaker has appeared open to providing additional funding that would be used to keep the two VHRP programs open. Following the initial news of the planned closures, Sen. Howard Marklein (R-Spring Green) and Rep. Mark Born (R-Beaver Dam) co-chairs of the Joint Finance Committee, blamed Evers for not negotiating for the money in the budget.

According to the Green Bay Press Gazette, Sen. Eric Wimberger (R-Oconto) claimed last week that Evers had a “slush fund” — referring to federal pandemic aid — and should be able to find the money to keep the facilities afloat. He pointed to the Wisconsin DVA’s Veterans Trust Fund, a state fund that supports most grant and benefit programs for Wisconsin veterans, and said the agency has regularly returned around $1 million in unspent funds each year and in 2025, the agency sent back about $600,000.

WDVA Assistant Deputy Secretary Joey Hoey has disputed the comments, saying that the agency is “only allowed to spend the money they tell us to spend.” He has also said the trust fund cannot be used for the staffing costs and that there isn’t enough in it.

Wall objected to Wimberger’s “slush fund” comments as well on Wednesday, saying that federal American Rescue Plan Act money has been spent. ARPA funds were used to help support costs for the program in 2023-24. States had to expend the one-time ARPA funds by the end of 2024.

“[Evers] took some ARPA interest funds and used it to help prop up the program. Those funds don’t exist anymore. The ARPA funds all had to be allocated by the end of last year,” Wall said. “The ARPA interest money was all spent in the last budget, so that get out of jail free card doesn’t exist.”

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

ICE arrests fell in August despite show of force in DC, Los Angeles

Federal agents patrol the halls of immigration court at the Jacob K. Javitz Federal Building in July in New York City. Despite a show of force on immigration raids in cities, arrests by Immigration and Customs Enforcement dropped in August and remain well below the Trump administration’s daily target of 3,000. (Photo by Spencer Platt/Getty Images)

Federal agents patrol the halls of immigration court at the Jacob K. Javitz Federal Building in July in New York City. Despite a show of force on immigration raids in cities, arrests by Immigration and Customs Enforcement dropped in August and remain well below the Trump administration’s daily target of 3,000. (Photo by Spencer Platt/Getty Images)

Despite the assistance of armed troops in U.S. cities, federal immigration officials recorded fewer daily arrests in August than in July and remain well short of a Trump administration plan for 3,000 arrests a day, according to a new report.

As of Aug. 29, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement arrests averaged 1,055 a day for the month, down 14% from 1,124 a day in July, according to data obtained by Transactional Records Access Clearinghouse at Syracuse University. The organization tracks federal immigration data.

“President Trump’s orders recently assigning substantial personnel from the national guard and the U.S. military to target Los Angeles and Washington, D.C. may have been counter-productive in failing to increase total arrests countrywide,” said Susan B. Long, co-founder of TRAC and a professor in the Whitman School of Management, in an e-mail statement.

In a Tuesday decision a federal judge ruled that the Trump administration’s deployment of Marines and National Guard units to Southern California, where they assisted with immigration and other arrests, was illegal.

In May, Stephen Miller, a White House deputy chief of staff, told Fox News that the administration was “looking to set a goal of a minimum of 3,000 arrests for ICE every day and President Trump is going to keep pushing to get that number up higher.”

ICE did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

The U.S. Department of Homeland Security announced it would give more financial incentives to state and local police to cooperate with ICE, including reimbursement for salary and benefits for officers trained in the 287(g) program to assist ICE in making arrests, and “performance awards” for “successful location of illegal aliens.”

“By joining forces with ICE, you’re not just gaining access to these unprecedented reimbursement opportunities — you’re becoming part of a national effort to ensure the safety of every American family,” ICE Deputy Director Madison Sheahan said in a statement.

Stateline reporter Tim Henderson can be reached at thenderson@stateline.org.

This story was originally produced by Stateline, which is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network which includes Wisconsin Examiner, and is supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity.

Democratic AGs disclose FEMA failed to make grants for months to critical disaster program

The Federal Emergency Management Agency building is seen on May 15, 2025 in Washington, D.C.  (Photo by Kayla Bartkowski/Getty Images)

The Federal Emergency Management Agency building is seen on May 15, 2025 in Washington, D.C.  (Photo by Kayla Bartkowski/Getty Images)

WASHINGTON — Democratic attorneys general have updated their complaint against the Trump administration in a lawsuit over whether the Federal Emergency Management Agency can refuse to spend pre-disaster mitigation grants approved by Congress.

The attorneys general wrote in the new filing that FEMA hadn’t made a single award to the Building Resilient Infrastructure and Communities program between April 2 and Aug. 25.

“The BRIC program is critically important nationwide. Over the past four years, FEMA has selected nearly 2,000 projects from every corner of the country to receive roughly $4.5 billion in funding,” they wrote. “Due to the unique threats they face, coastal communities have received the largest allocations over the past four years, with California, Louisiana, Texas, New York, New Jersey, Florida, North Carolina, and Washington leading the way. 

“But interior communities rely on BRIC too: Pennsylvania and Utah have received the next largest allocations, and Ohio is not far behind.”

FEMA announced in April that it was “ending” the program and “canceling all BRIC applications from Fiscal Years 2020-2023.” 

Members of Congress from both political parties brought up their disagreement with that decision in May during a hearing on FEMA’s budget request and by sending a letter signed by more than 80 lawmakers.

But that didn’t appear to sway the Trump administration to reverse course and allocate the funding that had been approved by Congress. 

‘Devastating’ delays in FEMA funding

Democratic attorneys general, Kentucky Gov. Andy Beshear and Pennsylvania Gov. Josh Shapiro filed their lawsuit in July and later called on the judge to block the Trump administration from moving money out of the pre-disaster mitigation account. 

U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts Judge Richard G. Stearns, who was nominated by President Bill Clinton, issued a preliminary ruling in early August preventing FEMA “from spending the funds allocated to BRIC for non-BRIC purposes until the court is able to render a final judgment on the merits.”

The updated 83-page complaint filed Friday argues the two people President Donald Trump has installed as acting FEMA administrator did so unlawfully because they were never formally nominated to run the agency, didn’t receive Senate confirmation and didn’t meet the qualifications laid out in federal law.  

It also alleges that unilaterally canceling funding approved by Congress, which holds the power of the purse, violated the separation of powers laid out in the Constitution. 

“The impact of the shutdown has been devastating. Communities across the country are being forced to delay, scale back, or cancel hundreds of mitigation projects depending on this funding,” they wrote. “Projects that have been in development for years, and in which communities have invested millions of dollars for planning, permitting, and environmental review are now threatened. And in the meantime, Americans across the country face a higher risk of harm from natural disasters.”

Each BRIC grant, the updated complaint notes, “can cover up to 75% of a project’s costs, and the federal share can rise to 90% for small rural communities.” 

Attorneys general from Arizona, California, Colorado. Connecticut, Delaware, the District of Columbia, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont, Washington and Wisconsin filed the suit, along with the Pennsylvania and Kentucky governors.  

Wisconsin Democrats introduce proposal to save Knowles-Nelson Stewardship Program

A sign acknowledging Stewardship program support at Firemen's Park in Verona. (Henry Redman | Wisconsin Examiner)

Democrats in the Wisconsin state Legislature released their proposal for saving the broadly popular Knowles-Nelson Stewardship Grant program from lapsing next year. The bill marks the latest step in a legislative effort to save the conservation program — a goal for which members of both political parties have expressed optimism.  

The stewardship grant program through the Department of Natural Resources allows the state to fund the purchase and maintenance of public lands. Created 35 years ago, the program is supported by a large swathe of Wisconsin voters, but a subset of Republicans in the Legislature have grown increasingly hostile to its continuation. 

Those Republicans argue the burden of land conservation falls largely on their rural districts in northern Wisconsin, which has the most land available for recreational purposes but the state purchasing that land takes it off the property tax rolls.

Republicans have also complained that the program lacks legislative oversight since the state Supreme Court ruled in a 6-1 decision last year that the Legislature’s Joint Finance Committee doesn’t have the authority to hold up projects through the program. 

Sen. Mary Felzkowski (R-Tomahawk), one of the program’s strongest critics, has suggested she’d support re-authorizing the program if it included provisions that capped the amount of government-owned land in a county or allowed counties to sell off existing conservation land.

Without action, the program will end next summer. In his initial budget proposal, Gov. Tony Evers had asked for the program to be provided $100 million per year for 10 years. The version of the budget signed into law in July did not include the program’s re-authorization. 

Another bill authored by Republican Rep. Tony Kurtz (R-Wonewoc) and Sen. Patrick Testin (R-Stevens Point) would re-authorize the program for six years at $28 million per year. To gain the support of the Republicans who want more oversight of the program, the bill would require that any land acquisitions that cost more than $1 million be approved by the full Legislature. 

Tuesday’s proposal from Democrats would re-authorize the program for six years at $72 million per year. The bill would also create an independent board with oversight authority over the program. 

The 17-member board would include members of the majority and minority in both chambers of the Legislature; two representatives from environmental organizations; two representatives of hunting, fishing or trapping interests; two DNR representatives, including one member from the Natural Resources Board; one representative from the Department of Tourism; one representative of the outdoor recreation industry; one representative from the Ice Age Trail Alliance; a representative of a federally recognized Native American tribe in the state; one local government representative and two members of the public. Members of the board would serve staggered three-year terms. 

Under the bill, the board would meet at least quarterly and have the authority to advise the DNR on all projects through the program. On projects involving grants of more than $2.5 million, the board would have full approval authority. If the board doesn’t meet to vote on a project within 120 days, it would be automatically approved. 

The Democratic proposal has been co-sponsored by all 60 Democrats in the Assembly and Senate, signaling the broad support for the bill among the Democratic caucuses. 

Sen. Jodi Habush Sinykin (D-Whitefish Bay) tells the Wisconsin Examiner that the proposal involves a lot of thoughtful effort from Democrats trying to make a “good faith” effort to answer Republican concerns about oversight over the program while getting it re-authorized. 

“Our intent in introducing these companion bills in the Senate and the Assembly was premised on a great deal of thought and seriousness,” she says. “That we have the expectation that Republican legislators will take it seriously, because, like us, they have been hearing from their constituents and constituents from across the state. This is an issue that people in Wisconsin 90% approve and they want action, and they want legislators to demonstrate that they can work together and lead with our shared values to get something done.”

In a statement, a spokesperson for Kurtz said his intention remains working to find a bipartisan solution to re-authorizing the program. 

“It’s always been our intention to find a bipartisan path forward to ensuring the Stewardship Program’s future,” the spokesperson said. “We haven’t reviewed their proposal yet, but look forward to continued discussions on this important issue this fall.”

Charles Carlin, the director of strategic initiatives at the non-profit land trust organization Gathering Waters, says the fate of the program is now up to Republican leaders and their ability to compromise. Carlin points out that it’s clear there aren’t 17 Republican votes in the Senate to support reauthorization. 

“As far as anybody can tell, there’s not 17 Republican senators that are going to vote to reauthorize Knowles-Nelson,” he says. “If they were to choose that strategy of trying to do this with only Republican votes, my fear and expectation is the bill would wind up becoming so weighed down with poison pills and anti-conservation measures, it would wind up not being a workable proposal. On the other hand if leaders in the Senate were willing to say ‘OK, this can be a bipartisan exercise, nobody’s going to get quite what they want,’ I think we’re going to see there are 15 Democratic senators eager to find a solution and we could get a decent bill passed with pretty overwhelming support from both parties.”

Carlin says he sees the Democrats’ oversight board idea as a good way to avoid the Joint Finance Committee “veto fiasco” that previously held up projects through the program while allowing the board to make “smart, educated and informed decisions” separate from the political games of the legislative process. 

However in recent years under Wisconsin’s divided government, legislative proposals have been met with hopes for bipartisan compromise only to end in partisan bickering. Last session, a proposal to get $125 million out the door to clean up PFAS contamination across the state died after initial optimism after Democrats and Republicans couldn’t agree on the bill’s language. 

“That’s a real concern. Where we had the most heartburn and worry coming out of the state budget, this Legislature does not have a good track record of getting things done,” Carlin says. “Even though there were promises made that legislators would come back to work and get Knowles-Nelson done, there’s not a lot of precedent for legislators working together. There are folks on the Republican Senate side who are simply not going to work in good faith to get this done.”

He says Felzkowski’s ideas on the subject are “not serious proposals” but that there are 10 or 12 Republicans in the Senate who value conservation and understand how important it is to the state’s voters. 

“If they really engage with the Democrats’ proposal and find middle ground, we can find that success without too much heartache,” he says. “We do know that everybody’s constituents want to see this get done.”

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

Extreme heat in prisons brings more legal challenges, pressure on states

Incarcerated people exercise in the maximum security yard of the Lansing Correctional Facility in April 2023 in Lansing, Kan. This year, several states have taken steps to install air conditioning and expand cooling measures to address sweltering heat inside prisons, but many across the country remain years away from significant upgrades. (Photo by John Moore/Getty Images)

Summer heat is bearing down on U.S. prisons, where temperatures in uncooled cells can climb well into the triple digits.

Facing growing pressure from advocacy groups, lawsuits and climate projections that show hotter days ahead, some state prison systems are moving to install air conditioning and expand cooling measures — though many facilities remain years away from significant upgrades.

But in other states, such efforts have stalled or failed. That may lead to more lawsuits in the future, experts say, even as judges may raise the bar for such cases.

An emphasis on being “tough on crime” and prioritizing other public safety measures may have contributed to less attention on prison conditions in some states. In others, slowing revenue growth and pressure to rein in corrections spending could be making new investments a harder sell.

At least two states this year, Virginia and Texas, considered legislation addressing excessive heat in prisons but neither measure became law. The Texas bill would have required the state Department of Criminal Justice to purchase and install climate control systems in all of its facilities by the end of 2032. About two-thirds of the state’s correctional facilities have only partial or no air conditioning.

The measure passed the House but did not advance in the Senate before the legislature adjourned in June.

In Virginia, lawmakers approved a bill that would have required the state corrections department to install heat and air conditioning in its prisons and to ensure cell temperatures not exceed 80 degrees. Republican Gov. Glenn Youngkin vetoed it, citing the cost of installation and operational burdens. Youngkin also wrote that existing state corrections data “does not substantiate the claims of extreme temperatures or health risks.”

But in Delaware, the fiscal year 2026 capital budget approved last month includes $2 million in funding to install air conditioning at the James T. Vaughn Correctional Center.

These changes mark the latest actions in a long-running debate over how correctional systems respond to rising summer temperatures — an issue that affects both incarcerated people and staff. Some of the policy debates and facility updates this year follow years of advocacy and litigation over the health, safety and operational challenges posed by heat in correctional settings.

The problem of excessive heat in prisons has persisted for decades and has unfolded alongside other challenges, including chronic understaffing and overcrowding. In some cases, these problems have led to extended facility lockdowns, even during the summer months.

Stifling prison heat used to be just a Southern problem. Not anymore.

“There are people working in prisons and they have the right to work in climates that are comfortable,” said Nancy La Vigne, a criminal justice researcher and dean of the School of Criminal Justice at Rutgers University. “When they’re not, there’s retention issues, and it’s hard to replace staff. And when you don’t replace staff, then you have challenges in maintaining the safety and security of the facility.”

In New York, for example, correctional officers staged a three-week strike earlier this year and many didn’t return to work. Some facilities now are operating with 30%-60% fewer guards than needed, resulting in some incarcerated people getting only an hour or two outside of their cells each day.

A 2023 study published in the peer-reviewed PLOS One journal found that mortality in state and private prisons rose during periods of extreme heat, with deaths increasing 3.5% on extreme heat days and up to 7.4% during three-day heat waves. Between 2001 and 2019, nearly 13,000 people died in prison during the summer months, almost half of them in the South, though the study did not determine how many of those deaths were directly attributable to heat.

Climate change is fueling longer, more intense periods of extreme heat. Exposure to extreme heat can worsen conditions such as cardiovascular disease, diabetes and asthma, and has also been linked to worsening mental health and higher suicide rates among incarcerated people.

“Average temperatures are rising, and you’re going to have more and more states around the country where incarcerated people are held in conditions that are not livable because they’re too hot,” said Sharon Dolovich, a law professor and director of the Prison Law and Policy Program at the University of California, Los Angeles.

Some upgrades

At least 44 states lack universal air conditioning within their prison facilities, even in regions known for sweltering summer temperatures, according to a 2022 USA Today analysis. A recent Reuters investigation also found that nearly half of state prisons across 29 states have partial or no air conditioning in housing units.

But some states are investing millions to update their prison facilities.

In North Carolina, corrections officials are working toward their goal of installing air conditioning in all 54 state prisons by 2026. To date, 33 facilities are fully air-conditioned, 17 are partially air-conditioned, and four have no air conditioning, according to its dashboard.

In California, the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation, which operates 31 adult prisons, has spent $246 million in the past five years on cooling improvements at five prisons, according to a department spokesperson.

Lawmakers this year also approved funding for the Air Cooling Pilot Program at three facilities, with $17.6 million allocated for fiscal years 2025-26 and $20 million for fiscal years 2026-27. It will evaluate the effectiveness of two alternatives prior to a statewide plan to address high indoor temperatures across the California prison system.

Public pushes DOC to apply law, reduce the number of people returned to Wisconsin prisons

The Texas Department of Criminal Justice, as of Aug. 1, is building 12,827 “cool beds,” or prison cells in air-conditioned units, and is in the process of procuring an additional 7,162, according to its dashboard.

Texas is one of the states most closely associated with heat-related deaths in prison. A 2022 study estimated that, on average, 14 deaths per year in Texas prisons are associated with heat. And a Texas Tribune analysis found that at least 41 incarcerated people died during a record-breaking heat wave in 2023.

In March, a federal judge ruled the extreme heat in Texas prisons is “plainly unconstitutional,” but declined to order immediate air conditioning, saying the work could not be completed within the court order’s 90-day window and temporary systems might delay a permanent fix.

‘More miserable’

Sweltering summer heat can turn prisons into pressure cookers. People inside already may have health conditions, limited access to cooling, or take medications that make it harder for their bodies to handle the heat. And research suggests that high temperatures can heighten irritability and aggression, sometimes fueling more conflicts between incarcerated people or with staff.

“It makes you more miserable. … If you to the point of even thinking about suicide, that’s just going to add to it,” said Ronald McKeithen, who spent 37 years incarcerated in Alabama prisons and is now the director of second chances at the Alabama Appleseed Center for Law and Justice. McKeithen recalls feeling “on edge” due to tension among other incarcerated people on hot days.

At the Oshkosh Correctional Institution in Wisconsin, Devin Skrzypchak said the heat worsens his bladder condition, and he often can’t get the incontinence briefs he needs. The heat forces him to drink more water, and on days when ice isn’t available, he’s left drenched in sweat.

“At times, it’s a living hell. … It can be very excruciating,” Skrzypchak wrote in a message to Stateline through the facility’s messaging platform.

At times, it's a living hell . . . It can be very excruciating.

– Devin Skrzypchak, who is incarcerated at Oshkosh Correctional Institution in Wisconsin

D’Angelo Lee Komanekin — who has spent about 25 years in and out of different Wisconsin corrections facilities — said prison architecture plays a major role in why temperatures inside climb so high.

“The planet is getting hotter and hotter,” said Komanekin, who relies on a small plastic fan to stay cool. Komanekin also is incarcerated at the Oshkosh Correctional Institution. “They’re doing nothing about the architecture. Some institutions’ windows open, some don’t, but most of the doors have steel doors with trap doors.”

Older prison designs that rely heavily on steel and concrete building materials often trap heat, making it difficult to keep temperatures down in the summer. Aging facilities also are less likely to be equipped for the installation of central air conditioning.

Some state prison systems, including Alabama’s and Wisconsin’s, are adding air-conditioning or air-tempering systems to new prison construction and major renovation projects.

Future legal battles

Legal experts say the issue of excessive heat in prisons is likely to become more pressing as climate change drives longer and hotter summers.

Extreme heat in correctional facilities has already been the subject of litigation in dozens of states, with plaintiffs arguing that high temperatures constitute cruel and unusual punishment under the Eighth Amendment. Court rulings in these cases have varied, but some experts say even more lawsuits are likely if facilities do not adapt.

“The conditions are going to worsen. [Incarcerated people are] going to be looking for every possible avenue for assistance they can,” Dolovich, the UCLA law professor, told Stateline.

One of the latest cases comes from Missouri, where the nonprofit law firm MacArthur Justice Center filed a class-action lawsuit in May on behalf of six incarcerated people at Algoa Correctional Center.

The lawsuit alleges that the conditions violate their constitutional rights under the Eighth Amendment. It seeks to require the Missouri Department of Corrections to work with experts to develop a heat mitigation plan that keeps housing unit temperatures between 65 and 85 degrees. If the department cannot meet that standard, the plaintiffs are asking for the release of three of the incarcerated people who have less than a year remaining on their sentences.

Lawsuits such as the Missouri case often focus on claims that extreme heat worsens existing medical problems. To proceed, they must meet two legal requirements: proving the heat poses a serious health or safety risk, and showing prison officials knew about the danger but failed to address it, according to Dolovich, whose work has focused on the Eighth Amendment and prison conditions.

Courts may also raise the bar for proving such claims if judges echo decisions in cases with similar Eight Amendment arguments related to the death penalty and homelessness, Dolovich said. Judges have shifted, she said, toward a “superadding terror, pain and disgrace” standard under the Eighth Amendment — a higher threshold requiring proof that conditions were created with the intent to cause unnecessary suffering.

Dolovich added that some recent court decisions have provided only narrow remedies, such as ordering ice and fans instead of installing air conditioning.

“Prison officials have a moral and a constitutional responsibility to respond to changing conditions. In this case, it means air conditioning. … Anything less than that, to me, is indefensible.” she said.

Stateline reporter Amanda Hernández can be reached at ahernandez@stateline.org.

Stateline is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Stateline maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Scott S. Greenberger for questions: info@stateline.org.

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

New work rules could deny food stamps to thousands of veterans

Darryl Chavis, 62, served in the U.S. Army for two years as a watercraft operator. He stands outside the Borden Avenue Veterans Residence, a short-term housing facility in the Long Island City neighborhood of Queens, N.Y., where he lives. Chavis relies on the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) and is worried about new work requirements for the program, commonly known as food stamps. (Photo by Shalina Chatlani/Stateline)

NEW YORK — After a year in the U.S. Navy, Loceny Kamara said he was discharged in 2023, because while on base he had developed mental health issues, including severe anxiety and nightmares, and had fallen into alcoholism.

Kamara, 23, went to rehab and managed to get sober for some time while living with family in the Bronx, he said. But after he lost his job as a security guard in December, Kamara was kicked out of his home. Now he lives at a veterans homeless shelter in Long Island City, a neighborhood in Queens, New York, and he relies on the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program — commonly known as food stamps — and odd jobs to make ends meet.

Each month, nearly 42 million people receive SNAP benefits to help supplement their grocery budgets. Able-bodied SNAP recipients who are between 18 and 54 and don’t have children have always been required to work. Veterans, however, have been exempt from those rules — but that’s about to change.

The giant domestic policy measure that President Donald Trump signed on July 4 eliminates that exemption. Beginning in 2026, veterans will have to prove they are working, volunteering, participating in job training, or looking for work for at least 80 hours a month to keep their food stamps beyond three months, unless they qualify for another exemption, such as having certain disabilities.

Republicans in Congress and conservatives who helped formulate the law say these eligibility changes are necessary to stop people who could be working from abusing the system. But critics say the change fails to take into account the barriers many veterans face, and that the new work rules will cause thousands of veterans to go hungry.

“I’m pissed. I mean, I cannot get a job. Nowhere to live,” said Kamara. As he spoke, Kamara pointed to his collared shirt, noting that he had just dressed up to interview for a job as a security guard. He learned that morning he hadn’t gotten the job.

“I’ve been out of work for eight months,” Kamara told Stateline. “It’s hard to get a job right now for everybody.”

Loceny Kamara, 27, was discharged from the U.S. Navy after serving for a year. In December, Kamara was kicked out of his home. Now he lives at the Borden Avenue Veterans Residence and relies on food stamps and odd jobs to make ends meet. (Photo by Shalina Chatlani/Stateline)

Veterans depend on SNAP

Nationally, around 1.2 million veterans with lower incomes, or about 8% of the total veteran population of 16.2 million, rely on food stamps for themselves and their families, according to the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, a left-leaning research group.

An analysis by the group found veterans tend to have lower rates of employment because they are more likely to have health conditions, such as traumatic brain injuries, that make it difficult for them to work. They also tend to have less formal education, though many have specialized skills from their time in the military.

There has been a work requirement for most SNAP recipients since 1996. But Robert Rector, a senior research fellow at The Heritage Foundation, a conservative think tank, said the rules have “never really been enforced.” Rector argued that able-bodied people who have been exempt from the work requirement, such as veterans and homeless people, create an unnecessary burden on the system if they are capable of working but don’t.

“Most of the people that are in this category live in households with other people that have incomes, and so there really isn’t a chronic food shortage here,” Rector said in an interview. “We have tens of thousands of free food banks that people can go to. So it’s just a requirement to nudge these people in the proper direction, and it should no longer go unenforced.”

Darryl Chavis, 62, said that view ignores the difficulties that many veterans face. When Chavis left the U.S. Army at 21 after two years of service, he said, he was “severely depressed.”

“Nobody even came to help me,” said Chavis, who served as a watercraft operator, responsible for operating and maintaining tugboats, barges and other landing craft.

Chavis said he was diagnosed with post-traumatic stress disorder, which has made it difficult for him to keep a job. He just moved back to New York from Virginia after leaving a relationship. He’s been at the housing shelter in Long Island City since January.

“What I’m trying to do is get settled in to, you know, stabilize into an apartment. I have the credentials to get a job. So it’s not like I’m not gonna look for a job. I have to work. I’m in transition, and the obstacles don’t make it easy,” Chavis said.

The new SNAP work rules apply to all able-bodied adults between 55 and 64 who don’t have dependents, and parents with children above the age of 14. Some groups, such as asylum-seekers and refugees, are no longer eligible for the program.

Barbara Guinn, commissioner of the New York State Office of Temporary and Disability Assistance, estimates that around 300,000 New Yorkers could lose SNAP benefits due to work requirements. Of those, around 22,000 are veterans, homeless or aging out of foster care, she said. Almost 3 million New Yorkers relied on SNAP as of March 2025.

Veterans in other states are in a similar situation. In California, an estimated 115,000 veterans receive SNAP benefits, according to a study by the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities. The number is nearly 100,000 in Florida and Texas, and 49,000 in Georgia.

Between 2015 and 2019 about 11% of veterans between the ages of 18 and 64 lived in food insecure households, meaning they had limited or uncertain access to food, according to the U.S. Department of Agriculture, which oversees SNAP.

“We know that SNAP is the best way to help address hunger. It gets benefits directly to individuals,” Guinn said. “There are other ways that people can get assistance if they need it, through food banks or other charitable organizations, but we do not think that those organizations will have the capacity to pick up the needs.”

A greater burden on states

In addition to the work rule changes, the new law reduces federal funding for SNAP by about $186 billion through 2034 — a cut of roughly 20%, according to the Congressional Budget Office, an independent research arm of Congress. The federal government expects the new work requirements to reduce SNAP spending by $69 billion as people who don’t comply are dropped from the rolls.

SNAP has historically been funded by the federal government, with states picking up part of the cost of administering the program. Under the new law, states will have to cover between 5% and 15% of SNAP costs starting in fiscal year 2028, depending on how accurately they distribute benefits to people who are eligible for the program.

This has been a strategic agenda to dismantle SNAP and to blame states for doing so.

– Gina Plata-Nino, SNAP deputy director at the Food Research & Action Center

“This has been a strategic agenda to dismantle SNAP and to blame states for doing so, because they knew they are making it so incredibly burdensome to run and operate and unaffordable,” said Gina Plata-Nino, SNAP deputy director at the Food Research & Action Center, a poverty and hunger advocacy group.

“States are going to have to cut something, because there’s no surplus. There are no unlimited resources that states may have in order to be able to offset the harm.”

Guinn said New York expects to see a new cost burden of at least $1.4 billion each year. In California, new state costs could total as much as $3.7 billion annually, according to the California Department of Social Services.

Kaitlynne Yancy, director of membership programs at Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans of America, said many veterans with disabilities will not be able to fulfill the work requirements or find resources elsewhere. And it’s unclear whether states will be able to provide their own relief to people who are no longer exempted from work requirements or will be excluded from the program.

“It is a frustrating thing to see, especially for those that have been willing to put everything on the line and sacrifice everything for this country if their country called them to do so,” she said.

Yancy, 35, served in the U.S. Navy from 2010 to 2014. She began to use food stamps and the Medicaid program, the public health insurance program for people with lower incomes, as she navigated life’s challenges. They included going back to school to pursue her bachelor’s degree, becoming a single mother, and a leukemia diagnosis for one of her children. Frequent trips to the hospital made it hard for her to work steadily or attend school for 20 hours each week, she said.

Guinn said the new rules will create significant administrative challenges, too; even SNAP recipients who are working will struggle to prove it.

“Maybe they’re working one month, they have a job, and then their employer cuts their hours the next month,” Guinn told Stateline. “There are mechanisms for people to upload documentation as needed to demonstrate compliance with the program, but from an administrative standpoint, right now, we don’t have any super-high-tech automated way of doing this.”

Stateline reporter Shalina Chatlani can be reached at schatlani@stateline.org.

Stateline is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Stateline maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Scott S. Greenberger for questions: info@stateline.org.

New federal school voucher program poses a quandary for states: Opt in or opt out?

A school bus drives along a rural road outside of Kenosha, Wis. The One Big Beautiful Bill Act established a national tax credit scholarship program, but state leaders can decide whether and how to participate. (Photo by Spencer Platt/Getty Images)

When President Donald Trump signed the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, he gave state leaders — not federal regulators — the power to decide whether and how to participate in the first-ever national tax credit scholarship program.

That decision now looms largest in blue states, where Democratic governors and lawmakers must weigh whether to reject the law outright on ideological grounds — or try to reshape it into something that reflects their own values.

“This isn’t the federal voucher program we were worried about five years ago,” said Jon Valant, a senior fellow in governance studies at the left-leaning Brookings Institution who testified before Congress on earlier versions of the bill. “It still has serious problems — but states now have tools to mold it into something they might actually support.”

The final law gives states wide discretion, he said. They can opt out entirely. They can opt in passively, leaving the program to operate as written. Or, as Valant suggests, they can try to redraw its footprint — focusing less on private school tuition and more on public school supports like tutoring, transportation and enrichment services in underserved districts.

“My hope is that blue states take a hard look and ask: Can this be used to address our own needs?”

For progressives and education advocates who are wary of school vouchers, the decision is fraught. Opting in could draw criticism for approving what many see as a vehicle for privatization of K-12 education. But opting out could mean turning down federal dollars — education money that states with budding or robust private school voucher infrastructures, such as Arizona and Florida, will gladly take.

“There’s money on the table, and it can be used for more than just private school tuition,” Valant said. “If blue states want to keep that money from reinforcing inequality, they’ll have to get creative, and act fast.”

Since 2020, private school choice programs — once limited to low-income or special needs students — have rapidly expanded.

In 2023, $6.3 billion was spent nationwide on private school choice programs — less than 1% of total public K-12 operational spending, according to EdChoice, a nonprofit that advocates for school choice measures. From 2023-24 to 2024-25, participation in universal private school choice programs surged nearly 40%, growing from roughly 584,000 to 805,000 students in just one school year.

By 2026-27, about half of all U.S. students will be eligible, according to estimates by FutureEd, an independent think tank at Georgetown University.

These trends, combined with new federal tax credit, could fundamentally reshape the education funding landscape across state governments, experts say.

“States will need to decide whether to encourage the redirection of funding to support private and religious schools — either by expanding existing voucher programs or, if they don’t have one, by introducing such a program for the first time,” said Sasha Pudelski, director of advocacy for AASA, The School Superintendents Association. The group opposes the national voucher plan.

State regulations

As of this May, 21 states operated tax credit scholarship programs with varying degrees of funding and oversight. According to the EdChoice Friedman Index, the states of Florida, Arkansas, Arizona and Alabama rank highest in private school access, with 100% of students eligible for school choice programs.

Some states, like Florida and Arizona, already have extensive tax credit scholarship systems. Others, including Texas, are building new infrastructure such as statewide voucher programs and education savings accounts, known as ESAs.

States with no current programs face decisions about participation, regulation and equity, but without clear federal guardrails, education advocates told Stateline.

The federal policy builds on existing state-level tax credit scholarship programs — such as Alabama’s — but significantly expands eligibility, removes scholarship caps and broadens allowable uses to include not just tuition, but also tutoring, therapy, transportation and academic support services. Beginning in 2027, scholarships will be excluded from federal taxable income.

Valant, of Brookings, told Stateline that some of his initial concerns were addressed in the version of the bill signed into law.

“There was a very realistic scenario in the earlier version of the bill where a small number of very wealthy people could essentially make money off this,” Valant said. “That was mostly addressed.”

The enacted version eliminates stock donations and caps individual tax credits at $1,700. And with states that opt in having the power to shape their own program, Valant said that gives them the chance to establish their own guardrails, such as income eligibility caps or nondiscrimination policies for participating schools.

If blue states want to keep that money from reinforcing inequality, they’ll have to get creative, and act fast.

– Jon Valant, a senior fellow in governance studies at the Brookings Institution

The scholarship-granting organizations, known as SGOs, would then be subject to new state regulations about where the money can go.

“States could say SGOs can’t give money to schools that discriminate based on sexual orientation. … There’s quite a lot of room here for state regulation,” he said.

Looking ahead, Valant said he’ll be watching how states interpret their regulatory powers — and how effective scholarship-granting organizations are at fundraising under the new rules, which prohibit large stock gifts and rely instead on millions of smaller donations.

“Now it’s a strange pitch: ‘Can you front me $300 to give to the SGO? I swear the IRS will give it back,’” he said. “It’s going to take time to figure out how to sell this to families.”

Concerns over transparency and equity remain. The program allows donors, scholarship-granting organizations and families to direct funds with little public accountability, critics say. And in states without robust oversight, Valant warns that funds could be misused — or channeled to institutions that exclude students based, for example, on identity or beliefs about sexual orientation.

He also emphasized that early participation is likely to skew toward families already in private schools, particularly in wealthier ZIP codes — mirroring patterns seen in programs in Arizona, Florida and Georgia.

“One big risk is that the funds will disproportionately flow to wealthier families — just like we’ve seen in many ESA programs,” Valant said.

What do these programs look like across the country?

FutureEd studied eight states — Arizona, Arkansas, Florida, Iowa, Indiana, Ohio, Oklahoma and West Virginia — where 569,000 students participated in school choice programs at a cost to taxpayers of $4 billion in 2023-24.

The FutureEd analysis found significant differences among the states in design, funding and oversight.

Arizona’s ESA program was the first of its kind in 2011, and also the first to shift toward universal eligibility in 2022.

Florida operated the largest and most expensive program, with broad eligibility, no caps or accreditation requirements, and a major influx of higher-income families, though it mandated some university-led performance reviews. Iowa fully funded ESAs and, like other states, saw mostly existing private school families benefit.

Arkansas had a cautious rollout due to legal delays and geographic clustering of participants, while West Virginia allowed spending across state lines with no performance reporting.

Newcomer North Carolina began with income-based prioritization but quickly expanded under political pressure or demand, while Alabama and Louisiana will launch ESA programs in 2025-26 using general state revenues.

Utah enacted a universal voucher program in 2023, providing up to $8,000 per student for private school or homeschool expenses. A state teachers union sued, arguing that participating schools were not “free and open to all children” and that the program diverted public school funds. A state court this April ruled the program was unconstitutional.

As the new federal law opens the door for tax-credit-funded tuition support, Texas is building its first universal school voucher program, aided through ESAs to begin in the 2026-27 school year. The program is funded with $1 billion over two years, with $10,000-$11,000 per student — up to $30,000 for students with disabilities and $2,000 for homeschoolers.

The Texas comptroller will oversee the program, and private schools must be open for at least two years to be eligible for funds.

Voucher programs can drain state budgets, and budget wonks predict the cost for Texas could rise to around $4.8 billion by 2030, The Texas Tribune reported.

A spokesperson for the Texas comptroller’s office said that details are still being finalized; the state has issued a request for proposals due Aug. 4 to select eligible educational assistance organizations that would help funnel scholarship dollars to schools.

Other states may be more cautious. The Missouri National Education Association filed a lawsuit this summer to block $51 million in state appropriations to private school scholarships through the MOScholars program. The suit argues that using general revenue rather than private donations violates the state constitution and undermines public education funding.

Stateline reporter Robbie Sequeira can be reached at rsequeira@stateline.org.

Stateline is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Stateline maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Scott S. Greenberger for questions: info@stateline.org.

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

ACLU report shows growth of Wisconsin immigration enforcement

Waukesha County Sheriff Department, one of the agencies which participate in the 287(g) program. (Photo by Isiah Holmes/Wisconsin Examiner)

The Waukesha County Sheriff Department, one of the agencies that participate in the 287(g) program. (Photo by Isiah Holmes/Wisconsin Examiner)

The number of Wisconsin county sheriff’s offices participating in a collaborative program with Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) has jumped from nine to 12 this year, with other forms of cooperation with ICE growing across the state, according to a report by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) of Wisconsin

The report shows more sheriff offices joining the 287(g) program over the last three years. The program carves out dedicated immigration operations within the sheriff’s offices, shares data with ICE and increases local participation in ICE detention requests. 

The ACLU report, released Tuesday, is an update from its 2022 report on Wisconsin’s “Jail-to-deportation pipeline.” 

“Immigrants have been an important part of the fabric of Wisconsin for many years,” said Tim Muth, senior staff attorney at the ACLU of Wisconsin, in a statement released by the ACLU, along with the updated report. “They are a part of our families. They are our coworkers, friends, and neighbors, and the public should know what their local law enforcement agencies are doing.”

The Wisconsin Examiner’s Criminal Justice Reporting Project shines a light on incarceration, law enforcement and criminal justice issues with support from the Public Welfare Foundation.

In 2022, there were eight law enforcement across the state participating in the 287(g). The program allows ICE Enforcement and Removal Operations (ERO) to partner with state and local law enforcement agencies, who are empowered to dedicate their own resources to pursuing people living without legal immigration paperwork in the United States. 

“ICE recognizes the importance of its relationships with law enforcement partners to carry out its critical mission,” states a Department of Homeland Security (DHS) webpage

Agencies can participate in 287(g) under a few different models including a “jail enforcement” model that focuses on people without legal immigration status already in local jails on other criminal charges, a “task force” model that gives local law enforcement officers limited authority to enforce immigration law and a warrant service program which allows local law enforcement to serve administrative warrants to people without legal status within county jails.

The participants in 287(g) include the sheriff’s offices of Brown, Fond du Lac, Kewaunee, Manitowoc, Marquette, Outagamie, Sheboygan, Washington, Waukesha (which is listed twice on the DHS website’s “pending agencies” portion), Waupaca, Wood, and Winnebago counties. 

A growing number of Wisconsin sheriffs continue to opt into this program, actively contributing to the jail-to-deportation pipeline.

– ACLU of Wisconsin

Six of those sheriffs (Kewaunee, Outagamie, Washington, Waupaca, Winnebago, and Wood counties) joined the program between from March to June of this year. The rest began participating in 287(g) in 2020, according to the ACLU report,

While some law enforcement agencies have joined the program, others have distanced themselves from immigration enforcement. The Milwaukee County Sheriff’s Office does not participate in the 287(g) program, and both that office and the Dane County Sheriff limit or prohibit their participation in immigration activities. The Milwaukee Police Department (MPD) also has policies limiting its own involvement in immigration enforcement in the interest of preserving a trusting and cooperative relationship with the community, the policies state.

“The expansion of these agreements enables ICE to further embed its enforcement presence within local jurisdictions, often circumventing community-driven policies against immigration enforcement,” the report states. “These partnerships not only divert local resources from community safety initiatives but also significantly heighten the risk of racial profiling and erode trust between law enforcement and immigrant communities.”

The ACLU has also found that between 2021 and 2024, the Wisconsin Department of Corrections (DOC), along with 29 counties, received over $7 million in federal funds through the State Criminal Alien Assistance Program (SCAAP). The ACLU states that the funds were “in exchange” for data sharing with ICE. Wisconsin Examiner reached out to DOC, the story will be updated with any reply from the the state agency regarding data sharing.

Protesters gather to support Judge Hannah Dugan. (Photo by Isiah Holmes/Wisconsin Examiner)
Protesters gather outside of the Milwaukee federal building. (Photo by Isiah Holmes/Wisconsin Examiner)

That data is just part of a growing immigration enforcement and detention network across the state. From Oct. 2021 to June 2025, according to the report, ICE sent over 3,300 immigration detainers to Wisconsin. These are situations in which ICE requests that a local jail hold individuals for up to 48 hours beyond their scheduled release, the ACLU report states. “Although these detainers are often not accompanied by a warrant signed by a neutral judicial official and lack authority under Wisconsin law,” it explains, “most sheriffs across the state continue to honor them.”

Although over 3,300 individuals have been held between Oct. 2021 and June 2025, the biggest jump in detainer requests occurred this year. Between Jan. 1 and June 10, there were 1,065 ICE detainers in Wisconsin. By comparison there were 942 ICE detainers during all of 2024, 853 detainers during a 12-month period between October 2022 and September 2023 and 474 in the 12 months before that. 

“These numbers demonstrate that even without a judge-signed warrant, ICE continues to issue these ‘requests,’ and a significant number of Wisconsin jails continue to comply,” the ACLU’s report states. “This practice is problematic as federal deportation proceedings are civil, not criminal, matters and Wisconsin law does not provide legal authority for law enforcement to act on civil immigration detainers.”

Some sheriff offices are even taking it a step further than 287(g) and SCAAP. New financial agreements have also been arranged with counties such as Brown, Sauk and Ozaukee. In Brown County, the sheriff maintains a $90,000 contract for detention and transportation services, carrying a $70.00 per detainee, per day reimbursement, and another $36.00 per hour, with mileage and funding, for transportation services. Sauk County receives a $106.00 per-diem rate for housing ICE detainees, and Ozaukee County gave ICE the ability to purchase cell space in its jail by building off an existing contract with the U.S. Marshall Service. The ACLU calls this a “concerning trend” of local sheriffs “not only passively complying with ICE requests” but also “actively entering into benefiting from direct financial arrangements to house and transport immigrants for ICE removal activities.”

The report also highlights recent legislation which would require more cooperation with ICE. Republican lawmakers have introduced bills that would compel sheriffs to work with ICE regardless of their own priorities, mandate citizenship investigations of jail detainees, mandate compliance with detainer requests, and other policies.

To counter these advancements, the ACLU is calling on community members to reach out to their local sheriffs and police chiefs to learn more about where they stand on ICE cooperation, push agencies to prioritize community trust over obedience, and engage with lawmakers on the proposed bills. 

“These cozy relationships between ICE and many sheriffs are disrupting our communities and funneling immigrant community members into the federal deportation machine,” said Muth.

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

Democrats, education groups call for Trump to unfreeze K-12 funds

The Lyndon Baines Johnson Department of Education Building pictured on Nov. 25, 2024. (Photo by Shauneen Miranda/States Newsroom)

The Lyndon Baines Johnson Department of Education Building pictured on Nov. 25, 2024. (Photo by Shauneen Miranda/States Newsroom)

WASHINGTON — U.S. Senate Democrats on Thursday slammed the “assault” on public education by President Donald Trump’s administration, underscoring the impact of billions of dollars in funds still frozen for K-12 schools and ongoing efforts to dismantle the Education Department.

Hawaii Sen. Mazie Hirono, who hosted a forum alongside several Democratic colleagues that also heard testimony from education leaders, advocates and leading labor union voices, said Trump is engaged in “an all-out, coordinated attack on public education.”

The agency has seen a dizzying array of cuts, overhauls and changes since Trump took office as he seeks to dramatically redefine the federal role in education and take an axe to the agency.

This month, the U.S. Supreme Court temporarily cleared the way for the administration to carry out mass layoffs and a plan to dramatically downsize the Department of Education that Trump ordered earlier this year.

“How can we expect our schools to plan for the upcoming school year when they are confronted with chaos and uncertainty from this administration?” Hirono said at the forum.

Compounding the issue, the administration garnered bipartisan backlash after notifying states that it would be withholding $6.8 billion in funds for K-12 schools just a day before July 1, when these dollars are typically sent out as educators plan for the coming school year.

The administration last week confirmed the release of a portion of those funds that support before- and after-school programs and summer programs, totaling $1.3 billion, but it has yet to release the remaining $5.5 billion that go toward migrant education, English-language learning, adult education and literacy programs, among other initiatives.

“How dare they take the monies that you appropriated, that schools need right now, as schools start in the next two weeks, taking it away from summer school, from after-school, from kids that need English-language acquisition — how dare they do that?” Randi Weingarten, president of the American Federation of Teachers, said at the forum.

“How come we have to constantly go in and sue them and sue them and sue them to get things that you already appropriated?” said Weingarten, who leads one of the country’s largest teachers unions.

Jacqueline Rodriguez, CEO of the National Center for Learning Disabilities, said the withheld money was devastating to students with disabilities.

“This funding delay is sabotaging student learning, educator preparedness and essential services, causing heavy impacts on those students with disabilities,” she said.

“To educators, this isn’t a delay, it’s a breach of public trust,” she said, adding that the freeze is “forcing schools to make tough choices about how they now have to reallocate funding.”

National school voucher program

The forum also took aim at a sweeping national school voucher program included in the mega tax and spending cut bill that Trump signed into law July 4.

The permanent program starts in 2027 and allocates up to $1,700 in federal tax credits for individuals who donate to organizations that provide private and religious school scholarships.

“What we are seeing is just a wholesale dismantling and disruption of the public education system,” said Denise Forte, president and CEO of the nonprofit policy and advocacy group EdTrust.

“And with this new national voucher scheme — which is exactly what it is — that’s really about making sure that students from wealthier families who had already been participating in private schooling will have access to even more public dollars.”

Former Education secretary speaks out

Earlier Thursday, former U.S. Education Secretary Miguel Cardona also criticized Trump’s “attacks” on education, including the billions of dollars in frozen funds.

“The irony is, this is really impacting many of the communities that really were rooting for this current administration,” Cardona, who was Education secretary under then-President Joe Biden, said on a press call hosted by Defend America Action that also featured Karen Smith, a member of Pennsylvania’s Central Bucks School District School Board as well as Nick Melvoin, a member of the Los Angeles Unified School District Board of Education.

“They’re being impacted the most in many ways,” Cardona said. “I always say, all students are going to be impacted, but the students furthest from opportunity are going to be impacted the most and more severely and more quickly, so let’s put that perspective on what’s happening in education — policies have consequences, and the consequences are going to be felt for decades, just from what was done in the last five months.” 

‘They’re scared’: Housing sites, programs for veterans to shrink without state funds 

Gov. Tony Evers and Veterans Affairs Sec. James Bond spoke an event for veterans in the state Capitol on April 22, 2025. (Photo via Wisconsin Department of Veterans Affairs Facebook page)

Two Wisconsin Department of Veterans Affairs programs that provide support to struggling veterans, including those experiencing homelessness, are on track to close locations and shrink in size due to a lack of funding in the new state budget.

The state budget was passed by the Legislature and signed into law by Gov. Tony Evers in early July following months of negotiations. While Evers and lawmakers hailed the agreement as a bipartisan accomplishment, they are now blaming each other for the anticipated closure of two facilities, one in Chippewa Falls and one in Green Bay, that serve veterans struggling with homelessness this year due to insufficient funding available. Another program that provides support for veterans dealing with mental health and substance use issues will also face cuts due to the budget.

The Veterans Housing and Recovery Program (VHRP), which currently has three physical sites, serves veterans who are on the verge of or experiencing homelessness, including those who have experienced incarceration, unemployment or underemployment, physical and mental health problems. The program lasts a maximum of 24 months, but the average length of stay is six to 10 months.

The VHRP locations in Chippewa Falls, which has 48 beds, and Green Bay, which has 17, will close by September 30 of this year. The Union Grove location, which has a capacity of 40 beds, will remain open.

“We make a promise to our veterans that when they return home to their civilian life, we will support and serve them just as they have supported and served us. Our veterans should not have to worry about being able to afford to keep a roof over their heads. Period,” Evers said in a statement Monday. 

Randy Nelson, 63, has resided at Klein Hall in Chippewa Falls for about three months. He told the Wisconsin Examiner in a phone interview that it has been the “perfect place for me to come and figure some things out,” especially since his daughter lives nearby. Before he moved in, he had been experiencing homelessness and navigating substance use issues.

Nelson served in the military for three years starting in 1979 and spent much of his time working on aircraft repairs. He said he has been lucky to receive some of the veterans’ services that he has. 

Nelson said the VHRP program has given him an array of resources, including access to recovery and anger management programming, and it has also been a safe place for him to look for housing. 

“I just lucked out in getting a housing voucher this quick, otherwise I’d have no place to go,” Nelson said.

Nelson said he is confident in his sobriety now and “more hopeful about my remaining years,” but is “truly worried” about his fellow veterans, given the recent news. He said some residents are considering leaving the state to try to find a new place with similar services, even though they want to remain in the area. 

“They’re scared of getting kicked out and being homeless,” Nelson said. He said residents are still considered homeless to some degree, since they lack a permanent address, but the closure could mean some would “actually be out on the streets again.”

“There’s people that are working and saving up money here, and they don’t know what to do because they’re not making enough money to get into a place yet,” Nelson said.

The Legislature, Nelson said, is “taking away valuable resources for veterans” with the cuts to the program. 

The program was created by Wisconsin lawmakers in the 1993-95 state budget and was initially supported from Wisconsin’s veterans trust fund. It was expanded in the following years and is currently funded from a combination of trust fund payments, payments made by program participants and per diem payments, which are made to the agency by the federal government at a current rate of about $71 per resident per day. Participants can be charged up to 30% of their monthly income in rent when using transitional housing. 

Growing staffing and maintenance costs at the facilities led to Evers and the agency requesting nearly $2 million in additional state funding during the budget process, but it wasn’t included in the final bill. 

“The bottom line is that there will now be fewer options for homeless veterans as a result of the Legislature’s irresponsible decision to reject the investments,” Evers said, adding that he would be urging the Legislature to provide additional support for veterans in the fall.

Democratic lawmakers, including Sens. Jeff Smith (D-Brunswick), Jamie Wall (D-Green Bay) and Reps. Jodi Emerson, Ryan Spaude, Christian Phelps, Christine Sinicki, Brienne Brown, Amaad Rivera-Wagner, Maureen McCarville and Angelito Tenori, quickly introduced legislation Wednesday that would provide the necessary funding.

“Republicans withheld critical funds for over a year while our region struggled with hospital closures. Now homeless veterans are the victims of the Republicans’ callous inaction,” Smith said in a statement. “These men and women served our country. We have a moral obligation to ensure they have a roof over their heads.”

Emerson called the closures “extremely alarming” in a statement, noting that the facilities  are scheduled to close just as the weather in Wisconsin turns cold.   

The co-chairs of the Joint Finance Committee Rep. Mark Born and Sen. Howard Marklein pushed back on Evers in a statement, saying his comments were “simply disingenuous.”

“The Legislature made significant investments to support veterans in our state including in this program,” the lawmakers said, noting the budget included $5 million to support Wisconsin veterans homes, $2.5 million to support the Veterans Community Project which provides housing and support services for veterans and a slight increase in the Veterans Housing and Recovery Program.

“Legislative leaders negotiated for weeks with Governor Evers and he did not bring this topic up once,” Born and Marklein said. “Evers is looking for a scapegoat to blame for his administration’s failure to adequately manage the changes to the program volume and demands.”

WDVA Assistant Deputy Secretary Joey Hoey told the Wisconsin Examiner, however, that it is “disingenuous” to blame Evers when lawmakers made the decision to exclude the funding from the budget.

“They can try and paint it however they want,” Hoey said. “If they wanted to fund it, they could have put it in the budget.”

The agency worked with lawmakers on the Joint Finance Committee during the budget cycle, agreeing to eliminate over 200 positions that were unfilled. Rep. Mark Born (R-Beaver Dam) thanked the head of the agency for working with them during the committee’s June 12 meeting. 

Hoey said the agency had hoped the budget would reflect that collaboration and would include funding for the Veterans Housing and Recovery program (VHRP) or the Veterans Outreach and Recovery program (VORP). Ultimately, it did not.

The VHRP program’s base funding was about $2.1 million, including $1.3 million in federal funding, $677,500 from the veterans trust fund and $115,500 from rent payments.

The Legislative Fiscal Bureau (LFB) laid out the stakes for the program in a memo to lawmakers as they were writing the state budget. 

“Without additional funding, the Department would not have sufficient resources to maintain the program’s three sites,” the memo stated. 

One of the funding issues outlined by LFB was the rising cost of staffing. According to the memo, about two-thirds of VHRP costs went towards Lutheran Social Services, the organization providing management and supportive services at each location. Lutheran Social Services has incurred higher staffing costs in recent years. Evers dedicated $500,000 in ARPA funds to those increased costs in 2023-24, but that funding has run out.

The facilities were also proving a problem, Hoey said. Evers had requested $24 million in his capital budget to build new facilities in Green Bay and Chippewa Falls, but lawmakers declined to fund them.

“The physical upkeep was also above what we had calculated or budgeted,” Hoey said, noting that the Chippewa Falls building had roof leaks and the HVAC system was old. “We were paying people to repair it and Band-Aid it. In Green Bay, we had problems, and every time you have a problem and you can’t have a resident in a room… you’re not getting that $73 per day from the federal government. It’s a double whammy, and that’s why we thought new facilities would fix that for Green Bay and Chippewa Falls.” 

Evers had proposed providing $1.95 million across the biennium for the program.

Lawmakers provided an adjustment to the program of $100,000, which they are touting as a 15% increase. Hoey said in an email, however, that the funding is an adjustment that reflects what the agency has already been spending and still falls “well short” of the funding the LFB identified as necessary to keep the sites open.

Hoey also noted another program administered by the WDVA will face cuts under the new state budget.

The Veterans Outreach and Recovery Program (VORP), which serves veterans dealing with mental health and substance use issues and aims to reduce the suicide rate among veterans, is set to lose seven employees. Evers had asked for seven positions and more than $1.1 million to help support the program. 

The program launched in 2015 with the help of a federal mental health grant, and has since become state funded. ARPA funds were used in 2023 to expand the reach of the program, but with those funds running out the agency sought state funds to continue its current size. The positions expire in October 2025.

“We had expanded to 16 regions where there was somebody who was living in that part of the state, and now we’re having to go back to 11 regions,” Hoey said. “They wouldn’t fund that.”

Those positions had helped the agency reach more veterans, provide support in a more timely manner and give veterans more time, according to the Legislative Fiscal Bureau. The program provided services to 2,222 people in 2023-24 — nearly 70% more contacts than in 2021-22 when the program served 1,329 people. 

“It was really very disappointing, because these are two programs that have incredible track records of really helping veterans who need it,” Hoey said. “It was really disappointing being in Joint Finance when that vote came up. My heart was breaking, sitting there thinking ‘Oh, my God, all these people who won’t get served.’” 

Hoey shared an anecdote of a former program participant who recently returned to the Chippewa Falls site to give people an update on where he was, to illustrate the effectiveness of the programs. The VHRP, Hoey explained, is a monthslong process to help struggling veterans get to “the point where they can return to society in a stable, functioning way.” 

“He came in and wanted to tell everyone that, you know, five years ago, he was homeless, and now he’s married with a kid, and he had just bought his first house and was so proud because he had paid his first property tax bill,” Hoey said. “That’s the kind of result these programs have… Between the two programs you’re looking for $4 million and we couldn’t find that.” 

Wisconsin DVA Secretary James Bond said in a statement that the agency remains committed to assisting veterans. 

“We have a duty to support veterans, especially in their darkest times,” Bond said. “VHRP has been integral in helping veterans find stability and succeed in their communities, and along with our partners on the ground, we intend to still carry out that mission to the best of our ability.”

Veterans who are currently residing at the two facilities will be offered alternative placement options and will continue to receive assistance through supportive services.

Hoey said even as the Department of Veterans Affairs continues its work, the cuts and closures will likely mean fewer veterans will be served and it could be more difficult to reach veterans across the state. He said wait times could also become more of an obstacle for veterans seeking services. 

“Most of these veterans, they want to go to a program that’s somewhat near their community so they can count on whatever support systems they have, so… it’s unlikely we’ll be able to serve as many veterans in the majority of the state, since the home that’s existing is near Milwaukee.” 

Hoey said the agency decided to retain the Union Grove site, located just south of Milwaukee, because upgrades and repairs that were funded with state and federal funds were recently completed.

“The VORP team, instead of referring someone to Chippewa Falls, now they have to refer them to a program in Minneapolis, so we’re going to still try and get people the help they need,” Hoey said. “It’s just going to be harder.”

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

New national school voucher program included in ‘big, beautiful’ law, with no cap on cost

A new national school voucher program allocates up to $1,700 in federal tax credits for individuals who donate to organizations that provide private and religious school scholarships. (Photo by Getty Images)

A new national school voucher program allocates up to $1,700 in federal tax credits for individuals who donate to organizations that provide private and religious school scholarships. (Photo by Getty Images)

WASHINGTON — A national private school voucher program is now law, though the school choice initiative comes with a huge caveat. States also choose — whether or not to participate. 

It’s a setback for advocates who hoped to see the program — baked into the mega tax and spending cut bill President Donald Trump signed into law on July Fourth — mandated in all 50 states.

The permanent program, which starts in 2027, saw several versions between the House and Senate before getting to Trump’s desk as part of congressional Republicans’ massive reconciliation package.

Robert Enlow, president and CEO of EdChoice, touted aspects of the program, but said his organization would have preferred to see a 50-state program, rather than allowing states to opt in or decline. 

“I think I’m really worried about that because this is seen as a sort of more partisan issue and as a result, what would make a governor in a blue state say, ‘Let me bring in school choice’?” said Enlow, whose nonprofit focuses on advancing school choice options.

Still, Enlow described the program as “just another step along the way of giving parents more choices.”

Who will join?

It remains to be seen which states will participate, including those with their own voucher programs already underway.

Jon Valant, a senior fellow at the nonpartisan Brookings Institution, said he’s “not clear on how states will shake out on the question of whether or not to participate.”

“I’m sure the vast majority of, really, all red states will participate in this thing, but I don’t know what’s going to happen in blue and purple states,” said Valant, who also serves as director of the think tank’s Brown Center on Education Policy.

Despite that unknown, Valant said that states “do have some incentive to participate because if they don’t, then they’re potentially losing access to some funds that they wouldn’t otherwise get.”

How the program works

The program allocates up to $1,700 in federal tax credits for individuals who donate to organizations that provide private and religious school scholarships.

There is also no cap to the cost of the program, unlike earlier versions seen in both chambers of Congress.

The scholarship funds would be available to families whose household incomes do not exceed 300 percent of their area’s median gross income.

More than 138 million people could be eligible to make use of the tax credit in 2027, according to an analysis from the Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy.

However, Carl Davis, research director of the left-leaning think tank, notes in the analysis that “most of those people will not contribute” given the necessary paperwork and vouchers’ unpopularity with the public.

A state’s program participation will be decided by its governor or “by such other individual, agency, or entity as is designated under State law to make such elections on behalf of the State with respect to Federal tax benefits,” according to the final bill text.

The GOP’s school choice push

The umbrella term “school choice” centers on alternative programs to one’s assigned public school.

The effort has sparked controversy, as opponents say these programs drain critical funds and resources from school districts, while school choice advocates describe the initiatives as necessary for parents dissatisfied with their local public schools.

Trump and congressional Republicans have made school choice a major part of their education agenda.

The program also reflects a sweeping bill that GOP Reps. Adrian Smith of Nebraska and Burgess Owens of Utah and Sen. Bill Cassidy of Louisiana reintroduced in their respective chambers earlier this year.

‘Very little quality control’

Valant, of the Brookings Institution, expressed several concerns about the program, saying “there’s very little quality control, transparency or accountability for outcomes in this program, and it’s potentially a major use of public taxpayer funds.”

He said he doesn’t see anything in the program’s text that “protects against widespread waste, fraud and abuse and from programs and schools that aren’t providing much value at all to students from continuing to get a large amount of funding.”

The program also came as Trump and his administration continue to dramatically redefine the federal role in education.

Trump’s fiscal 2026 budget request calls for $12 billion in spending cuts to the Education Department. A summary from the department said this cut “reflects an agency that is responsibly winding down.”

Billions on hold

The administration has also taken heat for its recent decision to put on hold $6.8 billion in federal funds for K-12 schools.

Sasha Pudelski, director of advocacy at AASA, The School Superintendents Association, said that a time when the administration is withholding billions of dollars in these funds for public schools, “the idea that we’re going to spend an unlimited amount of tax dollars to support private and religious schools is unthinkable, unimaginable — it’s horrific.”

“This is yet another handout to wealthy Americans who can already afford to send their children to private religious schools and at a cost that comes from tax dollars being deferred away from public education that serve the poorest and neediest students in America,” added Pudelski, whose organization helps to ensure every child has access to a high quality public education.

Rural hospitals, SNAP cuts, Medicaid: Democrats force tough votes on GOP megabill

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., walks back onto the Senate floor after speaking to reporters at the U.S. Capitol Building on June 30, 2025 in Washington, D.C. (Photo by Andrew Harnik/Getty Images)

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., walks back onto the Senate floor after speaking to reporters at the U.S. Capitol Building on June 30, 2025 in Washington, D.C. (Photo by Andrew Harnik/Getty Images)

WASHINGTON — Senate Republicans were closing in Monday on passing their version of the “big beautiful” tax break and spending cut bill that President Donald Trump wants to make law by a self-imposed July Fourth deadline.

But the chamber’s Democrats first kicked off a marathon of amendment votes, forcing their GOP colleagues to go on the record on tough issues, including cuts to health and food safety net programs. As of early evening, Democrats had not prevailed on any votes.

The tactic is used by the opposition party during massive budget reconciliation fights to draw attention to specific issues even as their amendments are likely to fail.

Democrats decried numerous measures in the mega-bill, including new work reporting requirements for Medicaid, the federal-state health insurance program for low-income people and people with disabilities.

Loud opposition has also swelled as legislative proposals shift significant costs of the federal Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or SNAP, to states for the first time.

“I say to our colleagues, ‘Vote for families over billionaires,’” Sen. Amy Klobuchar of Minnesota said on the Senate floor.

The heart of the nearly 1,000-page legislation extends and expands the 2017 tax law to keep individual income tax rates at the same level and makes permanent some tax breaks on business investments and research and development costs.

The bill would also put in motion some of Trump’s campaign promises, including no tax on qualifying tips, overtime or car loan interest, but only for a few years.

The tax cuts are estimated to cost nearly $4.5 trillion over 10 years, and a provision in the bill raises the nation’s borrowing limit to $5 trillion as the United States faces record levels of debt.

Overall, the Senate bill is projected to add $3.25 trillion to deficits during the next decade, according to the latest calculation from the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office.

Here are some key votes so far:

Planned Parenthood 

Washington Democratic Sen. Patty Murray tried to remove language from the bill that would block Medicaid payments from going to Planned Parenthood for one year unless the organization stops performing abortions.

Federal law already bars funding from going toward abortions, with limited exceptions, but GOP lawmakers have proposed blocking any other funding from going to the organization, effectively blocking Medicaid patients from going to Planned Parenthood for other types of health care.

Murray said the proposal would have a detrimental impact on health care for lower-income women and called it a “long-sought goal of anti-choice extremists.”

“Republicans’ bill will cut millions of women off from birth control, cancer screenings, essential preventive health care — care that they will not be able to afford anywhere else,” Murray said. “And it will shutter some 200 health care clinics in our country.”

Mississippi Republican Sen. Cindy Hyde-Smith opposed efforts to remove the policy change and raised a budget point of order, which was not waived following a 49-51 vote. Maine Republican Sen. Susan Collins and Alaska’s Lisa Murkowski voted with Democrats.

“There was a time when protecting American tax dollars from supporting the abortion industry was an uncontroversial, nonpartisan effort that we could all get behind,” Hyde-Smith said.

Medicaid for undocumented immigrants

Senators from both political parties crossed the aisle over whether the federal government should reduce how much a state is given for its Medicaid program if that state uses its own taxpayer dollars to enroll immigrants living in the country without proper documentation.

The provision was included in an earlier version of the bill, but the Senate parliamentarian ruled it didn’t comply with the complex rules for moving a budget reconciliation bill.

The vote was 56-44, but since it was on waiving a budget point of order, at least 60 senators had to agree to set aside the rules and move forward with the amendment, so the vote failed.

Democratic Sens. Catherine Cortez Masto of Nevada, Maggie Hassan of New Hampshire, and Jon Ossoff and Raphael Warnock of Georgia voted with GOP senators. Maine’s Collins voted with most of the chamber’s Democrats against moving forward.

Texas Republican Sen. John Cornyn asked for the vote, saying he believes the policy change would reduce undocumented immigration.

“Border patrol talks about push and pull factors,” Cornyn said. “One of the pull factors for illegal immigration is the knowledge that people will be able to receive various benefits once they make it into the country.”

Senate Budget Committee ranking member Jeff Merkley, D-Ore., opposed Cornyn’s attempt to get the language back in the bill, saying the policy change would financially harm states that expanded Medicaid under the 2010 health care law for simple mistakes.

“What this amendment says is that if one person, despite state law, through a bureaucratic mistake, is receiving funds, then the whole state pays the price and has their rate on expanded Medicaid changed from 90% to 80%,” Merkley said, referring to the percentage paid by the federal government.

Reduction in funding for Consumer Financial Protection Bureau

An amendment to stop a nearly 50% reduction in funding for the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau was blocked by Republican Sen. Tim Scott of South Carolina, who chairs the Senate Committee on Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs.

Sen. Elizabeth Warren, a Democrat who championed the CFPB after the 2008 financial collapse, attempted to bring the amendment to the floor saying the agency “is the financial watchdog to keep people from getting cheated on credit cards and mortgages and Venmo and payday loans and a zillion other transactions.”

“When this financial cop can’t do its job there is no one else in the federal government to pick up the slack,” Warren said.

Scott blocked her using a budget point of order, saying the reduction still provides “ample funding” for the agency. Democrats tried to waive that procedural tactic, but failed following a 47-53 vote.

An original provision to completely zero out the budget for the CFPB was not included because it did not meet the reconciliation process’ parameters.

Medicaid hospitals and maternal mortality

Senators voted 48-52 to reject Delaware Democratic Sen. Lisa Blunt Rochester’s proposals to send the legislation back to committee to remove language cutting certain funding for Medicaid, which she said would negatively impact “vital hospital services, especially labor and delivery rooms.”

“Today, Medicaid is the single largest payer of maternity care in the United States, covering 40% of births nationwide and nearly half of the births in our rural communities,” Blunt Rochester said. “Obstetric units, particularly in rural hospitals, are closing at alarming rates, actually creating maternity deserts.”

No Republicans spoke in opposition to the proposal, though Maine’s Collins voted in support. 

Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program

New Mexico Democratic Sen. Ben Ray Luján offered a motion to commit the bill back to committee in order to remove all changes related to the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or SNAP. It was rejected following a 49-51 vote, though Alaska Republican Sens. Dan Sullivan and Murkowski voted in favor.

“I’m offering my colleagues the opportunity to step away from these devastating cuts, to show our fellow Americans that in this country we care for our friends, family and neighbors who need support,” Luján said.

Senate Agriculture Chairman John Boozman, R-Ark., opposed the proposals, saying that SNAP is “on an unsustainable path wrought with mismanagement and waste.”

“This program has devolved into viewing success as enrolling more individuals to be dependent on government assistance,” Boozman said. “SNAP is long overdue for change.”

Medicaid work requirements

Senators voted 48-52 to reject a proposal from Delaware Democratic Sen. Chris Coons that would have sent the bill back to committee to remove language requiring Medicaid enrollees to work, participate in community service, or attend an educational program at least 80 hours a month. Alaska’s Murkowski was the only member of her party to vote in favor of the effort.

Democrats have expressed concern for weeks that some people would lose access to Medicaid if they forgot to complete paperwork proving that time commitment or didn’t understand how to show the government they met the new requirement.

“It is cruel and dishonest to bury patients, kids and seniors in paperwork and then blame them when they lose their health care, all to further rig our tax code for the very wealthiest,” Coons said.

Kansas Republican Sen. Roger Marshall urged opposition to the proposal, saying that working helps people.

“My question is, don’t you think a job brings value, that it brings dignity?” Marshall said. “Do you not think it brings purpose and meaning to life?”

Rural hospitals and Medicaid

Maine’s Collins and Alaska’s Murkowski both voted for a proposal from Massachusetts Democratic Sen. Ed Markey that would have removed parts of the bill changing Medicaid.

But even with some bipartisan support, the changes were rejected on a 49-51 vote that would have technically sent the bill back to committee for three days to implement the changes.

“My Republican colleagues’ so-called Medicaid cuts replacement fund is like giving aspirin to a cancer patient,” Markey said. “It is not enough. It is pathetically inadequate to deal with the health care crisis Republicans are creating here today on the Senate floor. No billionaire tax break or Donald Trump pat-on-the-back is worth the risk of people’s lives.”

Senate Finance Committee Chairman Mike Crapo, R-Idaho, spoke out against the proposal, saying that rural hospitals have long had financial challenges and that it was clearly “intended to derail this very bill.”

“Unfortunately for far too long some rural hospitals have struggled to achieve financial stability, even with a wide-range of targeted payment enhances,” Crapo said. “These issues pre-date the consideration of the reforms that we are including in the legislation today.” 

 

Legislative finance committee meets in budget in all-nighter 

The Joint Finance Committee convened at 10:17 p.m. Friday — over 12 hours after it was originally scheduled. (Photo by Baylor Spears/Wisconsin Examiner)

The Joint Finance Committee convened at 10:17 p.m. Friday — over 12 hours after it was originally scheduled — to vote on a fraction of the budget areas it had originally planned and to release part of the literacy funding that is set to expire next week.  

Legislative leaders have been working behind closed doors over the last week to negotiate with Gov. Tony Evers and work out the details of the state budget as the end of the fiscal year approaches next week. 

Areas of the budget still left to take up are at the center of negotiations including the University of Wisconsin system, where Republicans have considered cuts, and the Department of Children and Families, which is responsible for the state’s Child Care Counts program. Evers has said he would veto a budget without funding for the program, which will run out of federal money soon. The committee also still needs to take up the Department of Health Services, the Department of Transportation, the capital budget and more. 

The committee co-chairs did not take questions from reporters ahead of the meeting, but as the meeting started Rep. Mark Born (R-Beaver Dam) said the other agencies “will be taken up at a later date.” He didn’t specify when that would be.

The budget committee did approve the budget for several state agencies including the Department of Natural Resources, part of the Department of Justice, the Higher Education Aids Board, the Department of Administration and the Tourism Department. Each action the committee did take passed along partisan lines.

Portion of $50 million for literacy released

The committee voted unanimously to release $9 million of the nearly $50 million left in funding for literacy initiatives that was first allocated in the 2023-25 state budget. The majority of the money has been withheld by lawmakers since 2023 and is slated to lapse back into the state’s general fund if not released by the end of the fiscal year on June 30.

Lawmakers said action on the other $40 million will be taken soon. 

“This has taken a long time to get here. One of the things that this bill was originally about was to make it so that kids could read. We want to help kids read. We want to give schools the tools to be able to do that,” Rep. Tip McGuire (D-Kenosha) said. “Unfortunately, it’s taken this Legislature a tremendous amount of time to allocate the funds for that, and ultimately, that’s simply not acceptable.” 

Born said he is glad lawmakers were releasing part of the money Friday and would have further motions on it in the future. He also said the delay on the funding was Evers’ fault. Lawmakers were holding the funding back due to a partial veto Evers exercised on a bill related to the literacy funding. The Wisconsin Supreme Court unanimously ruled on Wednesday that partial veto was  unconstitutional and restored the original language of the law.

“We’re glad that justice has been done, and we’re here now with the proper accounts and able to do these two separate motions here in the next couple of days in the committee to get this program that was a bipartisan program moving along,” Born said. 

Certain projects funded in DNR budget, Knowles-Nelson not 

Noticeably missing from the Republicans’ Department of Natural Resource motion was funding for the Knowles-Nelson Stewardship Grant program, which allows the agency to fund the purchase of public land and upkeep of recreational areas.

Rep. Deb Andraca (D-Whitefish Bay) said lawmakers were missing an opportunity by not funding the program in the budget. 

“There’s a lot of individual pet projects in here that seem to be of interest to individual legislators, but there aren’t a lot of park projects that are of interest to Wisconsinites, particularly Knowles-Nelson,” Andraca said.

The committee approved funding in the budget for an array of projects including $42 million to help with modernization of the Rothschild Dam, $500,000 to go towards the repair of a retaining wall for the Wisconsin Rapids Riverbank project, $2.2 million environmental remediation and redevelopment of Lake Vista Park in Oak Creek, $70,000 for a dredging project in Manitowoc River in the Town of Brillion, $1.75 million for dredging the Deerskin River and $100,000 for assistance with highway flooding in the Town of Norway in Racine County. 

Rep. Tony Kurtz (R-Wonewoc), who is the author of a bill to keep the program going, said lawmakers are working to ensure it handles the program in the best way, which is part of why the funding is not in the budget as of now. 

“We actually have until 30th of June of 2026 to work on this. It’s something that Sen. [Patrick] Testin and I have been working on along with our staff over the last six months. It’s something that is a bipartisan effort. We’ve met with so many different stakeholders, so many different groups, so many fellow legislators on getting this done,” Kurtz said. “We are committed to get it done.” 

Kurtz said that the hearing on the bill was “good” and there will be “a lot more coming up in the future” when it comes to Knowles-Nelson. 

The committee also approved raising nonresident vehicle admission sticker fees, nonresident campsite fees and campsite electricity fees. 

Office of School Safety, VOCA grants get state funding

The Department of Justice’s Office of School Safety will get 13 permanent staff positions and $1.57 million to continue its work. That’s about $700,000 less than what the agency had requested, but is about what Evers had proposed for the office. 

The office serves as a resource for K-12 schools — helping them improve security measures by providing training on crisis prevention and response, grants for safety enhancements, threat assessment training and mental health training. It also operates the Speak Up, Speak Out tipline where students can anonymously report safety concerns.

The Wisconsin DOJ will also get help filling funding gaps for Victims of Crime Act (VOCA) grants left by federal funding cuts. 

Wisconsin’s federal allocation for VOCA grants has been cut from $40 million to $13 million. Domestic violence shelters and victim services organizations along with the state DOJ have been navigating the limited funding for over a year. The organizations that receive VOCA grants help people who are the victims of a crime by assisting them with finding housing, providing transportation to and from court appearances and navigating the criminal justice system.

The Republican-approved motion will provide $20 million to cover the federal funding loss. It will also provide $163,500 for two staff positions, which will expire in July 2027. The Wisconsin DOJ had requested an additional $66 million in the budget to make up for the funding gap. 

McGuire noted the funding would be significantly less than what the state agency had requested and would essentially create a two-year program rather than an ongoing one.

“[This] maintains the Legislature’s level of input, but it doesn’t actually maintain the same level of service because of the declining revenues as a result of the federal government,” McGuire said. “While we can’t fix all the things that are the result of what the federal government is doing wrong … this is something that will have an impact on communities across the state. It’s going to have an impact on people who’ve had the worst day and the worst week in the worst month of their life. It’s gonna have an impact on people who have been harmed by violence who have been in toxic, abusive relationships. It’s going to have an impact on people who desperately need services through no fault of their own. These are really vulnerable people and they should receive our support.  

Wisconsin Grants to get slight infusion, UW budget postponed 

The committee did not take up the budget for the University of Wisconsin system. It’s been one of the key issues for debate as Republican lawmakers have considered cuts, while Evers and UW leaders have said the university system needs $855 million in additional funding. Evers has said that in negotiations he and lawmakers were discussing a “positive number.”

The committee did take up the Higher Educational Aids Board, which is the agency responsible for overseeing Wisconsin’s student financial aid system, investing in the Wisconsin Grant Program. The program provides grants to undergraduate Wisconsin residents enrolled at least half-time in degree or certificate programs.

The Wisconsin Grants program would receive an additional $5.6 million in 2025-26 and $11.9 million in 2026-27 under the proposal approved Friday. The UW system, private nonprofit colleges and Wisconsin Technical College System would receive equal dollar increases. It also includes a $75,000 increase for tribal college students.

Evers had proposed 20% increases for the Wisconsin Grants for the state’s public universities, private nonprofit colleges and technical colleges — a total $57.7 million investment.

The Wisconsin Technical Colleges System had requested $10.8 million in each year of the biennium, saying there has been a waitlist for the grants for the first time in 10 years and that list is projected to grow.

The committee also approved $3.5 million in 2026-27 in a supplemental appropriation for emergency medical services training costs to reimburse training and materials costs. 

“Recruiting volunteer EMS personnel is a challenge all over the state of Wisconsin — certainly is in my Senate district,” Sen. Howard Marklein (R-Spring Green) said. “We believe that this will remove one barrier to recruitment of volunteers in our EMS units all across the state.” 

Other portions of the budget approved Friday evening include: 

  • $30 million to the Tourism Department for general marketing, and an additional $1 million in the second year of the budget, as well as about $113,000 for state arts organizations and two staff positions and funding for the Office of Outdoor Recreation. The motion includes $5 million for Taliesin Preservation Inc. for restoration projects at Frank Lloyd Wright’s Taliesin home located in Spring Green supporting private fundraising for an education center, the restoration of visitor amenities and the stabilization of some buildings.
  • $193,700 to the Wisconsin Elections Commission with over $150,000 of that going toward information technology costs and the remaining going towards costs for the Electronic Registration Information Center.
  • $20.9 million and 147 positions for 12 months of personnel related costs for a Milwaukee Type 1 facility, which is meant to serve as a portion of the replacement of youth prisons Lincoln Hills and Copper Lake, which the state had been working to close for years. The 32-bed facility in Milwaukee has a planned completion date in October 2026.
  • The WisconsinEye endowment received $10 million to continue video coverage of the Legislature.
  • The committee also approved $11 million for grants to nine of Wisconsin’s 11 federally-recognized tribes. The committee has been excluding two tribes — the Bad River Band of Lake Superior Chippewa and the Lac du Flambeau Band of Lake Superior Chippewa — from the grant funding for several years due to disputes over roads. The exclusion “strikes me as inappropriate,” McGuire said. He added that it’s “an insult to those people.” 

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

GOP leaders in US Senate struggle to lessen pain of Medicaid cuts for rural hospitals

House Speaker Mike Johnson of Louisiana speaks to reporters about the Republican budget reconciliation package at a weekly press conference on Tuesday, June 24, 2025, at the U.S. Capitol. (Photo by Ashley Murray/States Newsroom)

House Speaker Mike Johnson of Louisiana speaks to reporters about the Republican budget reconciliation package at a weekly press conference on Tuesday, June 24, 2025, at the U.S. Capitol. (Photo by Ashley Murray/States Newsroom)

This report has been updated.

WASHINGTON — U.S. Senate Republicans were scrambling Tuesday to restructure several proposals in the “big, beautiful bill” that don’t meet their chamber’s strict rules for passing a reconciliation package, while GOP lawmakers on the other side of the Capitol warned those changes may doom its passage in the House.

Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., said he and several others are working on a way to bolster rural hospitals, which could experience financial strain as a result of the various changes to Medicaid and other health care programs in the package.

“We are working on a solution for rural hospitals and that’s something that’s been in the works now for several days in response to a number of concerns that our colleagues have mentioned in ensuring that the impact on rural hospitals be lessened, be mitigated,” Thune said. “And I think we’re making good headway on that solution.”

Thune said GOP lawmakers shouldn’t let the “perfect be the enemy of the good,” though he predicted there “could be” two or three Republicans who vote against the package.

“We’ve got a lot of very independent-thinking senators who have reasons and things that they’d like to have in this bill that, in their view, would make it stronger,” Thune said. “But at the end of the day this is a process whereby not everybody is going to get what they want. And we have to get to 51 in the United States Senate.”

More objections to Medicaid cuts

Missouri Sen. Josh Hawley, who has been vocal about Medicaid changes and rural hospitals, said he had “no details whatsoever” about the rural hospital fund or how it would work if it’s added to the bill.

But he said he’s not going to support a bill that takes away working people’s health care.

“We’ve got 1.3 million people on Medicaid in Missouri, hundreds of thousands of kids. That’s 21% of my population. Most of these people are working people. They’re on Medicaid, not because they’re sitting around at home; they’re on Medicaid because they don’t have a job that gives them health care and they cannot afford to buy it on the exchange,” Hawley said. “They don’t want to be, but it’s their only option. And I just think it’s wrong to take away health care coverage from those folks. Now if they’re not working, then sure, they should be.”

Senate Republican Policy Committee Chair Shelley Moore Capito, R-W.Va., said she had a “lengthy discussion” with her home state’s hospital association earlier in the day.

“This has a lot of impacts and we want to make sure we have a lot of rural hospitals. That’s why this rural hospital fund idea is developing,” Capito said. “I don’t think anything is set yet but that is an issue. I think Medicaid, we need to preserve it for the people it’s intended for and get rid of the people who don’t deserve it and don’t qualify and are bilking the system.”

Capito said she hadn’t yet formed an opinion on the rural hospital fund since there isn’t yet a formal proposal written down.

Public lands

In one major development, the Senate parliamentarian ruled Monday that a controversial provision championed by Senate Energy and Natural Resources Chairman Mike Lee to mandate the sale of at least 2 million acres of public lands in 11 Western states did not comply with the chamber’s rules for reconciliation.

Lee, a Utah Republican, has said the provision would free up land to build new housing. But Democrats and some Republicans from the affected states strongly opposed it.

Lee said on social media Monday evening that he was working to rewrite the proposal to comply with reconciliation rules. A spokesperson for his office did not return a message seeking comment Tuesday morning.

SNAP cost-sharing under debate

In another turn of events, Senate Agriculture Chairman John Boozman, R-Ark., earlier Tuesday had announced the panel successfully reworked a provision that would transfer some of the cost of the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program to state governments.

But a spokesperson for the panel said later that the parliamentarian actually has not yet made a ruling. The spokesperson said “we’ve gotten some clarification from leadership and it’s steering in the direction it would be compliant but not official.”

Boozman earlier had said his proposal would improve SNAP. “Our commonsense approach encourages states to adopt better practices, reduce error rates, be better stewards of taxpayer dollars, and prioritize the resources for those who truly need it,” Boozman wrote in a statement.

The new language, if accepted, would give states the option of selecting fiscal year 2025 or 2026 as the year that the federal government uses to determine its payment error rate for SNAP, which will then impact how much of the cost the state has to cover starting in fiscal year 2028. Afterward, a state’s payment error rate will be calculated using the last three fiscal years.

Any state with an error rate higher than 6% will have to cover a certain percentage of the cost of the nutrition program for lower income households.

Rushing toward deadline

The internal debates among lawmakers about how to rewrite major pieces of the tax and spending cuts package have led to a rushed feeling among Republican leaders, who have repeatedly promised to approve the final bill before the Fourth of July — an exceedingly tight timeline.

Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., said during a press conference shortly after a closed-door House GOP conference meeting Tuesday that he’s hopeful the final bill that comes out of the Senate won’t make too many changes to what the House approved earlier this year.

“I remain very optimistic that there’s not going to be a wide chasm between the two products — what the Senate produces and what we produce,” Johnson said. “We all know what the touchpoints are and the areas of greatest concern.”

Paul Danos, vice president of domestic operations at Danos and Curole in Houma, Louisiana, advocated for energy provisions in the Republican tax and spending bill at a weekly House Republican press conference on Tuesday, June 24, 2025, at the U.S. Capitol. (Photo by Ashley Murray/States Newsroom)
Paul Danos, vice president of domestic operations at Danos and Curole in Houma, Louisiana, advocated for energy provisions in the Republican tax and spending bill at a weekly House Republican press conference on Tuesday, June 24, 2025, at the U.S. Capitol. (Photo by Ashley Murray/States Newsroom)

Republicans, he said, know they need to focus on preserving a fragile compromise on the state and local tax deduction, or SALT, that helps offset the cost of living in some higher-tax states like California, New Jersey and New York.

A deal Johnson brokered with GOP lawmakers in the SALT Caucus has been significantly rewritten in the Senate, but is expected to move back toward the House version, though not entirely.

Johnson also mentioned GOP efforts to roll back certain clean-energy provisions that Democrats approved and President Joe Biden signed into law in their signature climate change, health care and tax package, called the Inflation Reduction Act, or IRA, in 2022.

“We’ve got to get the SALT negotiation number right. We’ve got to make sure the IRA subsidies are handled in an appropriate manner,” Johnson said. “Look, you’ve got a number of provisions.”

Johnson said he expects the Senate to vote on its final bill by Friday or Saturday and that he’s told House lawmakers to “keep your schedules flexible” on being in Washington, D.C., for a final House vote. 

Trump goads Republicans

President Donald Trump sought to spur quick approval of a final bill, posting on social media that GOP lawmakers should get the package to him as soon as possible.

“To my friends in the Senate, lock yourself in a room if you must, don’t go home, and GET THE DEAL DONE THIS WEEK. Work with the House so they can pick it up, and pass it, IMMEDIATELY,” Trump wrote Tuesday. “NO ONE GOES ON VACATION UNTIL IT’S DONE. Everyone, most importantly the American People, will be much better off thanks to our work together. MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN!”

Oklahoma Sen. Markwayne Mullin said there are concerns among his fellow Republicans about all of the provisions that must be removed or significantly reworked to meet the complex rules for moving a reconciliation bill through that chamber.

“Every time something comes out that we’re using as a pay for, it takes the deficit reduction down. And they’ve taken out nearly $300 billion so far. We’ve got to make that up,” Mullin said after leaving the closed-door House GOP meeting. “The Senate can’t come in below the House version as far as deficit reduction. So that makes it difficult.”

Sam Palmeter, founder of Laser Marking Technologies LLC in Caro, Michigan, advocated for the passage of the
Sam Palmeter, founder of Laser Marking Technologies LLC in Caro, Michigan, advocated for the passage of the “One Big Beautiful Bill Act” during the weekly House Republican press conference on Tuesday, June 24, 2025, at the U.S. Capitol. (Photo by Ashley Murray/States Newsroom)

Mullin, who has been acting as his chamber’s top negotiator with SALT Republicans in the House, told reporters he expects the deduction for state and local taxes to remain at the $40,000 level negotiated in the House. But said the Senate will likely rewrite the $500,000 income ceiling to qualify for the tax deduction.

“I think 40 is a number we’re going to land on,” Mullin said. “It’s the income threshold that’s in negotiations.”

Sen. Kevin Cramer of North Dakota said “most of us would like to make it zero.”

“I hate the idea of $40,000 but if that’s what it takes to pass the bill, I probably could do it. I would like to maybe find some other tweaks to it, somehow, like changing the income levels,” he said.

Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent told reporters he expects a resolution on SALT in the next 24 to 48 hours.

“I had a very successful lunch meeting with the senators. I think that we are on track,” Bessent said.

The ‘red line’ in the House

New York Republican Rep. Mike Lawler told reporters following the closed-door meeting that Senate leaders shouldn’t assume whatever they pass will be accepted by the House.

“I’ve been very clear about where my red line is. So, you know, we’ll let this process play out,” Lawler said. “I think the Senate should recognize the only number that matters is 218, and 50 plus 1. That’s it. And how do you get there?”

Republicans hold 53 seats in the Senate, so leadership cannot lose more than four votes and still approve the package, given that Democrats are universally opposed.

In the House, GOP leaders have 220 seats and need nearly every one of their members to support whatever the Senate sends back across the Capitol for it to make it to the president’s desk before their self-imposed deadline.

Retired Sheriff James Stuart, now executive director of the Minnesota Sheriff's Association, spoke alongside House Republicans at the U.S. Capitol on Tuesday, June 24, 2025, about a temporary elimination of tax on overtime in the Republican budget reconciliation bill. (Photo by Ashley Murray/States Newsroom)
Retired Sheriff James Stuart, now executive director of the Minnesota Sheriff’s Association, spoke alongside House Republicans at the U.S. Capitol on Tuesday, June 24, 2025, about a temporary elimination of tax on overtime in the Republican budget reconciliation bill. (Photo by Ashley Murray/States Newsroom)

In addition to the SALT tax compromise, Lawler said he has concerns about how the Senate has changed other provisions, including those addressing Medicaid, the state-federal health program for lower income people.

“Yeah, there are a number of concerns about decisions that they’re making,” Lawler said. “And obviously, the bill on their side is not final, so we’ll see where it goes.”

Missouri Republican Rep. Jason Smith, chairman of the Ways and Means Committee that crafted the tax provisions in the reconciliation bill, stood by the House’s version of the Opportunity Zone Tax Incentives. The House version extends the incentive from the 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act for a year, while the Senate’s version makes it permanent.

The Opportunity Zone Tax Incentive was pushed by South Carolina Sen. Tim Scott during the first Trump administration, which aimed to create tax cuts for businesses and real estate to invest in low-income communities, but it had mixed results.

“The tax bill that we’re going to deliver is gonna deliver for working families, small businesses and farmers,” Smith said.

Thumbs down from one House Republican

House Freedom Caucus Chairman Andy Harris, R-Md., posted on social media that he doesn’t support how the Senate has changed the bill and that he would seek to block it from becoming law. 

“The currently proposed Senate version of the One Big Beautiful Bill weakens key House priorities—it doesn’t do enough to eliminate waste, fraud, and abuse in Medicaid, it backtracks on Green New Scam elimination included in the House bill, and it greatly increases the deficit – taking us even further from a balanced budget.

“If the Senate tries to jam the House with this version, I won’t vote ‘present.’ I’ll vote NO.”

Rattlesnakes and the Senate

West Virginia Republican Sen. Jim Justice told reporters that it’s important for the Senate to take its time in its changes to the reconciliation package and that GOP lawmakers need to be patient.

“If you’re walking through the woods and you look right over there at that wall and there’s a rattlesnake all curled up there and everything, what do you do?” Justice asked. “Most people just jump and take off runnin’, well … rattlesnakes run in pairs and if you just jump left or right or behind, that one can hurt you right there.”

Rattlesnakes are typically solitary creatures, but new research has shown that rattlesnakes are more social than previously thought.

Justice said the best course of action when dealing with a rattlesnake, or two, is to stand still for a moment.

“Look to the left, look to the right, look behind you, and then decide which way you’re going,” he said. “That’s what I think we need to do (in the Senate).”

‘A purpose in this world’: Older adults fear elimination of program that helps them find work

Mike Leslie, 66, helps manage the fleet of staff vehicles at the Top of Alabama Regional Council of Governments, a support services agency in Huntsville, Ala. Leslie got the job through a workforce development program for older adults that could see its funding eliminated by Congress. (Photo by Anna Claire Vollers/Stateline)

HUNTSVILLE, Ala. — Mike Leslie, 66, sits at a desk beneath the buzz of fluorescent office lights, his fingers hovering over his new laptop keyboard. He smiles, eyes crinkling beneath a worn baseball cap. It’s a place he never imagined he’d be sitting.

Before last year, he’d never used a computer.

For most of his life, Leslie hadn’t needed one. He spent 36 years in pipe manufacturing near his North Alabama hometown, in jobs that included welding, driving forklifts, mixing concrete and running crews as a foreman. The work was hard and physical, but he didn’t mind.

Then the COVID-19 pandemic hit. Layoffs followed.

Leslie found himself looking for a job to make ends meet, at an age when more affluent men might think of retiring. He was no longer suited for manufacturing work. But he also lacked experience with the technology that now powers even the most basic tasks in nearly every modern workplace, such as the internet, email and Microsoft Office.

“A lot of people think old people are obsolete, but they’re not,” he said. “There’s a lot of knowledge in their heads. They just need the opportunity to get it out and learn new things.”

His life’s unexpected second act began in late 2023, thanks to an obscure state-federal initiative called the Senior Community Service Employment Program. For people ages 55 and older with low incomes, it provides paid part-time work at local nonprofits and government agencies such as libraries, senior centers and the Red Cross. Its on-the-job training is meant to prepare participants to transition into permanent jobs.

But 700 miles away in Washington, D.C., Congress is considering axing the funding for the very program that has made this new chapter of Leslie’s life possible. In his budget for the coming fiscal year, President Donald Trump has recommended eliminating this and some other programs that fall under the Older Americans Act, a landmark 1965 law that provides social and meal services for older people. The U.S. House also proposed eliminating the employment program’s funding, while the Senate proposed keeping it.

At this point, experts say, anything is possible.

Advocates fear that the loss of this program, which serves about 50,000 older adults nationwide, could affect not just participants like Leslie, but also stretch further into communities, removing tens of thousands of employees from local libraries, city recreation facilities and senior centers.

Isolated and unsure

Sitting at home post-layoff, Leslie felt isolated and unsure about what to do next. A friend told him about the job program, and he eventually decided to apply. He got in.

Now he helps manage the fleet of vehicles at the Top of Alabama Regional Council of Governments, a multicounty agency based in Huntsville that provides support services to older Americans and people with disabilities. As part of the program, he enrolled in a digital certification program that provided him with a laptop, prepaid internet access and a 10-week education course that taught him the basics of the Microsoft Office suite, email, internet, social media and other skills.

For Leslie, it’s been a foothold into a workforce that felt like it had moved on without him.

“You’ve got purpose,” he says, “getting up every morning, coming to a job you like.”

He’s a favorite around the office, where everyone calls him “Mr. Mike.”

In April, he wore a three-piece suit to the officewide celebration where he received a graduation certificate for acing his digital skills courses. He made his co-workers cry as he told them about how the program had given him his confidence back.

‘Lost in D.C.’

On a recent Wednesday afternoon, in a conference room not far from Leslie’s desk, some of his managers at the Top of Alabama Regional Council of Governments, known as TARCOG, were sitting around a table discussing what to do.

It had been a chaotic few months. TARCOG is responsible for administering many services for older people, from Meals on Wheels to transportation, caregiver support to services that prevent abuse and exploitation.

Earlier this year, the Trump administration began to dismantle the federal agency responsible for overseeing such services, while his proposed federal budget recommended cutting or freezing spending on them, including the employment program.

Michelle Jordan, TARCOG’s executive director, had been fielding questions from local leaders who were aghast that Meals on Wheels might be canceled. Across the country, national and local advocates at similar agencies sounded the alarm. In some states, local groups like TARCOG have reported delays in receiving federal funds they were promised.

Earlier this month, the Trump administration reversed course and recommended that most of the programs for older adults continue under a new federal agency.

These are people who worked hard all their lives. But they can’t pay the heating bill. They have to decide between medicine and groceries.

– Nancy Robertson, former executive director of the Top of Alabama Regional Council of Governments

But a few of the Older Americans Act programs would be left without funding. One of the largest is the senior employment program.

“These are real people, and I think that gets lost in D.C.,” said Sheila Dessau-Ivey, who directs the aging programs at TARCOG. “They just see programs and dollars, and say, ‘Well, we don’t need these.’ But those dollars are actually attached to a human life.”

The Senior Community Service Employment Program is a tiny fraction of the size of budgetary behemoths such as Medicaid and Medicare. Its budget is about $400 million and it serves about 50,000 older people nationwide each year. Eighty-six of those slots — including Leslie’s — are in the five-county swath of North Alabama served by TARCOG.

To qualify under the nationwide Senior Community Service Employment Program, a person must be at least 55 years old, unemployed, and have a family income of no more than 125% of the federal poverty level. For an individual, that’s currently $19,562 a year. Veterans are given priority in the program, as are people with disabilities, rural residents, people over age 65 and those experiencing homelessness. Funding comes mainly through the U.S. Department of Labor.

“We’ve had workers who were homeless when they started this program,” Jordan said. Past research found about 3 in 5 participants nationally reported being homeless or at risk of homelessness.

“You forget there are people living with us, sitting next to us in church, going to the grocery store with us, who just don’t have those skills or that confidence,” she said.

And it has an outsize impact on other vulnerable groups. In 2019, about two-thirds of participants were women, and about 44% were Black, according to research. A majority of participants reported having a high school diploma or less.

“These are people who worked hard all their lives, but they can’t pay the heating bill,” said Nancy Robertson, TARCOG’s retired former executive director, who’d come into the office to lend her experience to the group discussing how to advocate for funding.

“They have to decide between medicine and groceries.”

The program participants aren’t the only ones that would be hurt by the loss of the program, she said.

Participants can stay in the program up to four years. While they’re there, they provide more than 40 million hours of work to public and nonprofit agencies across the nation. The agencies and community groups that hire the participants — with salaries paid by the program — would lose those employees. An employee working in a small-town library, for example, might be the only reason the library is able to remain open for certain hours.

In Huntsville, the local senior center would lose 14 of its employees if the employment program closes. Across town at a community rec center, a beloved 91-year-old receptionist would lose the job she trained for.

Congressional chaos

The U.S. population is aging rapidly. In 2003, about 1 in 7 people in the U.S. labor force was 55 or older. By 2023, that share was nearly 1 in 4. One of the looming challenges for lawmakers and community advocates is how to keep older people healthy and thriving.

As Republicans consider adding work requirements to programs like Medicaid, cutting funding for a work program designed to help older people doesn’t make sense, said Marci Phillips, director of public policy and advocacy at the National Council on Aging, a nonprofit organization focused on issues that affect older adults.

“If people age 55 and older have to show they’re working to qualify for Medicaid, but [lawmakers] are cutting the federal program to help workers age 55 and older, there’s a disconnect there,” she said.

Some lawmakers question the usefulness of the program. In 2019, only about 38% of participants who exited the program were employed a few months later, according to a 2022 study. That share was below the U.S. Department of Labor’s goal of 42%. Median earnings were also below federal goals.

Phillips said the program shouldn’t be judged by the metrics that are used to measure whether a traditional workforce development program is succeeding.

“These are older adults who have to work, but the realities of their health and their caregiving situations aren’t changing,” she said. “It’s a standard that doesn’t really recognize the population we’re trying to serve.”

Programs that are funded under the Older Americans Act are discretionary, meaning Congress can’t cut or eliminate them in the reconciliation bill that’s currently before the Senate and that has generated public outcry over potential cuts to programs including Medicaid and the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, commonly known as food stamps.

Trump has recommended eliminating funding for the employment program, but ultimately its fate lies in the hands of Congress.

The U.S. House is scheduled to take up the appropriations bill that provides funding for these programs the week of July 20. The Senate’s plans are less certain, as its members remain focused on Trump’s reconciliation bill, the One Big Beautiful Bill Act. And it’s conceivable, Phillips said, that Congress may instead pass a continuing resolution, a temporary measure that keeps the government funded at current levels.

For his part, Leslie would like to travel to Washington to testify before Congress. If anyone understands the needs of older Americans, he figures, it’s them.

“Society looks at older people as not useful, but if you look at the people in Congress, they’re old folks too,” Leslie said. “If you’re old, why would you not want another older person to have something, to learn something?”

Future possibilities

Leslie is studying to earn his license as a private investigator. It’s a job he’s always wanted, and now he feels like he has the skills he needs to chase that dream.

He’s also trying to organize a workshop this fall to be held at his church, Beaver Dam Primitive Baptist, where he hopes he and some of his TARCOG co-workers can share about services and programs available to help older adults.

“We’ve got 26 churches in our association, so we’ve reached out to all of them, saying there’s these things you need to know about,” Leslie said. “If I had known about some of this stuff when my dad was living, he may have had a better quality of life.”

He doesn’t know if his own program will be one of those still available by then, but he’s hopeful.

He believes the biggest reward has been less tangible than the modest paycheck and newfound computer skills, but more profound: The sense that his life has opened back up, full of possibilities.

“Senior citizens have a purpose in this world, and we can’t think that because they’re old we can just throw them away,” Leslie said. “They’ve still got knowledge. I think we should give them every chance to succeed.”

Stateline reporter Anna Claire Vollers can be reached at avollers@stateline.org.

Stateline is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Stateline maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Scott S. Greenberger for questions: info@stateline.org.

US Senate mega-bill drops requirement states help pay for SNAP program

At a farm market in St. Petersburg, Florida, on April 14, 2012, SNAP recipients were able to use their Electronic Benefits Transfer cards for food. (Photo by Lance Cheung/USDA).

At a farm market in St. Petersburg, Florida, on April 14, 2012, SNAP recipients were able to use their Electronic Benefits Transfer cards for food. (Photo by Lance Cheung/USDA).

WASHINGTON — U.S. Senate Democrats have succeeded in eliminating more than a dozen policy changes from Republicans’ “big, beautiful bill” after successfully arguing before the chamber’s parliamentarian that the elements didn’t comply with the strict rules that go along with writing a budget reconciliation bill.

Removed is language that would have transferred some of the cost of running the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program to state governments, potentially leaving states on the hook for billions in added spending on the food aid program for lower-income people.

Democrats also fended off a proposal to eliminate funding for the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, which fields complaints on banking and other financial institutions, and another that sought to bar federal district court judges from issuing nationwide injunctions. 

Among the contested items that remained, Missouri Republican Sen. Josh Hawley announced in a social media post that his years-long effort to reauthorize the Radiation Exposure Compensation Fund, or RECA, passed what’s known on Capitol Hill as the “Byrd bath” test.

“Terrific news for Missouri, radiation survivors, and MAHA: RECA has passed the ‘Byrd bath’ – Democrats did not strip it – and will be in the final bill,” Hawley wrote, referring to the Trump administration’s Make America Healthy Again slogan. “Huge step forward #MAHA.”

Democrats to continue challenges

Budget Committee ranking member Jeff Merkley, D-Ore., has cheered many of the parliamentarian’s rulings, though Republican committee chairs say they’ll look for ways to rewrite the various proposals.

“Today, we were advised by the Senate Parliamentarian that several more provisions in this Big Beautiful Betrayal of a bill will be subject to the Byrd Rule — and Democrats plan to challenge every part of this bill that hurts working families and violates this process,” Merkley wrote in a statement released Saturday night. “Republicans’ relentless attack on middle class families in order to fund tax breaks for billionaires is a slap in the face to working families everywhere, and Democrats are fighting back.”  

The changes could create several issues for Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., and eventually for Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., who need nearly every GOP lawmaker in Congress to vote for the sweeping tax and spending cuts package in order for it to become law.

The House voted 215-214 to approve its version of the bill in May, but since the Senate is making substantial changes, the House will have to vote on the measure again before it can go to President Donald Trump for his signature. GOP leaders hope to complete all that before the Fourth of July.

Republicans are using reconciliation, instead of moving the bill through the regular legislative process, to avoid needing Democratic votes to get past the Senate’s 60-vote legislative filibuster.

But the lower threshold for passing a reconciliation bill comes with several requirements, including that all of the proposals in the package have an impact on spending or revenues that’s not “merely incidental.”

The Senate parliamentarian, the chamber’s official scorekeeper who holds a detailed understanding of the rules and procedures, examines each of those policies and hears from both Republicans and Democrats before issuing the rulings.

The Byrd bath began last week behind closed doors and will continue for at least several more days. Once it concludes, Senate GOP leaders can move the bill to the floor, where members of both parties can call for votes on as many amendments as they want.

SNAP program

Agriculture, Nutrition and Forestry Committee Chairman John Boozman, R-Ark., released a written statement defending his committee’s bill after the parliamentarian ruled several provisions must go to comply with the rules.

“To rein in federal spending and protect taxpayer dollars the committee is pursuing meaningful reforms to the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) to improve efficiency, accountability and integrity,” Boozman wrote. “We are continuing to examine options that comply with Senate rules to achieve savings through budget reconciliation to ensure SNAP serves those who truly need it while being responsible stewards of taxpayer dollars.”

The parliamentarian ruled the committee erred in including language that would have shifted some of the cost of the SNAP program to state governments if they didn’t meet an efficiency benchmark before 2028.

A proposal to eliminate SNAP eligibility for “immigrants who are not citizens or lawful permanent residents, with certain exceptions,” was also determined not to comply with the rules, according to a press release from Merkley.

Minnesota Democratic Sen. Amy Klobuchar, ranking member on the committee, wrote the parliamentarian’s ruling “made clear that Senate Republicans cannot use their partisan budget to shift major nutrition assistance costs to the states that would have inevitably led to major cuts.

“While Republicans’ proposed cuts to SNAP will still be devastating to families, farmers, and independent grocers across the country, we will keep fighting to protect families in need. Instead of a rushed partisan process, Republicans should work with us to lower costs for Americans and pass a bipartisan Farm Bill that works for all farmers and rural America.”

Consumer financial agency victory for Dems

The Senate Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs Committee’s proposal to eliminate funding for the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, which Congress established in the 2010 Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act, also doesn’t comply with the rules, under the parliamentarian’s ruling.

Massachusetts Democratic Sen. Elizabeth Warren, ranking member on the panel, wrote in a statement that the GOP’s proposal for the CFPB represented “a reckless, dangerous attack on consumers and would lead to more Americans being tricked and trapped by giant financial institutions and put the stability of our entire financial system at risk–all to hand out tax breaks to billionaires.”

But committee Chairman Tim Scott, R-S.C., wrote in a separate statement that he remains “committed to advancing legislation that cuts waste and duplication in our federal government and saves taxpayer dollars.”

Scott listed provisions that he said will remain.

“As it stands now, the Banking Committee’s reconciliation provisions will delay the implementation of Section 1071 of Dodd-Frank, which reduces CFPB spending and protects the privacy and data of small business owners; rescind unused funds earmarked for green initiatives to give HUD discretion in funding critical housing programs; and save taxpayer dollars by eliminating an unnecessary reserve fund at the SEC,” Scott wrote. “My colleagues and I remain committed to cutting wasteful spending at the CFPB and will continue working with the Senate parliamentarian on the Committee’s provisions.”

Judges and injunctions

The parliamentarian told lawmakers that various elements of the Judiciary Committee’s bill don’t comply with the rules, including an attempt to block federal district court judges from issuing nationwide preliminary injunctions or temporary restraining orders.

The issue has become a thorn in Trump’s side during the past few months as he’s watched the courts block several of his executive orders and other unilateral administration actions.

The Judiciary Committee’s reconciliation bill cannot block the Department of Justice from awarding Byrne JAG and COPS grants to “sanctuary cities.” The bill also can’t send funding to local and state governments for the purpose of “apprehending aliens who are unlawfully present in the United States.”

Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, did not respond to a request for comment, but a committee spokesperson wrote in an email to States Newsroom that “Democrats are clinging to their radical open borders legacy by fighting to keep criminal migrants in the United States.

“Republicans are committed to enforcing the rule of law, and will continue using all available avenues to secure our borders, clean up the mess left by the Biden-Harris administration’s disastrous policies and ensure courts operate according to lawful and constitutional standards.”

Illinois Democratic Sen. Dick Durbin, ranking member on the committee, issued a statement calling the bill’s policies “an attempted power grab by our Republican colleagues that we would not stand for.”

“Here’s what Senate Republicans attempted to sneak into their so-called Big, Beautiful Bill: a provision intended to limit the ability of individuals and organizations to challenge lawless Trump Administration executive actions by putting those potential plaintiffs on the hook for millions of dollars; and a provision conditioning grant eligibility on a state or locality’s compliance with federal immigration policies,” Durbin wrote.

Artificial intelligence and states

The parliamentarian didn’t, however, remove all of the proposals contested by Democrats.

Language that would prevent local and state governments from regulating artificial intelligence for the next decade if those jurisdictions want to receive money from a $500 million fund does meet the reconciliation requirements and can remain in the Committee on Commerce, Science and Transportation’s bill.

But that doesn’t mean the provision will stay in the bill moving forward, since several GOP lawmakers have expressed concern about potentially tying the hands of local and state governments when it comes to AI.

Georgia Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene wrote in a social media post after she voted for the House’s bill that she had no idea about the AI provision. That chamber’s package barred state and local AI regulation for a decade without tying it to any funding stream.

“We have no idea what AI will be capable of in the next 10 years and giving it free rein and tying states hands is potentially dangerous,” Greene wrote. “This needs to be stripped out in the Senate.

“When the OBBB comes back to the House for approval after Senate changes, I will not vote for it with this in it.”

Both parties prep for mega-bill marathon in U.S. Senate vote-a-rama

U.S. Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., speaks during a press conference inside the Capitol building on Wednesday, June 18, 2025. Oregon Democratic Sen. Ron Wyden is at right. (Photo by Jennifer Shutt/States Newsroom)

U.S. Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., speaks during a press conference inside the Capitol building on Wednesday, June 18, 2025. Oregon Democratic Sen. Ron Wyden is at right. (Photo by Jennifer Shutt/States Newsroom)

WASHINGTON — The next hurdle for Republican leaders in the U.S. Senate and the “big, beautiful bill”: Democrats — and possibly a few of their own members — in a marathon voting session will make last-ditch attempts to change the tax and spending cut measure.

The vote-a-rama, as it’s known, is expected to begin sometime during the last full week of June as Congress heads toward the Fourth of July recess. It will likely begin in the afternoon and  last overnight into the next morning. Senators will debate and vote on dozens of amendments attempting to revise the massive legislation that could have an effect on nearly every American.

Democrats, who have 47 votes in the Senate compared to 53 for Republicans, plan to zero in on Medicaid, taxes, corruption, policies that could raise energy costs and proposals that would increase the deficit, according to Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer.

Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., and the committee chairs tasked with drafting pieces of the package have spent weeks combing through the House-passed bill to figure out what needs to be altered to avoid divisive floor votes. 

They’ve rewritten numerous policy proposals to comply with the strict rules that go along with the complex reconciliation process and are now trying to work out disagreements among GOP senators that could doom or complicate a final deal.

The goal is to avoid a protracted debate over core GOP provisions in full public view once the vote-a-rama begins, though some senators are already predicting votes on GOP amendments.

‘A potentially messy process’

Missouri Republican Sen. Josh Hawley, who has raised concerns about the bill’s impact on rural hospitals, said he hopes GOP leaders reach a consensus before vote-a-rama but didn’t rule out offering his own amendments if they don’t settle their disputes.

“Amending it on the floor, that’s a potentially messy process,” Hawley said. “I would hope that we could get to a good place before that. But we have to fix the rural hospital issue.”

Alabama Republican Sen. Tommy Tuberville said he will likely propose amendments during floor debate, though he declined to say what specific policies he’d seek to change or eliminate from the package.

“Yeah, we’ll have some,” Tuberville said. “And we’ve got them all, we just haven’t turned them in yet.”

Thune said he and other negotiators are making “headway” toward consensus on the more significant provisions in the package, which in many respects is far from its final form.

“The meetings right now are on the major provisions in tax and health. We have sort of pre-litigated a lot of that,” Thune said. “But there are a lot of the other provisions in the bill, chapters in the bill that are still subject to going through the Byrd bath, and we’re in the process of doing that. But hopefully that’ll be done by early next week.”

U.S. Senate Majority Leader Sen. John Thune, R-S.D., left, listens as Sen. Mike Crapo, R-Idaho, speaks to reporters outside of the West Wing of the White House on June 4, 2025 in Washington, D.C. (Photo by Anna Moneymaker/Getty Images)
U.S. Senate Majority Leader Sen. John Thune, R-S.D., left, listens as Sen. Mike Crapo, R-Idaho, speaks to reporters outside of the West Wing of the White House on June 4, 2025 in Washington, D.C. (Photo by Anna Moneymaker/Getty Images)

Republicans are using the reconciliation process to pass their sweeping tax and spending cuts package through the Senate with just a simple majority vote, requiring them to comply with the Byrd rules.

That includes the Byrd bath — going before the Senate parliamentarian to explain how each provision has an impact on federal revenue or spending that is not “merely incidental.” Democrats then usually debate before the parliamentarian the various changes that don’t meet that threshold. The process is named after the late Sen. Robert Byrd, a West Virginia Democrat.

Once the parliamentarian rules what elements comply and which need to be removed, the bill can go to the floor and senators can trudge through vote-a-rama. Eventually, all 100 lawmakers will vote to approve or disapprove of the legislation.

GOP senators passing their version of the package would send it back to the House, which passed its version on a slim 215-214 vote earlier this year — and could make yet more changes in the Senate bill.

Democrats develop strategy

Democrats are hoping to highlight policy divisions among Republicans during the vote-a-rama. And even if they don’t succeed in getting any of their amendments adopted, several votes could serve as fodder for campaign ads during next year’s midterm elections.

Schumer said Wednesday during a press conference it would be “difficult” for Democrats to peel off at least four GOP senators from the rest of the party in order to get an amendment adopted, but said he’s hopeful Republicans will “vote with us on some things they’ve all said they’ve agreed with.”

Democratic senators, he said, have created a task force to reach out to Republicans on major issues in the package, including how it would impact rural hospitals.

“Many of these hospital administrators and employees are Republican,” Schumer, a New York Democrat, said. “In many of the rural hospitals, they are the largest employer in the county, and in most they’re the only supplier of health care. It infuriates the rural counties, and they tend to be Republican.”

‘It’s just a show, it’s a charade’

West Virginia Republican Sen. Shelley Moore Capito said she’s not concerned about having to vote on dozens of amendments. 

“We’re here to vote,” Capito said. “As a creature of the House, we voted all the time on everything, so this doesn’t bother me. And, you know, just let the body work its will. If some changes are made, those will have to be dealt with. But I’m not worried about that.”

Arkansas Republican Sen. John Boozman said he expects the vote-a-rama will be “a very late night” and that he’s not planning to offer any of his own amendments.

As chairman of the Agriculture, Nutrition and Forestry Committee, Boozman expects to spend a considerable amount of time during vote-a-rama arguing against amendments seeking to change those provisions — including controversial cuts in the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, which provides food aid for lower-income families.

Wisconsin Republican Sen. Ron Johnson said he plans to spend much of the vote-a-rama “going back and forth from my hideaway,” the ceremonial office that every senator holds in the Capitol building.

But Johnson cast doubt on actually being able to amend the package during that process, saying changes to the various bills that Senate committees have released need to be agreed to before then.

“You’ve got to get this before it ever goes to the floor. I mean, you’re not going to change things substantially or significantly with amendments. I know people have some idealized version that happens. It doesn’t,” Johnson said. “You’ve got to get these things in the base bill. Amendments; it’s just a show, it’s a charade.”

Vote-a-rama after vote-a-rama

The Senate has held two vote-a-ramas so far this year, and both demonstrated how difficult it is to change a piece of legislation.

The first all-nighter in February went along with Senate debate on its budget resolution and included votes on 25 amendments, with lawmakers adopting just two — one from Alaska Republican Sen. Dan Sullivan and one from Utah Republican Sen. Mike Lee.

The second vote-a-rama took place in April just before the Senate voted to approve the budget resolution that ultimately cleared the way for Congress to use the budget reconciliation process to advance the “big, beautiful bill.” Senators debated 28 amendments, voting to adopt one change from Sullivan.

Oregon Democratic Sen. Ron Wyden, ranking member on the Finance Committee, said he and staff on the panel will continue to parse through details of the panel’s bill, which Republicans just released Monday.

Wyden said he plans to hold several town hall meetings in GOP areas of his state over the weekend to gauge how residents there view the policy revisions Republican senators have put forward.

“We’ve had this bill for basically 36 hours. The first time I had it, I stayed up all night, so last night I got a little sleep,” Wyden said on Wednesday. “But on the plane, I’ll be working through it. And I expect to be working through it all through the next few days, except when I’m having these town hall meetings where I’ll have a number of questions.”

Wildlife, land conservation groups push for tweaks to Republican stewardship grant bill

Rep. Tony Kurtz testifies on his proposed legislation to reauthorize the Knowles-Nelson Stewardship Grant program. (Henry Redman | Wisconsin Examiner)

Organizations representing wildlife, land conservation and local governments testified Wednesday at a public hearing to push for the passage of a Republican bill to reauthorize the Knowles-Nelson Stewardship Grant program while advocating for a number of amendments to the bill’s text. 

The proposal’s authors, Rep. Tony Kurtz (R-Wonewoc) and Sen. Patrick Testin (R-Stevens Point), say the current version of the bill is a starting point for negotiations. Without a deal, the 35-year-old program will lapse despite its popularity among voters. 

The challenge for legislators is that despite overwhelming public support for land conservation, a subset of the Republican members of the Legislature have grown opposed to the grant program. In their view, the grant program allows land to be taken off the local property tax roll and blocks  commercial development. 

That opposition has grown stronger since the Wisconsin Supreme Court ruled in a 6-1 decision last year that the Legislature’s Republican-controlled Joint Finance Committee’s authority to place anonymous holds on stewardship grant projects is unconstitutional. 

Kurtz has said that without returning some level of legislative oversight, the Republican opposition to the program won’t get on board with reauthorizing it. But the bill also needs to be palatable to Democratic Gov. Tony Evers so that he will sign it and any Republican opposition to the bill could make the votes of Democratic legislators more important. 

In an effort to recruit  Republican holdouts, the bill includes a provision that requires the Department of Natural Resources (DNR) to submit a list to the Legislature each January of any major land acquisitions costing more than $1 million the department plans to purchase with stewardship funds that year. The Legislature would then need to approve each proposed project in a piece of legislation and provide the required appropriation. 

To gain the support of environmental groups, the bill allows stewardship dollars to be used for the first time to fund habitat restoration projects. 

Following a recent trend of Republican-authored legislation, the bill separates the policy changes to the program from the budget appropriation to fund it in an attempt to sidestep Evers’ partial veto pen. 

Charles Carlin, the director of strategic initiatives at non-profit land trust organization Gathering Waters, said in his testimony at the hearing Wednesday that the bill’s authors had to “try and thread a challenging political path towards reauthorization.” 

At the hearing, testifying members of the public mainly highlighted two areas for improvement on the bill — clarifying how the DNR should prioritize habitat restoration, facility upkeep and land acquisition in award grants and more clearly laying out how the legislative approval process for major land acquisitions will work. 

As currently written, the bill would require the DNR to prioritize property development over land acquisition projects. 

Brian Vigue, freshwater policy director for Audubon Great Lakes, said those types of grants are so different that they should be considered separately. 

“Because habitat management projects are so different from land acquisition projects, it really will make it difficult for the DNR to determine which of the two types of grant applications would have priority over the other,” he said. “It’s kind of an apples to oranges comparison to make so I think a practical solution to this challenge is to create a separate appropriation for wildlife habitat grants.” 

A number of organizations testifying called for more direct language outlining how the legislative oversight process will work, such as binding timelines for when the Legislature must consider the projects on the DNR list, clear guidelines for how projects will be evaluated and quickly held votes on project approval. 

Representatives of organizations that work to purchase private land and conserve it through conservation easements or deals with the state said that the opportunities to purchase a piece of land and save it for future enjoyment by the broader public come rarely and that those real estate transactions can often be complicated and take a long time. If a deal is largely in place except for the required legislative approval — which could potentially take years or never even come up for a vote — landowners might be unwilling to participate in the process. 

“Opportunities to provide such access sometimes only come once in a generation,” said Tony Abate, conservation director at Groundswell Conservancy, a non-profit aimed at conserving land in south central Wisconsin. “We are concerned with the funding threshold and the logistics of the proposed major land acquisition program. Real estate near population centers is expensive, and we often compete with non-conservation buyers to secure farmland or recreational lands.”

Abate said that of the conservancy’s 16 current projects, four would surpass the $1 million threshold and require legislative approval. He suggested raising the threshold to $5 million.

Carlin, with Gathering Waters, said the provision as currently written could indefinitely delay projects. 

“We appreciate legislators’ concerns with oversight, and we welcome discussion about how to provide effective and efficient oversight,” he said. “Unfortunately, the current proposal lacks defined timelines, transparent evaluation processes or mechanisms to require timely votes. Without these elements, worthy conservation projects could languish indefinitely. So we would ask that any review process include binding timelines, transparent project evaluation and timely votes to ensure strong oversight while maintaining predictability for applicants.”

At the hearing, members of the committee asked few questions of the testifying groups and members of the public. Democrats on the committee pushed more than once to make sure they see the partner bill providing the money for the program before voting on the policy changes. 

All of the testimony at the hearing Wednesday was either to provide information only to the legislators or in favor of the bill. The committee received one written comment against the bill’s passage, from the Wisconsin Bear Hunters’ Association.

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

Republican lawmakers introduce bill to keep stewardship grant program alive

Republicans on the Legislature's Joint Finance Committee rejected a funding request from the City of Ashland to build a new boat launch at Kreher Park. (City of Ashland)

A pair of Republican lawmakers has introduced legislation that would re-authorize the Knowles-Nelson Stewardship Grant program, a popular program that allows the state Department of Natural Resources (DNR) to fund the purchase of public land and the upkeep of recreational areas. 

The decades-old program is set to expire next year and despite its bipartisan support among the state’s voters, a subset of Republicans in the Legislature — largely from the northern part of the state — have become increasingly opposed to the program due to concerns that it stops land from being developed for commercial activities. 

Until a 6-1 decision by the Wisconsin Supreme Court last summer, members of the Legislature’s powerful Joint Finance Committee had the ability to place anonymous holds on proposed grants through the program, which resulted in many projects being delayed or prevented altogether. Without that ability, Republicans who were already wary of the program became more opposed because of what they characterize as a lack of legislative oversight. Proponents of the program say the Legislature exercises oversight through the budget writing process when it allocates funding for the program. 

In recent years, the Knowles-Nelson Stewardship program has received $33 million annually in the state budget. In his budget request this year, Democratic Gov. Tony Evers proposed re-authorizing the program with a $100 million annual budget. Republicans stripped that provision out of the budget along with most of Evers’ other proposals. 

Last week, Rep. Tony Kurtz (R-Wonewoc) and Sen. Patrick Testin (R-Stevens Point) introduced a bill that would keep the program alive with $28 million in annual funding. The bill would also create a major land acquisitions program for stewardship grant awards which would require the DNR to annually submit a list of all its proposed land acquisitions costing more than $1 million for that year. 

Those acquisitions would need to be approved by votes of the full Legislature. 

Additionally, the bill would create a sub-program to use stewardship grant funds for habitat restoration projects, require the DNR to prioritize projects that develop already existing public lands over new land acquisition, require local governments to match 20% of the state funding, get rid of the current 10-acre minimum size requirement and limit the state’s contribution to 40% of the total cost if the sale of a piece of land is already closed when stewardship funds are applied for. 

In a co-sponsorship memo, Kurtz and Testin, who did not respond to requests for an interview about the bill, said the initial proposal is meant to be the start of negotiations, not the final version of the bill. 

“It’s important to note what we’re proposing is not an agreed upon deal,” the memo states. “It’s a first offer to provide a starting place for negotiations on this important program. It’s very likely the bill will continue to change during the legislative process, but it’s important to put something forward to allow feedback, have open-minded conversations and ultimately find a good place to ensure the Knowles-Nelson Stewardship Program’s legacy continues.” 

At a meeting with the Wisconsin chapter of the Audubon Society in April, Kurtz said the program was on “life support” and he was trying to save it from dying but any bill would need to put some oversight on the DNR in order to receive enough Republican support. 

The opposition to the stewardship program from a subset of the Republican caucus in both chambers means the bill might require Democratic votes to pass the Legislature and reach Evers’ desk. 

Sen. Jodi Habush Sinykin (D-Whitefish Bay) has spent months pushing for the program’s reauthorization – often pointing to a stewardship grant project in her district that was subjected to an anonymous hold, the Cedar Gorge Clay Bluffs on Lake Michigan. She said the hold on that project angered a lot of her constituents of both parties. 

“That really got people upset,” she told the Wisconsin Examiner. “People would not at all want to see a reenactment in any fashion of that anonymous objection process.” 

Habush Sinykin said that she’s closely watching the bill to make sure it protects a program that enjoys wide support outside of the Capitol building and will stir up significant opposition if it’s allowed to die. 

“Once people understand that this program is at risk, they are coming forward to express their opposition to any permanent damage to the program,” she said. “And so what we are engaged in right now is this process to keep it going forward, and there is going to be ongoing negotiation, because the devil is in the details. We need to make sure that what is one step forward will not ultimately be two steps backward.” 

Charles Carlin, director of strategic initiatives for Gathering Waters, a non-profit aimed at land conservation across Wisconsin, said that Kurtz and Testin should be credited for working to get the conversation started and provisions in the bill like the habitat restoration program. But he added that there are still a lot of questions about how provisions such as the requirement for legislative approval will work. 

“I think part of what they are trying to balance here is a recognition that this is an incredibly popular program with voters, while trying to balance that against the fact that there are a handful of legislators who are deeply skeptical of the DNR and deeply skeptical of additional investments in conservation,” he said. “So I see that major land acquisitions component as a way for them to try and balance those competing interests. The way that that major land acquisitions program is currently described in the bill just leaves a lot of question marks.”  

The bill is set to receive a public hearing in the Assembly Committee on Forestry, Parks and Outdoor Recreation Wednesday at 11 a.m.

❌