A masked U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement agent knocks on a car window in Minnesota on Jan. 12, 2026. (Photo by Nicole Neri/Minnesota Reformer)

WASHINGTON — U.S. Senate Democrats on Wednesday detailed the “common sense” changes they want to implement for federal immigration enforcement, saying reforms must be added to a funding package that needs to become law before the weekend to avoid a partial government shutdown. 

Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., said after a closed-door lunch that lawmakers in the conference are united on several policy restrictions.

They include:

• The end of roving patrols;
• Tightening the rules governing the use of warrants;
• Requiring Immigration and Customs Enforcement to coordinate with state and local law enforcement;
• Implementing a uniform code of conduct that holds federal law enforcement to the same set of standards that apply to state and local agencies;
• Barring the wearing of masks;
• Requiring the use of body cameras;
• Mandating immigration agents carry proper identification. 

“These are common-sense reforms, ones that Americans know and expect from law enforcement,” Schumer said. “If Republicans refuse to support them, they are choosing chaos over order, plain and simple. They are choosing to protect ICE from accountability over American lives.”

Schumer said Democrats want to negotiate with Republicans, but called on Senate GOP leaders to separate out the funding bill for the Department of Homeland Security from a package that includes five other full-year appropriations bills. 

The bills must become law before a Friday midnight deadline to avoid a partial government shutdown. 

Schumer said he expects senators could “very quickly negotiate a bipartisan proposal” on restrictions to federal immigration activities.

Thune, White House weigh in

Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., said shortly before Schumer spoke that he isn’t ruling out any options for funding the government.

“These are all hypotheticals at this point, and I will reserve optionality to consider that,” Thune said. “But I think the best path forward, as I’ve said, is to keep the package intact. And if there are things that the Democrats want that the administration can agree with them about, then let’s do that.”

Thune expressed concern that any changes to the six-bill government spending package, which includes funding for the Department of Defense, would require it to go back to the House for final approval before it could become law. 

The House is out this week and isn’t scheduled to return to Capitol Hill until 

Monday, possibly causing a brief funding lapse if Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., doesn’t call that chamber back early. 

A White House official said in a statement to States Newsroom the administration wants to avoid a shutdown and is committed to a “productive dialogue with the Congress.”

“A demand for agreement on legislative reforms as a condition of funding the Department of Homeland Security with a government funding deadline just 48 hours away is a demand for a partial government shutdown,” according to a White House official. “This bipartisan appropriations package, which the Democrats agreed to and have now walked away from, has been under negotiation for more than a month. The White House urges congressional Democrats not to subject the country to another debilitating government shutdown.”

Schumer said during his press conference the White House “has had no specific, good, concrete ideas.”

Alex Pretti killing

Congress has approved half of a dozen full-year government funding bills, but hasn’t yet cleared the remaining measures, which make up a huge swath of government spending. 

A partial government shutdown would affect the Departments of Defense, Education, Health and Human Services, Homeland Security, Housing and Urban Development, Labor, State, Transportation and Treasury. The Executive Office of the President, Supreme Court and judicial branch would also go without funding. 

Democrats’ insistence for additional guardrails on how federal immigration officers operate follows the death of 37-year-old Alex Pretti, the second person in Minneapolis shot and killed by federal immigration agents.

ICE would still be able to operate during a shutdown, due to an influx of funding from the massive tax and spending cuts package Republicans passed and President Donald Trump signed into law last summer.

The “One Big Beautiful Act” provided the Department of Homeland Security with $170 billion for immigration enforcement spread across four years, with $75 billion of that going directly to ICE. 

The Homeland Security appropriations bill at the center of the current dispute in Congress keeps ICE flat funded at $10 billion for the fiscal year that began on Oct. 1 and will end on Sept. 30.

In the wake of the Jan. 7 shooting of 37-year-old Renee Good by federal immigration officer Jonathan Ross, Democrats and Republicans agreed to some changes for the department that are provided for in the bill. That includes $20 million for body cameras for ICE and other federal immigration officers, $20 million for independent oversight of detention facilities and a $1 billion cut to Customs and Border Protection funding, which totals $18.3 billion.  

Border Patrol agents’ shooting of Pretti on Jan. 24 spurred Democrats to call for Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem to resign and demand additional reforms at DHS. 

No masks, body cameras required

Maine independent Sen. Angus King said Wednesday while the funding bill up for debate allocates money for optional body cameras, he wants to require immigration agents to wear them and to identify themselves. 

“I think one of the things that should be in it is no masks,” King said. “There’s not a law enforcement agency in the United States that wears masks. I’ve never encountered that before in my life.”

King added he wants to see increased “accountability” for federal immigration officers, including “independent investigations of injuries to either detainees or private citizens.”

The top Democrat on the panel that deals with Homeland Security funding, Sen. Chris Murphy of Connecticut, said the proposed changes are a start.

“I’ve got a much longer list of reforms that I would like, but we’re operating in a world of possibility, and I think that these reforms are things that we could get done in the next couple days, or the next week,” he said. 

Alaska Republican Sen. Lisa Murkowski said she’s okay splitting off the Homeland Security spending bill from the rest of the package. 

Murkowski also said she believes Trump should replace Noem.

“Ultimately it’s his call as to who he keeps in this position, whether it’s Secretary Noem or someone else. I understand that. And he’ll decide,” she said. “I just think that he deserves better.”

Two ‘losers,’ Trump says

North Carolina GOP Sen. Thom Tillis also called for Noem’s resignation, and for White House senior advisor Stephen Miller to be removed. Miller is the main architect of the Trump administration’s immigration policy, and played a pivotal role in the president’s first administration.

On Tuesday during an interview with ABC News, Trump called Tillis and Murkowski “both losers” for calling for Noem’s resignation and criticizing her handling of immigration operations in Minnesota. The president has stood by Noem.

“I’m kind of excited about being called a loser,” Tillis said. “Apparently, that qualifies me for DHS secretary and senior advisor to the president.”

South Dakota Republican Sen. Mike Rounds didn’t entirely rule out supporting a five-bill funding package if GOP leaders agree to remove the DHS appropriations bill. 

“I won’t get ahead of the president on it … but even if you do that, the House still has to approve that,” Rounds said. “The question is, logistically, can they get back in time to do it by Friday night?”

Texas Democratic Rep. Henry Cuellar, ranking member on the House Homeland Security Appropriations subcommittee, wrote in a social media post that while the current bill isn’t perfect, it “is better than those alternatives.”

“But the worst thing Congress could do is allow a powerful department to operate with a blank check under a continuing resolution or shut the government down entirely.”

Pictures of Alex Pretti sit in front of his home on Jan. 26, 2026 in Minneapolis, Minnesota. Pretti, an ICU nurse at a VA medical center, died Jan. 25, after being shot multiple times during a brief altercation with Border Patrol agents in Minneapolis. (Photo by Scott Olson/Getty Images)

WASHINGTON — White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt on Monday urged Senate Democrats to advance the government funding package that must become law before the weekend to avoid a partial shutdown, rejecting their proposal to remove the Homeland Security funding bill.

Democrats in the upper chamber say they are ready to help pass five of the six bills, but insist the Homeland Security spending measure must be stripped and renegotiated to include more constraints on federal immigration enforcement after officers killed a second American citizen in Minnesota this weekend. 

“We absolutely do not want to see that funding lapse and we want the Senate to move forward with passing the bipartisan appropriations package that was negotiated on a bipartisan basis,” Leavitt said. 

Negotiators in Congress have reached bipartisan consensus on each of the dozen full-year government spending bills during the last few months, though the final bills still need to clear the Senate and become law.

Funding for hundreds of programs in those measures lapses Friday at midnight, when the stopgap spending law Congress approved at the end of the last shutdown expires.  

A partial shutdown would affect the Departments of Defense, Education, Health and Human Services, Homeland Security, Housing and Urban Development, Labor, State, Transportation and Treasury. The Executive Office of the President, Supreme Court and judicial branch would also go without funding if a solution cannot be reached in time. 

Leavitt said during the briefing that “policy discussions on immigration in Minnesota are happening” and pointed to the phone call that President Donald Trump and Minnesota Democratic Gov. Tim Walz had earlier in the day. 

“But that should not be at the expense of government funding for the American people, which would include FEMA funding,” Leavitt said. “And we are in the midst of the storm that took place over the weekend and many Americans are still being impacted by that.”

The Homeland Security appropriations bill funds numerous programs in addition to Immigration and Customs Enforcement and Customs and Border Protection. The Coast Guard, Federal Emergency Management Agency, National Flood Insurance Fund, Secret Service and Transportation Security Administration are among the other agencies that rely on the bill for budget authority. 

Schumer demands removal of DHS bill 

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., wrote in a statement that Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., should remove the Homeland Security funding bill from the larger package before the deadline to avoid a lapse in funding. 

“The responsibility to prevent a partial government shutdown is on Leader Thune and Senate Republicans,” he wrote. “If Leader Thune puts those five bills on the floor this week, we can pass them right away. If not, Republicans will again be responsible for another government shutdown.”

Senate Appropriations Chairwoman Susan Collins, R-Maine, in a brief floor speech urged lawmakers from both political parties to vote to advance the full funding package, calling the possibility of another shutdown “harmful, unnecessary and disastrous.”

“I hope we can come together in a constructive way to get this done and to ensure that we do not lurch into a dangerous and detrimental government shutdown,” she said. 

Collins did acknowledge the killing of Alex Pretti over the weekend, saying his “tragic death” had “refocused attention on the Homeland Security bill and I recognize that and share the concerns.” 

“I do want to point out to my colleagues that there are many safeguards that have been put in this bill that I would encourage them to review,” Collins added without going into detail. “And that the vast majority of the funding in this bill, more than 80%, is for non-immigration and non-border security functions.” 

A Senate Republican aide, who wasn’t authorized to speak publicly, said GOP leaders are “determined to not have another government shutdown.” 

“We will move forward as planned and hope Democrats can find a path forward to join us,” the aide added. 

A Senate Democratic leadership aide said that “Republicans and the White House have reached out but have not yet raised any realistic solutions.”

‘Government shutdowns do not help anyone’

Senate Homeland Security Appropriations Subcommittee Chairwoman Katie Britt, R-Ala., wrote in a social media post that the array of programs in that bill “are critical to keeping Americans safe and must be funded.”

“We know from recent history that government shutdowns do not help anyone and are not in the best interest of the American people,” Britt wrote, referring to the shutdown of historic length that ended Nov. 12. “As we approach a government funding deadline, I remain committed to finding a pathway forward.”

Senate Homeland Security Appropriations Subcommittee ranking member Chris Murphy, D-Conn., said Sunday on CNN’s “State of the Union with Jake Tapper & Dana Bash” that he couldn’t “vote to fund this lawless Department of Homeland Security.” 

“And remember, it’s not just in Minnesota. They’re violating the law all over the country,” Murphy said. “I spent last week in Texas where they are locking up 2-year-old and 3-year-old kids who are here in the United States legally, just for the purpose of traumatizing them.”

Fetterman, Shaheen part ways

Pennsylvania Democratic Sen. John Fetterman appeared to be the only member of his party in that chamber to support the entire package, writing in a statement he “will never vote to shut our government down, especially our Defense Department.”

“I reject the calls to defund or abolish ICE. I strongly disagree with many strategies and practices ICE deployed in Minneapolis, and believe that must change,” Fetterman wrote. “I want a conversation on the DHS appropriations bill and support stripping it from the minibus. It is unlikely that will happen and our country will suffer another shutdown.”

New Hampshire Democratic Sen. Jeanne Shaheen backed the strategy of pulling out the Homeland Security spending bill and allowing the other five government funding bills to become law before the shutdown deadline.

“The Senate then needs to have a real bipartisan discussion about what additional reforms we need to put in place to prevent tragedies like Minneapolis from happening across the country,” Shaheen wrote in a social media post. “I will vote against DHS’s funding until additional reforms are in place.”

A September poll from First Five Years Fund, an advocacy group, found that 4 out of 5 rural Americans “say the ability of working parents to find and afford quality child care is either in a ‘state of crisis’ or ‘a major problem.’” (Photo by Sue Barr/Getty Images)

WASHINGTON — Several U.S. Senate Democrats launched an investigation into how the Trump administration’s child care funding cuts and policy changes are affecting rural families, in a Sunday letter provided exclusively to States Newsroom.

Sens. Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts and Raphael Warnock of Georgia led four of their colleagues in urging the respective heads of Rural Development at the Department of Agriculture and the Administration for Children and Families at the Department of Health and Human Services to offer up more information on their “current capacity to support child care, particularly in rural communities.” 

Joining Warren and Warnock are Sens. Ben Ray Luján of New Mexico, Angela Alsobrooks of Maryland, Alex Padilla of California and Jeff Merkley of Oregon. 

“Despite child care being one of the biggest costs American families face, the Trump administration has taken a wrecking ball to the federal programs that aim to make child care more accessible and affordable, including ACF and USDA’s Rural Development Office,” the senators wrote to acting Under Secretary for Rural Development Todd Lindsey and ACF’s Assistant Secretary Alex Adams. 

USDA Rural Development and ACF work to expand access to child care in rural areas. 

The senators pointed to a September poll from First Five Years Fund, an advocacy group, which found that 4 out of 5 rural Americans “say the ability of working parents to find and afford quality child care is either in a ‘state of crisis’ or ‘a major problem.’” 

The group said the administration’s slashing of staff at agencies and programs that support affordable child care, including ACF and Rural Development at USDA, are raising concerns that the administration is “failing families across the country and adding to the affordability crisis facing working-class families.” 

Cuts from federal child care fund to Dem states

The senators raised alarm over some of the administration’s most sweeping actions regarding child care programs, including attempts to cut off nearly $2.4 billion from the multibillion-dollar Child Care and Development Fund, or CCDF, to California, Colorado, Illinois, Minnesota and New York earlier in January. 

All are led by Democratic governors and the administration cited concerns about allegations of fraud.

CCDF — administered within the Office of Child Care under ACF — provides federal funding to states, territories and tribes to help low-income families obtain child care.

The five Democratic-led states sued in a New York federal court over the freeze, which also included $7.35 billion from the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families program and $869 million from the Social Services Block Grant — totaling more than $10 billion when combined with CCDF. 

A judge temporarily blocked the administration from freezing the funds earlier this month. A separate judge extended that order Friday. 

“States are challenging the legality of this freeze, but the consequences would be devastating should the courts permit the administration to permanently withhold the funds,” the senators wrote. 

Days prior to the announced freeze, the administration said states had to provide “justification” that federal child care funds they receive are spent on “legitimate” providers to get those dollars.

That demand followed allegations of fraud in Minnesota child care programs, which had prompted HHS to freeze all child care payments to the state.

The administration also announced earlier in January it would be rescinding multiple Biden administration child care rules that “required states to pay providers before verifying any attendance and before care was delivered.” 

Head Start in rural America

The Democrats argued that President Donald Trump has also “attacked Head Start at every turn since his inauguration.” 

ACF administers Head Start, which provides early childhood education, nutritious meals, health screenings and other support services to low-income families. 

The senators noted that “Head Start is especially crucial in rural communities, where it is often the only licensed child care program available.” 

During the record-long government shutdown in 2025, scores of Head Start centers experienced lapses in funding grants as a result.  

Even prior to the shutdown, Head Start already experienced chaos during the Trump administration, such as reports of delays in accessing approved grant funding, regional office closures and firings at ACF’s Office of Head Start.

Flood of workers departing USDA 

Meanwhile, USDA saw more than 20,000 employees leave in the first half of 2025, according to a report from the agency’s Office of Inspector General. More than one-third of the agency’s Rural Development unit left during that time.  

“Instead of strengthening the programs that aim to address the rural child care crisis, President Trump is firing the people who administer them,” the senators wrote. 

On top of that, the agency in March confirmed it would be slashing around $1 billion in previously announced funding for programs to help child care facilities, schools and food banks purchase from local farmers. 

USDA also faced backlash during the shutdown for refusing to tap into a multibillion-dollar contingency fund in order to keep benefits flowing for the country’s main food assistance program known as the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or SNAP.

The senators urged Lindsey and Adams to respond to their inquiries by Feb. 16. 

USDA did not immediately respond to requests for comment. 

In response to a request for comment, ACF said Monday it is “currently reviewing the U.S. Senators’ letter and will respond to them directly.” 

An aerial view of residential housing under construction at a planned community in Fontana, California, on Sept. 17, 2025. (Photo by Mario Tama/Getty Images)

WASHINGTON — U.S. Senate Democrats began detailing their affordability agenda Thursday ahead of the November midterm elections, starting with a focus on housing. 

Minority Leader Chuck Schumer said during an event at the Center for American Progress, a left-leaning think tank, that if Democrats regain control of the House and Senate they would pass legislation to expand rental assistance, reduce barriers to home ownership, build more housing and address predatory practices. 

Schumer listed several statistics he finds concerning, including that the median price of a home has gone up by 55% since the coronavirus pandemic, that rent has risen by one-third and that the average age for a first-time home buyer is 40. 

“That’s a record high,” he said. “That’s a devastating statistic that should shake up everyone in a position of power at the federal, state or local levels.”

Schumer said the outline for housing is just the first of several cost-of-living policy proposals Democrats will detail this year as they seek to sway voters in key districts and states to vote for their candidates over Republicans.

Democrats, he said, will also focus on how to curb the rising cost of groceries, electricity, child care and health care as part of the midterms messaging. 

On housing, Schumer said Democrats will focus on legislation that would 

• incentivize construction companies to build more housing to address shortages throughout the country;
• expand rental assistance, including Section 8 vouchers for low-income families;
• reduce barriers to home ownership;
• expand the low-income housing tax credit;
• allow the Department of Housing and Urban Development to use the Defense Production Act to purchase “housing materials in short supply”;
• create an agency focused on advanced research into housing issues, similar to the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency; and
• block “predatory companies” from being “allowed to gobble up entire neighborhoods so easily and turn them into profit machines.”

Democratic bills would provide down payment assistance, lower the cost of mortgage insurance, expand access to portable mortgages and “reform homeowners insurance which is now at a crisis level and so important for people who can’t afford that down payment,” Schumer said.  

Democrats have relatively good odds of winning back control of the House during the November midterm elections, especially since the president’s party tends to lose that chamber two years after taking power. 

Campaigns to regain control of the Senate will be much more difficult for Democrats, who face challenges keeping seats in Georgia and Michigan, while trying to flip Republican seats in Alaska, Maine, North Carolina and Ohio. 

Even if voters were to give Democrats control of Congress, leaders in the party would still need some Republican buy-in to move legislation past the Senate’s 60-vote legislative filibuster and need President Donald Trump to sign legislation into law, unless they had the two-thirds needed in each chamber to override a veto. 

A ‘family conversation’

Hawaii Democratic Sen. Brian Schatz said during a panel discussion with Illinois Democratic Sen. Tammy Duckworth that was moderated by CAP President and CEO Neera Tanden that he’s been “radicalized on housing” and pressed for members of the party to talk realistically about issues with supply and affordability. 

“And the reason is that our shortage nationwide, but especially in Hawaii, is so acute that people can’t make the math work anymore,” Schatz said. “In Hawaii, people are paying more than 50%, all-in, of their income for housing, either rental housing or paying a mortgage. And what I have come to realize is that we are the problem.”

Schatz argued that the government “is the primary impediment to alleviating the shortage” and said that realization has led him to have some “very difficult conversations.” 

In Hawaii, he said, there are environmental and cultural protections intended to safeguard “special places” but that have ended up applied more broadly, impeding housing development. 

“They were not originally conceived to prevent a walk-up apartment building on the corner of Eisenberg and King to house Native Hawaiian families,” Schatz said. “And yet those same laws are being weaponized against people in Hawaii even being able to live in the state of Hawaii.”

Schatz said Democrats must be honest with voters about what their housing policies would mean for communities throughout the country, contending the party needs to “solve the politics” around expanded housing before it can tackle the policy debate. 

“I actually think we have to have this family conversation around the politics of housing and realize that some of our base voters in the suburbs, who are otherwise good all the way down the line on all the progressive issues, also want to prevent a nurse or a firefighter or the disabled or the elderly or the student from living anywhere near them,” Schatz said. “And we have to have that conversation in the progressive coalition.”

Rethinking inspections, other processes

Duckworth said some solutions to housing could come through rethinking the processes in place now, similar to how the Department of Veterans Affairs changed its approach to homeless veterans. 

“VA used to say, ‘You have to get clean and sober, and then we’ll give you a voucher to get into an apartment.’ And so it made no sense, right?” Duckworth said. 

“So we had to change the thinking to what the homelessness community had been working on, which is reduction of harm — get them into the housing and then work on getting them clean and sober,” she continued. “And by changing that thought, we were able to immediately start pulling veterans off the streets, put them into housing units where they immediately were also getting counseling, getting treatment.”

Duckworth compared the sometimes slow process of housing inspections that can stop construction with the way the government approaches vehicle safety as one possible way to get things moving faster. 

“With automobiles, we say, ‘This car that you’re manufacturing must be able to withstand a crash at 35 miles an hour into a brick wall.’ And then when they meet and get that car approved, when we go buy that car, we don’t have to take that car to get it inspected from top to bottom, like we do with homes,” Duckworth said. 

She added: “So why would we not say to homebuilders, especially (prefabricated) homes, if you come to VA and you are willing to get two models of your home, pre-inspected, pre-approved, then when a veteran builds a new home and they say, ‘Hey, I’m going to choose one of these models that already has a VA good housekeeping seal of approval,’ they can shortcut that inspection process.”

Senators and two current representatives seeking Senate seats in 2026 have been touring the state to highlight affordability and the effects of Republican policy choices, including tariffs and cuts to health care at the federal level. Senate Minority Leader Dianne Hesselbein, second from left, listens as Christmas Tree farm operator Lance Jensen discusses his business with Hesselbein and Sens. Sarah Keyeski and Melissa Ratcliff, during a visit to Jensen's farm on Dec. 8. (Photo by Erik Gunn/Wisconsin Examiner)

Senate Minority Leader Dianne Hesselbein told the Wisconsin Examiner in a year-end interview that while she may have had a seat at the budget negotiating table this year, the Legislature still hasn’t engaged in as much bipartisan work as she had hoped. 

Democratic lawmakers entered this year with bolstered numbers under new voting maps, but still in the minority. The closely divided partisan breakdown in the Senate — 15 Democrats and 18 Republicans —  led to Republicans scrapping their plans to cut the University of Wisconsin budget and providing additional funding for K-12 schools, in budget negotiations with Democratic Gov. Tony Evers where Hesselbein had a seat at the negotiating table. But the current session still hasn’t matched up to Hesselbein’s “really high hopes at the beginning of the session that we were going to be able to do some really good bipartisan work.” 

Hesselbein noted that at the start of the session, lawmakers introduced three bills she thought were “really strong.”

“Unfortunately, Republicans are refusing to work with us on those issues,” Hesselbein said. “I am hopeful that they will go spend time with their families back home over the holidays, and they will realize that we can still get a lot of great things done for the state of Wisconsin in the spring.” 

One bill would provide school breakfast and lunch to students at no cost, another would make several policy changes aimed at helping bring down the costs of prescription drugs and the final one would expand the homestead tax credit to provide additional relief to low-income homeowners and renters.

Hesselbein said the “Healthy Schools Meals” legislation would help “every single kid, make sure they get a good nutritious lunch at school” and help “save the average family like $1800 a year on grocery costs.” She said the prescription drug legislation would help prevent more people from “choosing to cut their medicine in half” due to costs and the tax credit would help people stay in their homes longer. 

“These were three really common-sense bills. I still really think they are, and all we needed was two Senate Republicans to help us get these bills across the finish line and show that they care about the people of the state of Wisconsin and that they want to do some bipartisan work,” Hesselbein said. “Unfortunately, they weren’t interested in doing that work with us, and they don’t have a plan to help people with the rising costs in the state of Wisconsin.” 

Hesselbein said that passing helpful legislation, including the three bills she mentioned, could mitigate the upheaval of President Donald Trump’s administration.

“There’s so much chaos and confusion happening with the Trump administration that sometimes it’s hard to keep track of it day to day,” she said. “…What we can do as legislators in the state of Wisconsin is pass bills that actually help people.” 

Hesselbein said Senate Democrats continue to have conversations with Republicans in the hopes that they can get more legislation passed. One pressing concern is  the Knowles-Nelson stewardship program which, without legislative action, will sunset early in 2026. 

“We’re very worried about that happening, so our doors are open to any ideas they have,” Hesselbein said of her Republican colleagues, adding that she hopes a bill authored by Sen. Jodi Habush-Sinykin (D-Whitefish Bay) can move forward.

Hesselbein noted that the stewardship program, which was created in 1989 to fund land conservation in Wisconsin, has bipartisan roots. It is named after former Republican Gov. Warren Knowles and former Democratic Gov. Gaylord Nelson and was signed into law by Republican Gov. Tommy Thompson.

“This has never been a partisan issue,” Hesselbein said, noting that the program is popular with people across Wisconsin who love the outdoors, “whether they’re going hiking or they’re fishing, or they’re hunting.”

Hesselbein also said she is hopeful that the bill she coauthored, which would bolster education on menopause and perimenopause, will advance. It received a public hearing in the Senate earlier this year.

Wisconsin Senate is the ‘most flippable’ in 2026

Next year will be a definitive election year in Wisconsin with control of the Senate, Assembly and governor’s office up for grabs.

Hesselbein said she believes that the Wisconsin State Senate is “the most flippable chamber” in the United States — and Democrats are working hard towards that goal. Wisconsin’s 17 odd-numbered Senate districts are up for reelections in 2026. It’s the first time new legislative maps adopted in 2024 that reflect the 50/50 partisan divide in the state will be in effect for those districts.

Hesselbein said Democrats are focused on winning districts that previously went to former Vice President Kamala Harris in 2024, former President Joe Biden in 2020, Gov. Tony Evers in his two elections and to Mary Burke, who lost to former Gov. Scott Walker in 2014. 

Two seats targeted by Democrats to flip are Senate District 5, which is currently held by Sen. Rob Hutton (R-Brookfield) and Senate District 17, which is currently held by Sen. Howard Marklein (R-Spring Green).

“Fair maps and great candidates matter, and we already have people on the field that are out there knocking on doors listening to voters today on a cold day in Wisconsin… We have people that want to be elected to do the right thing for the people in the state of Wisconsin,” Hesselbein said.

Democratic candidates in Wisconsin and nationwide are hammering a message about affordability. Through the State Senate Democratic Campaign Committee, senators and two current representatives seeking Senate seats in 2026 have been touring the state to highlight the effects of Republican policy choices, including tariffs and cuts to health care at the federal level. They also recently launched an ad titled “Aisle 5.”

The ad opens as a group of Democratic lawmakers, including Sen. Sarah Keyeski (D-Lodi), Sen. Brad Pfaff (D-Onalaska) and Hesselbein, declare: “Same groceries from the same store. Same people in power, calling the shots and driving the prices up.”  The words “Senate Republicans” pop up on the screen. “My colleagues and I are fighting every single day against tariffs that make beef, eggs, and even cheese more expensive,” Hesselbein says. “But guess what? They don’t care. We can’t keep hoping they’re going to make the right choice because they’ve shown us they won’t.”

Hesselbein vowed in the interview with the Examiner that under Democratic control the Senate will have more floor sessions, be more transparent and “be actually doing the people’s work.”

“When Senate Democrats are fortunate enough to be the majority, we will continue to work with our Republican colleagues and get the best policies to help the people in the state of Wisconsin, especially when it comes to rising costs,” she told the Examiner. 

Senate Democrats’ ability to pursue their agenda will not only rely on winning the majority, but will also depend on who wins the consequential gubernatorial race, though Hesselbein said she is prepared to work with whoever wins. 

“I was able to work with a Republican governor when Scott Walker was there. I was able to pass some bills,” Hesselbein said. “I’m hoping we have a Democratic governor so we can finally start listening to the people of the state of Wisconsin and get things done because we’ve been waiting a long time.” 

Hesselbein said she doesn’t plan to endorse anyone in the Democratic primary for governor. 

Many of the candidates have legislative experience including state Sen. Kelda Roys (D-Madison) and state Rep. Francesca Hong (D-Madison) as well as Lt. Gov. Sara Rodriguez, Milwaukee County Exec. David Crowley, former Lt. Gov. Mandela Barnes and former state Rep. Brett Hulsey. Other Democratic candidates include former Wisconsin Economic Development Corporation CEO Missy Hughes and former Department of Administration Sec. Joel Brennan.

“I have too many friends,” Hesselbein said of her decision not to make an endorsement. “I have been in caucus with some of them… They are really good people, and when the going got tough, they never ran from an argument or anything, so I’m really looking forward to seeing how that race shapes up.” 

Hesselbein said she is looking forward to seeing each candidate’s platform and a “robust” discussion among them. 

“What are the plans that they have for the state of Wisconsin? How do they see us addressing rising costs and affordability? What is their plan for K-12 education, higher education? For the environment and all the things that we’ve been hearing about for years that people in the state of Wisconsin want us to effectively address,” Hesselbein said.

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

Student protesters shout during a “Hands Off Our Schools” rally in front of the U.S. Department of Education’s Washington, D.C., headquarters in April. Students from several colleges and universities gathered to protest President Donald Trump’s efforts to dismantle the department. (Photo by Kayla Bartkowski/Getty Images)

WASHINGTON — U.S. Senate Democrats on Tuesday blasted ongoing efforts from President Donald Trump’s administration to dismantle the Department of Education, including plans to shift several of its responsibilities to other Cabinet-level agencies.  

Hawaii Sen. Mazie Hirono hosted a forum on the issue with several Democratic colleagues. The lawmakers, joined by education leaders, advocates and leading labor union voices, said the restructuring would lead to a loss of expertise, create more bureaucracy and weaken support for students and families. 

The administration announced six agreements in November with the departments of Labor, Interior, Health and Human Services and State as part of a larger effort from the administration to dismantle the 46-year-old Education Department. 

Trump has sought to axe the agency in his quest to send education “back to the states” and tapped Education Secretary Linda McMahon to fulfill that mission. Much of the funding and oversight of schools already occurs at the state and local levels.

Losing expertise

Sen. Elizabeth Warren slammed the transfers as “illegal” because of federal laws assigning specific responsibilities to the Education Department.

“Congress already passed the laws on this,” she said. “Every one of the programs that’s moving out of the Department of Education specifically says we have allocated the money for a program in the Department of Education, not in whatever random other place Secretary McMahon decides to put it.” 

The Massachusetts Democrat said that if the transfers go through, “we’ve got now four federal agencies that have no experience with education suddenly in charge of more than 50 different educational programs, including ones that fund literacy, education for veterans, kids in rural school districts — you name it, it’s moving somewhere else.” 

Even before the announcements of interagency agreements, the Education Department had seen several changes since Trump took office, including layoffs of hundreds of employees that the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in July could temporarily proceed.

In a late Tuesday statement to States Newsroom, department spokesperson Madi Biedermann said the transfers were part of a wider effort to initiate a sorely needed overhaul of the federal education bureaucracy.

“The opposition is protecting a system that produces dismal results for our students,” she said. “The Trump Administration demands better than the status quo.”

‘Nothing but chaos’

Under one of the agreements, the Education Department said the Labor Department would take on a “greater role” in administering elementary and secondary education programs currently managed under the Education Department’s Office of Elementary and Secondary Education. 

Rachel Gittleman, president of American Federation of Government Employees Local 252, which represents Education Department workers, said “nobody wins, the least of all, students and educators,” when the Labor Department takes on massive education programs, noting the current workforce at Education has the right experience.

“Our staff have decades of experience with the complicated programs we’re talking about today,” Gittleman said. “These moves will cause nothing but chaos and harm for the people they’re intended to help.” 

In general, the agreements “swap a highly efficient system for a chaotic, underfunded one spread across multiple agencies,” Gittleman said.

Randi Weingarten, president of the American Federation of Teachers, also rebuked the administration’s efforts to gut the agency.

“What is happening here is not simply the dismantlement of the Department of Education,” she said. “It is taking away — it is abandoning the federal role in education.” 

Weingarten, who leads one of the largest teachers unions in the country, added that “we should be, as a nation, expanding the federal role in public education, not supplanting states.” 

Rhode Island commissioner condemns Brown shooting

Angélica Infante-Green, Rhode Island’s commissioner of elementary and secondary education, said the administration’s attempts to gut the agency are “already putting our nation’s education system and our students at a disadvantage.”

Communication from the Department of Education “lacks detail,” she added.

“We get these one or two sentences with edicts that often conflict with state and federal law. What do we do? The chaos has resulted in protracted legal battles across the country, raising serious constitutional questions,” she said. 

At the top of her remarks, Infante-Green also expressed her condolences for the victims, their families and the entire Brown University community after two students were killed and nine others were injured in a shooting on campus over the weekend. 

Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., center, joined by Senate Majority Whip John Barrasso, R-Wyo., left, and Sen. James Lankford, R-Okla., speaks to reporters following a Senate Republican policy luncheon at the U.S. Capitol on Dec. 9, 2025 in Washington, D.C.  (Photo by Heather Diehl/Getty Images)

WASHINGTON — The U.S. Senate in long-anticipated votes failed to advance legislation Thursday that would have addressed the rising cost of health insurance, leaving lawmakers deadlocked on how to curb a surge in premiums expected next year. 

Senators voted 51-48 on a Republican bill co-sponsored by Louisiana Sen. Bill Cassidy and Idaho Sen. Mike Crapo that would have provided funding through Health Savings Accounts for some ACA marketplace enrollees during 2026 and 2027. 

They then voted 51-48 on a measure from Democrats that would have extended enhanced tax credits for people who purchase their health insurance from the Affordable Care Act Marketplace for three years. A group of Senate Democrats in November agreed to end a government shutdown of historic length in exchange for a commitment by Republicans to hold a vote on extending the enhanced subsidies.

Republican Sens. Susan Collins of Maine, Lisa Murkowski and Dan Sullivan of Alaska voted for the Democrats’ bill. Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., voted against both bills. 

Neither bill received the 60 votes needed to advance under the Senate’s legislative filibuster rule. 

Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., criticized the ACA marketplace and the subsidies for leading to large increases in the costs of health insurance. 

“Under Democrats’ plan insurance premiums will continue to spiral, American taxpayers will find themselves on the hook for ever-increasing subsidy payments,” Thune said. “And don’t think that all those payments are going to go to vulnerable Americans.”

Thune argued Democrats’ bill was only an extension of the “status quo” of a “failed, flawed, fraud program that is increasing costs at three times the rate of inflation. 

Thune said the Republican bill from Cassidy and Crapo would “help individuals to meet their out-of-pocket costs and for many individuals who don’t use their insurance or who barely use it, it would allow them to save for health care expenses down the road.”

Schumer calls GOP plan ‘mean and cruel’

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., said the three-year extension bill was the only option to avoid a spike in costs for people enrolled in ACA marketplace plans. 

“By my last count, Republicans are now at nine different health care proposals and counting. And none of them give the American people the one thing they most want — a clean, simple extension of these health care tax credits,” Schumer said. “But our bill does extend these credits cleanly and simply and it’s time for Republicans to join us.”

Schumer referred to the Cassidy-Crapo proposals as “stingy” as well as “mean and cruel.”

“Under the Republican plan, the big idea is essentially to hand people about $80 a month and wish them good luck,” Schumer said. “And even to qualify for that check, listen to how bad this is, Americans would be forced onto bare-bones bronze plans with sky-high deductibles; $7,000 or $10,000 for an individual, tens of thousands for a couple.”

After the votes failed, Schumer outlined some of the guardrails Democrats would put in place regarding negotiations with GOP colleagues.

“They want to talk about health care in general and how to improve it — we’re always open to that, but we do not want what they want — favoring the insurance companies, favoring the drug companies, favoring the special interests and turning their back on the American people,” he said. 

Health Savings Accounts in GOP plan

The Cassidy-Crapo bill would have the Department of Health and Human Services deposit money into Health Savings Accounts for people enrolled in bronze or catastrophic health insurance plans purchased on the ACA marketplace in 2026 or 2027, according to a summary of the bill. 

Health Savings Accounts are tax-advantaged savings accounts that consumers can use to pay for medical expenses that are not otherwise reimbursed. They are not health insurance products.

ACA marketplace enrollees who select a bronze or catastrophic plan and make up to 700% of the federal poverty level would receive $1,000 annually if they are between the ages of 18 and 49 and $1,500 per year if they are between the ages of 50 and 64. 

That would set a threshold of $109,550 in annual income for one person, or $225,050 for a family of four, according to the 2025 federal poverty guidelines. The numbers are somewhat higher for residents of Alaska and Hawaii.  

The funding could not go toward abortion access or gender transitions, according to the Republican bill summary. 

Members of Congress have introduced several other health care proposals, including two bipartisan bills in the House that would extend the enhanced ACA marketplace tax credits for at least another year with some modifications. 

Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., has been reluctant to bring either bipartisan bill up for a floor vote, though he may not have the option if a discharge petition filed earlier this week garners the 218 signatures needed. 

Pennsylvania Republican Rep. Brian Fitzpatrick wrote in a statement the legislation represents a “solution that can actually pass—not a political messaging exercise.”

“This bill delivers the urgent help families need now, while giving Congress the runway to keep improving our healthcare system for the long term,” Fitzpatrick wrote. “Responsible governance means securing 80 percent of what families need today, rather than risking 100 percent of nothing tomorrow.”

But Johnson said Wednesday that he will put a package of bills on the House floor next week that he believes “​​will actually reduce premiums for 100% of Americans who are on health insurance.” Details of those bills have not been disclosed.

Thune told reporters that if “somebody is successful in getting a discharge petition and a bill out of the House, obviously we’ll take a look at it. But at the moment, you know, we’re focused on the action here in the Senate, which is the side-by-side vote we’re going to have later today.” 

Alaska’s Murkowski said lawmakers can find a compromise on health care by next week “if we believe it is possible.”

Political costs

The issue of affordability and rising health care costs is likely to be central to the November midterm elections, where Democrats hope to flip the House from red to blue and gain additional seats in the Senate. 

The Democratic National Committee isn’t waiting to begin those campaigns, placing digital ads in the hometown newspapers of several Republicans up for reelection next year, including Maine’s Collins and Ohio’s Jon Husted. 

“Today’s Senate vote to extend the ACA tax credits could be the difference between life and death for many Americans,” DNC Chair Ken Martin said in a press release. “Over 20 million Americans will see their health care premiums skyrocket next year if Susan Collins, John Cornyn, Jon Husted, and Dan Sullivan do not stand with working families and vote to extend these lifesaving credits.”

White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt blasted Senate Democrats’ proposal during Thursday’s press briefing, calling it a “political show vote” meant to provide cover for Democrats, whom she blamed for creating the problem. 

Trump and Republicans would “unveil creative ideas and solutions to the health care crisis that was created by Democrats,” she said. “Chuck Schumer is not sincerely interested in lowering health care costs for the American people. He’s putting this vote on the floor knowing that it will fail so he can have another talking point that he can throw around without any real plan or action.”

Shauneen Miranda and Jacob Fischler contributed to this report.