Democratic U.S. Senators Tammy Baldwin, Bernie Sanders, and Chris Van Hollen have sent a joint letter to the secretary of  the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), condemning the arrest and detention of Salah Sarsour, the president of Milwaukee’s Islamic Society, and charging that Sarsour has received inadequate medical care Sarsour at an Indiana immigration detention center where he’s being held. 

Sarsour has been detained since late March.  His family and supporters say that Sarsour, a man of Palestinian descent, was targeted for his criticism of the Israeli government’s treatment of Palestinians and the mass slaughter in Gaza. DHS has accused the father and business owner of lying on his green card application more than 30 years ago. 

The federal government has called Sarsour a terrorist who was detained as a teenager for attempting to possess weapons or ammunition. As a boy Sarsour was detained by Israeli forces in the West Bank, where torture and abuse of Palestinian prisoners have been reported for decades, something Sarsour said had happened to him as well. 

In their letter to DHS Secretary Markwayne Mullin, Baldwin, Sanders, and Van Hollen called Sarsour a business owner, father, grandfather and a “respected leader in the Milwaukee community.” He has lived in the United States as a legal permanent resident since 1993 and has not acquired a criminal record in that time. 

“We are deeply concerned that Mr. Sarsour was targeted in retaliation for his activism,” the senators wrote. “Through his work with the Islamic Society of Milwaukee and American Muslims for Palestine, Mr. Sarsour has spoken out passionately against the war in Gaza and on issues impacting the Islamic Society. The First Amendment of the United States Constitution guarantees everyone in our country, including lawful permanent residents, the right to speak freely without fear of retribution from the government.”

The senators added that they are concerned about Sarour’s health in detention. “Those in federal custody must be treated humanely and receive the level of care required,” the senators wrote. “Mr. Sarsour is a diabetic and we are concerned that he does not have appropriate access to healthcare, medical supplies, and a healthy diet required to properly manage that chronic condition, including by regularly testing blood glucose.” 

Sarsour has also not been provided “reasonable religious accommodations, such as a prayer mat,” the senators wrote. “He had been using a facility-issued bath towel to perform his prayers, but this was recently confiscated without explanation and Mr. Sarsour has been forced to pray on the facility’s barren floors. This treatment is unacceptable.”

Baldwin, Sanders, and Van Hollen demanded answers to several questions by May 31. They asked DHS to provide documentation that immigration officers relied on when they decided to arrest Sarsour and requested communications with the White House or Office of Budget and Management regarding Sarsour’s detention. 

They also asked whether Sarsour has access to proper healthcare and nutrition, what protocols immigration detention centers have regarding detainees with hyperglycemia or hypoglycemia, whether those protocols are being followed with Sarsour, and what protocols exist for providing detainees with reasonable religious accommodations. 

“Our nation’s founders realized that democracy cannot exist in a nation with a government that restricts or limits the speech and expression of its people,” they wrote. “The Constitution protects an individual’s right to express their political views and have their voice heard. We condemn any attempts by this Administration to use the power of the United States government to unfairly target and punish people for simply disagreeing with it.”

Members of Congress, including U.S. Reps. Gwen Moore, Mark Pocan, Greg Cesar of Texas, and Summer Lee of Pennsylvania, have also called for Sarsour’s release, joining a list of supporters   including Gov. Tony Evers, Milwaukee elected leaders, former elected officials  and numerous local activist and advocacy groups. 

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

 

Reading Time: 5 minutes

It’s boom times for Wisconsin’s congressional delegation: Most members have seen their personal wealth substantially rise since arriving on Capitol Hill, according to a NOTUS analysis of congressional financial disclosures.

That surge in their financial portfolios is primarily driven by real estate, retirement accounts and, in one case, a well-placed billboard, NOTUS’ analysis indicates. In all, five of Wisconsin’s 10 delegation members reported median net worths of more than $1 million in 2024, the most recent year covered by federal disclosures.

Overall, the Wisconsin delegation is much wealthier than the average Wisconsinite, who has a median net worth of about $76,000, according to U.S. Census Bureau data.

Republican Sen. Ron Johnson’s median net worth nearly tripled in recent years, from $24 million in 2010, when he was first elected to the Senate, to $64.9 million in 2024.

One of the assets driving the uptick in Johnson’s median net worth is an industrial building he and his wife own in Oshkosh, Wisconsin. The property was worth between $1 million and $5 million in 2010. In 2024, Johnson valued it at between $5 million and $25 million, according to his latest financial disclosure.

In a decidedly political twist, part of Johnson’s wealth is tied up with his own reelection campaign committee. Federal Election Commission records indicate Johnson’s campaign owes Johnson more than $8 million from personal loans he’s made to the committee. In his 2024 personal financial disclosure, Johnson lists these loans as assets, valuing them between $5 million and $25 million.

Johnson’s office did not respond to requests for comment.

Therein lies a major challenge in pinpointing lawmakers’ net worths: They are only required to publicly disclose the value of their assets and liabilities in broad ranges. So if an asset increased from $4.9 million to $5.1 million, it grew 4%, but the category range (going from $1-$5 million to $5-$25 million) would have increased 400%.

Lawmakers also aren’t required to disclose the value of several assets including personal property, vehicles or their personal residence, although they do have to declare the value of their mortgage as a liability along with other debts including credit card balances and student loans.

To best estimate lawmakers’ wealth, NOTUS calculated the median of their minimum net worth — minimum total assets minus maximum liabilities — and maximum net worth — maximum total assets minus minimum liabilities.

Johnson is hardly alone among Wisconsin lawmakers whose personal wealth has grown substantially while they earn a $174,000 annual salary.

Among the others: Republican Reps. Glenn Grothman, Bryan Steil, Scott Fitzgerald and Tom Tiffany, as well as Democratic Rep. Mark Pocan.

Steil, elected to Congress in 2018, and Grothman, elected in 2014, have both become millionaires since they entered Congress.

Grothman’s median net worth has more than doubled, from $885,000 in 2014 to more than $2.2 million in 2024. Several accounts Grothman disclosed owning in 2014, including state retirement accounts and two individual retirement accounts, steadily increased in value. And the value of a condominium he owns in West Bend, Wisconsin, greatly increased, from a reported minimum value of $15,001 in 2014 to $100,001 in 2024, according to his financial disclosures. The condominium could be worth as much as $250,000, according to Grothman’s latest disclosure.

Grothman’s office did not respond to a request for comment.

Steil’s median net worth more than doubled from 2018 to 2024, from $812,000 in 2018 to nearly $1.9 million in 2024, according to his financial disclosures. Several of Steil’s brokerage and retirement accounts jumped in value, including Vanguard Target Retirement, Mid Cap Growth Index Fund and Strategic Equity Investor accounts. He also added a Vanguard U.S. Growth Fund account worth between $250,001 and $500,000 that’s now among his largest assets.

Steil’s office did not respond to a request for comment.

Fitzgerald’s median net worth increased from $3.5 million in 2021, his first year in the House, to $6.3 million in 2024. His financial disclosure report from 2020, the year he was elected, is blank and has not been amended.

A spokesperson for Fitzgerald did not return a request for comment.

Fitzgerald’s wealth spike is primarily driven by real estate investments. The minimum disclosed value of his Wisconsin farm increased from $500,001 to $1 million over those three years, and he disclosed a property in Watertown, Wisconsin, in 2024 that’s worth at least $250,001. He also disclosed a Big Horn, Montana, property worth between $1 million and $5 million, although the property’s value range did not change between 2021 and 2024.

Tiffany’s median net worth ticked up slightly from $230,000 in 2020 to $296,000 in 2024, according to his latest disclosure.

Some of his income comes from on high: He owns a billboard in Oneida, Wisconsin, worth between $1,001 and $15,000 that consistently generates between $5,000 and $15,000 each year, according to his disclosures.

Tiffany’s office did not respond to a request for comment.

Pocan’s median net worth has also risen, from $541,000 in 2012 to $778,000 in 2024.

Most of his net worth comes from Budget Signs & Specialties, a printing company Pocan fully owns. It sells custom signs, awards and apparel, as well as campaign materials to Wisconsin Democratic candidates, and is valued between $500,001 and $1 million. It was valued between $250,001 and $500,000 in 2012.

Political candidates and committees have paid Pocan’s Budget Signs & Specialties more than $1.2 million since 2004, according to FEC data. That includes about $12,700 so far during the 2026 election cycle, with $7,600 collectively coming from Pocan’s own congressional campaign committee and the committee of Sen. Tammy Baldwin.

Baldwin’s campaign committees and the Democratic Party of Wisconsin are among Pocan’s biggest political customers over the last 22 years, FEC filings indicate.

The state Democratic Party has paid Pocan’s company more than $500,000 for materials such as yard signs and T-shirts since 2008. Committees for Baldwin’s House and Senate campaigns have collectively spent $171,000 since 2004.

In addition, Pocan’s campaign committee has paid his business more than $91,000 for printing and copying services and signs since 2018, according to FEC filings.

Pocan’s office declined to comment on the congressman’s net worth increase and business.

Baldwin’s median net worth has dipped slightly from $623,000 in 2012 to $588,000 in 2024, according to her financial disclosures.

Baldwin’s office said in a statement that the Wisconsin Democrat has “no knowledge of where her assets are invested or the composition of her portfolio” and communicates with her trustee through the Senate Ethics Committee.

One of the delegation’s wealthiest members is also its newest.

Republican Rep. Tony Wied, whose median net worth is nearly $10.1 million, arrived in Washington in 2024 after selling his chain of dinosaur-themed gas stations and convenience stores.

Wied holds between $50,000 and $100,000 in Black Hills Corp., an electric and gas utility in the West, and at least $250,000 in companies that produce tractors, trucks and automotive parts, including an investment in the Canadian National Railway.

That’s notable because Wied sits on the House Agriculture Committee and House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, where he serves on the subcommittee for rural development, energy and supply chains. These committees have oversight jurisdiction for the industries in which Wied personally invests.

Wied reports his stock trades each month to the House Ethics Committee in compliance with current law and guidelines, spokesperson Aidan Strongreen said.

“Congressman Wied’s investments are managed solely through an independent financial adviser, and he has no role in any of their decisions,” Strongreen said.

Only two members of Wisconsin’s congressional delegation have net worths below the Wisconsin household median, according to a NOTUS analysis of their annual financial disclosures: Republican Rep. Derrick Van Orden and Democratic Rep. Gwen Moore.

Van Orden’s median net worth is -$88,000, while Moore’s is also in the red, at -$75,000, according to their most recent financial disclosures.

On her most recent disclosure, Moore reported no assets. She disclosed a mortgage balance on her home in the range of $50,000 to $100,000. Lawmakers are not required to publicly disclose the value of their personal residence, and most do not.

Moore’s net worth has dropped almost $100,000 from $24,000 in 2008, according to her disclosure.

Van Orden does have some assets, primarily a Navy Mutual Whole Life policy valued between $50,001 and $100,000, his disclosure shows. But his overall net worth is pulled down by a mortgage and a “revolving charge account,” a category that includes credit cards and home equity and personal credit lines.

This story was produced and originally published by Wisconsin Watch and NOTUS, a publication from the nonprofit, nonpartisan Allbritton Journalism Institute.

Here’s how much the wealth of Wisconsin’s congressional delegation has changed since going to Washington is a post from Wisconsin Watch, a non-profit investigative news site covering Wisconsin since 2009. Please consider making a contribution to support our journalism.

U.S. Sens. Tammy Baldwin and Ron Johnson sent a letter to the White House Wednesday recommending their nominees for U.S. Attorney in Wisconsin’s two federal court districts. 

The appointment process for the two jobs has become more politically fraught than in the past after the commission was unable to agree on a nominee for the state’s Eastern District. The administration of President Donald Trump named former Republican attorney general and failed state Supreme Court candidate Brad Schimel as the interim U.S. Attorney in Milwaukee last year, which allowed him to serve for a limited time. The district’s judges ruled earlier this year that Schimel could no longer serve in his interim role, but former U.S. Attorney General gave him a new title that allowed him to continue working in the office. 

“I appreciate the hard work and dedication of Brad Schimel, who continues to serve the people of Wisconsin and remains fully committed to his role as first assistant U.S. attorney in the Eastern District of Wisconsin,” Johnson said in a statement. “My bipartisan nominating commission with Sen. Baldwin submitted two well-qualified U.S. attorneys for the President’s consideration. Peter Smyczek and Chadwick Elgersma will apply the rule of law and serve the people of Wisconsin’s Eastern and Western districts well.”

Historically, the two senators from a state each appoint people to a bipartisan nominating commission which selects candidates to be recommended to the president. Presidents usually adhere to the recommendations of a state’s senators. The Wisconsin nominating commission had broken down but was restarted after Democrats objected to Schimel’s appointment. 

Baldwin and Johnson named Peter Smyczek and Chadwick Elgersma to be the state’s top federal prosecutors. Smyczek has been an assistant U.S. attorney in the Milwaukee office while Elgersma was named to the job in January after working as an assistant prosecutor in the Madison office. 

“This is proof that the hard work of this commission and finding common ground can work,” Baldwin said. “The candidates that the commission put forward appear well qualified, to have relevant experience, and committed to delivering justice impartially, and I support them moving through the next stage of the nomination process. Wisconsinites want these top law enforcement officials to work for them and uphold the constitution without fear or favor, and I will vet these candidates to ensure they meet that criteria and do right by Wisconsin families.”

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

WASHINGTON — U.S. senators across the aisle pushed back Tuesday against President Donald Trump’s proposal to eliminate funding for programs serving disadvantaged students.

Education Secretary Linda McMahon defended those and other proposed cuts to her agency outlined in Trump’s fiscal 2027 budget request, which calls for $75.7 billion in new discretionary budget authority for the department that would mark a $3.2 billion, or 4.1%, reduction from fiscal 2026 levels. 

The administration has taken major steps to dismantle the 46-year-old Department of Education as part of the president’s quest to send education “back to the states.” That effort continues despite much of the funding and oversight of schools already occurring at the state and local levels.

“We’ve been clear: Shifting authority back to the states will not come at the expense of the central federal programs (and) support, much of which predate the department itself,” McMahon told lawmakers at the hearing of the U.S. Senate Appropriations Subcommittee on Labor, Health and Human Services, Education, and Related Agencies.

The panel shares jurisdiction over Education Department spending with the corresponding subcommittee of the House Appropriations Committee. The president’s budget request is generally considered a starting point for negotiations, but Congress is responsible for deciding federal spending.

Bipartisan support for TRIO 

Republican and Democratic senators took particular aim at the administration’s proposal to eliminate Federal TRIO Programs in fiscal 2027.

The Federal TRIO Programs — funded at $1.19 billion this fiscal year — help support groups including low-income students, first-generation college students, individuals with disabilities and veterans. 

Sen. Susan Collins, chair of the full Senate Appropriations Committee, said she opposes the president’s proposal to eliminate TRIO, noting that these programs have “changed the lives of countless first-generation and low-income students in Maine and across the country.” 

The Maine Republican added that TRIO “enjoys robust support and has made such a difference in the lives of children.” 

Arkansas GOP Sen. John Boozman also emphasized his support for TRIO, noting that in his state, these programs “have been a game-changer in helping low-income and first-generation students not only access higher education, but also succeed once they are there.” 

Sen. Jeff Merkley was the first in his family to go to college and said he comes from a “very blue-collar, frontier, homesteading, timber background.”

The Oregon Democrat said it’s from that perspective he believes that “having conscious programs to help people overcome the cultural chasm that exists between blue-collar kids like myself and that college world that you have very little contact on is enormously valuable in America, and the stats from these programs are pretty damn impressive.” 

The secretary told the panel that while “there are many instances where the TRIO program has been very beneficial … as we look across the country in how to spend these dollars and how to have similar results by maybe not necessarily focusing students towards college degrees, maybe there’s another way for them to have their path to success.” 

McMahon said her agency was in the process of spending “about $2.1 million” for investigating and evaluating the TRIO programs.

In its summary of Trump’s fiscal 2027 budget request, the department said that TRIO “has failed to meet the vast majority of its performance measures, and studies of program effectiveness have shown that it has not increased college enrollment.” 

Dems decry plan to eliminate agency

Meanwhile, McMahon took heat from the leading Democrats on the subcommittee and the broader Senate Appropriations panel over the administration’s ongoing efforts to dismantle the agency. 

Part of those efforts include several interagency agreements between Education and the departments of Labor, Health and Human Services, Interior, State and Treasury that transfer many of Education’s responsibilities to those agencies.

Sen. Tammy Baldwin, ranking member of the subcommittee, said Education “is transferring the vast majority of its programs to other federal departments, agencies with little experience or expertise or capacity to administer them.” 

The Wisconsin Democrat said that instead of “reducing bureaucracy” — a major goal of the administration across the federal government and the department in particular — the transfers are creating “another layer of it.”

She added that “where states previously primarily dealt with the Department of Education, they will now have to deal with multiple federal agencies.” 

Sen. Patty Murray of Washington state, the top Democrat on the full Appropriations Committee, pressed McMahon on the status of the administration mulling the transfer of special education services out of the Education Department amid its dismantling efforts. 

The possible move to transfer programs out of the department’s Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services has stoked widespread concern from disability advocates.

McMahon said her department was “still evaluating where those programs would best be located, and we have not made that determination yet.” 

“I can assure you that the intent of this administration is not to put these students at risk in any way whatsoever,” McMahon said. 

But Murray was not satisfied with the secretary’s response, saying she is “deeply concerned that your answer sounds like you’re still moving ahead — let’s make it clear that will break the law, and it will make it a lot harder for these students with disabilities to get the education and understanding that their country will stand behind them with that.” 

WASHINGTON — President Donald Trump is looking to eliminate funding in fiscal 2027 for the agency that serves as the primary federal funding source for libraries and museums nationwide.

But congressional appropriators — who rebuffed similar efforts to gut the agency in fiscal 2026 — expressed little enthusiasm for the proposed cut in interviews with States Newsroom. Groups representing museums and libraries across the country also blasted the president’s proposal. 

The administration is requesting $6 million in fiscal 2027 for the agency, known as the Institute of Museum and Library Services, “for necessary expenses to carry out (its) closure.”

U.S. Sen. Shelley Moore Capito, chair of the Senate Appropriations Subcommittee on Labor, Health and Human Services, Education and Related Agencies, noted that her panel did not agree to the same Trump request in fiscal 2026 to eliminate funding for the agency. 

“I personally have always been a fan of libraries, and it does a lot for local communities,” said Capito, a West Virginia Republican whose panel writes the annual bill to fund the Institute of Museum and Library Services. 

“So, that’s what he does, he proposes, and then we look at it and make our own decisions,” she said. 

Last year’s request turned down

The spending package signed into law by Trump in February provides roughly $292 million for the agency this fiscal year — a sharp rejection of Trump’s efforts. 

Capito said that though her committee will consider the president’s fiscal 2027 request, “if you look at what we did last year, it shows that we kind of rejected that premise.” 

Rep. Robert Aderholt, an Alabama Republican and chair of the corresponding Appropriations subcommittee in the House, appeared noncommittal about pursuing Trump’s fiscal 2027 request to gut the agency.

In response to States Newsroom’s request for a phone interview, Aderholt provided a written statement. 

“We are reviewing the request from the Administration and the requests from every member of the House,” Aderholt said, adding that “this is a member-driven process, and we look forward to working with our colleagues in putting together a strong bill for the American taxpayers.” 

Legal battles

The agency was created by Congress in 1996 and has a mission to “advance, support, and empower America’s museums, libraries, and related organizations through grantmaking, research, and policy development.”

The administration has taken major steps to try to dismantle the agency, including through a March 2025 executive order. 

However, Trump’s Department of Justice reached a settlement earlier in April with the American Library Association — the nation’s largest library association — and the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees — the country’s largest union of cultural workers — that protects the agency and guarantees it will continue issuing grants and program operations. 

In another setback for the administration, the DOJ dropped its appeal this month in a case brought by 21 attorneys general, who challenged the administration’s efforts to dismantle the agency and had secured a major court victory in November. 

‘The barbarians are at the door’

Meanwhile, leading Democrats on the House and Senate appropriations panels dealing with the agency’s spending were quick to lambaste Trump’s proposal in interviews with States Newsroom. 

Sen. Tammy Baldwin, ranking member of the Senate subcommittee and a Wisconsin Democrat, described the agency as “such an incredibly valuable entity” and vowed to fight “tooth and nail” to protect it. 

Rep. Rosa DeLauro, ranking member of the full House Appropriations Committee and the spending subcommittee with jurisdiction over the agency, said the administration’s request is “just neanderthal.”

The Connecticut Democrat said “we’ll work to restore like we try to do every time,” while adding that Trump’s request indicates that “the barbarians are at the door.” 

Library, museum organizations push back

Leading library and museum organizations fiercely opposed Trump’s request and called on Congress to reject the proposal. 

In a statement, Sam Helmick, president of the American Library Association, said Trump’s “continued attack” on the agency in the budget request and the March 2025 executive order to shutter it “shows the extent to which the administration is tone deaf to the needs of millions of Americans who rely on libraries every day: older adults and veterans who use library telehealth spaces; unemployed people who use library resources to find a new job or learn new skills; families who count on story time; and students and faculty who do research in school and academic libraries.”

John Chrastka, founder and executive director of EveryLibrary, said Trump’s proposal is “a direct threat to the infrastructure that millions of Americans rely on every day,” in a statement. 

Chrastka, whose organization is dedicated to building support for libraries, said “libraries are not optional,” but instead represent “essential public resources that support literacy, workforce development, and community connection in every state.”

The American Alliance of Museums blasted the proposal as “misguided and out of step with the American public and Congress,” noting that similar efforts in fiscal 2026 and prior budget cycles to yank funding for the agency were rejected due to “strong bipartisan, bicameral support in Congress and sustained advocacy from the museum community.” 

The Institute of Museum and Library Services declined to comment on Trump’s fiscal 2027 budget request. 

WASHINGTON — Senate Republicans, and one Democrat, maintained their support for President Donald Trump’s war in Iran, after blocking for the fifth time a resolution that would force the president to seek congressional authorization for further action in the Middle East.

The vote failed 46-51, largely following the same split as previous failed measures. Sen. John Fetterman, D-Pa., opposed the resolution to rein in Trump, and Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., voted in favor, just as they have in the four times prior. 

Sens. Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, David McCormick, R-Pa., and Mark Warner, D-Va. were absent.

Thirteen U.S. service members and thousands of civilians across the Middle East have died in the war, which the Trump administration has claimed is about regime change and stopping Iran’s nuclear program.

As of Wednesday, the Pentagon updated the number of American troops injured in the conflict to 400.

Fetterman and all but one Senate Republican blocked the measure one day after Trump extended a ceasefire with Iran after the prospects of a second round of peace talks fell through. Trump did not specify an end date to the ceasefire extension but announced the United States would not back down on its blockade of ships traveling to and from Iranian ports.

Trump claimed late Tuesday night that Iran is “collapsing financially!” 

“They want the Strait of Hormuz opened immediately- Starving for cash! Losing 500 Million Dollars a day. Military and Police complaining that they are not getting paid. SOS!!!” he wrote on his social media platform, Truth Social.

U.S. military forces fired on and seized a sanctioned Iranian cargo ship Sunday.

Iran’s foreign minister, Seyed Abbas Araghchi, wrote Tuesday on X that the seizure was “an act of war and thus a violation of the ceasefire.” 

Early Wednesday, Iran claimed responsibility for attacking two commercial vessels in the Strait of Hormuz, a key narrow maritime passage where a fifth of the world’s petroleum flowed prior to the war. Iranian parliament representative Ebrahim Rezaei declared on X, “an eye for an eye, an oil tanker for an oil tanker.” 

Baldwin leads opposition to war

Sen. Tammy Baldwin, D-Wis., lead sponsor of Wednesday’s War Powers Resolution, said on the floor ahead of the vote that Trump sold Americans “a bad bill of goods” when he campaigned on lowering costs and not starting any new foreign wars.

“This war has taken us backwards and created more problems for the people that I work for,” she said, citing increasing fuel and fertilizer costs as a result of a standstill in the Strait of Hormuz.

The latest U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics inflation numbers reflected a 21% increase in the cost of fuel from February to March.

A gallon of regular gas remained on average just north of $4 across the country, according to AAA.

United Airlines announced Wednesday it plans to raise airfare as much as 20% to offset the cost of jet fuel, according to multiple media reports.

Brent crude oil, the global oil market’s standard, spiked above $100 a barrel Wednesday, as it has numerous times since the beginning of the U.S.-Israeli war in Iran.

“Less than two months ago, oil prices were normal, the Straits of Hormuz was open, commerce was happening,” said Sen. Tim Kaine, D-Va., ahead of the vote. 

“And then President Trump made the decision without a rationale, without a plan, without consulting with allies, without consulting or seeking a vote of Congress to enter the nation into yet another war in the Middle East. And the entire world is suffering,” Kaine said.

Trump entered the joint war on Iran alongside Israel on Feb. 28.

Sen. Roger Wicker, R-Miss., said passing the resolution would be “unwise.”

“We’ve been through these votes recently, and nothing has occurred in the makeup of this body or in the situation in Iran or the Middle East to materially change since the last time we voted on this matter,” the chair of the Senate Armed Services Committee said on the floor ahead of the vote. 

Wicker was the only Republican to speak out against the resolution during Wednesday afternoon’s debate.

Earlier vote

Senate Democrats last forced a vote to stop Trump’s actions in Iran on April 15, just days after the president threatened on social media to wipe out Iran’s “whole civilization” and to bomb its power plants and bridges.

Senate Democrats say they have no plans to stop introducing War Powers Resolutions and speaking out against the war.

Several sent a letter Sunday to Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth demanding answers about “troubling allegations of civilian harm incidents,” including a strike on an elementary school that killed more than 160 children on the war’s opening day.

“We are concerned that these were all preventable tragedies. The high human toll of this war reflects the administration’s broader disregard for the strategic, legal, and moral imperative to minimize civilian harm,” the senators wrote.

The letter, led by Sens. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., and Chris Van Hollen, D-Md., was also signed by Ben Ray Luján, D-N.M; Mazie Hirono, D-Hawaii; Tina Smith, D-Minn.; Mark Kelly, D-Ariz.; Raphael Warnock, D-Ga.; Jeff Merkley, D-Ore.; Kirsten Gillibrand, D-N.Y.; Peter Welch, D-Vt. and Bernie Sanders of Vermont, an independent who caucuses with the Democrats. 

The 11 senators who joined Baldwin in sponsoring Wednesday’s War Powers Resolution, a vestige of Congress’ efforts to rein in President Richard Nixon during the Vietnam War, included Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., and Sens. Gillibrand, Kaine, Merkley and Van Hollen, as well as Adam Schiff, D-Calif.; Chris Murphy, D-Conn.; Tammy Duckworth, D-Ill.; Andy Kim, D-N.J.; Cory Booker, D-N.J.; and Mark Kelly, D-Ariz.

U.S. Sen. Tammy Baldwin introduced a new bill Tuesday aimed at making it simpler and cheaper for people to watch professional sports. 

Currently, for a fan in Wisconsin to watch every Packers, Brewers and Bucks game in a year it costs more than $1,500 annually to purchase the necessary streaming services and subscriptions — a cost that Baldwin said Wednesday benefits league and streaming service executives, as well as the billionaire owners of sports teams, at the expense of fans. 

“This isn’t just a Packers or a Wisconsin issue. This has become an American issue,” Baldwin said during a Wednesday news conference. “What used to be grabbing the remote and hitting a button or two has turned into a maze of streaming subscriptions, unexpected blackouts or a sky high payment. To top it all off, there is no consistency, and it is flat out confusing for fans.” 

She said at the news conference she was introducing the bill without any co-sponsors specifically to start conversations in Congress about the issues in the bill. 

Baldwin’s For the Fans Act includes two major provisions meant to make it cheaper for people to watch their favorite teams. The first would prohibit league-owned streaming services, such as MLB.Tv or NBA League Pass, from blacking out games that are played locally or on a third-party streamer. The second would require the leagues to provide a way for local fans to watch all games for teams based in the state in which they live. 

The proposal comes after the Green Bay Packers v. Chicago Bears playoff game in January was only available on local TV in Wisconsin in the Milwaukee and Green Bay markets — meaning that in five of the state’s markets, fans were forced to subscribe to Amazon to watch the game. 

The bill would apply to professional sports teams playing baseball, basketball, football, basketball, hockey and soccer. Minor league teams and leagues with fewer than eight teams are exempted. 

Baldwin has also previously introduced the Go Pack Go Act, which aims to make sure the Wisconsin households assigned to Michigan or Minnesota television markets are able to watch Packers games.

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

WASHINGTON — An effort to force President Donald Trump to seek congressional approval for further war actions in Iran failed in the U.S. Senate for the fourth time Wednesday, with all but one Republican continuing to support the president’s Middle East conflict.

Senators voted down the measure, 47-52, with a similar partisan breakdown as earlier votes that saw one Republican and one Democrat break with their parties.

Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., who previously sponsored one of the Iran War Powers Resolutions, again split with his party to oppose Trump’s military actions in Iran, which the president launched without approval from Congress. 

As he has previously, Sen. John Fetterman, D-Pa., was the only Democrat to support Trump continuing the war in Iran.

Sen. Jim Justice, R-W.Va., did not vote.

Senate Democrats have vowed more votes ahead to rein in Trump’s joint operations with Israel in Iran.

Wednesday’s War Powers Resolution was sponsored by Sens. Tammy Duckworth, D-Ill., Tim Kaine, D-Va., Chris Murphy, D-Conn., Adam Schiff, D-Calif., and Tammy Baldwin, D-Wis.

Fourth failed vote

Prior votes to cut off Trump’s unchecked military operations in Iran were held March 18, March 4 and June 27, when the U.S. and Israel bombed Iran’s nuclear facilities last year.

The U.S.-Israeli war in Iran has claimed the lives of 13 American troops, and as of Wednesday injured 395, according to the Pentagon. Thousands of civilians in Iran and across the Middle East have been killed and injured in the shelling on both sides.

Meanwhile, the war has set off an oil crisis across the globe as Iran and the U.S. vie for control of the Strait of Hormuz, a narrow passage connecting the Persian Gulf to the Arabian Sea that moves one-fifth of the world’s oil and liquid natural gas.

A gallon of regular gas peaked at $4.16 on average across the U.S. last week, while diesel reached nearly $5.97, according to AAA. As of Wednesday, a gallon of regular gas sat at $4.10 on average, and diesel at $5.63.

A Quinnipiac University poll released Wednesday showed voters held Trump responsible for the spike in gas prices by a nearly 2-to-1 margin.

Reading Time: 3 minutes

Small businesses that paid President Donald Trump’s tariffs have been largely left to fend for themselves as they navigate the administration’s refund system.

In Washington, the lawmakers calling for small businesses to be first in line to receive their share of the $166 billion paid in tariffs say that, for the most part, their hands are tied.

“I’m fighting for that to happen, but most of it’s going to end up playing out in court, but it really matters to our small businesses in particular,” said Sen. Tammy Baldwin, D-Wis.

Baldwin said she met with the owners of a local textile company that laid off staff to afford tariffs on imported fabric — and now they wonder if they’ll get their money back.

In Wisconsin, importers paid $3.5 billion in tariffs from March to December 2025, according to the small business coalition We Pay The Tariffs. More than a dozen Wisconsin companies, including Milwaukee Tool and Kohl’s, have sued the Trump administration for tariff refunds.

U.S. Customs and Border Patrol is currently updating its duty payment processing system to issue refunds at scale. Officials must review more than 53 million entries filed by importers that include emergency tariff payments.

The development of the CBP system’s new functions to receive, process and refund these duties was mostly complete as of last week, according to court filings.

Once the process is set, it becomes a question of who has the resources and know-how to navigate CBP’s refund system. The Trump administration is requiring business owners to file their own claims.

CBP’s updated system will require importers to file a declaration detailing their payments of tariffs under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, according to an affidavit filed in trade court earlier this month.

“It’s incumbent on smaller importers to do what they need to do to get their money,” said Chris Duncan, a former CBP attorney who currently works as a tariffs and customs lawyer.

Sen. Ed Markey, D-Mass., the ranking member of the Small Business Committee, said that puts small businesses at a disadvantage.

“Small businesses do not have teams of legal and financial experts to submit their forms. Small businesses do not have the time to navigate this convoluted system,” Markey said in a call with business owners last week. “Small businesses need their refunds, and they need them now.”

Markey and 19 other Democratic senators sent a letter to CBP Commissioner Rodney Scott on Friday demanding the agency automatically refund IEEPA tariffs through its existing system rather than the updated one.

“There is no principled reason for the Trump administration to conduct the refund process this way,” reads the letter, reviewed by NOTUS. “CBP already has the payment records it needs to issue refunds.”

Markey — along with Democratic Sens. Ron Wyden and Jeanne Shaheen — also introduced a bill that would require CBP to issue full tariff refunds with interest and prioritize returning money to small businesses.

Without buy-in from Republicans, however, Democratic senators say it will be up to the local communities to pressure the federal government.

“What is going to be most helpful is to create enough pressure in communities, particularly small communities,” Wyden, the top Democrat on the Senate Finance Committee, said.

Rep. Mark Pocan, a Democrat who represents the Madison area, expressed concern about the “dysfunction” that could arise from companies trying to navigate the intricacies of the CBP’s refund system and answer to consumers who shouldered price increases.

“Bottom line is, we never should have done illegal tariffs to begin with. Congress should have stood up, as Democrats had asked for, for our constitutional authority around tariffs, and now we’re going to wind up creating all kinds of dysfunction for businesses and individuals,” Pocan said.

Following the Supreme Court’s 6-3 ruling striking down his emergency tariffs in February, Trump said he would continue his tariff agenda using alternative legal authorities and imposed a 15% global tariff, which Congress must vote to extend later this year.

Trump allies in Congress say the president’s tariffs, which are unpopular among voters, are short-term pain for the long-term gain of balancing the U.S.’s trade relationships and attracting foreign investment.

Nevertheless, when asked if tariff refunds should be passed on to consumers, Rep. Scott Fitzgerald, a Republican who represents suburban and rural areas west of Milwaukee, expressed openness to the idea.

“If it’s something that they could actually draw, like a clear line or a bright line. You know, we had a lot of companies where the tariffs had a direct effect on aluminum out of Canada or textiles out of Vietnam, or — you know, it was all part of the manufacturing process,” Fitzgerald said.

“So I’m not sure how that would shake out either, if it was one element of a larger manufacturing versus, like, a straight retailer who was selling some type of consumer goods.”

This story was produced and originally published by Wisconsin Watch and NOTUS, a publication from the nonprofit, nonpartisan Allbritton Journalism Institute.

Lawmakers are worried small businesses will get left behind in Trump’s tariff refund system is a post from Wisconsin Watch, a non-profit investigative news site covering Wisconsin since 2009. Please consider making a contribution to support our journalism.