“We obviously believe that giving the public access to see what we're doing is important, but… just blindly giving money to an organization that's asking us for money, but not giving us any answers, is certainly not the solution at this time,” LeMahieu said. (Photo by Baylor Spears/Wisconsin Examiner)

The Wisconsin Senate passed three constitutional amendment proposals Wednesday, including one to eliminate DEI, one to limit the executive partial veto power and another to prohibit closures of places of worship during emergencies.

With WisconsinEye, the state government video streaming service, still offline, the first floor session of the year for the Senate was livestreamed with the help of the Legislative Technology Services Bureau. 

Senate Majority Leader Devin LeMahieu (R-Oostburg) told reporters ahead of the session that after WisconsinEye halted its coverage on Dec. 15, the co-chairs of the Legislative Joint Audit Committee sent a letter with questions to the nonprofit organization. The letter had a Jan. 9 deadline to reply, but the organization did not provide responses until Jan. 21.

“We obviously believe that giving the public access to see what we’re doing is important, but… just blindly giving money to an organization that’s asking us for money, but not giving us any answers, is certainly not the solution at this time,” LeMahieu said. 

LeMahieu said he had not yet reviewed the answers WisconsinEye sent on Wednesday morning. He said the livestream was not a way to explore replacing WisconsinEye.

The state Legislature set aside $10 million in 2023 to help the organization build an endowment. But that grant came with a requirement that WisconsinEye to raise enough money to match the funds in order to access the state dollars. As it ran out of funds, WisconsinEye asked  the state to make money available for its operating expenses without the match requirement. 

LeMahieu noted that the organization had three years to raise funds and request money from the Joint Finance Committee.

“We just want to figure out, really, what’s going on. It’s not proof that we don’t need WisconsinEye…,” LeMahieu said. “The point of today is just so that the general public can see us in action today.” 

During the floor session, the Senate also took up bills on tax exemptions and education.

Constitutional amendments on DEI, partial veto and places of worship

The Senate passed three constitutional amendment proposals, each of which is on its second consideration, during its Thursday floor session. Constitutional amendment proposals in Wisconsin must pass two consecutive sessions of the Legislature before they go to the voters for final approval.

Republicans have relied on constitutional amendment proposals in recent years to bypass Democratic Gov. Tony Evers. According to a Ballotopedia review, Wisconsin voters decided on 258 ballot measures between  the state’s founding in 1846 and April 2025. About 71% — or 185 — measures were approved and 28% — or 73 — were defeated.

In the last five years, Wisconsin voters will have decided on 10 constitutional amendment questions — a divergence from some points in state history when Wisconsin has gone years without a constitutional amendment going before voters. 

The Senate voted 18-15 to pass a constitutional amendment that seeks to target and eliminate diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) efforts throughout Wisconsin local and state governments, officially setting it to go before voters in November. 

If approved by voters, AJR 102 would amend the state constitution to “prohibit governmental entities in the state from discriminating against, or granting preferential treatment to, any individual or group on the basis of race, sex, color, ethnicity, or national origin in public employment, public education, public contracting, or public administration.”

Democratic lawmakers said the amendment would take the state backwards. They suggested amending the proposal to enshrine equality and same-sex marriage protections. Those proposals were voted down. 

State Sen. Dora Drake (D-Milwaukee), who chairs the Legislative Black Caucus and has been working to call attention to the proposal over the last few weeks, likened the amendment to lawmakers rolling back Reconstruction efforts after the Civil War. She said the abandonment of Reconstruction efforts to bring justice to those who were enslaved, are the reason why the U.S. lived with Jim Crow laws for so long.

“Lawmakers made a decision to not protect [Americans],” Drake said. “Anything that was built was destroyed. It took nearly 80 years for our country to rectify that mistake with the Civil Rights Act, the Voting Rights Act and landmark Supreme Court decisions to undo that harm.” 

Drake said the amendment would cause harm and eliminate measures that keep Wisconsinites safe. 

“Republicans will send us back to the pre-Civil Rights era, possibly further,” Drake said. 

Sen. Steve Nass (R-Whitewater) said the proposal is “long overdue” and would give Wisconsin voters the final say on “discrimination at all levels of government.” He said that programs including the Supplier Diversity Program, which was established in the 1980s and certifies minority-owned, service-disabled veteran-owned and woman-owned businesses to provide better opportunities for them to do business with the state of Wisconsin, and scholarships and loans within the state’s higher education system that consider race amount to discrimination.

“Past discrimination, however wrong, cannot be corrected with more discrimination,” Nass said, adding that merit, character and ability should be the only things considered when it comes to programs. 

The Senate also voted on voice vote to pass SB 652, which would amend several programs offered in the University of Wisconsin system to focus on “disadvantaged” students as opposed to considering race. Some of those programs include the minority teacher loan program and minority undergraduate grants. 

Bill coauthor Sen. Eric Wimberger (R-Oconto) said the proposal will make it so people are able to receive help based on their specific life experiences, rather than having their life experiences presumed.

“We’ll finally make eligibility based on need,” Wimberger said. 

Drake emphasized that several of the programs, including the Minority Teacher Loan Program that was signed into law by Republican Gov. Tommy Thompson, were bipartisan efforts at the time they were created. She said lawmakers were forgetting history and abandoning the previous work that was done to address the barriers that students face. She said that the only thing that has changed is the election of  President Donald Trump, who has targeted DEI initiatives, and launched a “war against Black and brown people.”

“Shifting the policy solely to disadvantaged students without acknowledging racial, ethnic disparities risks eroding the progress made to address educational inequities,” Drake said. “That doesn’t solve anything, it covers up the issue.”

Curtailing partial veto powers 

SJR 116, if approved by voters, would prohibit the governor from using the state’s partial veto power to create or increase a tax or fee. It passed the Senate 18-15 along party lines and still needs to pass the Assembly before it would be set to go to voters. 

The proposal was introduced in reaction to Gov. Tony Evers’ partial veto that he exercised on the state budget in 2023 that extended annual school revenue limits for 400 years. 

Sen. Melissa Ratcliff (D-Cottage Grove) spoke against the proposal, saying that the partial veto power is one of the only checks that can “correct harmful or irresponsible provisions that come from the Legislature” and will “weaken one of the few checks that protects the public.” 

AJR 10 would prohibit the state from ordering the closure of places of worship during a state of emergency. The Senate concurred in the bill in a 17-15 vote, meaning it will officially go to voters in November.

The proposal was introduced in response to actions taken during a state of emergency declared by Evers during the COVID-19 pandemic. There was no debate on the floor about the measure.

Tax exemptions

The Senate concurred in AB 38, which would mirror federal policy to exempt tips from state income taxes, in a 21-12 vote. Sen. Sarah Keyeski (D-Lodi), Sen. Brad Pfaff (D-Onalaska) and Jamie Wall (D-Green Bay) joined Republicans in favor of the bill. The Assembly passed the bill last week, so it will now head to Evers for consideration.

The bill would allow tipped employees to deduct up to $25,000 in tips annually from their federal taxable income. Those earning more than $150,000 would not be eligible for the deduction.

According to a Department of Revenue fiscal estimate, the bill would result in Wisconsin collecting $33.7 million less in revenue annually.

The Democratic lawmakers who opposed the bill said it didn’t do enough to ensure that employees make a stable wage. Tipped employees in Wisconsin can currently make a minimum wage of $2.33.

Sen. Kelda Roys (D-Madison) said that raising the minimum wage would ensure that a person’s wage doesn’t rely on “the mood that somebody is in” or “somebody’s willingness to be sexually harassed.” 

“We should not put working people through that,” Roys said.

“You don’t get everything you want in life,” Jacque said. “I think this is something that is going to make life a little bit easier for those who work in the service industry.” 

“We don’t make the employers pay these people fairly,” Sen. LaTonya Johnson (D-Milwaukee) said. “These are the same people who have to rely on child care subsidies, who have to rely on Medicaid.”

Pfaff said in a statement that he voted for the bill because “hard working people continue to feel the pressure of rising costs every time they go to the grocery store, pay their rent and utility bills, and receive their new health insurance premium.” 

SB 69, which will allow teachers who spend money on classroom expenses to claim a subtraction on their state income taxes of up to $300, passed unanimously. 

Three education bills pass

The Senate voted 18-15 to concur in AB 602, a bill that instructs Evers to opt into the federal school choice tax credit program. It now goes to Evers. 

A provision in the federal law signed by President Trump will provide a dollar-for-dollar tax credit of up to $1,700 to people who donate to a qualifying “scholarship granting program” to support certain educational expenses including tuition and board at private schools, tutoring and books, but governors must decide whether to opt in and have until Jan. 1, 2027 to do so.

Sen. Mary Felzkowski (R-Tomahawk) said during a press conference that the program would help provide additional funding to students without using state dollars. She emphasized that if the state doesn’t opt in, then Wisconsinites could still benefit from the credit by donating to programs in participating states, but those dollars would not go to Wisconsin students.  

“We want to see those dollars stay in Wisconsin,” Felzkowski said. 

Evers has previously said he wouldn’t opt the state into the program. He could veto the Republican bill instructing him to do so when it arrives at his desk. 

Sex ed legislation

SB 371 passed 18-15 along party lines. It would add requirements for school districts that provide human growth and development programs to show high definition video of the development of the brain, heart, sex organs and other organs, a rendering of the fertilization process and fetal development and a presentation on each trimester of pregnancy and the physical and emotional health of the mother. It now goes to the Assembly for consideration. 

Roys, the Madison Democrat, criticized the bill as being part of a “nationwide effort by some of the most extreme anti-abortion… to try to indoctrinate young children.” She noted that some of Wisconsin’s prominent anti-abortion organizations support the bill including the Wisconsin Catholic Conference, Pro-Life Wisconsin and Wisconsin Right to Life. 

Felzkowski, the GOP author of the bill, said young people deserve to know “what happens to them, what happens to their body, what happens to a fetus… What are you afraid of? Why would a child having knowledge scare you?”

The Senate concurred in AB 457 18-15 and will now go to Evers for consideration. The bill would require Wisconsin school districts to submit their financial reports to the Department of Public Instruction (DPI) on time before they can ask voters for funding through a referendum. It was introduced in reaction to Milwaukee Public Schools approving a large referendum and a subsequent financial reporting scandal in 2024.

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

Planned Parenthood and other providers got word in March that millions they anticipated in Title X funding would be withheld. The money was eventually released last year, though some providers say damage was still done. (Getty Images)

Planned Parenthood clinics in Utah resumed family planning services after the Trump administration unfroze millions in federal funds.

The American Civil Liberties Union on Tuesday submitted a brief to dismiss a lawsuit filed on behalf of the National Family Planning and Reproductive Health Association after the federal government notified nine Planned Parenthood affiliates and other family planning providers in March it would withhold annual Title X funding. 

Shireen Ghorbani, president and CEO of Planned Parenthood Association of Utah, said in a statement Monday that the restored funding does not erase all of the damage caused by nine months without it. Title X funds are meant to provide affordable family planning services, such as birth control, cancer screening, and STI tests and treatment. 

Ghorbani noted that the Utah affiliate has been the only Title X grant recipient in the state since 1985. 

“We are thrilled that Title X funding is restored to Utah for now, allowing more Utahns to get critical family planning services,” Ghorbani said. “But we cannot ignore the fact that too many Utahns have already felt the devastating effects of the Trump administration’s unwarranted decision to withhold this funding for the last nine months. Many of the 26,000 Utahns who rely on the program were forced to pay more for their health care or go without care altogether.”

Crucially, she said, the affiliate closed two health centers, in St. George and Logan, among dozens that have closed because of the withheld Title X funding and are unlikely to reopen, according to Planned Parenthood. 

Some grantees had their funding restored over the summer, Politico reported, while others remained under investigation for possibly violating the Trump administration’s new rules around so-called diversity, equity and inclusion practices until December. That’s when the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services informed Planned Parenthood affiliates that they would receive their promised funds dating back to last April, with no explanation beyond unspecified “clarifications made by, and actions taken by, the grantees.” 

Planned Parenthood’s Utah affiliate said that on Jan. 9 it received $2 million in Title X funding for the current grant year that had been withheld since April.

In the lawsuit over the Title X funding, plaintiffs argued that the federal government withholding 22 federal Title X grants from Planned Parenthood and other family planning organizations was illegal and unjustified. 

“Our lawsuit succeeded in holding the administration accountable for its unlawful acts, and today, NFPRHA members’ grants have been restored. We are relieved all of our members now have access to their promised funds, but we know the fight for contraceptive access in this country goes on,” said Clare Coleman, president & CEO of the National Family Planning and Reproductive Health Association, in a statement Tuesday. 

She estimated that 865 family planning service sites were unable to provide Title X-funded services to an estimated 842,000 patients across nearly two dozen states.

While some states have fought to restore Title X family planning funding, Idaho last year declined its annual $1.5 million federal Title X funding, leaving patients statewide without free and low-cost contraception and reproductive health care services.

At least 20 more Planned Parenthood clinics have also closed because of last year’s budget reconciliation bill, which effectively blocked Planned Parenthood and other nonprofit reproductive health care providers from being able to participate in Medicaid, reducing low-income health care options throughout the country. Litigation remains ongoing in several cases over that Medicaid rule.

Colbey Decker, a WILL client who alleges her white son who struggles with dyslexia faced racial discrimination in the Green Bay Area School District, testified in favor of a proposed amendment to the state constitution outlawing government programs that promote diversity, equity and inclusion. (Photo by Baylor Spears/Wisconsin Examiner)

Two constitutional amendment proposals that could be on Wisconsinites’ ballots in November received public hearings on Tuesday, including one to eliminate diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) programs from state and local governments and one to bar the governor from issuing partial vetoes that increase taxes. 

Constitutional amendment proposals in Wisconsin must pass the state Legislature in two consecutive sessions and receive majority approval from voters to become law. Each proposal is on its second consideration, meaning if they pass the Senate and Assembly, each would appear on voters’ ballots in November alongside a slate of consequential races including for governor, Congress and the state Legislature.

One of the proposed constitutional amendments, SJR 94, takes aim at DEI programs throughout state and local government in Wisconsin. Republicans have been targeting DEI programs for years and have at times found success, including when they elicited concessions from the University of Wisconsin system in 2023. 

If the proposal passed the Senate and Assembly, voters will see on their ballots the question “Shall section 27 of article I of the constitution be created to prohibit governmental entities in the state from discriminating against, or granting preferential treatment to, any individual or group on the basis of race, sex, color, ethnicity, or national origin in public employment, public education, public contracting, or public administration?”

Sen. Steve Nass (R-Whitewater) told the Senate Licensing, Regulatory Reform, State and Federal Affairs Committee that the proposal would “ensure that we hire, promote, select, and admit people to our unit, public universities, schools and government agencies the same way we choose people for our Olympic team, military and sports teams — through merit, character, ability and hard work without regard to race, sex color, ethnicity or other immutable characteristics.” 

Sen. Dora Drake (D-Milwaukee) asked the authors of the proposal how they define “preferential treatment” and whether they know about the types of programs the amendment would eliminate.

“I don’t know how deep it is in hiring, contracting… I would say if the criteria for making your choice deals with race or sex, then that’s not appropriate,” Rep. Dave Murphy (R-Hortonville) said.

Drake brought up the state’s Supplier Diversity Program, which was established in the 1980s and certifies minority-owned, service-disabled veteran-owned and woman-owned businesses to provide better opportunities for them to do business with the state of Wisconsin. 

“Everyone should have access to opportunity. The reality is that our state historically has not shown that. That [program] was created because we have minority-owned businesses that were seeking opportunities for state contracting and they weren’t getting them, and that was based on relationships, it was based on race… and so this was implemented as a protective measure to ensure that people weren’t being discriminated against,” Drake said. “We’re pushing this forward when we still haven’t addressed what’s happening. If we’re doing this based on merit, then I would argue that there’s plenty of different minority-owned businesses that would be more than qualified, but they don’t get them, and you have to ask why.”

“They may be qualified, but are they the most qualified?” asked Sen. Chris Kapenga (R-Delafield). “And what this does is it takes away… the sex, the gender all of those items that the U.S. Constitution lays out as this is something that you can’t discriminate against. If you discriminate against a male because he’s a male, that’s still discrimination.” 

Dan Lennington, the Wisconsin Institute for Law and Liberty’s managing vice president and deputy counsel, said the bill would help to ensure that Wisconsin is “color blind.”

Lennington leads the conservative legal organization “Equality Under the Law Program,” and spoke to the number of lawsuits they’ve engaged in on the issue.

“We sued [former President] Joe Biden 12 times. We have five lawsuits pending against President [Donald] Trump right now based on race discrimination. We have a lot of things in the pipeline against the state of Wisconsin… We’d love to sue over the Minority Supplier Program. We haven’t gotten to it yet” Lennington said. “A constitutional amendment would, especially a new attorney general, would wipe all this clean and enforce the law as it’s already written, and would really help bring this to an abrupt end. Otherwise, there’s going to be decades more of this litigation.” 

Colbey Decker, a WILL client who alleges her white son who struggles with dyslexia faced racial discrimination in the Green Bay Area School District, testified in favor of the proposed amendment. The Trump administration launched an investigation into the school district over the allegations last year. 

Decker told the committee that her son wasn’t able to receive reading services because he is white, saying that she found that the school’s “success plan” included a policy related to “prioritizing resources to First Nations, Black and Hispanic students.”

“When an educational system’s moral compass is calibrated by a child’s skin color, the system has fundamentally failed. Our family’s story has forever changed after witnessing firsthand the casual callousness of sorting my son, color-coding him and then deprioritizing him based on his race,” Decker said. “The brutal reality of DEI is that it robs all children of the dignity and respect of individuality.” 

Curtailing executive partial veto power

SJR 116 would limit the governor’s partial veto power by prohibiting any vetoes from “creating or increasing or authorizing the creation or increase of any tax or fee.”

Lawmakers introduced the proposal last session in response to Gov. Tony Evers’ partial veto on the last state budget that extended school revenue increases for an additional 400 years. He did so by striking two digits and a dash from the years to extend the annual increases through 2425. The action was upheld by the state Supreme Court in April 2025. 

Rep. Amanda Nedweski (R-Pleasant Prairie) said the school revenue increases that are resulting from the partial veto are “unaffordable” and “unsustainable” for Wisconsinites.

“No governor, Republican or Democrat, should be able to single-handedly raise taxes on Wisconsin families with the stroke of his pen. The governor is not a king,” Nedweski said. “This constitutional amendment reigns in that power, restores the proper balance between the branches of government and ensures taxpayers are protected from runaway tax increases in the future.”

A recent Wisconsin Policy Forum report found that Wisconsin property taxpayers’ December bills included the highest increase since 2018 and warned property taxpayers could see similar increases to their property taxes in the future.

“We did all get a kick in the pants with property taxes this year… we’re gonna get another wack in 2026 in December,” Nass said during the hearing. 

Drake said the bill appeared to be a “grab for power.” 

Kapenga, one of the proposal authors, pushed back on the comment, saying if he were governor, he would sign a bill from Drake eliminating the governor’s ability to levy such a veto. 

“I do not like the power that the governor has in this state, regardless of who it is,” Kapenga said. “The power of the people should be vested in the Legislature, not in the executive branch.”

The question voters would see is: “Shall section 10 (1) (c) of article V of the constitution be amended to prohibit the governor, in exercising his or her partial veto authority, from creating or increasing or authorizing the creation or increase of any tax or fee?”

Constitutional amendments have been used to limit the partial veto power in a couple other scenarios, including in 1990 when voters approved the prohibition of the “Vanna White” veto, or eliminating single letters within words, and in 2008, when voters approved, eliminating the “Frankenstein veto” — or the ability for governors to create new sentences by combining parts of two or more sentences.

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE