Wisconsin Supreme Court chambers. (Photo by Baylor Spears/Wisconsin Examiner)
The Wisconsin Supreme Court declined Monday to throw out Wisconsin’s religious exemption from the state’s unemployment insurance system and affirmed that Catholic Charities organizations in Wisconsin are exempt.
The state’s highest court acted in response to the U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling in June reversing the Wisconsin Court’s decision in 2024, which found the organizations didn’t qualify for the state law’s UI religious exemption.
Monday’s unsigned order made no statements for or against any of the numerous briefs that were filed with the Wisconsin Court after the Supreme Court ruling.
In a 4-3 ruling in March 2024, the Wisconsin Supreme Court held that Catholic Charities’ work wassecular rather than religious, and that the organization therefore was not entitled to an exemption in Wisconsin’s unemployment insurance law.
The religious exemption is reserved for employees of churches, their parent organizations, employees of organizations “operated primarily for religious purposes” and controlled by churches or church associations, church ministers or members of a religious order.
The U.S. Supreme Court ruled unanimously June 5, 2025, that the Wisconsin Court’s ruling “grants a denominational preference by explicitly differentiating between religions based on theological practices” and therefore violated the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution’s religious freedom provision.
After that ruling, both Catholic Charities and the Wisconsin Department of Justice filed proposed remedies with the Wisconsin Court. The Wisconsin DOJ called on the court to throw out the state law’s religious exemption to restore “equal treatment.”
Catholic Charities rejected that proposal, declaring it showed “animus” toward the charity, and urged the court instead to affirm the exemption.
In the decision Monday, the Wisconsin Supreme Court sent the case back to Douglas County Circuit Court. The order directs the lower court to vacate earlier Labor and Industry Review Commission decisions denying the religious exemption and to direct LIRC to declare Catholic Charities “eligible for the religious purposes exemption to unemployment taxation.”
Victor Forberger, a Wisconsin unemployment lawyer who haswritten about the case on his blog, told the Wisconsin Examiner that the state high court’s action Monday was not a surprise in light of the U.S. Supreme Court ruling.
The federal ruling, however, did not address calls by outside groups seeking a more sweeping religious exemption, Forberger said. “How this is going to play out with other entities and their claim for religious exemptions are all to be determined,” he added.
The Senate on Thursday rejected legislation to extend Affordable Care Act tax credits, essentially guaranteeing that millions of Americans will see a steep rise in costs at the beginning of the year.
Senators rejected a Democratic bill to extend the subsidies for three years and a Republican alternative that would have created new health savings accounts — an unceremonious end to a monthslong effort by Democrats to prevent the COVID-19-era subsidies from expiring on Jan. 1.
Ahead of the votes, Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer of New York warned Republicans that if they did not vote to extend the tax credits, “there won’t be another chance to act,” before premiums rise for many people who buy insurance off the ACA marketplaces.
“Let’s avert a disaster,” Schumer said. “The American people are watching.”
Republicans have argued that Affordable Care Act plans are too expensive and need to be overhauled. The health savings accounts in the GOP bill would give money directly to consumers instead of to insurance companies, an idea that has been echoed by President Donald Trump.
Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., said ahead of the vote that a simple extension of the subsidies is “an attempt to disguise the real impact of Obamacare’s spiraling health care costs.”
But Democrats immediately rejected the GOP plan, saying that the accounts wouldn’t be enough to cover costs for most consumers.
The dueling Senate votes are the latest political messaging exercise in a Congress that has operated almost entirely on partisan terms, as Republicans pushed through a massive tax and spending cuts bill this summer using budget maneuvers that eliminated the need for Democratic votes. In September, Republicans tweaked Senate rules to push past a Democratic blockade of all of Trump’s nominees.
The Senate voted 51-48 not to move forward on the Democratic bill, with four Republicans — Maine Sen. Susan Collins, Missouri Sen. Josh Hawley and Alaska Sens. Lisa Murkowski and Dan Sullivan — voting with Democrats. The legislation needed 60 votes to proceed, as did the Republican bill, which was also blocked on a 51-48 vote.
No interest in compromise
Some Republicans have pushed their colleagues to extend the credits, including Sen. Thom Tillis of North Carolina, who said they should vote for a short-term extension so they can find agreement on the issue next year. “It’s too complicated and too difficult to get done in the limited time that we have left,” Tillis said Wednesday.
But there appeared to be little interest in compromise. Despite the potential for bipartisan agreement, Republicans and Democrats have never engaged in meaningful or high-level negotiations on a solution, even after a small group of centrist Democrats struck a deal with Republicans last month to end the 43-day government shutdown in exchange for a vote on extending the ACA subsidies. Most Democratic lawmakers opposed the move as many Republicans made clear that they wanted the tax credits to expire.
Still, the deal raised hopes for bipartisan compromise on health care. But that quickly faded with a lack of any real bipartisan talks.
An intractable issue
The votes were also the latest failed salvo in the debate over the Affordable Care Act, President Barack Obama’s signature law that Democrats passed along party lines in 2010 to expand access to insurance coverage.
Republicans have tried unsuccessfully since then to repeal or overhaul the law, arguing that health care is still too expensive. But they have struggled to find an alternative. In the meantime, Democrats have made the policy a central political issue in several elections, betting that the millions of people who buy health care on the government marketplaces want to keep their coverage.
“When people’s monthly payments spike next year, they’ll know it was Republicans that made it happen,” Schumer said in November, while making clear that Democrats would not seek compromise.
Even if they view it as a political win, the failed votes are a loss for Democrats who demanded an extension of the benefits as they forced a government shutdown for six weeks in October and November — and for the millions of people facing premium increases on Jan. 1.
Maine Sen. Angus King, an independent who caucuses with Democrats, said the group tried to negotiate with Republicans after the shutdown ended. But, he said, the talks became unproductive when Republicans demanded language adding new limits for abortion coverage that were a “red line” for Democrats. He said Republicans were going to “own these increases.”
A plethora of plans, but little agreement
Republicans have used the looming expiration of the subsidies to renew their longstanding criticisms of the ACA, also called Obamacare, and to try, once more, to agree on what should be done.
Thune announced earlier this week that the GOP conference had decided to vote on the bill led by Louisiana Sen. Bill Cassidy, the chairman of the Senate Health, Labor, Education and Pensions Committee, and Idaho Sen. Mike Crapo, the chairman of the Senate Finance Committee, even as several Republican senators proposed alternate ideas.
In the House, Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., has promised a vote next week. Republicans weighed different options in a conference meeting on Wednesday, with no apparent consensus.
Rep. Kevin Kiley, R-Calif., has pushed for a temporary extension, which he said could be an opening to take further steps on health care.
If they fail to act and health care costs go up, the approval rating for Congress “will get even lower,” Kiley said.
Wisconsin Watch is a nonprofit and nonpartisan newsroom. Subscribe to our newsletters to get our investigative stories and Friday news roundup.This story is published in partnership with The Associated Press.
Reading Time: 6minutesClick here to read highlights from the story
Free clinics like Bread of Healing in Milwaukee and Open Arms Free Clinic in Walworth County serve as a final safety net for community members who can’t afford health care.
They are bracing for higher demand as more residents are expected to forgo insurance as a crucial tax credit is set to expire and premiums spike.
Clinic staff say they may need more resources to meet demand.
The U.S. Senate on Thursday rejected dueling plans related to helping people pay for plans on the federal marketplace.
Listen to Addie Costello’s story from WPR.
Editor’s note: This story has been updated to note the U.S. Senate’s rejection on Thursday of legislation to address the expected rise in health care premiums.
Cars filled the small parking lot outside of Milwaukee’s Cross Lutheran Church on a recent Monday afternoon. The church’s pews sat empty, but downstairs visitors waited around folding tables. Not to hear a sermon, but to see a volunteer physician.
Staff and volunteers walked patients past a row of dividers used to separate the “waiting room” from the folding tables where doctors and counselors filled out paperwork.
In front of the free health clinic’s four exam rooms, two phones rang.
“This is the Bread of Healing Clinic. Can you hold for a moment?” asked Diane Hill Horton, the free health clinic’s assistant.
Across from Hill Horton, another staff member scheduled an appointment in Spanish.
On a typical Monday, the clinic sees up to 30 patients. Bread of Healing treated 2,400 patients in 2024 across three clinics it runs in Milwaukee. Patients typically lack any health coverage and aren’t asked to pay for their visits.
“We don’t turn anyone away,” Hill Horton said.
Diane Hill Horton talks with a patient at the Bread of Healing Clinic, Nov. 24, 2025, in Milwaukee. (Jonathan Aguilar / Milwaukee Neighborhood News Service / CatchLight Local)
Dr. Greg Von Roenn talks with Dr. Barbara Horner-Ibler at the Bread of Healing Clinic, Nov. 24, 2025, in Milwaukee. (Jonathan Aguilar / Milwaukee Neighborhood News Service / CatchLight Local)
But without action from lawmakers in Washington, clinic staff worry that it will become harder to answer every call.
Free clinics like Bread of Healing serve as a final safety net for community members who can’t afford health care. They are bracing for higher demand as more residents are expected to forgo insurance as a crucial tax credit is set to expire and premiums spike.
Affordable Care Act premiums in Wisconsin will increase on average by 17.4% next year, a previous Wisconsin Watch analysis showed, with wide variation depending on age, income, family status and geography. Meanwhile, experts estimate more than 270,000 Wisconsinites rely on the enhanced premium tax credit to make insurance more affordable. It will expire at the end of the month without intervention.
People without insurance are less likely to get preventative care. Bread of Healing focuses on treating chronic conditions to prevent people from overwhelming emergency rooms, said Executive Director Erica Wright.
“If we don’t try our best to move with that demand, we’re not going to be able to see as many people, and there’s going to be a lot of folks falling through the cracks,” she said.
Wright oversees all three Bread of Healing locations. While the clinics have some room to take on more patients right now, she wants to significantly increase their capacity over the next year — adding money and volunteers to serve a possible “monsoon” of demand.
“We’re never going to be able to serve everybody, we know that,” Wright said. “But I don’t want it to be where our phones are ringing off the hook and we just can’t meet at least a good chunk of the demand.”
Executive Director Erica Wright is shown at the Bread of Healing Clinic in Milwaukee, Nov. 24, 2025. (Jonathan Aguilar / Milwaukee Neighborhood News Service / CatchLight Local)
Higher premiums and shrinking options
Ashley Bratz paid about $545 a month for a low-deductible marketplace plan this year. That same plan cost over $700 when she went to sign up for 2026.
Even with her job at Open Arms Free Clinic in Walworth County covering a portion of her health care costs, the only option in Bratz’s price range had deductibles higher than what she expects to spend.
“It’s supposed to be reasonable, and this is not reasonable,” Bratz said.
The names of clinic volunteers are shown on a board at Open Arms Free Clinic in Elkhorn, Wis., Dec. 2, 2025. (Addie Costello / WPR and Wisconsin Watch)
Bratz, who works as the nurse clinic coordinator, said she did not receive enhanced marketplace subsidies this year. Those who did will face a particular shock as the tax credit expires — while also confronting rising prices and shrinking options.
The income-based tax credits have lowered some marketplace enrollees’ monthly premium payments since they became available in 2014.
In 2021, the federal government expanded those subsidies, further bringing costs down for lower-income enrollees and extending smaller subsidies to people making over four times the federal poverty level — $62,600 a year for one person in 2025.
Without an extension, monthly premiums are expected to more than double on average nationally for subsidized enrollees, according to KFF, an independent source for health policy research.
A quarter of enrollees surveyed by KFF said they were “very likely” to go without insurance if their premiums doubled.
The U.S. Senate on Thursday rejected a Democratic plan to extend marketplace subsidies. Republicans, who have long criticized the Affordable Care Act (ACA), have instead called for a broader overhaul. The Senate also rejected a Republican plan that would have expanded access to high-deductible insurance plans and deposit $1,000 to $1,500 in enrollees’ health savings accounts — without renewing enhanced subsidies.
Sara Nichols, Open Arms Free Clinic executive director, is shown Dec. 2, 2025, in Elkhorn, Wis. (Addie Costello / WPR and Wisconsin Watch)
Sara Nichols, Open Arms Clinic executive director, is forging ahead regardless. When Bratz told her about her shrinking affordable coverage options, Nichols started working with an insurance broker to find a new plan for the clinic’s small team of paid staff.
“We cannot have health care workers not have health insurance,” Nichols said.
The move left Bratz relieved. Now she’s preparing to help more clients who can’t afford coverage or just need help navigating the complicated system.
They face challenges beyond lost subsidies and premium hikes. President Donald Trump’s “big” bill-turned law included additional changes to Medicaid funding and the ACA that are expected to increase the number of people without insurance by 10 million over the next decade, according to the Congressional Budget Office.
“We always take what is thrown at us and we figure out how to handle it,” Bratz said. “Do I think we could also use more help? Yes.”
Resources needed to meet demand
Open Arms Free Clinic is already seeing higher demand, Nichols said.
It operates a dental clinic five days a week, and she’s considering whether further demand would require opening its medical clinic for an additional day.
That would take more volunteers and money.
While the Legislature sent state dollars to free clinics in its latest budget, private grants and donations have been harder to secure this year, Nichols said. She expects the clinic will have to get even leaner next year.
But she won’t start turning patients away.
The clinic provides dental, medical and behavioral health to low-income people who live and work in Walworth County. Its 250 volunteers help with things like translating, nursing, greeting patients and connecting people to the clinic. They also provide vision and pharmacy services.
“I know that we have enough smart people and kind people that we’re going to come up with a solution to anything that comes up,” Nichols said.
Steven Thompson counts out a patient’s medication at the Bread of Healing Clinic, Nov. 24, 2025, in Milwaukee. (Jonathan Aguilar / Milwaukee Neighborhood News Service / CatchLight Local)
This is far from the first time Wisconsin’s free clinics have faced big changes, said Dennis Skrajewski, the executive director of the Wisconsin Association of Free and Charitable Clinics.
Free clinics adapted to the COVID-19 pandemic, operating with fewer volunteers and switching to telehealth services and opening vaccine programs, Skrajewski said. Then clinics prepped for increased demand in 2023 after Medicaid unwinding.
“We’re used to waking up and the world changed yesterday, so we’ll adjust,” Skrajewski said.
Wisconsin’s free and charitable clinic association is collaborating with other safety net health providers as part of the Wisconsin Owns Wellbeing initiative, which will host statewide planning meetings to strengthen the state’s safety net services.
Clinic co-founder: ‘I just wish it weren’t needed’
Rick Cesar started working as a parish nurse at Cross Lutheran Church in the 1990s. He took people’s blood pressure at a weekly food pantry and ran an HIV testing site and needle exchange out of the church’s basement.
He helped co-found the Bread of Healing Clinic in 2000, a decade before the ACA passed.
“There were so many people that had no coverage,” Cesar said.
An exam room is shown at the Bread of Healing Clinic in Milwaukee, Nov. 24, 2025. (Jonathan Aguilar / Milwaukee Neighborhood News Service / CatchLight Local)
Brochures sit on shelves at the Bread of Healing Clinic in Milwaukee, Nov. 24, 2025. (Jonathan Aguilar / Milwaukee Neighborhood News Service / CatchLight Local)
Demand for free services persisted even after more people enrolled in marketplace plans. The clinic expanded to two other locations and hired paid staff. Cesar retired from nursing in 2019 but still regularly volunteers. He feels proud watching the clinic grow.
“I just wish it weren’t needed,” he said.
The clinic is adaptable, Cesar said, whether it’s responding to a pandemic with vaccine drives or helping clients navigate ACA changes.
“We’re going to be here and do as much as we can,” Cesar said. “But those resources, you never know how long they are going to last when the demand is so great.”
Looking for a free clinic?
Find a map of free or charitable clinics near you at wafcclinics.org.
Wisconsin Watch is a nonprofit, nonpartisan newsroom. Subscribe to our newsletters for original stories and our Friday news roundup.
The website of Connect for Health Colorado, the state's health insurance marketplace, is pictured on Aug. 27, 2025. (Photo by Chase Woodruff/Colorado Newsline)
WASHINGTON — Americans who purchase their health insurance through the Affordable Care Act marketplace are bracing for a steep rise in costs next year that many say they will not be able to afford, according to a poll released Thursday by the nonpartisan health organization KFF.
Nearly 60% of enrollees surveyed could not cover the costs of a $300 annual increase in their premiums, while an additional 20% said they couldn’t afford a $1,000 jump in prices per year.
About 90% of those polled said it would be somewhat or very difficult to afford health insurance within their budget if they could no longer purchase a plan through the ACA marketplace.
About one-in-eight Marketplace enrollees say they could afford an increase of $2,000 or more. (Graphic by KFF)
The spike in prices is predominantly due to the end-of-year expiration date for enhanced tax credits for ACA marketplace plans. Republicans in Congress have so far declined to extend the subsidies, while Democrats shut down the government in an unsuccessful attempt to continue the credits.
While increases would vary considerably based on location, income and plan type, a Sept. 30 KFF analysis projected individuals’ annual premiums would rise between around $350 and more than $1,800.
Open enrollment for ACA marketplace plans ends at different times throughout the country, with some states finishing on Dec. 15. Residents of other states are able to sign up through varying dates in January, but with their coverage starting later in the year. That doesn’t give Congress much time to broker a deal before the ability to purchase a plan for next year closes.
No progress on negotiations
The Senate is expected to vote next week on a Democratic bill to extend the subsidies, though that legislation appears unlikely to get the 60 votes needed to advance in the Republican-controlled chamber.
The Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee held a hearing this week to explore short- and long-term options to bring down health care costs, but senators on that panel didn’t reach a clear consensus.
KFF President and CEO Drew Altman said in a statement the “poll shows the range of problems Marketplace enrollees will face if the enhanced tax credits are not extended in some form, and those problems will be the poster child of the struggles Americans are having with health care costs in the midterms if Republicans and Democrats cannot resolve their differences.”
The KFF poll showed only 9% of marketplace enrollees have a lot of confidence that Republicans in Congress will address rising health insurance costs, with 24% saying they had some confidence, 25% saying they didn’t have much confidence and 42% responding they had no confidence in GOP lawmakers on that particular issue.
Blame falls to Trump
ACA marketplace enrollees would predominantly fault President Donald Trump if their overall health care costs, including premiums, co-pays and deductibles, were to increase by $1,000 next year, though Republicans and Democrats in Congress would share nearly as much blame, the survey found.
Thirty-seven percent would place the responsibility with Trump, while 33% would cite GOP lawmakers and 29% would fault Democrats with the rising costs.
Those numbers fluctuate significantly depending on a person’s political affiliation, with 65% of Republicans saying they would blame Democrats, while 20% would credit Republicans in Congress and 14% would fault Trump.
Forty-four percent of people who identified as independents said they would blame Trump, while 32% said they would cite Republicans in Congress and 23% said they would fault Democrats.
Among Democrats, 49% would blame Trump, 46% would credit congressional Republicans, with the remainder would fault members of their own party.
KFF conducted the survey of 1,350 people between Nov. 7-15. It has a margin of error of plus or minus 3 percentage points for the full sample, with a plus or minus 6 percentage points margin of error for political party affiliation questions.
4:38 pmThis report has been clarified to reflect that deadlines for ACA enrollment vary among states.
A Rivian R1T owner faced a massive bill after a low-speed parking incident.
Insurance estimated $1.7K but later refused to pay the certified shop’s bill.
Owner paid out of pocket, fought insurance, and recovered only part of it.
Rivian owners take on a risk that many may not fully appreciate when they buy one of these trucks. It’s not just about the company being young, or its future still being written. Those are expected gambles.
The real hidden concern and surprise comes when something goes wrong, and not mechanically, but physically. Damage that would be a quick fix on a Ford, a Toyota or most other legacy carmakers can turn into a financial nightmare with a Rivian, sometimes severe enough to write off the vehicle altogether.
It’s becoming an increasingly common problem, and the ordeal one owner continues to face shows just how complicated it can get.
When Simple Damage Isn’t Simple
Back in May of this year, the employee of a Rivian R1T owner backed into his electric truck. The damage appeared quite straightforward in the rear quarter panel. However, this is a Rivian R1T, so “straightforward” doesn’t really apply in this case.
The rear quarter panel is part of one giant piece that actually includes the roof. In other words, fixing a dent in it, especially a large one, isn’t a simple job. We’ve seen instances of paintless dent repair (PDR) being a savior in some cases. This isn’t one of them.
The owner of the R1T says that his employee’s insurance company initially quoted just $1,700 for the repair. Considering that many of these situations end up in the five-figure range, he knew that was potentially problematic. To that end, he contacted Rivian, and things only got worse from there.
The True Cost of Rivian Repairs
The automaker explained that there was only one certified repair shop within 300 miles (about 480 km), and their estimate came in at a whopping $16,000. Given the huge gap, the owner started asking PDR shops for help, but none would touch the R1T.
That said, the owner decided to go ahead and go with the certified repair shop, hoping that the final bill would come in lower than the estimate. Instead, the shop found additional damage once the truck was in the building.
The total came to $22,000 after a seven-week repair process. The ordeal wasn’t even over after all that because insurance refused to pay that amount.
Instead, it offered $13,000 and said that the certified repair shop’s rates were excessive. Faced with either paying the $9k himself or entering arbitration that would delay pickup indefinitely, the owner paid the difference, retrieved the truck, and launched an appeal.
His letters were ignored. A second, more forceful letter outlining what he considered an unfair settlement? Also ignored. Only after filing a complaint with his state’s Secretary of State did the insurer finally respond, this time offering an additional $5,100 to make the issue go away.
The state recommended accepting the offer, and the owner did. “I really enjoy this truck, but this is bonkers,” he says. “I hope Rivian improves design to allow for less expensive repair costs for common dings.”
No doubt, plenty of other Rivian owners hope the same thing.
Two of the biggest political issues of the year are immigration and health care.
In the latest Marquette Law School Poll, 75% of Republicans said they were very concerned about illegal immigration and border security while 83% of Democrats said they were very concerned about health insurance. Those were the top issues among those groups. (Among independents, 79% said they were very concerned about inflation and the cost of living, making it their top issue.)
Here’s a look at some recent fact checks of claims related to health care and immigration.
Health care
No, Obamacare premiums aren’t doubling for 20 million Americans in 2026, but 2 to 3 million Americans would lose all enhanced subsidies and about half of them could see their premium payments double or triple.
Yes, Obamacare premiums increased three times the rate of inflation since the program started in 2014. They’re making headlines now for going up even more.
No, 6 million people have not received Obamacare health insurance without knowing it. There wasn’t evidence to back a claim by U.S. Sen. Ron Johnson, R-Wis., about the level of fraud in the program.
No, Wisconsin does not have a law on minors getting birth control without parental consent. But residents under age 18 can get birth control on their own.
Immigration
Yes, unauthorized immigrants have constitutional rights that apply to all people in the U.S. That includes a right to due process, to defend oneself in a hearing, such as in court, though not other rights, such as voting.
No, standard driver’s licenses do not prove U.S. citizenship. There’s a court battle in Wisconsin over whether voters must prove citizenship to cast a ballot.
Yes, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) is offering police departments $100,000 to cooperate in finding unauthorized immigrants. It’s for vehicle purchases.
No, tens of millions of unauthorized immigrants do not receive federal health benefits.
Wisconsin Watch is a nonprofit, nonpartisan newsroom. Subscribe to our newsletters for original stories and our Friday news roundup.
The amount some pay for Affordable Care Act health insurance will double when enhanced subsidies expire, but there isn’t evidence the number is 20 million.
KFF, a health policy nonprofit, estimates monthly payments for Obamacare recipients will increase, on average, $1,016 – more than doubling, from $888 in 2025 to $1,904 in 2026.
That counts increases to premiums and lost subsidies.
U.S. Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vermont, citing KFF, made the 20 million claim. U.S. Sen. Ron Johnson, R-Wis., said Sanders was wrong.
KFF doesn’t say how many of the 24 million Obamacare enrollees will see premiums double.
But 2 to 3 million people on the high end of income eligibility would lose all enhanced subsidies. About half could see premium payments double or triple.
Enhanced subsidies, created in 2021, expire Dec. 31. Some Obamacare enrollees will receive lower enhanced subsidies or none. Standard subsidies remain.
This fact brief is responsive to conversations such as this one.
About 13,000 disabled workers previously declared ineligible for unemployment insurance are being sent mailed notices from the Wisconsin Department of Workforce Development notifying them they might be eligible for past benefits, worth potentially hundreds to thousands of dollars per person.
The DWD began processing nearly 10 years worth of unemployment claims from individuals who, under a 2013 state law, were previously declared ineligible for those benefits due to simultaneously receiving Social Security Disability Insurance (SSDI). But last year a court struck down that law.
That means thousands of people could receive financial compensation if they were either denied unemployment benefits or ordered to repay benefits they received between Sept. 8, 2015, and July 29, 2025, because the person collected SSDI.
A spokesperson for DWD said the total cost of the claims the agency may have to pay out is unclear right now. Individuals who receive unemployment insurance can receive a maximum of $370 per week for at most 26 weeks, which would be $9,620. But not every person files for the entire 26-week period. The current average is 13 weeks, the spokesperson said.
What led to this?
A federal judge in 2024 struck down the law that previously blocked individuals from receiving both SSDI benefits and unemployment insurance.
A spokesperson for DWD said it is mailing notices to individuals who may be eligible for past benefits, but warned that it will take time to process the claims from the designated time period.
While DWD is mailing about 13,000 notices, the agency doesn’t know how many people will actually reach out about filing a claim to receive the past benefits. Individuals must call DWD about their claim within 90 days of receiving a notice from the agency.
Where can I go for more information?
The DWD has a web page with guidance and answers to questions about the court order and individuals who may be eligible for past unemployment benefits.
People with questions can also contact a DWD Help Center phone number at 414-435-7069 or toll free at 844-910-3661 during business hours.
Wisconsin Watch is a nonprofit, nonpartisan newsroom. Subscribe to our newsletters for original stories and our Friday news roundup.
We found no documentation confirming a Sept. 29 statement by U.S. Sen. Ron Johnson, R-Wis., that 6 million people unknowingly received health insurance through the Affordable Care Act.
Johnson cited a report by Paragon Health Institute, a think tank alignedwith the Trump administration.
The report produced an estimate, not a count, claiming 6.4 million people were fraudulently enrolled in Obamacare. It said they were not income-eligible, including millions who “appear to be enrolled without their knowledge.”
Fraud is much more common among brokers misappropriating patients’ identities than by patients, said KFF Obamacare program director Cynthia Cox and Justin Giovannelli of Georgetown University’s Center on Health Insurance Reforms.
Consumers are cautioned about offers to enroll them in Obamacare.
This fact brief is responsive to conversations such as this one.
That includes Medicaid (low-income people), Medicare (age 65 and over) and the Children’s Health Insurance Program (CHIP). And they aren’t eligible to buy coverage through the Affordable Care Act (Obamacare) marketplaces.
Federal Medicaid can reimburse hospitals for providing emergency care to unauthorized immigrants, but that is not coverage for individuals.
Vice President JD Vance said Aug. 28 in La Crosse, Wisconsin, that health care benefits can’t be sustained “if you allow tens of millions of people” into the U.S. without authorization “and give them those benefits.”
White House spokespersons did not return requests for comment.
This fact brief is responsive to conversations such as this one.
Reading Time: 3minutesClick here to read highlights from the story
A judge’s order promises compensation to potentially thousands of disabled workers who were denied unemployment benefits under a state law struck down as discriminatory.
The invalidated law prevented recipients of Social Security Disability Insurance (SSDI) from collecting unemployment insurance.
Two classes of workers may be eligible for compensation: those denied unemployment benefits after Sept. 7, 2015, and before July 30, 2025, under the invalidated law, and those who had to repay benefits they received during that period for the same reason.
A federal judge has ordered Wisconsin’s Department of Workforce Development to compensate disabled workers who were denied unemployment benefits under a state law struck down as discriminatory.
U.S. District Judge William Conley’s order promises relief to potentially thousands of workers affected by a 2013 Wisconsin law that banned recipients of federal disability aid from collecting unemployment compensation when they lost work.
But many details remain to be ironed out, including how quickly the state will reprocess a decade’s worth of denied claims and whether any claims should draw priority.
“Some work needs to be done yet to put the order into practice, and counsels for the class are working diligently to get to that point,” said Paul Kinne, one of the attorneys representing plaintiffs.
Conley issued his order Wednesday following a hearing in which attorneys representing workers and the state discussed remedies for denials under a law that Conley ruled violated the Americans with Disabilities Act and the Rehabilitation Act.
The overturned law prevented recipients of Social Security Disability Insurance (SSDI) — a monthly benefit for people with disabilities who have worked and paid into Social Security — from collecting unemployment insurance.
Republican lawmakers who approved the law claimed in 2013 that simultaneously collecting disability and unemployment benefits represented “double dipping.” But SSDI guidelines have long allowed and even encouraged recipients to supplement their income with part-time work, so long as their earnings remain below the threshold of “substantial gainful activity.”
Conley’s order covers two classes: workers who were denied unemployment benefits after Sept. 7, 2015, and before July 30, 2025, due to receiving SSDI, and those who had to repay benefits they received during that period for the same reason.
Not every class member is automatically entitled to benefits, Kinne said, and it may take time to determine eligibility. That’s due to a variety of factors, including potential difficulties in retrieving and analyzing past claims data — and locating the claimants. Still, Kinne expects an “overwhelming majority” of class members to be compensated.
In addition to receiving compensation for past denied claims, class members can file certifications for subsequent weeks in which they were told they were ineligible to file. These certifications should be submitted within 90 days of receiving notice from the department, the order said.
Eugene Wilson of Madison, Wis., receives federal Social Security Disability Insurance due to health issues that prevent him from working full time. After he lost his part-time job during the pandemic, the state denied his unemployment claim — citing a law that banned workers on disability from collecting unemployment insurance. He’s among workers who may be eligible to be compensated for past denials after a federal judge struck down the ban. He is shown with his dog Kane on Aug. 18, 2025. (Brad Horn for Wisconsin Watch)
The order also states that claimants who were charged with unemployment fraud for not properly disclosing their SSDI status will be eligible for benefits they had to repay.
Class members who received federal Pandemic Unemployment Assistance (PUA) — aid for people who lost work during the COVID-19 pandemic but didn’t qualify for regular benefits — will not receive additional benefits for weeks in which they already received pandemic aid. PUA claims were paid at a higher rate than regular benefits, Conley’s order states, and federal law bans the collection of both.
The Department of Workforce Development will begin notifying affected workers by Oct. 1, the order said. The parties must still agree on the language for those notifications, which should inform affected workers about the outcome of the lawsuit and how to claim benefits to which they should be entitled.
“I was generally pleased with the order,” Kinne said. “There is now light at the end of the tunnel for disabled people to receive the unemployment compensation that they should have received in the past.”
Wisconsin Watch is a nonprofit, nonpartisan newsroom. Subscribe to our newsletters for original stories and our Friday news roundup.
Reading Time: 5minutesClick here to read highlights from the story
A 2013 state law prevented recipients of federal Social Security Disability Insurance from collecting state unemployment insurance after losing part-time work.
A federal judge struck down the law, ruling that it had “disparate impact on disabled workers seeking unemployment insurance benefits.”
A hearing will explore whether and how the state should compensate workers for past denied claims.
Wisconsin has stopped blocking laid-off workers who receive disability benefits from collecting unemployment insurance — a response to court rulings that the practice violated federal discrimination law.
Now U.S. District Judge William Conley will consider whether and how the state should compensate workers for past denied claims. Attorneys representing the state and affected workers plan to propose remedies ahead of a hearing on Wednesday.
“In my eyes, we deserve all of it,” James Trandel, a longtime seasonal worker who faced denials for years, told Wisconsin Watch. “The law should have never been.”
The state law in question prevented recipients of Social Security Disability Insurance (SSDI) — a monthly benefit for people with disabilities who have worked and paid into Social Security — from collecting unemployment insurance after losing work.
Eugene Wilson is shown with his dog Kane on Aug. 18, 2025. He has tried for years to return to the workforce, but he rarely hears back after filing applications. (Brad Horn for Wisconsin Watch)
In proposing the law under Gov. Scott Walker in 2013, Republican lawmakers claimed that simultaneously collecting disability and unemployment benefits represented “double dipping” that “may constitute fraud.”
That overlooked the fact that SSDI guidelines have long allowed and even encouraged people on disability to supplement their income with part-time work, so long as their earnings remain below the threshold of “substantial gainful activity.”
Eight SSDI recipients, with help from attorneys, challenged the law in 2021 by filing a class action lawsuit.
Conley ruled in July 2024 that the law violated the Americans with Disabilities Act and the Rehabilitation Act, citing its “disparate impact on disabled workers seeking unemployment insurance benefits.”
But the ruling was not immediately implemented. The state’s Department of Workforce Development continued denying unemployment claims until Conley ordered it to stop in July.
DWD spokesperson Haley McCoy said the department did not oppose Conley’s order to stop enforcing the law he struck down, but she declined further comment due to pending litigation.
The lawsuit covers two classes: workers who were denied unemployment benefits after Sept. 7, 2015, due to receiving SSDI, and those who had to repay benefits they received for the same reason.
Conley will now consider who in those classes qualifies for benefits and how much they should get.
Both parties will exchange proposals before Wednesday’s oral arguments to address such questions, said Victor Forberger, an attorney for the plaintiffs who has helped many SSDI recipients pursue their claims. The plaintiffs want the state to fairly compensate those who faced discriminatory denials, he added.
The discussions may also involve how to address past claims for federal Pandemic Unemployment Assistance (PUA) — aid for people who lost their jobs during the COVID-19 pandemic but didn’t qualify for regular benefits. The state initially denied PUA claims from workers on disability, but it reversed course in mid-2020 following Wisconsin Watch and WPR’s reporting on the denials.
“No one’s asking to get paid benefits twice. They’re just asking to get paid to be treated just like everyone else,” Forberger said.
Fighting for future generations
Trandel, who has used a wheelchair since a 1983 fall left his legs paralyzed, filed for unemployment for years during the off-seasons of his job as a gate chief for the Milwaukee Brewers, where he helps with tickets and security. He has since hit retirement age, now 67, allowing him to switch from SSDI to Social Security retirement benefits. The state allowed him to collect a couple of weeks of state unemployment pay for the first time this spring because he was no longer on SSDI.
Although Trandel managed to get by without the state fulfilling his past claims, he believes that compensating workers for past denials would offer a measure of justice.
But even if that doesn’t happen, he’s proud of what the lawsuit has accomplished so far.
“If I get nothing, that’s fine,” Trandel said. “At least the law’s changed so the future generations won’t have to go through what we went through the last 12 years.”
James Trandel, center, is seen at American Family Field with a group of baseball fans. Trandel works as a gate chief for the Milwaukee Brewers, helping with tickets and security. (Courtesy of James Trandel)
Judy Fintz, a seasonal worker and a plaintiff in the lawsuit, hopes that allowing SSDI recipients to collect unemployment like others will eliminate one of the many barriers they face in interacting with a long-outdated system that’s undergoing an overhaul.
Fintz spends the school year cleaning tables, windows and soda machines part time at the University of Wisconsin-La Crosse dining hall. She applied for unemployment during the off months from school, when she relies on SSDI while her bills pile up. That experience was far from smooth, even outside of the denials. She faced the difficulties of having to file claims by phone rather than online due to a severe learning disability, and she said she was treated poorly.
“This should really change everything around,” Fintz said of the court proceedings. “We should be able to get (unemployment insurance) without issue, so we can pay our bills.”
Reentering the workforce
As they await the outcome of litigation, some SSDI recipients are looking for more work that accommodates their disabilities.
Eugene Wilson of Madison is one such person. He deals with anxiety, depression and post-traumatic stress disorder — conditions that make him easily overwhelmed by tasks and make repetitive work difficult.
Wilson found part-time work years ago before being laid off during the pandemic. He was denied regular unemployment and PUA during a process that took an additional toll on his mental health, he said.
He now receives about $1,500 a month in SSDI benefits and affords his apartment with the help of rental aid. He barely gets by.
He has tried for years to return to the workforce, but he rarely hears back after filing applications and sending thank-you messages.
“It’s like nobody wants to hire anybody on disability,” Wilson said.
“I just want to get out there and do it and show people that people on disability can do this.”
Jessica Barrera of Eau Claire lost her job during the pandemic and depended in part on Social Security Disability Insurance to survive. She spent six months fighting to receive her Pandemic Unemployment Assistance claim after being denied regular unemployment insurance, initially unaware of a state law that banned people on disability from collecting unemployment aid. “It really made me feel less than others,” Barrera said. (Courtesy of Jessica Barrera)
Jessica Barrera of Eau Claire has a similar goal. Wisconsin Watch followed her in 2020 as she navigated life as a single mother who lost her job during the pandemic and depended in part on SSDI to survive. She spent six months fighting to receive her PUA claim after being denied regular unemployment insurance, initially unaware of the 2013 state law.
“It really made me feel less than others,” Barrera said.
That pushed her toward a new goal: “to be equal” by earning a degree and returning to the workforce full time. Barrera is just two semesters away from earning her bachelor’s degree in social work at the University of Wisconsin-Eau Claire. She works part time as a peer and parent support specialist, supporting families with mental health challenges — including those who face similar barriers to hers.
She lives with a rare disorder that makes her blood too thick, causing clots and severe fatigue that can make it hard to even get out of bed. Her current job gives her the flexibility to handle her frequent medical appointments and other challenges with the disease. Working full time will require finding an employer who understands her situation.
Barrera, who is not a plaintiff, encourages those seeking justice in court to stay hopeful and persistent.
“When I got the denial, had I just been like, ‘Well, I’m denied. I’m just out of luck’… Would we be where we are now?” Barrera said. “You have to sometimes be patient, but keep (up) the good fight.”
Confused about the unemployment system?
Forberger created this primer to help workers navigate the complicated process of filing unemployment claims and participating in the system.
Wisconsin Watch is a nonprofit, nonpartisan newsroom. Subscribe to our newsletters for original stories and our Friday news roundup.
On paper, the calculation seems simple enough: If well-trained drivers operate school buses equipped with safety devices that reduce traffic collisions, then insurance claims and premiums should likewise decrease.
In reality, insurance brokers say no single piece of technology or training technique is enough to warrant lower premiums on its own. But combined, these tools can help protect a fleet from liability in court.
“The biggest takeaway is it hopefully leads to less claims, which would ultimately drive down your cost,” said Kyle McClellan, a practice leader at NSM Insurance Brokers. “There’s not a direct correlation, like when you bundle your insurance together and you’re going to save 10 percent. But fewer claims leads to fewer dollars spent on insurance.”
While carrier insurance rates vary depending on fleet size, vehicle type, routes and loss history, rates have consistently trended upward nationwide.
Over the past year, the Consumer Price Index calculated motor vehicle insurance rising an average 6.4 percent. In one extreme case, the David School District in Oklahoma saw a 328-percent increase in insurance rates from 2020 to 2022, rising to $261,000 from $61,000 annually, per Education Week.
Rising rates often result in shopping around for better policies. When it comes to negotiating rates, McClellan said two pieces of school bus technology are particularly
attractive to providers: Cameras and telematics.
“Those allows us on the broker side to meet with school bus contractors, identify what they’re doing, how they’re doing certain things, and then go to the insurance market and tell them, here’s the reasons why you’d training fall by the wayside.
“Now they got the big screen in front of them and every time someone burps it records it, and they have to look at it instead of paying attention to what they’re doing on the road,” quipped school bus training expert Richard Fischer, who has owned Trans-Consult since 1977, after serving as a transportation and safety director in California.
Having been called as an expert witness too many times to count, Fischer said three questions often come up in court that can be addressed with training, studying driver manuals and simple record keeping: Did the driver have a duty? Did the driver previously breach this duty? What was done to correct the breach of duty?
State CDL driver manuals and the National School Transportation Specifications and Procedures manual updated by the National Congress on School Transportation don’t just lay out best practices, Fischer said. It is a driver’s job to know the manuals forward and backward.
“A driver-carrier has one duty to perform, and that’s to do everything possible to make sure that the drivers are safe to drive the bus and the kids are protected,” Fischer said.
In addition to training, he advised documenting hours and topics covered, with each driver documenting their own record in their own handwriting. A trainer writing records might implicate questions of falsified records. Most importantly though, Fischer said
don’t make excuses.
“Quit arguing the point we don’t have any money to do safety meetings or we’re short drivers, so we have to excel our training program,” Fischer said. “Everyone says we transport the most precious cargo in the world—then do it.”
Besides providing benefits on the road, many insurers favor having vehicles equipped with telematics and cameras for their benefits in court, particularly as an upward trend of high judgments increases financial risk.
Along with an increase in court-ordered “nuclear verdicts” that brokers say have resulted in increased insurance costs across the board, recent years have seen a trend of higher judgments in urban areas and lower judgments in rural areas impacting localized policy prices.
Regardless of who is at fault, Lisa Paul of Paul Consulting said juries are often poised to believe the little guy over a large company, a trend she has seen play out time and time again over a 32-year career in commercial insurance.
“Courts tend to rule against the big power unit, where people perceive there’s big dollars, whether that’s a school district or a large public company,” Paul said. “But the utilization of external facing cameras has been extremely helpful in improving the exoneration rates of accidents.”
A 2023 survey by the American Transportation Research Institute found driver-facing camera footage exonerated drivers in more cases than it provided evidence of negligence. Per legal experts surveyed, the presence of cameras seemed to drive settlements in nearly 75 percent of cases reviewed. Besides being useful in court, many commend telematics for catching both positive and negative behavior, providing opportunities for coaching and praise.
“It gives an opportunity to enhance and improve driver coaching of how the driver, the school bus operator themselves can improve their driving behavior based on how the vehicle is monitoring that during the course of transit,” Paul said.
Jeffrey Cassell, president of the School Bus Safety Company and a former director of safety for Laidlaw, credits certain camera systems, like National Express’ G-force activated DriveCam, with driving quick settlements.
“What happens is, if you’re liable, you admit to liability immediately and get to negotiating the amount and there’s no discovery. And if you’re not liable, you just get the video and send it to the plaintiff attorney,” Cassell said. “Attorneys don’t chase rainbows.”
While investing in technology and maintaining training helps avoid crashes, thus reducing insurance claims, the staunch safety advocate said keeping students safe should be motivation enough to follow best practices.
“Otherwise, it’s doing it for the wrong reason,” Cassell said. More than school bus technology and training, Cassell said loss records are ultimately the most important factor in obtaining a favorable insurance rate.
“Now if you then say to them, hang on a minute, we’ve just fitted extended stop arms, which should reduce the accidents, can we have a reduction in the premium? They’ll
say, of course you can, as soon as it shows up in your losses,” Cassell said. “If your losses go down, your premium will go down.”
Editor’s Note: As reprinted from the July 2025 issue of School Transportation News.
Login
