Reading view

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

Who will run the next election in small-town Wisconsin? No one knows

A person wearing a lavender pullover stands outside near a metal-sided building, with a closed door and concrete walkway visible behind the person.
Reading Time: 7 minutes

Inside the mostly empty town hall in the town of Wausau on County Road Z last week, a handful of voters cast ballots in wooden booths for a school board race. The biggest question on the minds of local election officials wasn’t who would win — it was who would run elections next year.

After two clerks left within a year, longtime town supervisor Sharon Hunter stepped in because no one else would. Hunter’s term ends in April 2027. Nomination papers for a potential successor are due in January 2027, but local officials still don’t know who comes next.

“Sharon’s not going to do 29 years,” Deputy Clerk Amy Meyer said, referring to the long tenure of the clerk who resigned in late 2024, setting off the cascade of brief replacements. 

Hunter, 72, laughed. “I’d be over 100 years old,” she said. “I don’t think you want me here with my walker.”

Hunter’s decision to step up in a town of 2,200 may seem insignificant. But Wisconsin’s election system — one of the most decentralized in the country — depends on people like her. The state requires each of its 1,850 municipalities to run its own elections. That means hundreds of local clerks are needed to keep the system running. By contrast, Texas, a state with nearly five times Wisconsin’s population, relies on county-level election offices and has about one-sixth as many local election officials. 

That structure leaves Wisconsin unusually dependent on small-town clerks. Between 2020 and 2024, more than 700 municipal clerks here left their posts, the highest turnover by raw numbers in the nation. As rural communities age and fewer residents are willing or able to take on an increasingly complex job, replacing them has become harder — raising questions about how long the state’s hyper-local model can hold.

The system can absorb one vacancy. It strains under dozens. Elections get stitched together, paperwork piles up, and the quiet machinery of local government — licenses, payroll, meeting notices — shifts its weight onto whoever is left. 

A metal-sided building displays the sign "TOWN OF WAUSAU MUNICIPAL BLDG." next to double doors, with snow piled along a sidewalk in front.
The town of Wausau municipal building is pictured Feb. 17, 2026. The town has had three clerks in the past year and struggled to keep the position filled until Sharon Hunter stepped in, giving up her vote as town supervisor. (Alexander Shur / Votebeat)

Meyer, 55, understands why people don’t want the job — she doesn’t want it either. Like her mother, she has worked elections in town for much of her adult life. She considered becoming clerk, but it wasn’t the right time. She doesn’t want residents coming to her house with ballots or questions, as they once did under the longtime clerk.

“There comes a point in the day where I want to turn my phone off,” Meyer said from the town hall, situated at the center of loosely stitched county roads dotted with ranch homes and small farms, some of them no longer in operation. “I don’t want to hear that your garbage didn’t get picked up, or your neighbor’s dog is barking,” she said. “I just don’t.” 

In a small town, the clerk is often the first call for everything from election deadlines to everyday complaints — and the learning curve is steep. 

“It’s going to take you practically the first year to learn everything,” Meyer said. “Now, we have somebody new in it, and we have spent half the term relearning.” 

Older residents have long filled these roles, but clerks say the job has grown more demanding, with little added support. It is often thankless work for modest pay. In Wausau, the clerk earns about $27,000 a year with no benefits.

Even so, many residents remain committed to keeping elections at the town level. Hunter said preserving local control was her biggest reason for stepping in, though she has not decided whether to seek another term.

“But we do need to have someone coming after me,” she said. “Because I am old.”

In an aging town, succession is unclear

The rural town of Wausau sits just east of the city of Wausau, a community of about 40,000 that began as a logging town in the 1830s and now centers on manufacturing and a burgeoning ginseng farming industry. As the city has grown, the town has increasingly become a bedroom community, as its lower property taxes attract commuters. A handful of farms remain, but the town is less agricultural than it once was. 

Its population is slowly growing — and steadily aging. That’s because retirees also make up a large and growing share of the town’s residents. Its median age has climbed by roughly a decade since 2000 and now hovers around 50 — a decade older than the statewide average. The town still must run elections, issue licenses and post meeting notices. What’s less certain is who will do it. 

Here, as in many communities nationwide, the responsibility will likely fall to older residents. Nationally, nearly 70% of chief election officials are 50 or older, according to the Elections & Voting Information Center. In Wisconsin, that share climbs to almost 80%, with the oldest officials concentrated in the smallest jurisdictions.

One poll worker, knitting pink yarn during a lull between voters, said at 71 she was too old to take on the clerk’s job. She had encouraged a younger neighbor to consider it, she said, but the woman had just given birth.

Wausau’s shift reflects a broader reality in rural Wisconsin: The state built a system that depends on hundreds of small-town clerks and their deputies — a structure rooted in an era when farms were multigenerational, churches were full, and civic roles widely shared. That foundation is thinning. About a quarter of Wisconsin’s farms closed between 2002 and 2022, and churches are aging and shrinking. Volunteer fire departments and other local services report persistent staffing shortages.

There is no sweeping rural exodus. Rural counties are mostly growing, largely because retirees are staying or moving in. Wisconsin’s population is projected to age most rapidly in its rural communities, according to UW-Madison’s Applied Population Lab

A folding table holds documents, envelopes and a lime-green bag inside a room with American and Wisconsin flags, a window and stacked folding tables behind the table.
Voter check-in materials sit on a table during a school board election that affected only part of the town of Wausau. Turnout remained slow throughout the day. (Alexander Shur / Votebeat)

Originally from nearby Birnamwood, Hunter moved to the town of Wausau in the 1970s and has worked in public service ever since. For four decades, she wrote federal grants and helped low-income youth map out their futures through the Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction.

Her entry into town government came by accident. Upset over a town decision to pave the ends of some residents’ driveways, but not hers or her neighbors’, she ran for town treasurer. What began as frustration became a career: She spent 10 years as treasurer and two decades as a supervisor.

Her path shifted again after the former town clerk, Cindy Worden, retired after 30 years on the job. Supervisors appointed a replacement, but she left after two weeks because of a terminal cancer diagnosis. The next clerk resigned within months, overwhelmed by balancing the duties with a full-time job and raising a family.

As the town searched for a clerk, Hunter and fellow supervisor Steve Buntin, a retired auto mechanic, filled in. Supervisors listed the job on Facebook and the town website. Potential candidates declined. Some didn’t want the scrutiny of elections, and others resisted the administrative grind. 

At one point, county officials offered to step in to run elections and charge about $1,000 per election. That was Hunter’s turning point, though stepping into the role meant giving up her vote on the town board — a sacrifice she did not take lightly. 

“After you start, you kind of get hooked,” Hunter said. The residents might be “ornery most of the time,” but helping them navigate difficult choices is public service. “It’s in your blood.”

She can return to being a supervisor if someone else steps up as clerk, but, as Buntin put it, “nobody seems to be knocking down the door.”

Last April, the town asked voters to allow clerks to be appointed rather than elected, which would have permitted hiring someone from outside town limits. The referendum failed narrowly. A new state law has since made it easier for small municipalities to switch to appointments, but the town has yet to make the jump.

“You still have to have somebody come forward who wants to be a clerk,” Meyer said. “Just because the state law changed doesn’t make it all that easy.”

Clerks are hard to recruit, and harder to retain

Wausau sits in Marathon County, home to about 130,000 people. To run elections for that population, the county depends on roughly 60 municipal clerks — one in each city, village and town — layered beneath its elected county clerk. In most similarly sized counties elsewhere, such as St. Joseph County, Indiana, or Frederick County, Maryland, a single county office oversees elections for everyone.

There’s little appetite to abandon Wisconsin’s structure. Local clerks argue decentralization limits errors and keeps elections in familiar hands. But filling dozens of posts — and keeping them filled — is no easy task. Of the 13 new municipal clerks who have taken office in Marathon County since the April 2025 election, including Hunter, four resigned within months, County Clerk Kim Trueblood said. Since then, a fifth clerk — in the city of Wausau — has also stepped down.

Trueblood attributes part of the churn to recruitment practices that understate the job. Town and village chairs often approach potential clerks by describing the work as little more than taking meeting minutes.

“Then they get into a job, and it’s the elections, it’s all of the financial reporting, the liquor licenses, everything that they have to do — it’s just overwhelming,” she said. “And people who work a full-time job and have families, I don’t know how they do it.”

The pay rarely offsets the demands. In the town of Wausau, the clerk makes $27,628 per year plus a $1,000 mileage stipend, with no benefits. The job can require 10 to 20 hours a week — and far more around elections — covering everything from meeting notices and licenses to payroll and ballot administration.

Other municipalities in Marathon County pay far less. Kelley Blume, the clerk in the town of Marathon who’s also a deputy clerk for the county, earned just over $10,000 for her town role in 2025. During election seasons, she said, the hours stretch late into the night.

When she was first approached for the job about 10 years ago, she said town officials told her it would only be a couple of hours per week. 

“It’s not a couple hours,” she said. “I feel bad for all of these new clerks that think it’s going to be easy.”

She is considering stepping down. The added responsibilities have grown heavier each year, she said, and she wants to spend more time with her children and grandchildren.

Waiting for the next name on the ballot

Hunter says she stepped in to preserve something she believes is worth protecting: the idea that elections should be run by people who know the roads and the names on the ballot, who know which farm sits beyond the bend and which houses were built last year. To her, local government isn’t an abstraction. It’s a neighbor answering the phone.

“I do feel local government is critical, and I would hate to see that be taken away from the residents,” Hunter said. “It’s important they have a voice, and it starts at their local government.”

She knows the structure is imperfect, but pride in local control runs deep here, even as the pool of residents willing to shoulder the work grows thinner. Ultimately, she said, the town may have to bend. Communities could share clerks or other services, even if that means loosening borders that have long felt fixed.

She’ll decide later this year whether to run again. If she doesn’t, she said, the town may take another vote on hiring clerks outside of town limits. In the meantime, she has no regrets about stepping up — even if nobody in town seems ready to follow her lead.

“It’s my civic duty,” she said.

Alexander Shur is a reporter for Votebeat based in Wisconsin. Contact Shur at ashur@votebeat.org.

This coverage is made possible through Votebeat, a nonpartisan news organization covering local election administration and voting access. Sign up for Votebeat Wisconsin’s free newsletter here.

Who will run the next election in small-town Wisconsin? No one knows 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.

Wisconsin Assembly is done legislating for the year. Here’s what lawmakers did and what’s unfinished.

A wide view of a legislative chamber shows people seated at desks facing a person at a podium beneath a large mural, with flags behind the podium and electronic voting boards on the walls.
Reading Time: 8 minutes

The final days of the Wisconsin Legislature’s 2025-26 legislative session are near.

The Assembly gaveled out for what could be the chamber’s final session day Friday preceded by a dramatic 24 hours that included longtime Assembly Speaker Robin Vos, R-Rochester, announcing his retirement and a concession from Vos to allow votes on bills to extend Medicaid funding for low-income mothers and require insurance companies to cover screenings for women at increased risk of breast cancer. The bills have stalled in the chamber for months. 

Lawmakers could still return for a special session on tax cuts as negotiations continue with Republican leaders and Gov. Tony Evers. Democratic lawmakers and Evers have called on Republicans to continue work at the Capitol in Madison instead of turning to the campaign trail ahead of elections later this year. Evers this week also said he plans to call a special session in the coming months for lawmakers to act on a constitutional amendment to ban partisan gerrymandering.  

The Senate will continue to meet in March. 

Here’s a rundown of what is still being debated, what is heading to the governor and some of the key items to get signed into law this session. 

What is still being discussed? 

Tax cuts 

The context: State leaders learned in January that Wisconsin has a projected $2.4 billion surplus. Evers at the start of the year called for bipartisan action on property tax cuts for Wisconsinites. Republicans have agreed with the idea that those funds should be returned to taxpayers. But both sides have yet to officially agree on how. 

Republican arguments: In a letter to Evers on Feb. 16, Vos and Senate Majority Leader Devin LeMahieu, R-Oostburg, said they would agree to Evers’ request for $200 million to boost the special education reimbursement rate and provide an additional $500 million to schools through the school levy tax credit. In return, Republican leaders wanted to see an income tax rebate in the form of $500 for individuals and $1,000 for married couples who filed their taxes in 2024, reducing state revenues by $1.5 billion. “We are trying to be bipartisan,” Vos told reporters after Evers said the proposal doesn’t balance what he wants to see for schools. “We accepted his number and actually went higher than he requested.”

Democratic arguments: Evers told WISN-12 that he would not sign the Republican plan Vos and LeMahieu sent him. He wants to see more money for schools, specifically general equalization aid, which are dollars that schools can use without as many constraints. The 2025-27 budget Evers signed last summer kept that aid flat from the previous year, which coupled with fixed revenue limit increases under Evers’ previous 400-year veto gives school districts more latitude to raise property taxes. 

Latest action: Assembly Majority Leader Rep. Tyler August, R-Walworth, said Republicans are still intent that Evers should take the deal that was offered. “It checks a lot of boxes, if not all the boxes on the things he had previously asked for,” he said. 

A person wearing a suit and a tie is surrounded by other people who are holding microphones iand cellphones n a wood-paneled room, with an American flag visible behind them.
Wisconsin Assembly Speaker Robin Vos, R-Rochester, takes questions from the press after Gov. Tony Evers’ State of the State address at the Wisconsin State Capitol on Tuesday, Feb. 17, 2026, in Madison, Wis. (Joe Timmerman / Wisconsin Watch)

Knowles-Nelson Stewardship  

The context: In 2024, the Wisconsin Supreme Court ruled the Legislature’s top financial committee could not block the Department of Natural Resources spending for the Knowles-Nelson Stewardship Fund that was created in 1989 for land preservation. Republicans did not reauthorize funds to keep the program going in the 2025-27 budget, which puts the fund on track to expire this summer. Bills led by Rep. Tony Kurtz, R-Wonewoc, and Sen. Patrick Testin, R-Stevens Point, would extend the program until 2028, but also pause the majority of land conservation projects for two years and require the DNR to study and inventory government-owned land for nature activities.

Republican arguments: Republicans blame the court’s decision for limiting legislative authority over how the dollars are spent. During a public hearing earlier this month, Testin said he understood the bills were imperfect but action was necessary. “If we do nothing, Knowles-Nelson Stewardship is dead,” Testin said. 

Democratic arguments: Senate Democrats on Wednesday said stopping money for land conservation projects would essentially kill the program. Democrats had been participating in negotiations on the future of the fund, but the Republican proposal had only gotten “significantly worse.” “We cannot and will not support a bill this bad,” said Senate Minority Leader Dianne Hesselbein, D-Middleton. In September, Democrats introduced a proposal to reauthorize the program until 2032. 

Latest action: The Senate was scheduled to vote on the bills during a floor session on Feb. 18, but removed the bills from its calendar. The bills already passed the Assembly in January. After Senate Democrats said they would not support the current proposal, Testin told WisPolitics he would have to drum up support from Senate Republicans to determine the fate of the fund. 

Toxic forever chemicals (aka PFAS) 

The context: Republican lawmakers and Evers in January announced they were optimistic about a deal on legislation about the cleanup of toxic forever chemicals referred to as PFAS. The 2023-25 state budget included $125 million for addressing PFAS contamination, but the Legislature’s finance committee has yet to release those funds to the Department of Natural Resources. In January, Evers and Republicans said bipartisan agreements so far included the release of the prior funds, protections for property owners who are not responsible for PFAS contamination and a grant program to help local governments with remediation projects. 

Republican arguments: Republican Sen. Eric Wimberger, R-Gillett, has sought protections from the state’s spills law and financial penalties for “innocent landowners” who did not cause PFAS contaminations and seek help from the Department of Natural Resources. 

Democratic arguments: The Environmental Protection Agency has previously issued health advisories on PFAS in drinking water. Evers in January argued that the state has a responsibility to provide safe and clean drinking water across Wisconsin. 

Latest action: The Assembly passed the legislation, Assembly Bills 130 and 131, on 93-0 votes Friday evening. The Senate has yet to consider the bills, but Wimberger in a statement Thursday night said amendments in the Assembly “will help us get this vital legislation across the finish line in the Senate and signed into law by the Governor.” 

Several people sit at wooden desks in a marble-columned room decorated with red, white and blue bunting.
Lawmakers listen as Wisconsin Gov. Tony Evers delivers his final State of the State address at the Wisconsin State Capitol on Tuesday, Feb. 17, 2026, in Madison, Wis. (Joe Timmerman / Wisconsin Watch)

Online gambling

The context: Legal gambling in Wisconsin can only occur in-person on tribal properties, which means individuals who place online bets on mobile devices are technically violating the law. A proposal from August and Sen. Howard Marklein, R-Spring Green, would legalize online gambling if the server or device that a wager is placed on is located on tribal lands. 

Supportive arguments: The bills from August and Marklein have bipartisan support. Lawmakers argue it provides clarity on what is legal in Wisconsin and protects consumers from unregulated websites. 

Opposing arguments: The Wisconsin Institute for Law and Liberty in a November memo argued that the bills would violate the Wisconsin Constitution and the federal Indian Gaming Act and provide a “race-based monopoly to Tribal gaming operations.” 

Latest action: The Assembly passed the bill Thursday on a voice vote, meaning lawmakers didn’t record individual votes. It now heads to the Senate.

Funding for a public affairs network

The context: WisconsinEye, the nonprofit public affairs network that has filmed legislative proceedings since 2007, went dark in mid-December due to not raising the funds to operate this year. The Legislature previously approved a $10 million endowment that could only be accessed if WisconsinEye raised matching dollars equal to its request of state lawmakers. Legislative leaders approved $50,000 to bring WisconsinEye back in February, but the Assembly and Senate had opposing views of how to provide transparent viewing of legislative processes going forward.  

Senate arguments: Senate Republicans specifically have been wary of providing funds to WisconsinEye and expressed frustrations at how the nonprofit spends its dollars. Senate Republicans proposed a bill that would seek bids for a potential public affairs network, which could go to WisconsinEye or another organization. “Maybe we are getting the best value currently with WisconsinEye, but we greatly don’t know,” LeMahieu told reporters this month.

Assembly arguments: Assembly Democrats and Republicans proposed a bill that would place the previously allocated matching dollars in a trust and direct earned interest to WisconsinEye. That could generate half a million dollars or more each year for an organization with a $900,000 annual budget. Assembly leaders said they wanted to ensure continued transparency at the Capitol.

Latest action: The Assembly earlier this month passed its bill 96-0 that would provide long-term funding support to WisconsinEye, but the Senate has yet to consider the bill. The Senate passed its bill on requesting bids for a public affairs network on Wednesday. The Assembly did not take up the Senate proposal before gaveling out for the year. 

What is heading to Evers? 

Postpartum Medicaid 

Lead authors: Sen. Jesse James, R-Thorp/Rep. Patrick Snyder, R-Weston

What it does: The bill extends postpartum Medicaid coverage in Wisconsin for new moms from current law at 60 days to a full 12 months after childbirth.

The context: Wisconsin is just one of two states that have yet to extend postpartum Medicaid for new mothers for up to one year. The proposal has been brought up in the Legislature for years, but Vos has long been the roadblock for getting the bill across the finish line, often objecting to the idea as “expanding welfare.” “Anybody who’s in poverty in Wisconsin today already gets basically free health care through BadgerCare. If you are slightly above poverty level, you get basically free health care from the federal government through Obamacare,” Vos told reporters earlier this month. “So the idea of saying that we’re going to put more people onto the funding that the state pays for, as opposed to allowing them to stay on the funding that the federal government pays for, it doesn’t make any sense to me.” 

How they voted: The Senate passed the bill on a 32-1 vote in April, with Sen. Chris Kapenga, R-Delafield, voting against. The Assembly voted 95-1 Thursday to send the bill to Evers’ desk, with Rep. Shae Sortwell, R-Two Rivers, as the lone vote against. Vos voted to pass the bill.

Dense breast cancer screenings 

Lead authors: Sen. Rachael Cabral-Guevara, R-Fox Crossing/Rep. Cindi Duchow, R-town of Delafield

What it does: The bill requires health insurance policies to cover supplemental screenings for women who have dense breast tissue and are at an increased risk of breast cancer, eliminating out-of-pocket costs for things like MRIs and ultrasounds. The proposal has been referred to as “Gail’s Law,” after Gail Zeamer, a Wisconsin woman who regularly sought annual mammograms but was diagnosed with stage three breast cancer at age 47. 

The context: The proposal has been stuck in the Assembly for months after near-unanimous passage in the Senate last year. Some Republicans had concerns about the bill being an insurance mandate. Vos told Isthmus in January that federal regulations might not make the bill necessary in Wisconsin, but ultimately allowed a vote on the Assembly floor.

How they voted: The Senate passed the bill in October on a 32-1 vote. The Assembly passed the bill Thursday on a 96-0 vote. 

Key bills signed into law (outside the state budget)

Wisconsin Act 42 – Cellphone bans during school instructional time

Lead authors: Rep. Joel Kitchens, R-Sturgeon Bay/Cabral-Guevara

What it does: The law requires Wisconsin school boards to adopt policies that prohibit cellphone use during instructional time by July 1. By October districts must submit their policies to the Department of Public Instruction. 

How they voted: The bill passed the Assembly along party lines in February 2025 and passed the Senate on a 29-4 vote in October. 

When Evers signed the bill: October 2025.

Wisconsin Acts 11, 12 – Nuclear power summit and siting study

Lead authors: Sen. Julian Bradley, R-New Berlin/Rep. David Steffen, R-Howard

What it does: The laws created a board tasked with organizing a nuclear power summit in Madison and directed the Public Service Commission, which regulates utilities, to study new and existing locations for nuclear power and fusion generation in the state. In January, the Public Service Commission signed an agreement with UW-Madison’s Department of Nuclear Engineering and Engineering Physics to complete the siting study. 

How they voted: The Senate passed and the Assembly passed the bill in June 2025 on a voice vote. 

When Evers signed the bills: July 2025

Wisconsin Act 43 – Candidacy withdrawals for elections 

Lead authors: Steffen/Sen. Van Wanggaard, R-Racine

What it does: The law gives Wisconsin candidates a path other than death to withdraw their name from election ballots. The bill was proposed in the wake of Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s effort to withdraw his name from the ballot in Wisconsin after he exited the presidential race in 2024 and endorsed President Donald Trump. 

How they voted: The Assembly passed the bill in June. The Senate approved the bill on a 19-14 vote in October.

When Evers signed the bill: October 2025

Wisconsin Act 48 – Making sextortion a crime 

Lead authors: Snyder/James

What it does: The law makes sexual extortion a crime that bans threatening to injure another person’s property or reputation or threatening violence against someone to get them to participate in sexual conduct or share an intimate image of themselves. Lawmakers named the bill “Bradyn’s Law” after a 15-year-old in the D.C. Everest School District who became a victim of sextortion and died by suicide.

How they voted: The Senate passed and the Assembly passed the bill on a voice vote. 

When Evers signed the bill: December 2025

Wisconsin Act 22 – Informed consent for pelvic exams for unconscious patients

Lead authors: Sen. Andre Jacque, R-New Franken/Rep. Joy Goeben, R-Hobart

What it does: The bill requires that written consent is obtained from a patient before medical professionals at a hospital perform a pelvic exam while that person is unconscious or under general anesthesia.

How they voted: The Senate and the Assembly passed the bill on a voice vote. 

When Evers signed the bill: August 2025

Wisconsin Watch is a nonprofit, nonpartisan newsroom. Subscribe to our newsletters for original stories and our Friday news roundup.

Wisconsin Assembly is done legislating for the year. Here’s what lawmakers did and what’s unfinished. 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.

As the Tony Evers chapter of Wisconsin history draws to a close, a new chapter is just beginning

A person stands and raises a hand at a podium with a microphone in a marble-walled room, with other people sitting in the foreground.
Reading Time: 3 minutes

As Wisconsin Gov. Tony Evers gave his final State of the State address at the Capitol on Tuesday, I was struck by how many of the people I’ve met or covered over the past nearly six months were all in the same room. 

Evers, who is not seeking reelection this year, entered the Assembly chambers shortly after 7 p.m. and spoke of his accomplishments over the past seven years with longtime Assembly Speaker Robin Vos, R-Rochester, and Senate President Mary Felzkowski, R-Tomahawk, seated right behind him. All seven members of the Wisconsin Supreme Court, who have frequently been deciding factors in conflicts between Evers and Republican lawmakers, were in the audience. Statewide elected officials, including Attorney General Josh Kaul and Superintendent of Public Instruction Jill Underly, were there. Both Democratic and Republican representatives and senators sat underneath the glass skylight to listen to Evers. 

In his hour-long speech, Evers called on the Republican Legislature to take bipartisan action on issues such as tax cuts, special education school funding and corrections reform before lawmakers leave Madison and turn to the campaign trail for elections later this year. He also announced plans to call a special session for lawmakers to address a constitutional amendment to ban partisan gerrymandering. Republicans criticized Evers’ remarks as a partisan speech. 

The governor’s address Tuesday night came as Wisconsin stands on the precipice of significant change. A new governor will be elected later this year. New legislative maps and Democratic gains in 2024 set up real competition for control of the Legislature.

It’s been almost six months since I began my role as the state government and politics reporter at Wisconsin Watch. I returned to Wisconsin, where I was born and raised, in September after starting my journalism career reporting in Florida and Indiana.

These initial months at Wisconsin Watch have been an exciting whirlwind as I’ve immersed myself into the debates and issues facing our state. Eight years away left me with much to catch up on. 

I’ve had a lot of coffee — maybe too much — as I’ve met people inside and outside of the Capitol who can help me understand the deeper issues beyond press releases and social media posts. I’ve attended many committee meetings, hearings and press conferences. I’ve made phone calls and sent text messages when I needed explanations about the recent state budget or legislative procedures. I’ve stopped by a host of Assembly and Senate offices to introduce myself, ask questions and learn what lawmakers are working on. 

And if you read all the way through Forward, Wisconsin Watch’s free weekly politics newsletter, you will know I love diving into our state’s history and seeing what it can teach us about what is happening in Wisconsin today.

People sit at a wooden desk with laptops and a video camera on the desk.
Wisconsin Watch statehouse reporter Brittany Carloni takes notes as Wisconsin Gov. Tony Evers delivers his final State of the State address at the Wisconsin State Capitol on Feb. 17, 2026, in Madison, Wis. (Joe Timmerman / Wisconsin Watch)

My curiosity and my past reporting experiences in other states have driven my work so far. In November, I looked into why Republican lawmakers sent bills to the governor’s desk that Evers would never sign. When WisconsinEye, the public affairs network, went dark for weeks between December and January, I looked beyond our borders to understand how neighboring states film legislative proceedings. As voters face another Wisconsin Supreme Court election, I asked the candidates about their past rulings and how they reflect how each candidate would serve on the court. 

I’ve largely found people willing to share their perspectives and point me in the direction of others who can provide the information to explain complicated topics. I’ve particularly enjoyed the times I’ve heard “Welcome home,” as I’ve shared what brought me back to Wisconsin. 

Evers’ address and the last year in the governor’s office signal an end to one chapter of Wisconsin’s history. I feel like I am just getting started. If you have tips, ideas, questions or feedback, email me at bcarloni@wisconsinwatch.org.

Wisconsin Watch is a nonprofit, nonpartisan newsroom. Subscribe to our newsletters for original stories and our Friday news roundup.

As the Tony Evers chapter of Wisconsin history draws to a close, a new chapter is just beginning 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.

Interested in data center news? The latest on stories we’re following

An aerial view of a large industrial complex next to a pond and surrounding construction areas at sunset, with orange light along the horizon under a cloudy sky.
Reading Time: 2 minutes
What happens when residents near proposed data center sites have no idea what’s being built in their communities? Wisconsin Watch’s Tom Kertscher recently followed up on a tip discussing nondisclosure agreements in cities like Beaver Dam. In this video, Wisconsin Watch also met with community members Prescott Balch and comedian Charlie Berens to discuss these issues. (Video by Trisha Young / Wisconsin Watch)

The $46 billion in data centers proposed or under construction in Wisconsin continue to make news over who should pay for the electricity to power them, whether municipalities should use nondisclosure agreements to keep details confidential and more. Here are some of the latest updates:

Utility rates: The state Public Service Commission is accepting public comment on a We Energies proposal for determining whether the general public pays any share of the costs of constructing and operating power plants needed to meet data centers’ electricity demands. One concern is creating more “stranded assets” — power plants that are shut down before their debt is paid off. Wisconsin Watch reported in December that Wisconsin ratepayers owe $1 billion for stranded assets.

Legislation: A state Senate committee is holding hearings Tuesday, Feb. 17, on three data center bills. Senate Bill 729 seeks to limit how much general ratepayers can be charged by utilities for the cost of providing electricity to data centers. Senate Bill 843 contains a similar provision and has passed the Assembly, but also contains a controversial requirement that renewable energy used for a data center be on the data center site. Senate Bill 969 would prohibit local governments from signing nondisclosure agreements with data center developers. Separately, a new bill would impose 14 requirements on data center proposals, including prohibiting NDAs between local governments and data center developers. Wisconsin Watch found that local officials in at least four communities signed NDAs to hide details of data center proposals. 

Wisconsin Watch reporter Tom Kertscher joined Charlie Berens on “Old Fashioned Interview” to discuss his recent reporting on data centers and their impact on Wisconsin — from rising utility costs to residents being unaware when projects are proposed in their communities. (Video by Trisha Young / Wisconsin Watch)

Janesville: The City Council put on the Nov. 3 ballot a referendum proposed by data center opponents that could give voters direct say over a hyperscale data center. If the referendum is approved, it would create an ordinance requiring separate referendum approval for any type of development project worth $450 million or more that is proposed for the former General Motors site. The data center proposed for Janesville is worth $8 billion.

Port Washington: Business groups are suing to block a proposed ordinance affecting economic development projects. The proposal was made by citizens who claimed a lack of transparency by the city over a $15 billion data center now under construction. 

Grant County: A company seeking a site for a $1 billion data center has included rural Cassville in southwest Wisconsin in its search. A local official said he expects to learn in spring whether the county is still being considered.

Wisconsin Watch is a nonprofit, nonpartisan newsroom. Subscribe to our newsletters for original stories and our Friday news roundup.

Interested in data center news? The latest on stories we’re following 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.

There’s a primary election in Wisconsin on Tuesday. See what’s on your ballot.

A voting station with American flag graphics and the word "VOTE" is next to a sign reading "Ballot" with instructions in multiple languages.
Reading Time: < 1 minute

There’s an election in Wisconsin on Tuesday, but don’t be alarmed if that comes as a surprise — in most places there isn’t much, if anything, on the ballot.

The Feb. 17 spring primary seeks to narrow down any contests where there are more than two candidates competing for a single seat ahead of the April 7 spring general election. With no statewide primaries on the ballot, voters will be tasked with narrowing down municipal, judicial and school board elections.

Voters can see what’s on their ballot by visiting myvote.wi.gov and entering their address.

The biggest statewide race this spring, the Wisconsin Supreme Court election, features only two candidates, appellate court judges Maria Lazar and Chris Taylor, so they won’t be on the primary ballot Tuesday. There are also dozens of school district property tax referendums on the April 7 ballot, but none on the primary ballot.

In Madison, voters will vote in the Dane County Circuit Court judge Branch 1 primary, choosing two candidates to contend on April 7 to replace current Wisconsin Supreme Court Justice Susan Crawford. In Green Bay, residents will narrow down candidates for city council if their district includes more than two candidates. There are no primary elections in the city of Milwaukee, but neighboring municipalities may have elections. 

Polls are open Tuesday from 7 a.m. until 8 p.m. Voters can register at the polls.

Wisconsin Watch is a nonprofit, nonpartisan newsroom. Subscribe to our newsletters for original stories and our Friday news roundup.

There’s a primary election in Wisconsin on Tuesday. See what’s on your ballot. 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.

As Tony Evers delivers his final State of the State, he remains crosswise with the GOP Legislature

A person stands with a hand raised at a podium that has a microphone in a wood-paneled room, with two people seated in the background on raised chairs.
Reading Time: 6 minutes

It’s the last year of Wisconsin Gov. Tony Evers’ final term, and activity at the Capitol since January reflects much of how the last eight years have gone with the Republican Legislature. 

GOP lawmakers continue to send conservative bills to Evers’ desk for a likely veto. such as a proposal to allow people to seek legal action for injuries from gender transition procedures when they were a minor. Evers in January called for Assembly Speaker Robin Vos, R-Rochester, to allow a bipartisan bill that would extend postpartum Medicaid to new moms to “finally” reach the governor’s desk, while Vos last week told reporters it wouldn’t advance. 

As the political world turns to who might be Wisconsin’s next governor, Evers and Republicans are attempting to negotiate a tax cut in the wake of a projected $2.4 billion state surplus reported in January. The last time there was an open governor’s seat the state faced a multibillion-dollar deficit. Surpluses have been a regular feature of the last eight years of split government.

“There have been plenty of times in the last eight years where we have had a disagreement and we had a public argument with Gov. Evers,” Vos said last week. “I think there’s a long list of things where I think he’s just wrong on the issue. But on this one, considering the fact that he came out and sincerely said he wants to do something on property taxes. We feel the same. I don’t know why we wouldn’t negotiate in good faith to try to find something that can actually get across the finish line.” 

Evers, who is not seeking reelection in 2026, will give his final State of the State address before the Legislature at 7 p.m. on Tuesday. Part of Evers’ legacy during his two terms as governor is his navigation of split government and the oftentimes contentious relationship between his administration and the legislative branch.

Asked to reflect on his own legacy, Evers highlighted for Wisconsin Watch three specific achievements: a deal that kept the Brewers in Milwaukee through 2050, a shared revenue deal that boosted state support for local municipalities and the replacement of heavily gerrymandered GOP maps with “fair maps.” But he also criticized the often contentious relationship with the Legislature.

“There’s something wrong when lawmakers are spending more time thinking of new and creative ways to circumvent the governor and the executive branch than working to address pressing challenges facing our state. So, for the last seven years, we’ve been hard at work to restore the separation of powers and hold the Legislature accountable to the will of the people that elected us,” Evers said in a statement to Wisconsin Watch. “My promise to the people of Wisconsin was — and is — that I will always work to do the right thing and get things done. Now, today, thanks in part to the fair maps we enacted, we’re seeing more collaboration and more compromise than seven years ago, and I believe most Wisconsinites would say that is a good thing because that is how government is supposed to work. So, while we haven’t agreed on 100 percent of the issues 100 percent of the time, I’m proud of the good bipartisan work we’ve accomplished together over the last seven years.”

Evers’ defeat of Republican Gov. Scott Walker in 2018 marked a change in the Legislature’s relationship with the governor’s office. For eight years prior, a Republican governor and Legislature meant conservative ideas — slashing the power of public sector unions, strict voter ID, concealed carry, corporate tax cuts — became law with ease. Evers, a moderate Democrat, became a check on that power. 

In the weeks before Evers officially took office, Walker and the Republican-led Senate and Assembly enacted laws in the lame duck session limiting the power of the incoming Democratic administration.

Since then, and despite Evers’ frequent calls for bipartisanship, the governor and legislative Republicans have been engaged in a yearslong tug-of-war over their powers. It’s a relationship that has been marked by court cases, record-breaking numbers of gubernatorial vetoes and the Legislature advancing numerous constitutional amendments that don’t need Evers’ signature. While Evers has served as a check on far right legislation, Republicans have shrugged at Evers’ calls for special sessions on Democratic issues such as abortion rights and gun safety. 

“I think the most telling was the 2020 COVID experience,” said Barry Burden, director of the Elections Research Center and political science professor at the University of Wisconsin-Madison. “The state was facing a bunch of crises that year. … There were so many things the state needed to address and there was not a single bill passed in the Legislature and sent to his desk that year. Instead, the two branches were mostly pointing fingers at each other.” 

Despite the partisan battles, every other year a compromise between the two sides has brought the biennial state budget across the finish line on schedule and with billions of dollars in unspent tax revenue that has shored up the state’s fiscal health. 

“The governor is open to meeting with anybody to try and get things done,” said Rep. Christine Sinicki, D-Milwaukee, who was first elected to the Assembly in 1998. 

His easygoing demeanor has helped that relationship with the Legislature, Sinicki said. Republicans seem to recognize that, too. 

“When you talk to Gov. Evers, you realize he’s sincere,” Senate Majority Leader Devin LeMahieu, R-Oostburg, told the audience at a recent WisPolitics event. “I think he’s a sincere person, but (there’s) obviously a lot of things we don’t necessarily agree on.” 

Conflict and the courts

Several power disputes between Evers and the Legislature have ended up before the Wisconsin Supreme Court, which transitioned from a conservative to liberal majority during Evers’ two terms. They include: 

  • In 2020, the court’s conservative majority sided with Republican lawmakers who challenged the Evers administration’s powers when the governor’s office extended the “Safer at Home” order during the coronavirus pandemic. 
  • In late 2023, the court’s new liberal majority struck down the Republican legislative maps, ruling they were unconstitutional. Evers in 2024 signed the current maps into law. 
  • In 2025, the liberal majority upheld the governor’s veto powers after Evers used his veto pen to raise school district revenue limits annually for the next 400 years. 

Sen. Chris Kapenga, R-Delafield, is leading a constitutional amendment to prevent the governor from using veto powers to increase taxes or fees. 

“The state Supreme Court has given the executive branch unprecedented power,” Kapenga said in a statement to Wisconsin Watch. “Nowhere is this more apparent than in the use of the partial veto pen.” 

One of the other significant disagreements of the Evers era that reached the Supreme Court has been the oversight of administrative rules, or policy changes sought by executive agencies like the Department of Natural Resources. 

Republicans have long criticized these policies as red tape for Wisconsin businesses. The 2018 lame duck legislation gave the Legislature the ability to delay the implementation of policies from state agencies, such as a ban on conversion therapy or updating surface water quality standards. 

Evers sued the Legislature on the issue. In 2025, the Supreme Court’s liberal majority last summer ruled that a key legislative committee that oversees administrative rules could not block the Evers administration’s policies from going into effect. The Legislature is essentially in an advisory role now, said Rep. Adam Neylon, R-Pewaukee, one of the co-chairs of the Joint Committee on Review of Administrative Rules. 

“I think that people are expecting more from an executive role or from the governor and it’s in some ways disrupted the balance of the co-equal branches of government,” Neylon said. “I think, especially a lot of the court decisions upholding the 400-year veto or Evers v. Marklein, which took away our oversight of the rulemaking process, I think we’re in an era now that the power has been slowly drifting into the executive and I think real people do feel that.” 

The balance of power is a legitimate concern for the Legislature to have, but Republicans prior to the Supreme Court’s decision asserted control over the process in ways that often negatively affected public health issues, said Sen. Kelda Roys, D-Madison, one of the Democrats running for governor and a member of the administrative rules committee. 

“The most important legacy is the court decision, Evers v. Marklein, that says, basically, the Legislature can’t be judge, jury and executioner,” Roys said.

What’s next

Whether the partisan battles of split government continue depends on where Wisconsin voters take the state during the 2026 elections later this year. Evers’ departure leaves an open governor’s race. New legislative maps and Democratic gains in both chambers in 2024 set up real competition for control of the Legislature in 2026. 

A unified government with one-party control of the executive and legislative branches could bring a burst of new laws starting in 2027, Burden said. 

But more split government conflicts are also possible, and none of the candidates for governor appears as interested in bipartisan negotiations as Evers, Burden said. Republican U.S. Rep. Tom Tiffany cleared the GOP primary field in January. Seven major Democrats are running for governor, including Roys, former Lt. Gov. Mandela Barnes, former Department of Administration Secretary Joel Brennan, Milwaukee County Executive David Crowley, Madison state Rep. Francesca Hong, former Wisconsin Economic Development Corp. CEO Missy Hughes and Lt. Gov. Sara Rodriguez. 

“He has a more conciliatory tone, I think, than Democrats would like to see,” Burden said. “So if we get divided government again next year in some form, whether it’s a Tiffany governorship or a Democratic governorship and the Legislature at least partly divided, I think the kind of stalemate that we’ve seen will continue and the option to go to the courts or to use constitutional amendments to get around the governor will still be a popular method.”

Wisconsin Watch is a nonprofit, nonpartisan newsroom. Subscribe to our newsletters for original stories and our Friday news roundup.

As Tony Evers delivers his final State of the State, he remains crosswise with the GOP Legislature 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.

Can Wisconsin do what Montana is attempting to prohibit corporations from donating to campaigns?

A row of wooden chairs and microphones sits beneath marble walls and a large framed painting of people gathered in a historical interior.
Reading Time: 3 minutes

Organizers are working to introduce a Montana ballot initiative that could prevent corporations from spending on elections.

The constitutional amendment would alter corporate charters and the power given to “artificial persons” in Montana, barring them from political spending. It attempts to bypass the U.S. Supreme Court’s 2010 Citizens United decision, which said under the First Amendment the government can’t bar corporations and similar groups from spending money independently to influence elections.

The Montana proposal is not yet on the 2026 ballot after the Montana attorney general and the Montana Supreme Court determined the version was legally insufficient under state constitutional rules, but organizers are refiling new versions in the hopes of getting the initiative on the ballot. 

In Wisconsin, home of the most expensive state Supreme Court races ever, could similar campaign finance laws be put in place? It’s a complicated question, according to legal experts. 

Unlike in Wisconsin, Montana residents can propose changes to the state constitution or statutory law through a citizen petition process. To qualify a constitutional initiative for the ballot, proponents must gather signatures equal to 10% of the state’s electors, including at least 10% of electors in two-fifths of Montana’s legislative districts. Statutory initiatives require signatures equal to 5% of the state’s electors, including at least 5% of electors in one-third of legislative districts.

Similar reforms in Wisconsin would need to come from the Legislature, not from a citizen-led ballot initiative. To place a constitutional amendment on the ballot, lawmakers must approve the same proposal in two consecutive legislative sessions. The amendment would then appear on the statewide ballot, where voters could approve it and make it part of the Wisconsin Constitution by a majority vote. The governor doesn’t have a role in that process.

If Montana’s initiative makes it to the ballot and voters approve it, more litigation is likely to follow, said Derek Clinger, senior counsel at the State Democracy Research Initiative at the University of Wisconsin Law School. It’s unclear if the organizer’s argument would survive a constitutional challenge. 

Nevertheless, Montana’s proposed ballot initiative is an interesting conversation starter that could help put “political pressure” on the courts if Montana voters agree to approve a potential amendment, Clinger said. 

“They made a case that doing this would comply with the U.S. Supreme Court precedent and that states have this power to regulate and kind of control what sorts of activities corporations are allowed to participate in,” Clinger said. “It’s an interesting idea what they’re doing in Montana, but I think it would absolutely be litigated, and it’s kind of hard to predict what would happen.”

There are other campaign finance changes Wisconsin politicians could introduce, such as spending limits in judicial elections.

“Judges are supposed to be kind of more above politics compared to legislators and executive officials, and that kind of need to keep judges out of the political fray can justify more campaign finance regulations,” Clinger said. “I think if there was an appetite to impose more regulations on judicial elections in Wisconsin, I think they would have the constitutional ability to do so. But the question is: Is there that appetite?”

Paul Nolette, director of Marquette University’s Les Aspin Center for Government, said it’s a difficult legal environment for supporters of campaign finance reform. 

“Getting laws on the books that make meaningful campaign finance change is just difficult at this particular moment,” Nolette said.

One way to change the system without limiting corporate giving would be more disclosure from so-called “dark money” groups, which can avoid disclosing donors through Super PAC donations. The Arizona Supreme Court allowed legislators to challenge a citizen ballot initiative that called for “dark money” disclosure. More than 70% of voters approved the measure in 2022. 

Legislators also could introduce a more robust public campaign finance system. Wisconsin once had a public financing program for Supreme Court elections as part of the Wisconsin Election Campaign Fund, but it was repealed in 2011. State Sen. Kelda Roys, D-Madison, previously told Wisconsin Watch she was drafting a bill to revive the public financing system and would propose significantly larger grants than the original $100,000 for primary candidates and $300,000 for general election candidates, saying smaller amounts would not meaningfully support competitive campaigns.

“The amount of money in politics, even if it’s just coming from individuals, is still significant enough that it just overwhelms the amount of public money that could be available,” Nolette said.

Apart from the state Legislature, Clinger said the Wisconsin Supreme Court could institute recusal rules, which may discourage partisan campaign donations to justices.

Wisconsin Watch is a nonprofit, nonpartisan newsroom. Subscribe to our newsletters for original stories and our Friday news roundup.

Can Wisconsin do what Montana is attempting to prohibit corporations from donating to campaigns? 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.

As Wisconsin weighs who should pay, another possible billion-dollar data center emerges

An aerial view shows a town along a wide river, with homes, roads, railroad tracks, green hills, and a construction site with utility structures near the shoreline.
Reading Time: 5 minutes
Click here to read highlights from the story
  • An eighth billion-dollar data center project is in the early stages of development, this one in southwestern Wisconsin, the Grant County Economic Development Corp. confirmed in an interview Monday.
  • An undisclosed company is seeking 400 to 500 acres in the town of Cassville, the town of Cassville chair told Wisconsin Watch. Not much else is known at this point.
  • The project comes as public scrutiny of data center projects intensifies and the Public Service Commission considers how to structure rates for large utility consumers like data centers.

A site in the Driftless Area in southwest Wisconsin is being eyed for a possible $1 billion data center, just as the state considers who should pay to provide the unprecedented amount of electricity such projects need.

It would be the eighth major data center known to have been proposed in Wisconsin, though one of those, near Madison, has been dropped.

Ron Brisbois, executive director of the Grant County Economic Development Corp., said Feb. 9 he expects to learn by spring whether Grant County remains in consideration by a company scouting sites for what it said would be a $1 billion data center. 

“They’re casting a pretty wide net, Grant County just happens to be part of that net,” Brisbois told Wisconsin Watch. “It’s very, very preliminary.” 

The revelation contrasts with how other Wisconsin officials have handled data center proposals. 

A Wisconsin Watch investigation found that local officials in some of the seven communities where hyperscale data centers have been proposed worked on the proposals for months before making any announcement to the public. In four of the communities, officials signed confidential nondisclosure agreements (NDAs), pledging to keep details of the plans private.

Brisbois said he has not been asked to sign a data center NDA. He said he met with a company, whom he would not identify, in November before announcing at an open meeting in December that a $1 billion data center was being floated in Grant County. That mention was reported by local news media.

Brisbois told Wisconsin Watch he felt that his board of directors deserved to know about the initial inquiries, but that he wouldn’t release details that might jeopardize the project.

“I don’t know who the end user would be, all I’m being told is it’s one of the big five or six businesses,” Brisbois said. “I’ve asked not to be told that information. I don’t need that information to do my job.”

Besides storing and processing data, data centers are vital to advancing the use of artificial intelligence (AI). Major companies building data centers in Wisconsin include Meta, the owner of Facebook and Instagram, in Beaver Dam, which used an NDA; and Microsoft in Mount Pleasant and Vantage Data Centers in Port Washington, to serve OpenAI and Oracle, which did not.

Vehicles drive through a security gate at dusk, passing traffic barrels, a guard booth, and tall light poles under an overcast sky.
Vehicles pass through a security gate as construction continues at Microsoft’s data center project, Nov. 13, 2025, in Mount Pleasant, Wis. (Joe Timmerman / Wisconsin Watch)

“I like to be transparent with my board of directors,” Brisbois said. “But did I give a lot of details? No. I thought it was an appropriate time that we were being evaluated, at least initially. Did I need to do that? No. But it’s how I do my job.”

Doug Schauff, the town chair in Cassville, in southwest Grant County, told Wisconsin Watch he attended a meeting about the data center about a week ago. He wouldn’t reveal other details, other than the company involved is seeking 400 or 500 acres in the town.

“Everything is so vague right now,” Schauff said. “They had not contacted land owners. … They wouldn’t give us any definite figures (on power usage), which would be Greek to us anyway.”

The seven major data center projects detailed in the Jan. 26 Wisconsin Watch report were valued at more than $57 billion, including one in the Madison suburb of DeForest. DeForest city officials did not sign an NDA, but kept details of a $12 billion data center proposal quiet for months before announcing it to the public. Amid opposition from residents, the city dropped the project Jan. 27. 

A person holds several stickers reading “DATA CENTER” with a red circle and diagonal slash, with other seated people blurred in the background
Sheri Stach hands out stickers in opposition to the QTS data center development prior to a village board meeting at DeForest Village Hall in DeForest, Wis., on Jan. 20, 2026. Facing opposition from residents, the city dropped the project Jan. 27. (Kayla Wolf for Wisconsin Watch)

Data center proposals are pending in Kenosha, Menomonie and Janesville, all of which signed NDAs. 

The Janesville City Council has scheduled five informational sessions on an $8 billion data center proposed there. The first is Feb. 9, when the council is also scheduled to consider a proposal from data center opponents that would require a referendum on such large-scale projects.

Republican state lawmakers on Feb. 6 introduced a bill that would prohibit local governments from signing data center NDAs.

Meanwhile, attention is turning to how the state will determine who will pay to provide the massive amounts of electricity that data centers need to operate.

On Feb. 10, the Public Service Commission is scheduled to hold a hearing, which will be livestreamed, on establishing a payment structure for the generation and distribution of electricity needed by “very large customers,” such as data centers.  

A key question is whether data centers will be required to pay entirely, or whether some of those costs will be spread among other residential and other general ratepayers.

High-voltage transmission towers support multiple power lines stretching across the sky above a tree line at dusk
Electrical power lines near Trempealeau, Wis., Aug. 11, 2017. (Tony Webster / Wikimedia Commons)

Bert Garvin, an executive vice president of We Energies, has said the rate structure proposed by the utility to the PSC will protect general ratepayers. “While your bills may go up for other cost-of-service reasons, we can assure all our customers your bills aren’t going up because of” data centers, he said at a public forum last week.

At the same forum, Tom Content, executive director of the consumer advocate Citizens Utility Board, said “the devil’s in the details” on how the PSC protects ratepayers. 

“I think it’s really important that these wealthy tech companies have to put up the money and not have to achieve compliance with that some other way,” he said.

Content also alluded to stranded assets — power plants that are shut down while ratepayers are still paying off their debt. He said the PSC must impose “exit fees” stringent enough so that data centers remain financially responsible for new multibillion-dollar power plants, should the AI phenomenon become a “bubble” and data centers shut down early.

Wisconsin Watch reported in December that residential and business utility customers in Wisconsin owe $1 billion for stranded assets — the debt taken on to build and upgrade power plants that have been shut down or are scheduled to be shut down soon.

One challenge in trying to protect ratepayers for the costs of electricity needed for data centers is that the PSC has never faced a surge in electricity demand of this scale. We Energies alone plans to spend $19 billion over five years to meet what is expected to be a doubling of its demand for electricity, largely from the two Milwaukee-area data centers, in Port Washington and Mount Pleasant. 

Nationally, the procedures that regulators use are “not designed for the current level and pace of load growth,” one energy consultant wrote in a December report

“As a result, the estimated cost to serve new customers can quickly become outdated and inaccurate,” potentially leading to costs being shifted to other customers, the report said.

The Republican-controlled Assembly on Jan. 20 passed a bill to require that the PSC ensure “that no costs associated with the construction or extension of electric infrastructure that primarily serves a data center are allocated to or recovered from any other customer.” 

No action has been scheduled in the GOP-controlled state Senate. 

Opponents have criticized a “poison pill” provision in the bill they say would severely limit the ability to use renewable energy to power data centers.

Democratic Gov. Tony Evers has said he likely would not sign the bill.

Wisconsin Watch is a nonprofit, nonpartisan newsroom. Subscribe to our newsletters for original stories and our Friday news roundup.

As Wisconsin weighs who should pay, another possible billion-dollar data center emerges 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.

Court says Madison can be liable for disenfranchising voters

A person holding a red bag points with a pen at a piece of paper on a table covered with papers of varying colors and envelopes.
Reading Time: 3 minutes

A Dane County judge on Monday rejected the city of Madison’s claim that absentee voting’s characterization in state law as a “privilege” precludes damages against the city for disenfranchising 193 voters and ruled that Madison can face potential financial liability for the error.

In rejecting motions by the city and other defendants to dismiss the case, Dane County Circuit Court Judge David Conway said that a state law describing absentee voting as a privilege does not mean absentee ballots receive less constitutional protection than votes cast in person.

“That right to vote,” Conway wrote, “would be a hollow protection if it did not also include the right to have one’s vote counted.”

Conway also rejected former Madison Clerk Maribeth Witzel-Behl’s legal argument that there is a meaningful legal difference between intentionally not counting votes and mistakenly failing to count them due to human error. He held that state law allows for people to seek damages against election officials who “negligently deprive citizens of the right to vote.”

“When an election official fails to count a valid absentee ballot, whether by negligence, recklessness, or malice, he or she deprives the absentee voter of that constitutional right,” he wrote. 

The city and Witzel-Behl’s legal argument, made in response to a lawsuit seeking damages on behalf of 193 Madison voters disenfranchised in the 2024 election, drew sharp rebukes from legal experts, Gov. Tony Evers and the Wisconsin Elections Commission, which filed its very first friend-of-the-court brief opposing the rationale. 

Conway dismissed the Madison clerk’s office from the case after arguments that it could not be sued separately from the city, but allowed the case to proceed against the city, Witzel-Behl and Deputy Clerk Jim Verbick. The voters are represented by a liberal election law firm, Law Forward. 

“At the dawn of another election season, the message is clear: The right to vote protects Wisconsinites whether they vote in-person or absentee,” Law Forward staff attorney Scott Thompson told Votebeat. “We are pleased the court agreed with our arguments and that this case will proceed.”

Matt O’Neill, the lawyer representing Witzel-Behl, declined to comment.

Madison spokesperson Dylan Brogan said the city is reviewing the decision and considering its next steps. Brogan stressed that the city “has a long history of promoting and protecting absentee voting and that policy has not changed,” but said monetary damages for unintentional errors would mean money and resources “would be diverted to pay for this human error.”

Madison mayor says ‘nonsensical’ lawsuit could weaken elections

In an interview with Votebeat last week, Madison Mayor Satya Rhodes-Conway said she didn’t like the state law calling absentee voting a privilege, not a right. But she said that critics should direct their concerns at the Legislature, rather than at the city. 

Rhodes-Conway said the city’s argument “literally repeat(s) what’s in state law.” Legal experts have disputed that characterization, saying the city advanced a novel interpretation of a long-standing statute. Rhodes-Conway said she wasn’t sure those critiques were relevant.

“It shouldn’t be in the law,” she said. “And the state Legislature should take action to correct that and better protect voting in this state.”

The 1985 state law describes absentee voting as a privilege exercised outside the safeguards of the polling place. Another provision requires absentee voters to comply with laws regulating the practice for their votes to count. The law has been cited in lawsuits seeking to restrict absentee voting, but it had never before been used to shield election officials from liability for failing to count valid ballots.

In his Monday ruling, Conway dismissed the city’s interpretation of the law without questioning the statute itself.

“Just because the absentee voting process is a privilege does not mean that those who legally utilize it do not exercise their constitutional right to vote,” he said.

Rhodes-Conway said that, despite using that legal argument in court, the city has consistently promoted absentee voting and will continue to do so.

Rhodes-Conway criticized the lawsuit as a whole, saying that the solution for the city disenfranchising 193 voters in the 2024 presidential election “is not to charge the city of Madison millions of dollars because our clerk’s office made a mistake.” 

“That’s not achieving anything. It’s not making elections better,” she continued. “It’s simply taking money that could be invested in basic services and in election protection and election services, and paying it to the plaintiffs. It’s just nonsensical to me.”

Alexander Shur is a reporter for Votebeat based in Wisconsin. Contact Shur at ashur@votebeat.org.

This coverage is made possible through Votebeat, a nonpartisan news organization covering local election administration and voting access. Sign up for Votebeat Wisconsin’s free newsletter here.

Court says Madison can be liable for disenfranchising voters 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.

Judicial philosophies clash as both Wisconsin Supreme Court candidates point to same case to highlight their fitness for the high court

Ornate columns and carved stone surround an entrance marked "SUPREME COURT" beneath a decorative ceiling and skylight.
Reading Time: 6 minutes

In 2022, a student-led voting advocacy organization sued in Dane County to clarify which parts of a witness’ address must appear on an absentee ballot envelope. What was accepted differed from city to city. 

The 4th District Court of Appeals, in an opinion written by Judge Chris Taylor, affirmed a lower court ruling that a witness only needs to provide an address where that person can “be communicated with.” The Legislature, which had appealed, argued a precise, multipart address is necessary to prevent election fraud. 

“The legislature could have required such specificity for the absentee ballot witness address requirement when it initially adopted the witness address requirement in 1966 or in subsequent modifications of the absentee voting statutes,” wrote Taylor, a liberal candidate running for the Wisconsin Supreme Court in April.

Taylor’s campaign shared that decision as a prime example of the kind of justice she would be on the high court. The campaign for her opponent, conservative appeals court Judge Maria Lazar, shared that exact same decision as a prime example of why Taylor shouldn’t be on the high court.

As Wisconsinites head to the polls in just two months to elect another state Supreme Court justice, Wisconsin Watch asked the Lazar and Taylor campaigns separately to provide examples of rulings in past cases that show how they might serve as a justice and decisions from their opponents that warrant criticism. 

That both campaigns shared the otherwise mundane witness address case speaks to the deep ideological divide that persists in the state judiciary. Campaigns can point to the outcomes of politically charged cases, such as those related to voting rights, gun rights or abortion, as a way to point voters to what their views are, legal experts said.

Court of Appeals Judge Chris Taylor. (Matt Roth)
Court of Appeals Judge Maria Lazar
(Courtesy of Wisconsin Court of Appeals)

“To me, those are very subtle signals as to their constituency that the impact of this decision, one way or another, is consistent with your views,” said Janine Geske, who served on the Wisconsin Supreme Court from 1993 to 1998. 

A spokesperson for Taylor’s campaign said the case demonstrates how Taylor protected Democratic rights and “fairly” and “impartially” applies the law. 

“This decision balanced protecting each Wisconsinite’s right to vote with establishing a fair, uniform procedure for our local clerks,” Taylor campaign spokesman Sam Roecker said. “As indicative of the strength of this decision, no party involved in the case appealed Judge Taylor’s decision.” 

Lazar’s campaign said Taylor failed to consider the intent of the Legislature. 

“Judge Taylor’s opinion, on the merits, indicates how far an activist judge who legislates from the bench will go to alter procedures for election integrity,” Lazar campaign spokesman Nathan Conrad said of the witness address case. “Every common sense citizen in Wisconsin knows that an address consists of a street name, number and municipality.” 

Other significant cases from the judges

The other judicial rulings the candidates’ campaigns shared with Wisconsin Watch also showcase the candidates’ contrasting judicial philosophies.

Lazar’s campaign pointed to her opinions that show her being tough on crime and supportive of Second Amendment rights. One was a Waukesha County case where she ruled that a man who pleaded guilty to child enticement and mental harm could not withdraw his guilty plea. In the other case she ruled that the city of Delafield could not deny an operating permit for a shooting range. 

In addition to the voting rights case, Taylor’s campaign highlighted rulings that favored utility consumers and reproductive health. In one decision the court determined the Public Service Commission did not follow proper rulemaking procedures when it prohibited activities companies use to incentivize lower energy use. In the other opinion Taylor wrote that a woman could continue seeking legal action against a physician she claimed did not inform her of a recommendation to another doctor to remove her ovaries during a colon surgery. The Wisconsin Supreme Court last May affirmed that decision with Justice Brian Hagedorn joining the liberal justices in the majority.

The different political focuses between the candidates is no surprise given their different professional and political paths prior to their time on the bench. Lazar, a conservative, was an assistant attorney general under Republican Attorney General JB Van Hollen before her election to the Waukesha County Circuit Court in 2015. Taylor worked as a policy director for Planned Parenthood of Wisconsin and served five terms as a Democrat in the Assembly before Gov. Tony Evers appointed her to the Dane County Circuit Court in 2020.

The judicial rulings they highlighted as reflecting poorly on their opponent are nothing like those featured in the multimillion-dollar Supreme Court campaigns of recent years, when both sides sought to paint the other as lax on crime and public safety. 

While there are still two months to go, it’s possible the race will stay muted because the stakes are different with no Supreme Court majority on the line, said Howard Schweber, a professor emeritus of political science and legal studies at the University of Wisconsin-Madison. Neither outcome will change liberal control of the court, though because the winner will replace retiring conservative Justice Rebecca Bradley, it could extend guaranteed liberal control until at least 2030.

The quiet nature of the race is “bizarre” given the increasingly political direction Wisconsin Supreme Court elections have gone in the past, Schweber said.

“There is not invective. There is not screaming accusations,” Schweber said. “This may all change over the course of the election, but at least at the moment, we’re not seeing over-the-top ads making hysterical accusations, and it appears that at least part of the reason for that might be that neither campaign can find anything particularly embarrassing that the opposing candidate has done.” 

Some criticisms from each campaign are still there and could grow stronger as Election Day nears. In a recent social media post seeking campaign contributions, Lazar’s campaign described Taylor not as a judge, but a “radical left-wing legislator.” Taylor’s campaign in a post following the release of January campaign finance reports described Lazar as “our extreme opponent.” 

Lazar and Taylor will face each other in a March 25 debate hosted by WISN-TV at the Lubar Center at Marquette University’s Law School. 

Which cases did the campaigns share?

Taylor’s campaign shared the following cases with Wisconsin Watch as examples of how Taylor would serve as a justice: 

  • Midwest Renewable Energy Association v. Public Service Commission of Wisconsin (the utility case). (Read the opinion here.) 
  • Rise Inc. v. Wisconsin Elections Commission (the absentee ballot case). (Read the opinion here.)
  • Melissa A. Hubbard v. Carol J. Neuman, M.D. (the ovary removal case). (Read the opinion here.)

The campaign criticized a 2024 appellate opinion written by Lazar that contradicted a ruling from another appeals court branch on whether a conservative group questioning the 2020 election results could access health information about individuals who were judged incapable of voting. Lazar and another judge on the 2nd District Court of Appeals released an opinion that said the group had a right to the information after the 4th District’s opposite ruling was published as precedent.

The opinion shows Lazar “is an extremist who uses our courts to protect special interests and push her right-wing agenda,” Roecker said. 

“Lazar completely ignored recent precedent that private voter data could not be released to the public,” Roecker said. “That should alarm anyone who believes in protecting our democracy and fair elections.” 

Lazar’s campaign in response to that criticism said the dual appeals court opinions were about “issues of procedure” when two districts disagree. The 2nd District revised the opinion at the request of the Wisconsin Supreme Court, which then accepted the case, Conrad said. It is scheduled for oral arguments before the high court in April. 

Lazar’s campaign shared the following cases as examples of how Lazar would serve as a justice: 

  • Saybrook Tax Exemptors, LLC. v. Lac Du Flambeau Band of Lake Superior Chippewa Indians, et. al.: Lazar concluded that certain agreements and documents between a financial company and the Lake Superior Chippewa tribe about plans for a casino were void. (Read the decision here.)
  • State v. Scherer: Lazar ruled that law enforcement’s seizure of a man’s cellphone that possessed child pornography was too broad and violated his privacy rights, despite the “egregious” potential crime. (Read the decision here.)
  • State v. Flores (the child enticement case). (Read the decision here.)
  • State v. Heinz: Lazar denied a request to modify the sentence of a woman who was diagnosed with post-traumatic stress disorder after she was charged with first-degree reckless homicide. (Read the decision here.)
  • Hartland Sportsman Club v. City of Delafield (the gun range case). (Read the decision here.)
  • Pewaukee Land County, LLC. v. Soo Line Railroad: Lazar ruled that a company could not claim ownership of property in Pewaukee that belonged to the Canadian Pacific railroad, but did not block the company’s current use of the property. (Read the decision here.)
  • Craig, et. al. v. Village of West Bend: Lazar dismissed a case about the transfer of cemetery property that already had been decided in an earlier case. (Read the decision here.) 

Lazar’s campaign shared two cases as criticism of Taylor’s judicial opinions:

  • Rise Inc. v. Wisconsin Elections Commission (the absentee ballot case). (Read the opinion here.)
  • State v. Kruckenberg Anderson: In an opinion written by Taylor, the 4th District Court of Appeals affirmed a lower court ruling that suppressed certain statements a teenager made to law enforcement prior to being charged with killing his newborn child. The Wisconsin Supreme Court denied a petition to review the case in 2024. (Read the Court of Appeals opinion here.)

Wisconsin Watch is a nonprofit, nonpartisan newsroom. Subscribe to our newsletters for original stories and our Friday news roundup.

Judicial philosophies clash as both Wisconsin Supreme Court candidates point to same case to highlight their fitness for the high court 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.

DataWatch: Wisconsin hasn’t raised its minimum wage for 17 years. What does that mean for workers and the economy?

Reading Time: 4 minutes

Minimum-wage workers in 19 states saw their paychecks increase this year. But Wisconsin hasn’t changed its minimum wage — just $7.25 per hour — for 17 years, shrinking the buying power of the lowest-earning workers.

Wisconsin ties its minimum wage to the federal level, which hasn’t budged for its longest stretch in history. Had Congress indexed the wage to inflation in 2009, it would have risen to $10.88 in 2025. That’s a difference of $145.20 over a 40-hour workweek. 

Elsewhere, 34 states, territories and districts have set minimum wages above $7.25.

Neighboring Minnesota raised its minimum wage from $11.13 to $11.41 this year, while Michigan’s leaped from $12.48 to $13.73. Illinois kept its threshold at $15, the highest level among noncoastal states.

In 2024, about 1% of the Wisconsin workforce earned at or below the state’s minimum wage. Those people generally worked as salespeople, automotive service technicians or food preparation workers, U.S. Census data show.

Wisconsin’s tipped workers have an even lower minimum wage of $2.33 per hour, slightly higher than the $2.13 federal minimum, which has not changed since 1991.

Meanwhile, the average living wage for a single adult with no children in Wisconsin in 2025 is $20.96, according to MIT’s living wage calculator, with higher costs in metropolitan areas — including $22.18 in Madison and $21.07 in Milwaukee and Waukesha. The living wage is significantly higher for adults who raise children and lower for people living with a working partner. 

New York campaign sparked ‘Fight for $15’

Campaigns to raise the minimum wage have regularly drawn national headlines. In 2012, fast-food workers and their supporters began calling for a $15-per-hour minimum wage in New York City. Their victory inspired a broader ‘Fight for $15’ movement, including in Wisconsin, as Wisconsin Watch previously reported.

This year, The Living Wage Coalition — a group of labor and progressive organizations — launched a campaign to raise Wisconsin’s minimum wage to $20 per hour, calling the status quo far below a reasonable standard of living for the lowest-wage workers. 

An increase to $15 per hour would be politically popular and directly or indirectly raise the wages of 231,800 (18%) women workers, 36,200 (25.6%) Black workers and 50,200 (26.6%) Hispanic workers in Wisconsin — narrowing gender and racial wealth and income gaps that are some of the largest in the nation, according to a 2025 High Road Strategy Center report. The University of Wisconsin-Madison-based “think-and-do tank” focuses on solutions to social problems — including those related to the environment, opportunity and democratic institutions. 

Still, multiple bills to raise Wisconsin’s minimum wage — largely proposed by Democrats — have stalled in the Legislature. Republican lawmakers have cited concerns about burdening small businesses.

Higher wage ‘has to come from somewhere’ 

Minimum-wage hikes — depending on the size — can bring a mix of positive and negative economic consequences, according to Callie Freitag, assistant professor at the University of Wisconsin-Madison’s School of Social Work. 

“The good thing is that earnings would go up for workers. Employers would raise wages and be able to pay workers more,” Freitag said. “But the money to pay workers more has to come from somewhere.”

Economists worry that dramatic minimum-wage hikes could lead to higher consumer costs  — or prompt businesses to cut worker hours or eliminate their jobs entirely, Freitag added.

The key would be an increase that benefits the lowest-paid workers without significantly affecting the broader economy. But it’s unclear what that sweet spot is.

Conditions of the labor market — the supply and demand for workers — shape wages across most of the economy. Wages typically increase when there are more openings than workers, and they decrease when there are few openings for available workers. 

Setting the minimum wage close to or below an equilibrium wage — where the demand for labor matches the supply — only minimally affects wages across the market, economists suggest. 

States that hiked minimum wages saw slightly higher gains across the lowest-tier wages (the bottom 10%) between 2019 and 2024, but not enough to claim a correlation, an analysis by the liberal-leaning Economic Policy Institute (EPI) found. A range of factors could have shaped the wage increases, which also played out in the Midwest.

Wisconsin has seen slightly faster growth in bottom-tier wages than its neighbors — even without increasing the minimum wage. The state’s bottom-tier wages increased from $10.92 hourly in 2009 to $14.58, Wisconsin Watch found by analyzing EPI’s data.

Bigger hikes strain employers 

While basic economic principles suggest that a 10% increase in the minimum wage would decrease the hiring of unskilled workers by 1 to 2%, recent studies suggest an even smaller shift, or no effect at all. 

Most minimum-wage studies published between 2004 and 2024 have shown little or no job loss, Ben Zipperer, an EPI senior economist, found. 

Researchers tend to focus most on cities and states that have significantly increased their minimum wage. Seattle, Washington, which has hiked its threshold annually since 2015, has among the highest in the country at $21.30 this year. 

A person holds a sign reading “$15 MINIMUM WAGE IS THE COVID RELIEF WE NEED,” with illustrated figures at the bottom and hands gripping the edges.
A sign is seen during a Wisconsin State Capitol press conference about raising Wisconsin’s minimum wage, June 17, 2021. (Isaac Wasserman / Wisconsin Watch)

In a 2022 study, University of Washington researchers found that Seattle’s minimum wage increase to $11 hourly in 2015 “had an insignificant effect on employment,” but a spike to $13 in 2016 “resulted in a large drop in employment.” 

But the findings might not directly apply to other places, the researchers found, because industries and the makeup of the labor force might look and act differently elsewhere. 

A separate University of Washington study found that a minimum-wage increase to $15 hourly affected most child care businesses, which commonly responded by raising tuition and reducing staff hours or total number of staff — potentially harming staff and lower-wage customers.

What work is worth

“Minimum wage legislation commonly has two stated objectives: the reduction of employer control of wages; and the abolition of poverty,” George Stiegler, a leader of the Chicago school of economics, wrote in 1946 — an era when Congress was debating bigger increases to the minimum wage in the policy’s early years. 

But Stiegler was pessimistic about the prospect that minimum-wage hikes were the best way to eliminate poverty. He instead called for lawmakers to grant lower-income families other forms of relief, including tax cuts and credits. 

That spirit was reflected in the “no tax on tips” bill, which the Wisconsin Assembly passed this month to benefit tipped workers. 

Still, Laura Dresser, associate director of the High Road Strategy Center, views the minimum wage as an important floor to benefit workers at the margins and signal “work is worth this.” 

“People who are working full time should be able to afford life,” she said. “At $7.25 per hour, there’s almost nothing you can afford, and it feels far below what a wage floor really should function as.”

Wisconsin Watch is a nonprofit, nonpartisan newsroom. Subscribe to our newsletters for original stories and our Friday news roundup.

DataWatch: Wisconsin hasn’t raised its minimum wage for 17 years. What does that mean for workers and the economy? 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.

No, Mr. President. Wisconsin’s voter roll figures aren’t a sign of ‘fraud waiting to happen’

Arms of two people handling ballots on a table
Reading Time: 3 minutes

A misleading claim that Wisconsin has more registered voters than people eligible to vote is gaining traction on social media, including in posts shared this week by President Donald Trump. 

It’s just the latest in a long-running series of claims that misinterpret basic data about voter rolls to create alarm about the risk of voter fraud.

The posts circulating this week cite a video asserting that Wisconsin’s voter rolls contain more than 7 million names — far more than the state’s voting age population — and are overlaid with text reading, “This Is Not a Glitch — This Is Election Fraud Waiting To Happen.”

The video features Peter Bernegger, an entrepreneur who has been convicted of mail fraud and bank fraud. Bernegger has repeatedly promoted false theories about the 2020 election in Wisconsin legislative hearings and repeatedly filed unsuccessful lawsuits against election officials in search of proof for his claims. 

But his claim conflates two datasets in Wisconsin’s voter registration system: the Wisconsin voter list and active registered voters. 

A person in a blue shirt stands with one hand placed over their chest, facing to the side, while another person and a camera are visible blurred in the background.
Peter Bernegger is seen on Feb. 9, 2022, at the Capitol in Madison, Wis. (Mark Hoffman / Milwaukee Journal Sentinel)

As of July 2025, the state had about 8.3 million names on its list — in line with the number Bernegger cites. But of them, only 3.7 million were active registered voters. The remaining roughly 4.6 million are inactive voters. Inactive records include people who previously registered to vote but later moved out of state, died, lost eligibility because of a felony conviction, or were ruled incompetent to vote by a court. Those individuals haven’t been removed from the voter list, but because of their inactive status, they cannot vote unless they re-register, which requires proof of residency and a photo ID.

Bernegger claims in his video that the list of voters generally grows every day, going down only once every four years, when voters who haven’t cast a ballot in four years are sent postcards asking whether they want to remain registered and then removed from the active list if they don’t respond.

Part of that claim is true: Wisconsin never deletes voter records, so the total database of active and inactive registrations only grows. But the active voter roll, which includes only voters currently eligible to cast a ballot, can shrink

By email, Bernegger disputed Votebeat’s characterization of his claims but provided no further proof for them.

The confusion stems from a common misunderstanding about Wisconsin’s voter system, Wisconsin Elections Commission Chair Ann Jacobs, a Democrat, told Votebeat. The pollbooks used to check voters’ eligibility on Election Day contain only active voters, while the broader voter database also retains inactive records. 

The inactive records also detail why a voter was deactivated. Wisconsin state law allows for several reasons for a voter’s registration status to be changed from eligible to ineligible, but there’s no state law calling for the destruction of voter registration records, not even for a voter who has died.

And Jacobs said there’s a good reason for that: Keeping these inactive records indefinitely helps prevent fraud: If somebody tries to register using the identity of a dead voter, for example, clerks can flag that application because the prior record — including the reason it was deactivated — is still on file. 

“It’s actually pro-list-hygiene to have access to that information immediately,” she said.

Interstate databases also play a role in maintaining accurate voter rolls. One such organization, the Electronic Registration Information Center, has helped states including Wisconsin identify hundreds of thousands of voters each year who have moved across state lines and tens of thousands of voters who died. But the system has gaps. Some Republican-led states have left the program, leaving just 25 states and Washington, D.C., participating.

Experts say voter fraud is extremely rare, but Republicans have long argued that dirty voter rolls could enable fraud and reduce confidence. 

Similar misleading claims about voter rolls have circulated in other states, including Michigan, amplified by right-wing figures such as Elon Musk.

Democrats and many election officials typically support regular voter roll maintenance but warn that aggressive cleanup efforts may risk disenfranchising lawful, active voters

Wisconsin’s own data shows how infrequently fraud occurs. In its latest report, which covers five elections, the WEC identified just 18 potential instances of fraud. One relates to a voter seeking to vote in two states. Most involved voting after a felony conviction or double-voting by casting an absentee and in-person vote in the same election.

Correction: This story was updated to reflect the number of names on the state’s voter list was 8.3 million.

Alexander Shur is a reporter for Votebeat based in Wisconsin. Contact Shur at ashur@votebeat.org.

This coverage is made possible through Votebeat, a nonpartisan news organization covering local election administration and voting access. Sign up for Votebeat Wisconsin’s free newsletter here.

No, Mr. President. Wisconsin’s voter roll figures aren’t a sign of ‘fraud waiting to happen’ 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.

In Wisconsin governor’s race, Democrats have a range of options with no clear front-runner

People sit on a stage while a person stands at a podium; a large screen above shows headshots and text reading "2026 Main Street Governor Candidate Forum"
Reading Time: 4 minutes

In less than 200 days, fall primary voters will head to the polls to choose the candidates they hope can win control of the governor’s office. 

For those who decide to vote in the Democratic primary, there are plenty of options, with a range of political experience, gender and racial backgrounds, and left-wing to left-of-center political views. But recent campaign finance reports and candidate performances at a small business forum in Milwaukee show no clear front-runner yet.

The Democratic race is reminiscent of the party’s 2018 primary field, when 10 candidates (two dropped out before the primary) ran to unseat former Republican Gov. Scott Walker in another favorable year for Democrats during President Donald Trump’s first term. Tony Evers, the relatively moderate, soft-spoken, aw-shucks, occasionally cussing, thrice elected to statewide office, old white guy from the Sheboygan area, won the primary with 42% of the vote and eventually two terms as governor.

The major candidates in the Democratic field this time include (in alphabetical order) former Lt. Gov. Mandela Barnes, former Department of Administration Secretary Joel Brennan, Milwaukee County Executive David Crowley, Madison state Rep. Francesca Hong, former Wisconsin Economic Development Corp. CEO Missy Hughes, Lt. Gov. Sara Rodriguez and Madison state Sen. Kelda Roys, who also ran in 2018. 

Rep. Francesca Hong, D-Madison, third from left, speaks to the audience during the year’s first Democratic gubernatorial candidate forum Jan. 21, 2026, hosted by Main Street Action at The Cooperage in Milwaukee. The candidates are, from left, Lt. Gov. Sara Rodriguez; Milwaukee County Executive David Crowley; Hong; Sen. Kelda Roys, D-Madison; former WEDC director Missy Hughes; former DOA Secretary Joel Brennan and former Lt. Gov. Mandela Barnes. (Joe Timmerman / Wisconsin Watch)

In the Republican primary, Washington County Executive Josh Schoemann and U.S. Rep. Tom Tiffany are the only major candidates at this time.

Barnes, who lost the 2022 U.S. Senate race against Republican U.S. Sen. Ron Johnson by just over 26,000 votes, has been considered the initial front-runner due to the name recognition that comes from running in a major statewide election. But campaign fundraising reports from the second half of 2025 released in mid-January show no person out significantly in front of the pack. Crowley topped the group with almost $800,000 in fundraising, reports show. 

The next Marquette University Law School poll that will gauge how voters feel about candidates in the governor’s race is expected to be released on Feb. 25. The October poll, released before Barnes and Brennan joined the race, showed 81% of Democratic primary voters hadn’t made up their minds. 

The Republican campaigns are watching how far to the left the Democrats go, said Bill McCoshen, a lobbyist and Republican strategist who previously worked for former Gov. Tommy Thompson. 

“They want the top tier to get sort of sucked into that discussion of progressive policies and to say things that make them more liberal than moderate,” McCoshen said. 

Elements of this already appeared at a Democratic gubernatorial forum organized by Main Street Action in Milwaukee last week. At times candidates tried to one-up each other on questions about supporting a public option for BadgerCare, taxing the rich and protecting civil rights from federal overreach in the wake of immigration enforcement in Minnesota. 

Asked whether they would increase taxes on the wealthiest, Hughes said her priority would be growing the economy “because my fear is if we simply increase taxes on the wealthy, the next team will get elected and come back in and take that away.” Brennan said Democrats need to build more trust in how elected leaders spend public money.  Barnes pledged to “do bold things” including taxing the wealthy.

“The wealthy have gotten away without paying their fair share for far too long,” Barnes said.

Rep. Francesca Hong, D-Madison, third from left, speaks to the audience alongside Lt. Gov. Sara Rodriguez, from left, Milwaukee County Executive David Crowley, and Sen. Kelda Roys, D-Madison, during the year’s first Democratic gubernatorial candidate forum, Jan. 21, 2026, hosted by Main Street Action at The Cooperage in Milwaukee. (Joe Timmerman / Wisconsin Watch)
Former DOA Secretary Joel Brennan, second from left, speaks to the audience alongside former WEDC director Missy Hughes, left, and former Lt. Gov. Mandela Barnes, third from left, during the year’s first Democratic gubernatorial candidate forum Jan. 21, 2026, hosted by Main Street Action at The Cooperage in Milwaukee. (Joe Timmerman / Wisconsin Watch)

Rodriguez, Crowley, Roys and Hong all agreed the state needs a public option for BadgerCare. Rodriguez added she supports extending Medicaid to 12 months postpartum, which has bipartisan support in the Legislature. Crowley said the state needs to figure out how to plug the holes left by the expiration of Obamacare subsidies. Hong and Roys both said a public option is not enough.

“Health care should be a right, not a privilege that we ration based on your wealth or your job,” Roys said.

In 2018, Wisconsin Democrats were “hungry for a win” after two terms of the Walker administration, and Evers’ statewide election success as superintendent of public instruction appealed to Democratic voters, said Anthony Chergosky, a political science professor at the University of Wisconsin-La Crosse.

Without Walker to run against in 2026, there are multiple factors that could play a role in pushing one of the Democrats out in front, Chergosky said. It could be electability, like Evers in 2018, a compelling biographical story, unique political experience or signature policy issues. 

Just this month, several candidates released major policy proposals. Rodriguez shared an immigration response plan requiring a judicial warrant for federal agents to enter sensitive locations. Hughes announced an economic development plan that includes building 200,000 homes by the end of her first term. Barnes released a proposal to lower the cost of groceries by providing grants for opening grocery stores in food deserts. Hong called for a moratorium on data center construction in Wisconsin and directing any sales and use tax exemptions from data centers into green energy infrastructure. 

The candidates recognize there’s “a ton of folks” running, as Hughes said. Barnes, Crowley and Hughes, speaking to reporters after the Main Street Action forum, emphasized some of the factors that could make their candidacy stand out to primary voters. 

For Barnes, it’s his experience as lieutenant governor during the COVID-19 pandemic and his “bold vision” for Wisconsin. Hughes pointed to her private sector experience and the fact that she hails from outside Madison and Milwaukee. Crowley highlighted his Milwaukee County executive experience working with both Republican and Democratic leaders.

By the August primary, some candidates may drop out and endorse others. Whoever wins may only have to secure a thin slice of the Democratic primary vote, setting up potential divisions within the party heading into the general election, Chergosky said. 

“It’s plausible that someone could win the nomination with 25 to 30% of the vote,” Chergosky said. “And at that point, the question becomes, if that nominee truly represents the will of the party.”

Wisconsin Watch is a nonprofit, nonpartisan newsroom. Subscribe to our newsletters for original stories and our Friday news roundup.

In Wisconsin governor’s race, Democrats have a range of options with no clear front-runner 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.

At least four Wisconsin communities signed secrecy deals for billion-dollar data centers

A banner on a chain-link fence reads “Beaver Dam Data Center” and “Building for the Future,” with snow-covered ground behind it and a blurred vehicle passing in front.
Reading Time: 9 minutes

Editor’s note: On Jan. 27, the village government in DeForest announced that a data center “is not feasible,” indicating that the previously proposed project will not move forward.

Click here to read highlights from the story
  • At least four major data center projects in Wisconsin were developed after local community leaders signed a nondisclosure agreement (NDA) with the companies. In Beaver Dam, Meta used two shell companies to develop its project in secret.
  • In one community without a data center NDA, DeForest, the village president offered misleading comments to the public about how long officials knew about the proposal.
  • Several states, including Wisconsin, have legislative proposals to ban data center NDAs. Data center advocates say NDAs are necessary to ensure private companies continue to invest in local communities.

How did a $1 billion, 520-acre data center proposed by one of the world’s richest companies go unnoticed in tiny Beaver Dam, Wisconsin?

A key reason: In a city that lists “communication matters” atop its core values, officials took steps to keep the project hidden for more than a year.

Now Meta, the trillion-dollar company that owns Facebook and Instagram, is building a complex as big as 12 football fields in a city with a population of 16,000, enough to fill only a fifth of Lambeau Field.

It’s one of seven major data center projects pending in Wisconsin that combined are worth more than $57 billion. 

In four of them, including Beaver Dam, local government officials kept the massive projects under wraps through confidential nondisclosure agreements (NDAs), a Wisconsin Watch investigation has found.

Secrecy also occurred in the three communities without NDAs.

In one, the Madison suburb of DeForest, officials worked behind the scenes for months before publicly announcing a proposed $12 billion data center, which residents are fighting.

The lack of public disclosure, while relatively common for typical development proposals in the planning stages, raises questions about how much time the public should have to digest projects that dramatically affect the economy, land use, energy, taxes, the environment and more. 

“As soon as community leadership is contemplating, even entertaining it, I think they need to make the public aware,” said retired tech executive Prescott Balch, who is advising residents around Wisconsin where data centers are proposed.

“Even if it makes it harder, that’s the right way to do it. And nobody is doing it that way.”

Blowback from residents who have been kept in the dark has spurred a new legislative proposal that would ban data center NDAs statewide.

How Beaver Dam did it

Wisconsin has some 40 data centers, stretching from Kenosha to Eau Claire. But most are tiny compared with the big seven: three under construction in Beaver Dam, Mount Pleasant and Port Washington; and four proposed in DeForest, Janesville, Kenosha and Menomonie. 

Besides storing and processing data, data centers are vital to advancing the use of artificial intelligence (AI).

A case study in how projects each worth $1 billion or more are kept quiet is Beaver Dam, the Dodge County burg an hour northeast of Madison, where Meta’s data center is expected to open in 2027.

A large industrial building sits behind a fenced construction site with snow-covered ground, orange safety fencing, stacked pipes, and a tall crane rising above the structure.
Construction is ongoing at the 350-plus-acre Beaver Dam Commerce Park where a new Meta data center is being built, photographed on Jan. 20, 2026, in Beaver Dam, Wis. (Joe Timmerman / Wisconsin Watch)

The Beaver Dam Area Development Corp., a quasi-government nonprofit that functions as the city’s economic development arm, signed an NDA on Dec. 1, 2023, not with Meta, but with a shell company no one had ever heard of, Balloonist LLC.

The agreement referred only to a “project,” making no mention of a data center or Meta.

The NDA was signed “very early, almost in the introductory period of that project,” the development corporation’s leader, Trent Campbell, told Wisconsin Watch. All major development projects have “different levels of confidentiality for different purposes. And this entity believed it to be necessary at the onset of the conversations.”

The NDA meant that the Beaver Dam Area Development Corp. could not reveal its discussions with Balloonist, or even disclose “the existence of the project.”

The NDA also put the wheels in motion.

For more than a year, the city quietly took official actions to make the data center a reality, including:

  • July 2024: The city council voted 12-0 to approve a predevelopment agreement with another shell company, Degas LLC, that only later was identified with the data center. The agenda and the minutes of the meeting don’t mention a data center.
  • November 2024: The city council created a tax incremental finance (TIF) district for the data center to help fund development. The agenda and the minutes for that meeting do not mention a data center, though the agreement itself does.
People stand in raised bucket lifts beside wooden utility poles, with power lines overhead and white service trucks parked behind a chain-link fence on snowy ground.
Beaver Dam city and economic development officials worked with two shell companies as they developed a $1 billion, 520-acre data center. Meta announced its involvement in December 2025. (Joe Timmerman / Wisconsin Watch)

Not until February 2025 — 14 months after the NDA was signed — did the Beaver Dam Area Development Corp. announce that it and the city were working with a company — then still unidentified — on a “potential data center project.”

Campbell noted to Wisconsin Watch that Gov. Tony Evers and other officials had identified the site for a major development as far back as 2019. For months after the NDA was signed, it wasn’t known whether the data center would come to fruition, he added.

“I know the opponents currently disagree, but I think the city acted in as transparent a way as they could,” Campbell said.

Eventually, a news report in April 2025 identified Meta, which declined comment for this story, as the company likely behind the data center.

Meta confirmed its involvement eight months later, saying on Facebook: “We’re proud to call Beaver Dam home. We are honored to have joined such an incredible community in 2025.” 

The first reply to that post was from a Beaver Dam resident, who wrote: “We would have been honored to have the opportunity to decline this.”

Secrecy without an NDA

NDAs also helped keep the public in the dark about data centers under consideration in the three other cities that used them. 

  • Menomonie signed its NDA with Balloonist LLC in February 2024 — more than a year before the city in northwest Wisconsin announced a $1.6 billion data center proposal in July 2025. Two months after the NDA, the city council unanimously helped pave the way for a data center by changing a land use ordinance. The change gave, for the first time, a definition of the ordinance’s reference to “warehousing,” saying warehousing includes data centers. The city’s mayor put the proposed data center on hold in September 2025. In January 2026, the city council adopted a zoning ordinance for data centers that reversed the warehousing definition. “Based upon feedback from the community and elected officials, it is clear that additional discussion should occur regarding the appropriate level of regulation of data centers,” the city’s public works director told the council and the mayor.
  • Kenosha signed its NDA, with Microsoft, in May 2024, six months before news reports surfaced saying the NDA kept the proposed data center operator’s name confidential. It was later announced that Microsoft had purchased 240 acres in the neighboring town of Paris, which the city annexed in December 2024. No dollar amount for the proposal has been announced.
  • Janesville announced in July 2025 it was approached by developers about a data center and put out a request for proposal. The city signed its NDA two months later and is now in negotiations with Viridian Acquisitions, a Colorado developer, for an $8 billion data center.
A large industrial building with rows of rooftop units stands behind construction barriers and cranes as sunlight breaks through clouds near the horizon.
The sun sets as construction continues at Microsoft’s data center project Nov. 13, 2025, in Mount Pleasant, Wis. (Joe Timmerman / Wisconsin Watch)

Port Washington in Ozaukee County and Mount Pleasant in Racine County responded to records requests from Wisconsin Watch saying they had not signed NDAs for their data centers. 

In Port Washington, where three people were arrested during a city council meeting on the data center in December, residents are trying to recall Mayor Ted Neitzke, saying he has been secretive about the $15 billion data center from OpenAI, Oracle and Vantage Data Centers. 

In Mount Pleasant, Microsoft this month announced plans to add 15 data centers, worth $13 billion, to the $7 billion complex under construction there.

NDAs are described by economic development officials as necessary and criticized by data center opponents as against the public interest.

NDAs and other steps to protect confidentiality are crucial at the early stages of a development proposal, said Tricia Braun, executive director of the Wisconsin Data Center Coalition.

“If I’m a company considering making strategic investments, regardless of industry, I don’t want my competition to know where I’m going, what I’m doing, what pace I’m doing it at,” said Braun, a former executive at the Wisconsin Economic Development Corp. “You want to make sure everything is buttoned up and bow tied before that type of information is put into the public realm.”

Questions have swirled around transparency even in communities where local government officials did not sign NDAs. 

That includes DeForest, which lists “communicate clearly” among its core values. 

The DeForest data center, proposed by Virginia-based QTS Data Centers, is controversial, in part, because the village board would have to annex 1,600 acres in the neighboring town of Vienna.

A person sits at a desk with a piece of paper, a nameplate reading “Jane Cahill Wolfram” and “Village President,” a water bottle, and a cup in front and a jacket on the chair behind the person.
DeForest Village President Jane Cahill Wolfgram looks on during a village board meeting at DeForest Village Hall in DeForest, Wis., on Jan. 20, 2026. As negotiations between QTS and the village of DeForest continue, members of the public attended a village board meeting to speak in support and opposition to the proposed development. (Kayla Wolf for Wisconsin Watch)

At one DeForest Village Board meeting about the project, Village President Jane Cahill Wolfgram said that based on emails she had been receiving from residents, there was “just one thing I think we need to clear up.” 

“And you can ask any one of these board members. They will tell you, they just learned about this project in the last couple of weeks.”

That was Nov. 18, 2025.

But Village Board trustees had been offered one-on-one meetings with the developer some 10 weeks earlier, trustee Jan Steffenhagen-Hahn said in an email to Vienna resident Shawn Haney. 

“Because of the scale of this project,” that’s when residents should have been notified, said Haney, a leader of a group that opposes the data center.

Other emails obtained by the group show that DeForest staff were strategizing with QTS representatives and Alliant Energy as early as March 2025 — seven months before announcing the proposal last October.

People sit in chairs facing a long desk in a room, with people seated behind microphones and a wall sign reading “Village of DeForest” above them.
Members of the public attend a village board meeting at DeForest Village Hall in DeForest, Wis., on Jan. 20, 2026. (Kayla Wolf for Wisconsin Watch)

In one email, the village planner discussed with QTS representatives when to seek various village approvals, including annexation, while acknowledging that doing so without disclosing “any details of the project or operations will be difficult.”

Cahill Wolfgram told Wisconsin Watch she in fact had met with QTS on Oct. 1, three weeks before the public announcement. She expressed frustration that many residents are urging trustees to stop the data center.

“They’ve been brought in from the very early moments of this discussion and they have continued to be front and center of everything we’ve done,” Cahill Wolfgram said. “As village president, I know of nothing that has been done behind the scenes.”

A public hearing on the annexation is scheduled for Feb. 9. 

A person wearing a patterned yellow sweater stands holding a tablet, with other seated people and a microphone visible in the background.
Lydia Reid returns to her seat after speaking in opposition to the QTS data center development during a village board meeting at DeForest Village Hall in DeForest, Wis., on Jan. 20, 2026. Reid is concerned about the process that the village is using to allow the data center development. (Kayla Wolf for Wisconsin Watch)
A person holds several stickers reading “DATA CENTER” with a red circle and diagonal slash, with other seated people blurred in the background
Sheri Stach hands out stickers in opposition to the QTS data center development prior to a village board meeting at DeForest Village Hall in DeForest, Wis., on Jan. 20, 2026. (Kayla Wolf for Wisconsin Watch)

The state Department of Administration, which reviews annexation proposals and issues advisory opinions, concluded the DeForest annexation is not in the public interest because of concerns over how the village would provide water and sewer services for the annexed area.

The Clean Economy Coalition of Wisconsin has called for state leaders to pause consideration of any data centers until a comprehensive strategy on them is adopted. In part, the coalition said comprehensive planning is needed to avoid more “stranded assets.”

Wisconsin Watch reported in December that Wisconsin utility ratepayers owe nearly $1 billion for stranded assets — coal power plants that have been or soon will be shut down. A push to provide new energy capacity for data centers poses the risk of creating more stranded assets.

Some states targeting NDAs

Microsoft on Jan. 13 announced new standards aimed at being a “good neighbor in the communities where we build, own and operate our data centers.” It mentioned transparency five times.

But University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee researchers called Microsoft’s initial Mount Pleasant data center a “microcosm of a larger problem with secrecy and lack of transparency about water and electricity demands” of data centers throughout the country. That, they wrote, “harms the public’s ability to determine whether hosting a data center is in their best interest.” 

An aerial view of a large industrial complex next to a pond and surrounding construction areas at sunset, with orange light along the horizon under a cloudy sky.
The sun sets as construction continues at Microsoft’s data center project on Nov. 13, 2025, in Mount Pleasant, Wis. (Joe Timmerman / Wisconsin Watch)

Mount Pleasant has wanted a major development where the data center is now under construction because a massive development signed with Foxconn in 2017 largely fell through.

Local government use of NDAs and other methods to keep data center development secret is widespread across the U.S.

In Minnesota, local elected officials were aware of data center proposals for months or even years before disclosing them. In Virginia, 25 out of 31 data center projects had NDAs. In one New Mexico county, county staff negotiated for a $165 billion data center with an NDA that kept elected officials in the dark.

Several states are targeting NDAs. 

At least three — Florida, Michigan and New Jersey — are considering legislation to prohibit governments from signing data center NDAs. A Georgia bill would prohibit NDAs that hide information about data center electricity or water usage. New York is considering a bill to limit NDAs for economic development proposals generally.

Now, similar legislation is pending in Wisconsin.

A person stands at a wooden podium speaking into multiple microphones, with other people standing in the background and a U.S. flag visible in an ornate room.
Wisconsin state Rep. Clint Moses, R-Menomonie, is photographed during a press conference on Nov. 14, 2023, in the Wisconsin State Capitol building in Madison, Wis. (Drake White-Bergey / Wisconsin Watch)

Last week, state Rep. Clint Moses, R-Menomonie, citing questions about transparency over the Menomonie proposal, introduced legislation to prohibit NDAs for data center proposals in Wisconsin.

“I’ve never seen such overwhelming opposition from all sides of the aisle,” he told Wisconsin Watch, describing constituents’ feelings about data centers and secrecy surrounding them.

Moses said he understands the need for confidentiality in economic development generally, but because data centers have such widespread impact, public notice is paramount.

“The earlier the better,” he said.

Braun, the data center coalition leader, said the public should be notified when a data center proposal is ready to be considered for approvals by elected officials — after municipal staff do due diligence to determine whether things such as zoning, utility capacity, water and sewer would make a proposal potentially viable.

Balch, who helped defeat a proposed data center in the Racine County village of Caledonia, where he lives, said the public should be alerted well before local elected officials consider such votes.

“You have to use your judgment,” he said. “But at some point, you need to realize this is not a normal thing and we need to look out for the residents.”

Wisconsin Watch is a nonprofit, nonpartisan newsroom. Subscribe to our newsletters for original stories and our Friday news roundup.

At least four Wisconsin communities signed secrecy deals for billion-dollar data centers 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.

Why has WisconsinEye gone dark and what can be done about it?

People sit at desks inside an ornate room beneath a domed ceiling, with U.S. and state flags, a large mural and an electronic board visible above the floor.
Reading Time: 6 minutes

In a flurry of activity at the Capitol last week, Wisconsin lawmakers held more than 30 public meetings and two Assembly floor sessions, advancing bills on issues from eliminating taxes on tips and overtime to placing regulations on data centers

For the first time in two decades, none of the actions were live-streamed, video-recorded or archived for those who sought to follow the legislative process outside of the building in Madison. 

It’s a stark change at the Capitol where, since 2007, lawmakers, lobbyists, journalists and the public could rely on WisconsinEye — the nonpartisan public affairs network that functions sort of like Wisconsin’s version of C-SPAN — to record and archive legislative committees, floor sessions, press conferences and other political events around the state.

After more than 18 years, WisconsinEye went offline in mid-December after it did not raise enough funds to operate in 2026. The organization launched a GoFundMe on Jan. 12 to raise $250,000 to get back online, equal to about three months of its operating budget. About $13,000 was raised as of Friday afternoon.  

“Without this funding, WisconsinEye could lose up to four highly skilled staff members,” the online fundraiser states. “Thus putting the network at considerable risk of failure.”

A person gestures with one hand while others sit behind at desks as on-screen text reads “Sen. Chris Larson”
This WisconsinEye screenshot shows Sen. Chris Larson, D-Milwaukee, during a May 14, 2024, floor debate. (WisconsinEye)

While the gap in live video coverage continues in Wisconsin, this is not an issue for four of Wisconsin’s neighboring states where the legislatures provide recordings rather than rely on a separate entity. Legislative chambers in Minnesota, Iowa and Michigan provide video streams and recordings of floor sessions and committee meetings, Wisconsin Watch found. 

The Illinois Channel, a public affairs network founded in 2003, provides programming on state government, but the network no longer has cameras in the legislative chambers after the Illinois General Assembly began providing video and audio feeds in the House and Senate. 

The approach varies around the country. In 2022, the National Conference of State Legislatures reported half of the states, including Wisconsin, televised broadcasts of the legislature. Some of the entities responsible for recording the sausage-making process are connected to public broadcasting stations, and others are tied to state governments. The Connecticut Network, for example, is a partnership between a nonprofit and the state legislature, but is solely funded by the Connecticut General Assembly. WisconsinEye has historically been privately funded, except for two one-time grants from the state prior to 2023.

WisconsinEye’s creation as a separate network from state government stemmed from a 1995 legislative study committee that recommended televised coverage of the Legislature be done by an organization independent of state funding, said WisconsinEye President and CEO Jon Henkes. 

“Based on the recommendation of the study committee itself and the donor reality at that time … the cornerstone was laid as an independent, nongovernment-controlled, nongovernment-funded public affairs network,” Henkes said. 

Over the last 18 years, Henkes said WisconsinEye’s reputation for independent coverage of state government assuaged concerns from donors over whether the organization could receive state support. The Legislature created a $10 million endowment for the network during the 2023-25 budget process. But those funds can only be accessed if WisconsinEye raises a private amount equal to a request it makes of the Joint Finance Committee. The 2025-27 budget provided $250,000 to WisconsinEye from that $10 million fund without any match requirement. 

Since WisconsinEye’s departure from the Capitol, Republican lawmakers have also started to strictly enforce rules prohibiting people from recording and filming during committee meetings, although credentialed journalists are still able to do so. The Wisconsin Senate’s chief clerk in a memo this month said the Senate’s rules on prohibiting filming supersede the state’s open meetings law.

Rep. Jerry O’Connor, R-Fond du Lac, told the Wisconsin Examiner there are concerns about whether video filmed during committees can be filmed for political aims, particularly the political ads that will be blanketing TV and online media this upcoming fall. That wasn’t the case with WisconsinEye, which prohibited use of its videos for political or campaign purposes in its user agreement. 

Democrats blamed Republicans for allowing legislative activities to continue “in darkness.” 

“This is a step in the wrong direction and it erodes the public’s trust in this institution,” said Assembly Minority Leader Greta Neubauer, D-Racine. 

Assembly Speaker Robin Vos, R-Rochester, in a press briefing last week dismissed the idea that enforcing the rules banning recording while WisconsinEye is not operating lessens transparency at the Capitol. 

“I think we have had about 48,000 bills passed before WisconsinEye went into effect, and I think the public was well served by the media reporting on them,” he said. “We’ve had literally hundreds of session days, thousands of session days, so this idea that if some activist is not allowed to record people, that that’s not transparent, we’ve got plenty of transparency. That’s why we’re here today.” 

Other state legislatures 

While Wisconsin’s neighboring states record legislative proceedings, each state differs on what is recorded, the resources available to provide video of the legislature and whether there are any restrictions on filming. 

In Michigan, the state House and Senate separately handle video streaming for their own chamber. Videos in both chambers are prohibited from use for political purposes, according to Michigan House and Senate rules. 

The Michigan Senate has a TV Department that records all Senate sessions and up to three committees at the same time, a Senate staff member told Wisconsin Watch. Video recordings from 2020 onward are posted to the Senate’s streaming website, but the chamber has an archive of offline videos dating back to 2003. 

The Michigan House provides “gavel-to-gavel” coverage of session and committee proceedings, including archived videos, which can be accessed on its website and YouTube channel, according to the state’s House clerk. 

The Minnesota House and Senate also individually handle video recordings of their chamber’s legislative activities through nonpartisan media departments. In the Minnesota House, the Public Information Services department controls the TV production of the chamber’s floor proceedings, committees and select press conferences. The department has 12 permanent staff and brings on 14 part-time staff members when the legislature is in session, according to the department’s executive director. Minnesota’s House and Senate media departments do not have any bans on the use of footage in campaign materials, staff said. 

In Iowa, specific individuals in each chamber are in charge of the livestreams of legislative activities. All floor sessions and committees are filmed while legislative subcommittees are not, the Senate clerk’s office told Wisconsin Watch. It did not respond to questions about whether the state has limitations on how videos can be used. 

But while Wisconsin’s neighboring state legislatures provide the live footage of legislative proceedings, Terry Martin, the executive director of the Illinois Channel, questioned if there could be limitations placed on a state-offered service depending on who is in power, pointing to Rod Blagojevich, the former Democratic Illinois governor who was convicted of corruption-related crimes.

“Somebody like Rod Blagojevich, if we had been funded by him, by the state, would have said, if you don’t do it my way, I’m going to cut your funding,” said Martin, who ran for Congress as a Republican in Illinois in 2022. 

The Illinois Channel has not accepted funding from the state of Illinois for its operations, Martin said. 

The path forward

Both Democratic Gov. Tony Evers and legislative leaders said they are open to options that can resolve the gap left by WisconsinEye. 

Vos said he hopes there can be a “bipartisan answer.” Democrats and Republicans have had discussions on the topic, but there is no concrete next step yet, Neubauer said. 

Evers told reporters he would not support simply giving WisconsinEye the money allocated without matching funds. 

“I think there has to be some skin in the game,” Evers said. 

A person wearing glasses smiles slightly in a close-up portrait, with short hair and a framed poster on a wall in the background.
Jon Henkes (Provided photo)

Neubauer told reporters the endowment’s $10 million matching requirement may not have been realistic for WisconsinEye.

“We would, of course, like to see more fundraising,” Neubauer said. “But I don’t think we set them up for success with the provision that was in the budget.” 

Henkes said WisconsinEye is simply asking state leaders for support by providing nine months of its operating budget and then, in following years, investing the approved endowment funds and directing the earnings annually to the network. WisconsinEye would still require private support. A $10 million endowment conservatively invested can generate a half-million dollars each year. WisconsinEye’s annual budget is about $900,000.

That specific scenario is not how the language in the budget that created the WisconsinEye endowment is set up to work, according to the nonpartisan Legislative Fiscal Bureau. Changes to the law would likely be needed to direct the state to invest those dollars, LFB staff said.

Henkes said he hopes a decision comes soon. 

“I mean, frankly, if this cannot be resolved in the next several weeks, WisconsinEye will have no choice but to fold up the tent and everybody goes home,” he said.

How to support WisconsinEye

Online: Visit wiseye.org or GoFundMe at https://gofund.me/2fac769f7 

By text message: Text “WISEYE” to 44321 to receive a fundraising link.

By mail: Send checks to 122 W. Washington Avenue, Suite 200, Madison, WI 53703

Wisconsin Watch is a nonprofit, nonpartisan newsroom. Subscribe to our newsletters for original stories and our Friday news roundup.

Why has WisconsinEye gone dark and what can be done about it? 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.

Wisconsin’s state building footprint is shrinking. Candidates for governor have different ideas about what’s next

Exterior of a stone building with a sign reading "State of Wisconsin Department of Health and Family Services" and a separate sign reading "FOR SALE" near an entrance.
Reading Time: 5 minutes

A 422,000-square-foot Art Deco building overlooking Lake Monona in Madison was the home of state employees for nearly 100 years. It most recently served as the offices of the Wisconsin Department of Health Services. 

Today large “For Sale” signs bookend the historic structure, which sits vacant just a few blocks from the Capitol. A brochure for the property describes redevelopment opportunities such as a boutique hotel or mixed-use space. It also notes its proximity to a potential future commuter rail station in another state-owned building occupied by the Department of Administration.

The sale of the building, announced in December, is merely one piece of a multiyear initiative of Gov. Tony Evers’ administration known as Vision 2030. The plan seeks to make state government smaller and save taxpayers money through “rightsizing” underused office space and supporting hybrid work to grow the number of state workers across the state, according to the Department of Administration. 

Since its launch in 2021, state agencies have sold millions of dollars worth of buildings and consolidated more than 589,000 square feet of office space, nearly 10% of the state’s total building footprint, according to DOA reports. The funds from building sales are used to cover outstanding state debts and then transferred to the state’s general fund. 

“I see this really as a win-win both for state workers and for taxpayers,” DOA Secretary Kathy Blumenfeld said in an interview with Wisconsin Watch. “One of the things that we’re looking at is modernization and how can we be more efficient and be good fiscal stewards for the state.” 

Vision 2030 fits with a long-standing desire by Wisconsin’s leaders of both parties to reduce the physical footprint of state agencies and create a presence outside of Madison. Former Gov. Scott Walker also sought to move state divisions and to seek efficiencies for taxpayers by reducing private leases. Walker’s administration oversaw the construction of a new state office building that opened in Madison in 2018 and is home to eight state agencies today. 

These ideas on building a smaller, modernized state government are likely to continue when Evers leaves office next year. Former Evers Cabinet member Joel Brennan, who led DOA when it launched Vision 2030 in 2021, is one of at least eight Democrats running for governor this year.

Washington County Executive Josh Schoemann, a Republican candidate for governor running against U.S. Rep. Tom Tiffany, announced in December a “Shrink Madison” plan to require state employees to return to in-person work, sell state office buildings in Madison and eventually move key agencies to different regions across the state. His plan specifically mentions continuing Evers’ Vision 2030 efforts.

But he also goes further to move agencies out of liberal Dane County and into more conservative parts of the state — a potential source of political patronage. Schoemann proposes moving the Department of Veterans Affairs to La Crosse, the Department of Natural Resources to Wausau, the Department of Agriculture, Trade and Consumer Protection to Stevens Point, the Department of Financial Institutions to Green Bay, the Department of Tourism to Rhinelander and the departments of Children and Families and Workforce Development to the Kenosha/Racine area. 

Those moves would take years, but Schoemann in an interview said he sees it as a way to improve the relationships between state government and its citizens. 

“I think this is about people, first, affordability and accountability and changing the culture of state government, which to me, ultimately, is just entirely too focused on itself … and getting it back focused on the people,” Schoemann said. 

Why Vision 2030? 

The Evers administration’s plan grew out of the pandemic when conditions required remote work, deferred maintenance costs for state buildings kept rising, and there was a growing need for workers to fill state jobs — all colliding at the same time. 

“All these things were swirling at one time, and we launched a study in 2021 trying to get our arms around that,” Blumenfeld said. 

Hybrid work opportunities meant state agencies took up less space and could hire workers outside of Madison and Milwaukee, which Blumenfeld refers to as the “Hire Anywhere in Wisconsin” initiative. Remote work also meant the state could get rid of underused office space through consolidation or sales, she said. In Milwaukee, the state sold a former Department of Natural Resources headquarters in 2022 and purchased 2.69 acres for a new office building. But as of last year it planned to work with a private developer to create a multitenant public-private space instead. 

Expected moves in Madison this year include the sale of the former human services building along Lake Monona where offers are due in March. Other expected moves in 2026 include the spring listing of two adjacent general executive offices in downtown Madison, the brutalist GEF 2 and GEF 3 buildings, at a combined total of 391,000 square feet, Blumenfeld said. 

A large stone office building with tall windows and decorative carvings, displaying signs reading "State of Wisconsin Department of Health and Family Services" and "FOR SALE" near an entrance.
The historic Art Deco state government office building at 1 W. Wilson Street in Madison, Wis., seen Jan. 6, 2026, was the home of state employees for nearly 100 years. It most recently served as the offices of the Wisconsin Department of Health Services. (Brittany Carloni / Wisconsin Watch)

Blumenfeld said DOA has seen limited opposition to building sales and agency moves to reduce office space, but the Republican-led Legislature has pushed back on remote work following the pandemic. Lawmakers have argued that in-person work ensures more accountability for state employees. Evers in October vetoed a Republican bill that would have required state employees to “perform assigned work duties in physical office space for at least 80 percent” of their work time every month. 

“The important progress my administration has made on our Vision 2030 goals means that it would not be possible to return to largely in-office-only work arrangements without leasing more space,” Evers wrote in his veto message. “Or having to re-open buildings that are slated for closure and sale — both of which will cost taxpayers more money.” 

Blumenfeld said she can’t predict what the next governor will do when it comes to government efficiency, but changes in the state’s workforce needs and updates to work spaces are unlikely to slow down.

“Our hope is that we’ve laid a really solid foundation for utilizing space efficiently, effectively, for hiring the best talent, for bringing in people from all over the state and bringing family-sustaining jobs to all 72 counties,” Blumenfeld said. 

Wisconsin’s next governor

Wisconsin voters will choose the next governor later this year, with primary contests in August and the general election in November

Other than Schoemann’s plan, gubernatorial campaigns that responded to questions from Wisconsin Watch shared different perspectives on how they would address state government’s size and efficiency.   

Tiffany, the Northwoods congressman and Schoemann’s primary opponent, said he supported then-Gov. Walker’s move of the DNR’s forestry division to Rhinelander when he served in the Legislature, but his goal is focused on rooting out “waste, fraud and duplication” in state government. 

“I’ve supported changes like that when they make sense, but my focus is making government smaller, more accountable, and more efficient, not just rearranging the furniture,” Tiffany said.

Among Democratic candidates, plans for state government include making sure state agencies are effectively helping Wisconsinites and that citizens can access resources. 

“Mandela Barnes’ priority as Governor is to deliver for Wisconsin families and lower costs — which includes ensuring state agencies are serving communities effectively, are spending taxpayer dollars efficiently, and that Wisconsinites in every corner of the state can access the services they rely on,” Cole Wozniak, a spokesperson for the Barnes campaign, said in a statement. 

Brennan, who helped develop Vision 2030, in a statement said state government should continue to work for and be led by Wisconsinites. 

“Any conversation about the future footprint of state government should start with access, effectiveness, and responsible use of taxpayer dollars,” Brennan said. 

Sen. Kelda Roys, D-Madison, said the state should invest in modernizing its technology so agencies can deliver better services to citizens across the state. Republicans in the Legislature have pursued a “fiscally irresponsible starvation of government for decades,” she said.  

“There’s a huge opportunity to make state government work better and deliver better outcomes for people at lower cost to taxpayers,” Roys said. “But it does take that upfront investment and political capital, frankly, to say it’s actually worth spending a little money to save bigger in the long run.” 

Wisconsin Watch is a nonprofit, nonpartisan newsroom. Subscribe to our newsletters for original stories and our Friday news roundup.

Wisconsin’s state building footprint is shrinking. Candidates for governor have different ideas about what’s next 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.

Madison’s defense in missing ballot case: Absentee voting is a ‘privilege,’ not a right

A person wearing a face mask holds up a paper ballot with printed candidate lists while seated at a table, with other people partially visible nearby.
Reading Time: 4 minutes

The city of Madison and its former clerk are arguing in court that they can’t be sued for failing to count 193 absentee ballots in the 2024 presidential election, in part because a Wisconsin law calls absentee voting a privilege, not a constitutional right. 

That legal argument raises questions about how much protection absentee voters have against the risk of disenfranchisement — and could reignite a recent debate over whether the law calling absentee voting a privilege is itself unconstitutional.

That law, which appears to be uncommon outside of Wisconsin, has been cited repeatedly in recent years in attempts to impose more requirements and restrictions on absentee voting, and, at times, disqualify absentee ballots on which the voters have made errors. It does not appear to have been invoked to absolve election officials for errors in handling correctly cast ballots.

Nonetheless, the law has become central to the defense presented by Madison and its former clerk, Maribeth Witzel-Behl, in a novel lawsuit seeking monetary damages on behalf of the voters whose ballots went missing. 

The suit, filed by the law firm Law Forward, names the city and the clerk’s office as defendants, along with Witzel-Behl and Deputy Clerk Jim Verbick in their personal capacities, and cites a series of errors after the 2024 election that led to the ballots not being counted in alleging that they violated voters’ constitutional rights. 

In defending against that claim, attorneys for Witzel-Behl argued in a court filing that by choosing to vote absentee, the 193 disenfranchised voters “exercised a privilege rather than a constitutional right.”

Witzel-Behl’s filing argues that the 193 disenfranchised voters did, in fact, exercise their right to vote, but chose to vote absentee and therefore place the ballots into an administrative system that “can result in errors.”

“The fact that Plaintiffs’ ballots were not counted is unfortunate,” the filing states. “But it is the result of human error, not malice. And that human error was not a violation of the Plaintiffs’ constitutional right to vote.” 

Matthew W. O’Neill, an attorney representing Witzel-Behl, declined to comment.

The city’s attorneys have now adopted the same argument, filings show

Asked about the city’s legal defense, current Madison clerk Lydia McComas didn’t address the argument directly but told Votebeat that the city is committed to counting all eligible votes “regardless of how they are cast.”

Phil Keisling, a former Oregon secretary of state, said he wasn’t aware of other states with similar laws. He said he found the city’s argument wrong and offensive. 

“The right to vote, if there is a state constitutional right to vote, should have nothing to do with the form that a voter chooses,” he said.

Law passed to clarify absentee voting requirements

The law that Madison cites in its legal defense was enacted in 1985, long before absentee voting became widespread. The stricter language about the regulation of absentee voting came after judges in a series of Wisconsin court cases called for more liberal interpretation of those regulations.

The law states that while voting is a constitutional right, “voting by absentee ballot is a privilege exercised wholly outside the traditional safeguards of the polling place.” A subsequent provision states that absentee ballots that do not follow required procedures “may not be counted.”

The law appears similar to a 1969 U.S. Supreme Court decision that drew a distinction between the right to vote and the right to receive absentee ballots. That decision has since been interpreted — and misinterpreted — in a “number of ways by a number of people wanting to trim back mail voting,” said Justin Levitt, an election law professor at Loyola Marymount University.

After the Wisconsin law was enacted, the state election board clarified the Legislature’s position that failing to comply with procedures for absentee ballot applications and voting would result in ballots not being counted. The board did not suggest the law could be used to excuse municipalities that improperly discard legally cast ballots.

Absentee voting has long been available in Wisconsin but surged in 2020 amid the COVID-19 pandemic and has been extensively litigated since then.

The law calling absentee voting a privilege was central to a lawsuit that resulted in a 2022 statewide ban on ballot drop boxes; another lawsuit to prohibit voters from being able to spoil ballots and vote with a new one; and President Donald Trump’s attempt to overturn the 2020 election outcome in Wisconsin.

A later lawsuit led to the reinstatement of drop boxes in 2024. In that case, plaintiffs argued that the law “unconstitutionally degrades the voting rights of all absentee voters by increasing the risk of disenfranchisement.” The court, then led by liberal justices, declined to overturn the statute but disagreed with an earlier interpretation that absentee voting requires heightened skepticism.

Experts say Madison’s defense misinterprets the law

Rick Hasen, a professor at UCLA Law School and expert on election law, said he didn’t think the law itself was problematic, adding that states have various laws controlling absentee voting. The U.S. Constitution, he noted, doesn’t require any state to offer absentee voting.

But “once the state gives someone the opportunity to vote by mail,” he said, “then they can’t — as a matter of federal constitutional law — deprive that person of their vote because they chose a method that the state didn’t have to offer.”

The city and Witzel-Behl’s use of the law in this instance “seems to be wrong,” Hasen said.

Attorneys for Law Forward in a court filing called Witzel-Behl’s argument a “shocking proposition.”

“There is no right to vote if our votes are not counted,” Law Forward staff attorney Scott Thompson told Votebeat. “And this is the only case I’m aware of where a municipal government has argued otherwise.” 

Alexander Shur is a reporter for Votebeat based in Wisconsin. Contact Shur at ashur@votebeat.org.

This coverage is made possible through Votebeat, a nonpartisan news organization covering local election administration and voting access. Sign up for Votebeat Wisconsin’s free newsletter here.

Madison’s defense in missing ballot case: Absentee voting is a ‘privilege,’ not a right 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.

DataWatch: Nearly half of Wisconsin private school students receive a taxpayer-funded voucher

Reading Time: 6 minutes

Almost half of all private school students in Wisconsin now receive school vouchers, signaling a rapid reshaping of the state’s educational landscape powered by state taxpayers.

Step 1 Step 2 Step 3

When it launched in 1990, the Milwaukee Parental Choice Program, the nation’s first modern private school voucher program, included just 300 students at seven secular private schools. The students came from families earning less than 175% of the federal poverty level, and state taxpayers covered $2,446 of tuition for each. The total price tag that year: about $700,000, or $1.78 million today adjusted for inflation. It was a pittance compared to the $1.9 billion of state aid and $2.4 billion of property taxes provided to public schools in Wisconsin that year.

By 2011, enrollment in Milwaukee’s voucher program reached 23,000 students, or about three out of four private school students that year. Former Gov. Scott Walker and the Republican-led Legislature helped spur the creation of three more private school choice programs similar to MPCP: one for students in Racine (RPCP), one for students elsewhere in the state (WPCP) and another for students with special needs (SNSP). This expansion was part of a national effort to boost private school education with support from Walmart founders, the Walton family, according to previous Wisconsin Watch reporting.

Flash forward to last school year: Nearly half  (46%) of all private school students in Wisconsin received vouchers across the state’s four programs. Taxpayers this school year will spend more than $700 million to defray tuition costs for about 60,000 students. Almost all (about 96%) attend religiously affiliated schools. The vast growth of the voucher system has helped Wisconsin’s private school system grow modestly as public school enrollment declines. Critics, particularly Democrats and public school teacher unions, describe the state as funding two school systems.

Supporting a second school system with public money

Taxpayers through school district budgets provide $10,877 for each K–8 voucher student and $13,371 for each voucher student in grades 9-12 who enrolls in one of the three voucher programs. Each student who participates in the Special Needs Scholarship Program receives $16,049. Those amounts will increase by 4%, 3.2% and 2.6% respectively next school year.

Except in Milwaukee, where the program is directly funded by the state budget, the funding is deducted from the state aid to each school district. This school year, $357.5 million was deducted.

For public schools, state aid roughly represents 45% of school funding. Federal aid, property taxes and other revenue cover the rest. Although the exact amount varies by district, public schools collected an average of $14,104 per student in property taxes and state general and categorical aid during the 2024-25 school year.

When the state redirected aid from public schools to pay for the Racine, statewide and special need vouchers, school districts were still allowed to raise revenue as if the private school student were attending the public school. So while the district pays $10,877 to the private school for a K-8 student, it can still collect roughly $13,362 in state general aid and property taxes, keeping the difference to pay for other students still in the public system.

Some cities, like Green Bay, have started adding a note to property tax bills stating the amount of money school districts levied to pay for private school vouchers.

In the meantime, Republican lawmakers proposed “decoupling bills,” which would have the state fully cover the Racine, statewide and special need voucher programs, similar to Milwaukee. That would prevent the money from passing through the public school districts, reducing the net revenue school districts have been able to collect for the past decade.

“The funding system is broken, and the link in current law between school choice funding and property taxes needs to be repealed,” said Carol Shires, vice president of operations, School Choice Wisconsin, an advocate group for the voucher system, in an email to Wisconsin Watch.

Private school market stabilizes with public funds

As homeschooling has gained considerable popularity over the past decade, the voucher program has saved many private schools from losing enrollment and likely closure.

“There really would not be a private school sector in Milwaukee, with a few exceptions, if it wasn’t for the voucher program,” said Alan Borsuk, senior fellow in law and public policy at Marquette University Law School, “because nobody had the money to pay tuition, and there was just no way to afford schools.”

Wisconsin private schools gained 1,687 students from 2011 to 2024, a stark contrast to public schools, where enrollment declined by more than 65,000 students. Homeschooling grew even more, by nearly 13,000 students.

More than half of all private schools (56%) now accept vouchers. This year, 91 private schools had 90% or more of its students participate in the voucher program.

There are fewer private schools, but more are participating in the voucher program

A Wisconsin Watch data analysis found that about half of the private schools that joined the voucher program between 2008 and 2024 grew their student population. 

A debate on effectiveness

When the voucher program was introduced in Milwaukee, lawmakers envisioned the program empowering low-income parents who couldn’t otherwise afford private schools to choose where their children are educated, bridging the education gap, and improving education quality for both the private and public school systems. 

“Choice gives poor students the ability to select the best school that they possibly can,” former Gov. Tommy Thompson said in a telephone interview with the New York Times in 1990. “The plan allows for choice and competition, and I believe competition will make both the public and private schools that much stronger.”

About 35 years after the program’s introduction, people still cannot come to a consensus on whether it improves education quality.

“Taxpayers fund choice students at a lower dollar amount than they fund public school students, yet those choice students achieve better outcomes,” Shires wrote, referring to the school year 2024-25 state testing results from DPI.

The DPI data cited by the organization showed a higher average test score for voucher students compared to their peers in public schools. 

However, that methodology has been criticized by reviewers affiliated with the National Education Policy Center, a university research center housed at the University of Colorado Boulder’s School of Education. The reviewers criticized the approach of directly comparing standardized test scores of voucher students with those of public school students, arguing that such comparisons are overly simplistic and misleading.

In his review, Stephen Kotok, an associate professor at St. John’s University, wrote that simply comparing average test scores between the two groups without accounting for nonrandom selection into voucher programs overlooks other factors that may influence student performance besides school quality. He also wrote that relying solely on standardized test scores to judge educational quality or productivity is a “crude” measure.

DPI uses report card systems to provide a more comprehensive review of school performances in addition to test scores. Last year, 85% of public schools and 85% of voucher schools met, exceeded or significantly exceeded expectations. However, less than half (43%) of the voucher schools were scored due to insufficient data. DPI cited small student populations and low test participation rates among voucher students for not assessing those schools.

Several recent studies indicate that the academic benefits of voucher programs are marginal.

An analysis of 92 studies on school choice students’ academic achievements published between 1992 and 2015 found a very slight rise in standardized test scores among students who transferred from public schools to voucher schools, according to Huriya Jabbar, an associate professor at the University of Southern California.

Even though earlier data tended to show positive effects from voucher programs, math scores for students who switched to voucher schools were less impressive, and even negative, particularly in newer and larger programs, according to a study by Christopher Lubienski, director of the Center for Evaluation and Education Policy at Indiana University.

Borsuk wrote that the voucher system does not improve the overall quality of education in a column for the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel. He noted the education quality of voucher schools varies by school, with a mixture of excellence and disappointment.

In addition, state laws do not protect private school students from discrimination as they do in public schools. Previous reports by Wisconsin Watch have found some voucher school students have faced discrimination because of their disabilities or sexual orientation.

Not just providing choice for public school students

RPCP and WPCP generally do not accept students previously registered in private schools, but the program makes an exception for grades K4-1 and 9

This year, one in four (1,129) newly enrolled WPCP students studied in a private school the previous year — even more than the 948 students who transferred from Wisconsin public schools. Comparatively, most newly enrolled Racine students came from public schools or had not previously attended any school.

MPCP does not have a similar requirement, and DPI stopped publishing the source of enrollment data in 2006.

Bringing religion into classrooms

Enrollment at MPCP jumped in 1998 as the program began incorporating religious schools after the Wisconsin Supreme Court ruled 4-2 the program didn’t promote state-sponsored religious education.

As of the 2025-26 school year, nearly all of the voucher schools are religiously affiliated.

Parents cite the religion-based curriculum, safer environments, strict discipline and small classrooms in their decision to send their children to private schools.

Parents of voucher students may opt out of the religious curriculum under the law, yet no available data show how often that happens. 

“Almost 30 years now, if there have been 25 cases of opt-outs, I’d be really surprised,” Borsuk said. “If you’re going to a religious school and don’t want to be there, then why are you going to that school? It’s basically as simple as that.”

Wisconsin Watch is a nonprofit, nonpartisan newsroom. Subscribe to our newsletters for original stories and our Friday news roundup.

DataWatch: Nearly half of Wisconsin private school students receive a taxpayer-funded voucher 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.

Here are 5 Wisconsin political predictions for 2026 (and a review of our 2025 predictions)

A Capitol dome rises behind bare tree branches at dusk, with columns and a statue atop the dome silhouetted against a pale sky.
Reading Time: 5 minutes

It’s a new year in Wisconsin, and an election one, too. There are many state government and politics storylines we plan to follow at Wisconsin Watch in 2026 from major policy debates to races that could determine the future of the state. 

But we value accountability here, including for ourselves. Before we dive into predictions for the year ahead, we want to look back at what our state team thought might happen in 2025.

Here’s what we predicted and what actually happened. 

2025 prediction: The Wisconsin Supreme Court will expand abortion rights.

Outcome: True.

The court in a 4-3 July ruling struck down Wisconsin’s 1849 near-total abortion ban, determining that later state laws regulating the procedure enacted after the ban superseded it. 

There are still restrictions on when someone can receive an abortion, including a ban on the procedure 20 weeks after fertilization and a 24-hour waiting period and ultrasound before an abortion is performed. President Donald Trump’s big bill signed in July has also threatened Medicaid funding for Planned Parenthood clinics in Wisconsin that offer abortions. A federal appeals court in December paused a lower court ruling and allowed the Trump administration to continue enforcing that part of the law.

2025 prediction: Democratic Gov. Tony Evers and the Republican-controlled Legislature will again strike a deal to increase funding for public education and private voucher schools, similar to the compromise they made in 2023.

Outcome: Mixed.

Evers and the Republican-controlled Legislature did reach an agreement on K-12 education funding during the budget process, approving a $500 million boost for special education funding. But this wasn’t like 2023, when conservatives secured significant funding increases for private voucher schools.

General school aid was kept at the same level as previous years. The Department of Public Instruction in October said, because of that decision, 71% of school districts will receive less general aid during the current school year. Private voucher school funding increased based on past per pupil funding adjustments. As a result of revenue limits going up $325 a year for the next 400 years (no change there from Evers’ creative veto in 2023) and general aid staying flat, property taxes increased significantly. 

2025 prediction: The state Supreme Court election will set another spending record.

Outcome: Nailed it!

Total spending for the 2025 state Supreme Court race between liberal candidate Susan Crawford and conservative Brad Schimel hit $144.5 million, shattering the record set in 2023. The spending in last year’s race broke records even without a $30.3 million giveaway from tech billionaire Elon Musk to conservative voters in the state.

As Larry Sandler recently reported for Wisconsin Watch, it was another year demonstrating how expensive and highly political Wisconsin’s state Supreme Court elections have become over the years. 

2025 prediction: Ben Wikler will be the next chair of the Democratic National Committee.

Outcome: Swing and a miss!

Former Minnesota Democratic-Farmer-Labor Party chair Ken Martin was elected chair of the Democratic National Committee in February. Wikler was the runner-up in the contest. 

Following the DNC chair race, Wikler announced in April he would not seek reelection as chair of the Wisconsin Democratic Party. Devin Remiker took on the leadership role following the state party’s convention in June. 

It’s not clear what’s next for Wikler. He announced in October he would not seek the Democratic nomination for governor. 

Wisconsin Watch predictions for 2026

There is a lot on the line this year, especially with several key elections on ballots in the spring and fall. Here are storylines we expect to follow in 2026.

2026 prediction: The Wisconsin Supreme Court election will NOT set a new spending record.

The big factor here is that the outcome of the April race won’t determine who controls the majority of the court, which lowers the stakes compared to elections in 2023 and 2025. The contest is expected to be a race between Appeals Court judges Chris Taylor, a liberal, and Maria Lazar, a conservative. 

A clearer picture of the fundraising for the 2026 race will appear after campaign finance reports are released this month. Lazar entered the race in October, so her campaign fundraising since then is not yet available. 

Taylor, who announced her campaign in May, reported raising more than $584,000 as of July. Following the August announcement that conservative Justice Rebecca Bradley would not seek reelection, a spokesperson for Taylor’s campaign said it had raised more than $1 million.

2026 prediction: Data centers will continue to be a major subject of public interest in Wisconsin as public outcry causes the Public Service Commission to delay approvals of new power plant projects.

Public protests against data centers punctuated the 2025 news cycle as tech giants saw pushback in communities where they sought to build. The Marquette University Law School poll conducted in October shows a majority of Wisconsin voters across the state believe the costs of data centers outweigh their benefits. 

The public opposition to data centers and rising utility bill costs will lead to closer scrutiny of power plant projects, which the Public Service Commission is set to review this year.

2026 prediction: In the governor’s race, Republicans will focus on rising property taxes. Democrats will focus on rising health care costs. But the ultimate X factor will be the public mood about what’s happening at the federal level — just as it was in 2018. 

Already in December, Republicans have slammed Evers’ 2023 creative veto that increases public school funding for the next 400 years as a centuries-long property tax increase. Democrats have condemned Republicans for not voting to extend the Affordable Care Act subsidies, which expired at the end of December.

Federal issues and public opinion about Trump will ultimately be what sways voters to one party or the other. During the 2018 governor’s race between Evers and then-Gov. Scott Walker, health care was a key issue with Walker authorizing a lawsuit challenging the Affordable Care Act and Evers calling to expand BadgerCare. But as we’ve noted before, the public is turning against public education in favor of lower taxes, which could keep Republicans in Wisconsin from suffering major swings the party has seen in other states in 2025 off-year elections.

2026 prediction: Democrats will flip at least one chamber of the Legislature for the first time in nearly two decades (not counting that short-lived Senate flip after the 2012 recall elections).

New legislative maps being used for the first time in state Senate races and midterm elections favoring the opposite political party from the one in the White House are signs it could be a good year for Democrats to secure at least one chamber of the Legislature — if not both. 

The more likely of the two is the Senate, where Republicans hold an 18-15 majority. Democrats need to flip at least two Republican seats and hold onto the Eau Claire area seat held by Sen. Jeff Smith, D-Brunswick, to win the majority. The party is targeting GOP districts currently held by Sen. Van Wanggaard, R-Racine; Sen. Rob Hutton, R-Brookfield; and Sen. Howard Marklein, R-Spring Green, where new maps have yet to be tested. Kamala Harris won those three districts, and Democrats running in other states in 2025 have made double-digit gains.

The Assembly, where Republicans hold a 54-45 majority, could also be in play, but Democrats need to flip five Republican-held Assembly seats. Of the 12 Assembly districts in 2024 decided within less than 5 percentage points, five were won by Republicans. Assembly Democrats would need to flip those five seats and hold onto the other seven close districts from 2024 to win the majority. 

Democrats already flipped 10 seats under the new legislative maps in 2024 during a year when Trump’s name atop ballots gave a boost to Republicans. If Democrats see big wins across the country, there could be down-ballot momentum to flip the Assembly. 

2026 prediction: Fundraising by candidates for Wisconsin’s 3rd Congressional District will exceed 2024, especially as that seat draws national attention in the Republican fight to keep the U.S. House majority.

Republican U.S. Rep. Derrick Van Orden defeated Democrat Rebecca Cooke by less than 3 percentage points in 2024. Van Orden raised nearly $7.7 million and Cooke brought in nearly $6.4 million during the 2024 cycle, outraising all other Wisconsin congressional candidates at the time, according to Open Secrets

The 2026 race for the 3rd District is likely to be a rematch between Van Orden and Cooke, who have already raised millions for the 2026 cycle. As of late September, Van Orden reported bringing in about $3.4 million and Cooke nearly $3 million. National attention on who wins the U.S. House majority will also bring more money into the race. The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee put the 3rd District on a list of “offensive targets” for 2026.

Wisconsin Watch is a nonprofit, nonpartisan newsroom. Subscribe to our newsletters for original stories and our Friday news roundup.

Here are 5 Wisconsin political predictions for 2026 (and a review of our 2025 predictions) 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.

Back Words: Read 12 stories from Wisconsin history

An illustration shows people standing and facing a train car platform where several figures are visible above them, with “EUGENE V. DEBS ON BOARD ‘RED SPECIAL’ IN TRANSCONTINENTAL SPEAKING TOUR” printed at the top
Reading Time: 8 minutes

Every week in Forward, our Monday newsletter about the week ahead in Wisconsin government and politics, Brittany Carloni shares a short story from Wisconsin history.

We like to select stories that tie into current events to illustrate how the past speaks to the present. Whether it’s Teddy Roosevelt, after being shot in Milwaukee, warning against factional fighting or the origins of multicultural centers on university campuses or the spirit of gift-giving tied to the first evergreen tree in the Capitol rotunda, the past teaches us a lot about the present.

Today we present the last 12 editions of Back Words. If you like local history tidbits, political analysis and a preview of upcoming state government happenings, make sure you’re subscribed to Forward.

Oct. 6, 2025

On Oct. 6, 1917, just six months after the U.S. entered World War I, Wisconsin Sen. Robert La Follette Sr. spoke for three hours on the floor of the U.S. Senate about the importance of free speech during war time. 

“Fighting Bob” earlier that year voted against Congress’ declaration of war with Germany and criticized war time initiatives from President Woodrow Wilson’s administration. His remarks followed news that a Senate committee received a resolution to expel him from the chamber. 

“Our government, above all others, is founded on the right of the people freely to discuss all matters pertaining to their government, in war not less than in peace,” reads a copy of La Follette’s remarks published in the congressional record. “For in this government the people are the rulers in war no less than in peace.”

Oct. 13, 2025

On Oct. 14, 1912, former President Theodore Roosevelt was shot during a campaign stop in Milwaukee while he sought a third term for president as a member of the Progressive Party. 

The shooting occurred as Roosevelt left the former Gilpatrick Hotel on his way to give remarks at the Milwaukee Auditorium. Despite his injuries, Roosevelt followed through with the speech

“Every good citizen ought to do everything in his or her power to prevent the coming of the day when we shall see in this country two recognized creeds fighting one another, when we shall see the creed of the ‘Havenots’ arraigned against the creed of the ‘Haves,’” Roosevelt told the crowd, even as supporters implored him to seek medical attention. “When that day comes then such incidents as this to-night will be commonplace in our history. When you make poor men — when you permit the conditions to grow such that the poor man as such will be swayed by his sense of injury against the men who try to hold what they improperly have won, when that day comes, the most awful passions will be let loose and it will be an ill day for our country.”

The episode made headlines the next day. The front page of the Oct. 15 afternoon edition of the Green Bay Press Gazette read: “Crank Shoots Roosevelt at Milwaukee; Wound Not Dangerous.”

Oct. 20, 2025

A Wisconsin Historical Society marker notes that on Oct. 20, 1856, abolitionist Frederick Douglass gave a speech in Beaver Dam about the “brutality and immorality” of slavery. Douglass was born into slavery but escaped and grew to become a renowned activist, writer and speaker.

Newspaper notices show Douglass spoke in several other Wisconsin cities during that period. A Kenosha newspaper at the time previewed his visit to the city, describing Douglass as “the eloquent champion of freedom.” Though there isn’t a record of his Beaver Dam speech, his July 5, 1852, speech in Rochester, New York, had a similar theme.

“The existence of slavery in this country brands your republicanism as a sham, your humanity as a base pretence, and your Christianity as a lie,” Douglass said. “It destroys your moral power abroad; it corrupts your politicians at home. It saps the foundation of religion; it makes your name a hissing, and a bye-word to a mocking earth. It is the antagonistic force in your government, the only thing that seriously disturbs and endangers your Union.”

Oct. 27, 2025

An illustration shows people standing and facing a train car platform where several figures are visible above them, with “EUGENE V. DEBS ON BOARD ‘RED SPECIAL’ IN TRANSCONTINENTAL SPEAKING TOUR” printed at the top
The Beloit Daily News on Oct. 2, 1908, ran this story about stops in Wisconsin from the “Red Special” train carrying Socialist Party presidential candidate Eugene V. Debs.

As election season ramped up in 1908, the “Red Special” train carrying Socialist Party presidential candidate Eugene V. Debs made stops in Wisconsin on Oct. 30 and 31 and Nov. 1 during his third campaign for the White House.

An Oct. 31, 1908, story in the Social-Democratic Herald quoted Debs at a stop in Beloit.

“The last panic, so-called, occurred under a Democratic administration in 1893. The Republicans were swift to exclaim, ‘Behold, the fruit of Democratic misrule!’” Debs said. “Up to this time the working class had not yet learned to any great extent to think or to act for themselves. They were still responsive to the plea of the capitalist demagogue. Hundreds of thousands of them swept from the Democratic Party into the Republican Party, and that party went into power upon that issue.”

Debs ran for president again four years later with a Wisconsin connection. In 1912, former Milwaukee Mayor Emil Seidel ran as the Socialist Party’s vice presidential candidate. 

Nov. 3, 2025

On Nov. 3, 1998, Wisconsin voters elected Republican Gov. Tommy Thompson to an unprecedented fourth term. He was first elected to the governor’s office in 1986. 

Thompson won the 1998 election with 60% of the vote to Progressive labor attorney and Democrat Ed Garvey’s 39% of the vote. That same night, Democratic Sen. Russ Feingold won re-election against Republican Mark Neumann by only 2 points.

On election night, CNN senior political analyst William Schneider noted 58% of moderate voters picked Thompson, but only 41% voted for Neumann. 

“This really epitomizes the two faces of the Republican Party,” Schneider said. “There’s going to be a split in the Republican Party coming between the governors’ wing, which is dominated by pragmatists and moderate Republicans who are inclusive in their appeal, and the congressional wing of the Republican Party which is dominated by conservative ideologues. Why are the two wings different? Well, clearly, governors represent a whole state, so they have to represent a more diverse constituency and they have to run a government and make things work, whereas members of Congress have much smaller constituencies in the House of Representatives and they can be more ideological and more partisan. I think we’re going to see this division getting bigger and bigger.”

Thompson resigned as governor in 2001 to serve as the secretary of Health and Human Services under President George W. Bush. 

Nov. 10, 2025

On Nov. 12, 1836, Wisconsin’s first territorial Gov. Henry Dodge signed the first law approved by the territorial legislature, which set expectations for the conduct between citizens and elected officials.  

The legislation authorized the “by fine and imprisonment” of members of the public who disrespect lawmakers or threaten those elected officials for anything they said or did while in session. Fines could not exceed $200, and a prison sentence could not extend beyond 48 hours for one incident. A $200 fine in 1836 would equal roughly $6,000 in today’s dollars. 

The initial law also allowed each chamber of the territorial legislature to expel a member with a two-thirds majority. But it exempted lawmakers from arrest during a session “in all cases except treason, felony, and breach of the peace.” 

Nov. 17, 2025

On Nov. 21, 1968, 94 Black students participated in a mass demonstration in University President Roger Guiles’ office at what we know today as the University of Wisconsin-Oshkosh. The event later became known as “Black Thursday.” 

The students sought a series of demands from the university, including providing courses on Black literature and history, hiring Black faculty and creating an African-American cultural center for Black students. 

“We envision the center as a place where on a cold winter night any student, black or white, can come and in one minute throw off all the unpleasant association of the university proper and enter the center in a spiritual as well as an intellectual experience,” sophomore Sandra McCreary told the Oshkosh Northwestern in the days after. 

Oshkosh police later that day arrested the students for unlawful assembly and disorderly conduct for occupying the president’s office and damaging materials from thrown typewriters to broken windows. In December, the Board of Regents chose to expel 90 of the students who participated in the demonstrations. But changes came in the months following Black Thursday, including a new intercultural center that opened in 1969. 

Nov. 24, 2025

On Nov. 24, 1959, Wisconsin leaders celebrated the opening of a 15-mile stretch of Interstate 90 between Beloit and Janesville. A program from the dedication ceremony described the project as “the largest single segment of four-lane highway to be completed at one time in the history of Rock County.” 

Then-Gov. Gaylord Nelson said he hoped the project would reduce traffic accidents and hailed its completion as an example of how officials working together from multiple levels of government “can bring about civic progress.” 

“As Governor of Wisconsin I am pleased to note that this cooperation, combined with the foresight and high standards of the citizens of this area, has resulted in providing Wisconsin motorists as well as visitors with the best transportation facility available,” Nelson wrote in a program message. 

Dec. 1, 2025

On. Dec. 2, 1954, the U.S. Senate voted 67-22 to censure Sen. Joseph McCarthy, the Republican senator from Wisconsin who was known for his anti-communism crusades and investigations in Congress. The charges were for the failure to cooperate with the Subcommittee on Privileges and Elections in 1952 and the “abuse” of the Select Committee to Study Censure in 1954. 

McCarthy answered “present” on the vote while fellow Wisconsin Republican Sen. Alexander Wiley was absent from the chamber that day on official business, according to the congressional record.

The Senate’s vote came after McCarthy’s hearings in April that year on alleged security issues in the U.S. Army, which further damaged the Wisconsin senator’s reputation. The hearings included the infamous moment when army lawyer Joseph Welch, after McCarthy questioned the communist ties of one of Welch’s colleagues, asked: “Have you no sense of decency?” 

In the weeks prior to the official censure vote, McCarthy appeared on the debut program of political show “Face the Nation” where he criticized Democrats and called the upcoming Senate proceedings a “lynch bee.” 

“When they’re not basing their vote upon the counts set forth, when they base their vote upon political reasons,” McCarthy said on the program. “When they say ahead of time in effect regardless of what the evidence says, ‘This man has been fighting communism, he’s been shouting that for over 20 years the Democrat party has been infiltrated, therefore we’re going to get him,’ I think lynching bee is a good name for it.” 

Dec. 8, 2025

On Dec. 7, 1943, two years after the attack on Pearl Harbor, the USS Wisconsin was christened by Wisconsin first lady Madge Goodland. Official construction on the battleship started in January 1941. 

A story on the events in the Wisconsin State Journal said Goodland practiced breaking the ceremonial champagne bottle ahead of the christening by shattering bottles of sherry against the executive residence. 

Then-Gov. Walter S. Goodland also attended the christening and called the USS Wisconsin celebration “thrilling and inspiring.” 

“What more appropriate than to dedicate this immense fighting craft to the men and women engaged in the world war in which this ship will soon participate,” Goodland said in remarks that day. “And especially to the 250,000 gallant men and women who hail Wisconsin as their home.” 

The ship was officially commissioned in April 1944. 

Dec. 15, 2025

On Dec. 14, 2020, the Wisconsin Supreme Court in a 4-3 ruling upheld former President Joe Biden’s election win in the state and rejected a lawsuit from President Donald Trump and his campaign that sought to overturn the election results. 

Justice Brian Hagedorn, a conservative, joined liberal Justices Ann Walsh Bradley, Rebecca Dallet and Jill Karofsky in the majority while conservative Justices Patience Roggensack, Annette Ziegler and Rebecca Bradley dissented. 

Hagedorn, who wrote the majority opinion, criticized the timing of the Trump campaign’s challenges to Wisconsin’s results, claims which “must be brought expeditiously.” 

“Our laws allow the challenge flag to be thrown regarding various aspects of election administration,” Hagedorn wrote. “The challenges raised by the Campaign in this case, however, come long after the last play or even the last game.” 

Dec. 22, 2025

The first evergreen tree placed in the Capitol rotunda during the Christmas season was in December 1916 as the new building neared completion, according to the Wisconsin Historical Society. 

A 40-foot tree for the rotunda arrived in Madison that year from northern Michigan, news reports show. It was lit on Dec. 23, 1916, during a two-day Christmas celebration organized by the local Rotary Club, which included donated gifts to “every child in the city” from the Capitol Mutual Club. 

“Hundreds of children of all ages and sizes tried to stand still yesterday afternoon and listen to the strains of ‘Holy Night’ and other devotional strains interspersed with popular airs at the Rotary club celebration while their eyes were glued on the wonderful tree in the rotunda of the capitol, and the huge baskets of gifts furnished by the Capitol Mutual Club near it,” a Dec. 24, 1916, Wisconsin State Journal story wrote of the festivities. “The singing was very nice but judging from the howl that went up when Santa Claus began to distribute the gifts, the music was not the most interesting feature of the program.” 

An evergreen tree is placed in the Capitol rotunda every year during the holiday season while political party leaders have disputed calling it a Christmas tree or a holiday tree. Gov. Tony Evers gave the 2025 balsam fir from Oconto County the theme “The Learning Tree.”

Wisconsin Watch is a nonprofit, nonpartisan newsroom. Subscribe to our newsletters for original stories and our Friday news roundup.

Back Words: Read 12 stories from Wisconsin history 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.

❌