Quotes of the Week
Is it possible that we don’t pass a budget? It’s possible, but I think as I look back, it’s never been done. So what’s the advantage of us doing it? It’s on the table. … if we can’t find a way for us to get to a common middle ground. But that’s not the goal. … Look, there are programs that people depend on in Wisconsin.
– Assembly Speaker Robin Vos, R-Rochester, on his meeting with Gov. Tony Evers on state budget negotiations and whether they could reach a deal.
It was all about tax cuts and what they want to do with that and what we hope to do and see if we can find a common ground. It has to be part of the budget. … We have to look at it together.
– Evers on budget negotiations.
It’s disgusting; it’s racist.
– Sen. Chris Kapenga, R-Delafield, during the Joint Audit Committee hearing on the DEI audit with DOA and UW. Kapenga slammed DEI as racist and said he found it encouraging the audit found the majority of DEI programs had not been implemented.
Diversity, equity and inclusion isn’t meant to be racist, it is meant to address things that have been racial inequities for years.
– Rep. Sequanna Taylor, D-Milwaukee, responded to Kapenga’s comments at the hearing.
Political Stock Report
-A collection of insider opinion-
(April 12-25, 2025)
Rising
Tony Evers: Wisconsin governors already had the strongest partial veto authority in the country. The liberal majority made it even stronger with its OK of the 400-year veto Evers inserted in the 2023-25 budget. And insiders say that may further embolden the guv in the 2025-27 budget. They’re also trying to read the tea leaves on what his conversations on a tax deal with Senate Majority Leader Devin LeMahieu and Assembly Speaker Robin Vos mean for a possible run at a third term. The liberal majority on the court hasn’t ruled against Dems very often since flipping control in 2023, so few were surprised when it came back with a 4-3 ruling upholding Evers’ move to strike out numbers and a dash to write into state law annual increases in how much school districts can spend per student through 2425. While voters in 1990 approved a constitutional amendment barring guvs from striking out individual letters to create new words — once dubbed the Vanna White veto — the court rules letters aren’t numbers. If that amendment had intended to extend to numerals, it would’ve said so plainly, the majority reasons. Conservative Justice Brian Hagedorn rips the ruling, writing it can’t be justified “under any reasonable reading of the Wisconsin Constitution.” He also bemoans another missed opportunity for the court to rein in governors’ expansive partial veto power after largely blessing various creative uses over the years. While no surprise, Republicans are no less apoplectic, accusing Evers of guaranteeing property tax increases for the next four centuries. Insiders note it’s not that simple. The guv’s veto applied to a cap on spending through a mix of state aid and property taxes. Put enough state money into the formula and there’d be little if any impact on property taxes. But that’s not likely, and barring an agreement to change that cap, it could set up homeowners for a huge hit if the state hits tough times and the Capitol can’t keep pace with state aid. In the near term, insiders see the court decision strengthening Evers’ hand in the 2025-27 state budget. If the court’s not going to rein him in on this, why not see just how far you can push the envelope? It will force lawmakers to try being even more creative in how they draft the budget, including putting it together with no numbers, period. Some also predict a battle of AI, seeing a scenario where lawmakers plug the budget into a program in an attempt to veto proof it and Evers taking his own run at it with artificial intelligence to see where he can poke holes in that effort. Or, some note, the two sides could strike a deal for once. That’s what has some taking an interest in the meeting Evers had with LeMahieu, R-Oostburg, and Vos, R-Rochester. WisPolitics was first to report the three met in person — a newsworthy event all on its own — in late March and that Republicans have been holding off introducing their own tax package as they see if a deal can be struck. As that news spills into the rest of the press corps, Evers makes clear it’s by no means a done deal. He’s still insisting on it being part of the budget, while Republicans want a standalone bill. And there’s still the matter of just how they could agree to cut taxes. Vos’ preference has been retirement income, while LeMahieu wants something targeting the state’s third-highest tax bracket. As much as Ever’ emboldened veto power hangs over the budget, insiders can see a path where the two sides could strike a deal on taxes, education and Medicaid while making small changes to other programs. That, though, would hinge on Republicans being able to extract a promise from Evers that he wouldn’t mess with the language — and for the GOP to be able to trust him on such a pact. We’re a long way from there, some note. Still, that might be the only way to get a budget done with the narrow GOP majorities, especially in the state Senate, where some continue to have their doubts the chamber could pass a budget on Republican votes alone. A deal between Evers and GOP leaders could draw enough Dems votes to secure passage. And it wouldn’t be a bad thing for some of the new Dem members of the Legislature to cast a vote for a bipartisan budget to burnish their credentials for working across the aisle. Meanwhile, the tax talks have spurred another round of speculation about Evers’ future, and the assessment on the likelihood of him running for a third term has been largely unchanged. The health of Evers and his wife will be a key factor, and the opportunity of having unified Dem control of the Capitol is enticing. And the caveat continues to be Evers would turn 79 before the end of a third term. Does he really want to spend his late 70s in public office? The guv again says this week that he will wait until after the budget to make a decision. That has some Dems nervous that any delays in the budget process could push things later into the summer — or fall — before the guv gives a definitive answer on his future. They’d like to see him fire up the fundraising machine sooner rather than later. They also want to avoid a knock down, drag out primary to replace him. Next year is too golden of an opportunity for Dems with the traditional pushback against the party in power in the White House during a midterm election, especially with the additional headwinds that Donald Trump’s tariffs and federal agency bashing are causing. Republicans, meanwhile, see Evers in a strong position, even as they continue to see opportunities to paint him as out of step with average Wisconsinites. That includes the missive his administration sent to state employees directing them to decline answering questions if they encounter a federal immigration officer at their workplace. Republicans howl that Evers is encouraging state employees to obstruct federal agents, while others counter that the advice is consistent with the Fourth Amendment. Meanwhile, Republicans dunk on Evers over a social media post showing him awkwardly throwing a football as he celebrates the NFL draft coming to Wisconsin. Likewise, they’ve spent much of the past six years seeking to portray him as weak, ineffective and out of touch. But as the Capitol heads into the budget season — and with Evers teasing a decision on his political future after that’s wrapped up — the guv’s emboldened partial veto authority is giving Republicans pause as they work on their spending plan. In addition, the potential GOP field to take him on has significant flaws and his job approval ratings have consistently been around or above 50% for much of his time in office, regardless of what Republicans have thrown at him. Meanwhile, the state GOP is fractured and looking for answers after yet another off-year election loss in the Trump era. November 2026 is still a political lifetime away. But few would bet against Evers right now if he decided to seek another term.
Election observer rules: Republican lawmakers don’t trust the Elections Commission, period, and are loathe to let anything it proposes take effect. So it’s all but a minor miracle when the GOP-controlled Joint Committee for Review of Administrative Rules deadlocks on a package of new standards for election observers, clearing a path for the changes to be implemented later this year. The tension between local election officials and observers has ramped up since 2020 with some monitoring polling sites — particularly those who are fervent supporters of Donald Trump — sure there is something amiss and fraud is plaguing Wisconsin elections. The commission, meanwhile, has spent more than two years putting together new rules for observers that backers argue would be an improvement over the current system and would provide more clarity for those seeking to watch what’s going on at polling sites. But you’ll never convince the most ardent agency critics they’ll do any good, and an Assembly committee earlier this year voted along party lines to recommend JCRAR object to the rules. But instead, Assembly Speaker Pro Tempore Kevin Petersen, R-Waupaca, joins the four Dems on the committee in voting against a motion to object to the rules. The office of Co-chair Steve Nass, R-Whitewater, said the committee retains authority over the proposed rules through May 11. If JCRAR takes no further action, the package would go back to the Elections Commission to move forward with implementation. Petersen didn’t immediately respond to a request from WisPolitics for comment on the paper-ballot vote, and insiders wonder if he’s just not worried about the very vocal — and fairly small — “stop the steal” crowd that regularly shows up at committee hearings and other meetings to harangue Republicans about election laws. After all, Petersen drew a primary challenge last year from someone aligned with the “patriot” groups popular with some local Republicans — and won with 63% of the vote. That win and other unsuccessful GOP primary challenges last fall suggested to some insiders that Republican lawmakers didn’t necessarily have to sweat some of the pressure they’ve been getting over issues like observer rules.
Mixed
Lyndsey Boon Brunette and Chris Taylor: One matches the formula that liberals have used to retake control of the state Supreme Court. The other has the political pedigree that has made her the preferred candidate of some in the Dem base with the connections to possibly give her a leg up in raising money. But with the way the electorate has shifted in spring races and conservative Rebecca Bradley up for another 10-year term next year, insiders ask just how much the challenger’s resume will matter. Taylor, a former Dem lawmaker from Madison, a year ago considered a bid for an open seat on the state Supreme Court but ultimately passed as liberals coalesced around fellow Dane County Judge Susan Crawford as their best shot to retain control of the court. Like Janet Protasiewicz in 2023, Jill Karofsky in 2020 and Rebecca Dallet in 2018, Crawford had what has proven a winning combination for a liberal Supreme Court candidate: a female sitting judge with prosecutorial experience. Now comes Boon Brunette, a Clark County judge, with a similar resume. A source with knowledge of her plans tells WisPolitics that Boon Brunette has been making calls and is seriously considering a bid. She served one term as DA for the central Wisconsin county following her election as a Dem in 2012. She then ran for an open court seat in 2018, winning with 76.4% of the vote, and was reelected in 2024 without opposition. Those kinds of credentials would typically make liberals stand up and notice. After all, Donald Trump won Clark County with more than 68% of the vote last fall. But some from team Crawford have already started lining up behind Taylor. The key to winning spring elections, they argue, isn’t so much the resume, but ginning up the Dem edge in the electorate for these races. They see Taylor’s base in Madison and her history fighting for liberal causes, such as her work for Planned Parenthood, as advantages that would help motivate Dems as they seek to take out Bradley, the conservative justice that grates on liberals more than any others. While being from Clark County may be an attractive quality in a general election, you also need a base for the primary and donors. They question how Boon Brunette would connect with either, especially with the powerhouse that Dane County is for spring races. In the four-way primary two years ago, the county accounted for 14.7% of the votes cast, even though it’s home to a little more than 10% of the state’s voting age population. Still, it didn’t help Dane County Circuit Court Judge Everett Mitchell two years ago as he finished fourth in the four-way primary. Insiders note some forget that Protasiewicz in 2023 and Dallet in 2018 both had primaries in which someone ran to their left — and easily advanced to the general election. Some argue being a former prosecutor isn’t just about checking a box on your resume. It also allows liberal candidates to insulate themselves from attacks over being soft on crime and to have a foundation to return fire. Facing criticism from conservative Brad Schimel and his allies over sentences she’d handed out, Crawford ran ads showing her as both a prosecutor and a judge in the courtroom while going after her opponent for his own perceived weaknesses on crime. Taylor, some argue, wouldn’t have the foundation to do that. Still, Bradley hasn’t been a prosecutor, either, making some wonder how the crime issue could play out in next year’s race. Assuming Bradley doesn’t snag an appointment to the federal bench and is on the ballot in April 2026, a race against Taylor would be akin to ideological nuclear war, some say, with a true base-on-base election that has little appeal to voters in the middle. The advantages Taylor has makes some wonder if Boon Brunette will ultimately pull the trigger on a 2026 bid — or if she’ll take the feedback and look ahead to 2027, when conservative Annette Ziegler would be on the ballot for another 10-year term.
GOP guv field: Southeastern Wisconsin businessman Bill Berrien has a great resume, he’s got a PAC that serves as a campaign in waiting, and he’s put together a top-notch team for his expected gubernatorial bid. Insiders also see a “but” as they assess his chances in next year’s guv race. It’s a common theme with the early field that’s formed as insiders see some potential, noteworthy flaws and likely a difficult environment for Republicans in 2026. Berrien, a newcomer compared to the rest of the field, announces Never Out of the Fight PAC, a title that refers to the SEAL’s code, “I am never out of the fight.” And working on the PAC are some veteran campaign hands with experience on winning GOP campaigns in Wisconsin. That includes Betsy Ankney, who was campaign manager for Ron Johnson’s 2016 reelection campaign and led a super PAC that backed him as the Oshkosh Republican secured a third term in 2022. Dylan Lefler, who worked on Johnson’s race three years ago and Donald Trump’s 2024 Wisconsin campaign, is also on board, as is veteran pollster B.J. Martino. But … Berrier committed the cardinal sin of supporting top five voting and backed Nikki Haley early in the 2024 GOP primary, prompting some MAGA figures to take shots at his campaign on social media. To operatives, the bigger question is whether it makes sense for Republicans to run another wealthy businessman after watching Tim Michels lose in 2022 and Eric Hovde coming up short in the 2024 U.S. Senate race even as Trump won the state at the top of the ticket. Berrien backers try to differentiate him, noting, for example, Michels dropped $19 million on his campaign three years ago, though much of it was spent during the primary. Berrien likely wouldn’t make that same mistake, supporters say. The rest of the potential field also has flaws, insiders say. U.S. Rep. Tom Tiffany, R-Minocqua, has been kicking around a run, and some who want to see him in the race argue the trouble for Republicans in off-year elections during the Trump years has been their failure to excite Trump voters. Who better to do than the most Trumpy of the state’s House members who can speak with authenticity on the issues that matter to MAGA voters most — immigration, transgender issues and America first? But insiders point out he’s a mediocre fundraiser who hails from northern Wisconsin and has little name recognition outside his district despite being in public office for more than 14 years. He also wouldn’t help Republicans stem the bleeding in the suburbs. Some have pushed Hovde to take another shot after his close call last fall, noting he dropped $20 million on his bid and has the resources to go all in financially again. But for all the name ID he built up last year, it wasn’t necessarily good name ID. In the last Marquette University Law School Poll before the election, 36% of voters had a favorable impression of him, while 48% had an unfavorable one, and Dems could easily dust off the ads they ran against him last fall to remind voters what they didn’t like. He’s also spent the last five months blaming his loss to U.S. Sen. Tammy Baldwin on conspiracy theories. That didn’t hurt Trump after his 2020 loss, but insiders can’t say the same for the Wisconsin businessman. Washington County Exec Josh Schoemann clearly wants to run for guv, insiders note, and he’s a vet who’s from a part of the state that’s key in GOP primaries. But being Washington County exec doesn’t build a lot of statewide name ID, and there’s little evidence that he can raise the kind of money needed for a statewide campaign. State Sens. Mary Felzkowski and Pat Testin are both mentioned as possible candidates. Still, is that because they truly burn to be guv or because it’d be a free shot for them after winning reelection to their Senate seats last year? Insiders are convinced Felzkowski is positioning herself for something besides being Senate president. But is it more about being prepared in case Tiffany leaves the 7th CD, where she lives, or a statewide run? So far, Wisconsin Dems say, none of the potential contenders are keeping them up at night. Berrien’s resume, though, has some wondering if he’d be the toughest general election matchup. Getting there, though, could mean getting through a GOP primary, and the potential for a bloody — and expensive — fight gives some Republican flashbacks to 2022. Some would like to see the party rally around one candidate before next summer, and insiders note ultimately GOP primaries are about who Donald Trump wants. And with his loyalty to the president, Tiffany would likely have the inside track to winning that backing. But there’s a significant difference between winning a GOP primary in a mid-term election in the age of Trump and emerging victorious from a general election.
Brian Schimming: Republicans are trying to manage the unmanageable. Some insiders say they have no choice. But as the party searches for answers after another disappointing off-year election and continues to struggle raising money, the state chair is heading to a state convention in a couple of weeks that could be a bit on the unruly side. That’s because the new “patriot” wing of the party is mad about a new personal conduct policy added to GOP rules. As Donald Trump has reshaped the party’s supporters, those changes have started taking hold with who’s running county parties. Paul Ryan’s name was booed at state convention a few years ago, while Trump backers unsuccessfully pushed a resolution demanding Speaker Robin Vos, R-Rochester, either resign or be forced from office. Beyond some bad headlines, those kinds of things don’t amount to much. But when the Sheboygan County GOP refuses to stock the yard signs of state Rep. Amy Binsfeld as she’s locked in a tight reelection battle — like what happened last fall — then it’s time to put your foot down, some argue. It’s hard enough to win elections as it is without having someone trying to undermine your own candidates. The new code of conduct approved by the Executive Committee bans things like publicly defaming GOP elected officials as well as party staff and volunteers; working to defeat any candidate who has won a Republican primary; and using social media accounts associated with RPW and its affiliates “for purposes that conflict with” the party’s mission. It also provides a path to remove from power those who violate the rules. To some, it’s more than a coincidence the rules were put in place not long after Oconto County GOP Chair Ken Sikora won a race to lead the 8th CD, giving him a spot on the state party executive committee once his term begins following state convention. Sikora was elected after a raucous process involving a lawsuit that overturned a state party decision barring some county members from voting in the election. Ahead of his election last month, some party members raised concerns about his candidacy, in part, due to a 2019 conviction on misdemeanor battery and disorderly conduct charges with domestic abuse modifiers. He’s also been a vocal critic of Schimming. As some bristle at the code as an attempt to tamp down dissent, others call it a necessary step to send a message that the team needs to be rowing in the same direction to achieve electoral success. The party also needs to pick it up on the fundraising front. The latest federal report again underscores the disparity in fundraising between the two parties, as the state Dem Party reported raising $3.6 million through its federal account in the month of March, compared to the $320,688 the state GOP pulled in. One thing that sticks out to insiders is the $1.5 million the Dem Party raised through unitemized donations in March. Those donors — giving less than $200 — are often seen as the lifeblood of campaigns and committees, helping to keep things chugging along even when there isn’t an election to get their attention. The state GOP just doesn’t have much of a small-dollar operation right now. It reported $69,196 from small-dollar donors in March. Meanwhile, its last state report showed the Wisconsin GOP actually topped its Dem counterpart for fundraising between Feb. 4 and March 17 as Wisconsin’s state Supreme Court race captured national attention. But while the party raised $7.1 million overall — compared to the $6 million WisDems raised — just 14 people gave the Wisconsin GOP $125 or less during the fundraising period. Dems reported more than 500 such contributions. Theories abound about the disparity, including that Dem donors are more likely to give to a cause and Republicans a candidate. Thus it’s easier to get a Dem donor in California to give to the party in Wisconsin because of the bigger picture of wanting to fight back against Donald Trump or protect abortion rights. Others argue a state party is only as strong as its governor. And being out of the East Wing for more than six years now is driving some of the financial challenges. Win the guv’s race in 2026, and it would go a long way to reversing that dynamic. Republicans are breathing a sign of relief with Ben Wikler leaving his post as state Dem chair this summer, hoping that helps level the financial playing field. Dems, though, are confident they can keep the money machine rolling. They also note all of the big political fights next year — from the Supreme Court race in the spring to the guv and control of the Legislature in the fall — will be fought under state campaign finance rules. And until the state GOP can prove it can consistently go toe-to-toe with WisDems for fundraising, liberals believe they will have the upper hand next year.
Rebecca Cooke: The nonprofit leader has money. She has DC support. She also has two challengers for the Dem nomination in her own backyard. So as formidable as Cooke looks as a possible November 2026 opponent for U.S. Rep. Derrick Van Orden, R-Prairie Du Chien, Wisconsin insiders believe she’s got work to do on the home front. It wasn’t long after Cooke lost to Van Orden in November by 2.7 percentage points that Dems started talking up the chance of a rematch. She overperformed Kamala Harris in western Wisconsin’s 3rd CD, as Van Orden was the only GOP House incumbent in the state delegation to run behind Donald Trump. And she raised $6.4 million last year in doing it. So no one was surprised by her decision to make a third go at the race after her narrow loss last year and coming in second in a three-day Dem primary in 2022. Insiders are fairly certain that Cooke has been laying the foundation for her latest run since shortly after her November loss. But they’re still impressed by the more than $1 million she raises over three weeks, leaving her just behind the $1.1 million that Van Orden pulled in over the full three-month first quarter. Van Orden is one of eight vulnerable House Republicans who raised more than $1 million in the first quarter, and he has some wealthy friends who helped him get there. In addition to the $6,600 that billionaire Elon Musk gave his campaign during the period, venture capitalist Peter Thiel gave him $7,000, the maximum for the primary and general combined. Good allies to have, insiders note, especially if they’re willing to put their largesse into PACs that can help your campaign. Van Orden’s receipts included $661,210 from individuals with $323,981 of that coming from small-dollar donors. Meanwhile, Cooke’s haul includes $962,591 from individuals with $477,754 of that from small-dollar donors. Those unitemized contributions — coming from donors giving less than $200 — is viewed as a sign of a campaign’s small-dollar network. And Cooke’s haul is impressive for such a short window. So is the list of more than a dozen Dem House members endorsing her campaign, a sign of insiders that the national party is already lining up behind her. But that doesn’t seem to be scaring off anybody at home. Emily Berge, president of the Eau Claire City Council, and Laura Benjamin, a small business owner and former Eau Claire alder, get in the race for the party’s nomination, one right after another. It’s striking to insiders that not only are there two others getting into the race despite the perception that Cooke has the blessing of national Dems, but that they’re both from her part of the district. State Sen. Brad Pfaff, who topped Cooke for the Dem nomination in 2022 and then lost to Van Orden that November, has also been mentioned as a possible candidate, though insiders see him as focused on helping Dems win control of the state Senate next fall. He’s likely to give Cooke whatever room she needs to shore things up with some elements of the Dem base at home and would likely only give the race serious consideration if Cooke were to falter badly, they say. Some operatives are puzzled by the efforts to challenge Cooke for the party nomination between her fundraising, the support of House Dems and groups like EMILY’s List already in her corner. Local Dems, though, bristle at the idea that Cooke should be given a free pass for the party’s nomination. They ask, have those national queenmakers bothered to talk to anyone local? If they had, some say, they’d pick up on tensions between the public persona Cooke has cultivated of waiting tables and growing up on her family dairy farm with a career that includes working outside Wisconsin as a professional fundraiser. Some local Dems question just how genuine Cook is, and it leads some to believe Cooke needs to do some serious relationship building in the district before she gets too caught up in the national support she’s drawing. Otherwise, she runs the risk of having a campaign that looks great on paper, but fails to connect with voters. The recipe is there to beat Van Orden in 2026, some say. He hasn’t done anything to cultivate a bipartisan image while in DC, instead going all in on MAGA. His brusque approach to the job rubs some the wrong way. And there’s the chance 2026 will be a very good year for Dems, especially with the way Trump’s poll numbers have been sliding. Many Wisconsin Dems can’t stand Van Orden or the thought of him being in Congress. Still, they also acknowledge it’s not a walk in the park to beat an incumbent in a GOP-leaning district even in a good year. And anything that splits the Dem base or takes focus off of Van Orden could make it easier for him to survive what could shape up to be a difficult year for Republicans.
State revenues: It’s never a good idea to overreact to a single month of tax collections. But there are enough red flags in what the state took in last month — particularly with the ongoing turmoil in the global economy — to give veteran budget watchers pause. The Department of Revenue reported the state took in $507.2 million in income taxes for March, 9.3% less than what it did for the same month a year ago. Meanwhile, the state collected $519.9 million in sales taxes last month, 2.2% less than in March 2024. You can get a month that’s an anomaly, insiders note. Still, Legislative Fiscal Bureau Director Bob Lang says the state “can’t have another month of bad sales and bad income (collections).” Along with looking at what the state took in for the month, the latest update from the Department of Revenue includes a comparison of how much the state has taken in since the fiscal year began July 1.Through the end of February, state tax collections were running 5.7% ahead of what the state took in during the same eight-month period a year earlier. After the March report, the state was still ahead of the pace set a year before. But it was down to 4.8% more than the same nine-month period in 2023-24. In January, the LFB had projected the state would see revenues grow 4.3% in fiscal year 2024-25 compared to the year before. That included growth of 7.2% for income taxes, the largest category of state revenues, and 2.2% for sales taxes, the second largest. April is always a key month for state revenues with the tax filing deadline, and LFB will have new revenue projections out sometime in mid-May. But some are already bracing for potential bad news. For years, the updated revenue estimates every other May were a boost for lawmakers as they got down to the nitty gritty of the budget as LFB “found” more money. But the updated projections in May 2023 were the first in the previous dozen years to revise downward what the agency had projected in January. Then, LFB predicted the state would take in $755.1 million less than what it had projected just four months earlier, equal to 1.2% of expected state revenues. Over the previous six budgets, the LFB had told lawmakers twice that its May projections were still in line with what it had expected in January. Otherwise, it has revised the projections upward in the other four budgets. If LFB paints a less rosy picture of the state’s finances with next month’s revised revenue estimates, it could get a little tight with the state’s finances — even though on the surface it would seem Wisconsin has plenty laying around to weather a little downturn. In January, LFB projected the state would finish the 2023-25 budget with a $4.3 billion surplus and $1.85 billion in additional revenue growth in 2025-27. But there are some serious bills to pay. Republicans are insistent on a tax cut, and GOP leaders have had discussions with Dem Gov. Tony Evers on that. Assembly Speaker Robin Vos, R-Rochester, has vowed to use some of the surplus for a new prison in Green Bay. And it would take $1.6 billion in state general purpose revenue to cover the cost to continue providing current Medicaid services. Add it all up, insiders note, and there’s not as much money laying around as some would think — and that’s even before addressing Evers’ call to pump $3.4 billion into K-12 education.
Falling
ROFR: The opposition rung the alarm bells. Senate GOP leaders were going to ram through the hotly contested transmission line bill, and it was time for opponents to hold lawmakers’ feet to the fire. Then nothing. The opposition swore Assembly Speaker Robin Vos was maneuvering to get ROFR 2.0 through the Assembly. Then nothing. But give the opposition credit, some say, for they’ve found a way to keep pounding a message on social media about “right of first refusal’’ that continues to be a thorn in the side of GOP leaders as they struggle to find a path forward on the legislation. The legislation to give existing utilities the first shot at building new transmission lines has been stuck for weeks. Assembly Republicans took a run at spurring action with an alternative version that added provisions dealing with things like farmland preservation in the hopes of attracting GOP support. Backers dubbed it the Wisconsin Energy Reform Act, and Vos, R-Rochester, said he hoped to pass the bill before month’s end. But it still has yet to get a hearing in an Assembly committee, and the April floor period has come and gone with lawmakers not due back on the floor until mid-May. LeMahieu, R-Oostburg, wasn’t shy in a December interview about his openness to using Dem votes to pass the original bill after it stalled in his house last session due to GOP opposition. And critics have rung alarm bells at any option — real or perceived — that they see for LeMahieu to get the bill on the Senate floor and out of his chamber. Problem is, insiders say, if LeMahieu has some grand plan to ram it through, he’s not communicating it to key Senate Republicans he may need to pull off a procedural move. If there’s no grand plan at all, backers will be spinning their wheels, unable to attract more GOP support. Insiders had their doubts with ROFR 2.0 was introduced. It’d be one thing if the provisions were enough to get backers to 50 GOP votes in the Assembly and 17 in the Senate. But there were no signs of that happening. So why even bother? The only clean path insiders see to the bill passing is for GOP leaders to put it on the floor as is, take all the Dem votes needed to push it through and be done with it. But insiders add the problem is that LeMahieu and Vos would need so many Dems votes at this point for the original bill that it’d leave them on some shaky ground with their caucuses. So for all the lobbying on the bill and all the warnings issued by the opposition, ROFR still has seen no legislative votes more than three months into the session. Backers had hoped to have it signed into law by now. And timing is starting to become a real issue. The first bids for coming transmission lines are due by mid-summer, meaning the window to lock in right of first refusal is gradually closing.
Ron Johnson: It’s one thing, insiders say, for the Oshkosh Republican to pop off once again about another conspiracy theory on vaccines. It’s another, though, to claim there’s “no other explanation” other than a controlled demolition for Building 7 coming down following the attack on the World Trade Center, and he wants a Senate hearing to explore what “actually happened” and what’s “being covered up.” There’s been plenty of investigation into what happened after hijacked planes hit the twin towers on Sept. 11, 2001, taking both buildings down. The official conclusion is that fires that raged at Building 7 after debris that rained down from one of the towers led to its collapse. But a persistent conspiracy theory has been that it was taken down by explosives planted by the federal government or other entities in an attempt to place the blame on al-Qaeda with those pushing the claim noting Building 7 included an outpost of the Central Intelligence Agency. Appearing on a podcast with MAGA personality Benny Johnson, the senator nods to the theory as he questions what really happened. Johnson has made all kinds of claims in the past with most falling on deaf ears with voters or being ignored after a flare up on social media. What has some Republicans cringing is Johnson’s office telling Politico a day after the podcast that he’s seeking information in order to hold a hearing looking into the matter. As chair of the Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations, Johnson would have a powerful perch to air theories about the attack — and create a circus. Some Republicans push back on Johnson’s comments with U.S. Rep. Mike Lawler, R-New York, posting on X that “Crap like this dishonors and disrespects the innocent lives lost, our brave first responders, and all families and survivors who still carry the pain of 9/11 each and every day.”
Dems condemn Milwaukee judge’s arrest; Republicans call for her removal
Wisconsin Dems today criticized the arrest of a Milwaukee County judge for allegedly interfering with federal agents’ attempts to arrest an undocumented immigrant, while the Assembly’s top Republican said lawmakers “will act” if she’s convicted.
Judge Hannah Dugan was arrested this morning on two felony counts in a case that drew national attention amid the Trump administration’s crackdown on illegal immigration.
FBI Director Kash Patel announced Dugan’s arrest in a post on X this morning, writing she was taken into custody after “evidence of Judge Dugan obstructing an immigration arrest operation last week.”
News of the arrest prompted some Republicans to call for her impeachment, a move that would require a majority vote in the Assembly followed by two-thirds of the state’s senators voting to convict.
Speaker Robin Vos, R-Rochester, said in a statement to WisPolitics the charges are “serious,” and the Assembly is prepared to act.
“We are actively monitoring the situation and should the charges result in a conviction, we will act,” Vos said. “Judge Dugan’s decision to hide a dangerous and illegal immigrant was irresponsible and put public safety at risk.”
The Dems who slammed the arrest include U.S. Sen. Tammy Baldwin, who in a statement called the arrest a “serious and drastic” move. The Madison Dem condemned President Donald Trump’s administration for abusing the separation of powers.
“By relentlessly attacking the judicial system, flouting court orders, and arresting a sitting judge, this President is putting those basic Democratic values that Wisconsinites hold dear on the line,” she said.
According to the criminal complaint, Eduardo Flores-Ruiz is an undocumented immigrant who was set for a criminal court appearance in front of Dugan April 18 for charges of misdemeanor battery. Members of Milwaukee Immigrations and Customs Enforcement were at the courthouse on that day for his expected arrest.
The complaint alleges that when Dugan learned ICE agents were in the courthouse, she became visibly angry and said the situation was “absurd.” Dugan reportedly approached the deportation officers and asked them to leave. When they refused, she ordered them to speak to the chief judge. According to the complaint, witnesses later saw Dugan escort Flores-Ruiz through a “jury door” into a non-public area. She then continued other hearings, adjourning Flores-Ruiz’s planned hearing. Flores-Ruiz then left the building and made it out before being arrested.
The case is one of two arrests this week that have made national headlines in the Trump administration’s crackdown on illegal immigration. A former judge in New Mexico is accused of harboring a Venezuela gang member.
U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi said during an appearance on Fox News today said the arrests send a message that “we will come after you and we will prosecute you. We fill find you,” if judges obstruct the administration’s immigration crackdown.
“What has happened to our judiciary is beyond me,” Bondi said, adding some judges are “deranged.”
Gov. Tony Evers’ administration last week sent a memo to state employees directing them to decline answering questions if they encounter a federal immigration officer at their workplace. He criticized today’s arrest.
“Unfortunately, we have seen in recent months the president and the Trump Administration repeatedly use dangerous rhetoric to attack and attempt to undermine our judiciary at every level, including flat-out disobeying the highest court in the land and threatening to impeach and remove judges who do not rule in their favor,” Evers said.
See the WisPolitics press release page for more reaction.
GOP search for Medicaid savings could impact Evers budget plan to increase hospital assessment
A hospital fee that spurs additional federal revenue for providers while covering other costs is unlikely to run afoul of cost-cutting measures DC Republicans have floated for the Medicaid program.
But those talks in Washington could complicate Gov. Tony Evers’ call in the budget to triple the hospital assessment, a move the state’s largest hospital association generally supports.
The Wisconsin Hospital Association began pitching the Capitol last fall on increasing the assessment, which hasn’t changed since it was implemented in 2009. WHA President and CEO Eric Borgerding argued that with costs increasing significantly over the past 16 years, it made sense to look at increasing the assessment to the maximum allowed to boost hospital revenues.
He also downplayed the possibility that the coming federal budget could jeopardize what Evers has proposed. The net impact of the guv’s budget also would more than triple the payments hospitals receive each year under the arrangement.
“At this point, I’ve seen nothing coming out of Washington that would jeopardize not only the existing assessment, but nothing coming out of Washington that would jeopardize increasing it in a way that would allow us to start catching up to inflation,” Borgerding said.
The push to cut federal spending has created uncertainty for the state as the budget season heats up. Congress earlier this month approved the framework for a budget with the Senate outlining $4 billion in spending cuts and the House seeking at least $1.5 trillion.
As House Republicans have sought ways to hit their target, some have looked at the Medicaid program for possible savings even as various lawmakers insist benefits won’t be cut. That includes a closer look at the hospital assessment that Wisconsin and other states have implemented. While drawing matching federal funds that are sent to hospitals, states also keep part of the money — which critics call a skim — to use for other expenses.
Under federal law, states can receive reimbursement for assessments that go up to 6% of net patient revenue.
According to the Legislative Fiscal Bureau, the state is currently at 1.8% of net patient revenue, while Evers’ budget would take that to 5.7%.
In 2024-25, most hospitals were scheduled to pay $414.5 million to the Hospital Assessment Trust Fund. The state then put $265.5 million of that back into payments to the hospitals, while pulling in $426 million in federal money.
In all, while the hospitals paid $414.5 million, they received $672 million for a net gain of $257 million.
Under Evers’ budget, that assessment would jump to more than $1.3 billion. Hospitals would net $808.9 million under his plan.
Joint Finance Committee Co-chair Mark Born, R-Beaver Dam, said he’s been open to the idea of increasing the assessment since the hospital lobbying effort began. But Born said he hasn’t had a discussion with his caucus to gauge support among his colleagues.
He said a complicating factor for the discussion will be the governor’s veto authority, especially after last week’s state Supreme Court ruling finding that Evers has the power to strike out individual numbers in spending bills. While it would seem odd for the guv to rework one of his own ideas, Born said Republicans have seen it before. “You can’t really trust him,” Born said.
A portion of Evers’ plan would also increase the assessment on critical access hospitals, which are generally in rural communities. Smaller providers would come out $31.2 million ahead of where they are now.
“I’d be interested in doing this to help rural health care and not close some more hospitals,” Born said. “But if he’s just interested in creating a bigger slush fund for him or DHS, I don’t think anyone in the Legislature is going to be interested in that.”
When it comes to the assessment, some House Republicans have floated the idea of ratcheting down the maximum percentage states can tax patient revenues in exchange for matching federal funds.
With that cap now at 6%, the Congressional Budget Office has laid out scenarios of possible changes. Reducing that cap to 5% could produce $48 billion in savings by 2034, while going down to 2.5% could push that to $241 billion. Eliminating the option entirely could save $612 billion.
The Kaiser Family Foundation noted in a background piece on the assessments last month that the impact of any changes to the current 6% cap would vary widely by state. Those near the current 6% would feel the biggest impact, while those — like Wisconsin — now at the lower end could be spared any changes.
Borgerding said while the WHA supports increasing Wisconsin’s current assessment, it also wants to see more of the money going back into the payments to hospitals. Meanwhile, some in Congress have raised concerns that states are using money for things besides health care.
Currently, $168.5 million of the $414.5 million that hospitals paid went into the Wisconsin assessment trust fund. The rest went to cover other Medicaid expenses.
Robin Rudowitz, a vice president at the Kaiser Family Foundation and director of the program on Medicaid and the uninsured, said it’s difficult to compare how Wisconsin uses the assessment to other states. That’s due to the mix of general funds, hospital assessment and federal dollars that go into the program.
“We’ve heard ‘financing scheme,’ ‘money laundering,’ all of these things are within the bounds of the rules that Congress has set up,” she said.
Close, but no cigar last session: lawmakers spark new effort to exempt cigar bars from smoking ban
Lawmakers are reigniting an effort this session at exempting cigar lounges from an early 2000s-era law banning smoking in most public places in the state.
But the proposal is again facing stiff opposition from health-related groups, despite changes meant to allay concerns it would weaken the state’s smoke-free air law and cause regulatory confusion. Meanwhile, the Wisconsin Restaurant Association has yet to take a stance on the latest measure.
Rep. Nate Gustafson, R-Fox Crossing, introduced a bill last session that would have exempted tobacco bars, also known as cigar lounges, from the ban. The proposal didn’t see a vote in either chamber.
The latest version, SB 211, would also exempt tobacco bars from the ban, but only if they existed on or after June 4, 2009, only allow cigar and pipe smoking, and aren’t a retail food establishment.
Gustafson said the provision to prohibit retail food establishments from operating as cigar lounges was added in response to concerns from stakeholders.
“That came from the response of not only just constituents, but also from restaurants that said, ‘Hey, we don’t want those who are operating with restaurants to just, you know, decide turn of a key that they’re gonna also start being a cigar bar,’” Gustafson said. “And so I agreed with that, I think a lot of people would agree with that as well. So we made that change, and I think that change has actually brought more bipartisan support to this bill this session compared to last.”
The Wisconsin Restaurant Association opposed the bill last session. Executive Vice President Susan Quam told WisPolitics the group is “carefully monitoring and discussing the changes made by the author and no official decision has been made yet by our board of directors.”
Last session, WRA expressed concerns that the current threshold for what is considered a tobacco or cigar bar is too low. Under current law, a tobacco bar is defined as a tavern that earns 15% or more of its annual gross income from the sale on the premises — other than from a vending machine — of cigars and pipe tobacco.
“We also have concern that the bill does not clarify how enforcement agencies would access and determine whether that sales volume requirement is being met,” Quam said in written comments on the previous bill in 2023.
Smoking has been banned in most public places in Wisconsin since 2010 after former Dem Gov. Jim Doyle signed the prohibition into law. The ban includes an exemption for retail tobacco stores and tobacco bars in existence before June 3, 2009. According to CigarScore.com, a website that tracks cigar lounges across the country, at least 17 cigar lounges currently operate in Wisconsin.
Health groups oppose effort
While WRA has yet to take a position, a coalition of more than a dozen health groups sent a letter on April 2 to lawmakers urging them to reject the bill.
They argued the proposal would weaken the state’s widely supported public smoking ban, and includes a loophole that would allow for the smoking of “little cigars.”
The definition of “cigar” isn’t specified in the state’s smoking ban. However, little cigars, which the groups referred to as “brown cigarettes,” are considered cigars for tax purposes in Wisconsin.
Little cigars contain tobacco, usually have a filter, and are about the same size and shape as cigarettes. The main difference between little cigars and cigarettes is that little cigars are wrapped in a tobacco leaf or other substance containing tobacco, while cigarettes are wrapped in paper.
The American Cancer Society and other health advocacy groups have fought to require little cigars to be taxed at the same rate as cigarettes. But Republicans have repeatedly rejected budget proposals by Gov. Tony Evers to make the change.
Sarah Sahli, government relations director for the American Cancer Society Cancer Action Network, said the bill is “much more complicated than I think it’s being sold,” noting the biggest concern relates to the little cigar issue.
“So when you’re saying cigars are allowed to be smoked, that means this cigarette, right? So it isn’t just these premium cigars as perhaps it’s being sold,” Sahli said.
She also raised concerns about the bill being too vague and argued that the 15% threshold for sales to be considered a tobacco bar is too low.
“But again, we can’t talk about a true cigar bar business model until we fix the brown cigarette issue,” Sahli said.
Gustafson argued opponents are trying to expand the scope of the bill, adding questions over how to regulate little cigars aren’t relevant to SB 211.
Rep. Sylvia Ortiz-Velez, D-Milwaukee, who is co-sponsoring the bill, said the portion of sales from little cigars in Wisconsin is minimal. Department of Revenue data show the state has reported about $11.1 million in taxes on cigars, including little cigars, for the current fiscal year.
Ortiz-Velez also said people exposed to secondhand smoke are choosing to enter places that allow smoking, noting bill authors are open to discussing ventilation systems to mitigate the effects.
“We’re not creating anything new, they already exist in our state,” Ortiz-Velez said of cigar lounges. “We’re just giving people the opportunity to actually apply, if they’d like, for these licenses.”
Molly Collins, advocacy director for the American Lung Association, another group opposing the bill, said while she appreciates the added language to prohibit cigar smoking where food is sold, “it doesn’t alleviate the problems with the bill.”
She said it isn’t clear how the state would track compliance and who would take on that responsibility.
“Who’s going to track the percentage of sales requirements? Are there going to be compliance checks? What if people call and say ‘Hey, this bar, you know, there are folks smoking in this bar’ and they’re confused about whether or not it is legal to do that,” Collins said. “You know, who is going to be responsible for that? It’s putting a lot on our local law enforcement, and, you know, potentially, the Department of Revenue, if that’s who would wind up having to track percentage of sales requirements.”
She added “100% smoke-free air is the easiest thing to understand, and it’s really been self-regulating.”
Gustafson said if the bill were to pass, there would still be options for local control if Wisconsinites don’t want a cigar lounge in their area.
“So if a local entity like the city of Madison doesn’t want to issue another license, even if this bill was to pass, they don’t have to. …We really want to drive that home of, you know, it’s not like a cigar shop is going to pop up on every corner of every street just because this gets passed,” he said. “There’s still a lot of local control mechanisms in place that will prevent that.”
Capitol Chats: Walker concerned liberal-controlled Supreme Court could overturn Act 10
Former Gov. Scott Walker said he’s “concerned” the court will decide to overturn Act 10, which he signed into law as governor in 2011. Following the spring election, liberals are guaranteed a majority on the Supreme Court until 2028.
“ If they overturn it after it has been upheld previous times before, it’ll set a horrible standard, not so much just for Act 10, but for any law with the idea being that law shouldn’t go back and forth, depending on election. Law should be determined based upon the constitution and the rule of law,” Walker said on a WisPolitics “Capitol Chats” podcast recorded April 17.
Commenting on recent Dem wins, Walker said outgoing Dem State Party Chair Ben Wikler has done a “remarkable job” getting national investment in Wisconsin races. He acknowledged the Republican Party could do this better following the spring election results.
”You gotta have a powerful message,” Walker said. “You’ve gotta have manpower. You gotta have the grassroots. But if you can’t match the money, the Republican Party here in Wisconsin’s gonna be behind the eight ball for quite some time until they figure out a way to balance what state Democrats have done over the last few years.”
Walker said he won’t be running for governor in 2026, but joked he’s “a quarter-century younger than Joe Biden,” and won’t rule out running for office in the future.
For now, Walker said he’s happy leading Young Americans for Freedom, a conservative youth activism organization, and supporting a conservative candidate for governor following what he said are the “failings” of Dem Gov. Tony Evers. He specifically mentioned Evers calling women “inseminated persons” in his 2025-2027 proposed budget.
Still, if a Republican doesn’t win governor in 2026, he said “maybe I’ll look at things differently” in terms of running for governor in the future.
Walker said he supports President Donald Trump’s tariff policies so far. He said he believes Trump’s end goal is no tariffs, which Walker argued will eventually benefit Wisconsinites.
In YAF polling he’s worked on, Walker said there’s been a “huge shift” in young people in the last few polls to the biggest issues being the economy and high prices.
But Walker has also noticed young voters are becoming more moderate, instead of more partisan.
“Most young people, like most voters in a state like Wisconsin, are just trying to figure it out,” Walker said. “They’re just trying to figure out what the truth is, where the facts are, plus just live their lives.”
Political TV
(Check local listings for times in your area)
“UpFront” is a statewide commercial TV news magazine show airing Sundays around the state. This week’s show, hosted by GERRON JORDAN and MATT SMITH, features Gov. TONY EVERS, Green Bay Mayor ERIC GENRICH and the Rev. TIM KITZKE, rector and pastor at Milwaukee’s Cathedral of St. John the Evangelist.
*See more about the program here.
*Also see a recap of the show online each Monday at WisPolitics.
“Rewind,” a weekly show from WisconsinEye and WisPolitics, airs at 8 p.m. on Fridays and 10 a.m. on Sundays in addition to being available online. On this week’s episode, WisPolitics’ JR ROSS and CBS 58’s EMILEE FANNON discuss how GOP lawmakers may seek to get around Gov. TONY EVERS’ veto authority, efforts to reach a tax cut deal, this week’s action in the Legislature, Evers administration guidance on how state employees should respond to ICE visits, the race for state Dem Party chair and more.
*Watch the show here.
This week’s episode of WisPolitics’ “Capitol Chats” features Former Gov. SCOTT WALKER on the spring election and the future of the state GOP. Walker also says he’s “concerned” the state Supreme Court will overturn Act 10.
*Listen to the podcast here.
“The Insiders” is a weekly WisOpinion.com web show featuring former Democratic Senate Majority Leader CHUCK CHVALA and former Republican Assembly Speaker SCOTT JENSEN. This week, Chvala and Jensen discuss the recent Wisconsin Supreme Court decision that upheld the governor’s line-item veto authority after Gov. TONY EVERS edited the ’23-’25 state budget to extend a two-year school funding increase by 400 years.
*Watch the video or listen to the show here.
“In Focus: Wisconsin” airs Sundays at 9:30 a.m. on Spectrum News 1 on channel 1. This week’s program with host RYAN BURK features conversations with Wisconsin lawmakers about their introductions to the legislature and their respective roles. Guests include State Representative MAUREEN MCCARVILLE, State Representative BENJAMIN FRANKLIN, and GORDON HINTZ, the Winnebago County Executive.
PBS Wisconsin’s “Here and Now” airs at 7:30 p.m. Fridays. This week’s program with anchor FREDERICA FREYBERG features U.S. Rep. TOM TIFFANY on tariffs, federal spending cuts and immigration orders; former Social Security Commissioner MARTIN O’MALLEY on Social Security; ZAC SCHULTZ on the NFL draft, UW–Madison Prof. MICHAEL WAGNER on termination of federal study grant; and Wisconsin Department of Health Services public health entomologist XIA LEE on tick-borne diseases around the state.
“For the Record” airs Sundays at 10:30 a.m. on Madison’s WISC-TV with host WILL KENNEALLY.
Week Ahead
Monday: The Joint Finance Committee holds a public hearing on the state budget.
– 10 a.m., Hayward High School, Hayward, WI
Tuesday: The Joint Finance Committee holds a public hearing on the state budget.
– 10 a.m., Northcentral Technical College, Wausau, WI
Tuesday: The Assembly Committee on Workforce Development, Labor and Integrated Employment holds a public hearing on bills related to annuities for law enforcement and unemployment insurance.
– 10 a.m., 225 Northwest, state Capitol
Tuesday: The Assembly Committee on Corrections holds an informational hearing with speakers from the Department of Corrections.
– 2 p.m., 415 Northwest, state Capitol
Wednesday: The Assembly Committee on Ways and Means holds an executive session on bills related to tax-exemptions. The committee is to holds a public hearing immediately following on more bills related to tax-exemptions.
– 1 p.m., 328 Northwest, state Capitol
Wednesday: The Senate Committee on Utilities and Tourism holds a public hearing on bills related to electric vehicle charging and nuclear energy.
– 1:15 p.m., 330 Southwest, state Capitol
Names in the News
Attend Wednesday’s Wisconsin Economic Forecast Luncheon hosted by WisPolitics, WisBusiness and the Wisconsin Bankers Association at the Alliant Energy Center in Madison. The event will feature Forward Analytics Director of Research & Analytics DALE KNAPP and US Bank economist ANDREA SORENSEN. Register here.
Join WisPolitics/State Affairs on May 14 for a DC breakfast with CNN Chief Congressional Correspondent and “Inside Politics Sunday” host MANU RAJU. Raju is a UW-Madison alumnus who wrote for The Badger Herald student newspaper. Register for the Washington, D.C., event here.
Register for a May 20 WisPolitics luncheon at the Madison Club for a panel discussion on Wisconsin’s long-term transportation needs and how to pay for them. Panelists will include: Sen. CORY TOMCZYK, R-Mosinee, chair of the Senate Transportation and Local Government Committee; Rep. KALAN HAYWOOD, D-Milwaukee, Assembly assistant minority leader and a member of the Assembly Transportation Committee; Wisconsin Transportation Builders Association Executive Director STEVE BAAS; and Wisconsin Policy Forum President JASON STEIN. Register here.
The Tommy G. Thompson Center on Public Leadership will honor Waukesha County Executive PAUL FARROW, a former GOP lawmaker, and conservation advocate TIA NELSON as “Distinguished Public Leadership Award” recipients on Tuesday. An awards ceremony will be held at 10 a.m. in 412 East of the state Capitol.
Cognitive scientist STEVEN PINKER will speak on May 5 at UW-Eau Claire for an event titled “Fostering the Pursuit of Truth & the Marketplace of Ideas.” Pinker will explore universities’ role in the marketplace of ideas. The Tommy G. Thompson Center on Public Leadership, UW-Eau Claire and the Menard Center for Constitutional Studies are sponsoring the event.
Customers First Coalition will host a “Power Breakfast 2025: Data Centers and Energy Use” event on May 6. Public Service Commission Chair SUMMER STRAND will provide opening remarks. The event also will feature two expert panels, and Rep. SCOTT KRUG, R-Nekoosa, will provide closing remarks.
The Wisconsin Historical Society on Wednesday held a groundbreaking ceremony for the new Wisconsin History Center. Attendees included Assembly Speaker ROBIN VOS, R-Rochester, Senate President MARY FELZKOWSKI, R-Tomahawk, and Sen. KELDA ROYS, D-Madison.
The Wisconsin Economic Development Corporation Board of Directors has unanimously elected PAMELA BOIVIN as its new chair. Boivin, a member of the Menominee Indian Tribe of Wisconsin, is currently program manager at the Native CFDI Network. She will succeed HANK NEWELL, who has been chair since 2019.
GOP aide JACOB FISCHER has joined Wisconsin Manufacturers & Commerce as director of communications and marketing. Fischer most recently worked as communications director to former state Supreme Court candidate BRAD SCHIMEL.
Madison College has chosen JENNIFER BERNE to succeed JACK DANIELS III as president of the community college after Daniels retired in January. Berne, who is currently provost at Oakland Community College in Michigan, will begin the new role July 1. TIM CASPER, who has been serving as interim president, will return to his position as executive vice president for student affairs.
Endorsements: The following is a list of recent endorsements, based on emails received by WisPolitics.com:
Dem Party Chair
DEVIN REMIKER: Senate Minority Leader DIANNE HESSELBEIN, D-Middleton, Assembly Minority Leader GRETA NEUBAUER, D-Racine, 14 local Democratic Party leaders, and 10 current and former elected officials.
JOE ZEPECKI: Reps. CLINTON ANDERSON, D-Beloit and KAREN KIRSCH, D-Greenfield, Sen. JAMIE WALL, D-Green Bay, Milwaukee County Democratic Party Vice Chair PATRICIA RUIZ CANTU and Treasurer DAWN MARTIN, former Janesville City Council President SAM LIEBERT, Rock County Democratic Party Chair JIM WHITE.
3rd CD
REBECCA COOKE: UFCW Local 1473, 15 Democratic members of Congress.
Lobbyist Watch
Twenty-three changes were made to the lobbying registry in the past 10 days.
Follow this link for the complete list.
