Yearly Archives: 2023

The Biden Administration and House Republicans recently reached a bi-partisan deal to raise the debt ceiling. To reach the compromise, and keep the United States from a catastrophic debt default, the White House agreed to a series of spending cuts to social safety net programs, including the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or food stamps. (Here is a look at the American presidents who added the most to the national debt.)

SNAP is a federal program designed to help needy families and households afford food. The debt ceiling deal includes considerable changes to SNAP eligibility, expanding work requirements for older Americans, while also expanding access for veterans and homeless populations.

According to the latest available data from the U.S. Census Bureau's American Community Survey, more than 15.8 million American households -- or 12.4% of all households -- received SNAP benefits in 2021. And exactly how many Americans would be directly impacted by the latest eligibility changes remains to be seen.

Of the 12 metro areas with available data in Wisconsin, Milwaukee-Waukesha has the highest SNAP recipiency rate. According to the ACS, 15.6% of all area households received SNAP benefits in 2021. Meanwhile, the SNAP recipiency rate across the state as a whole stands at 11.8%.

Of all 366 metro areas nationwide with available data, Milwaukee-Waukesha ranks as having the 87th highest SNAP recipiency rate.

StateMetro area with highest SNAP recipiency rateMetro area SNAP recipiency rate (%)State SNAP recipiency rate (%)Metro area(s) considered in stateAlabamaMobile19.514.112AlaskaAnchorage8.710.41ArizonaYuma22.311.27ArkansasFort Smith15.110.96CaliforniaEl Centro25.912.026ColoradoPueblo19.48.47ConnecticutNew Haven-Milford14.411.74DelawareDover12.910.51FloridaMiami-Fort Lauderdale-Pompano Beach18.614.121GeorgiaColumbus22.012.414HawaiiKahului-Wailuku-Lahaina11.412.62IdahoPocatello16.28.46IllinoisDecatur20.414.110IndianaKokomo13.89.411IowaDavenport-Moline-Rock Island15.89.87KansasWichita10.07.32KentuckyBowling Green15.514.25LouisianaLake Charles22.919.09MaineLewiston-Auburn13.511.53MarylandCumberland18.012.65MassachusettsSpringfield20.114.65MichiganSaginaw19.613.414MinnesotaDuluth9.47.95MississippiHattiesburg12.713.53MissouriSt. Joseph12.310.28MontanaGreat Falls11.58.63NebraskaOmaha-Council Bluffs9.28.53NevadaLas Vegas-Henderson-Paradise14.313.62New HampshireManchester-Nashua5.96.01New JerseyVineland-Bridgeton15.99.13New MexicoFarmington28.420.74New YorkBuffalo-Cheektowaga16.415.012North CarolinaGoldsboro25.513.915North DakotaFargo6.66.22OhioLima20.113.011OklahomaLawton13.413.83OregonGrants Pass24.715.98PennsylvaniaErie19.614.118Rhode IslandProvidence-Warwick16.414.91South CarolinaFlorence20.911.18South DakotaRapid City7.88.02TennesseeKingsport-Bristol15.311.910TexasMcAllen-Edinburg-Mission30.912.223UtahOgden-Clearfield6.35.64VermontBurlington-South Burlington9.910.91VirginiaVirginia Beach-Norfolk-Newport News10.68.89WashingtonYakima23.912.310West VirginiaBeckley22.118.37WisconsinMilwaukee-Waukesha15.611.812WyomingN/AN/A5.50

(The Center Square) – Some of Wisconsin’s latest proposed election changes may actually become law.

Both Republicans and Democrats at the Capitol on Wednesday agreed on new legislation that would re-work some of the fringes of the way that Wisconsin’s elections work.

One of those plans is Assembly Bill 298, which would require a vote of the full city council or county board before a city or county could close polling places.

Milwaukee State Senator Lena Taylor, D-Milwaukee, said that change goes straight back to the long lines in Milwaukee during the 2020 election.

“In 2020 the residents of Milwaukee had to be in line for six blocks. They had 175 polling locations sold,” Taylor. “It truly was an issue to see people standing for six blocks, in the rain. With five polling locations.”

Another plan, Assembly Bill 283 would have the Wisconsin Elections Commission reimburse local election managers for the costs of special elections in the state.

“It’s not a blank check,” Rep. Sylvia Ortiz-Velez, D-Milwaukee, added.

Assembly Bill 282 would require any election office that livestreams Election Night vote counting to keep the recordings.

A fourth plan, which lawmakers said was still being worked on, would require a military ID for all military ballots or absentee ballots.

“I believe there are ways to…try and figure out ways to make sure our military members are not having their votes stolen, not having their votes discounted by people pretending to be armed forces members,” Sortwell said.

Wisconsin law currently does not require any kind of voter ID for military ballots. A former Milwaukee Elections Commission worker mailed three fake military ballots to State Rep. Janel Brandtjen, R-Menomonee Falls, last year to expose the loophole.

Under the new plan, Assembly Bill 299, military members would have to provide their DOD number along with their ballot for their vote to be counted.

Sortwell said the proposal is not ready for a vote yet, but promised to find a way to “adapt and overcome as they say in the military.”

Gov. Tony Evers has vetoed many of the past attempts to reform or clarify Wisconsin’s elections laws post-2020. The governor has said he will not sign any new law that makes it tougher to vote.

The U.S. House of Representatives voted late Wednesday to pass a debt limit deal brokered by the White House and Speaker Kevin McCarthy, R-Calif.

The vote was 314-117 in favor, with dozens of Republicans and some Democrats voting against.

The measure, if approved by the Senate and signed by President Joe Biden, would suspend the nation's debt limit until Jan. 1, 2025, after the 2024 presidential election; cap non-defense spending but also limit defense spending increases; and expand work requirements for some of those receiving food stamps, among other things.

With the bill now heading to the Senate, it still faces a tough vote as lawmakers on both sides of the aisle have already expressed hesitation or outright disapproval.

The Senate faces a looming deadline Monday, the day the U.S. Treasury has said puts the federal government at risk of defaulting on its debt obligations, which many economists say could have significant impacts on the country's debt rating and economy.

McCarthy fought off dozens of Republican defections to get the bill across the finish line in the House.

Those critical of the bill, named the “Fiscal Responsibility Act,” argue it is a far cry from the one Republicans passed weeks ago to raise the debt limit, saying it has been hollowed out by concessions made to Democrats.

One of the concerns is that it would suspend the debt limit until 2025, after the 2024 presidential election. The U.S. is approaching $32 trillion in debt and fiscal conservatives say federal spending, and massive budget deficits, must be cut. Critics argue that the bill passed by House Republicans earlier in May went much farther to cut spending.

“The Limit, Save, Grow Act, passed by House Republicans, responsibly raised the debt limit while reining in spending,” Rep. Jeff Van Drew, R-N.J., wrote on Twitter Wednesday. “The Fiscal Responsibility Act simply does not live up to the expectations we set, and I cannot in good conscience vote for it."

(The Center Square) – Dairy farmers in Wisconsin are happy to deal with one less set of regulations now that the United States Supreme Court has scuttled the Environmental Protection Agency's Waters of the United States rule.

“For too long unelected bureaucrats in Washington have run amok, punishing farmers and landowners under this draconian rule,” Kim Bremmer, executive director of Venture Dairy Cooperative, said. “The EPA should have to follow the letter of the law, as they require farmers to.”

The high court last week unanimously ruled that the EPA went too far with the WOTUS rule. That rule offered a broad definition of what the federal government considers “water” for the sake of environmental regulations.

Under the vague WOTUS rule, wetlands, farm fields, and even ditches could be considered bodies of water, and therefore under the EPA’s regulatory reach.

“Prior to this decision the EPA had interpreted the Clean Water Act to allow the agency to regulate any water ‘adjacent’ or with a ‘significant nexus to’ a navigable water. This standard was vague, and inconsistent with Federal law, per the Court,” the co-op said in a statement. “The Court was particularly troubled by the vagueness of the rule’s definitions given the potential for criminal penalties under the Act.”

Cindy Leitner, president of Wisconsin Dairy Alliance, concurred.

“The Supreme Court of the United States got it right,’ Leitner said. “Farmers are not afraid of regulation per se, but they cannot operate with uncertainty. The EPA’s definition was so vague that nearly every bit of wet ground might be considered a ‘water’ of the U.S. Living under this uncertainty was untenable.”

Not everyone in Wisconsin is as happy with the ruling as the state’s dairymen.

The Wisconsin Wetlands Association said the Supreme Court rolled back protections and threatened to undo 50 years of wetland protections.

“Wisconsin has embraced and embodied this philosophy for years. Our leaders have never allowed federal policy to dictate where, how, or why we protect wetlands. As a result, the majority of Wisconsin wetlands and streams that lost federal protections today remain protected under current state law,” the association said in a statement.

(The Center Square) – The state of Wisconsin could soon be expected to return as much as $447 million in federal funds to the government as part of the debt ceiling agreement brokered by President Joe Biden and House Speaker Kevin McCarthy.

Gov. Tony Evers told reporters his administration is now planning for the possibility of returning the untapped funds, which were originally part of the windfall the state received from the federal pandemic funds that were issued to states that helped them recover from the impact of COVID-19.

"We haven't heard anything because I don't think the written document exists so we are planning all across our agencies," Evers said. "We're looking at what is known and seeing how much money we would have to send back but at this point in time we're not anywhere near because they aren't anywhere near soup yet."

The agreement between the two sides raises the country’s borrowing limit but also dictates that the federal government retake possession of roughly $30 billion in unspent pandemic relief funding. While it remains an open question just how much federal funding Wisconsin will have to return, as recently as in March the state had not spent $447 million in pandemic relief funding.

The state is now "closely monitoring the ongoing conversations at the federal level regarding any potential recissions," Evers spokesperson Britt Cudaback said.

In addition, Milwaukee Mayor Cavalier Johnson told the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel he and those around him have also started to prepare for all the changes that could be coming.

In a statement, Milwaukee County Executive David Crowley added "we have and will continue to leverage one-time funding to support community needs, even as we prioritize conversations with leaders in Madison to identify a long-term solution to avoid a quickly approaching fiscal cliff and continue county services residents rely on each day."

With the federal public health emergency having formally come to an end after three years in early May, Milwaukee County officials regularly allocated funds they received in the areas of tackling housing insecurity and increasing residents' access to mental and behavioral health resources.

(The Center Square) – Lawmakers in Wisconsin have a new plan that is making the rounds at the Capitol in Madison.

State Sen. Romaine Quinn, R-Cameron, and a handful of state representatives are looking for co-sponsors for what they are calling the "Embrace Them Both" plans.

“I will always champion the sanctity of life that begins with the miracle of pregnancy,” Quinn said. “I am proud to offer these bills that clarify support for both the mother and the child. We have put together a series of bills that build upon each other to provide protection and assistance to pregnant women and their children at all stages of life.”

The first plan would clarify Wisconsin’s abortion laws “explicitly stating that a medical procedure designed to prevent the death of a pregnant woman, such as the removal of a miscarriage or ectopic pregnancy, is not an abortion.”

The plans also want to expand and extend Wisconsin’s tax credit for children from $700 to $1,000, and to include unborn children.

The lawmakers also want to send pregnancy resource centers $1 million, and create a $5 million fund to help make adoptions more affordable.

“All four of these bills work to protect and uphold children, both born and unborn, and families, both new and existing. Being pro-life is about embracing and affirming life, in all stages at all times, both parent and child,” Rep. Amanda Nedweski, R-Pleasant Prairie, said.

“Allowing families that are expecting a child to claim the dependent tax exemption will better support families,” Rep. Pat Snyder, R-Schofield, added. “Increasing the exemption demonstrates Wisconsin’s commitment to parents and children and will ensure that Wisconsin remains a great place to raise a family.”

“This pro-life package provides clarity to the definition for terminating a non-viable pregnancy which protects the judgement of a physician, invests needed funds in crisis pregnancy centers, recognizes an unborn child as a distinct human being prior to birth by allowing the child to be claimed as a dependent, and financially supports those who choose adoption. This package promotes all-important, life affirming legislative initiatives. These reasonable bills should move through the legislative process with bipartisan support and be signed by the Governor,” Rep. Donna Rozar, R-Marshfield, added.

The legislation is now out for co-sponsorship, and will remain out until June 16th. After that, the lawmakers hope to get a hearing and eventually a vote.

(The Center Square) – One of the reasons that homes are so expensive in Wisconsin is that there are not enough of them for sale. And realtors in Wisconsin say one of the reasons there are not enough homes is because there are too many hurdles to build them.

The Wisconsin Realtors are pushing a series of proposals at the Wisconsin Capitol that the group says will help lessen the state’s housing shortage.

“The biggest hurdle is often the process, and the time it takes to get a new subdivision or a new apartment building approved.” Tom Larson, the Senior Vice President of Public Affairs for Wisconsin Realtors Association, told The Center Square. “And the reason why the process takes so long is because the process has become overly politicized.”

Larson said neighbors have a tremendous amount of “input” when it comes to building new houses, and that both delays construction and increases the cost.

The Realtors’ solution is a piece of legislation that would make it harder for local communities to say no to housing projects.

Assembly Bill 266 would require local governments to “to approve certain permit applications

related to residential housing developments that are consistent with certain local requirements and limits the authority of a [local governments] to impose a supermajority requirement for a zoning ordinance amendment.”

“We all have a little bit of ‘Not in my backyard’ within us,” Larson explained. “We are our biggest problem to the creation of new housing.”

The Realtors have a study that says Wisconsin needs 140,000 new homes by the end of the decade to keep-up with housing demand.

Larson said Wisconsin’s housing shortage and worker shortage go hand-in-hand.

“Business can’t get people to fill the job openings they have because the people don’t have a place to live,” Larson explained. “They can’t attract people from different states, or even different parts of the state because there is no place to live.”

The Realtors’ other legislation would create a new revolving loan fund to help pay for senior and workforce housing, to convert older buildings, and to update homes built before 1980.

(The Center Square) – The head of the University of Wisconsin System says all but three campuses will be running a deficit by the end of the next school year if the university doesn’t get more money.

President Jay Rothman told reporters on Thursday that a new report shows every campus but UW-Madison, UW-Stout, and UW-La Crosse will lose next year.

“We are at the bottom for public funding, nationally,” Rothman said. “If we can’t fulfill our potential then all Wisconsinistes will suffer.”

The fiscal forecast from the university shows 10 campuses will be spending more than they take-in by the end of the next school year, The gaps range from an $18 million deficit at UW-Milwaukee to a $400 deficit at UW-Superior.

UW-Madison, according to the report, will finish the 2023-2024 school year $2.8 million in the black. UW-La Crosse will be up $1.1 million, and UW-Stout will end the year $283,000 ahead.

In all, Rothman said, the UW System will see a $60 million deficit next year without new money.

“At the end of the day, you never cut your way to success. You just can’t do that,” Rothman said. “So I remain hopeful that we can find other avenues, while still being good financial stewards and looking at the expense line, and cut where we can, and be efficient about it. But we also need to get that further investment

Rothman continues to push lawmakers for more money for the UW System.

Regents already raised tuition for next year, and Rothman has asked lawmakers for an 8% increase in the next state budget.

"We have to move ourselves up. If we're going to be successful in winning the war for talent, we want them to remain accessible and affordable to students and prospective students," he said, "but we need the state to participate with us as well."

Rothman didn’t rule out closing some campuses if things don’t turn around.

House Republicans voted 218-203 Wednesday to overturn President Joe Biden’s student loan forgiveness even as the U.S. The Supreme Court considers the legality of the measure.

Rep. Bob Good, R-Va., led the effort to overturn Biden’s loan cancelation via the Congressional Review Act, a provision that allows Congress to overturn recently enacted federal rules. The Government Accountability Office recently said that the student loan rule fell within Congress’ authority to overturn under the CRA.

“President Biden’s student loan transfer scheme shifts hundreds of billions of dollars of payments from student loan borrowers onto the backs of the American people,” Good told The Center Square. “I am proud to lead the fight against President Biden’s reckless, unilateral, and unauthorized action that would unfairly penalize those who worked hard to pay off their loans or who never took them out in the first place. I am pleased that my Republican colleagues overwhelmingly supported my legislation on the House Floor this week.”

Biden announced last year his administration would “forgive” $10,000 in federal student loan debt for those making less than $125,000 per year. For Pell Grant recipients, the debt cancelation would total $20,000, and the plan would allow debtors to to cap repayment of their loans at 5% of their income.

"Whether you want it or not—and you don't—thanks to Biden’s student loan bailout every man, woman, and child in America will be taxed $3,527 to foot the bill for someone else’s debt," Rep. Aaron Bean, R-Fla., said Wednesday.

The U.S. Congressional Budget Office estimated the provision would cost taxpayers about $400 billion.

Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget Senior Vice President and Senior Policy Director Marc Goldwein testified before Congress in March, raising the alarm about runaway federal spending, inflation, and the rise of the national debt.

“Unfortunately, the Administration’s policies have contributed to this inflation and cancellation could further exacerbate inflationary pressures if allowed by the Supreme Court to go forward,” Goldwein testified before the House Subcommittee on Higher Education and Workforce Development. “This in turn puts more pressure on the Federal Reserve to raise interest rates, which disrupts the financial, housing, and labor markets and risks pushing the economy into a recession.”

Biden has defended his plan, saying it is helping Americans struggling to pay back their debt. Student loans have been deferred several times because of the COVID-19 pandemic, first by former President Donald Trump and then by Biden. The House bill would also put an end to that delay and restart repayments for borrowers.

Critics of Biden’s plan say it unfairly punishes poorer Americans who could not afford to go to college, forcing them to subsidize wealthier Americans with degrees and more earning potential.

“President Biden is not forgiving debt, he is shifting the burden of student loans off of the borrowers who willingly took on their debt and placing it onto those who chose to not go to college or already fulfilled their commitment to pay off their loans,” Sen. Bill Cassidy, R-La., said after introducing the Joint Resolution of Disapproval earlier this year in conjunction with Good.

“It is extremely unfair to punish these Americans, forcing them to pay the bill for these irresponsible and unfair student loan schemes," he added.

Whether the measure can get traction in the Senate, especially before the Supreme Court issues their ruling, is unlikely. A favorable court ruling, though, could push the issue for some Senate Republicans in particular.

Biden has made clear he opposes the House's move to overturn his Department of Education rule, meaning it would almost certainly be vetoed.

The Supreme Court is expected to issue a ruling on the debt forgiveness in the coming weeks.

(The Center Square) -- Congressman Derrick Van Orden says he may get a T-shirt made to celebrate his being banned from Russia.

Van Orden, the Republican congressman from western Wisconsin, is among 500 Americans on the latest list of people banned from Russia.

“I think it’s great that Vladimir Putin and his gang of thugs have identified the fact that I don’t believe this naked, international aggression should go unchecked,” Van Orden told The Center Square on Wednesday.

Van Orden has been a vocal opponent of the war in Ukraine.

“What I said about Putin is correct. That he has cable television,” Van Orden explained. “One of the reasons that he invaded Ukraine is that he saw President Biden abandon thousands of American citizens and our allies to terrorists in Afghanistan. I believe that emboldened Putin to invade Ukraine.”

Russia released a new list last Friday of 500 Americans who have been banned from the country for life.

In addition to Van Orden, the list includes former President Obama, former U.S. Ambassador Jon Huntsman, several U.S. senators, and entertainers Jimmy Kimmel, Stephen Colbert, and Seth Meyers.

“It is interesting that President Obama and I wound up on the same list,” Van Orden explained. “We didn’t really agree with a lot of stuff, politically. But it's nice to see that this really, truly is a bipartisan issue. That Russia must be stopped from what they are doing.”

Russia’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs said in a statement that “It is high time for Washington to learn that not a single hostile attack against Russia will go without a strong reaction.”

Van Orden said he’s not worried about the ban, because he wasn’t planning on going to Russia anytime soon anyway.