logo
Wisconsin governor signs budget in early morning to secure Medicaid funds

Wisconsin governor signs budget in early morning to secure Medicaid funds

MADISON, Wis. — Wisconsin Gov. Tony Evers signed a new two-year budget in the early morning hours Thursday in a race against Congress to ensure the state gets a federal Medicaid match that it would lose under President Trump's tax and spending cuts package.
In an extraordinarily rapid succession of events, Evers and Republican lawmakers unveiled a compromise budget deal on Tuesday, the Senate passed it Wednesday night and hours later just before 1 a.m. on Thursday the Assembly passed it. Evers signed it in his conference room minutes later.
Democrats who voted against the $111-billion spending bill said it didn't go far enough in meeting their priorities of increasing funding for schools, child care and expanding Medicaid. But Evers, who hasn't decided on whether he will seek a third term, hailed the compromise as the best deal that could be reached.
'I believe most Wisconsinites would say that compromise is a good thing because that is how government is supposed to work,' Evers said.
Wisconsin's budget would affect nearly every person in the battleground state. Income taxes would be cut for working people and retirees by $1.4 billion, sales taxes would be eliminated on residential electric bills and it would cost more to get a driver's license, buy license plates and title a vehicle.
There was urgency to pass the budget because of one part that increases an assessment on hospitals to help fund the state's Medicaid program and hospital provider payments. Medicaid cuts up for final approval this week in Congress cap how much states can get from the federal government through those fees.
The budget would increase Wisconsin's assessment rate from 1.8% to the federal maximum of 6% to access federal matching funds. But if the federal bill is enacted first, Wisconsin could not raise the fee, putting $1.5 billion in funding for rural hospitals at risk.
In the rush to get done, Republicans took the highly unusual move of bringing the budget up for votes on the same day. In at least the past 50 years, the budget has never passed both houses on the same day.
'We need to get this thing done today so we have the opportunity to access federal funding,' Republican Assembly Speaker Robin Vos said at the start of debate just before 8 p.m. Wednesday.
Governors typically take several days to review and sign the budget after it's passed but Evers took just minutes.
In a concession to the Democratic governor, Republicans also agreed to spend more money on special education services in K-12 schools, subsidize child-care costs and give the University of Wisconsin System its biggest increase in nearly two decades. The plan would also likely result in higher property taxes in many school districts due to no increase in general aid to pay for operations.
The Senate passed the budget 19-14, with five Democrats joining with 14 Republicans to approve it. Four Republicans joined 10 Democrats in voting no. The Assembly passed it 59-39 with six Democrats in support. One Republican voted against it.
Democratic senators were brought into budget negotiations in the final days to secure enough votes to pass it.
'It's a bipartisan deal,' Senate Minority Leader Dianne Hesselbein said before the vote. 'I think everybody left the table wishing it was different, but this is something everyone has agreed on.'
Democrats said newly drawn legislative maps, which helped them pick up seats in November and narrow the Republican majorities, led to greater compromise this year.
'That gave us leverage, that gave us an opportunity to have a conversation,' Democratic Sen. Mark Spreitzer said.
Still, Spreitzer said the budget 'fell far short of what was needed on our priorities.' He and other Democrats said it didn't go enough to help fund child care, K-12 schools and higher education, in particular.
The budget called for closing a troubled aging prison in Green Bay by 2029, but Evers used his partial veto to strike that provision. He left in $15 million in money to support planning for the closure, but objected to setting a date without a clear plan for how to get it done.
The governor noted in his veto message that the state has 'painful experience' with trying to close prisons without a fleshed-out plan, pointing out that the state's youth prison remains open even though lawmakers passed a bill to close the facility in 2017.
'Green Bay Correctional Institution should close — on that much, the Legislature and I agree,' Evers wrote. 'It is simply not responsible or tenable to require doing so by a deadline absent a plan to actually accomplish that goal by the timeline set.'
Evers used his partial veto powers to wipe out provisions in the budget that would have handed the town of Norway in southeastern Wisconsin's Racine County an annual $100,000 grant to control water runoff from State Highway 36. The governor said in his veto message he eliminated the grant because Republicans refused to extend the Warren Knowles-Gaylord Nelson Stewardship Program.
That program provides funding for the state and outside groups to buy land for conservation and recreation. Republicans have complained for years that the program is too expensive and removes too much land from property tax rolls, hurting local municipalities. Funding is set to expire next year. Evers proposed allocating $1 billion to extend the program for another decade, but Republicans eliminated the provision.
Evers accused legislators in his veto message of abandoning their responsibility to continue the program while using the runoff grant to help 'the politically connected few.' He did not elaborate.
The town of Norway lies within state Rep. Chuck Wichgers and Sen. Julian Bradley's districts. Both are Republicans; Bradley sits on the Legislature's powerful budget-writing committee. Emails to both their offices seeking comment Friday morning weren't immediately returned.
Rep. Tony Kurtz and Sen. Pat Testin, both Republicans, introduced a bill last month that would extend the stewardship program through mid-2030, but the measure has yet to get a hearing.
Bauer writes for the Associated Press. AP writer Todd Richmond contributed to this report.
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Trump got $170 billion for immigration. Now he has to enact it.
Trump got $170 billion for immigration. Now he has to enact it.

Politico

time7 minutes ago

  • Politico

Trump got $170 billion for immigration. Now he has to enact it.

And as illegal border crossings decline, ICE must look within the country to reach its arrest quota — a goal of 3,000 daily apprehensions in recent weeks. But an increase in arrests in the months ahead doesn't automatically result in more deportations, as it will take time for the administration to build out a 'logistical pipeline all over the country,' said Ken Cuccinelli, who served as deputy secretary of Homeland Security during Trump's first term. 'It's a whole lot of little contracts with state and local officials. It's building more facilities. It's reopening the ones they already have. And all you need is one choke point in the logistics — every convoy is as fast as the slowest ship,' Cuccinelli said. 'You've got to have the planes, the vehicles, the manpower, the security, in all the right places.' The domestic policy bill also includes over $1 billion for the immigration court system to hire more judges and staff, but it's unclear how quickly the administration can build out the courts, and whether it can move at a rate that can keep up with an increased pace of ICE arrests — or if the effort will ultimately result in longer detention time. The Trump administration's efforts to work around the immigration courts have been met with legal challenges. And the case backlog is substantial: roughly 700 immigration judges are coping with a 3.5 million case pile-up. The funding for immigration judges is 'important as well, because the system is backlogged,' said Michael Hough, director of federal relations at NumbersUSA, a group that works to reduce both legal and illegal immigration. 'Just because you detain these people, especially people who have been here for a while, they need hearings — you've got to get them in front of an immigration judge.' While the White House celebrates the bill's passage, political pressure is already growing for congressional Republicans to enact new policy. Immigration hawks say the money is crucial, but the party also has to look to legislation that will make permanent changes to the immigration system — such as reviving talks around border security and asylum law from the party's legislation from last year, known as H.R.2. 'There are other legislative changes that Republicans campaigned on, and that we're going to continue to be looking to them to move things forward and not just sit on their hands now that they've passed the Big Beautiful Bill Act,' said a person close to the Trump administration, granted anonymity to speak candidly. 'No, this is a budget reconciliation bill … it's infused a ton of money into this effort, but there's still some policy changes that the administration has talked about and wants to pursue.'

Trump branded, browbeat and prevailed. But his big bill may come at a political cost
Trump branded, browbeat and prevailed. But his big bill may come at a political cost

Yahoo

time8 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

Trump branded, browbeat and prevailed. But his big bill may come at a political cost

WASHINGTON (AP) — Barack Obama had the Affordable Care Act. Joe Biden had the Inflation Reduction Act. President Donald Trump will have the tax cuts. All were hailed in the moment and became ripe political targets in campaigns that followed. In Trump's case, the tax cuts may almost become lost in the debates over other parts of the multitrillion-dollar bill that Democrats say will force poor Americans off their health care and overturn a decade or more of energy policy. Through persuasion and browbeating, Trump forced nearly all congressional Republicans to line up behind his marquee legislation despite some of its unpalatable pieces. He followed the playbook that had marked his life in business before politics. He focused on branding — labeling the legislation the 'One Big, Beautiful Bill' — then relentlessly pushed to strong-arm it through Congress, solely on the votes of Republicans. But Trump's victory will soon be tested during the 2026 midterm elections where Democrats plan to run on a durable theme: that the Republican president favors the rich on tax cuts over poorer people who will lose their health care. Trump and Republicans argue that those who deserve coverage will retain it. Nonpartisan analysts, however, project significant increases to the number of uninsured. Meanwhile, the GOP's promise that the bill will turbocharge the economy will be tested at a time of uncertainty and trade turmoil. Trump has tried to counter the notion of favoring the rich with provisions that would reduce the taxes for people paid in tips and receiving overtime pay, two kinds of earners who represent a small share of the workforce. Extending the tax cuts from Trump's first term that were set to expire if Congress failed to act meant he could also argue that millions of people would avoid a tax increase. To enact that and other expensive priorities, Republicans made steep cuts to Medicaid that ultimately belied Trump's promise that those on government entitlement programs 'won't be affected.' 'The biggest thing is, he's answering the call of the forgotten people. That's why his No. 1 request was the no tax on tips, the no tax on overtime, tax relief for seniors,' said Rep. Jason Smith, R-Mo., chairman of the tax-writing House Ways and Means Committee. 'I think that's going to be the big impact.' Hard to reap the rewards Presidents have seen their signature legislative accomplishments unraveled by their successors or become a significant political liability for their party in subsequent elections. A central case for Biden's reelection was that the public would reward the Democrat for his legislative accomplishments. That never bore fruit as he struggled to improve his poll numbers driven down by concerns about his age and stubborn inflation. Since taking office in January, Trump has acted to gut tax breaks meant to boost clean energy initiatives that were part of Biden's landmark health care-and-climate bill. Obama's health overhaul, which the Democrat signed into law in March 2010, led to a political bloodbath in the midterms that fall. Its popularity only became potent when Republicans tried to repeal it in 2017. Whatever political boost Trump may have gotten from his first-term tax cuts in 2017 did not help him in the 2018 midterms, when Democrats regained control of the House, or in 2020 when he lost to Biden. 'I don't think there's much if any evidence from recent or even not-so-recent history of the president's party passing a big one-party bill and getting rewarded for it,' said Kyle Kondik, an elections analyst with the nonpartisan University of Virginia's Center for Politics. Social net setbacks Democrats hope they can translate their policy losses into political gains. During an Oval Office appearance in January, Trump pledged he would 'love and cherish Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid.' 'We're not going to do anything with that, other than if we can find some abuse or waste, we'll do something,' Trump said. 'But the people won't be affected. It will only be more effective and better.' That promise is far removed from what Trump and the Republican Party ultimately chose to do, paring back not only Medicaid but also food assistance for the poor to make the math work on their sweeping bill. It would force 11.8 million more people to become uninsured by 2034, according to the Congressional Budget Office, whose estimates the GOP has dismissed. 'In Trump's first term, Democrats in Congress prevented bad outcomes. They didn't repeal the (Affordable Care Act), and we did COVID relief together. This time is different,' said Sen. Brian Schatz, D-Hawaii. 'Hospitals will close, people will die, the cost of electricity will go up, and people will go without food.' Some unhappy Republicans Sen. Thom Tillis, R-N.C., repeatedly argued the legislation would lead to drastic coverage losses in his home state and others, leaving them vulnerable to political attacks similar to what Democrats faced after they enacted 'Obamacare.' With his warnings unheeded, Tillis announced he would not run for reelection, after he opposed advancing the bill and enduring Trump's criticism. 'If there is a political dimension to this, it is the extraordinary impact that you're going to have in states like California, blue states with red districts,' Tillis said. "The narrative is going to be overwhelmingly negative in states like California, New York, Illinois, and New Jersey.' Even Sen. Lisa Murkowski, R-Alaska, who eventually became the decisive vote in the Senate that ensured the bill's passage, said the legislation needed more work and she urged the House to revise it. Lawmakers there did not. Early polling suggests that Trump's bill is deeply unpopular, including among independents and a healthy share of Republicans. White House officials said their own research does not reflect that. So far, it's only Republicans celebrating the victory. That seems OK with the president. In a speech in Iowa after the bill passed, he said Democrats only opposed it because they 'hated Trump.' That didn't bother him, he said, 'because I hate them, too.' ___ Associated Press writer Joey Cappelletti contributed to this report. Seung Min Kim, The Associated Press

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store