Assembly Minority Leader Greta Neubauer joins DLCC's board as Dems looks to win majorities in 2026
Wisconsin Assembly Minority Leader Greta Neubauer is joining the Board of Directors for the Democratic Legislative Campaign Committee (DLCC) — the national organization dedicated to electing Democrats to state legislatures.
The Racine Democrat, who has been in the Legislature since 2018 and has led Assembly Democrats since 2021, joins the board as Wisconsin Democrats seek majorities in both chambers for the first time in many years in 2026.
Neubauer said DLCC President Heather Williams asked her to join the board and it's a sign of the organization's 'deep commitment' to Wisconsin and understanding that a trifecta could be possible in 2026.
'They want to be a part of helping us flip this state blue,' Neubauer said. 'DLCC of course is focused on the national strategy of supporting democratic legislatures to win majorities in legislative chambers. They have had great success in the last few years… so I'm excited to be part of that national strategy work.'
Williams said in a statement that 'all eyes should be on the states in 2025' and Neubauer is a leader to watch.
'As state Democrats continue to overperform in special elections and counter the chaos in Washington, we are laying the foundation for Democratic success up and down the ticket,' Williams said. 'Our board members represent some of the sharpest minds in politics, and I'm excited to partner with them to build our plan for victory for cycles to come.'
In the past, the DLCC has invested in helping Wisconsin Democrats win and outlined strategies for winning targeted seats.
Neubauer said it has been helpful getting to know leaders in other states where Democrats have successfully flipped control of their legislative chambers including Michigan, Minnesota, Pennsylvania. She said she has learned a lot from those leaders and is trying to bring those lessons back to Democrats in Wisconsin, especially when it comes to preparing to be in the majority.
'When we do win, we want to take advantage of the opportunity and pass policy that is going to materially improve people's lives very quickly, so that's been really helpful to me to speak with them about how they prepared to govern, how they worked with their caucuses,' Neubauer said, adding that Democrats have 10 new Assembly members this year and hope to grow that number now that the Legislature has passed new maps that no longer overwhelmingly favor Republicans. 'The level of program that we run during the campaign cycle, the amount of money we need to raise and candidates we're supporting has grown significantly since we got the fair maps. I'm getting all sorts of advice from those leaders both about governing and about effectively campaigning, winning majorities.'
When it comes to its targets for 2025-26, Wisconsin is one of five of the DLCC's 'battleground' states where legislative majorities are determined by the slimmest of margins.
New legislative maps were put in place last year by the state Legislature and Gov. Tony Evers after the Wisconsin Supreme Court ruled the old maps were an unconstitutional gerrymander. Democrats in Wisconsin haven't held a legislative majority in the Senate or Assembly since 2010, and under the old maps, Senate Republicans were able to win two-thirds of the seats, while Republicans held a 64-35 majority.
Under the new maps, Democrats in 2024 were able to pick up 10 Assembly seats and now hold 45 of 99 seats. They also added four Senate seats and now hold 15 seats out of 33 in that chamber.
Wisconsin's 2026 elections will be the first time that control of the Senate will be in play as only half of the body was up in the last election and Assembly Democrats will again be working to try to win a majority.
'It is absolutely doable, but it is going to take quite a bit of work,' Neubauer said.
Democratic lawmakers, she said, are taking a few approaches to getting things done for voters ahead of the next elections. This includes working across the aisle in the budget process to get investment into programs that Wisconsinites rely on, including child care and public schools and ensuring 'Republican attacks on our rights and freedoms are not successful' by upholding the governor's veto.
Neubauer said her party is also 'focused on that long-term vision and communicating what we will do when we have a Democratic trifecta — how we will change the state, how we will make Wisconsin a place where everyone has the ability to thrive, wants to live, raise a family, retire.' She noted that Democrats introduced a package of bills in January to address prescription drug access, ensure students have access to food in school and help improve housing, but Republicans haven't shown interest in them.
'We have a big and deep policy agenda that we've been working on for over a decade that we are ready to implement, and so we just have to get out and communicate about it,' Neubauer said. 'And that of course looks like fanning out across the state, both in districts we represent and other communities, and talking about the work that we need to get done.'
Neubauer said they are going to continue to work to lower costs, especially as 'Trump engages in reckless, irresponsible trade wars and weakens the economy for no good reason.' She said state legislatures are essential in pushing back on his agenda.
The first part of Trump's term in office could have an effect on Wisconsin Democrats' chances as well, Neubauer said.
'We have a number of Republican legislators who have really tried to position themselves as being moderate. They go home to their districts and they emphasize the bipartisan proposals that they've signed on to or tried to get passed, but what they don't talk about is their voting record being in line with Republican leadership almost 100% of the time,' Neubauer said.
Neubauer said that Wisconsin Republicans haven't distanced themselves from Trump's agenda.
'The first several months of the legislative session here in Wisconsin, we saw Republicans focused on culture wars rather than lowering costs for working families, making their lives easier, investing in our schools — the things that we all hear about when we run into our constituents at the grocery store,' Neubauer said. 'Republicans are going to have to answer for Donald Trump and his attacks on Wisconsin families next year, and that is going to be difficult for them to do in extremely purple districts.'
Wisconsin's gubernatorial election is also coming up in November 2026. Evers hasn't said whether he'll run for a third term, saying he'll likely decide after the next budget is done. Republican Josh Schoemann, who serves as the county executive of Washington, is the first candidate to announce his campaign.
'We're all eagerly awaiting that decision,' Neubauer said of Evers' choice whether to make a re-election bid. '[I] always look forward to working with the governor.'
Neubauer is one of seven legislative leaders joining the DLCC board alongside California Speaker of the Assembly Robert Rivas, Colorado Senate President James Coleman, Illinois Speaker Pro Tempore Kam Buckner, Michigan Senate Majority Leader Winnie Brinks, Oregon Speaker of the House Julie Fahey and Virginia Speaker of the House Don Scott.
New York Senate President Pro Tempore and Majority Leader Andrea Stewart-Cousins, who also serves as the DLCC chair, said in a statement that she is thrilled Neubauer is joining.
'There has never been a more important time to ensure we have battle-tested, experienced leaders at the helm of Democratic strategy in the states as Donald Trump upends Washington and our economy,' Stewart-Cousins said, adding that Neubauer 'embodies the diverse expertise needed to drive and elevate our strategy to build durable state power through the end of the decade.'
SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Axios
18 minutes ago
- Axios
Trump birthright citizenship order "unconstitutional," appeals court rules
President Trump's executive order that seeks to end birthright citizenship in the U.S. is "unconstitutional," a federal appeals court ruled Wednesday. Why it matters: The 2-1 ruling upholds a nationwide pause on enforcement of the policy, which is likely headed for the Supreme Court. It's the first time an appeals court has weighed in on the matter since the Supreme Court last month limited lower courts ' ability to freeze federal policies — specifically, Trump's effort to eliminate U.S. birthright citizenship. Driving the news: "We conclude that the Executive Order is invalid because it contradicts the plain language of the Fourteenth Amendment's grant of citizenship to 'all persons born in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof,'" per the San Francisco-based 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals' majority ruling. Context: Although the Supreme Court limited lower courts' powers, it left room for broader relief through the filing of class-action lawsuits. The Trump administration has since faced fresh challenges to the policy. For the record: Democratic attorneys general in Washington, Arizona, Illinois and Oregon brought the case against President Trump and agencies including the State Department, Justice Department and Department of Homeland Security. Administration officials named in the suit include Secretary of State Marco Rubio, Attorney General Pam Bondi and Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem.
Los Angeles Times
an hour ago
- Los Angeles Times
House resolution seeks to stop plan to shoot nearly half a million owls
Rep. Troy E. Nehls, a Republican from Texas, backed by 17 co-sponsors from both political parties, introduced a resolution Wednesday that could mark the end of a plan to protect spotted owls in the Pacific Northwest. The plan calls for shooting roughly 450,000 barred owls over 30 years in California, Oregon and Washington, because they are outcompeting spotted owls, pushing them out of their native territory. The spotted owls are in rapid decline. Northern spotted owls are listed as threatened under California and U.S. endangered species laws, and there may be as few as 3,000 left on federal lands. Federal wildlife officials have proposed endangered species protection for two populations of California spotted owls. In a statement, Nehls called the owl-culling plan, approved by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service under the Biden administration, 'a waste of Americans' hard-earned tax dollars.' He estimated it will cost $1.35 billion, based on a $4.5-million contract awarded to the Hoopa Valley Tribe in Northern California last year to hunt about 1,500 barred owls over four years. That is about $3,000 per owl. The bipartisan alliance says killing the owls is also inhumane and unworkable. Co-sponsors of the resolution consist of 11 Republicans and six Democrats, including three California representatives — Josh Harder (D-Tracy), Adam Gray (D-Merced) and Sydney Kamlager-Dove (D-Los Angeles), according to Nehls' office. The effort makes use of the Congressional Review Act, a tool sometimes employed by new presidential administrations to reverse rules issued by federal agencies in the final months of prior administrations. In late May, the Government Accountability Office concluded the plan was subject to the act. To stop the owl-culling plan, both chambers of Congress would need to pass a joint resolution by majority vote and President Trump would need to sign it. If successful, the resolution would preclude the Fish and Wildlife Service from pursuing a similar rule, unless explicitly authorized by Congress. The plan already faced setbacks. In May, federal officials canceled three related grants totaling more than $1.1 million, including one study that would have remove barred owls from over 192,000 acres in Mendocino and Sonoma counties. Another would have removed them from the Mendocino National Forest. Some scientists and conservationists say nixing the plan would mean the end for northern spotted owls. The raptor, dark brown with bright white spots, prefers old-growth forests. It became the central symbol of the so-called timber wars in the 1980s and '90s when environmentalists and logging interests fought over the fate of old-growth forests in the Pacific Northwest. Barred owls are slightly larger, more aggressive and less picky when it comes to habitat and food — giving them an advantage in competition for resources. 'If we don't move forward with barred owl removal, it will mean the extinction of the northern spotted owl, and it will likely mean the extinction of the California spotted owl as well,' Tom Wheeler, executive director of the Environmental Protection Information Center, told The Times last week. He pointed to a long-term field experiment that showed spotted owl populations stabilized in areas where barred owls were killed. Barred owls originated in eastern North America and expanded west along with European settlers who planted trees and suppressed fires, biologists believe. Government scientists see barred owls' presence in the Pacific Northwest as invasive, but some argue that it's natural range expansion. 'Protecting spotted owls is an imperative, but assaulting other native wildlife occupying the same forests is not ethical or a practical means of achieving that goal,' said Wayne Pacelle, president of Animal Wellness Action and Center for a Humane Economy, who has helped galvanize opposition to the culling plan.
CNBC
an hour ago
- CNBC
U.S. appeals court blocks Trump's order curtailing birthright citizenship
A federal appeals court ruled Wednesday that U.S. President Donald Trump's executive order curtailing automatic birthright citizenship is unconstitutional and blocked its enforcement nationwide. The 2-1 decision by the San Francisco-based 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals marked the first time an appeals court has assessed the legality of Trump's order since the U.S. Supreme Court in June curbed the power of lower court judges to enjoin that and other federal policies on a nationwide basis. The Supreme Court's June 27 ruling in litigation over Trump's birthright citizenship order limited the ability of judges to issue so-called universal injunctions and directed lower courts that had blocked the Republican president's policy nationally to reconsider the scope of their orders. But the ruling contained exceptions allowing courts to potentially still block it nationally again. That has already allowed a judge in New Hampshire to once again halt Trump's order from taking effect by issuing an injunction in a nationwide class action of children who would be denied citizenship under the policy. The 9th Circuit's majority in Wednesday's ruling said the Democratic-led states that had sued to block the policy - Washington, Arizona, Illinois and Oregon - likewise still were entitled to a nationwide injunction as a more narrow order would not provide them "complete relief." "The court agrees that the president cannot redefine what it means to be American with the stroke of a pen," Washington Attorney General Nick Brown said in a statement. The Trump administration could either ask a wider panel of 9th Circuit judges to hear the case or appeal directly to the Supreme Court, which is expected to have the final word in the litigation. The White House did not immediately respond to a request for comment. Trump signed the order on Jan. 20, his first day back in office, as part of his hardline approach toward immigration. Trump's order directed federal agencies to refuse to recognize the citizenship of U.S.-born children who do not have at least one parent who is an American citizen or lawful permanent resident, also known as a "green card" holder. It was swiftly challenged in court by Democratic attorneys general from 22 states and immigrant rights advocates who argued it violates the citizenship clause of the U.S. Constitution's 14th Amendment, long been understood to recognize that virtually anyone born in the United States is a citizen. The Constitution's 14th Amendment citizenship clause states that all "persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside." The first judge to block Trump's directive was Seattle-based U.S. District Judge John Coughenour, an appointee of Republican President Ronald Reagan, who called it "blatantly unconstitutional." The 9th Circuit's ruling upheld his decision. U.S. Circuit Judge Ronald Gould, writing for Wednesday's majority, said Coughenour rightly concluded that Trump's executive order violated the citizenship clause of the U.S. Constitution's 14th Amendment by denying citizenship to many persons born in the United States. Gould said a geographically limited injunction would harm the four states by forcing them to overhaul their government benefits programs to account for how people denied citizenship under Trump's order might move into them. "It is impossible to avoid this harm absent a uniform application of the citizenship clause throughout the United States," Gould wrote. His opinion was joined by U.S. Circuit Judge Michael Hawkins, a fellow appointee of Democratic President Bill Clinton. U.S. Circuit Judge Patrick Bumatay, a Trump appointee, dissented, saying in his view the Democratic-led states lacked standing to challenge Trump's order, as he warned of the risks of "judicial overreach."
