Schools out, and for many parents in
Wisconsin, a big concern looms.
Funding for a childcare subsidy is
about to run out.
And the political backstories behind
a tuition hike at the University of
Wisconsin and a $10 million
PFAS settlement.
This is Inside Wisconsin Politics.
I'm Sean Johnson, here with Anya
Venwaktanok, Zach Schultz,
and Rich Kramer in Eau Claire.
Hey, everyone.
So Anya, how do we
get to this point with this
childcare subsidy that is
about to run it out right at a
point in an election cycle
in a year where costs
are already this massive
factor on everybody's minds?
Yeah, I mean, this is like a story
that we've all been covering
incrementally for years and years.
And when I say incrementally, what I
mean is people ringing that alarm
bell that we were heading towards
this cliff. So go back in time
to COVID.
There were federal subsidies put in
place for the childcare industry
while everything else is collapsing.
This is one of these things.
And so the childcare
counts program was initiated, which
in Wisconsin looked like about $300
million going to childcare
providers for things like paying
staff more to retain them,
infrastructure needs, material
needs, and also some amount of
financial aid for families that were
struggling.
And so that was due to expire.
And so then for years, we were all
covering legislative fights over
what to do about this funding that
was going to go away.
Program finally sunset last
summer, and then a bridge program
took over. And so now it is the
bridge program that is due to
expire.
So again, we've sort of been pushing
off this cliff for years
and years and years.
And now the thing that advocates
and providers have been warning
about is about to happen.
This new report came out last week
saying that potentially up to a
quarter of childcare providers could
close their doors and almost
certainly more than that are going
to raise tuition after all
of these funds go away.
And Rich, this is an issue where the
Democratic governor and Republican
legislature definitely have not seen
eye to eye when it comes to
subsidizing childcare.
Refresh my memory a little bit on
how they did see eye to a
year ago and how they
got this money that is about to run
out now.
So it goes back to
this fight over one hundred seventy
one million dollars.
Governor Evers had access
to this money, which was interest
from those federal covid
era stimulus funds.
So the interest generated from
that is Wisconsin
revenue in a sense.
So there was this political battle.
Republicans said, well, that
should be under our control or we
should have a say in how you spend
that. The governor said, no, this
is federal.
And I remember watching a
hearing on a bill that would
have essentially given the
legislature a lot more say over
that money.
And even an attorney with the
nonpartisan legislative council
said, well, it's kind of an open
question.
You know, they didn't answer it
specifically.
But that was a
political battle.
And during that discussion on the
bill, one of the authors,
Republican Eric Wimberger.
You know, toyed with the idea or
he mused about impeaching
Governor Evers over this money.
So that bridge fund
tapped into that interest
from the COVID stimulus
funds.
And that's how they were
able to at least,
you know keep this
program going to some extent.
The providers were saying it's not
enough.
A Democrat said it's no enough.
But here we are and That's
what's been keeping the thing
afloat.
Tony Evers said, it's very important
to me that we keep this child care
subsidy going. And Republicans said,
well, it is very important to us
that you get this money out
of your bank account, Governor
Evers. And so they found that
agreement for a year.
But Zach, it feels like now the
money really is going to run
out.
Are providers going to close?
I'm Mike. And I'm going to talk to you a little bit about what's going on
in the U.S.
Going to happen?
Well you're going to hear a lot of
noise about it and that's for sure
and there's there's a reality on the
ground of what it means for
providers and for parents
specifically who have to figure out
where their kids are gonna go if
they can't afford this and still
need to go work but in
a political season like this this is
going to be a top-line messaging
especially for the Democrats running
for governor.
Republicans in the past in the
legislature and we assume Tom
Tiffany's kind of in this category
have looked at you know, the private
sector means of trying to fix this
childcare issue of like, oh, let's
lower regulations.
Let's find some discounts or some
savings elsewhere. But instead of
directly funding them, they've never
liked that welfare idea,
as Robin Voss would constantly call
it. And so the, we
don't see Republicans coming back to
the table. This wasn't part of the
grand bargain that we talked about
for a month straight.
So this is a dead issue politically.
There's no one coming back in
special session to find money to
this. They've all known this date is
here. The question is...
What will it mean going into the
fall? How much damage will we
see leading up to September?
And maybe because September means
schools back in session, it'll
be a little less of a hot button
issue, but there will still be
people talking about it and there
will be Democrats campaigning
on it, especially since they have a
forum coming up that's
invited to all the gubernatorial
candidates, but five of the
Democrats are going to appear to it
and it's being held by these child
care providers and some of the
groups that represent them.
Where they're just gonna try to keep
raising the profile of this heading
into the fall.
And I mean, it's kind of a
subjective question here, but like,
do you feel like this particular
cost will resonate with
people at a time when we're
paying so much for gas and
everything else?
Does child care kind of, I
guess, get people's attention when
they have all this noise?
If you have a child in your house
that you have to pay childcare for,
yes. I remember 15, 20 years ago,
long before this was an issue, I had
family friends that said
I would actually save money by
staying home and quitting my job and
not making my truck payment and
paying gas and insurance and taxes
and not having to pay child care.
That was a long time ago and it's
still the reality even more so.
I mean, more people than ever need
to have two incomes to fund even
a modest lifestyle in Wisconsin.
And if you have small children, that
means they need to go somewhere.
As more and more families have split
apart from the nuclear larger
umbrella of grandma or grandpa or
aunts or uncles are around, you're
relying on other people to raise
your kids.
That is just the reality that people
are in right now.
And if it's your reality,
it's one of the biggest realities
facing.
Anya, any sense that this might
affect specific races, whether it
be the race for governor, you name
it.
I mean, I think one of the
interesting things here is that
child care as like a need and as a
household expense really spans, it
spans the state, it's spans
political backgrounds.
Where that's not as much reflected
is is in the capital where you
have a little bit more of these
hardline positions especially within
the republican caucus in
the assembly there is a small but
significant enough number of
lawmakers who do believe in a more
traditional family structure who
don't want to be subsidizing
other people raising your children
and they are really trying to
kind of legislate around that and so
it's not just about those sort of
market solutions And so.
I think that at that level, at the
legislative level, we might really
see this issue come to the fore
because people who kind of
don't care about some of those more
cultural fights, they just want
a little bit more money and a little
more ease in their bank accounts.
Will those people be motivated by
not just this, but this in
combination with gas prices and
inflation?
And then also, there's at least
one district where one of these
child care providers turned advocate
is now running for a seat in
the legislature.
I don't know that this will be her
only issue, but this will be one of
her strongest issues, and that'll be
really interesting to watch how
resonant this is through the summer.
That'd be Kareen Hendrickson,
I believe, a Democratic candidate.
She's in a primary with Lisa White
and Representative Jenna Jacobson
against Howard Marklein, the
powerful co-chair of the
Legislature's Budget Committee.
One of the most hotly watched races.
Anyway.
And he has really been clear
that he does not support this.
This is not an issue where
there's kind of gray between
what Democrats support and what
Republicans support with this child
care subsidy.
There are stark differences.
And so if they want to have that
kind of debate out there, it would
be certainly a chance for for voters
to see a difference in the
way that, you know, these two
parties view this issue in
government.
That's why it was probably really
helpful to have Rich's background of
how we got to this point, because
some people may be confused to think
there was a bipartisan solution to
provide this funding.
From COVID on, it was all
federal money that Governor Evers
directed into this program when the
federal money ran out, with
Republicans fighting it every step
of the way, repeatedly passing bills
that said, we would like oversight
in how this federal money gets
spent, so you can't make that
decision unilaterally.
Governor Evers vetoed every one of
those bills.
And it was this compromise in the
last time was not a compromise of,
oh, we believe this should happen.
It was, how do we spend this other
part of money that's still sitting
here? So the COVID money is
gone. This is now on the state's
back or we will see the consequences
in households and businesses across
the state.
And you alluded to this earlier, but
I was looking back through public
statements from the leaders as this
big deal was negotiated the deal
that fizzled and I don't.
Think anybody was ever talking about
putting some money behind childcare
as much as the governor has said
it's a priority for him.
So that kind of gives you the sense
of the politics on that one.
Rich, we've got another
cost going up here for
some Wisconsin residents or out of
state residents who come here to go
to school, tuition going up
at the University of Wisconsin,
how much first of all,
and gives a sense
of like, you know, how this came
to be.
Well, so the tuition increase,
specifically for tuition, that the
Board of Regents has approved is
2%.
But there's another 3.5%
increase with regard to what are
called segregated fees.
You name it, fees for
facilities, et cetera, et cetera.
So we're talking
2%, which is below the
rate of inflation, of course.
But the argument over
tuition, And I'm not sure if it
ever... Had a beginning or an end,
but this specifically
goes back to 2013 when
there was a tuition freeze after
Republicans found out and
loudly complained for years and
years that the University of
Wisconsin system had something
like five to $600
million in what are called
fund balances, tuition fund
balances essentially reserves.
And they had those reserves at a
time.
When tuition had increased
by five and a half percent year
after year after a year.
So that created a lot of
heartburn among Republicans
and that in 2013,
there was the tuition freeze.
Not long after that,
Republicans, when they had
both houses of the
legislature and
Governor Walker in the governor's
mansion, they cut $250
million from the UW budget,
essentially saying, you've
got those reserves, spend them down.
So the universities had these
directions to spend down the
reserves, and they did.
Over the years, the reserves went
down by 60%.
Some universities wound
up in the red and
had to do some
pretty stark
things to get
their budgets under control.
We saw layoffs, we saw a
lot of buyouts.
I think of Oshkosh.
Marathon, I mean excuse me,
Stevens Point, a number of
universities did that so
The tuition freeze was lifted
officially in 2021.
The university system,
the Board of Regents tread carefully
at first. They didn't immediately
ask for a tuition increase.
But since then, we've seen four
consecutive tuition
increases from the Board Of Regents.
And they haven't been the
five and a half percent.
They've generally been
close to or below CPI,
which is pretty high.
But Republicans don't like it.
And even when they lifted the
tuition freeze in 2021, some
Republican lawmakers said,
be careful.
If you get out of
hand with this, we will freeze it
again.
So what we're seeing now is
some Republicans, Tom Tiffany
running for governor,
saying we need another tuition
freeze.
That freeze lasted for eight years.
Universities said it was harming
quality of education.
But on the other hand, Republicans
said, this is about
access. This is about affordability.
So the tuition increases
back to back to back is
just not good for Wisconsin
families.
But also the university says our
tuition rates are lower than other
states. So it's a really complex
issue.
It's just been years and years since
they've been complaining and arguing
over this.
So certainly not.
Somebody might be forgiven to look
at that increase 2% and say,
hey, what's the big deal?
But this is something that goes
back, boy,
16 years or 13 years at this point
now that they've been fighting over
this particular round of tuition.
So I think it's it's an open
question on this issue, this issue
like any other.
Is this going to be something that
resonates in the campaign for
governor? Anya, how about you go
first?
I mean, in some ways, I think that
the arguments that we're seeing from
Democrats and Republicans mirrors
the property tax and K-12
funding thing, right, which is that
you have these kind of levers, and
as you pull one, another one goes
up. And so in this case, Democrats
are saying, well, the state has been
defunding the UW system.
What do you expect? Of course,
tuition is going to have to go up.
But one of those, you know, they're
sort of in balance with one another.
I think another point of tension
that's going to be really
interesting is the way that this
affects Madison and in some
ways Milwaukee compared to all the
other schools because Madison
especially has this international
cache, right, and can bring in
students from out of state and from
across the world who will pay full
freight and that offset some of
those costs in a way that Stevens
Point, Oshkosh are much more kind
of aimed at local Wisconsin kids.
You have Tom Tiffany now coming out
and saying he wants to see fewer
international students.
He wants to put the W back in the
UW.
What will that do for this kind of
other revenue source that
UW-Madison has and how that feeds
into the system?
Lots to play with and to what extent
that motivates voters who, again,
maybe they face the daycare charges,
now they're facing increased
tuition.
On the other end, it's expensive to
raise a kid in Wisconsin.
It could really be, whether or not
it resonates, could just be a matter
of whether or not Tom Piffty decides
to put some resources behind
it and put it in front of people
and make it his message or
focus on other stuff.
There's a lot out there.
And one of the things that's
interesting is a report just came
out from the Center for
Report on the Wisconsin Economy,
which is CRO, which is this
conservative think tank that was
created by Walker and his
administration at the UW
with the goal of having a little
more conservative-friendly economics
ideas being floated out there as
from the UW, giving it that stamp
of authenticity.
And they came out and said,
actually, UW's tuition is too low.
It's below its peer institutions.
It's actually freezing.
It is subsidizing.
This private enterprise of kids
that go to college and get this
degree and then are very successful
making their college tuition
cheaper subsidizes them at the
expense of everyone else who's
impacted by these costs.
So it's interesting even some of the
conservative groups out there aren't
supporting a freeze or keeping it
this low.
Zach, I wanna turn to another issue
with a long political backstory.
There was this settlement this week
or last week reached with
Tyco, a PFAS manufacturer
for $10 million with the state.
This is a big deal.
Tell us why and then tell us
kind of the politics that led to
this.
Well, these lawsuits have been out
there about PFAS contamination
throughout, Tyco makes
firefighting foam and equipment, and
so they've contaminated the ground
around there as we've learned more
about what PFAS does and
forever chemical.
But the history of this is
fascinating because we talk a lot
about elections having consequences.
This decision is a consequence of
Supreme Court elections.
So you have to go back and look at
that slow transition that
occurred from Democrats and liberals
taking over the court.
There were two major decisions that
they issued in 2025 that allowed
this to happen.
The first is that with the DOJ
lawsuit they said you do
not actually have to create a new
rule for each version of PFAS
chemical or contamination that's out
there in order to put into place
these kind of fines or sue people
over the Wisconsin Spills Act about
any things that spilled into our
ground that can harm our waterways.
So that was a big win that said you
don't have to Go back each time.
But then another separate
lawsuit, part of the Evers
versus Markline lawsuit, said,
well, the state doesn't actually
have to go and worry about the
Joint Committee for the Review of
Administrative Rules to promulgate
new rules for what the standards for
PFAS are.
And so when that happened, the Ebers
administration was able to push
through new standards on PFAS
contamination that matched stricter
federal standards.
Now the DOJ doesn't have to worry
about getting sign-off from the
Republicans for meddling these
lawsuits. And they can actually
prosecute this spills act for anyone
that's out there that's contaminated
the ground, which allows settlements
like this to happen and creating
money to help people that have been
impacted by this pollution.
So you're not gonna see any.
In the settlement language,
obviously, but that's the legal
environment that everybody is
operating in now under this liberal
majority on the court, which we know
is going to last until at least
2030. Yeah, and it's not
going to change anytime soon.
And on other issues, perhaps
as well in subtle ways,
but you got it. The court matters.
That's why we watch the court.
The court always matters.
That is very true.
That's all the time we have for
today. Thanks for joining us.
This has been Inside Wisconsin
Politics.
Be sure to follow us on
PBSWisconsin.org, WPR.org
YouTube, or wherever you get
your podcasts.
How'd you feel about two minutes for
that instead of three?
No, it's fine.
More than enough for them to pull
out for that. I should have just
pulled over to it.
No, that's fine But then you
wouldn't have gotten to that code
thing.
Well, I wasn't.