As Congress considers cuts to Medicaid, a new report showed one in three children living in rural areas of Wisconsin are insured by the health insurance program.

The nationwide study from Georgetown University's Center for Children and Families used census data to compare how many people living in rural areas are insured by Medicaid.

William Park Sutherland, senior policy analyst for the advocacy group Kids Forward, explained northern Wisconsin counties above Highway 29 have higher-than-average rates of children enrolled.

"I think we really are leveraging our future by targeting a program," Sutherland cautioned. "One of its most important roles is protecting the health of kids in small towns and rural areas and large cities."

He added potential cuts will make it harder for health care providers, hospitals and health systems to continue to provide care, especially in rural communities where significantly higher barriers to care already exist.

About 1.5 million Wisconsinites are insured through BadgerCare, the state Medicaid program. It makes up about 26% of the state budget providing health care coverage for low-income residents from birth to age 64.

"There's just no way to cut out this much of the program and not hurt children," Sutherland asserted. "And not hurt seniors and not hurt people with disabilities who depend on Medicaid, along with parents and caregivers."

He noted cuts would also risk increasing the number of uninsured people, up the amount of medical debt and financial insecurity in the state and potentially deter people from seeking care.

Wisconsin is one of 10 states to not expand Medicaid under the Affordable Care Act. A Wisconsin Policy Forum study shows the state could save $1.7 billion over the next two years if it did.


get more stories like this via email

Minnesota is little less than a year away from launching its paid-leave law, but state lawmakers are debating whether to delay the start until 2027.

Paid leave was considered one of the crowning achievements of the 2023 legislative session, when Democrats controlled both chambers. But the GOP now has a slight edge in the House, so the policy is getting a second look.

Employers will be required to provide up to 20 weeks of paid time off each year to a worker dealing with a health issue, or caring for a loved one. During committee debate Thursday, Minnesota AFL-CIO president Bernie Burnham argued against pushing things back.

"Working Minnesotans are ready for the peace of mind that comes from knowing we will have the freedom to care for ourselves, and the people we love, without sacrificing a paycheck," he said.

Supporters of the later start date have said there's still uncertainty about the impact on businesses, especially smaller companies, as they prepare to comply. Others testified there aren't enough safeguards in place yet for the state to smoothly roll out the program. But Burnham said the effort has been vetted, and any kinks can be sorted out after the currently scheduled launch of January 2026.

Some voices in the education field testified in support of the bill calling for a one-year delay. Kim Lewis, associate director of government relations for the Minnesota School Boards Association, said the timing isn't good for school districts around the state.

"A significant number of the 331 districts are currently making staffing cuts to balance budgets," she said. "No one wants to do that, but the increased costs and the increased needs are a reality. Our biggest issue and question is, how do we pay for the paid leave benefit?"

But the Minnesota Association of Professional Employees, which represents more than 18-thousand state workers, has said not only would this halt a critical benefit they've fought for over the past decade, but also result in additional administrative costs for the state.

Minnesota set aside funds to help cover the program's launch. After that, benefits would be funded by payroll taxes shared by employers and workers.

A lawsuit has been filed against the Trump administration over its budget-cutting plans targeting medical research led by colleges and universities.

Their allies warn of negative consequences for curing diseases, as well as local economies. The suit was brought by Minnesota and 21 other states after the National Institutes of Health said it would follow through on orders to cut $4 billion through a grant funding formula for indirect expenses.

North Dakota is not part of the legal case, but an analysis said the state could lose more than $3 million in research funds.

Ellie Dehoney, senior vice president of policy and advocacy for the group Research!America, said no matter the state, the pain will be quickly felt.

"The suddenness of it is one of the ways that you degrade your research capacity," Dehoney pointed out.

Beyond the effects on finding cures for diseases such as Alzheimer's, Dehoney warned of job losses at lab equipment makers and other supporting businesses. Trump advisers suggest too much grant money goes to overhead costs but advocates countered the argument misrepresents the facts. They said even indirect funds keep the lights on at university labs and support other key infrastructure such as data storage. A federal judge on Monday temporarily halted the cuts as the case proceeds.

Dehoney said medical research at the academic level needs to play out first because the private sector does not have the resources or patience to play the long game in advancing treatments. She also warned slowing scientific progress could keep more people dealing with chronic health issues from improving their quality of life and participating in the workforce.

"I know a person who is on Social Security disability," Dehoney observed. "She went on a biologic (drug), she has rheumatoid arthritis, and now she's working full-time."

Dehoney argued abruptly stalling important research work also benefits global competitors such as China. She feels there is room for groups like hers to work with the Trump administration on finding efficiencies but only if they actually boost research capacity, not reduce it.


get more stories like this via email

Gov. Josh Shapiro's proposed state budget includes a significant increase for public education to address Pennsylvania's school funding issues and educator shortage.

The proposed budget would boost funding for basic and special education and the state's student-teacher stipend program.

Aaron Chapin, president of the Pennsylvania State Education Association, is praising the commitment to education, and sees the $1 billion proposal as a vital investment in public schools.

"More than $600 million of that is going right to our public schools when it comes to providing adequacy, as well as tax equity payments to qualifying school districts for the Ready to Learn Grant," Chapin outlined.

Chapin noted an additional $75 million will be distributed to all school districts through the basic education funding formula, which he called "a big step forward." The state House and Senate will need to vote on the budget by June.

The proposed budget includes a $20 million boost for the Student Teacher Support Program, which provides a $10,000 stipend to eligible aspiring educators.

Kaylin Shewmake, a senior at Penn State University, second grade student teacher and Central Region president of Student Pennsylvania State Education Association, said the stipend has helped with her tuition, rent, groceries and other living expenses.

"It honestly was a huge relief when I saw I'd gotten the stipend," Shewmake recounted. "Because if not, I would have had to work a part-time job on top of student teaching, which would have been really difficult for me, because I am really involved outside of student teaching with my extracurriculars. With this extra money, I didn't have to take out any loans."

Chapin noted it is the first year the stipend is available and with the governor recommending doubling the funding, $40 million would support student teachers with these stipends.

"Gov. Shapiro, with legislators, designated $20 million this year -- didn't pay for everybody, it only paid for just over 2,000," Chapin pointed out. "Another $20 million is going to cover another 2,000. We're getting very close to making sure that every Pennsylvania college student that is student teaching will receive a stipend."

The proposed budget would also deliver $111 million for student mental health and school safety grants.