WisconsinEye remains imperiled

News analysis

Usually during Sunshine Week, journalists, lawmakers, and open-government advocates tally the year’s victories and defeats in the ongoing struggle to keep government accessible to the public.

The scorecard is often mixed but survivable. Some years produce great strides in transparency, while others are more of one-step-forward, two-step-backwards affairs.

This year, the mood is decidedly darker.

That’s because one of the largest windows into Wisconsin government was closed briefly last December, and, despite temporary fixes, its long-term survival remains uncertain. The organization is WisconsinEye, the nonpartisan public affairs network that for nearly two decades has provided C-SPAN-style coverage of the inner workings of Wisconsin government. 

Two competing proposals to keep coverage on the air — an Assembly-passed version and a Senate passed version — were not reconciled this week, with the Assembly having already adjourned in February and the Senate adjourning on Tuesday, March 17, without taking any new action.

Without additional state funding, WisconsinEye warned this past week, it might not it through the month of March.

Founded in 2007, WisconsinEye enables citizens to watch the political process unfold without commentary, narration, or editorial spin. The network broadcasts unfiltered legislative floor sessions, committee hearings, gubernatorial press conferences, state Supreme Court oral arguments, policy forums, and candidate debates.

Over time, it has compiled one of the most comprehensive digital archives of Wisconsin political life.

According to the organization, WisconsinEye now maintains more than 18,000 hours of recorded government proceedings and policy programming. In just the last two-and-a-half years alone, the network says it has covered 2,648 state capitol and public policy events, produced 218 studio programs, broadcast 401 campaign-related events, generated 2.4 million website page views, and reached more than 320,000 unique visitors.

While doing all this, the network’s neutral approach has drawn praise from across Wisconsin’s ideological spectrum.

“WisconsinEye has jealously guarded its mission during 17-plus years of providing transparency to the complexities of government and the actions of elected officials,” the editorial board of the progressive Cap Times wrote in recent support for funding the network.

Rick Esenberg, president of the conservative Wisconsin Institute for Law & Liberty, echoed that sentiment.

“For the people to hold their representatives accountable, access and information is critical,” Esenberg said. “WisconsinEye broadcasts and digital archive serve that end. Quite simply, WisconsinEye opens the doors of state government to citizens in all corners of the state.” 

WisconsinEye president and CEO Jon Henkes has underscored that commitment to neutrality.

“WisconsinEye is not just a media outlet, it’s a movement to guard the fundamental right of every Wisconsinite to see, hear, and evaluate the actions of elected officials,” Henkes said late last year. “A healthy democracy demands that truth is accessible to all, our voices are heard, and our leaders are accountable.”

Henkes said WisconsinEye is neither partisan nor political. 

“It is an investment in an even playing field, unlike campaign donations that can sway policy or perception, [and] helps to balance the scales, ensuring that every citizen, regardless of wealth or influence, has direct access to government proceedings,” he said.

Necessary but not sufficient

Despite its bipartisan appeal,  the organization found itself in a financial crisis last year. On December 15, 2025, WisconsinEye went dark after running out of operating funds.

The shutdown did not catch lawmakers by surprise. In a November letter to lawmakers, Henkes had warned that the nonprofit could not sustain operations without immediate financial assistance.

“In consideration of the current funding shortfall, on December 15, 2025, WisconsinEye will go dark — off the air — with no live or program content being produced or distributed,” he wrote. 

The archive of recorded government proceedings also disappeared from public access.

In letters to lawmakers and public appeals, WisconsinEye leadership repeatedly emphasized that the organization’s financial problems did not stem from runaway spending.

“Our annual operating budget is about $1 million and has not increased in four years,” Henkes wrote to legislators, stressing how lean the operation was. “WisconsinEye is a small staff — five working on programming and production; one responsible for fundraising and administration. Our performance speaks volumes of our commitment to mission.”

Neither did the shutdown occur because of political interference or government censorship. Instead, it was the result of a financial model that had gradually collapsed. For most of its history, WisconsinEye relied heavily on private donations from foundations, corporations, and individuals, but those sources increasingly dried up in the years following the Covid-19 pandemic, Henkes said.

“Over time, and more specially since Covid, traditional funding sources and generous support from individuals has literally disappeared as the competition for funding from these sources has dried up WisconsinEye’s support,” he wrote in a letter to lawmakers. 

Over the latter half of 2025, Henkes said WisconsinEye made more than 40 serious solicitations, brought on board multiple fundraising consultants, and undertaken a sustained effort to seek philanthropic commitments. 

“None have produced any revenue,” he wrote. 

A structural funding problem

Ironically, WisconsinEye’s financial crisis is occurring at the same time the state budget technically contains the largest potential funding source the organization has ever received. The 2025-27 state budget included a provision allowing WisconsinEye to receive up to $10 million in state matching funds for a permanent endowment.

Under the law, however, those funds could be accessed only if the organization first raised an equal amount in private donations, and even then, the money could not be used to cover operating expenses. Instead, it had to be placed in an endowment, with only investment earnings available for future spending. 

That created what Henkes described as a financial paradox: Essentially, he said, WisconsinEye had to raise money for operations to survive month to month while simultaneously asking donors for endowment-level gifts that would be untouchable under state rules.

“We could raise a half-million dollars, and the state would match that,” he told the Wisconsin Examiner. “But those dollars, by law, then would have to go into an endowment account — could not be spent for operating current budget needs, and could only be used as the income off of that investment is generated. Really, in a sense, we are competing against ourselves.” 

At the same time, the nonprofit fundraising environment had grown increasingly difficult, with Henkes saying donors were often reluctant to fund organizations that did not address immediate human needs. Meanwhile, as Henkes told the Wisconsin Examiner, political fundraising in Wisconsin had exploded, with more than $200 million raised and spent on campaigns in the recent election cycle.

“Much of the spending bought TV and social media advertising that was negative, exaggerated, misleading, and divisive,” the organization noted in its appeal for funding. “For a small fraction of that amount — just $1 million — the impact on truth-in-politics would be substantial.”

Where things stand

The Legislature did eventually step in.

Earlier this year, lawmakers approved approximately $50,000 in emergency funding, allowing WisconsinEye to restore operations temporarily beginning in February.

Once again, the results have been impressive. During that short window, the network covered 102 government events, 151 hours of programming, seven Assembly floor sessions, two Senate floor sessions, 50 committee meetings, and three state Supreme Court arguments.

But the funding only covered about half of WisconsinEye’s monthly operating expenses, leaving the organization again facing uncertainty. Without a permanent solution, WisconsinEye officials warned again that maintaining staff and continuing coverage might become impossible.

“Without it, March and April coverage is not imminent,” Henkes wrote in a March 9 memo to Gov. Tony Evers and legislative leaders. “It is likely that WisconsinEye will not be able to maintain its talented staff with a commitment to payroll.”

The funding crisis has triggered a political standoff inside the Republican chambers.

The GOP quickly dismissed a Democratic call to create a state-owned and operated public affairs network, creating a new bureaucracy as official state media, but both chambers of the Legislature committed to restoring statewide coverage of government proceedings.

Republicans in the Assembly and Senate, however, disagreed sharply on how to accomplish it. Assembly leaders, with Democratic support, have proposed establishing a nearly $10 million state trust fund to support WisconsinEye, similar to the endowment in the current state budget but without the matching endowment requirement. Under the proposal, investment earnings from the fund would help finance the network’s annual operating budget of slightly less than $1 million.

Assembly leaders framed the trust-fund proposal as a way to preserve the existing model while ensuring accountability. Under the legislation, WisconsinEye would be required to provide free and continuous public access to live broadcasts and its digital archives and submit annual financial reports to the Legislature.

“[The bill] directs the State of Wisconsin Investment Board to invest the current WisconsinEye Endowment Fund, $9.75 million, and allow the network to receive a grant each year that does not exceed the interest accrued by the fund that year,” state Rep. and minority leader Greta Neubauer (D-Racine) testified at a public hearing. “I want to be clear that this allows the state to retain the original appropriation while still providing essential funding for their work.”

The proposal would require WisconsinEye to focus coverage primarily on official state government proceedings and add board members appointed by legislative leaders. Neubauer said those requirements would strengthen transparency while preserving the network’s independence, and it would still require WisconsinEye to raise substantial private donations.

“I also want to be clear WisconsinEye will still have to put in the work and raise the remainder of their operating budget every year,” she testified. “If we assume a rate of return between 4-7 percent on the endowment, WisEye will still have to raise hundreds of thousands of dollars every year to be able to maintain a budget of about $950,000, which they have communicated is necessary to operate at their current levels and provide the services which they will be contractually obligated to.”

The measure passed the Assembly on a unanimous 96-0 vote, an unusually bipartisan show of support.

However, the Senate has taken a different approach.

Rather than guaranteeing WisconsinEye continued funding, Senate Republicans have proposed issuing a competitive request for proposals (RFP) to identify organizations capable of operating a statewide public affairs network.

Under the Senate plan, the state would provide about $585,630 in temporary funding while soliciting bids from potential providers. In effect, WisconsinEye would have to compete with other organizations.

Supporters say the state should not permanently fund a single nonprofit without evaluating alternatives. They also argue that the bidding process would ensure stronger financial oversight and accountability.

“For many years, the state has relied on a single public affairs network model without a competitive procurement process,” state Sen. Julian Bradley (R-New Berlin), the bill’s author, testified at a public hearing. “While that model has provided coverage, the lack of competition and clear financial transparency has made it difficult to consistently evaluate performance, cost, and quality. As technology evolves and expectations for public access grow, it is necessary to modernize how Wisconsin provides live coverage and archives government proceedings.”

This legislation directs the Department of Administration to issue a request for proposals (RFP) to solicit bids for the operation of a statewide public affairs network. Under the bill, the selected network would be required to provide unedited, gavel-to-gavel video and audio coverage of state government proceedings, including legislative floor sessions, committee hearings, executive agency meetings, and court proceedings. 

The network would be prohibited from charging fees to view Assembly and Senate floor sessions and meetings of the Joint Committee on Finance. The contract would also prohibit the use of content for campaign or political purposes.

With both chambers now adjourned, neither chamber acted on the other’s proposal. In its March 9 memo, WisconsinEye called for either one or both solutions.

“We clearly state the two necessary outcomes of the Legislature’s involvement: One: achieve immediate bipartisan funding (as in February) for March and continuing monthly to the point at which: (a) the Senate-proposed RFP process has concluded, or (b) earnings from the Assembly-proposed state investment account produce funding support. Two:  Passage of either the Senate or Assembly bill, or better, a negotiated hybrid, before the legislative calendar concludes for the year.”

Recording restrictions spark controversy

The potential demise of WisconsinEye or a similar network has alarmed transparency advocates, who fear what the legislature might do behind closed doors with the cameras off.

For example, with WisconsinEye sidelined back in December, Republican legislative leaders began enforcing an obscure internal rule that bars members of the general public — including lawmakers — from recording legislative proceedings unless they were credentialed members of the media or otherwise authorized.

Under existing rules, visitors to Assembly meetings cannot use recording devices and Senate rules allow only accredited media or authorized staff to record legislative proceedings without special permission. The rules had rarely been enforced while WisconsinEye provided official coverage.

But once the network went dark, the restrictions suddenly mattered. In January, Senate officials issued a memo reminding lawmakers of the rule.

“No persons other than members of the chief clerk’s staff, members of the staff of the sergeant at arms, members of a senator’s staff, and accredited correspondents of the news media may engage in any audio or video recording of the proceedings of the senate or any committee without permission of the committee on senate organization,” the memo stated, quoting the rule.

Members of the public are generally prohibited from recording committee proceedings unless they are credentialed press or have received specific authorization by the committee on senate organization, the memo emphasized.

“The application and enforcement of this rule during a committee meeting is the responsibility of the chairperson of the committee, who may use some discretion on what standard to use to determine who is to be considered accredited correspondents,” the memo states. “They may choose to use the standard laid out in Senate Policy for access to the Capitol Press Room, and other restricted press areas, which is the requirement of a valid, permanent, or temporary registration card issued by the Senate, often referred to as a legislative press credential.”

The memo also pointed to Wisconsin statutes that state that no provision of the state’s open meetings law applies to legislative meetings if it conflicts with Senate or Assembly rules, a statutory carve-out that effectively places internal legislative rules above statutory transparency requirements.

Democratic lawmakers criticized the policy. Rep. Clinton Anderson (D-Beloit) said he had been allowed to livestream one hearing but was later told the practice would no longer be allowed.

“If that’s the direction Republican leadership is heading, it represents a clear move to restrict public access,” Anderson said.

Republican leaders rejected that characterization. Luke Wolff, a spokesperson for Assembly speaker Robin Vos, said the memo simply reaffirmed long-standing rules.

“With WisconsinEye gone, and more instances of videotaping in committee hearings, we felt it was important to reaffirm the long-established rules,” Wolff said.

Ultimately, the WisconsinEye controversy is reviving a broader criticism of the Wisconsin legislature, and reinforcing its image as a body resistant to openness. Unlike most state and local government bodies, the legislature operates under significant exemptions from open-government laws.

For example, lawmakers have exempted themselves from the state’s public records retention statute, which generally requires government records to be preserved for at least seven years. Legislative offices may delete records unless an open records request has already been filed.

Critics say the exemption is hypocritical and blocks public input on important legislation.

That issue exploded into public view in 2015, when lawmakers attempted to repeal most of the state’s open records law in a late-night budget maneuver. The proposal was withdrawn within 48 hours after intense public backlash. The WisconsinEye funding dispute has now reopened many of those same debates.

For now, the future of WisconsinEye remains uncertain. The future of transparency in general in state government is even more uncertain. 

Viewed narrowly, the WisconsinEye fight involves less than $1 million a year in funding, but raises a fundamental question about how citizens see their government. In its public appeal to lawmakers and donors, WisconsinEye has tried to frame the issue in broader democratic terms.

“Wisconsinites deserve to see their government in action — unfiltered, unbiased, and accessible,”  Henkes said last October. “Open government is more than an ideal; it’s a necessity. We need your support. It will ensure that this vital, reliable, and trusted resource remains accessible and independent.”

Richard Moore is the author of “Dark State” and may be reached at richardd3d.substack.com.