Progressive Thinking

Senator Smith writes about the innovative approach some county health departments are taking to address the opioid overdoes epidemic by offering free vending machines with Narcan, and other items like gunlocks and fentanyl test strips.

MADISON - Fentanyl is an extremely powerful synthetic opioid, which is 50 times more powerful than heroin, and 100 times stronger than morphine. It is typically used to treat severe pain following major surgeries with strict oversight from nursing staff and doctors who understand how life threatening even a small amount can be. It only takes a two-milligram dose (equal in size to a few grains of salt) to cause an overdose of an average sized adult. Now that fentanyl is getting laced with other street drugs, people young and old are dying at an alarming rate by mistake. Even though the risks of accidental overdoses are real, the good news is that these deaths are preventable.

More and more, awareness is increasing about how effective overdose reversal drugs like Narcan are at saving lives and give people struggling with drug addiction another chance at recovery. The introduction of harm reduction kiosks in Eau Claire and Dunn Counties reflects an evolving, pragmatic approach to this public health nightmare. These kiosk vending machines provide free access to items like naloxone (aka Narcan), which can quickly reverse an opioid overdose. Other items at these vending machines include fentanyl test strips people can use to see if the something they are about to take has been laced with the powerful drug.

Since making a free vending machine available to the public last June at the Eau Claire County Jail lobby, they have dispensed a total of 2,188 doses of Narcan and 3,090 fentanyl test strips.

Dunn County installed their vending machine in July at the Health Department building and they go even further by offering additional items like gunlocks, Deterra bags to neutralize and dispose of drugs, menstruation products, condoms and even socks.

Earlier this summer, Eau Claire, Chippewa and Dunn County each released a community health report regarding the biggest issues facing each community. While the three main concerns facing all three counties were alcohol misuse, accessible childcare and access to health care, the report also noted substance abuse as a major issue.

Between 2018 and 2022, 82 people died due to drug overdoses in Eau Claire County and 62 of those deaths (76%) were opioid-related. During the same timeframe, more than 488 suspected nonfatal opioid overdoses occurred in Eau Claire County.

In 2021, the Wisconsin Department of Health Services found that fentanyl caused 91% of opioid deaths statewide. Provisional data from DHS shows there were 1,358 opioid overdose or poisoning deaths in 2022, a slight decrease from 2021, but it was still a 62% increase from five years ago.

I want to applaud the work of our county health departments for coming up with innovative and accessible solutions like these harm reduction kiosks. They may not be the silver bullet for solving incredibly complicated issues, but they provide a bridge to treatment and recovery services while reducing the burden on emergency services by helping individuals avoid fatal overdoses.

It’s clear these vending machines are practical and effective because they are anonymous and free for anyone to use. My plea for families is to have these lifesaving products in your home, in your car or any place you could find someone who might need them. People who need these items may not use the kiosks, but citizens having these items nearby might just be the way to save a friend or family member who struggles with addiction. You might just save someone’s life, or your own, one day.

Senator Smith represents District 31 in the Wisconsin State Senate. The 31st Senate District includes all of Buffalo, Pepin and Trempealeau counties and portions of Pierce, Dunn, Eau Claire, Jackson and St. Croix counties.

Senator Smith writes about the public health risks of vaping and ways our state government needs to do more on this issue, including banning flavored e-cigarettes.

EAU CLAIRE, WI - Vaping has rapidly emerged as a significant public health crisis, especially among young people. Initially marketed as a safer alternative to traditional smoking, vaping is now known to pose serious health risks. As evidence of these dangers mounts, the Wisconsin state government has a responsibility to take more meaningful actions to protect public health.

Public Health Risks

In 2018, the National Academies of Science, Engineering, and Medicine reported that the substances in e-cigarettes, like propylene glycol and vegetable glycerin, were toxic to users, and led to youths choosing to start smoking traditional tobacco.  During a severe outbreak in 2019, the American Medical Association linked more than 2,000 lung illnesses and over 40 deaths to e-cigarette usage.

Equally troubling are the dangers posed to non-users. Secondhand emissions from e-cigarettes, according to the U.S. Surgeon General, contain harmful substances like nicotine, diacetyl (linked to serious lung diseases), benzene (a carcinogen) and heavy metals like lead. These emissions, inhaled by anyone in the vicinity of the vaper, create a public health risk—particularly for children, pregnant women and those with preexisting respiratory conditions.

Impact on Youth

The rise in vaping among young people is particularly alarming. The same National Academies’ report found that youth who use e-cigarettes are at higher risk for respiratory issues like coughing, wheezing and asthma attacks. Nicotine is highly addictive and early exposure to nicotine can also increase the likelihood of addiction to traditional cigarettes or other harmful substances.

Flavored e-cigarettes also play a major role in attracting teens as the fruity, mint and candy taste masks the harshness of nicotine, making it easier to start vaping. The 2022 Wisconsin Tobacco Youth Survey found that 92 percent of Wisconsin high schoolers say they would not use unflavored tobacco products. While some states have implemented flavor restrictions, Wisconsin has yet to take significant action on this front.

Wisconsin’s Legislative Response

While other states have moved to limit vaping, Wisconsin's response has been slower. As of 2024, 19 states (and the District of Columbia) have laws banning e-cigarette use in indoor public spaces like restaurants, bars and workplaces. Wisconsin currently has no statewide restrictions on indoor vaping to protect non-users from secondhand emissions.

In Wisconsin, just last year, Senate Bill 268 was passed into law to require retailers who sell electronic vaping devices to obtain a cigarette and tobacco products retailer license. Several amendments to strengthen the bill failed, but it thankfully passed into law as Wisconsin Act 73 on December 7, 2023.

This law will help control who gets to sell vaping products, and it ensures that sellers are adhering to age restrictions, reducing the likelihood that minors can easily purchase vaping products. This is a good first step toward prevention, but more can be done to protect our public health.

Wisconsin should do more for prevention efforts. We should follow the lead of states like Minnesota and enact excise taxes on vaping products to discourage use, particularly among young people. Other measures should include removing flavored e-cigarettes from the market and banning the sale of all vaping products that are not approved by the FDA.

The health risks of vaping are undeniable, and the impact on Wisconsin’s youth is particularly troubling, and it’s clear that vaping is not the “safe” alternative it was once thought to be.

The Wisconsin state legislature must act swiftly to implement stricter regulations on sales, taxes and public vaping to protect our youth and the wider public. Addressing this issue now is crucial to protecting our kids and keeping them healthy.

Senator Smith represents District 31 in the Wisconsin State Senate. The 31st Senate District includes all of Buffalo, Pepin and Trempealeau counties and portions of Pierce, Dunn, Eau Claire, Jackson and St. Croix counties.

Deep-seated differences in worldview are part of why America is so divided, and Donald Trump tapped into these divisions in a way that made them even more extreme.

LAKE GENEVA, WI - The United States is more politically divided than ever, and Donald Trump’s presidency has played a significant role in deepening this rift. But it’s important to remember that this division has roots that go far beyond Trump himself. It’s not just that conservatives and liberals have different opinions on policies—it’s that they perceive the world fundamentally differently. These psychological and personality differences are at the heart of why our country feels so divided, and Trump’s leadership capitalized on and amplified those divisions.

Psychological studies have shown that liberals and conservatives aren’t just disagreeing about political issues; they process the world differently. For example, a study led by psychologist Michael Dodd and political scientist John Hibbing of the University of Nebraska-Lincoln found that conservatives’ eyes linger longer on repellent images like car wrecks or excrement, which suggests that conservatives may be more sensitive to potential threats. This heightened sensitivity might explain why many conservative policies focus on security, law and order, and a cautious approach to change. Conservatives tend to prioritize stability and protecting against perceived dangers, whether that’s through strong borders, a powerful military, or individual gun rights.

On the other hand, liberals tend to be more focused on ideals of fairness, equality, and openness to new ideas. They are more likely to see the world as a place that can and should be improved through social reform, government intervention, and regulation. This explains why liberals tend to advocate for progressive policies around healthcare, climate change, and gun control—areas where they see potential to create a more just and equitable society. In their view, government should play a strong role in addressing inequality and ensuring that all citizens have access to the same opportunities.

These deep-seated differences in worldview are part of why America is so divided, and Donald Trump tapped into these divisions in a way that made them even more extreme. His rhetoric was intentionally divisive, presenting the world in stark, black-and-white terms. He framed himself as the defender of conservative values, often painting liberals as dangerous enemies of the country. Trump’s language reflected the conservative focus on threat and danger—he spoke about immigrants as criminals, portrayed the media as the "enemy of the people," and called Democratic leaders unpatriotic or even traitorous. To his supporters, Trump’s strong stance on issues like immigration, gun rights, and national security made him a protector of their values, someone who was willing to stand up to the perceived threats they saw in the world.

For liberals, though, Trump represented everything they feared about authoritarianism and the erosion of democratic norms. His refusal to follow established political protocols, his attacks on the judiciary and the free press, and his reluctance to disavow white supremacists and conspiracy theories fed into their view that he was a direct threat to democracy and equality. To them, Trump wasn’t just another conservative president—he was a dangerous force who was undermining the very foundations of the country.

This mutual distrust has only grown. Trump’s presidency amplified the existing psychological and political divides by pitting the two sides against each other in a battle that felt existential. His rhetoric fostered an environment where compromise became almost impossible because both sides saw the other as a threat to their way of life. The growing polarization in media consumption added fuel to the fire, with conservatives tuning into Fox News or talk radio and liberals gravitating toward MSNBC or CNN. Each side was trapped in an echo chamber, with little exposure to opposing viewpoints.

One of the clearest examples of how Trump’s presidency deepened these divisions was his handling of the 2020 election. From the moment the votes were being counted, Trump falsely claimed widespread voter fraud, refusing to accept the results. His repeated claims that the election was “stolen” culminated in the January 6, 2021, attack on the U.S. Capitol, when his supporters, believing they were defending democracy, stormed the building in an effort to overturn the results. For Trump’s supporters, this was a fight for their country. For his critics, it was an attack on the very principles of democracy.

In the end, the divide isn’t just about Trump or the policies he promoted—it’s about the fundamental differences in how conservatives and liberals see the world. Trump’s presidency highlighted and exploited these differences, turning political disagreements into a cultural war. The fear, mistrust, and anger that grew during his tenure has left the country more polarized than ever, with little room for the kind of compromise and understanding needed to heal the divisions. As the study by Dodd and Hibbing suggests, conservatives and liberals are wired differently, and until there’s a greater understanding of those differences, it will be hard to bridge the gap Trump helped widen.

Senator Smith writes about the difficulty couples face when trying to plan a family and making the costly decision to pursue In Vitro Fertilization (IVF) as a solution for infertility.

EAU CLAIRE, WI - Raising children is expensive, and solving infertility can be a fortune. Couples trying to conceive experience the joy of a positive pregnancy test and the horrendous heartbreak of miscarriage. Before long, they turn to medical professionals for help.

Each person may try a lot of different things like changing diet, taking supplements, working on their timing, or they may get to the point when the conversation about IVF (in vitro fertilization) comes up as a potential solution.

What usually starts as a conversation with a doctor can quickly turn into a discussion with a financial planner. The price tag for each IVF treatment is close to $15,000 with no guarantees. I’ve heard about families who have gone through this procedure two or three times before having success. For most though, just the opportunity to try IVF costs too much to consider.

Couples shouldn’t have to take out a loan or a second mortgage to have a child. Families that have the resources to care for their children are good for our society. As with most questions about what is good for society, so goes the conversation in politics.

Unfortunately political hurdles are happening for IVF. Following the U.S. Supreme Court overturning the Roe v Wade decision in 2022, the Alabama Supreme Court ruled back in February that frozen embryos can be considered “unborn children.” Often excess frozen embryos are disposed of after a couple’s treatment is completed. Clinics around the country are starting to fear a future where they could be accused of murder. The combination of these two court decisions have caused many fertility clinics in Alabama to stop providing IVF altogether.

What should be a conversation between partners earnestly finding a solution has turned into a liability for them due to politics. Couples desperate for starting a family may have no other option than intensive fertility treatments such as IVF, and now that option is being threatened by reckless court decisions that are out of touch with the reality of thousands of Americans who are trying to start a family.

Republicans have stressed that they support IVF treatment, but then fail to have the courage to introduce legislation to protect it. If politicians are asked about IVF from either party, the vast majority will express support for the procedure. So what stops lawmakers from solving this important issue?

Once again the answer is politics. Democrats in Wisconsin and in Washington have introduced legislation to help families with the cost of IVF treatments, but Republicans ignored all attempts. In the meantime, couples are left with heartbreak when science has provided a clear path to resolution.

This is one time when Republicans must be willing to work with Democrats. It will take bipartisan agreement to put politics aside and do right for families. It’s an election year though and lines are being drawn. At a recent parade, I was walking with other Democrats and it was disheartening to see a Republican voter who wouldn’t let his child take candy from a woman offering it because she was walking with Democrats. “Not from you,” he said.

It doesn’t matter which political party you are a part of. Our kids deserve the best from us. It starts with politicians and it ends with people. As the election draws closer, there’s no doubt rancorous partisanship will reach a fever pitch, but when it comes to the hope of a new family, we must set differences aside and work together.

Senator Smith represents District 31 in the Wisconsin State Senate. The 31st Senate District includes all of Buffalo, Pepin and Trempealeau counties and portions of Pierce, Dunn, Eau Claire, Jackson and St. Croix counties.

This article challenges the notion that today’s political divide is simply about Democrats versus Republicans or right versus wrong. Instead, it emphasizes that the real issue is distinguishing truth from lies. It explores several key issues—such as the economy, immigration, climate change, women’s rights, COVID-19, healthcare, the 2020 election, January 6, and gun control— where some Republican beliefs diverge from the facts. The piece encourages readers to consider the consequences of discovering that what they believed to be true might not be, urging a commitment to truth for the sake of our society’s future.

LAKE GENEVA, WI - It’s essential to step back from the idea that our divisions are just about Democrats versus Republicans or even right versus wrong. The real issue at hand is distinguishing truth from lies. In today’s political climate, there are several beliefs held by some Republicans about critical issues like the economy, immigration, climate change, women’s rights, COVID-19, healthcare, the 2020 election, January 6, and gun control that don’t align with the facts. Let’s examine some of these beliefs, the truth behind them, and consider how one might feel if they found out the things they believed were not true.

The Economy

Belief: Some Republicans believe that cutting taxes for the wealthy and corporations always leads to economic growth and benefits everyone.

Truth: While tax cuts can stimulate short-term economic growth, the long-term effects often increase income inequality and national debt without significantly benefiting the middle class or poor. Studies have shown that wealth does not necessarily "trickle down" to the rest of the population.

Immigration

Belief: Many believe that immigrants, particularly undocumented ones, take jobs away from Americans and significantly burden public resources.

Truth: Immigrants, including undocumented ones, contribute to the economy by filling essential jobs, paying taxes, and starting businesses. Numerous studies indicate that immigrants are less likely to commit crimes than native-born citizens and that they contribute more in taxes than they consume in public services.

Climate Change

Belief: Some Republicans assert that climate change is either a hoax or not significantly influenced by human activities.

Truth: The overwhelming consensus among scientists is that climate change is real, primarily caused by human activities like burning fossil fuels, and poses a severe threat to the planet. Ignoring this reality increases the risk of catastrophic environmental and economic consequences.

Women’s Rights

Belief: There's a belief that limiting access to abortion is about protecting life and doesn’t infringe on women’s rights.

Truth: Restricting access to abortion not only undermines women’s autonomy over their bodies but also disproportionately affects low-income women and women of color. It can lead to dangerous, unregulated procedures and worsens inequalities in healthcare.

COVID-19

Belief: Some believe that COVID-19 was either overblown or that vaccines and masks were unnecessary and ineffective.

Truth: COVID-19 was a deadly pandemic that claimed millions of lives worldwide. Vaccines and masks were critical in reducing the spread of the virus and saving lives. Ignoring or downplaying the seriousness of the virus contributed to unnecessary illness and death.

Healthcare

Belief: Many Republicans hold that a free-market healthcare system without government intervention is the best way to ensure quality care.

Truth: The U.S. spends more on healthcare than any other country, yet has worse health outcomes compared to other developed nations with more government intervention. A market- driven approach can leave many without access to necessary care, particularly those with pre- existing conditions or those who cannot afford high premiums and deductibles.

The 2020 Election

Belief: A significant number of Republicans believe that the 2020 presidential election was stolen or rigged.

Truth: There is no credible evidence to support claims of widespread voter fraud in the 2020 election. Multiple audits, recounts, and court rulings, including by judges appointed by Republican presidents, confirmed that the election was fair and that Joe Biden won.

January 6

Belief: Some believe that the January 6th attack on the Capitol was either justified, not an insurrection, or was perpetrated by left-wing activists.

Truth: The January 6th attack was a violent attempt to overturn a democratic election, instigated by false claims of a stolen election. It was carried out by supporters of then- President Trump, and it resulted in deaths, injuries, and significant damage to one of the symbols of American democracy.

Gun Control

Belief: The belief persists that any form of gun control is a threat to the Second Amendment and that more guns make us safer.

Truth: Research consistently shows that more guns lead to more gun violence and that countries with stricter gun laws have far fewer gun deaths. Sensible gun control measures, like background checks and restrictions on certain types of firearms, do not infringe on Second Amendment rights but can save lives.

The Bigger Question

Now, let’s take a moment to consider: What if you found out that these things you’ve believed so strongly weren’t true? How would that make you feel? Would you feel betrayed by those who provided the misinformation? Would you be angry or confused?