Skip to content

By: Victor Jacobo of CBS 58

MADISON, Wis. (CBS 58) – Democrats expressed disappointment in the lack of action on gun violence following a school shooting in Waukesha South High School.

“My heart is with the students, educators, and staff of Waukesha South High School and the entire Waukesha community as they mourn and endure the trauma of today’s shooting,” Gov. Tony Evers said in a statement. Evers added gratitude for the action of educators and first responders who worked quickly to keep students safe.

Evers continued, “Today is a grim reminder that this can happen anywhere, but I do not accept—nor should we accept—that this is an inevitable reality for our kids, our communities, our state, or our country.”

The governor hinted at the need to address the issue in the State Capitol, something he has tried to do recently.

In November, a Special Session called by Evers ended almost as soon as it began as republican leadership, including Assembly Speaker Robin Vos and Senate Majority Leader Scott Fitzgerald refused to take up a pair of bills on gun safety up for debate or a vote.

It’s unclear as of now whether or not those bills would have prevented Monday’s incident at Waukesha South.

Other officials were more explicit in their call for action.

“Lawmakers have an obligation to do everything possible to ensure people feel safe where they attend school, work, and events in their community,” Assembly Minority Leader Gordon Hintz said in a statement. “People in every corner of the state have voiced these fears to their elected officials and are looking to their leaders to act.”

Hintz ended his statement saying, “While there are no easy solutions to end gun violence, we cannot continue to sit back and do nothing. We will continue to pursue common sense gun safety measures to lower these incidents of violence moving forward.”

Republicans expressed gratitude for the work of first responders and educators.

“I commend the students, school personnel, and first responders at Waukesha South for their swift response to today’s incident,” said Rep. Jim Sensenbrenner (R – WI 5th).

GOP Senator Ron Johnson said that he was, “Thankful for the swift response at Waukesha South High School this morning. My thoughts are with the entire Waukesha community.”

By: Brad Evans of WISN12

Police say a police officer shot an armed student at Waukesha South High School.

The shooting happened just before 10 a.m. Monday.

Students were dismissed after they were placed under a lockdown.

School officials told parents the shooting happened after a police officer confronted a 17-year-old boy after receiving information the student was armed with a gun in the school.

Police said the student would not remove his hands from his pants pocket.

They said the suspect removed a gun from his waistband and pointed it at the officer.

The officer ordered the student to drop the gun before the shots were fired, police said.

Witnesses told WISN 12 News they heard at least three shots fired.

Administrators said the confrontation was isolated to one classroom.

Police Chief Russell Jack said multiple officers responded to the classroom.

The school resource officer was present but did not fire the shots.

Some students reported hiding in closets and under desks.

News Chopper 12's Matt Salemme said he saw at least 17 police cruisers at the scene on East Roberta Avenue.

Waukesha police called the response a "critical incident."

"The building is safe and secure," police tweeted. "The suspect is in custody."

Officers said it was an "isolated incident" and they were not seeking any other suspects.

"We are in the investigative stage right now as the scene is stabilized," police tweeted.

Investigators have not said how many shots were fired.

The suspect was taken to a hospital, where he was listed in stable condition.

It's not clear how serious his injuries were.

No officers were injured.

"The safety and security of all students and staff are a top priority," school officials said.

Police said the officer was an 11-year veteran of the department.

According to the Waukesha South High School website, the school resource officer is Josh Tyndall.

The names of the student and officer who fired the shots have not yet been released.

Greenfield police will lead the investigation, with the assistance of the Milwaukee police.

Superintendent Todd Gray called the shooting his "worst nightmare."

The Milwaukee County Medical Examiner's Office said it was not called to the school or hospital.

U.S. Rep. Jim Sensenbrenner commended students, school officials and first responders and said he was monitoring the situation.

No other details were immediately available.

By: Amy Dupont of FOX6

WAUKESHA -- An officer shot a 17-year-old male student who was armed on Monday morning, Dec. 2 in a classroom at Waukesha South High School.

Waukesha Police Chief Russell Jack spoke with the media and indicated around 10:15 a.m., a student at the school reported that another student brought a handgun to school -- and was in possession of it. A student resource officer (SRO) immediately responded to the classroom where the armed student was located.

Police said the SRO made efforts to secure the classroom by getting the other students to safety. Other Waukesha officers also responded to the school.

Officers spoke with the student to de-escalate the situation, but Chief Jack said the student would not remove his hands from his pockets -- and ignored officers' commands. At one point, the student removed the handgun from his waistband and pointed it at officers. An officer was forced to discharge his firearm -- striking the student. Life-saving efforts were immediately put into action -- and the remaining students were evacuated from the school. Chief Jack said a firearm was recovered.

The 17-year-old was taken to the hospital -- and listed in stable condition.

The officer who fired his service weapon is an 11-year veteran of the Waukesha Police Department. Neither he nor any other officers or students were injured in this incident.

"This is clearly a superintendent's worst nightmare," said Waukesha Schools Superintendent Todd Gray. "We are very grateful for the response of the South High School SRO, the Waukesha Police Department, and the Waukesha County Sheriff's Department."

"For the citizens of Waukesha, I know this was a terrifying day for many students and parents," said Waukesha Mayor Shawn Reilly.

Congressman Jim Sensenbrenner offered the following statement on this matter:

"I commend the students, school personnel, and first responders at Waukesha South for their swift response to today’s incident. I will continue monitoring the situation as details are released and encourage anyone with information to contact the Waukesha Police Department."

Governor Tony Evers issued this statement:

“My heart is with the students, educators, and staff of Waukesha South High School and the entire Waukesha community as they mourn and endure the trauma of today’s shooting. I am grateful for our educators and first responders who worked quickly to keep our kids safe and ensure no one else was injured."

"We are continuing to learn more details about the situation this morning, but what I can say is it's gut-wrenching that our kids wondered whether this was a drill or it was real—our kids shouldn't have to fear for their life in our classrooms or at school, and no parent should have to send their kid off to school in the morning worrying about whether or not they’ll come home."

"Wisconsinites believe in helping each other in times of need, so I know we will come together to do everything we can to support the Waukesha community as they begin to heal. Today is a grim reminder that this can happen anywhere, but I do not accept—nor should we accept—that this is an inevitable reality for our kids, our communities, our state, or our country.”

Attorney General Josh Kaul issued this statement:

“No student should have to go through a day like the one that students at Waukesha South went through today. And no parent should have to go through a day like the one those students’ parents had today."

“My thoughts are with the Waukesha community and the Waukesha School District. Our Office of School Safety has reached out to offer assistance to the school district."

“A school resource officer and first responders helped prevent this event from potentially becoming even more tragic than it was. We thank them for their bravery and their service.”

Wisconsin Superintendent of Public Instruction Carolyn Stanford Taylor issued this statement:

“Ensuring the safety and security of our students and staff is the highest priority. The quick response today by law enforcement and staff at Waukesha South High School protected the school community. As state superintendent, I am committed to working with all our school districts to provide them the resources and supports they need to have safe and supportive environments in all our schools.”

Washington, D.C.—Today, Congressman Jim Sensenbrenner (WI-05) offered the following statement after a school resource officer at Waukesha South High School responded to a potential threat:

“I commend the students, school personnel, and first responders at Waukesha South for their swift response to today’s incident. I will continue monitoring the situation as details are released and encourage anyone with information to contact the Waukesha Police Department.”

By: Jack Rodgers of Courthouse News Service

WASHINGTON (CN) — The impeachment inquiry into President Donald Trump will play out on a new stage next week, as the House Judiciary Committee said Tuesday it will hold its first public hearing in the probe.

Chairman Jerry Nadler, D-N.Y., wrote in a two-page letter addressed to the president that the Dec. 4 hearing will be consistent with rules used in the Clinton and Nixon impeachments. Nadler also invited the president to attend next week’s hearings, in accordance with the House’s impeachment inquiry resolution.

“I write to ask if …you and your counsel plan to attend the hearing or make a request to question the witness panel,” the letter states. “If you would like to participate in the hearing, please provide the Committee with notice as soon as possible, but no later than by 6:00 pm on December 1, 2019.”

Nadler wrote that he “remains committed to ensuring a fair and informative process,” but noted invitations for a president to attend impeachment hearings are only a courtesy, not a right.

The House Intelligence Committee recently completed two weeks of public hearings into accusations of presidential misconduct by Trump, specifically over a July 25 phone call with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky in which Trump pressured Ukraine to announce an investigation of former Vice President Joe Biden and the 2016 presidential election. Biden is seen as Trump’s likely opponent in the 2020 election.

The inquiry began with a whistleblower complaint reported directly to Intelligence Committee Adam Schiff, D-Calif.

Schiff said Monday that lawmakers on his committee will soon issue a report on evidence gathered so far, working through the Thanksgiving holiday to do so.

“Fundamentally, the question that Americans who watched the hearings must ask themselves is: Are the president’s actions compatible with the office of the presidency?” Schiff wrote in his message. “All members of the House will have to examine their conscience and their constitutional duty and decide.”

In a statement Tuesday, Nadler said Trump has a choice to make in the impeachment proceedings.

“He can take this opportunity to be represented in the impeachment hearings, or he can stop complaining about the process. I hope that he chooses to participate in the inquiry, directly or through counsel, as other Presidents have done before him,” he said.

Nadler’s letter states that the continued refusal to produce documents and preventing witnesses from testifying to the House committees helming the inquiry will have consequences.

If the administration continues to stonewall the House, “the chair shall have the discretion to impose appropriate remedies,” the letter states.

Brian Kalt, a law professor at Michigan State University, said he thinks the Judiciary Committee will work on putting all the information dumped on it by the Intelligence Committee into context. Hesaid the committee will try to decide what constitutes a high crime or misdemeanor and hear from both sides, rather than go straight to a committee vote on impeachment.

“Personally, I think that works out better than having the president rely on his proxies from the committee, although the president might be happy to leave it to those people,” Kalt said.

Kalt noted that Republican Congressmen Jim Sensenbrenner of Wisconsin and Steve Chabot of Ohio both presented evidence against Bill Clinton in his 1998 Senate trial. They were appointed as managers to argue the case in those proceedings.

Lawmakers from that impeachment saga will flip-flop, Kalt predicted, noting that South Carolina Senator Lindsey Graham – a staunch defender of Trump – argued during Clinton’s trial that a crime was not required for impeachment.

“We’re going to have some colorful exchanges here. They tend to appoint less moderate people to Judiciary, more ideological,” Kalt said. “There are some people we can expect to hear some interesting things from.”

Washington D.C. – Today, Congressman Jim Sensenbrenner (R-WI) and Congresswoman Robin Kelly (D-IL) introduced the Gunfire Detection and Location Technology Act.

The legislation would direct the U.S. Attorney General to provide grants to states and localities for gunfire detection and location technology. Specifically, it would authorize $40 million in grants to be distributed in equal parts over the coming four fiscal years.

“Gunfire detection technology has proven to be successful in many cities across the U.S., including in my home state of Wisconsin. It’s time we empower law enforcement officers in other locations to implement this technology so they may better protect their communities,” said Congressman Sensenbrenner. “This bipartisan bill will help bring modern solutions to some of the longstanding challenges facing violence-plagued areas, and I’m grateful to Congresswoman Kelly for her leadership and cooperation on this effort.”

“As we work to prevent gun violence, we can and must use technology to equip first responders with the resources to respond more quickly in service of victims and investigations. This bipartisan measure will help cities and states adopt this powerful technology that is yielding positive results in our efforts to reduce gun violence and violent crime,” said Congresswoman Robin Kelly. “I thank Congressman Sensenbrenner for his support of this measure and his long history of working across the aisle to advance the best policies and innovations in serve to our communities.”

Background:
A network of sensors is used to detect gunshots, many of which are unreported to 911 dispatchers. Once a gunshot is detected, the technology triangulates the origin and notifies law enforcement with real-time data. This increase response time allowing for speedier access to victims and rapid securing of the crime scene. Additionally, the data can be used, via a secure database, for predictive intelligence, which further improves response times and resource allocation.

This technology is already used by more than 100 cities, including Chicago, Milwaukee and New York City. According to a report, the city of Milwaukee has seen a 38 percent decrease in the amount of gunshots fired in areas where this technology was used from 2017 to 2018 showing that its use can act as a deterrent. 

By: Ben Fox Rubin of CNET

House lawmakers on Wednesday called for two top antitrust regulators to take more action against major tech companies, saying several of these companies have avoided serious scrutiny for years as they swallowed up competitors and consolidated power. They made the request during a hearing for the House Judiciary's Subcommittee on Antitrust, Commercial and Administrative Law, which has been holding a series of hearings dubbed Online Platforms and Market Power.

"Despite mounting evidence of illegal monopolization activity by some of the dominant platforms and numerous cases brought by international enforcers, US enforcers appear to be paralyzed," Democratic Rep. Jerrold Nadler said in an opening statement. "It has been decades -- decades -- since the Department of Justice or the Federal Trade Commission has brought a significant monopolization case in the tech sector."

Wednesday's hearing included just two witnesses: FTC Chairman Joseph Simons and Makan Delrahim, the assistant attorney general for the Justice Department's Antitrust Division. The tone was largely collegial, with the subcommittee's antitrust efforts becoming a rare case of bipartisan work in a polarized Capitol. There were also few people in the audience, perhaps owing to the hearing being overshadowed by the highly anticipated House impeachment public hearings kicking off the same day.

Delrahim and Simons attended a similar hearing in September held by the Senate Judiciary Committee, pointing to just how much attention tech antitrust concerns have grown in Washington DC.

The hearing came as regulators and lawmakers have been shining a harsher light on many of the biggest US tech companies -- Facebook, Google, Amazon and Apple -- and their potential monopolies. So far, Facebook has publicly disclosed investigations into the social giant by both the Justice Department and the FTC, and Google disclosed a Justice Department investigation.

Added to that, the House Judiciary Committee and a group of state attorneys general are investigating these tech titans, too.

This work could have huge implications for the future of tech, potentially resulting in the breakup of dominant players like Facebook, the prevention of future tech mergers, or the creation of additional regulatory restrictions on tech giants. Regulators and lawmakers say they are pursuing this work to ensure customers can benefit from the growth of innovative new startups and healthy competition.

For their part, many major tech companies say they remain small players in their fields, such as Amazon being a fraction of global retail, and point to long lists of competitors in their markets.

While several committee members on Wednesday called for more regulatory action, Simons, from the FTC, warned that his agency lacked the authority to pursue more privacy-related enforcement. He said Congress would first need to enact privacy-focused laws, similar to the European Union's General Data Protection Regulation or the California Consumer Privacy Act.

"If you want us to do more on the privacy front, then we need more tools from you," he said.

Additionally, Republicans Jim Sensenbrenner and Doug Collins on Wednesday both warned of unintended consequences of new regulations and government overreach that could stifle innovation. For instance, Simons mentioned how Europe's GDPR may have ended up reinforcing market leaders there and suppressing new competitors.

"Proposals to break up big companies just because they are big risks throwing out the baby with the bathwater and are simply punishing success," Collins said.

By: Dr. Lisa Arkin in The Cap Times

On the first day of medical school, I took a sacred oath to “first, do no harm.” Above all, our role as physicians is to relieve suffering, carefully assessing in every treatment decision the delicate balance between risks and benefits. This requires clinical experience and medical knowledge of disease pathophysiology. But it is the available evidence that is paramount in our clinical decision-making as physicians. Clinical trials are created explicitly to evaluate the safety and efficacy of treatments before they are made available to patients. They provide the highest quality evidence to enable physicians to carefully weigh their risks and benefits in any clinical scenario.

However, an insurer practice called step therapy has been restraining physicians from carrying out their role by restricting treatment options for patients. Step therapy is when an insurance company forces patients to try and "fail" alternative medications decided by the insurer before covering the cost of the prescription that their physician has prescribed. This typically requires patients to fail less expensive medications first. In some cases, step therapy flies in the face of the available medical evidence, potentially endangering patients, frustrating physicians and other health care providers, and in the long run incurring greater costs for the health care system.

Thankfully, this year the Wisconsin Legislature passed, and Gov. Tony Evers signed Senate Bill 26 to reform step therapy in Wisconsin. The bill took effect on Nov. 1. I applaud the work of the bill sponsors, Sen. Alberta Darling and Rep, John Nygren, and all of the many advocates who came together to get this passed.

But it’s not enough. In order to protect all Wisconsin patients, we must pass step therapy reform on the federal level as well.

The "Safe Step Act" (S.2546/H.R. 2279) would offer common-sense protections to ensure patients have timely access to the medications prescribed to them by their health care providers by putting guardrails around the practice, and would provide patients the same protections that have been enacted in more than two dozen states across the country including Wisconsin. We need both state and federal legislation in order to cover plans that are regulated by varying state and federal agencies.

I am grateful to U.S. Reps. Mark Pocan, James Sensenbrenner and Ron Kind for cosponsoring the "Safe Step Act," and I urge the rest of the Wisconsin congressional delegation to likewise support this needed protection.

The practice of pediatric dermatology can be complicated and diverse. Although many of my patients have similar skin conditions, the severity of their disease varies widely. Severe cases are rarely just “skin limited,” and are often accompanied by other medical problems. Symptoms of itch and pain can be debilitating. The stigma of having a highly visible chronic skin disease can be significant. Based on the literature — factoring in the patient's age and other complicated medical conditions, I determine a course of care based on the highest quality evidence available for this specific population.

But without reform, step therapy means that some of my patients are denied the medications that are safest and most effective, in favor of a less expensive, often riskier drug. Only after failure — which can mean different things for different patients depending on the insurance plan — are they granted access to the medication I originally prescribed. In the most severe cases, this only delays care and increases costs to the system, since these patients are likely to get there anyway.

I believe it’s the responsibility of all of us in health care to be economic stewards in the system. Whenever possible, I prescribe the most cost-effective medication when it is also safe and likely to be effective. But not all patients are square pegs that fit into square holes. For the most unique and severely affected patients, the “round pegs” so to speak, the available evidence, combined with my own clinical experience, should outweigh the insurer’s desire to cut costs.

I’m thrilled that lawmakers from all sides, along with patients, providers and insurers, worked together to achieve step therapy reform in Wisconsin.

I am hopeful that the Wisconsin congressional delegation will continue to put patients first by supporting step therapy reform on the federal level. In spite of the gains in Wisconsin, it’s clear that federal step therapy reform is a critical next step to protect our sickest, most vulnerable patients.

Dr. Lisa Arkin is a pediatric dermatologist in Madison.

By John Eggerton of Multichannel News

The House Judiciary Committee Antitrust Subcommittee heard from two major players in the government's review of Big Tech and whether the antitrust laws have kept up with their exponential growth, but not before the legislators had staked out their own positions. 

The toughest rhetoric came from Democrats decrying consolidation and what they said was lax enforcement. 

Subcommittee Chairman David Cicilline (D-R.I.) pulled no punches, he said the extreme concentration of online platforms may have some benefits, but they were clearly using their power to set market terms that enrich themselves and make it impossible to compete. 

He said the power they wield is in some measures unprecedented, while government regulators have been paralyzed.  

Full committee chairman Jerry Nadler (D-N.Y.) echoed that criticism. He said they were at a critical moment when a handful of dominant companies control "commerce, content, and communications." He got specific, pointing out that Google had over 90% of search, Facebook over 80% of social media revenues, and Amazon over half of online commerce. 

He said that anticompetitive consolidation has had devastating effects on a free and diverse press as well as the survival of startups. Both talked of lax merger enforcement in the U.S. vs. more muscular oversight overseas. 

Ranking member Jim Sensenbrenner (R-Wis.) was concerned but less harsh in his assessment, a view echoed by other Republicans. He said that it was important not to overreach or punish success or suppress innovation or limit consumer power. 

Witnesses for the hearing were Department of Justice antitrust chief Makan Delrahim and Federal Trade Commission Chairman Joseph Simons in the latest hearing Wednesday (Nov. 13) in a series of hearings, Online Platforms and Market Power, Part 4: Perspectives of the Antitrust Agencies. 

Delrahim and Simons both talked about their ongoing, separate, investigations into Big Tech and antitrust, but both talked about the actions they had already taken in the digital space, and would take future action if their investigation warrants. 

On the issue of enforcement, Simons conceded that the FTC was resource-restrained so it focused on cases it had a better likelihood of winning, adding that if it had more money, it could pursue more cases. 

Simons was asked about Europe's opt-in consent regime and whether the U.S. should take a similar approach to federal privacy legislation. He said he was concerned that could backfire, entrenching the largest players even more at the expense of newer entrants because with consumers faced with a barrage of opt-in decisions on data use, the larger, more familiar, players are the ones most likely to get that consent in part because users may not want to spread their information so widely. 

Sensenbrenner agreed that the U.S. needed to beware the unintended consequences of efforts at protecting privacy or passing federal legislation.

By: CBS News

The first public hearings of the impeachment inquiry that begin Wednesday mark the fourth time in history that Congress has considered removing a president from office. The last time was 1998 when the House of Representatives impeached President Bill Clinton.

Clinton lied under oath about his affair with a White House intern, triggering an impeachment inquiry in the Republican-led House.

"I did not have sexual relations with that woman, Miss Lewinsky," Clinton said on Jan. 26, 1998.

Then, like now, the parties were split over whether the president's actions represented what the Constitution refers to as "high crimes and misdemeanors." Just like today, the minority argued the opposing party had been looking for a way to take down the president for years.

"He lied about sex, not an admirable thing, but really not an activity that shook the foundations of the Constitution and the democracy," Rep. Zoe Lofgren, D-Calif., said.

"The president of the United States should be held to the highest standard of anybody in the country," Rep. Jim Sensenbrenner, R-Wis., said.

Both lawmakers sit on the House Judiciary Committee, which handles impeachment. They were there in 1998 too.

"It was a heck of a lot of work," Sensenbrenner recounted, adding, "The Judiciary Committee got all of Starr's evidence dumped on us with a few days notice."

In this case, there is no special prosecutor like Kenneth Starr to gather all that evidence. So the intelligence committee has been investigating instead with a series of closed-door depositions.

"This is not a joyful experience for anyone engaged in it, but it's an obligation that we have given the facts that have been discovered so far," Lofgren said.

Clinton famously said the process was beyond his control.

"It's not in my hands; it's in the hands of Congress and the people of this country — ultimately, in the hands of God. There is nothing I can do," he said in 1998.

Mr. Trump has mounted a more direct defense. "We had a totally appropriate – I even say perfect – conversation with the president of Ukraine," Mr. Trump said earlier this month. 

In the end, the House voted to bring impeachment charges against Clinton on two charges. But he was acquitted by the Senate less than two months later with some Republicans crossing party lines.

Sensenbrenner predicts the same outcome for Mr. Trump.

"The president is not going to be removed from office, I think everybody realizes that," Sensenbrenner said.

The split we're seeing on impeachment in Congress reflects the divide in the country. The most recent CBS News poll shows 53 percent approve of the inquiry into Mr. Trump and 47 percent disapprove.

In 1998, before the House voted to start the impeachment inquiry of Mr. Clinton, a CBS News poll found that 53 percent of Americans would be satisfied if no action were taken against the president and the entire matter were dropped.