Wisconsin
The Wisconsin Idea and eugenics: conflicting sides of Charles Van Hise
A proposed university plaque would acknowledge the former UW president’s influence in a 20th-century movement that prompted sterilization, discrimination, and genocide.
Charles Van Hise (1857-1918) is an important but controversial figure in the history of the University of Wisconsin. He co-authored the Wisconsin Idea, a one-sentence ideology that has helped guide the development of our state for decades. He was a prominent figure in the Progressive movement, an important political chapter in Wisconsin’s history.
However, Van Hise was also a eugenicist, who believed the human race should use selective breeding and forced sterilization to eliminate “inferior” traits from society. Eugenics is a misinformed extrapolation of Darwin’s Theory of Evolution, applying “survival of the fittest” to humans as well as plants and animals.
A new plaque is set to be installed in the lobby of Van Hise Hall (1220 Linden Drive) at the UW-Madison, addressing the former university president’s support of eugenics, pending approval by UW-Madison Chancellor Jennifer Mnookin.
The plaque is a result of years of collaboration between Kacie Lucchini Butcher, director of the UW-Madison Center for Campus History, and the Committee on Disability Access and Inclusion (CDAI), an advisory body of faculty, staff, and students that operates as part of UW-Madison’s shared governance system. In 2021, Lucchini Butcher gave a presentation to the CDAI on Van Hise and eugenics at UW-Madison. After her presentation, the CDAI reached out to Lucchini Butcher about working together to find a way to address Van Hise’s history on campus.
Lucchini Butcher and the CDAI worked closely with UW administration and the Madison community, hosting multiple public engagement sessions between 2022 and 2023 to raise awareness of the issue and collect public opinion. They finally decided to design a plaque, which Lucchini Butcher describes as the “first step for the CDAI and for UW on confronting the legacy of Van Hise and eugenics.”
The proposed language for the plaque reads:
“Charles Van Hise was a professor at UW-Madison from 1879 to 1903, after which he served as its president until 1918. As president, Van Hise offered the best-known articulation of the Wisconsin Idea. He was also an advocate of eugenics, a set of beliefs and practices that has justified discrimination against marginalized people deemed “unfit” based on individual and group characteristics and identities. The impact of eugenics can be seen not only in the genocides of the 20th century but also, for example, in discriminatory immigration practices and in involuntary sterilization laws. As UW- Madison strives to serve the people of Wisconsin and the world, the legacy of Van Hise reminds us that we must acknowledge and grapple with all parts of our past and all parts of our present to move forward together.”
Now that the plaque proposal has passed through many channels for approval, including the Campus Planning Committee, Mnookin has the final say in whether or not the plaque will be installed in Van Hise Hall. The proposed plaque language was sent to Mnookin in April. UW-Madison spokesperson John Lucas tells Tone Madison he doesn’t “yet have timing updates on this project, which is still in the planning process.” A CDAI timeline indicated that the approval process has been delayed due to Mnookin’s travel schedule.
Despite Van Hise’s role in promoting the eugenics movement in Wisconsin, the narrative surrounding him, crafted in part by UW, is overwhelmingly positive. His biography on the UW Archives and Record Management website describes him as having “the distinctions of receiving the first PhD degree granted by the University of Wisconsin (1892, geology), being the first UW alumnus to head the university, and being the longest serving leader of the university.”
Only after clicking on a link at the bottom of UW’s Van Hise’s biography do you find a presentation by the University Committee on Disability Access and Inclusion on Van Hise’s involvement with the eugenics movement. Van Hise’s important role in UW-Madison’s history and his ugly eugenicist beliefs pose difficult but familiar questions about how to handle terrible truths about Wisconsin history.
The eugenics movement at UW-Madison
Modern eugenics emerged in the 1880s, and by the early 1900s, the U.S. saw the creation of several national organizations promoting eugenics; the Race Betterment Foundation was founded in 1911 by Dr. John Harvey Kellogg (using the Kellogg Cereal fortune). Leon J. Cole—founder of the UW Genetics Department—was also a featured speaker at the First National Conference on Race Betterment in 1914.
The eugenics movement in the U.S. in the early 1900s advocated for forced sterilization, institutionalizing the mentally “feeble,” and limiting immigration depending on race and health. The American Eugenics Society had hoped to sterilize one-tenth of the U.S. population in order to prevent “heredity degeneration.”
In 1910 Van Hise published an essay titled “The Conservation Of Natural Resources In The United States,” in which he wrote that “human defectives should no longer be allowed to propagate the race.” By human defectives, Van Hise might have been talking about African Americans, Native Peoples, immigrants, “wayward” women, the mentally or physically disabled, or any number of Americans with traits seen as undesirable by society in the early 20th century.
Van Hise would undoubtedly have been in support of a massive sterilization effort like the one advocated for by the American Eugenics Society. Van Hise wrote, “we know enough about eugenics so that if that knowledge were applied, the defective classes would disappear within a generation.”
That same year, Leon J. Cole founded the Department of Experimental Breeding at UW-Madison, which would eventually become known as the Genetics Department; it was the first of its kind in the country. The department was intended to focus its efforts on improving Wisconsin agriculture with genetics. However, in the early 1900s U.S., the eugenics movement was taking off, and scientific methods applied to breeding animals were already being applied to the human race.
As Van Hise wrote in “The Conservation Of Natural Resources,” “breeding has been long practiced with reference to producing high-grade stock. Until recently man has given very little attention to the matter as far as his own race is concerned.”
Cole also founded the nation’s first eugenics club at UW in 1912, which hosted bi-monthly lectures from eugenics experts. Multiple classes teaching eugenics were available: “Heredity and eugenics,” taught by Michael F. Guyer, addressed “the laws of heredity, their application to man, and the importance of the biological principles underlying race-betterment.”
Adolf Hitler’s genocide of the Jewish people in the 1930s and ’40s was, in fact, heavily inspired by the eugenics movement in the United States. Hitler is quoted saying, “now that we know the laws of heredity, it is possible to a large extent to prevent unhealthy and severely handicapped beings from coming into the world. I have studied with interest the laws of several American states concerning prevention of reproduction by people whose progeny would, in all probability, be of no value or be injurious to the racial stock.”
UW-Madison played a significant role in the development of the eugenics movement in the United States. The university continued to teach eugenics until 1948, with courses promoting its theories in the departments of sociology, criminology, genetics, and zoology.
Progressivism and eugenics
Both Cole and Van Hise were intellectuals in the American Progressive movement. Progressives wanted to reimagine the American economic and political landscape. They pushed for safer workplaces, labor laws, and a more democratic government. Wisconsin, and UW-Madison in particular, and were considered models of progressive reform and intellectualism in the early 1900s.
During the Progressive movement and Robert La Follete’s term as governor of Wisconsin from 1901 to 1906, reforms were passed to tax railroad tycoons, break up monopolies, and give voters the power to choose primary candidates with direct primary elections.
Progressivism and eugenics were closely related movements; in fact, eugenics was a Progressive cause. Chris McAllester, graduate student in the UW Genetics Department, researched the history of eugenics in that same department.
“Everyone in the Progressive movement, to first approximation, was pro-eugenics,” says McAllester.
Proponents of eugenics were overwhelmingly Progressives, including prominent members of the suffragist movement. The movements believed their shared goals of social and economic reform were directly tied to the success of the “race.” Progressives believed that the government should encourage selective breeding to strengthen favorable traits, and eliminate “inferior” ones.
Many Progressive initiatives used theories of eugenicists to justify government policy. When passing labor reforms, like a fixed minimum wage, Progressive economists agreed with their critics, in that instituting a minimum wage could cause job losses (a claim that has since been disproven), but they were unconcerned. For eugenicists, job loss caused by minimum wages was beneficial to society, as it fulfilled the eugenic goal of expelling the “unemployable” from the labor force.
Eugenicists saw their beliefs transformed into policy in many states. In 1913, Wisconsin Governor Francis McGovern passed Chapter 693, a statute that gave the state the power to sterilize inmates of mental and penal institutions. It further required the presentation of a medical certificate declaring mental competency when applying for a marriage license.
Between 1913 and 1963, Wisconsin forcibly sterilized 1,823 “defective” individuals with the authority of Chapter 693, before it was finally repealed in 1978. Those targeted by Wisconsin’s sterilization statutes were people with criminal records, mental illnesses, intellectual disabilities, and epilepsy. The majority of those sterilized, 79%, were women, often because they were deemed “sexually promiscuous.”
Eugenics and the Wisconsin Idea
Van Hise played an important role in the passage of the sterilization and marriage statutes, using the ideology of the Wisconsin Idea: state government should work in collaboration with the university for the betterment of the state.
According to McAllester’s research, Van Hise “vocally advocated for eugenic laws in the State of Wisconsin as a part of the ‘Wisconsin Idea’ whereby university experts informed the public and legislators of relevant science.”
The writings, speeches, classes, and clubs at UW that promoted eugenics all contributed to a racist, sexist, and ableist state consciousness in the 1900s, resulting in almost 2,000 forced sterilizations. Even after the sterilization and marriage statutes were repealed, eugenics teachings continued to influence healthcare in Wisconsin.
Doctors in Wisconsin, influenced by eugenics teachings and former state policies, continued to sterilize patients without their knowledge or consent after Chapter 693 was repealed. Native Americans accused the Indian Health Service of forcibly sterilizing at least 25% of all Native women between the ages of 15 and 44 in the 1970s.
The eugenics movement eventually lost scientific and social credibility. Traits that the eugenics movement targeted for elimination from the gene pool—like “criminality,” “promiscuity,” or the generic phrase “feeblemindedness”—had little genetic basis. In other words, you cannot inherit a tendency to break the law. The eugenics movement generally ignored the possibility that outside factors like economic status or education level are more likely to influence the development of those traits.
Now more than a century after Van Hise’s death, the legacy of his writing and the movement he promoted, as well as the building carrying his name, continue to loom large over UW’s campus.
Discussing Van Hise today
After Lucchini Butcher received emails from Madison residents asking her to address Van Hise’s legacy, she knew it was a project she had to undertake. Lucchini Butcher has given 10 to 12 presentations a year on Van Hise and eugenics since 2021. After she presented for the CDAI, members of the committee helped her get the ball rolling.
Lucchini Butcher says that her team never encountered opposition to addressing Van Hise’s support of eugenics, just debate over whether a plaque was the best option. Lucchini Butcher says that a plaque is the right first step for Van Hise Hall, as it achieves her team’s goal of education.
“Renaming is very controversial right now. So [when] lots of people hear that there is going to be a renaming, they immediately are like ‘No, you’re erasing this person, you’re erasing their legacy,’” Lucchini Butcher says. “And what you get is a huge controversy for a few years, where people are really upset—lots of op-eds, it’s everywhere in the newspaper—the building gets renamed. And then, in four years, nobody remembers.”
McAllester says the best way to address difficult histories is to provide people with access to detailed information about the past.
“To say Van Hise or Cole were eugenicists is different than saying ‘Cole wrote articles in which he argued that philanthropists shouldn’t spend their money on […] improving the lives of people who are having difficulty, or [experiencing] homeless[ness], and instead should be spending their money on advocating for eugenic sterilization, because that would be more effective,” McAllester says.
Although information about Van Hise and eugenics at UW-Madison has been accessible for decades, many people have never heard about this aspect of university history. At every presentation Lucchini Butcher has given on Van Hise, there are always multiple people in the audience who walk away shocked.
“The CDAI and the Center for Campus History have been working for years to raise awareness so that we can get a sense of urgency on doing something around campus,” says Lucchini Butcher. “Why 2023? Why isn’t the plaque up yet? The unsexy answer is that the university is a bureaucratic institution, and nothing happens quickly, or as quickly as we want.”
Lucchini Butcher says she hopes that the plaque will do what renaming won’t: educate future generations of UW students, and start conversations about how to reckon with abhorrent truths about the histories of our communities.
Wisconsin
These Wisconsin swing voters say Trump’s war in Iran wasn’t worth it
Vessels are anchored along the Strait of Hormuz.
Amirhossein Khorgooei/ISNA/AFP via Getty Images
hide caption
toggle caption
Amirhossein Khorgooei/ISNA/AFP via Getty Images
The war in Iran was a costly blunder, according to swing voters in the battleground state of Wisconsin.
NPR observed two online focus groups on Tuesday featuring voters who supported Joe Biden in 2020 and then Donald Trump in 2024.
President Trump had just announced a framework agreement to end the war, which he signed on Wednesday.
Yet among the focus groups’ 13 participants, no one said they thought the conflict with Iran was “worth it,” and nine said they felt that the U.S. is coming out of this conflict weaker than before.
Corey M., a 33-year-old independent voter, said he is concerned that the U.S. expended “so much financially and so much of our arsenal,” with little to show for it. (All participants agreed to be part of the focus groups on the condition that they be identified by their first name and last initial only.)
“We essentially got nothing out of it,” he said. “It’s hurt our economy and increased expenses for the everyday American, and it accomplished the square root of nothing.”
Focus groups are not scientifically significant like polling. But they provide insight into how Americans are thinking about what they see in the news.

These focus groups — made up of 10 self-described independents, two Democrats and one Republican — were conducted by messaging and market research firms Engagious and Sago as part of the Swing Voter Project. NPR is a partner on the project.
Rich Thau, president of Engagious, moderated the focus groups. He has been asking voters in key states about this conflict since March. And he said voters have been consistent.
“They were never on board,” Thau said. “Not the beginning. Not in the middle. And as we just learned, not at the end either, judging from what we heard from Wisconsin swing voters.”
Sam M., a 30-year-old independent, said from what he read about the deal, it wasn’t leaving the U.S. in a better position than before the war. In fact, he said he thought the Iran nuclear deal brokered by the Obama administration — which Trump backed out of — was a better deal for the United States.
Anger over high gas prices
For most voters, though, their biggest concern has remained the high gas prices that are a consequence of the war.
Tammy S., a 53-year-old independent voter, said Americans have been unfairly caught in the middle.
“I just don’t think the way that everybody else had to suffer through the tantrums of these two playing tug-of-war — I just don’t think that it was fair to the American people,” she said. “I don’t think that anybody was a real winner here.”

Several voters said they’ve felt squeezed by costs and as a result have given up something that had been a regular part of their life. They’ve cut vacations and eating out or are getting their hair done less often.
“I’ve given up all my extracurricular hobbies … paddleboarding, yoga,” said Jaylyn M., a 27-year-old who identifies as a Republican. “And then a lot of my subscriptions I’ve cut out, along with my daily coffee, which is minor, but all things that I’ve had to give up to make ends meet.”
“I had to raise all my deductibles on everything — my car insurance, my health insurance — to lower my premiums, so that I can continue to make it,” added Robyn T., a 63-year-old independent.
Trump owns the economic problems
The latest NPR/PBS News/Marist poll, out Thursday, finds that only a third of Americans approve of how Trump is handling the economy.
In the focus groups, nine of the 13 voters said they are more anxious about the economy than they were before Trump took office last year. And all but one voter said that “President Trump himself is responsible for those higher prices” because of the war.
“And 10 said he’s out of touch with their economic concerns,” Thau told NPR. “So for them, there’s a clear disconnect between how the president’s operating on the economy and what their needs are.”
And heading into what could be some tough midterm elections for Republicans, voters are really frustrated that Trump isn’t delivering a better economy by now.
“It seems to me, like, pick your issue, and things are not going well for him,” said Josh K., a 29-year-old independent voter. “I mean, we got this stupid war in Iran, and it turns out that we actually aren’t getting anything out of it. I mean, all we got was $4 gas. I mean, pick your issue — the economy, things are more expensive.”
Wisconsin
President of Wisconsin’s largest mosque released from ICE custody
A federal judge has ordered the release of the president of Wisconsin’s largest mosque, after finding that immigration officials probably detained him in retaliation against his public advocacy for Palestinian rights, suppressing his first amendment rights in the process.
The US district judge James Patrick Hanlon’s order on Thursday marked a sharp rebuke against Trump officials, including the secretary of state, Marco Rubio, who had tried to paint Salah Sarsour as a national security threat.
“Salah Sarsour, who has lived in this country for more than three decades and served as a core pillar in his community without any issues, should never have been detained in the first place,” his legal team wrote in a statement. “While we continue to fight these baseless claims in court, today is about celebrating a family being reunited. It is also a sober reminder that, if the government can target Mr Sarsour, everyone’s free speech rights are at risk.”
Sarsour describes himself as a stateless Palestinian, according to the order. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) says that he is a Jordanian citizen. He has lived in the United States for more than three decades, becoming a legal permanent resident in 1998. Immigration officials approved Sarsour’s citizenship application decades ago, though he did not naturalize.
Sarsour has garnered public attention as a champion for Palestinian rights, and serves as a board member of an advocacy group called American Muslims for Palestine.
But Rubio personally signed off on a memo to the DHS last year describing Sarsour as deportable despite his green card, because “his actions undermine US foreign policy to combat antisemitism around the world”. The memo, cited in Hanlon’s order, accuses Sarsour’s group of being “found to have been involved in activities providing funds to Hamas”.
A group of plainclothes ICE officers from at least 10 unmarked vehicles swarmed Sarsour on 30 March of this year, arresting him and putting him in deportation proceedings. ICE ultimately detained him in Clay county jail in Indiana.
Sarsour lost 30lb while detained, the order says. His lawyers told the court that he was “at constant risk of developing serious complications from diabetes given that the medical staff only checks his blood-sugar levels once a month”. Tightly controlling diabetes typically requires multiple glucose checks daily.
Hanlon’s order says that homeland security officials and Rubio probably trampled on Sarsour’s first amendment right to free speech and appeared to have arrested him in retaliation for his Palestinian rights advocacy.
The order cited a New York Times story and the website for the Heritage Foundation, the conservative thinktank that dreamed up Project 2025,
The Heritage Foundation presented the White House with the idea to present prominent foreign-born Muslims and Palestinian rights leaders as terrorists in order to sue them, deport them or pressure employers to fire them, the order says, citing reporting from the Times and Heritage’s own website. Sarsour was probably among the targets of that campaign, the order says.
The federal government, through its lawyers, contended that Sarsour should be deported based on two convictions from more than three decades ago in Israel – one for throwing a molotov cocktail and the other for attempting to store weapons and ammunition.
Sarsour denies having committed those crimes.
But Hanlon viewed those crimes as a non-issue for justifying his incarceration, noting that the federal government knew about them since the 1990s and approved his legal permanent residency and his citizenship application anyway.
Sarsour’s speech on Palestinian rights “is core political speech and squarely within the scope of the First Amendment”, the order says. “Mr Sarsour has submitted evidence allowing a reasonable inference that his protected speech was ‘at least a motivating factor’ in Respondents’ decision to detain him.”
A spokesperson for homeland security described Sarsour as a “terrorist”, citing the convictions from his youth in Israel.
Government lawyers had argued that Sarsour did not have the same first amendment rights as US citizens. If he were released, they said, he should have to pay a $25,000 bond, wear an ankle monitor, check in routinely with ICE and remain confined to his house.
Instead, Hanlon ordered his release on personal recognizance, meaning that Sarsour does not have to pay a cash bond to compel him to show up in court again. The order, however, requires him to remain in the state of Wisconsin.
Wisconsin
Couple asks Wisconsin Supreme Court to hear Brewers 50-50 raffle prize dispute
(WLUK) – A couple challenging the decision not to award them a 50-50 raffle prize at a Milwaukee Brewers game asked the Wisconsin Supreme Court to take the case, calling it one of “statewide importance.”
Matthew and Annette Flynn purchased ten raffle tickets at the July 7, 2023, game, and held the winning number which was originally selected for $13,000. According to court records, the raffle rules in effect at the time required the winning ticket holder to claim the prize at a designated 50-50 table by the end of the top of the seventh inning. Flynn said she did not see the winning number displayed or hear it announced and was directed by stadium personnel to another location before making her way to the claim table. Officials determined she did not arrive before the deadline and selected a new winning ticket.
The Flynns sued, but the circuit and appeals courts ruled the raffle’s rules gave the foundation sole discretion to determine the official winner and that the rules clearly stated a participant who failed to claim the prize within the specified time would be disqualified.
In a petition to the Wisconsin Supreme Court filed Wednesday, the Flynn’s asked the high court to take the case, saying the decision “affects not only the parties to this action but potentially every Wisconsin resident who participates in charitable raffles and similar gaming activities.”
“This case presents significant questions concerning contractual discretion, discovery, judicial review of charitable gaming decisions, and the treatment of digital evidence within Wisconsin’s appellate system. For these reasons, Petitioners respectfully request that this Court grant review of the decision of the Court of Appeals,” the petition states.
The high court does not have to take the case. At some point, it will vote on if to take it. If it does, a months-long process to review the issues will begin. If it does not, the appeals court ruling would stand.
According to the rules posted on the Milwaukee Brewers’ website, the deadline to claim the prize is no longer during the game the tickets were purchased.
BE THE FIRST TO COMMENT
“The Participant in possession of the Raffle ticket with the potential winning number may claim the Prize at the 50/50 Table located on the Loge (2nd) level concourse behind Sections 216/217 until such time as the Ballpark officially closes to fans after the end of the game. If the Participant in possession of the Raffle ticket with the potential winning number does not claim the Prize by the time the Ballpark closes to fans after the end of the game, that Participant may still claim the Prize within thirty (30) days after the conclusion of the Raffle Period for the respective baseball game by contacting the Raffle hotline (414-902-4334). A Prize that is not claimed within thirty (30) days after the conclusion of the Raffle Period will be awarded in compliance with applicable regulations,” the site states.
-
West Virginia1 minute agoCharleston commemorates Juneteenth with downtown parade and celebration – WV MetroNews
-
Wyoming8 minutes agoGordon hosts panel on New World screwworm; no outbreaks in Wyoming
-
Crypto11 minutes agoBest Crypto Recovery Law Firms in 2026: Leading Cryptocurrency Lawyers for Asset Recovery, Fraud Investigations and Digital Asset Disputes
-
Finance16 minutes agoHomegrown Music Festival looks to right finances, hire new leadership
-
Fitness23 minutes agoWhy this unexpected exercise is most effective for building arm muscle in your 50s – and how to do it properly
-
Movie Reviews31 minutes agoThe Beautifully Handcrafted Rose of Nevada Is a Ghost Story Like No Other
-
World41 minutes agoOn the South Lawn, a UFC fighter’s victory frames an unusual White House scene
-
Politics53 minutes agoVideo: Demining the Strait of Hormuz