Welcome to the Thursday, Feb. 20, 2025, Brew.
By: Lara Bonatesta
Here’s what’s in store for you as you start your day:
- How Israel and Palestine are showing up at the local ballot box
- Results from the Wisconsin statewide primary on Feb. 18
- Four members of Congress have announced 2026 retirement plans so far
How Israel and Palestine are showing up at the local ballot box
While most political coverage is focused on what’s happening in Washington, D.C., there’s a vast and vibrant political life outside the Beltway.
At the local level, in particular, policy debates sometimes seek to address issues far beyond a community’s borders, including human rights and matters of war and peace. One issue that has generated policy responses in several states and localities is the Israel-Hamas War.
Such is the case with ballot measures in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, and in five Vermont towns. In those localities, voters will have the chance to decide how their local governments respond to the war.
On May 20, Pittsburgh voters will decide on two charter amendments the city council passed in response to a proposed citizen initiative that may also appear on the ballot.
The citizen initiative, currently gathering signatures, would establish an investment policy that diverts funds from governments and entities engaged in genocide, ethnic cleansing, or apartheid, which are defined in the measure’s text.
To qualify for the ballot, proponents of the initiative, Not On Our Dime Pittsburgh, must submit 12,500 valid signatures.
Not on Our Dime states on its website, “Overwhelmingly, Americans want an arms embargo on Israel. It’s against Federal law to provide weapons to countries violating human rights. Pittsburgh’s Pension Fund even has an investment policy that says it should reduce arms production and promote human dignity.”
The proposed initiative would prohibit the use of public funds to purchase goods and services from any company that does business with governments actively engaging in or facilitating genocide, ethnic cleansing, or apartheid and would also divert spending and contracts away from those governments.
The measure would also establish an investment policy excluding enterprises involved in arms production and those that conduct business with governments or entities that restrict humanitarian aid to civilians, target infrastructure essential to sustaining human life, deny access to medical care based on ethnicity, race, religion, disability, gender, or sexual orientation, or use prison labor for commercial benefit.
Supporters of the initiative include the Democratic Socialists of America Pittsburgh, the Jewish Voice for Peace (JVP) Pittsburgh, the Pittsburgh BDS Coalition, and the Council on American–Islamic Relations (CAIR) Pittsburgh.
The Jewish Federation of Greater Pittsburgh opposes the initiative. Pittsburgh Councilmember Erika Strassburger (D), who also opposes the initiative, said, “We can’t subject our residents to the threat of service disruptions because we can’t contract with a mainstream corporation that happens to operate in a country that some don’t like.”
Strassburger introduced two charter amendments that will appear on the ballot, which would conflict with the initiative if it qualifies for the ballot. Beacon Coalition and StandWithUs Mid-Atlantic support both amendments.
- The first amendment would prohibit “the discrimination on the basis of race, religion, ancestry, sex, sexual orientation, age, gender identity or expression, disability, place of birth, national origin or association or affiliation with any nation or foreign state in conducting business of the City.”
- The second amendment would prohibit the use of the home rule charter amendment process to “add duties or obligations beyond the lawful scope of the city’s authority.”
On March 4, five Vermont localities—Brattleboro, Montpelier, Newfane, Vergennes, and Winooski—will also decide on nonbinding questions advising their respective mayors and city council members to adopt pledges on Palestine and Israel. The measures in all five localities have the same wording, which reads:
“WE AFFIRM our commitment to freedom, justice, and equality for the Palestinian people and all people; and WE OPPOSE all forms of racism, bigotry, discrimination, and oppression; and WE DECLARE ourselves an apartheid-free community, and to that end, WE PLEDGE to join others in working to end all support to Israel’s apartheid regime, settler colonialism, and military occupation.”
In 2024, voters in Urbana, Illinois, approved a question that advised local officials to stop providing military funding for Israel. As of 2025, 38 states had passed bills and executive orders discouraging boycotts against Israel. The conflict over Israeli contracts or investing public dollars in businesses that support Israel is part of the debate over Environmental, social, and corporate governance (ESG).
Results from the Wisconsin statewide primary on Feb. 18
Wisconsin voters went to the polls on Tuesday for the state’s primary elections. The offices on the ballot included Wisconsin’s Superintendent of Public Instruction, seats on various local school boards, city councils, and other local governments.
As we noted in our Feb. 6 edition of The Brew, three candidates—incumbent Jill Underly, Brittany Kinser, and Jeff Wright—ran in the nonpartisan primary for Wisconsin Superintendent of Public Instruction. Underly and Kinser were the top two finishers. With more than 95% of the votes in, they received 38% and 34.5%, respectively, and will advance to the April 1 general election. Wright received 27.4% of the vote.
PBS Wisconsin’s Steven Potter wrote, “Although the position is described as non-partisan, the job of running the state’s public school system is anything but apolitical. This is largely because of school system funding battles between the governor and the state Legislature, but also due to high-profile contemporary political issues that include transgender student policies, school library book access and bans, police in schools, and other contentious matters.”
Underly is campaigning on increasing funding for Wisconsin schools, saying, “Our state has been underfunding schools for a long time, and we need to make the necessary investments so Wisconsin kids get a great education, and are able to compete in the global economy.” Underly has also campaigned on her request for $4 billion in state spending for public schools, saying it “is what I truly believe the state of Wisconsin owes its public schools.” The Wisconsin Democratic Party has endorsed Underly.
Kinser is an education consultant, former special education teacher, and non-profit executive. She is campaigning to reform the state’s curriculum, saying, “We must prioritize reading, writing, math and science to provide the foundation for meaningful careers and a bright future.” Kinser also said she wants to publish test scores earlier: “It’s being transparent and getting people the information, parent and schools especially, so that they can see what’s working and what’s not working.” Kinser says she does not align with either party and has described herself as moderate. CJ Szafir, CEO of the Institute for Reforming Government, which describes itself as an organization that focuses on ”tax reform, government inefficiency, and burdensome regulation,” said Kinser is “aligned with conservatives and the conservative base.”
Here are some other races within Ballotpedia’s coverage scope.
- Eight candidates ran in the special nonpartisan primary for Milwaukee Common Council District 3. Alex Brower and Daniel Bauman received the most votes and will advance to the general election. According to the unofficial Milwaukee County election results, Brower and Bauman received 28.7% and 27.9% of votes, respectively, with all wards reporting.
- There were three contested primaries for Districts 9, 10, and 12 on the Madison Common Council. Click here to see the unofficial results of those races.
Wisconsin is one of the 26 states where we’ve expanded our local election coverage to include all local elections in 2025. To see our coverage of all local elections in Wisconsin by county, click here.
Four members of Congress have announced 2026 retirement plans so far
As of Feb. 19, four members of the U.S. Congress—two senators and two representatives—have announced they will not seek re-election in 2026. Today, we’ll break down who those members are and how these numbers compare to previous years.
The total number of 2026 retirement announcements—four—is the same as it was at this point in 2020 and 2018. However, it is less than it was in 2024 and 2022.
U.S. Senate
Two senators—Tina Smith (D-Minn.) and Gary Peters (D-Mich.)—have announced that they will not seek re-election in 2026. Both have said they plan to retire from public office.
Two senators had announced their retirements at this point in the 2020 and 2024 election cycles. Four had announced their requirements at this point in the 2022 cycle, and none had announced their retirements at this point in the 2018 cycle.
U.S. House of Representatives
Two representatives—Raúl Grijalva (D-Ariz.) and Andy Biggs (R-Ariz.)—have announced they will not seek re-election in 2026. Grijalva has said he plans to retire from public service, while Biggs is retiring to run for Governor of Arizona.
Two representatives had announced their retirements at this point in the 2020 election cycle. Eight had announced their retirements at this point in the 2024 cycle, one in the 2022 cycle, and four in the 2018 cycle.
Congressional retirements by year
In 2018, 55 incumbents retired from Congress. The total number of retirements fell to 40 in 2020 and then rose back to 55 in 2022. In 2024, 53 incumbents—eight senators and 45 representatives—retired from Congress.
Congressional retirements by month
Between January 2011 and February 2025, 351 members of Congress retired. Of every election cycle from 2012 to 2024, the 2018 cycle had the most retirements (54), and the 2020 cycle had the fewest (41). From 2011 to 2024, an average of 50 members of Congress announced their retirements per cycle.
The following chart shows a breakdown of total announcements by month, separated into election years and off years.
