The state Assembly passed a bill to eliminate the school revenue limit increases that are the result of Gov. Tony Evers’ 400-year veto. Evers signing the 2023 state budget which included the 400-year veto. (Photo by Baylor Spears/Wisconsin Examiner)

During its final planned floor session this week, the Wisconsin State Assembly passed a constitutional amendment proposal that would limit the executive partial veto power and a bill to eliminate the school revenue limit increases that are the result of Gov. Tony Evers’ 400-year veto. 

Assembly Minority Leader Greta Neubauer (D-Racine) said it was the “wrong decision” for lawmakers to finish their work in February and “take quite a long vacation.” 

“There is a lot left on the table for us to address but we all know that an arbitrary deadline has been set for us to go home,” Neubauer said. “Thankfully, it does seem like the tide is turning in this body and one day things will be different and operate under a different framework that is focused on people rather than politics and power.” 

Neubauer mentioned the passage of the postpartum Medicaid extension bill and the breast cancer screening bills that are now on their way to Gov. Tony Evers. 

The session wrap-up will free Assembly lawmakers up to campaign for reelection, and the body could look much different next session as some longtime lawmakers, including Assembly Speaker Robin Vos (R-Rochester), are retiring. Under newly competitive maps, the balance of power in both the Assembly and Senate is up for grabs.

“We have a lot left to accomplish this session. There is still time for us to act on funding our public schools, protecting our rights and freedoms, lowering costs and helping Wisconsinites make ends meet,” Neubauer said. “This is the moment to act boldly and do the right thing for the people of Wisconsin.” 

Vos told WISN-12 on Friday that leaders and Gov. Tony Evers had not yet reached a deal on how to use the state’s projected $2.5 budget surplus. The leaders have been negotiating on ways to ease property taxes and provide funding to schools.

“We’re going to figure a way to get it done,” Vos said, adding that he wants the money to “go back to the people” while Evers wants additional investments. “The middle ground is a little of each.”

“We’ll probably have to come back in a special session or extraordinary session, something like that,” he said. 

Lawmakers passed proposals that were introduced in reaction to the veto as well as bills to ban phones in school, regulate app and social media companies and to provide state money towards “Trump accounts.” 

Fight over partial veto

The Assembly passed two proposals that took aim at the partial veto Evers used when he signed the 2023 state budget that extended an annual $325 per-pupil school revenue limit increase for 400 years. Evers, who recently defended the veto in his State of the State address, said he wanted to provide school districts with a consistent way to raise revenue in the absence of reliable state funding increases. 

The Assembly also approved in a 54-41 vote along party lines a third constitutional amendment to go before voters later this year. 

The amendments will go before Wisconsin voters in November. Two others, including one to eliminate diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) programs from state and local governments and one to prohibit the state from ordering the closure of places of worship during a state of emergency, passed the state Legislature earlier this year. 

Constitutional amendment proposals have to pass the state Legislature in two consecutive legislative sessions before they go to voters. If approved, SJR 116 would prohibit partial vetoes from raising or creating any taxes or fees. 

Rep. Amanda Nedweski (R-Pleasant Prairie) introduced the amendment proposal  after Evers’ veto. 

“You never know for sure who’s going to be the next governor,” Nedweski said on the Assembly floor Thursday. “Choose wisely on this.” 

The Assembly also concurred in a bill that would outright eliminate the annual $325 per pupil revenue limit increases that are the result of the partial veto. The vote on SB 389 was 54-40 and it sends the bill to Evers, who is likely to veto it. 

Despite its likely rejection, Republican lawmakers still made the case for why Evers should sign the bill into law.

Rep. Karen Hurd (R-Withee) read a letter from superintendents on the professional advisory committee for the Cooperative Educational Service Agency 10, which serves parts of northwestern Wisconsin, urging Evers to reverse his veto. They argued in part that  $325 per pupil is not an increase that allows schools to keep pace with the rate of inflation, doesn’t fix chronic underfunding of special education funding and puts it all on property taxpayers.

The superintendents said that they thought the veto could impede reform of school funding in Wisconsin. 

The veto doesn’t stop lawmakers from being able to put more state funding into schools, but Republican lawmakers have refused to do so. During the state budget process, Republican lawmakers angered by the veto opted not to provide any increase in general school aid in the 2025-26 or 2026-27 fiscal years. School advocates said the decision would only further exacerbate the funding issues they face, especially since their decision on whether to use the additional $325 increase would rely only on property tax increases. 

“Every year we put together a budget, a budget that has to be sustainable. There may be a year that we could put more aid into schools than $325 per student. We have to look at that each year,” Hurd said. “We are people that are trying to fund the schools in every way that we can, but when it is set at $325 per year for the next 400 years, then that opportunity for us to work within the budget and increase it has been ripped away.”

Democrats said that before taking away authority from schools, lawmakers should consider improving the state’s system for funding schools. Rep. Christian Phelps (D-Eau Claire) said that the annual school revenue limit increase is the “only predictable source of revenue” for  Wisconsin public schools.

“We should not close public schools,” he said, alluding to Republican lawmakers who have proposed consolidating school districts as a way of helping with funding challenges. “We should fund them.”

Rep. Angelina Cruz (D-Racine) said the GOP bill does not answer the question of how to fund schools and provide relief to property taxpayers

“The answer is to reconnect school funding to inflation. The answer is to increase state aid so local property taxes are not the backstop. The answer is to modernize the formula to reflect demographic realities. The answer is to fulfill our constitutional obligation to fully fund public schools,” Cruz said. 

AB 460 would allow siblings of students in the state’s school voucher program to qualify for participation even if their family no longer meets the family income requirements. It passed on a voice vote. It now goes to the state Senate.

“I’m not going to do anything that further exacerbates the zeroing out of the state’s resources on public schools or expands privatization on the Wisconsin taxpayers dime, particularly Wisconsin property taxpayers dime,” Phelps said. “Unfortunately, this bill proposes removing income caps  on the students that Wisconsin property taxpayers would be funding to attend private schools.”

Cell phone ban, online regulations

AB 948 would require school districts to adopt policies that prohibit the use of cell phones for the entire school days, taking a step further than the recent law signed by Evers that bans phones during class. It passed via voice vote and will now go to the Senate.

Rep. Alex Joers (D-Waunakee) said he would support the bill but thought it was the “easy way out,” saying he wasn’t sure with advancing technologies in the future that to “blanketly ban things” would be an effective solution.

Rep. Alex Penterman (R-Hustisford), who has worked as a substitute teacher, said students in middle and high school can become a “social piranha” if they don’t have the latest smartphone. 

Rep. Lindee Brill (R-Sheboygan Falls) said the bill would encourage students to engage with each other and bring back “loud lunches” where “kids aren’t on the phones but instead negotiations are happening between peanut butter and jelly and grilled cheese and not Snapchat. We need to go back to kids making their after school plans while they’re eating their lunches instead of bullying each other online.”

Goeben said her bills would support the “God-given constitutional right of parents to protect and guide their children, not tech platforms.” 

The Assembly also passed a set of bills meant to put regulations on apps and social media companies that are intended to give parents more oversight over their children’s activity.

Rep. Joy Goeben (R-Hobart) said the bills were aimed at protecting children in “digital world that was not built with their safety in mind.”

“We’re living in an age of online predatory behavior, instant access and algorithm driven exposure. Children are encountering explicit material at younger and younger ages and many parents feel that they are fighting a losing battle.” 

“We cannot pretend that warning labels will solve every problem but we can insist on honesty and accountability from those who profit from this content.” 

AB 961 passed 61-34. It would would require digital distributors of media to display prominent “explicit content” warning labels on material that “predominantly appeals to the prurient, shameful, or morbid interest of children,” “is patently offensive to prevailing standards in the adult community as a whole with respect to what is suitable for children” and “lacks serious literary, artistic, political, scientific or educational value for children.” 

The bill calls for the warning label to be displayed on the front page of digital platforms, the label would need to appear for at least 10 seconds or until a user acknowledges the warning.

AB 962 passed 58-37. It would require app developers and app stores to verify the age of users and get parental consent before children are able to download or purchase apps or make in-store purchases. Accounts belonging to a minor would have to be affiliated with an account owned by a parent.

AB 963 passed 60-35. It would require social media platforms that bring in more than $1 billion in revenue per year to take several steps, including estimating the age of users and for minors,  setting their privacy to the most private settings, turning off addictive features and prohibiting profile-based, paid commercial advertising in their feeds. 

Trump accounts

The Assembly also approved bills to provide state funds to the “Trump accounts” program. 

The federal tax and spending bill signed into law by President Donald Trump last year included a measure to allow parents to create dedicated “Trump accounts” similar to IRA accounts, for their children. Parents of babies born between Jan. 1, 2025 through the end of 2028 and who are U.S. citizens with a valid Social Security number will be eligible to have $1,000 deposited in the account from the federal government. 

AB 996 would provide a state match for the accounts. AB 997 includes the $60 million in annual funding for the 2025-27 budget cycle for proposal. Both passed 62-35 with eight Democrats joining Republicans in favor.

“People are not saving at the right pace for retirement,” said the author of both bills, Rep. Elijah Behnke (R- Town of Chase). “The reason this is the best possible policy is because you’re investing in your kids’ future.” 

Joers said the money should be invested in other priorities that could help children and parents more and expressed concerns about the federal program not being up and running yet.

“I think that we need to do a lot better for our kids and our parents,” Joers said. “This bill takes money that we should be giving to our children and our parents right now and instead takes it and gives it to a federal program that has not even been set up yet. I know the president wandered around stage with Nicki Minaj, but this program has not started yet.” 

“Kids need this money now, not 18 years from now. They need it now in their schools they need this money. Let’s keep the promise that we made in our budget to fund special education reimbursement.”

“Immoral conduct” investigations

The Assembly also approved two additional bills that were introduced after an investigation by the CapTimes that found there were over 200 investigations into teacher licenses due to allegations of sexual misconduct or grooming from 2018 to 2023. 

The bills seek to provide new rules on how “immoral conduct” investigations are conducted.

AB 1003, which passed on a voice vote, would prohibit the Department of Public Instruction from ending an investigation into a license holder accused of immoral conduct without a determination on whether there should be a license revocation or termination. The prohibition wouldn’t apply if a licensee permanently surrenders the licenses and waives their rights to a future appeal. 

AB 1004, which passed 87-8, prohibits public and private schools from entering agreements that would suppress information on the immoral conduct of an employee, would affect the report of immoral conduct by an employer or employees or require an education employer to expunge information about allegations of findings or immoral conduct. 

Other bills on the issue that have passed the Assembly or Senate include one to create a “grooming” crime in Wisconsin, one to ensure school districts have policies on appropriate communications and one to require DPI to maintain an online licensing portal that is searchable by the public at no cost. 

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

Sen. André Jacque (R-New Franken) and Rep. Barbara Dittrich (R-Oconomowoc) argued that a measure regulating the use of student names and pronouns was needed to standardize policies across the state. (Photo by Baylor Spears/Wisconsin Examiner)

A bill that would require school districts to inform parents when students want to use pronouns and names that differ from the ones given to them at birth received significant pushback Tuesday during a Senate Education Committee hearing.

The committee also took testimony on a bill to add video requirements to human growth and development curriculum as well as to opt the state into a federal school choice tax credit program.

Under SB 120, Wisconsin schools would be required to adopt a policy on name and pronoun changes by July 1, 2026. Policies would not require written authorization if school staff are using a shortened version of a student’s first or middle name.

Sen. André Jacque (R-New Franken) and Rep. Barbara Dittrich (R-Oconomowoc) argued that the measure was needed to standardize policies across the state and ensure parents are involved in conversations related to pronoun and name changes for students. Many testified in opposition to the bill, saying it would do harm to students and infringe on local decision making. 

“It is deeply troubling to me that school staff are being encouraged to keep parents out of major life decisions concerning their children, while at the same time these same officials cannot give them aspirin without parental approval. Why would schools promote secrecy in such a way?” Jacque said. “Something has gone terribly wrong in our education system if officials inherently perceive parents as harmful to their own children. Parents are legally accountable for the health and welfare of their own children… Hiding from us important things that are going on in their lives is not only disrespectful to parents, it is harmful to our children.” 

Jacque said the legislation would be consistent with a 2023 ruling by a Waukesha County Circuit Court judge, which found that a policy that allowed students in the Kettle Moraine School District to change their names and pronouns in school violated the rights of parents to make medical decisions for their children. The school district now has a policy that requires express parental consent for staff to use different names and pronouns. 

“To me, if there’s going to be a name and pronoun change the school should be working together with parents and students to advance that together,” Dittrich said. 

Sen. Chris Larson (D-Milwaukee) pushed back on the Republican bill, saying it would infringe on local communities’ ability to make decisions about policies and would harm students.

“You could sub out the words ‘parental decision making’ and say that the Legislature is going to have the best authority of what should happen — instead of parents, instead of local governments, instead of local school boards. You’re saying that you guys know better,” Larson said. 

“That’s a total distortion of what the bill does,” Dittrich said.

Larson asked the bill authors to consider a situation where parents may not be accepting of a student who wants to use a different name and pronouns. 

“You are expediting that situation by making it come to a head when there are parents who are less than understanding, who are brought up under a very strict and very incorrect… and you are forcing the question in a vulnerable population that is already overly targeted with transphobia with this, which is already overly targeted for bullying, which is already higher than the average rates of suicide and mental health. You are bullying them by bringing this bill forward,” Larson said.

“You are saying we should hide information and not facilitate those conversations,” Jacque replied. Dittrich added that Larson was “trampling all over parental rights.”

Paul Bartlett, a father of two transgender children, said the bill works to “prioritize the unfounded fears of conservative parents over the well-being of children.” 

“Like any parent, I want my children to thrive and be happy. They are well supported against these continued legislative attacks, but many trans and nonbinary kids are not,” Bartlett said. He said that school should be a refuge for unsupported students, “not a place where teachers are obligated to out and humiliate them.” 

Bartlett pointed out that lawmakers recently approved a law, known as Bradyn’s Law, that seeks to protect young people from being sexually extorted online. 

“That everyone agreed on [that bill] was important because what we were doing was preventing teenagers from killing themselves basically from humiliation… and yet these bills, they do the opposite,” Bartlett said. 

Bartlett noted that anti-trans laws have a negative effect on young transgender people. 

According to a 2024 survey by the Trevor Project, 45% of transgender and nonbinary youth have reported that they or their family have considered moving to a different state due to anti-LGBTQ+ politics and laws, and about 90% have said that their wellbeing was negatively affected by  recent politics. 

The Trevor Project survey, which pulled from the experiences of over 18,000 LGBTQ+ youth, also found that 39% of LGBTQ+ young people, including 46% of transgender and nonbinary young people, had seriously considered attempting suicide. 

“I just don’t understand, like, why do we keep doing this?” Bartlett said.

Abigail Swetz, executive director of FAIR Wisconsin, said bills that target transgender youth contribute to the mental health struggles they face. 

The bill is part of a slate of bills that Wisconsin Republicans introduced related to transgender people, including children, last year. According to the 2025 anti-trans bills tracker, there were over 1,020 bills introduced across the country including 20 in Wisconsin. 

“Inclusive policies, like making it possible for students to use an affirming name and the pronouns that best represent their identity in school in an easily accessible way — those policies are a pressure valve making it possible for [youth] to live fully and healthily,” Swetz said. 

Swetz said when she previously worked as a teacher she helped support students that were preparing to share information about themselves with their family and said it was important to follow the child’s lead. 

“The youth themselves are the experts in their own experience and have a better understanding than anyone about the challenges they might face when it comes to acceptance and safety at home. I have witnessed that conversation go well, and I have seen it go badly,” Swetz said. She said the bill that lawmakers were pushing “aims to traffic in distrust while a process like this, one that is directed by a well-supported young person, is actually how we can build trust between parents, children and school staff.” 

Peggy Wirtz-Olson, president of the Wisconsin Education Association Council (WEAC), said she was speaking out against the bill on behalf of the students who would be “devastated” by the bill. 

“All students deserve safe and welcoming schools, not only some of them, every single one of them, and that includes our trans students,” Wirtz-Olsen said. “The simple use of preferred names and pronouns is associated with a large decrease in depressive symptoms, suicidal thoughts and even suicidal attempts. Respecting preferred names and pronouns is a proven measure to show respect, earn trust, affirm our students, so they can feel safe, and they can focus on learning.”

Requiring videos of fetal development

Lawmakers also took testimony on a bill to add requirements for schools that offer human growth and development education. 

Human growth and development is optional for Wisconsin school districts, but for those that do opt in, state law includes some requirements including encouraging abstinence for students who are unmarried. 

SB 371 would add requirements that explanations of pregnancy, prenatal development and childbirth include a high definition video that shows the development of the brain, heart, sex organs and other organs, a rendering of the fertilization process and fetal development as well as a presentation on each trimester of pregnancy and the physical and emotional health of the mother. 

The bill would also require that instruction on parental responsibility include information on the importance of secure interpersonal relationships for infant mental health and on the value of reading to young children. 

Bill coauthors Sen. Mary Felzkowski (R-Tomahawk) and Rep. Amanda Nedweski (R-Pleasant Prairie) rejected the assertion that the bill is a mandate, noting that school districts do not have to teach human growth and development. 

“Today’s youth are technologically and visually inclined learners. We should lean into this to better convey this important information,” Felzkowski said. She also added that there should be bipartisan agreement around “preparing the young women of today with all the knowledge they could need to prepare for motherhood and young men for fatherhood.” 

“Being able to actually see the real life process of fetal development in action will be more tangible to students than textbooks or seeing it in a still diagram or a drawing. We have a resource at our disposal to bring science into our classroom and we should use it to our advantage to give students a stronger educational experience,” Nedweski said.

Nedweski also said it “might not be obvious to some people that using an iPad as a babysitter is not healthy” and that it is “far more important for their health to read to children and to bond with them.”

Larson asked the lawmakers what type of research they had to back up the change to state law.

“There’s not one specific scientific research that we’re relating this to,” Felzkowski said. “Just Google it and numerous things will pop up, or we can have our staff do that for you.”

No one spoke against the bill. 

The Wisconsin Public Health Association (WPHA) and the Wisconsin Association of Local Health Departments and Boards are registered against the bill, according to the Wisconsin Lobbying website. The organizations outlined their concerns with the Assembly version of the bill in a statement to the Wisconsin Examiner. 

The organizations said they opposed the legislation in part because it doesn’t do anything to restore the educational standards that were in place under the Healthy Youth Act. The former state law, which included a more comprehensive policy that required providing age-appropriate instruction in human growth and development, was adopted in 2010 but was later repealed in 2012 during a special session under former Gov. Scott Walker, who reestablished abstinence-only education. 

“Evidence-based, comprehensive instruction is essential to equip students with accurate information and skills necessary to make informed decisions about their sexual health, reducing rates of unintended pregnancies and sexually transmitted infections. It also promotes healthy relationships, consent, and emotional well-being, contributing to overall public health and safety,” the organizations said in the statement.

DPI spokesperson Chris Bucher told the Examiner in an email that the state already has similar guidelines for human development instruction in state law and said the bill is an example of infringing on local control. 

“It is up to districts to determine human development curriculum for what best fits their community. This is also another unfunded mandate for districts choosing to offer human development. District budgets are already stretched thin,” Bucher said. “If the Legislature wants to mandate specific instruction, they should provide funding for curriculum.”

Federal choice tax credit program 

SB 600 would instruct Gov. Tony Evers to opt Wisconsin into a federal school choice tax credit program.

Gov. Tony Evers has previously said he will not opt Wisconsin into the program, and if the bill were passed by the Senate and Assembly instructing Evers to take action, he could veto the legislation. 

A provision in the federal law signed by President Donald Trump in July, which goes into effect in 2027, will provide a dollar-for-dollar tax credit of up to $1,700 to people who donate to a qualifying “scholarship granting program” to support certain educational expenses including tuition and board at private schools, tutoring and books. 

However, governors in each state must decide whether to opt in and have until Jan. 1, 2027 to do so.

Felzkowski said it would be “shortsighted and self-defeating” to not opt into the tax credit, noting that other states including North Carolina, Tennessee, Nebraska, Texas, South Dakota and Iowa, are already opting in. 

If Wisconsinites opt into the federal tax credit, the money will be directed to private schools outside the state if the law does not pass, Felzkowski said. “Our dollars will be going to those states… instead of our students here in the state of Wisconsin.”

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE