Rep. Barbara Dittrich (R-Oconomowoc) speaking during floor debate Thursday. Photo by Baylor Spears/Wisconsin Examiner.

The Wisconsin State Assembly passed several bills Thursday that target transgender youth in sports, their medical care and decisions on pronouns and names used in school. 

The bills are part of a national wave of actions targeting transgender people that have been taken since President Donald Trump took office. According to the Trans Legislation Tracker, 796 bills have been introduced across the country in 2025. 

Hearings on the bills over the last two weeks were emotional and lengthy, lasting over 20 hours, with the vast majority of people testifying against the bills. Republicans dismissed the public feedback, saying the policies are popular. They cited recent surveys, including a Marquette Law School poll that found 71% of U.S. adults favor requiring transgender athletes compete on teams that match the sex they were assigned at birth.

It’s unlikely the bills will become law as Gov. Tony Evers has vetoed similar bills in the past and vowed to veto any legislation targeting LGBTQ+ youth. 

Assembly Speaker Robin Vos (R-Rochester) said lawmakers were still pursuing the bills because they provide an opportunity for the public to tell Evers what it thinks.

“At some point you would hope that public pressure would convince Gov. Evers that he has to change his stance,” Vos said. “We have seen some brave Democrats across the country realize that their party has veered way too far to the left, and then if they want to win elections again, and they want to be on the side of the public, they’re going to change their stance.” 

When asked what he made of the overwhelming opposition to the bills at hearings, Vos referenced a saying by former Wisconsin Gov. Lee Dreyfus that Madison is “30 square miles surrounded by reality.”

“If you look at where the most part of Wisconsin is, I think everywhere there’s broad bipartisan support,” Vos said. The area surrounding the Capitol “is the one place where the majority of people think that it’s OK to mutilate your kids. It’s OK to have women never win another sporting event. Yes, did they succeed in getting a couple dozen people to come and testify? Yes, they did and to that, they deserve the credit, but the reality is, we had elections. This was an issue.”

Since the 2024 elections, some Democrats across the country, including U.S. Rep. Seth Moulton of Massachusetts and California Gov. Gavin Newsom, have challenged other Democrats’ positions on policies related to transgender people. Wisconsin Democrats were mostly united against the bills, giving impassioned speeches about how the bills would do more harm than good and citing testimony delivered at the hearings.

Assembly Minority Leader Greta Neubauer (D-Racine) said that denying children health care is a “new low” and accused Republicans of proposing the legislation in order to create a political issue and rile up their own base.

“We are here because the majority party is trying to gain an advantage in the Supreme Court election by bullying kids. We know it. You know it. It’s mean-spirited, and it’s not helping people of Wisconsin,” Neubauer said.

One Democrat, Rep. Russell Goodwin (D-Milwaukee), joined Republicans voting in favor of AB 100, which would ban transgender girls in Wisconsin K-12 schools from participating on teams that reflect their gender identity. 

AB 102, which would ban transgender women attending UW System schools and Wisconsin technical colleges from participating on women’s teams, passed 50-43 along party lines. Goodwin left before voting  on that bill or any of the other bills on the calendar.

Rep. Barbara Dittrich (R-Oconomowoc) said the sports bills are needed to fill the “gaps” left by recent policy updates by the Wisconsin Interscholastic Athletic Association and the National Collegiate Athletic Association, which recently barred transgender girl athletes from competing on teams that don’t correspond with their sex at birth. The changes came in reaction to an executive order signed by Trump.

The bill was amended to explicitly exclude transgender women from locker rooms and shower areas as well. 

Dittrich said the bills are about fairness and inclusion for women, saying that a co-ed option for teams is included.

“If you want to play with boys, have at it, there’s a co-ed track for you to do that,” Dittrich said.

Rep. Angelina Cruz (D-Racine) and Rep. Angela Stroud (D-Ashland) questioned how the legislation would be enforced. 

“This bill would inflict harm on girls. This bill is an attack on girls. This bill is about exclusion and not protection. This bill does not contemplate enforcement mechanisms — raising concerns about girls’ privacy,” Cruz said. “It is unclear whether the bill would require them to answer intrusive questions about their bodies or undergo physical exams.” 

Stroud said it would likely require people to carry documents to avoid harassment and discrimination. She said the bill wouldn’t help women as a group. 

“One of the reasons we so often celebrate Title IX is because sports have allowed women to defy narrow definitions of acceptable femininity. We could be strong. We could be aggressive. We could be tough. We could be leaders,” Stroud said. “No woman is benefited by narrowing the definition of what counts as being a real woman.” 

Several Republicans complained throughout the debate about “name-calling” and harsh words that were said to them during hearings.

“The only bullying I saw was coming from the trans community,” Dittrich said, adding that she was physically threatened, called a Nazi and had to be escorted to her car from her office. She added that there were “vile” comments posted about her and her family on social media.

AB 103 would require school districts to implement policies that require a parent’s written permission for school employees to use names or pronouns different from a student’s legal name. There is one exception in the bill for a nickname that is a shortened version of a student’s legal first or middle name. The bill passed 50-43 along party lines.

Dittrich, the author of the bill, said it is necessary for parents to be included in those decisions.

“We don’t want to divide between home and school,” Dittrich said. “This is meant to heal that.”

AB 104 would ban gender-affirming care, including the prescribing of puberty-blocking drugs or gender-affirming surgery, for those under 18. It would also require revocation of a medical provider’s license found to be providing the care. It passed 50-43 with Democrats against and Republicans in favor. 

Republican lawmakers said that the bill is necessary because children often change their minds about things, and shouldn’t make medical decisions that cannot be reversed. 

“It would be a failure on our part to allow children to make life-altering decisions, decisions that they will have to live with for the rest of their life, even when that choice is made with parental support,” Rep. Rick Gundrum (R-Slinger) said. 

Gender-affirming medical care is often a lengthy, multi-step process. For those under 18, it typically focuses on pubertal suppression or hormone therapy and surgeries are extremely rare for those under 18, according to KFF. Decisions in the process are made with the input of children, their families and health care providers, including mental health providers. 

Rep. Francesca Hong (D-Madison) said her office had gotten many calls from people who have concerns about the actions lawmakers are taking, including a Wisconsinite she said was “afraid that standing up for trans people would result in retaliation to her business.”

Hong said the bill is “deeply shameful” and she was “embarrassed” to be there as the Assembly passed it.

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

The Progress Pride Flag flies over the Wisconsin Capitol in June 2023. Wisconsin lawmakers held a hearing Thursday on two bills that would limit the rights of trans and non-binary people under the age of 18.. (Photo by Henry Redman/Wisconsin Examiner)miner)

Two controversial bills that target transgender youth in schools, one dictating how school districts handle name and pronoun changes and the other banning transgender students from sports teams that align with their gender identity, received vast opposition at a public hearing Thursday.

The first bill — AB 103 — would require districts to implement policies stating that parents determine the names and pronouns used by school staff and requiring a parent’s written authorization for school employees to use something different. It includes one exception: if a nickname is a shortened version of a student’s legal first or middle name.

Rep. Barbara Dittrich (R-Oconomowoc) told the Assembly Education Committee that the bill is another way to unite parents and their children. Dittrich and coauthor Sen. Andre Jacque (R-New Franken) said the bill is modeled after a policy implemented at Arrowhead High School in 2022. 

“Set aside whether or not you think a child should change their name or socially transition at school age, in our schools, we don’t allow our kids to take a Tylenol without permission from parents. We don’t allow them to go on a field trip without permission from parents. We don’t allow their pictures to be shared without permission from parents,” Dittrich said. “A major life choice — and transitioning and changing your name, it is a major life choice — is something parents should be involved in.”

Dittrich said there should be a legal document affirming that parents approve any changes.

Democrats expressed their opposition to the bill. Rep. Francesca Hong (D-Madison) said she was concerned about the bill being a “copy and paste” of one local school district’s policy and being applied statewide. 

Rep. Christian Phelps (D-Eau Claire) asked how many transgender people Dittrich consulted in drafting the bill. She said she spoke with none. 

“This is a parent’s rights bill. The parent is the legal guardian, therefore, I did not consult anyone who’s trans,” Dittrich said.

Sen. Mark Spreitzer (D-Beloit), leader of the LGBTQ+ caucus, and Sen. Melissa Ratcliff (D-Cottage Grove), leader of the Transgender Parent and Non-Binary Advocacy caucus, both testified at the hearing. The bill is “cruel, discriminatory, and inhumane,” said Ratcliff, who is the parent of a transgender child.

“It incentivizes persistent mistreatment of not just transgender and non-binary children, but all children, and it creates unsafe learning environments. It’s a mess of a bill that would lead to absurd situations,” Ratcliff said. “This bill would be laughable if not for the fact that it creates real harm for our trans and non-binary students.”

Ratcliff also noted that the exceptions to the bills were narrow and may not make sense in practice.

“Perhaps your legal name is Richard, and you cannot be called Dick, or perhaps Charles can no longer be a Chuck? Legislatures should not be micromanaging policy choices local school school boards make,” Ratcliff said. 

Spreitzer urged lawmakers to not take a vote on the bills or to vote them down in committee. He noted that the bills are unlikely to become law given that Gov. Tony Evers has vetoed similar bills and vowed to veto future legislation.

“This discussion is not aimed at making policy,” he said. “It is just giving a forum for bigotry, and it is going to hurt our youth, and if you don’t have that intent, then I appreciate that, but that is the effect it is going to have, so I would ask you to look at that, consider your own intent and act accordingly.” 

Many in the room broke out into applause at Spreitzer’s comments, but committee chair Rep. Joel Kitchens (R-Sturgeon Bay) quickly shut that down.

“Please, I’ve said no cheering. We’re all going to hear things we agree with and disagree with. Just keep it to yourself,” Kitchens said, adding he didn’t want to have to have people removed from the room. He asked the crowd to quiet down several times throughout the day.

Dittrich asked if there are any amendments that could be made to make the bill better, but Spreitzer said the bill isn’t “fixable.” He said the intent of the bill appears to be making it harder for trans and nonbinary youth to change their names or pronouns and “if that is the intent of this bill, I don’t know that there is a way you can fix the language of it through an amendment.” 

More than 70 people testified during the public hearing, which ran for more than ten hours, with witnesses given a five-minute time limit. 

There were many more opponents than supporters at the hearing — leading Wisconsin Moms For Liberty activist Scarlett Johnson, testifying in favor of the bill, to ask for extra time after hitting the time limit. Johnson argued that she and supporters of the bill were “wildly outnumbered.”

Wisconsin Republicans have introduced bills targeting LGBTQ+ youth many times over the last several years. This year’s bills come as President Donald Trump has also targeted transgender people through a series of executive orders. 

Several witnesses  noted that this was not their first time testifying against such legislation; one  said  they were “really tired of coming.” 

Luke Berg, an attorney with the conservative Wisconsin Institute for Law and Liberty, said the organization has received calls about schools from “far too many Wisconsin parents in the last few years.” Asked about the exact number, Berg estimated that WILL has heard from six to 12 parents. 

Lawmakers on the committee asked Berg about what would happen if a student is fearful of their home life. Berg said concerns about students living in an unsafe home environment could be dealt with by Child Protective Services. 

“I certainly don’t disagree that there are bad parents, but we have a system and a process in place to deal with that,” Berg said. 

WILL clients Tammy Fournier and her daughter, Autumn, said the bill would have been helpful for them and is needed to ensure “no other Wisconsin families would have to experience the government overstep we did.” They testified that at age 12, Autumn was questioning her gender identity and for a time was referred to at school as “he” and by a different name. She later changed her mind. 

WILL brought a successful suit against the Kettle Moraine School District on their behalf that claimed the district violated parental rights by adopting a policy to allow, facilitate, and affirm a minor student’s request to transition to a different gender identity at school without parental consent and even over the parents’ objection. A judge blocked the district’s policy that had allowed students to choose their name and pronouns. 

Many of the bill’s opponents, including parents of transgender youth, said transgender youth need support and should have the ability to make decisions for themselves. They said the bill could be detrimental to young people’s mental health. 

“Parental involvement in support is incredibly important, but it’s not always present, and when it’s not, our schools can be a safe place for students who do not have a safe place at home,” Spreitzer said. “There are nuanced ways we can navigate this without this one-size-fits-all approach that is aimed at making it harder for trans and non-binary students, and even in some cases, their supportive parent.”

The Trevor Project’s 2024 U.S. National Survey on the Mental Health of LGBTQ+ Young People surveyed 358 Wisconsin youths, finding significant mental health struggles LGBTQ+ youth can face. About 39% of LGBTQ+ youth surveyed reported seriously considering suicide, including 44% of transgender and nonbinary youth, and 12% reported a suicide attempt, the survey found. In addition, 63% of LGBTQ+ surveyed reported experiencing symptoms of anxiety. 

Kai Pyle, an assistant professor at UW-Madison told lawmakers about their experience exploring their identity growing up. Pyle stipulated they were speaking in a personal capacity, not for the university. 

Pyle  said that at the age of 15 they asked friends, classmates and teachers to use a name different from their legal name, and it was mostly accepted. A little over a year later, they came out as transgender, which was a “little bit of a more difficult change for many of my peers and teachers, but they were used to calling me Kai at that point, which in 2009 was a pretty unusual name in Wisconsin,” Pyle said.

Pyle questioned the effect the bill would have had on them had it been law then. 

“Would I have been acceptable because it was potentially just a shortened version of my legal name, which also started with the letter K?… The situation that a student like me would find themselves in, should this bill become law, clearly shows how this policy is discriminatory specifically to transgender youth, and how nonsensical it is to try to legally limit staff from using students’ own preferred names and pronouns,” Pyle said. “Beyond simply being nonsensical and discriminatory, however, it is fundamentally an attack on the right of all humans, regardless of their age, to be treated with dignity in a way that respects their sense of self.”

The second bill — AB 100 — would require  Wisconsin K-12 schools sports teams be designated based on “sex,” defined as the sex at birth, and would ban transgender girls from participating on teams and being in locker rooms consistent with their gender identity. 

Tessa Price, a Madison resident, said the legislation won’t be successful in gaining the type of control that lawmakers appear to want with the bill. 

“At the end of the day, trans people exist, they play sports, and they will continue playing sports with other members [with] community support that they find,” Price said. “So you will still find expressions within those sports that don’t match the control you’re trying to exert over it.”

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

Wisconsin Republicans introduced new bills targeting transgender youth last week after President Donald Trump signed several related executive orders. People gather in New Orleans for Transgender Day of Visibility on March 31, 2023. (Photo by Greg LaRose/Louisiana Illuminator)

Wisconsin Republicans are again turning their focus towards LGBTQ+ youth, especially those who are transgender, introducing bills that would prohibit gender-affirming care for youth, ban students from playing on certain sports teams and mandate that school districts get permission from parents when using different names and pronouns for students. 

The four bills come as President Donald Trump has signed a slate of executive orders targeting transgender people. The bills have received pushback from the Wisconsin Legislative LGBTQ+ Caucus, the Transgender Parent and Non-Binary Advocacy Caucus and LGBTQ+ advocacy organizations. 

Sen. Mark Spreitzer (D-Beloit), chair of the LGBTQ+ caucus, told the Wisconsin Examiner that the bills are “part of broader national Republican effort” to attack trans people. 

“Republicans are now trying to essentially legislate trans people out of existence by denying medically necessary life-saving care, by preventing people from playing team sports, by trying to make it harder for people to be called by the name and pronouns that they go by when they’re in school,” Spreitzer said. 

Targeting transgender athletes

The first two bills would ban transgender girls in Wisconsin K-12 schools and transgender women attending UW System schools and Wisconsin technical colleges from participating on teams that reflect their gender identity. 

The bills’ introduction followed the Wisconsin Interscholastic Athletic Association decision in early February to change its policy, which previously permitted transgender athletes to compete on teams consistent with their gender identity. In response to an executive order signed by Trump, the new policy prohibits an athlete from competing on a team that does not match the biological sex that they were assigned when they were born.

“Working in consultation with legal counsel, our Board updated this policy to ensure clarity is provided to our membership as they work to comply with new federal guidance from the White House,” Stephanie Hauser, executive director of the WIAA, said in a statement. 

The WIAA’s decision was celebrated by Reps. Barbara Dittrich (R-Oconomowoc) and Dan Knodl (R-Germantown), who have led unsuccessful efforts in the Legislature to restrict what teams transgender athletes play on for many years. The lawmakers said in a column that they would reintroduce a bill “to secure women’s and girls’ rights in Wisconsin.”

FAIR Wisconsin Executive Director Abigail Swetz said in a statement that sports should be an inclusive space for youth. 

“When an athlete gets to play sports on a team where they belong, that can make such a huge difference, and that is especially true for our trans athletes when the trans community is under attack from a hostile federal government. Now is the time to show our trans kids love and support, not exclusion,” Swetz said. “Our trans kids and young adults, and all trans Wisconsinites, need to know that there are so many people in this state who love you exactly as you are. The fact that a few members of the Wisconsin legislature want to play political games with your joy is inappropriate.” 

Swetz said in an email to the Wisconsin Examiner that the decisions by lawmakers and by the WIAA are examples of the power that the Trump administration is trying to exert on policies at all levels, “using their platform in a calculated, chaotic, and hateful way.”

“There is so much a federal administration cannot do, but let’s be real here, this administration is trying to govern by executive overreach, and although I do not think they will succeed in changing many federal laws, there is power in their federal agencies and also in their significant use of the very loud microphone at their disposal,” Swetz said.

The anti-trans orders “will undoubtedly create a chilling effect of pre-compliance,” Swetz added. “We cannot allow obedience in advance, although we’re already seeing it; the WIAA ruling is a disappointing example of pre-compliance, and it’s frankly antithetical to the values WIAA espouses.”

Gender-affirming care for minors

Another bill — coauthored by Sen. Cory Tomczyk (R-Mosinee), Rep. Scott Allen (R-Waukesha), Assembly Speaker Robin Vos (R-Rochester) — would ban gender- affirming care for people under the age of 18. It would prohibit health care providers from engaging in or making referrals for medical intervention “if done for the purpose of changing the minor’s body to correspond to a sex that is discordant with the minor’s biological sex,” including prescribing puberty-blocking drugs or gender-affirming surgery for minors.

“Our children are not experiments and parents should not be scared or pressured into having their children receive non-medically necessary drugs or irreversible procedures before their brains are fully developed,” the authors wrote in a memo. 

Health care providers under the bill could be investigated and have their licenses revoked by the Board of Nursing, the Medical Examining Board and the Physician Assistant Affiliated Credentialing Board if there are allegations that they have provided this type of care to a minor.

Following an executive order by Trump to withhold funds from medical institutions that provide gender affirming care and to require federal health programs to exclude coverage of gender-affirming surgeries and hormone treatments for young people by 2026, Children’s Wisconsin hospital paused gender-affirming care for teens. The hospital reinstated the practice.

Spreitzer called the bill the “cruelest” of the proposals. 

“Republicans are touting this idea that kids shouldn’t make permanent medical decisions until they’re 18,” Spreitzer said. “There are plenty of permanent medical decisions that need to be made before the age of 18 because of different conditions, and that’s why doctors exist.”

He added that such decisions “should be made between doctors, parents and the affected young people, based on medical necessity, based on rigorous medical evaluation, and politicians should not be inserting themselves into that.”

Spreitzer said that medications to delay puberty are intended to give young people the chance to grow up and potentially be able to make additional medical decisions once they turn 18. He said that banning them could create significant psychological harm and leave permanent physical effects that may require additional medical interventions in the future that wouldn’t have been necessary if they’ve been able to take puberty blockers. 

The process for gender affirming care is lengthy and is a decision that includes the child, their families and health providers, including mental health providers, and gender affirming care before 18 mostly focuses on pubertal suppression or hormone therapy.

Studies have found that de-transitioning is quite rare, according to the Human Rights Campaign, and one study found that transgender youth who start hormones with their parents’ assistance before age 18 years are less likely to detransition compared with those that start as adults.

Spreitzer noted that those under 18 who have been receiving care would also have to stop receiving it. The bill would include a six-month period before it goes into effect which would be meant for health care providers to discontinue care for minor patients 

“People are going to essentially be told in six months you’re going to have to stop taking medications you’re currently on, and you’re going to have to go through puberty as a sex that you don’t identify with. That is going to create incredible trauma for those young people,” Spreitzer said.

Names and pronouns

The fourth bill introduced last week would require school districts to implement policies stating that parents determine the names and pronouns used by school staff. The proposed policies must require a parent’s written authorization for school employees to use something different. 

The bill includes an exception if a nickname is a shortened version of a student’s legal first or middle name.

Bill authors Dittrich and Sen. Andre Jacque (R-New Franken) said the legislation is in response to parents feeling like schools are excluding them. The bill was modeled after a policy implemented by Arrowhead High School in 2022, even as there was some pushback from students and families.

“Its intent is not to punish children or eliminate their ‘safe spaces,’” the bill authors wrote in a memo. “Instead, the goal is to ensure transparency and prevent school district employees from withholding or, in some cases, encouraging life-changing decisions regarding a child’s sexuality or gender identity without parental involvement.” 

Spreitzer said the bill was poorly drafted. Besides “making it just harder for trans students to be called by the name and pronouns that they use in everyday life, it would really put school districts in a ridiculous position,” he said. 

“People go by all sorts of nicknames in everyday life — maybe it’s a version of their last name, maybe it’s a totally different name. It’s not as simple as just a shortened version of your first or middle name for everybody,” Spretizer said. “This is the Legislature trying to micromanage decisions that are made in everyday life without great controversy, and inserting itself into every school district, and I think it just would have absolutely absurd effects that the authors have not even thought of.” 

Spreitzer said bills targeting transgender youth are not particularly new in Wisconsin. He noted that in 2011 a bill that would have restricted bathroom use for transgender people was introduced, but it never got to then-Gov. Scott Walker’s desk. 

“It’s obviously become more front and center, just seeing how early in the legislative session these are being put out, and how much of coordinated effort there seems to be with bills coming out three different days this week, all attacking trans people,” Spreitzer said. 

Spreitzer said that even in the current national political environment, advocates opposed to such legislation are in a stronger position than in the past. Gov. Tony Evers has vetoed similar legislation in the past and has pledged to continue vetoing such legislation, he noted. The Legislature’s LGBTQ+ caucus has a record number of members this year — 12 lawmakers from across the state including Eau Claire, Appleton, Ashland and Green Bay.

“While we are deeply concerned about what’s coming down from Washington DC, we are in a very strong position to not only stop attacks on the LGBTQ+ community here in Wisconsin, but hopefully in two years, to be in a majority and be able to pass proactive legislation and protect equality,” Spreitzer said.

Swetz told the Wisconsin Examiner that FAIR Wisconsin will continue working with local, state and federal elected officials to strengthen protections for LGTBQ+ people. 

“I think fear is understandable. There is a lot that’s uncertain. I’m scared, too. I also think we have to remember that the LGBTQ+ community has always faced hostility, often from the government, and we are still here,” Swetz wrote. “This is a moment to organize and mobilize and most importantly, to take care of ourselves and our community.”

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

Rep. Benjamin Franklin speaks about his bill to require 70% of funding in schools go towards "classroom" expenses. (Photo by Baylor Spears/Wisconsin Examiner)

Wisconsin Republicans in the state Assembly passed a package of education bills Wednesday to implement new standards for standardized test scores, school funding allocations, responding to curriculum inspection requests and for keeping cell phones out of schools. 

Republicans argued that the state needs to ensure that schools are meeting certain standards, especially as they’ve provided some state funding increases in recent years and as school enrollments have declined. While Wisconsin schools did receive an increase in the last state budget, many schools continue to struggle to meet costs as funding has failed to match the rate of inflation.

“We need to make sure that, as we are increasing funding for education, we are also doing a better job, ensuring that the standards and the expectations that parents and taxpayers have across the state are being met,” Assembly Speaker Robin Vos (R-Rochester) said at a press conference. 

Vos called some school districts “disappointing”  and named Milwaukee Public Schools as an example. The district, which was  an ongoing target of Republican lawmakers throughout the debate, has experienced turmoil over the last few years with turnover in staff, a financial crisis after delays in delivering required documents to DPI and reading and math scores that show continued disparities between Black and white students.

“I’m a huge supporter of local control. There are some districts that are so broken and expect us to have to pay for it as taxpayers, either on the front end through funding the school district or on the back end with the bad decisions that are made where people make bad choices,” Vos said. “Having that statewide standards is good for Wisconsin while still maintaining the flexibility to try to get there.”

Democrats said Republicans’ focus was in the wrong place and that the proposed solutions would not help address the real challenges that schools are facing. 

Minority Leader Greta Neubauer (D-Racine) criticized Republicans for rejecting Gov. Tony Evers’ budget proposal that would invest heavily in Wisconsin K-12 education. 

Evers unveiled his complete state budget proposal Tuesday evening, calling for more than $3 billion in additional funding for K-12 schools, including to support operational costs, special education and mental health supports. 

“The level of investment from the Legislature is just not enough to provide these essential investments in our schools,” Neubauer said. “Here in the Capitol, the Legislature has failed our students … we just have not kept up our end of the bargain.” 

“Instead of bringing legislation to the floor to support our schools, teachers and students, the best the majority party can do is to fast-track a bill that would require cursive instruction,” Neubauer said. That bill — AB 3 — passed 51-46 with Reps. Joy Goeben (R-Hobart), Shae Sortwell (R-Two Rivers) and David Steffen (R-Howard) joining Democrats to vote against it.  

Test scores

Another bill focused on reversing changes to standards on state tests that were approved by the DPI last year. GOP lawmakers slammed State Superintendent Jill Underly, who is running for reelection against Republican-backed education consultant Brittany Kinser, for approving the changes in the first place.

“Something is wrong in our communication system. It is not a lack of resources. It’s a lack of willpower to do something about the problems that we know are obvious because it is the fact that we have kids who can’t read,” Vos said. He added that only lawmakers should be allowed to “dumb down” the state’s standards.

Vos said there was only one person — referencing Underly — that “needs to pay a price” and “hopefully she will in April.”

Wisconsin students take standardized tests each year including the Forward Exam for third graders through eighth graders and the ACT and PreACT Secure for high school students. 

Underly approved changes to the standards last year that included new terms — “developing,” “approaching,” “meeting” and “advanced” — to describe student achievement. Previously, the terms were “below basic,” “basic,” “proficient” and “advanced.” The changes also included new cut scores — which are the test scores cutoffs needed to qualify to be placed in each performance level. 

Underly and DPI have defended the changes, saying they were necessary to more accurately measure achievement; that educators and other stakeholders worked together to create the new measures with Underly signing off; and that it’s too late to take the state back to 2019-20 standards.

Republican lawmakers said the changes “lowered” state standards and were an attempt to “cook the books.”

AB 1 directs DPI to use score ranges and qualitative terms used on school report cards for the 2019-2020 school year and to tie the Forward exam score ranges and pupil performance categories to those set by the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP). 

“There’s no legislative oversight on the scoring and assessment of our kids, so this bill will establish that,” bill coauthor Rep. Robert Wittke (R-Caledonia) said at a press conference.

“We will be once again allowed to compare ourselves to other states — let us know who’s doing well, are we on pace with them or not,” Wittke said. “Then it provides legislative oversight, so the only time these scores can be adjusted or changed is when we actually legislate.” 

Rep. Angelina M. Cruz (D-Racine), who has worked as an educator for the last 20 years, said during floor debate that a variety of student assessments are used to measure students’ learning with each serving a “unique purpose” and reflecting the “expertise of professional educators.” She said that goes for the state tests as well and said the updates to standards weren’t made in a “vacuum,” noting that this isn’t the first time DPI has made changes and it shouldn’t be the last.

“Education is dynamic,” Cruz said. “The disconnect between the reality of classroom teaching and this body and the understanding of assessments has never been more clear… This bill is not about improving education. This bill is about playing political games.” 

Cruz said lawmakers would be better served fully funding the state’s public schools. 

During floor debate, Wittke said that Democrats were repeating political talking points by talking about increasing  funding for public schools. 

The bill passed 55-44 along party lines with Republicans for and Democrats against it.

Ban cell phones

Lawmakers also passed a bill that would mandate cell phone bans in schools statewide. 

Under AB 2, school boards must require districts to adopt cell phone ban policies in their schools during instructional time. Policies would need to be implemented by July 2026 and would need to include certain exceptions in emergencies, cases involving student’s health care, individualized education program (IEP) or 504 plan and for educational purposes.

Kitchens said it was a “modest” proposal and would help schools enforce policies if they already have them and get other school districts on the same page. 

“Part of that is putting them away when it’s time to do work,” Kitchens said, adding that the bill would provide a “unified” approach for the state. During the 40 minutes of debate on the bill, some lawmakers in the Assembly chamber could be seen with their phones out.

Of the 320 school districts that participated in DPI’s 2024-25 State Digital Learning survey approximately 90% of districts reported already having some sort of restrictive cell phone policy in place.

Rep. Robyn Vining (D-Wauwautosa) said she thinks the original intent of the bill was genuine in trying to address challenges posed by phones in classrooms. However, she noted that it wouldn’t apply to the state’s private and charter schools that participate in voucher programs. Vining said the bill was modeled after legislation in Indiana, but Wisconsin Republicans intentionally carved out the voucher schools.

“It’s not fair when the concerns of voucher lobbyists are considered valid by Republicans in the Legislature that while the same concerns are ignored when they come from public schools,” Vining said.

Kitchens said the issue shouldn’t be partisan and noted that Louisiana, a red state, and New York, a blue state, both have strict statewide cell phone ban policies.

The bill passed 53-45 with Rep. Rob Swearingen (R-Rhinelander) joining Democrats against. 

Materials inspections within 14 days

AB 5, which would require school districts to comply with requests within 14 days, passed 54-43, also on a party-line vote, with Republicans for and Democrats against. 

Parents can already submit open records requests to school districts to receive school materials. The bill adds  that entities should respond “as soon as practicable and without delay.” 

Rep. Barbara Dittrich (R-Oconomowoc) said during the press conference that the bill seeks to help  parents get information about materials more quickly. She noted that there are no time requirements included in state statute for responding to open records requests. 

“I’m old enough to remember a time in our Wisconsin schools where our schools were begging parents to become engaged and then there came a huge fracture when COVID-19 hit,” Dittrich said. Some parents, she said, aren’t having their requests fulfilled before their child is out of the class. “[The bill] works at bridging this gap between schools and families so they can work together for the benefit of our students.” 

This is the third time lawmakers have introduced a bill to implement a time frame for complying. In the 2021-23 session, the bill passed the Legislature and Evers vetoed it. Last session, the bill passed the Assembly and never received a vote in the Senate

Other laws in Wisconsin include one that requires a list of textbooks be filed with the school board clerk every year on an annual basis. Another state statute requires school boards to provide the complete human growth and development curriculum and all instructional materials for inspection to parents who request it.

Rep. Francesca Hong (D-Madison) said the bill is unnecessary given the current state laws. 

“It’s trying to solve a problem that doesn’t exist,” Hong said. 

Requiring 70% of money to go to “classroom” expenses

AB 6 would require school boards in Wisconsin to spend a minimum of 70% of operating money on direct classroom expenditures and limit annual compensation increases for school administrators to the average percent increase provided to teachers in the school district. 

An amendment to the bill would clarify that “direct classroom expenditures” would not include costs for administration, food services, transportation, instructional support including media centers, teacher training and student support such as nurses and school counselors. Those costs would need to fall under the other 30% of spending. 

Rep. Benjamin Franklin (R-De Pere) said the state has “a system that fails to put the money in the classroom where the education is happening” and said the bill would implement “guardrails” for school districts to ensure money is going to classrooms and teachers. 

Rep. Joan Fitzgerald (D-Fort Atkinson) said she was voting against the bill — and others on the calendar — because they appeared to be written without “meaningful input” from teachers, administrators, superintendents, parents, students or community members. 

“I’m here to let you know that if you want support in the educational community for any education bill, you should do your homework,” Fitzgerald said, “including having conversations with the public and reaching across the aisle.” 

Fitzgerald said Franklin’s bill would take away local control from school districts and school boards and criticized the bill for including “vague” wording and “undefined terms,” saying the bills are unserious. 

“What about all the additional staff needed to meet the special needs of my students — people like speech pathologists, nurses, counselors? People I could not have done my job without,” Fitzgerald said. “That definition does include athletic programs…. Does it include bus transportation to get to games because I’ve heard that actual bus transportation is not included as a direct class transmission? Although I’ll admit I’m incredibly confused about that one, since I would not have had kids in my classroom in my rural district without bus transportation.” 

Rep. Christian Phelps (D-Eau Claire) called the proposal an “arbitrary, one size fits all budget crackdown that limits our ability to meet moral and constitutional obligations.” 

The bill passed 53-44 with only Republican support.

The Assembly also passed AB 4, which would require civics instruction in K-12 schools, in a 52-46 vote. Sortwell and Goeben voted against the bill with Democrats.

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

Correction: This story has been update to correct the vote on AB 2 and a quote.