Bascom Hall, University of Wisconsin-Madison. (Ron Cogswell | used by permission of the photographer)

University of Wisconsin campuses could be limited in their ability to raise tuition under two Republican bills that received a hearing in the Senate Universities and Technical Colleges committee. One would leverage tuition freezes on campuses as a penalty for free speech violations, while the other would aim to help with affordability for students and families by capping tuition increases.

With the conclusion of the budget process over the summer and a $250 million investment in the UW system, Democratic and Republican lawmakers have recently turned their attention to potential policy changes that could be made to the higher education system in Wisconsin. Democratic lawmakers announced their own proposals for helping with higher education costs last week.

Implementing financial penalties on UW, technical colleges for free speech violations

Rep. Amanda Nedweski (R-Pleasant Prairie) said her bill would enshrine the principle of current University of Wisconsin system policy in law to clarify and protect the First Amendment rights of students, staff and visitors. 

Current UW system policy includes its commitment to freedom of speech and expression along with some accountability measures including conduct and due process mechanisms to address violations. 

A similar bill passed the Assembly in 2023, but failed to receive a vote in the Senate. Earlier versions of the policy were introduced after a controversial survey of UW campuses that found that a majority of students who responded said they were afraid to express views on certain issues in class. The survey had an average response rate of 12.5% across all UW System campuses. 

The latest iteration of the bill was introduced just six days after the assassination of right-wing activist Charlie Kirk, who has become a recurring point of discussion and debate. Lawmakers passed a resolution this week to honor his life.

Nedweski noted that another survey by the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE) that found that 35% of students say using violence to stop someone from speaking on campus is acceptable at least in rare cases. The survey included responses from 423 people. 

“It’s clearly even more chilling in light of the recent political assassination of conservative activist Charlie Kirk on a college campus. When we accept the false premise that speech is equivalent to violence, we allow violence to replace speech as a means of debate… We’ve seen many of our college campuses devolve into marketplaces of fear of certain viewpoints,” Nedweski said. “While Charlie Kirk’s assassination on the college campus is the most extreme example of this, it is not the first time conservatives on campus have been threatened or intimidated for their views.” 

Nedweski said the bill would help restore trust.

“The breakdown in public trust is real. It will only get worse unless our colleges and universities get serious about restoring intellectual diversity on campus, I believe,” Nedweski said. 

SB 498 would bar UW institutions from restricting speech from a speaker if their conduct “is not unlawful and does not materially and substantially disrupt the functioning of the UW institution or technical college.” It would also restrict enforcement of time, place and manner restrictions on expressive activities in public forum spaces, designating any place a “free speech zone,” charging security fees as a part of a permit application and sanctioning people for discriminatory harassment unless the speech “targets its victim on the basis of a protected class under law, and is so severe, pervasive, and objectively offensive that it effectively bars a student from receiving equal access to educational opportunities or benefits.” 

If an institution is found to violate the provisions by a state or federal court, then it would receive a notice and a person whose expressive rights were violated would be able to bring action against the UW Board of Regents or a technical college board. A plaintiff could be awarded damages of at least $500 for the initial violation plus $50 for each day after the complaint was filed and the violation continues up to $100,000. A plaintiff could also be awarded court costs and reasonable attorney fees. 

Students, employees and campus organizations would have a due process guarantee under the bill. If the due process provisions are violated more than once in a five-year period, a campus would be required to freeze tuition for all students for the following two academic years.

Nedweski said she hadn’t spoken with the UW system about the legislation this session, but she is open to conversations. 

“I’ve expressed it from the start of the session for the UW to come and work with us on this to get to a place where they can be a thumbs up, but I haven’t heard from anyone,” Nedweski said. “They will express some concerns about certain language in the bill and definitions, and I’d like to say today that, of course, the door is still open.”

UW Interim Vice President of University Relations Chris Patton that the system’s concerns with the bills center on the penalties. 

Patton said the penalty of freezing state funding would put the system’s financial health at risk — and potentially compromise the system’s ability to carry out its mission of being a “marketplace of ideas.” 

“Freedom of expression and free speech is not just a constitutional principle. It’s at the very core of what makes our universities thrive,” Patton said. “The First Amendment guarantees this right, and our institutions take seriously our responsibility to uphold it for all students, faculty, staff, visitors and stakeholders at the Universities of Wisconsin. We already have really robust policies and procedures in place.”

Sen. Rachael Cabral-Guevara (R-Appleton), a coauthor on the bill, urged lawmakers to “please understand” that the bill is “not to punish any of our institutions,” but is to “ensure that they’re following what’s already in the Bill of Rights.”

Sen. Chis Larson (D-Milwaukee), the top Democrat on the committee, expressed concern about the aims of the legislation, whether free speech was a top concern that was widespread on campuses and whether the bill could bolster harmful language. 

“I appreciate you guys coming up here to embrace DEI for Republican viewpoints, which this seems to be what this bill is all about — making sure that Republican viewpoints are more represented and encouraged and being inclusive to that,” Larson said. 

“You can call it DEI for conservatism, but there’s nothing in the bill that addresses anything specific to conservatives, liberals, Republicans, Democrats,” Nedweski replied. “It’s free speech protections for everyone.”

Larson noted that he represents the UW-Milwaukee campus and often speaks with students about their concerns and free speech is typically low on the list. He said he hears concerns about affordability and safety more frequently. 

“Other concerns include safety, especially for students who are LGBTQ, students who are of a different race than Caucasian, of their safety on campus, of being targeted with hate crimes,” Larson said. 

Larson also brought up a recent Politico article, which exposed racist messages sent into a group chat of Young Republicans, to ask whether lawmakers thought their bill could encourage that type of speech. 

Larson said he wasn’t concerned with self-censorship that discouraged people from “saying these racist, homophobic, xenophobic, glorification of rape things out in the public, because that is something that in a free and open society should have consequences associated with it.”

“We do not have the exemption for hate speech in our laws and in the First Amendment. It does not exempt hate speech,” Larson said. “It seems to me that this [bill] would pave the way to be able to say, yes, that would be something that is not only allowed on campus, but encouraged.” 

Nedweski said she was not concerned that the bill would “further unhinge people.” 

“We’re all concerned about the political temperature that has risen so high in this country,” Nedweski said. “I don’t have concerns this bill is going to push anybody overboard. The intent is to protect people whether I agree with what their ideas… are or not. I have no association with the group that you’re talking about. I don’t agree with the things that they said. It’s unfortunate that that happened.”

Capping tuition increases

Under SB 399, the UW Board of Regents would be prohibited from increasing undergraduate tuition by more than the consumer price index increase in a given year. 

The bill, coauthored by Sen. Andre Jacque (R-New Franken) and Rep. Dave Murphy (R-Hortonville), was introduced this year after the UW system adopted its third consecutive tuition increase in July. The increases were a maximum of 5% for each campus and were implemented after the recent state budget did not reach the requests the system said would be needed to avoid a hike. 

“With the continued rising prices in almost every area of the economy, some increase in resident tuition is to be expected but we must set common sense guardrails so that any price increases are reasonable, ensuring the UW system remains a cost-effective option for Wisconsin families,” Jacque said. 

Jacque said the recent hike “might be the impetus for the timing this session” but he has seen it as a “reasonable policy” for a while, noting that versions of the bill have been proposed in previous years.

Murphy said he thought the legislation would make it so that lawmakers don’t “have to always be looking” at tuition.

“It’s just up and down and up and down and up and down,” Murphy said. The bill, he added, would help provide a semblance of predictability down the line. “If you have a youngster in the K-12 system and you’re looking at what college is going to cost in the future, you could probably have a good idea of where it is going to go.”

Larson said he found it “noble” what the Republican lawmakers were trying to accomplish with the bill, but asked about why there wasn’t any state contribution included in the bill.

He noted that the portion of state funding that makes up the UW system’s budget has been decreasing over many years. 

“It’s like the cost of groceries,” Larson said, comparing it to “shrinkflation,” a form of inflation where the price of a product stays the same but the size or quantity of a product is reduced. “We’re gonna freeze the cost of a loaf of bread, and then year after year, you’re going to get one slice less, one slice less, one slice less. It will still be the same cost, but you’re getting less. I worry… if you freeze it, we’re going to be getting the equivalent of one slice less every single year in terms of what the deliverable is from the University.” 

Murphy noted that the legislation would just cap increases, not freeze tuition. 

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

UW-Milwaukee offers its own tuition promise program which covers up to four years of tuition and segregated fees for students from families earning less than $62,000 per year. (Photo by Isiah Holmes/Wisconsin Examiner)

Democratic lawmakers are proposing a package of higher education bills to help address affordability for students by investing in a statewide tuition promise program and to support faculty and staff members by reversing Walker-era collective bargaining and tenure policies. 

Rep. Jodi Emerson (D-Eau Claire), the ranking member on the Assembly Colleges and Universities committee, said Democratic lawmakers are looking for ways to ensure Wisconsin’s higher education system is strong and accessible to “anybody who has the talent and the work ethic to want to pursue something.” 

“That’s part of our American dream, is that no matter where you start out in life, you’ve got an opportunity to do better and to gain knowledge and training,” Emerson said. 

Emerson said Democratic lawmakers hope the bills can kickstart discussions about policy changes that could be made. She noted that Republican lawmakers have often stripped proposals from the budget, saying that policy should be passed through individual bills outside of the budget process.

“We’re putting some of these bills back out now and saying, let’s have the policy discussion,” Emerson said. “If you’re not willing to have that during the budget, let’s have the discussion now.” 

Emerson said the first pair of bills that lawmakers unveiled at a press conference last week seek to specifically help with the affordability of higher education. 

“A lot of us heard loud and clear last election that pocketbook issues are really what are leading people right now,” Emerson said, adding that it’s part of the reason she supported the recent state budget. “But it wasn’t a perfect budget, and so we thought, how can we make this a little bit better?”

One bill, coauthored by Sen. Kristin Dassler-Alfheim (D-Appleton) and Rep. Brienne Brown (D-Whitewater), would implement a statewide “tuition promise” program, allowing first-time, in-state students from households with an adjusted gross income of $71,000 or less to have their tuition covered at any UW school, other than UW-Madison. Under the bill, the state would dedicate nearly $40 million towards the program. 

The program would function as “last-dollar, gap funding” meaning it would fill in the rest of the tuition costs after all federal and state grants and scholarships are calculated.

According to The Hechinger Report , as of 2024, 37 states offered a statewide promise program. 

UW-Madison already offers “Bucky’s Tuition Promise,” which launched in 2018 and is funded with private gifts and other institutional resources, not state tax dollars. The program guarantees four years of tuition and segregated fees for any incoming freshman from Wisconsin whose family’s annual household adjusted gross income is $65,000 or less. 

Recent studies have found the tuition promise program increased enrollment among accepted students at UW-Madison and increased retention rates. 

UW-Milwaukee also offers its own program which covers up to four years of tuition and segregated fees for students from families earning less than $62,000 per year. 

The UW system also has a version of the program that recently relaunched in 2025 after the system secured private funding. The Wisconsin Tuition Promise first launched in 2023, but was ended in 2024 after Republican lawmakers declined to fund the program. 

Another bill by Dassler-Alfheim and Rep. Angela Stroud (D-Ashland) would invest $10 million in the UW system for student retention and talent development efforts. 

At the press conference last week, Dassler-Alfheim said the bills are essential for supporting the state’s workforce.  

“If our workforce is the engine that runs our economy, then our Universities of Wisconsin and Wisconsin Technical Colleges are the gasoline that power that engine as our baby boomers retire in droves. We have workforce shortages in every category. We have all struggled to schedule a doctor’s appointment, a plumber, an accountant, or even a cleaning at the dentist,” Dassler-Alfheim said. “The purpose of these two bills is to help qualified students access the higher education needed to advance themselves and to fulfill the promise to Wisconsin employers to develop the workforce necessary to maintain and grow Wisconsin’s economy.”

Democratic lawmakers also circulated bill drafts meant to help support staff and faculty at UW system campuses. 

One would again allow most UW system employees, faculty and academic staff to collectively bargain over wages, hours, and conditions of employment. UW employees were stripped of that ability under the Walker-era law Act 10. 

Another bill would reverse changes made in the 2015 state budget that eliminated language in state statute that protected tenure. Lawmakers said in 2015 that the changes were necessary to give the UW system flexibility to deal with budget cuts, though faculty members said then that the changes were an attack on tenure. 

Emerson said it is getting harder to recruit people to work at the universities in the state and that some of the changes could help. 

“If we’re making these big changes about how universities are dealt with, staff and faculty need to have a seat at the table for having these conversations and having a seat at the table in meaningful ways where their concerns are addressed too,” Emerson said. 

Emerson noted that in recent years Republican lawmakers have pushed through proposals and deals that triggered pushback from faculty members. 

The most recent budget deal negotiated between lawmakers and Gov. Tony Evers included new work load requirements for UW faculty, mandating that they teach a minimum of 24 credits per academic year, or four 3-credit courses, starting in Sept. 2026. The requirement has garnered concerned reactions from faculty, some of who have said it could be difficult to balance teaching and research demands.

In 2023, Republican lawmakers negotiated with UW leaders to secure concessions on diversity, equity and inclusion initiatives in exchange for staff pay raises and money for buildings. The deal garnered a lot of pushback from staff and students at the time.

“You know, the workload requirements that came through the budget, or the DEI deal that happened last session, none of those would have happened if we had collective bargaining in place,” Emerson said. “Those are two things that when you have people who don’t work in an industry trying to put working parameters around that industry, it falls flat.”

Bills likely won’t advance in Republican Legislature

The Democratic proposals will face a difficult road in the Republican-led Legislature. Emerson said the likelihood for a public hearing on the Democratic bills is “slim to none.”

However, Emerson said Democratic lawmakers plan to take the ideas to people in the state other ways. She and some of her Democratic colleagues will be on the UW-Stevens Point campus this week to start a tour of campuses around the state. 

Emerson said the purpose is to have as many conversations with staff, faculty and students as possible. 

“If we’re not going to have a hearing in Madison on it, we are ready to take this around to other campuses and other parts of the state and have the conversation on the college campuses,” Emerson said. “I want to hear what matters to the students. I want to hear what, you know, the career people need their students to have to get jobs. I want to hear from the business people in these communities.”

Emerson said part of the goal is to also start laying the foundation for if Democrats win more legislative power in 2026. 

“It’s always good when you’re making policy about something that you’re talking to the people that this is going to impact, so this is what we’re really hoping to do — work out all the kinks, and dust everything off, and, hopefully, have a little bit more governing power coming up in the next session, and be able to really hit the ground running with some of these bills,” Emerson said.

Emerson said Democratic lawmakers’ approach is focused on figuring out how the state can make higher education available for “anybody no matter their zip code, no matter their income level,” and she expressed skepticism the Republican bills will do that. 

“A lot of the bills that I see coming from my Republican colleagues about higher education tend to either be punitive — one person said one thing on one campus, therefore we have to make sure nobody ever says that again and getting into these free speech pieces — or they’re doing things in a way that tells me that they haven’t been on a college campus for a really long time,” Emerson said.

The Senate Universities and Technical Colleges Committee is scheduled to have a public hearing on eight Republican-authored higher education-related bills Wednesday. 

One bill, coauthored by Sen. Andre Jacque (R-New Franken) and Rep. Dave Murphy (R-Hortonville), would place caps on annual tuition hikes. It was proposed in reaction to the 5% tuition increase that was approved after the recent state budget was completed. The increase was the third annual hike in a row. UW President Jay Rothman and UW regents had said the tuition increases would be necessary if the system didn’t secure enough funding from the state. 

In a memo about the bill, the Republican lawmakers said the Legislature needed to “implement a common sense law placing controls on these types of skyrocketing tuition increases” and that a cap on tuition increases would provide families with “the predictability required to budget for college expenses into the future.” Sen. Julian Bradley (R-New Berlin) has also argued that the bill is about “protecting affordability.” 

Under the bill, the UW Board of Regents would be prohibited from increasing undergraduate tuition by more than the consumer price index increase in a given year.

Emerson said she didn’t think the bill would have the intended effect of helping students and families afford school. She noted some of the effects seen during the decade-long tuition freeze implemented under the Walker administration. 

UW leaders said at the time that the freeze was unsustainable as it limited campuses ability to maintain its program and course offerings and wages for staff and faculty. 

“Students couldn’t get the classes that they needed… so people would sometimes have to go for an extra year to get all of the classes that they needed to complete their degree. It ended up costing people more because they had to stay in longer to get the one last requirement that they needed for their degree,” Emerson said. “It’s a good messaging point to say we’re gonna not increase [tuition] by a certain amount, but I don’t think that that has the end result that they’re thinking it does.”

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

A row of framed houses under construction. (Getty Images)

Assembly Republicans proposed a package of bills they say would help increase affordable housing throughout Wisconsin on Tuesday. Rep. Rob Brooks (R-Saukville) said he hopes to build on the success of bills passed by the Legislature and signed by Gov. Tony Evers in 2023. Those measures created and expanded state loan programs and were supported with over $500 million in state funds.  

At a news conference in the state Capitol Tuesday morning, Brooks said GOP lawmakers anticipate cooperation from the governor’s office once again. The authors have worked with Wisconsin Housing and Economic Development Authority (WHEDA) on many of the bills, he said, and have put the bills on a fast track with hearings to take place soon. 

“We hope to get out more affordable housing throughout the state, and when I refer to affordable housing, I want to be clear, we’re not talking about subsidized housing. We’re talking about affordable housing,” Brooks said. “What I’m talking about is the housing stock that was built just a generation or two ago. We’re talking about small ranch homes, some of those homes built without garages or alleyways or detached garages.” 

Seven bills were drafted as of Tuesday, but Brooks said there could be up to 10 in the final package. “It’s kind of a fluid process right now,” he said. 

According to the National Association of Realtors, in 2024 the average age of a first-time homebuyer in the U.S. reached an all-time high of 38, said Tom Larson, president and CEO of the Wisconsin Realtors Association. He said that the average price of a home in Wisconsin is $340,000, and that over the last 15 years, Wisconsin has built fewer housing units per capita than the national average. 

“Housing prices continue to rise faster than wages, and the longer it takes somebody to purchase a home, the longer it takes for them to build wealth, the longer it takes for them to establish roots in our community, which has a direct impact on our labor force and our economy,” Larson said. “Wisconsin’s [housing] affordability is worse than any of our surrounding neighbors. It’s worse than Minnesota, Illinois, Michigan and Iowa.”

He said the Wisconsin real estate industry is “cautiously optimistic that the passage of these bills will help address Wisconsin’s affordability crisis.” 

New WHEDA programs 

One bipartisan bill, coauthored by Rep. Jessie Rodriguez (R-Oak Creek) and Sen. Jesse James (R-Thorp) would create a Workforce Home Loan Program through the WHEDA. The bill has two Democratic coauthors as well: Sen. LaTonya Johnson (D-Milwaukee) and Rep. Amaad Rivera-Wagner (D-Green Bay).

Rep. Dan Knodl (R-Germantown), who is also an author on the home loan legislation, said the bill is intended to help Wisconsinites who want to become homeowners. 

“Instead of putting down roots, people have been stuck in renting situations and are unable to build equity or stability, so, how do we do that to help them get into that first step of home ownership?” Knodl asked rhetorically. 

The program would allow first-time home buyers access to second mortgage loans of up to $60,000 at 0% interest. The loans could be used to help with down payments and closing costs. Knodl said the repayment terms would be flexible and tailored to household income, and there would be the option to defer payments for low-income families.

He said that the program would sustain itself through the repayments borrowers make.

“Home ownership is about more than buying a house. It’s about building stronger communities, investing in schools and growing local economies,” Knodl said.

Another bill proposed by Rep. Dave Murphy (D-Greenville) would require the agency to establish a grant program to support developers who want to convert multifamily housing to condominiums. 

WHEDA would be required to direct $10 million from the Main Street Housing Rehabilitation revolving loan fund to the grant program, which would cover up to $50,000 in reasonable attorney fees, state and local permitting fees, and any other costs associated with the conversion. 

Changes to help speed up, support development

A handful of the Republicans’ proposals would change laws to support more development and  standardize the process for a variety of housing developments.

Rep. David Armstrong (R-Rice Lake) has proposed creating residential tax increment districts, or TIDs. A TID is a financial tool  municipalities can use to designate certain areas for economic development and use the district’s property tax growth to help pay for improvements to the area. 

Armstrong said the TIDs are one of the biggest tools that municipalities have to do something about housing, and his bill would help address the biggest barrier to building more workforce housing — the cost of subdivision infrastructure, including sidewalks, curb and gutter, water, sewer and utilities. 

His bill would establish a “pay-as-you-go” TID, applying a portion of the tax increment from new homes  to offset the cost of subdivision development.

“In my area, a starter home is $400,000,” Armstrong said. “That’s not a starter home. That’s not what my workforce can afford.”

Armstrong also has a second bill that would require communities to align  comprehensive plans and the zoning ordinances. He said it would provide clarity and predictability for municipalities, builders and developers. 

Rep. Joy Goeben (R-Hobart) has authored a bill to provide a statewide framework for local regulations of “accessory dwelling units” — secondary housing units located on the same property as a primary residence. 

“Currently, Wisconsin lacks a unified approach, resulting in a confusing, patchwork of regulation that varies across local governments,” Goeben said. She said her bill “addresses that confusion” and gives property owners a pathway to add accessory units. “This legislation strikes a balance, ensuring individual property owners can efficiently add housing while maintaining reasonable community standards,” she said. 

According to the bill draft, local regulations would be allowed to limit the size and height of an accessory unit , require that a unit satisfy current setback and lot coverage requirements, and prohibit units built  after the effective date of the bill from being turned into short-term rentals.

Rep. Rob Kreibich (R-New Richmond) is proposing a bill that would set out a process for local governments and developers seeking to build a subdivision, including providing an opportunity for developers to meet informally with local representatives before submitting plans. He said the bill is meant to place local governments and developers on the same page “from the beginning of the process all the way through to the end of the process.” 

“Over the next five years, we’re gonna probably need about 140,000 housing units in the state of Wisconsin. At the current pace, we’re not going to even get close,” Kriebich said. “Delays and miscommunication oftentimes leads to delays or no subdivisions whatsoever, so this will clean up that process and again allow some tweaks in statutes to fast track new home construction in the state of Wisconsin.”

Delay new building codes

Rep. William Penterman (R-Hustisford) is seeking to delay the deadline for the implementation of new codes for commercial and multi-family residential buildings. The code changes are the first major updates to the codes in over a decade, and are being implemented following a Wisconsin Supreme Court ruling earlier this year that struck down lawmakers’ ability to indefinitely block administrative rules.

“Unfortunately, there was a recent Supreme Court ruling that will mandate that the new building code need to go into effect, and while we’re not here to prevent that, we need to have clarity as to when exactly that’s going to happen,” Penterman said. 

Currently, the Department of Safety and Professional Services has said that all commercial building plans submitted to DSPS for approval must meet the standards set in the upgraded code starting on Oct. 1, though the new code technically went into effect on Sept. 1.

Penterman has proposed a bill that would delay that requirement until April 2026. 

“This gives businesses, commercial buildings, residential housing and municipalities more time to review these plans, make sure everything’s all set to go,” Penterman said.

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE