Committee co-chair Sen. Julian Bradley noted that many of the issues discussed will need continued discussion from lawmakers and members of the public in the future as AI continues to develop and become a bigger part of Wisconsinites’ lives. (Screenshot via WisEye)

A Wisconsin study committee met Thursday to discuss regulation of artificial intelligence as well as investments in AI that it will recommend to the state Legislature. 

The committee includes four lawmakers — Sen. Julian Bradley (R-New Berlin), Rep. David Armstrong (R-Rice Lake), Sen. Tim Carpenter (D-Milwaukee) and Rep. Clinton Anderson (D-Beloit) — as well as eight members of the public. Members have been meeting monthly since July to hear from an array of stakeholders about the ways that AI is currently being used in the state, issues that have or could arise from the technology and ways to address those and how the state could capitalize on potential benefits.

The study committee is the latest effort as Wisconsin government and business leaders attempt to confront increased use of and ongoing advancements of AI technology. Gov. Tony Evers and Assembly Speaker Robin Vos both organized task forces in the last year to address the issue.

Bradley, the committee’s co-chair, noted at the end of the meeting that many of the issues will need continued discussion from lawmakers and members of the public as AI develops and becomes a bigger part of Wisconsinites’ lives. The committee is considering recommending an ongoing and more permanent body that will continue looking into AI after members end their work this year.

“I believe that a lot of these start with an ongoing committee. There’s a lot of things that say we need to continue to explore … because the technology is changing,” Bradley said. “Things are changing constantly, so we want to be able to have public members with the Legislature come together and say, ‘Hey, maybe not yet,’ or ‘OK, it’s time now.’ ” 

A final report with recommendations for lawmakers will be put together in coming weeks. 

Potential regulations and state uses 

The committee considered a number of proposals during the meeting for regulating the use of artificial intelligence, protecting consumers and exploring how state government will interact with the existence of AI. 

One of the first proposed concepts was to apply existing state laws to AI models in the same way the laws apply to humans, including when it comes to disinformation, impersonation and creating and distributing fake imagery.

“Anything that’s illegal for a human, should be illegal for AI — as a general principle,” CEO of the MKE Tech Hub Coalition Kathy Henrich said during the meeting. 

Wisconsin has already enacted two laws that regulate the use the AI: 2023 Wisconsin Act 123, which requires disclosure of the use of generative AI in political ads, and 2023 Wisconsin Act 224, which made it a crime to possess virtual child pornography and obscene material, including that created with generative AI.

Henrich acknowledged that this could be a complicated issue because any law would need to be able to determine a liable party. 

“Is it the developer? The deployer? The consumer?” Henrich said. “The devil will be in the details of making sure we’ve really thought through how you hold people accountable and where that accountability lies.” 

Sarah Alt, the chief process and AI officer for Michael Best, said the question of accountability for new technology is not a new dilemma, but it is complex because of how quickly AI has developed. 

Aly also proposed that the Legislature enact a couple of laws related to data privacy. 

Wisconsin considered a bill, 2023 Assembly Bill 466, that would have established certain requirements for “controllers and processors” of consumers’ personal data, including confirming what information they have, obtaining that data and requesting the deletion of data. It also included financial penalties of a forfeiture of up to $7,500 per violation. Three states, including Colorado, Connecticut and Utah, enacted similar data privacy laws in 2023.

Alt said that data is a “crucial raw material for artificial intelligence.” 

“If we’re not going to be able to legislate every possible use case … I do believe data is certainly one of the places where we would declare that to be no different than other raw materials that are regulated,” Alt said. She compared data to asbestos, saying, “there are safe ways that you can use asbestos and there are also very harmful ways that you can use asbestos.”

Jay Hill, Vice President of Advanced Technology for GE Healthcare, agreed that this type of regulation could help keep people accountable for how data is used.

“If it’s free, then people could do all sorts of crazy and exploitative things, but if there’s some cost to it, I think it elevates the level of responsibility for people who will use those data,” Hill said. 

Alt also said that lawmakers should look at resurrecting a bill similar to 2023 Wisconsin AB 824, which would have defined various roles and laid out a set of responsibilities for people or groups that own, control and share personal data. 

Members also discussed three other issues that lawmakers could explore including requiring the labeling of communications that use AI, possible bias embedded in the algorithms of large language models and requiring companies to publish clear AI guidelines and principles.

Anderson said that he thought that requiring disclaimers of AI when communicating with the public would be best practice. 

“I think I’m pretty good at discerning when AI is being used or not, but I think of my dad, who’s definitely not capable of determining what’s AI and what’s not. … So, just making sure we’re protecting the public, so they’re aware,” Anderson said. 

Henrich cautioned that legislation such as that could potentially set a bad precedent by discouraging people from using their own discernment skills to determine whether AI was used. 

“If you legislate that you mark things as AI, people will get trained to believe that anything that’s marked as AI is AI, and anything that isn’t is human,” Henrich said. “If I’m a bad actor, I’m more likely to not mark it and therefore I’m more likely to fall for bad actors who may be using AI in the wrong ways.” 

Henrich said that lawmakers would also need to think about how that kind of legislation would be enforced.

Potential Investments in AI

The committee also considered potential areas where the state could invest to help support universities, technical colleges, businesses and other stakeholders in the ongoing education, innovation and integration related to AI.

One suggestion the committee could make is to expand Fast Forward, a program administered by the Wisconsin Department of Workforce Development that provides grants to employers to provide training to workers, and specifically dedicating funding to learning how to work with AI and requiring courses on computer science and statistics for students. 

Henrich said an investment in teaching people skills related to AI could be essential as the technology may affect the job market and could come through the Fast Forward program and through technical colleges and universities. 

“I’ve seen market dynamics in play, and as much as people want to say everyone will be employable long-term with AI, I am a firm believer that there’s disruption in the middle, that as AI is implemented normal market dynamics will go to saving costs and may result in people losing roles as a result of that,” Henrich said. “Investing up front and people understanding AI so that they maintain employable skill is going to be very critical.”

Henrich noted that there might need to be changes to the Fast Forward legislation to make it applicable to AI. 

Two potential suggestions the committee discussed involve incentives for businesses, including tax breaks and a grant or revolving loan program. 

Armstrong suggested that lawmakers could explore creating a program that would give small manufacturers an incentive to adopt automation and AI through a revolving loan fund or a small grant. He said he did a survey of small manufacturers in his part of the state and found that many aren’t really exploring the use of AI currently. 

“Only 4% of them were even looking at AI right now,” Armstrong said. “A lot of them, when I started talking to them [said] we don’t even know where to start at this point. … They’re looking for somebody within a company to develop a curiosity about, what could AI do for us, and then I think you’d probably have a champion within that company that can run with it. This is more of a way to maybe jump-start that.”

Alt said she liked the concept of a revolving loan because of how quickly technology moves and the fact that a company would have to keep working on improvements. 

“If your grant is one and done, then even if you do get what you needed that first time that you implemented it, there is still the constant tuning and the constant investing and the constant improving, and because the technology moves so quickly your idea is already old within months, if not a couple of years,” Alt said. 

The full list of potential recommendations to lawmakers can be found here. 

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

Joint Finance Committee hearing room. (Photo: Legislature website)

Wisconsin Senate leaders announced their members of the Joint Finance Committee for next session Wednesday, including three Republicans new to the committee. 

The powerful 16-person committee, which includes eight Assembly and eight Senate lawmakers, is responsible for crafting the state’s biennial budget. The state’s next budget will cover the period from July 1, 2025 to June 30, 2027.

Senate Majority Leader Devin LeMahieu announced that Sen. Julian Bradley (R-New Berlin), Romaine Quinn (R-Cameron) and Rob Stafsholt (R-New Richmond) will serve on the committee for the first time next session. The lawmakers will replace Sens. Joan Ballweg and Duey Stroebel, who will no longer serve on the committee because they lost their reelection bids, and Sen. Mary Felzkowski (R-Tomahawk), who won’t serve on the committee as she was recently elected by the Senate Republican caucus to serve as Senate president. 

Sen. Howard Marklein (R-Spring Green) will continue as the Senate co-chair of the committee. He has served in the position for the last two budget cycles. Sens. Patrick Testin (R-Stevens Point), who will serve as vice-chair, and Eric Wimberger (R-Green Bay) will also continue to serve on the committee.

Marklein celebrated the appointments in a statement, saying that the new members will “bring unique new perspectives and experiences to our Senate finance team.” 

The state’s $4 billion budget surplus — and deciding what to do with it — will be a key discussion next session, and lawmakers, including those new to the committee, indicated that cutting taxes will likely be a top priority. 

LeMahieu said in a statement that he is “confident the new Senate finance team will responsibly utilize our state’s $4 billion surplus to shrink the size of government and reduce the tax burden on hardworking Wisconsin families.”

“A top priority of mine will be releasing the $4 billion surplus that Governor Evers currently holds hostage and returning it to the taxpayers,” Bradley said in a statement. 

“With a projected $4 billion surplus, the state is again in position to return more money back to the taxpayers and make further investments in our local roads, workforce development, and schools,” Stafholt said. “I look forward to getting to work.”

Democratic Senate members will remain unchanged next session as Senate Minority Leader Dianne Hesselbein announced that Sens. LaTonya Johnson (D-Milwaukee) and Kelda Roys (D-Madison) will continue on the committee. 

Hesselbein called the lawmakers “effective and passionate advocates for the priorities of Wisconsinites” and said that they “will continue to serve our caucus and state well during the budget process and beyond.”

Assembly members of the committee haven’t been announced yet.

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

Voters at the Wilmar Neighborhood Center on Madison's East side cast their ballots. (Henry Redman | Wisconsin Examiner)

On the ballot in Wisconsin this fall, voters will decide on a referendum asking to change one word in the state constitution to prevent non-U.S. citizens from voting in any local, state or federal elections. The effort is the Republican Legislature’s fifth attempt to amend the state constitution this year. 

Republicans point to a handful of municipalities across the country that have allowed non-citizens to vote in municipal elections like school board races and say the amendment would prevent any Wisconsin communities from doing the same. 

“Addressing this issue now will ensure votes are not diluted in the future,” Sen. Julian Bradley (R-Franklin) told Votebeat. “It’s best for the government to address this concern before it becomes a problem.”

Democrats and voting rights advocates say that non-citizen voting isn’t a real problem and that Republicans have shown no proof it is but continue to complain about it as part of their general anti-immigration push in this election. Plus, they say making changes like this by trying to amend the constitution makes an end run around the normal legislative process and Gov. Tony Evers’ potential veto, while making the state vulnerable to future efforts to make it harder for legal voters to cast a ballot. 

“First and foremost, we have a system that works, and I think this is a solution in search for problems,” T.R. Edwards, staff attorney at the voting rights focused Law Forward, says. “Secondarily, it shifts the burden to the voter. … But then third, I think it’s yet another vestige of our gerrymandered Legislature and an escape to actually go through the legislative process to do things that have an actual debate about what works for our state.” 

Currently the state Constitution says that “every United States citizen age 18 or older” can vote. If approved, the “every” would be changed to “only.” 

“Shall section 1 of article III of the constitution, which deals with suffrage, be amended to provide that only a United States citizen age 18 or older who resides in an election district may vote in an election for national, state, or local office or at a statewide or local referendum?” the referendum asks. 

Opponents to the referendum say it could lead to discrimination against Hispanic voters, who could be harassed and forced to prove that they belong in their communities. They also worry that changing the constitution could lead to future legislative attempts to require anyone registering to vote to prove they’re a citizen, which they say could disenfranchise legal voters who don’t have access to documents such as a birth certificate.

Edwards points to a recent Brennan Center study that found more than 21 million people across the country, 9% of voting age Americans, don’t have access to documents that would prove their citizenship. 

“That number of people, including people like my grandmother when she first moved to the state, [would lose] one of our few things that I think makes us unique as a state, our ability to have same day registration, and we’ll put that in jeopardy,” Edwards says. 

Recently, Republicans have moved across the country to warn about large-scale non-citizen voting in ways that would swing elections. Similar to other Republican claims about the election system, there is no proof that is happening. Studies of the voting system across dozens of communities involving millions of votes have found just a handful of cases of non-citizens casting ballots. 

Earlier this year, Congress was unable to pass a federal budget over disagreements about a bill that would require citizens to prove their citizenship to register to vote. 

State and local officials already have systems in place that determine if someone registering to vote is a citizen. In Wisconsin, people registering to vote must affirm they’re U.S. citizens. Lying about this when filling out the voter registration form is a felony that includes the penalty of deportation. 

“We have so many checks and balances in this state, the people that are non-citizens, you think they would actually risk — like if they’re DACA recipients — do you think they would risk their status and get thrown in jail or even be deported just to go cast a ballot?” Nick Ramos, executive director of the Wisconsin Democracy Campaign, says. “Like, think about how absurd that is.” 

A 2017 report from the Brennan Center for Justice analyzed votes cast in 42 jurisdictions accounting for 23.5 million votes. That report found that in the 2016 presidential election, after which President Donald Trump first raised claims of massive numbers of illegal votes, 30 incidents of non-citizens voting were referred to prosecutors — accounting for 0.0001% of the 2016 votes. 

The Republican attempts to amend the constitution this year have had mixed results. This spring, two proposed amendments to limit who can work on and provide funding for election administration in the state were approved. But in the August election — after Democrats and advocacy groups in the state waged a public-education campaign  to oppose two more amendments — voters denied an attempt to remove powers from the governor allowing him to spend federal emergency dollars.