Skip to content
Bills from the 2009–10 session

Assembly Bill 130

Costs of administering tests for intoxication

Topics: Drunken driving, Implied consent or alcohol concentration, Police

Passed the Assembly, then stopped

The Assembly passed it on Sep 17, 2009, but the Senate never voted on it. A bill has to ⁠. To try again, a lawmaker would have to start a new bill.

  1. Introduced, passed

    Mar 9, 2009

  2. Committee, passed

    Approved

  3. Assembly vote, passed

    Passed Sep 17, 2009

  4. Senate vote, stopped here

    Stopped here. The Senate never voted on it.

  5. Governor, not reached

  6. Law, not reached

Latest entry in the official record, Apr 28, 2010: “Failed to concur in pursuant to ⁠”

Read the bill

Following saves it on this device. New actions show on your Following page. You can also get updates in a feed reader.

What it would have done

Summary by the , the Legislature's nonpartisan drafting office. It's their wording, not ours.

Under current law, a law enforcement officer may request a person to provide a sample of breath, blood, or urine for analysis if the person is arrested for operating while intoxicated a vehicle, an all-terrain vehicle, a boat, or a snowmobile or for injury or homicide by intoxicated use of a vehicle (OWI-related offense). Upon the request of a law enforcement officer, a test facility must perform an analysis of a person's sample of blood.

Under this bill, if the person is convicted of an OWI-related offense, the person must be assessed any costs associated with acquiring a blood sample and administering a blood test or analysis that were charged to or paid by a law enforcement agency. The bill requires a law enforcement officer to inform each person from whom the officer wishes to obtain a blood sample that the person will be responsible for the costs of testing the blood if the person is convicted of an OWI-related offense.

Who's behind it

22 lawmakers are its ⁠. 17 are Republicans, 4 are Democrats and 1 is a Independent.

6 more lawmakers ⁠.

See all 28 names

Authors (22)

Signed on in support (6)

What it would cost

State agencies filed a . Each opens as a PDF from the Legislature.

Versions and amendments

Every text the Legislature printed for this bill, including proposed changes. Each opens on the Legislature's site.

How lawmakers voted

There was one vote on this bill.

Assembly Committee on Public Safety vote on an amendment

Passed, 8 to 0 · May 21, 2009

No member-by-member record exists for this vote. Committee votes and some older sessions record totals only.

Official motion: “Report Assembly Substitute Amendment 1 adoption recommended by committee on Public Safety, Ayes 8, Noes 0”. Official record · This vote on its own page

What happened

  1. Apr 28, 2010

    The session ended, and the bill died with it.

  2. Sep 23, 2009

    Sent to the Senate Committee on Judiciary, Corrections, Insurance, Campaign Finance Reform, and Housing.

  3. Sep 18, 2009

    The Senate received it.

  4. Sep 17, 2009

    The Assembly passed it.

  5. Sep 17, 2009

    The Assembly adopted it.

  6. May 21, 2009

    Sent to the Assembly Committee on Rules.

  7. May 21, 2009

    The committee voted to recommend passing it, 8 to 0.

  8. May 13, 2009

    A state agency sent in its estimate of the cost.

  9. May 5, 2009

    The committee held a public hearing.

  10. May 4, 2009

    A state agency sent in its estimate of the cost.

  11. Apr 29, 2009

    1 more representative signed on in support.

  12. Mar 24, 2009

    A state agency sent in its estimate of the cost.

  13. Mar 19, 2009

    A state agency sent in its estimate of the cost.

  14. Mar 9, 2009

    Sent to the Assembly Committee on Public Safety.

  15. Mar 9, 2009

    Introduced in the Assembly.

See the official record, word for word
  1. Mar 9, 2009 · Assembly

    Introduced by Representatives Gundrum, Petersen, Ziegelbauer, Montgomery, Staskunas, Nass, Townsend, Berceau, Kleefisch, Nerison, LeMahieu, Spanbauer, Bies, Lothian, Petrowski, A. Ott, Brooks, Mursau, Strachota, Gottlieb, Richards and Molepske Jr.;Cosponsored by Senators Kedzie, Lazich, Plale, Darling and Schultz

  2. Mar 9, 2009 · Assembly

    Read first time and referred to committee on Public Safety

  3. Mar 19, 2009 · Assembly

    Fiscal estimate received

  4. Mar 24, 2009 · Assembly

    Fiscal estimate received

  5. Apr 29, 2009 · Assembly

    Representative Newcomer added as a coauthor

  6. May 4, 2009 · Assembly

    Fiscal estimate received

  7. May 5, 2009 · Assembly

    Public hearing held

  8. May 13, 2009 · Assembly

    Fiscal estimate received

  9. May 13, 2009 · Assembly

    Assembly substitute amendment 1 offered by Representative Gundrum

  10. May 19, 2009 · Assembly

    Executive action taken

  11. May 21, 2009 · Assembly

    Report Assembly Substitute Amendment 1 adoption recommended by committee on Public Safety, Ayes 8, Noes 0

  12. May 21, 2009 · Assembly

    Report passage as amended recommended by committee on Public Safety, Ayes 8, Noes 0

  13. May 21, 2009 · Assembly

    Referred to committee on Rules

  14. Sep 15, 2009 · Assembly

    Placed on calendar 9-17-2009 by committee on Rules

  15. Sep 17, 2009 · Assembly

    Read a second time

  16. Sep 17, 2009 · Assembly

    Assembly substitute amendment 1 adopted

  17. Sep 17, 2009 · Assembly

    Ordered to a third reading

  18. Sep 17, 2009 · Assembly

    Rules suspended

  19. Sep 17, 2009 · Assembly

    Read a third time and passed

  20. Sep 17, 2009 · Assembly

    Ordered immediately messaged

  21. Sep 18, 2009 · Senate

    Received from Assembly

  22. Sep 23, 2009 · Senate

    Read first time and referred to committee on Judiciary, Corrections, Insurance, Campaign Finance Reform, and Housing

  23. Apr 28, 2010 · Senate

    Failed to concur in pursuant to Senate Joint Resolution 1

Terms on this page

Second chamber's vote

A bill has to pass both the Assembly and the Senate in the same form before it goes to the governor.

Official term: Concurrence. More in the glossary

Senate Joint Resolution 1

The session's calendar. Any bill not passed by its last voting day dies.

Official term: Failed to pass pursuant to SJR 1. More in the glossary

Legislative Reference Bureau

The Legislature's nonpartisan office that drafts bills and writes the summary at the top of each one.

Official term: LRB analysis. More in the glossary

Author

A lawmaker who formally puts a bill forward. The text itself is drafted by the Legislative Reference Bureau.

Official term: Author, coauthor. More in the glossary

Signed on in support

Lawmakers who back a bill without being one of its authors, often from the other chamber.

Official term: Cosponsor. More in the glossary

Cost estimate

A state agency's estimate of what a bill would cost or save.

Official term: Fiscal estimate. More in the glossary

Roll call

A vote where each lawmaker's yes or no is recorded by name.

Official term: Roll call vote. More in the glossary

From the Wisconsin Legislature's official record, checked Sep 15, 2026. See the source

Second chamber's vote

A bill has to pass both the Assembly and the Senate in the same form before it goes to the governor.

Official term: Concurrence

Senate Joint Resolution 1

The session's calendar. Any bill not passed by its last voting day dies.

Official term: Failed to pass pursuant to SJR 1

Legislative Reference Bureau

The Legislature's nonpartisan office that drafts bills and writes the summary at the top of each one.

Official term: LRB analysis

Author

A lawmaker who formally puts a bill forward. The text itself is drafted by the Legislative Reference Bureau.

Official term: Author, coauthor

Signed on in support

Lawmakers who back a bill without being one of its authors, often from the other chamber.

Official term: Cosponsor

Cost estimate

A state agency's estimate of what a bill would cost or save.

Official term: Fiscal estimate

Roll call

A vote where each lawmaker's yes or no is recorded by name.

Official term: Roll call vote