Skip to content
Bills from the 2009–10 session

Assembly Bill 178

Motor vehicle operating privileges, seizures by courts or law enforcement officers of operator's licenses, and reinstatement of canceled identification cards

Topics: Court, Forfeiture, Motor vehicle: Driver's license, Police, Transportation, Department of: Vehicles

Became law

The governor signed it on Feb 5, 2010. It's ⁠.

  1. Introduced, passed

    Mar 30, 2009

  2. Committee, passed

    Approved

  3. Assembly vote, passed

    Passed 62 to 34

  4. Senate vote, passed

    Passed 19 to 14

  5. Governor, passed

    Signed

  6. Law, here now

    2009 Wisconsin Act 103

Latest entry in the official record, Feb 9, 2010: “Published 2-18-2010.”

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 does

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

Under current law, if a court suspends or revokes a person's operating privilege, the court must take possession of the person's operator's license and forward it to the Department of Transportation (DOT). If a person is arrested for operating a motor vehicle while under the influence of an intoxicant (OWI), a law enforcement officer requests the person to take a test to determine the amount of alcohol in his or her blood or breath, and the person either refuses to take the test or the test results indicate a prohibited alcohol concentration, the officer must take possession of the person's operator's license and forward it to DOT.

Under this bill, a court that suspends or revokes a person's operating privilege may take possession of a person's operator's license but is not required to do so. If a court does take possession of a person's operator's license, the court must destroy the license. Upon reinstatement of the person's operating privilege, instead of returning the license, DOT must issue a new license. Also, a law enforcement officer who arrests a person for OWI may not take possession of a person's operator's license.

Read the full summary

The bill also allows a person who is otherwise eligible to obtain an occupational license to do so without surrendering his or her revoked operator's license.

Under current law, if a court suspends a person's operating privilege for certain violations and at the time of the suspension the person does not have a valid operator's license, the period of operating privilege suspension does not begin until the person is eligible and applies for an operator's license or until a specified period of time elapses, whichever occurs first.

Under this bill, a person need not apply for issuance, renewal, or reinstatement of an operator's license to trigger the commencement of the period of operating privilege suspension. The period of operating privilege suspension begins when the person first becomes eligible for issuance, renewal, or reinstatement of an operator's license. This bill also eliminates the requirement that a nonresident whose operating privilege is revoked in this state obtain a valid operator's license issued by his or her resident state as a condition of reinstatement by DOT of the nonresident's operating privilege.

Current law provides in most cases for automatic reinstatement of a person's suspended operating privilege after the period of operating privilege suspension has terminated and the person has paid the reinstatement fee. However, after revocation of a person's operating privilege, disqualification of a person's authorization to operate a commercial motor vehicle, or cancellation of a person's operator's license, in most cases reinstatement requires DOT to issue a new operator's license.

Reinstated licenses expire two years from the person's next birthday.

This bill provides for automatic reinstatement of a person's revoked operating privilege if the applicable period of revocation has expired and the person has applied for reinstatement and paid to DOT the applicable fee. The bill also provides for automatic reinstatement of a person's canceled operator's license or identification card if the cancellation occurred for specified reasons, the person has paid to DOT the applicable fee, and the reasons for the cancellation have been rectified.

The bill clarifies the general requirements for reinstatement of a person's authorization to operate a commercial motor vehicle. Under the bill, upon a person's application for reinstatement, DOT may reinstate the person's authorization to operate a commercial motor vehicle and issue a commercial driver license to the person if the person has paid the required fees and taken any examination required by DOT; however, DOT may not do so during any period of disqualification under state or federal law, under the law of another jurisdiction disqualifying the person from operating a commercial motor vehicle under circumstances similar to those specified in state or federal law, or under a federal agency determination that the person is no longer qualified to operate a commercial motor vehicle. The bill also provides for automatic reinstatement if the disqualification results from the issuance of a 24-hour out-of-service order. The bill eliminates the two-year expiration period for reinstated licenses if the license is canceled on a basis for which automatic reinstatement applies.

Who's behind it

14 lawmakers are its ⁠. 13 are Democrats and 1 is a Republican.

5 more lawmakers ⁠.

See all 19 names

Authors (14)

Signed on in support (5)

What it would cost

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

How lawmakers voted

There were 5 votes on this bill.

Assembly Committee on Transportation vote to recommend it

Passed, 12 to 0 · May 19, 2009

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

Official motion: “Report passage recommended by committee on Transportation, Ayes 12, Noes 0”. Official record · This vote on its own page

Assembly vote to pass it

Passed, 62 to 34 · Jun 23, 2009

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

Official motion: “Read a third time and passed, Ayes 62, Noes 34”. Official record · This vote on its own page

Senate Committee on Transportation vote to recommend it

Passed, 6 to 1 · Jul 17, 2009

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

Official motion: “Report concurrence recommended by committee on Transportation, Tourism, Forestry, and Natural Resources, Ayes 6, Noes 1”. Official record · This vote on its own page

Joint Committee on Finance vote to recommend it

Passed, 12 to 4 · Oct 29, 2009

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

Official motion: “Report concurrence recommended by joint committee on Finance, Ayes 12, Noes 4”. Official record · This vote on its own page

Senate vote to pass it

Passed, 19 to 14 · Jan 19, 2010

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

Official motion: “Read a third time and concurred in, Ayes 19, Noes 14”. Official record · This vote on its own page

What happened

  1. Feb 9, 2010

    The new law was published.

  2. Feb 5, 2010

    The governor signed it. It became 2009 Wisconsin Act 103.

  3. Feb 3, 2010

    Sent to the governor.

  4. Jan 19, 2010

    The Senate passed it too, 19 to 14.

  5. Oct 29, 2009

    The committee voted to recommend passing it, 12 to 4.

  6. Sep 8, 2009

    Sent to the Joint Committee on Finance.

  7. Jul 17, 2009

    The committee voted to recommend passing it, 6 to 1.

  8. Jun 25, 2009

    Sent to the Senate Committee on Transportation, Tourism, Forestry, and Natural Resources.

  9. Jun 23, 2009

    The Senate received it.

  10. Jun 23, 2009

    The Assembly passed it, 62 to 34.

  11. May 19, 2009

    Sent to the Assembly Committee on Rules.

  12. May 19, 2009

    The committee voted to recommend passing it, 12 to 0.

  13. Apr 10, 2009

    A state agency sent in its estimate of the cost.

  14. Apr 9, 2009

    The committee held a public hearing.

  15. Apr 9, 2009

    A state agency sent in its estimate of the cost.

  16. Apr 6, 2009

    A state agency sent in its estimate of the cost.

  17. Mar 30, 2009

    Sent to the Assembly Committee on Transportation.

  18. Mar 30, 2009

    Introduced in the Assembly.

See the official record, word for word
  1. Mar 30, 2009 · Assembly

    Introduced by Representatives Grigsby, Kessler, Fields, Young, Roys, A. Williams, Vruwink, Turner, Berceau, A. Ott, Sinicki, Colon, Honadel, Toles and Mason;Cosponsored by Senators Taylor, Lehman, Erpenbach, Grothman and Plale

  2. Mar 30, 2009 · Assembly

    Read first time and referred to committee on Transportation

  3. Apr 6, 2009 · Assembly

    Fiscal estimate received

  4. Apr 9, 2009 · Assembly

    Fiscal estimate received

  5. Apr 9, 2009 · Assembly

    Public hearing held

  6. Apr 10, 2009 · Assembly

    Fiscal estimate received

  7. Apr 23, 2009 · Assembly

    Representative Honadel withdrawn as a coauthor

  8. May 7, 2009 · Assembly

    Executive action taken

  9. May 19, 2009 · Assembly

    Report passage recommended by committee on Transportation, Ayes 12, Noes 0

  10. May 19, 2009 · Assembly

    Referred to committee on Rules

  11. Jun 18, 2009 · Assembly

    Placed on calendar 6-23-2009 by committee on Rules

  12. Jun 23, 2009 · Assembly

    Read a second time

  13. Jun 23, 2009 · Assembly

    Ordered to a third reading

  14. Jun 23, 2009 · Assembly

    Rules suspended

  15. Jun 23, 2009 · Assembly

    Read a third time and passed, Ayes 62, Noes 34

  16. Jun 23, 2009 · Assembly

    Ordered immediately messaged

  17. Jun 23, 2009 · Senate

    Received from Assembly

  18. Jun 25, 2009 · Senate

    Read first time and referred to committee on Transportation, Tourism, Forestry, and Natural Resources

  19. Jul 16, 2009 · Senate

    Executive action taken

  20. Jul 17, 2009 · Senate

    Report concurrence recommended by committee on Transportation, Tourism, Forestry, and Natural Resources, Ayes 6, Noes 1

  21. Jul 17, 2009 · Senate

    Available for scheduling

  22. Sep 8, 2009 · Senate

    Referred to joint committee on Finance by committee on Senate Organization, pursuant to Senate Rule 41 (1)(e)

  23. Oct 28, 2009 · Senate

    Executive action taken

  24. Oct 29, 2009 · Senate

    Report concurrence recommended by joint committee on Finance, Ayes 12, Noes 4

  25. Oct 29, 2009 · Senate

    Available for scheduling

  26. Jan 14, 2010 · Senate

    Placed on calendar 1-19-2010 by committee on Senate Organization

  27. Jan 19, 2010 · Senate

    Read a second time

  28. Jan 19, 2010 · Senate

    Ordered to a third reading

  29. Jan 19, 2010 · Senate

    Rules suspended

  30. Jan 19, 2010 · Senate

    Read a third time and concurred in, Ayes 19, Noes 14

  31. Jan 19, 2010 · Senate

    Ordered immediately messaged

  32. Jan 19, 2010 · Assembly

    Received from Senate concurred in

  33. Jan 22, 2010 · Assembly

    Report correctly enrolled

  34. Feb 3, 2010 · Assembly

    Presented to the Governor on 2-2-2010

  35. Feb 5, 2010 · Assembly

    Report approved by the Governor on 2-4-2010. 2009 Wisconsin Act 103

  36. Feb 9, 2010 · Assembly

    Published 2-18-2010.

Terms on this page

Wisconsin Act

The number a bill gets when it becomes law, like 2025 Wisconsin Act 12.

Official term: Act. 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

Wisconsin Act

The number a bill gets when it becomes law, like 2025 Wisconsin Act 12.

Official term: Act

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