Skip to content
Bills from the 2009–10 session

Assembly Bill 65

Public financing of campaigns for the office of justice of the supreme court, making appropriations, and providing penalties

Topics: Elections: Campaign expense, Income tax: Return, Supreme Court

Stopped before the full Assembly voted

The recommended passing it, but the full Assembly never voted on it. To try again, a lawmaker would have to start a new bill.

  1. Introduced, passed

    Feb 17, 2009

  2. Committee, passed

    Approved

  3. Assembly vote, stopped here

    Stopped here. The full Assembly never voted on it.

  4. Senate vote, not reached

  5. Governor, not reached

  6. Law, not reached

Latest entry in the official record, Apr 28, 2010: “Failed to pass 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.

This bill makes numerous changes in the campaign finance law affecting campaigns for the office of justice of the supreme court. The bill limits the application of the Wisconsin election campaign fund, under which eligible candidates for certain state offices (including justice of the supreme court) may currently receive public grants from state general purpose revenues derived from designations made by individuals filing state income tax returns, to state offices other than the office of justice. To finance elections for the office of justice of the supreme court, the bill creates a democracy trust fund under which eligible candidates for this office may receive public grants derived from general purpose revenues.

Under the bill, a candidate for the office of justice of the supreme court may qualify for public financing from the democracy trust fund to finance a campaign in a primary or election by receiving qualifying contributions from at least 1,000 separate contributors who are electors of this state in amounts of not less than $5 nor more than $100 in an aggregate amount of at least $5,000 but not more than $15,000.

Read the full summary

A candidate who accepts public financing may also accept "seed money" contributions from electors of this state in amounts of $100 or less, subject to aggregate limitations, and may contribute personal funds in specified amounts during specified periods. In order to qualify for a public financing benefit for the primary, a candidate at the spring primary must have an opponent who qualifies to have his or her name appear on the ballot at the primary, and in order to qualify for a public financing benefit for the spring election, a candidate at the election must have an opponent who qualifies to have his or her name appear on the ballot at the election. A candidate who accepts a public financing benefit may not accept any contributions other than qualifying and seed money contributions and contributions from personal funds within the limitations permitted. Public financing benefits for eligible candidates are $100,000 in the spring primary and $300,000 in the spring election. The benefits are subject to a biennial cost of living adjustment. A candidate who accepts more than a specified amount of qualifying or seed money contributions has the excess deducted from his or her public financing benefit. In addition, if a candidate's opponent declines to accept a public financing benefit and makes expenditures in a total amount that exceeds by more than 5 percent the amount permitted for a candidate who accepts a public financing benefit, the candidate who accepts a public financing benefit receives additional funding equivalent to the excess expenditures made by his or her opponent, but may not receive more than three times the amount of the public financing benefit for the office that the candidate seeks. A candidate also receives additional public financing equivalent to any independent expenditures made against the candidate or in support of his or her opponents if those expenditures exceed by more than 20 percent the amount of the public financing benefit for the office that the candidate seeks, but may not receive more than three times the amount of that benefit.

The bill provides that if a candidate makes disbursements that exceed the total amount of the public financing benefit allocated to the candidate and the total qualifying and seed money contributions lawfully accepted by the candidate, the candidate is subject to a forfeiture (civil penalty) of not more than ten times the amount by which his or her disbursements exceed the allocation. In addition, the bill provides that a candidate who accepts contributions in excess of any limitation imposed under the bill is subject to a forfeiture of not more than ten times the amount by which the contributions exceed the applicable limitation. The bill also provides that if any candidate or agent of a candidate knowingly accepts more contributions than the candidate is entitled to receive, or makes disbursements exceeding the total amount of the public financing benefit received by the candidate and the qualifying and seed money contributions lawfully received by the candidate, the candidate or agent may be fined not more than $25,000 or imprisoned for not more than ten years, or both. Under the bill, any person who, in connection with the receipt or disbursement of a public financing benefit, knowingly provides false information to the Government Accountability Board, or knowingly conceals or withholds information from the board, is subject to the same penalty.

Currently, a candidate for the office of justice of the supreme court may qualify to receive a grant from the Wisconsin election campaign fund for use in an election campaign only (no funding is provided for primary campaigns). In order to qualify for a grant, a candidate must qualify to have his or her name appear on the spring election ballot and must have an opponent who qualifies to have his or her name appear on that ballot. The maximum amount of a grant that a candidate may receive is $97,031. This amount is not subject to any cost of living adjustment. In addition, this amount is reduced by the total amount of contributions received by a candidate from special interest committees and this amount may not be fully funded in a particular year if there are not sufficient moneys in the Wisconsin election campaign fund to provide full financing for all qualifying candidates. A candidate must agree to abide by spending and self-contribution limits in order to receive a grant, but this agreement does not apply if the candidate has an opponent who could have qualified for a grant but declines to do so and declines to file an affidavit of voluntary compliance with spending and self-contribution limits.

Currently, individuals and committees making political contributions to candidates for the office of justice of the supreme court are subject to limitations on the amount or value of any contribution or contributions that may be made cumulatively to any candidate in a campaign. The limitations are $10,000 in the case of an individual making a contribution to a candidate and $8,625 in the case of a committee making a contribution to a candidate. This bill replaces these limitations with a contribution limitation of $1,000 applicable to an individual or committee making any contribution or contributions cumulatively during a campaign period to any candidate for the office of justice of the supreme court who is eligible to qualify for a public financing benefit but who declines to accept one.

Under current law, the Wisconsin election campaign fund is financed through an individual income tax "checkoff." Every individual filing a state income tax return who has a tax liability or is entitled to a tax refund may direct that $1 of general purpose revenue be transferred to the fund. Individuals filing a joint return may separately choose whether to direct that the $1 transfer be made. The designation does not increase an individual's tax liability nor reduce an individual's refund. This bill increases the amount of the individual income tax checkoff for the Wisconsin election campaign fund from $1 to $3. Under the bill, individuals filing a joint return may separately choose whether to make the $3 checkoff. Under the bill, $2 of each $3 designation is deposited into the democracy trust fund, and the remaining $1 is deposited into the Wisconsin election campaign fund, as currently provided. If the total designations do not generate sufficient general purpose revenues to fully fund the costs of public grants and administration of the democracy trust fund, the bill appropriates additional general purpose revenues to finance those costs.

Because this bill creates a new crime or revises a penalty for an existing crime, the Joint Review Committee on Criminal Penalties may be requested to prepare a report concerning the proposed penalty and the costs or savings that are likely to result if the bill is enacted.

Who's behind it

24 lawmakers are its ⁠. 23 are Democrats. 1 has no party on record.

13 more lawmakers ⁠.

See all 37 names

Authors (24)

Signed on in support (13)

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 were 2 votes on this bill.

Assembly Committee on Elections and Campaign Reform vote to recommend it

Passed, 4 to 3 · Oct 21, 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 Elections and Campaign Reform, Ayes 4, Noes 3”. Official record · This vote on its own page

Joint Committee on Finance vote on an amendment

Passed, 15 to 0 · Nov 3, 2009

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

Official motion: “Report Assembly Amendment 1 adoption recommended by joint committee on Finance, Ayes 15, 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. Nov 3, 2009

    Sent to the Assembly Committee on Rules.

  3. Nov 3, 2009

    The committee voted to recommend passing it, 11 to 4.

  4. Oct 21, 2009

    Sent to the Joint Committee on Finance.

  5. Oct 21, 2009

    The committee voted to recommend passing it, 4 to 3.

  6. Sep 30, 2009

    1 more senator signed on in support.

  7. May 27, 2009

    The committee held a public hearing.

  8. Apr 13, 2009

    A state agency sent in its estimate of the cost.

  9. Feb 25, 2009

    A state agency sent in its estimate of the cost.

  10. Feb 23, 2009

    A state agency sent in its estimate of the cost.

  11. Feb 17, 2009

    Sent to the Assembly Committee on Elections and Campaign Reform.

  12. Feb 17, 2009

    Introduced in the Assembly.

See the official record, word for word
  1. Feb 17, 2009 · Assembly

    Introduced by Representatives Hintz, Hilgenberg, Smith, Garthwaite, Benedict, Roys, Hebl, Staskunas, Turner, Parisi, Cullen, Jorgensen, Richards, Zepnick, Pocan, Pope-Roberts, Clark, Shilling, Hubler, Black, Berceau, Grigsby, Molepske Jr. and Kessler;Cosponsored by Senators Kreitlow, Taylor, Lehman, Erpenbach, Miller, Risser, Lassa, Hansen, Wirch, Vinehout, Schultz and Sullivan

  2. Feb 17, 2009 · Assembly

    Read first time and referred to committee on Elections and Campaign Reform

  3. Feb 23, 2009 · Assembly

    Fiscal estimate received

  4. Feb 25, 2009 · Assembly

    Fiscal estimate received

  5. Apr 13, 2009 · Assembly

    Fiscal estimate received

  6. May 27, 2009 · Assembly

    Public hearing held

  7. Jun 16, 2009 · Assembly

    Executive action taken

  8. Sep 30, 2009 · Assembly

    Senator Ellis added as a cosponsor

  9. Oct 21, 2009 · Assembly

    Report passage recommended by committee on Elections and Campaign Reform, Ayes 4, Noes 3

  10. Oct 21, 2009 · Assembly

    Referred to joint committee on Finance

  11. Nov 3, 2009 · Assembly

    Executive action taken

  12. Nov 3, 2009 · Assembly

    Assembly amendment 1 offered by joint committee on Finance

  13. Nov 3, 2009 · Assembly

    Assembly amendment 2 offered by joint committee on Finance

  14. Nov 3, 2009 · Assembly

    Assembly amendment 3 offered by joint committee on Finance

  15. Nov 3, 2009 · Assembly

    Assembly amendment 4 offered by joint committee on Finance

  16. Nov 3, 2009 · Assembly

    Report Assembly Amendment 1 adoption recommended by joint committee on Finance, Ayes 15, Noes 0

  17. Nov 3, 2009 · Assembly

    Report Assembly Amendment 2 adoption recommended by joint committee on Finance, Ayes 15, Noes 0

  18. Nov 3, 2009 · Assembly

    Report Assembly Amendment 3 adoption recommended by joint committee on Finance, Ayes 11, Noes 4

  19. Nov 3, 2009 · Assembly

    Report Assembly Amendment 4 adotion recommended by joint committee on Finance, Ayes 11, Noes 4

  20. Nov 3, 2009 · Assembly

    Report passage as amended recommended by joint committee on Finance, Ayes 11, Noes 4

  21. Nov 3, 2009 · Assembly

    Referred to committee on Rules

  22. Nov 3, 2009 · Assembly

    Placed on calendar 11-5-2009 by committee on Rules

  23. Nov 5, 2009 · Assembly

    Laid on the table

  24. Apr 28, 2010 · Assembly

    Failed to pass pursuant to Senate Joint Resolution 1

Terms on this page

Committee

A small group of lawmakers that looks at a bill first. Most bills never leave committee.

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

Committee

A small group of lawmakers that looks at a bill first. Most bills never leave committee.

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