Senate Bill 219
Various changes in the unemployment insurance law, providing a penalty, and making appropriations
Topics: Drugs, Employment, Federal aid, Sunset, Taxation, Unemployment insurance, Workforce Development, Department of
Became law
The governor signed it on Apr 3, 2012. It's .
-
Introduced, passed
Oct 6, 2011
-
Committee, passed
Approved
-
Senate vote, passed
Passed 29 to 3
-
Assembly vote, passed
Passed Mar 15, 2012
-
Governor, passed
Signed
-
Law, here now
2011 Wisconsin Act 198
Latest entry in the official record, Apr 5, 2012: “Published 4-16-2012”
Following saves it on this device. New actions show on your Following page. You can also get updates in a feed reader.
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
What it does
Summary by the , the Legislature's nonpartisan drafting office. It's their wording, not ours.
This bill makes various changes in the unemployment insurance (UI) law.
Significant provisions include:
Read the full summary Show less
Benefit changes Concealment and program integrity Currently, if a claimant conceals any material fact relating to his or her eligibility for benefits or conceals any wages earned in or paid or payable for a given week, the claimant is subject to graduated monetary penalties that increase in severity with the number of determinations of concealment by the claimant. In addition, if a claimant conceals any wages for a given week, the claimant is ineligible to receive any benefits for that week.
This bill provides instead that a claimant who conceals any material fact relating to his or her eligibility for benefits or conceals any wages is subject to a graduated forfeiture of benefit amounts equivalent to specified weeks of benefit eligibility that increases in severity with the number of determinations of concealment by the claimant. In addition, a claimant who is found guilty of concealment is subject to a penalty equal to 15 percent of the benefit payments paid to the claimant.
The bill also creates a segregated fund called the unemployment program integrity fund for deposit of all penalties collected under the above described penalty provision created by the bill. Under the bill, moneys in the fund are to be used for the payment of costs associated with program integrity (fraud detection and prevention) activities.
Partial unemployment Currently, with certain exceptions, if an employee earns wages or certain other amounts treated as wages in a given week, the first $30 of the wages or other amounts are disregarded and the claimant's weekly benefit payment is reduced by 67 percent of the remaining amount earned, but no employee is eligible to receive benefits for any week if the benefits would be less than $5, and any wages that the employee would have earned in any week for work performed for his or her employer had the claimant accepted available work from that employer are treated as wages earned for that week.
This bill provides that an employee is ineligible to receive any benefits for a week if the employee receives from one or more employers 1) wages earned for work performed in that week of more than $500; or 2) sick pay, holiday pay, vacation pay, or termination pay which, by itself or in combination with wages earned for work performed in that week, is equivalent to more than $500.
Eligibility of claimants who engage in full-time work Currently, if a claimant receives wages or certain other amounts treated as wages from an employer who paid at least 80 percent of the claimant's wages in his or her base period (period preceding a claim during which benefit rights accrue) for any week, the claimant is not eligible to receive benefits for that week if the claimant works for at least 32 hours for that employer in that week and receives pay at not less than the rate of pay that the claimant received during the calendar quarter in his or her base period in which the claimant received his or her highest wages, or the claimant receives certain other payments from that employer for that week that alone or in combination with any paid wages equal at least the pay the claimant would have received for 32 hours per week.
This bill substitutes a rule which provides that a claimant is ineligible to receive any benefits for a week in which one or more of the following applies to the claimant for 32 or more hours in that week: 1) The claimant performs work; 2) The claimant receives certain amounts treated as wages for that week; or 3) The claimant receives holiday pay, vacation pay, termination pay, or sick pay that is treated as wages under current law.
Failure or refusal to take a test for illegal drugs Currently, unless federal law otherwise provides, with certain exceptions, if an employee fails, without good cause, to accept suitable work when offered, the employee is ineligible to receive benefits until four weeks have elapsed since the end of the week in which the failure occurs and the employee earns wages, or certain other amounts treated as wages, equal to at least four times the employee's weekly benefit rate in employment covered by the unemployment insurance law of any state or the federal government. An employee's failure to accept an offer of work includes either a) the employee's refusal without good cause to take a test for illegal drugs conducted in a manner approved by the Department of Workforce Development (DWD) that is given on behalf of the employer as a condition of employment; or b) the employer's withdrawal of or failure to extend an offer of work due to a positive test result on such a test.
This bill deletes an employee's refusal to take a test for illegal drugs or a withdrawal or failure to extend an offer of employment due to a positive test result as an element of failure to accept suitable work.
Ineligibility for failure to perform work searches Currently, a claimant must conduct a reasonable search for suitable work during each week that the claimant receives benefits unless DWD waives the work search requirement by general rule under stated conditions. This bill provides that a claimant is ineligible to receive benefits for any week for which there is a determination that the claimant failed to conduct a reasonable search for suitable work and DWD has not waived the work search requirement. If benefits have been paid to a claimant for such a week, the bill permits DWD to recover the benefits in the same manner as other overpayments are recovered.
Tax changes Contribution liability of successor employers Currently, when a business is transferred from one employer to another employer, DWD must treat the transferee as the successor employer to the transferor if the the transferee and the transferor are owned, controlled, or managed by the same interests. DWD redetermines the contribution (tax) rate of a successor employer as of the first quarter beginning after the effective date of the transfer. This bill provides instead that DWD shall redetermine the contribution rate of a successor employer as of the beginning of the first calendar year beginning after the effective date of the transfer.
Other changes Determining who is the employer of certain employees Currently, when an employee has some relationship with more than one employer in the course of performing a job, DWD must determines which employer is considered to be the employee's employer for purposes of the UI law. Except in certain limited circumstances, current statutes do not address the issue of how employment status and employer responsibility for a particular employee is determined. This bill provides that, except with respect to providers of home health care and personal care services for medical assistance recipients, DWD must consider nine factors concerning an employer's relationship to an employee and three other factors concerning the beneficiary of an employee's services, maintenance of a staff of employees to perform the employee's services, and responsibility for employee compliance with regulatory laws in determining who is the employer of a particular employee. The bill also provides that notwithstanding these factors, a provider of home health care and personal care services for medical assistance recipients may elect to be the employer of employees providing those services, if the provider notifies in writing the recipient of the services of its election and the provider is treated by the federal Internal Revenue Service as an employer for purposes of compliance with federal unemployment tax laws.
Treatment of interest assessments and assessment-related revenue Currently, when there are insufficient moneys in the unemployment reserve fund to make full payment of benefit claims, DWD is authorized to borrow moneys from the federal government sufficient to make full payment of claims. DWD then levies an annual assessment against employers that engage employees in employment covered by the UI law sufficient to pay the interest due on the federal advances to the fund. Any interest earned on the assessments pending transfer to the federal government is credited to the state general fund, and any amount remaining after an interest payment is made is retained for the purpose of making future interest payments or for certain other authorized uses relating to the UI program. This bill creates a segregated fund called the unemployment interest payment fund for deposit of all unencumbered moneys collected on interest assessments and all moneys to be collected on assessments previously made. Under the bill, any interest earned on the assessments pending transfer to the federal government and any interest or penalties collected from employers who are delinquent in paying their assessments is credited to this segregated fund. The bill provides that DWD shall use the moneys in the fund to make interest payments due to the federal government on advances made to the unemployment reserve fund. The bill directs DWD to use excess moneys in the fund to pay interest due in future years, or if DWD determines that additional interest obligations are unlikely, the bill directs DWD to use the excess moneys to pay benefits. The bill also makes delinquent assessments subject to a simplified collection procedure that is currently used by DWD for collection of other UI liabilities.
Recovery of UI liabilities resulting from incorrect earnings reports Currently, DWD may utilize procedures available under state and federal laws to set off adjudicated UI liabilities against refunds or other payments that may be payable to a liable individual under state law or to offset adjudicated UI liabilities for fraudulent practices against refunds that may be payable to a liable individual under federal tax laws. This bill permits DWD to offset adjudicated UI liabilities for failure to report earnings in the same manner.
Who's behind it
Van Wanggaard, a Republican, is its .
1 more lawmaker .
See all 2 names Hide the names
Author (1)
- Van Wanggaard · Republican, Senate
Signed on in support (1)
- Joan Ballweg · Republican, Senate
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 6 votes on this bill. Taking a bill up right away needs two-thirds of the members, a higher bar than passing it, so that vote can draw more yeses than the final one.
Senate vote
Passed, 5 to 0 · Oct 24, 2011
No member-by-member record exists for this vote. Committee votes and some older sessions record totals only.
Official motion: “Referred to joint committee on Finance by committee on Senate Organization, pursuant to Senate Rule 41 (1)(e), Ayes 5, Noes 0”. Official record · This vote on its own page
Senate Committee on Labor vote to recommend it
Passed, 5 to 0 · Oct 24, 2011
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 Labor, Public Safety, and Urban Affairs, Ayes 5, Noes 0”. Official record · This vote on its own page
Senate vote
Passed, 17 to 16 · Oct 25, 2011
No member-by-member record exists for this vote. Committee votes and some older sessions record totals only.
Official motion: “Referred to committee on Senate Organization, Ayes 17, Noes 16”. Official record · This vote on its own page
Senate vote to take it up right away
Failed, 16 to 17 · Oct 25, 2011
No member-by-member record exists for this vote. Committee votes and some older sessions record totals only.
Official motion: “Refused to suspend rules to withdraw from committee on Senate Organization and take up, Ayes 16, Noes 17”. Official record · This vote on its own page
Senate vote to pass it
Passed, 29 to 3 · Nov 2, 2011 · 1 didn't vote
See how each of the 33 senators voted Hide the names
D: Democrat, R: Republican
Yes (29)
- Alberta Darling (R, 8)
- Chris Larson (D, 7)
- Dale Schultz (R, 17)
- Dave Hansen (D, 30)
- Frank G. Lasee (R, 1)
- Fred A. Risser (D, 26)
- Glenn Grothman (R, 20)
- Jennifer Shilling (D, 32)
- Jessica King (D, 18)
- Jim Holperin (D, 12)
- Joe Leibham (R, 9)
- Jon Erpenbach (D, 27)
- Julie M. Lassa (D, 24)
- Kathleen Vinehout (D, 31)
- Lena Taylor (D, 4)
- Luther S. Olsen (R, 14)
- Mark Miller (D, 16)
- Mary Lazich (R, 28)
- Michael Ellis (R, 19)
- Neal Kedzie (R, 11)
- Rob Cowles (R, 2)
- Robert Jauch (D, 25)
- Scott L. Fitzgerald (R, 13)
- Sheila Harsdorf (R, 10)
- Spencer Coggs (D, 6)
- Terry Moulton (R, 23)
- Tim Carpenter (D, 3)
- Timothy Cullen (D, 15)
- Van Wanggaard (R, 21)
No (3)
- Leah Vukmir (R, 5)
- Pam Galloway (R, 29)
- Rich Zipperer (R, 33)
Didn't vote (1)
- Bob Wirch (D, 22)
Official motion: “Read a third time and passed, Ayes 29, Noes 3”. Official record · This vote on its own page
Assembly vote to pass it
Passed, 80 to 12 · Mar 15, 2012 · 7 didn't vote
See how each of the 99 representatives voted Hide the names
D: Democrat, I: Independent, R: Republican
Yes (80)
- Alvin Ott (R, 3)
- Amy Loudenbeck (R, 31)
- Amy Sue Vruwink (D, 70)
- Andy Jorgensen (D, 43)
- Barbara Toles (D, 17)
- Bob Ziegelbauer (I, 25)
- Brett Hulsey (D, 78)
- Chad Weininger (R, 4)
- Chris Danou (D, 92)
- Chris Taylor (D, 76)
- Christine Sinicki (D, 20)
- Cory Mason (D, 66)
- Dale Kooyenga (R, 5)
- Dan Meyer (R, 34)
- Daniel LeMahieu (R, 59)
- David Cullen (D, 13)
- Dean Kaufert (R, 53)
- Dean Knudson (R, 30)
- Donna Seidel (D, 85)
- Edward Brooks (R, 50)
- Elizabeth Coggs (D, 10)
- Evan Wynn (R, 43)
- Fred Clark (D, 81)
- Frederick Kessler (D, 12)
- Garey Bies (R, 1)
- Gary Hebl (D, 46)
- Gary Tauchen (R, 6)
- Gordon Hintz (D, 54)
- Howard Marklein (R, 17)
- Janet Bewley (D, 25)
- Janis Ringhand (D, 15)
- Jeff Fitzgerald (R, 39)
- Jeff Mursau (R, 36)
- Jeffrey Stone (R, 82)
- Jeremy Thiesfeldt (R, 52)
- Jerry Petrowski (R, 29)
- Jill Billings (D, 95)
- Jim Steineke (R, 5)
- JoCasta Zamarripa (D, 8)
- Joan Ballweg (R, 14)
- Joe Knilans (R, 44)
- Joel Kleefisch (R, 38)
- John Klenke (R, 88)
- John Nygren (R, 89)
- Jon Richards (D, 19)
- Josh Zepnick (D, 9)
- Karl Van Roy (R, 90)
- Kathleen Bernier (R, 23)
- Keith Ripp (R, 42)
- Kelda Roys (D, 26)
- Lee Nerison (R, 96)
- Leon Young (D, 16)
- Louis Molepske Jr. (D, 71)
- Margaret Krusick (D, 7)
- Mark Honadel (R, 21)
- Mark Pocan (D, 78)
- Michelle Litjens (R, 56)
- Mike Endsley (R, 26)
- Mike Kuglitsch (R, 84)
- Nick Milroy (D, 73)
- Pat Strachota (R, 58)
- Paul F. Farrow (R, 33)
- Penny Bernard Schaber (D, 57)
- Peter Barca (D, 64)
- Richard Spanbauer (R, 53)
- Robert Turner (D, 61)
- Robin Vos (R, 33)
- Roger Rivard (R, 75)
- Samantha Kerkman (R, 61)
- Sandy Pasch (D, 10)
- Scott Krug (R, 72)
- Scott Suder (R, 69)
- Sondy Pope (D, 80)
- Steve Doyle (D, 94)
- Steve Kestell (R, 27)
- Thomas Larson (R, 67)
- Thomas Tiffany (R, 12)
- Tony Staskunas (D, 15)
- Travis Tranel (R, 49)
- Warren Petryk (R, 93)
No (12)
- André Jacque (R, 1)
- Bill Kramer (R, 97)
- Chris Kapenga (R, 33)
- Dan Knodl (R, 24)
- David Craig (R, 28)
- Don Pridemore (R, 22)
- Duey Stroebel (R, 20)
- Erik Severson (R, 28)
- Jim Ott (R, 23)
- Kevin Petersen (R, 57)
- Steve Nass (R, 11)
- Tyler August (R, 31)
Didn't vote (7)
- Jason Fields (D, 11)
- John Murtha (R, 29)
- John Steinbrink (D, 65)
- Mark Radcliffe (D, 92)
- Mary Williams (R, 87)
- Tamara Grigsby (D, 18)
- Terese Berceau (D, 77)
Official motion: “Read a third time and concurred in as amended, Ayes 80, Noes 12”. Official record · This vote on its own page
What happened
-
Apr 5, 2012
The new law was published.
-
Apr 3, 2012
The governor signed it. It became 2011 Wisconsin Act 198.
-
Apr 2, 2012
Sent to the governor.
-
Mar 15, 2012
The Assembly passed it too, 80 to 12.
-
Mar 15, 2012
The Assembly adopted it.
-
Mar 14, 2012
“Action ordered immediately messaged” (the official wording)
-
Mar 14, 2012
The Senate adopted it.
-
Mar 6, 2012
Sent to the Assembly Committee on Rules.
-
Dec 20, 2011
Sent to the Joint Committee on Finance.
-
Nov 7, 2011
The Assembly received it.
-
Nov 2, 2011
The Senate passed it, 29 to 3.
-
Oct 25, 2011
Sent to the Senate Committee on Senate Organization, Ayes 17, Noes 16.
-
Oct 25, 2011
“Read a third time” (the official wording)
-
Oct 24, 2011
“Withdrawn from joint committee on Finance and made Available for Scheduling by committee on Senate Organization, pursuant to Senate Rule 41 (1)(e), Ayes 5, Noes 0” (the official wording)
-
Oct 24, 2011
Sent to the Joint Committee on Finance.
-
Oct 24, 2011
The committee voted to recommend passing it, 5 to 0.
-
Oct 21, 2011
A state agency sent in its estimate of the cost.
-
Oct 13, 2011
The committee held a public hearing.
-
Oct 6, 2011
Sent to the Senate Committee on Labor, Public Safety, and Urban Affairs.
-
Oct 6, 2011
Introduced in the Senate.
See the official record, word for word Hide the official record
- Oct 6, 2011 · Senate
Introduced by Senator Wanggaard;Cosponsored by Representative Ballweg
- Oct 6, 2011 · Senate
Read first time and referred to committee on Labor, Public Safety, and Urban Affairs
- Oct 13, 2011 · Senate
Public hearing held
- Oct 21, 2011 · Senate
Fiscal estimate received
- Oct 24, 2011 · Senate
Executive action taken
- Oct 24, 2011 · Senate
Report passage recommended by committee on Labor, Public Safety, and Urban Affairs, Ayes 5, Noes 0
- Oct 24, 2011 · Senate
Available for scheduling
- Oct 24, 2011 · Senate
Referred to joint committee on Finance by committee on Senate Organization, pursuant to Senate Rule 41 (1)(e), Ayes 5, Noes 0
- Oct 24, 2011 · Senate
Withdrawn from joint committee on Finance and made Available for Scheduling by committee on Senate Organization, pursuant to Senate Rule 41 (1)(e), Ayes 5, Noes 0
- Oct 24, 2011 · Senate
Placed on calendar 10-25-2011 pursuant to Senate Rule 18(1)
- Oct 25, 2011 · Senate
Read a second time
- Oct 25, 2011 · Senate
Ordered to a third reading
- Oct 25, 2011 · Senate
Rules suspended
- Oct 25, 2011 · Senate
Read a third time
- Oct 25, 2011 · Senate
Referred to committee on Senate Organization, Ayes 17, Noes 16
- Oct 25, 2011 · Senate
Refused to suspend rules to withdraw from committee on Senate Organization and take up, Ayes 16, Noes 17
- Nov 1, 2011 · Senate
Placed on calendar 11-2-2011 pursuant to Senate Rule 18(1)
- Nov 2, 2011 · Senate
Read a second time
- Nov 2, 2011 · Senate
Ordered to a third reading
- Nov 2, 2011 · Senate
Rules suspended
- Nov 2, 2011 · Senate
Read a third time and passed, Ayes 29, Noes 3
- Nov 2, 2011 · Senate
Ordered immediately messaged
- Nov 7, 2011 · Assembly
Received from Senate
- Dec 20, 2011 · Assembly
Read first time and referred to joint committee on Finance
- Mar 6, 2012 · Assembly
Withdrawn from joint committee on Finance and referred to committee on Rules pursuant to Assembly Rule 42 (3)(c)
- Mar 6, 2012 · Assembly
Made a special order of business at 11:53 A.M. on 3-13-2012 pursuant to Assembly Resolution 22
- Mar 14, 2012 · Senate
Received from Assembly amended and concurred in as amended, Assembly amendment 1 adopted
- Mar 14, 2012 · Senate
Available for scheduling
- Mar 14, 2012 · Senate
Rules suspended and taken up
- Mar 14, 2012 · Senate
Assembly amendment 1 concurred in
- Mar 14, 2012 · Senate
Action ordered immediately messaged
- Mar 15, 2012 · Assembly
Read a second time
- Mar 15, 2012 · Assembly
Assembly amendment 1 offered by Representative Ballweg
- Mar 15, 2012 · Assembly
Assembly amendment 1 adopted
- Mar 15, 2012 · Assembly
Ordered to a third reading
- Mar 15, 2012 · Assembly
Rules suspended
- Mar 15, 2012 · Assembly
Read a third time and concurred in as amended, Ayes 80, Noes 12
- Mar 15, 2012 · Assembly
Ordered immediately messaged
- Mar 26, 2012 · Senate
LRB correction
- Apr 2, 2012 · Senate
Report correctly enrolled on 4-2-2012
- Apr 2, 2012 · Senate
Presented to the Governor on 4-2-2012
- Apr 3, 2012 · Senate
Report approved by the Governor on 4-2-2012. 2011 Wisconsin Act 198
- Apr 5, 2012 · Senate
Published 4-16-2012
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
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