Senate Bill 454
Reading readiness assessments and granting rule-making authority. (FE)
Vetoed by the governor
Both chambers passed it, and the governor vetoed it on Nov 5, 2021. Lawmakers did not , so it stands.
-
Introduced, passed
Jul 21, 2021
-
Committee, passed
Approved
-
Senate vote, passed
Passed 20 to 12
-
Assembly vote, passed
Passed 62 to 32
-
Governor, stopped here
Vetoed Nov 5, 2021.
-
Law, not reached
Latest entry in the official record, May 17, 2022: “Failed to pass notwithstanding the objections of the Governor pursuant to Joint Rule 82”
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
Veto override
Lawmakers can still pass a bill the governor vetoed, but it takes two-thirds of each chamber.
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 would have done
Summary by the , the Legislature's nonpartisan drafting office. It's their wording, not ours.
This bill replaces the current reading readiness assessment program with a three-tiered early literacy screening program.
Screening Assessments and interventions Under current law, school boards and independent charter schools must annually assess pupils enrolled in four-year-old kindergarten to second grade for reading readiness using an assessment of literacy fundamentals selected by the school board or independent charter school. The selected reading readiness assessment must evaluate whether a pupil possesses phonemic awareness and letter sound knowledge. Current law requires a school board or independent charter school to provide interventions or remedial reading services to a pupil if the reading readiness assessment indicates that the pupil is at risk of reading difficulty with interventions or remedial reading services. Current law does not define “at-risk.” This bill requires school boards and independent charter schools to assess the early literacy skill of pupils in four-year-old-kindergarten to second grade using various screening assessments and to create a personal reading plan for each pupil in five-year-old kindergarten to second grade who is identified as at-risk based on a universal screening assessment or a level 1 screening assessment. Under the bill, “at-risk” means the pupil scored below the 25th percentile on an applicable screening assessment, as indicated by the screening assessment publisher.
Read the full summary Show less
Fundamental skills screening assessments; four-year-old kindergarten Under the bill, school boards and independent charter schools must screen all pupils enrolled in four-year-old kindergarten at least two times each school year using a fundamental skills screening assessment. The bill specifies that the first screening must occur before the 46th day of the school term and that both screenings be completed by no later than 45 days before the last day of school. The bill defines a “fundamental skills screening assessment” as an assessment that evaluates a pupil's phonemic awareness and letter sound knowledge.
Tier 1 – Universal early learning screening assessments and interventions Required universal screening assessments Under the bill, school boards and independent charter schools must screen all pupils enrolled in five-year-old kindergarten to second grade at least three times each school year using a universal screening assessment. The bill specifies that the first universal screening must occur before the 46th day of the school term, the second universal screening must occur in the middle of the school term, and the third universal screening must occur no later than 45 days before the last day of school.
The bill defines a “universal screening assessment” as an assessment that evaluates a pupil's skill in phonemic awareness, decoding skills, rapid naming skills, alphabet knowledge, and letter sound knowledge.
Personal reading plan; at-risk pupils If a pupil is identified as at-risk based on a universal screening assessment, the bill requires the school board or independent charter school to create a personal reading plan for the pupil. Under the bill, a personal reading plan must include various components related to addressing the pupil's specific early literacy deficiencies, including interventions that will be provided to the pupil, how the pupil's progress will be monitored, and strategies the pupil's parent is encouraged to use to help the pupil achieve grade-level literacy skills. The bill further requires the school board or independent charter school to 1) provide the interventions included in the personal reading plan to the pupil, as soon as practicable; 2) monitor the pupil's progress at least weekly; 3) provide a copy of the personal reading plan to the pupil's parent; 4) obtain a copy of the reading plan signed by the pupil's parent; and 5) after 12 weeks of providing the interventions required in the personal reading plan, notify the pupil's parent of the pupil's progress.
Tier II – Level 1 screening assessments and interventions Required level 1 screening assessments Under the bill, school boards and independent charter schools must screen a pupil enrolled in five-year-old kindergarten to second grade using a level 1 screening assessment within 20 days of both of the following having occurred: 1) the pupil being identified as at risk on a universal screening assessment and 2) the pupil demonstrating an inadequate rate of progress in the pupil's early literacy skills after 12 weeks of receiving interventions outlined in the pupil's personal reading plan. A school board or independent charter school must also screen a pupil using a level 1 screening assessment within 20 days of a request by a teacher or parent who suspects that the pupil has characteristics of dyslexia. The bill defines a “level 1 screening assessment” as a screening tool that evaluates a pupil's skill in the skills assessed in a universal screening assessment as well as phonological awareness and encoding, and provides the pupil's parent the opportunity to complete a family history survey about learning difficulties in the pupil's family.
Personal reading plan after a level 1 screening assessment If a pupil is identified as at-risk based on a level 1 screening assessment, the bill requires the school board or independent charter school to modify the personal reading plan for the pupil. Under the bill, the modified personal reading plan must include the same components as a personal reading plan based on a universal screening assessment, except the modified personal reading plan must be created to address the specific early literacy deficiencies identified by the level 1 screening assessment and must include intensive interventions to address those early literacy deficiencies. Under the bill, an “intensive intervention” is an intervention that includes instruction that 1) is explicit, direct, systematic, sequential, and cumulative and follows a logical plan of presenting the alphabetic principle that targets the specific needs of the pupil without presuming prior skills or knowledge of the pupil;
2) is individualized to meet the specific needs of a pupil in a setting that uses intensive, highly concentrated instruction methods and materials that maximize pupil engagement; and 3) incorporates the simultaneous use of two or more sensory pathways during teacher presentations and pupil practice. A school board or independent charter school must provide the intensive interventions included in the personal reading plan to the pupil, as soon as practicable, and again monitor the pupil's progress at least weekly, provide a copy of the personal reading plan to the pupil's parent, obtain a copy of the reading plan signed by the pupil's parent, and notify the pupil's parent of the pupil's progress after 12 weeks of providing interventions under this personal reading plan.
Tier III – Level 2 screening assessments Required level 2 screening assessments Under the bill, school boards and independent charter schools must screen a pupil enrolled in five-year-old kindergarten to second grade using a level 2 screening assessment within 20 days of both of the following having occurred: 1) the pupil being identified as at risk on a level 1 screening assessment and 2) the pupil demonstrating an inadequate rate of progress in the pupil's early literacy skills after 12 weeks of receiving intensive interventions outlined in the pupil's personal reading plan, described above. A school board or independent charter school must also assess a pupil's early literacy skills using a level 2 screening assessment within 20 days of a request by a teacher or parent who suspects that the pupil has characteristics of dyslexia. The bill defines a “level 2 screening assessment” as a screening tool that evaluates a pupil's skill in the skills assessed in a universal screening assessment as well as phonological awareness, word recognition, fluency, spelling, reading comprehension, and listening comprehension, and provides the pupil's parent the opportunity to complete a family history survey about learning difficulties in the pupil's family. If a pupil is identified as at-risk based on a level 2 screening assessment, the bill requires the school board or independent charter school to provide information to the pupil's parent about how to make a special education referral.
Approved reading readiness screening assessments Under the bill, by July 15, 2022, the Department of Public Instruction must establish and maintain lists of approved fundamental skills screening assessments, universal screening assessments, level 1 screening assessments, and level 2 screening assessments (collectively, reading readiness screening assessments) on its Internet site. DPI must also submit these lists to the appropriate standing committees of the legislature. During the 2022-23 and 2023-24 school years, DPI must include specific assessments on its list of approved fundamental skills screening assessments and specific assessments on its list of approved universal screening assessments. On the list of approved fundamental skills screening assessments, DPI must include the Phonological Awareness Literacy Screening (PALS), the Predictive Assessment of Reading (PAR), and Acadience's Preschool Early Literacy Indicators (PELI). On the list of approved universal screening assessments, DPI must include the Dynamics Indicators of Basic Early Literacy Skills 8th edition, commonly known as DIBELS 8th edition; the Acadience reading assessment; FastBridge reading assessments; and the Renaissance Star Early Literacy assessment.
State funding for reading readiness screening assessments Under the bill, DPI must pay each school board and independent charter school for the per pupil cost of each reading readiness screening assessment required to be administered under the bill. However, beginning in the 2023-24 school year, a school board or independent charter school is eligible for the state funding provided in the bill only if the school board or independent charter school submits an annual report to DPI and in that report indicates that the school board or charter school used only approved reading readiness screening assessments in the previous school year.
Under current law, DPI pays school boards and independent charter schools for the per pupil cost of the reading readiness assessment selected by the school board or independent charter school.
Parent notification requirements Under the bill, a school board or independent charter school must provide a pupil's results on a reading readiness screening assessment to the pupil's parent by no later than 15 days after the applicable assessment is scored. The results provided to the parent must include the pupil's overall score, the pupil's score on each literacy skill category assessed by the assessment, the pupil's percentile rank score, if available, the score on the assessment that indicates a pupil is at-risk, and a plain language explanation of the literacy skills that were evaluated by the assessment.
In addition, if a school board or independent charter school is required to screen a pupil using a level 1 or level 2 screening assessment, the school board or independent charter school must provide the pupil's parent with information related to characteristics of dyslexia, including information about the common indicators of characteristics of dyslexia and appropriate interventions and accommodations for pupils with characteristics of dyslexia.
The bill also requires each school board and independent charter school to have an early literacy remediation plan. An early literacy remediation plan must include information about screening assessments used to identify at-risk pupils, the interventions used to address characteristics of dyslexia, and monitoring pupil progress related to early literacy skills. Under the bill, each school district and independent charter school must post its early literacy remediation plan on its Internet site.
Under current law, a school board or independent charter school must report the results of a reading readiness assessment to a pupil's parent. Current law does not provide a deadline by which the reading readiness results must be provided to parents.
Reporting requirements Under the bill, school boards and independent charter schools must annually, by July 15, report to DPI 1) the number of pupils who were identified as at-risk based on a reading readiness screening assessment administered in the previous school year; 2) the number of five-year-old kindergarten to second grade pupils who began receiving literacy interventions or remedial reading services in the previous school year, by grade; and 3) the total number of five-year-old kindergarten to second grade pupils who received literacy interventions or remedial reading services in the previous school year. The school board or independent charter school must also report the names of the specific reading readiness screening assessments the school board or independent charter school used to screen pupils, as required under the bill, in the previous school year. Annually, by November 30, DPI must compile the information it receives from school boards and independent charter schools and submit a report to the legislature.
Who's behind it
5 senators are its . All 5 are Republicans.
16 more lawmakers .
See all 21 names Hide the names
Authors (5)
- Kathleen Bernier · Republican, Senate
- Alberta Darling · Republican, Senate
- Mary Felzkowski · Republican, Senate
- André Jacque · Republican, Senate
- Van Wanggaard · Republican, Senate
Signed on in support (16)
- Scott Allen · Republican, Assembly
- Dave Armstrong · Republican, Assembly
- Janel Brandtjen · Republican, Assembly
- Rachael Cabral-Guevara · Republican, Senate
- Barbara Dittrich · Republican, Assembly
- Jesse James · Republican, Senate
- Joel Kitchens · Republican, Assembly
- Dan Knodl · Republican, Assembly
- Jeff Mursau · Republican, Assembly
- Donna Rozar · Republican, Assembly
- Michael Schraa · Republican, Assembly
- Pat Snyder · Republican, Assembly
- Rob Summerfield · Republican, Assembly
- Jeremy Thiesfeldt · Republican, Assembly
- Ron Tusler · Republican, Assembly
- Chuck Wichgers · Republican, Assembly
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 7 votes on this bill.
Senate Committee on Education vote on an amendment
Passed, 7 to 0 · Oct 21, 2021
No member-by-member record exists for this vote. Committee votes and some older sessions record totals only.
Official motion: “Report adoption of Senate Amendment 3 recommended by Committee on Education, Ayes 7, Noes 0”. Official record · This vote on its own page
Senate Committee on Education vote to recommend it
Passed, 4 to 3 · Oct 21, 2021
No member-by-member record exists for this vote. Committee votes and some older sessions record totals only.
Official motion: “Report passage as amended recommended by Committee on Education, Ayes 4, Noes 3”. Official record · This vote on its own page
Senate vote on an amendment
Passed, 20 to 12 · Oct 25, 2021
No member-by-member record exists for this vote. Committee votes and some older sessions record totals only.
Official motion: “Senate Amendment 3 adopted, Ayes 20, Noes 12”. Official record · This vote on its own page
Senate vote on an amendment
Passed, 20 to 12 · Oct 25, 2021
No member-by-member record exists for this vote. Committee votes and some older sessions record totals only.
Official motion: “Senate Amendment 4 rejected, Ayes 20, Noes 12”. Official record · This vote on its own page
Senate vote on an amendment
Passed, 20 to 12 · Oct 25, 2021
No member-by-member record exists for this vote. Committee votes and some older sessions record totals only.
Official motion: “Senate Amendment 5 rejected, Ayes 20, Noes 12”. Official record · This vote on its own page
Senate vote to pass it
Passed, 20 to 12 · Oct 25, 2021 · 1 didn't vote
See how each of the 33 senators voted Hide the names
D: Democrat, R: Republican
Yes (20)
- Alberta Darling (R, 8)
- Chris Kapenga (R, 33)
- Dale Kooyenga (R, 5)
- Dan Feyen (R, 20)
- Devin LeMahieu (R, 9)
- Duey Stroebel (R, 20)
- Eric Wimberger (R, 2)
- Howard Marklein (R, 17)
- Jerry Petrowski (R, 29)
- Joan Ballweg (R, 14)
- John Jagler (R, 13)
- Julian Bradley (R, 28)
- Kathleen Bernier (R, 23)
- Mary Felzkowski (R, 12)
- Patrick Testin (R, 24)
- Rob Cowles (R, 2)
- Rob Stafsholt (R, 10)
- Roger Roth (R, 19)
- Steve Nass (R, 11)
- Van Wanggaard (R, 21)
No (12)
- Bob Wirch (D, 22)
- Brad Pfaff (D, 32)
- Chris Larson (D, 7)
- Janet Bewley (D, 25)
- Janis Ringhand (D, 15)
- Jeff Smith (D, 31)
- Jon Erpenbach (D, 27)
- Kelda Roys (D, 26)
- LaTonya Johnson (D, 6)
- Lena Taylor (D, 4)
- Melissa Agard (D, 16)
- Tim Carpenter (D, 3)
Didn't vote (1)
- André Jacque (R, 1)
Official motion: “PASSAGE”. Official record · This vote on its own page
Assembly vote to pass it
Passed, 62 to 32 · Oct 26, 2021 · 3 didn't vote
See how each of the 97 representatives voted Hide the names
D: Democrat, R: Republican
Yes (62)
- Adam Neylon (R, 15)
- Alex Dallman (R, 39)
- Amy Loudenbeck (R, 31)
- Barbara Dittrich (R, 99)
- Bob Wittke (R, 63)
- Calvin Callahan (R, 35)
- Chuck Wichgers (R, 84)
- Cindi Duchow (R, 97)
- Clint Moses (R, 92)
- Cody Horlacher (R, 33)
- Dan Knodl (R, 24)
- Dave Armstrong (R, 67)
- Dave Murphy (R, 56)
- David Steffen (R, 4)
- Donna Rozar (R, 69)
- Dora Drake (D, 4)
- Elijah Behnke (R, 6)
- Francesca Hong (D, 76)
- Gae Magnafici (R, 28)
- James Edming (R, 87)
- Janel Brandtjen (R, 22)
- Jeff Mursau (R, 36)
- Jeremy Thiesfeldt (R, 52)
- Jesse James (R, 23)
- Jessie Rodriguez (R, 21)
- Jim Steineke (R, 5)
- Joe Sanfelippo (R, 15)
- Joel Kitchens (R, 1)
- John Macco (R, 88)
- John Spiros (R, 86)
- Jon Plumer (R, 42)
- Ken Skowronski (R, 82)
- Kevin Petersen (R, 57)
- LaKeshia Myers (D, 12)
- Loren Oldenburg (R, 96)
- Mark Born (R, 37)
- Michael Schraa (R, 53)
- Mike Kuglitsch (R, 84)
- Nancy VanderMeer (R, 70)
- Pat Snyder (R, 85)
- Paul Tittl (R, 25)
- Rachael Cabral-Guevara (R, 19)
- Rick Gundrum (R, 58)
- Rob Brooks (R, 59)
- Rob Summerfield (R, 68)
- Rob Swearingen (R, 34)
- Robin Vos (R, 33)
- Ron Tusler (R, 3)
- Samantha Kerkman (R, 61)
- Scott Allen (R, 82)
- Scott Krug (R, 72)
- Shae Sortwell (R, 2)
- Shannon Zimmerman (R, 30)
- Terry Katsma (R, 26)
- Timothy Ramthun (R, 59)
- Todd Novak (R, 51)
- Tony Kurtz (R, 41)
- Travis Tranel (R, 49)
- Treig Pronschinske (R, 29)
- Tyler August (R, 31)
- Tyler Vorpagel (R, 27)
- Will Penterman (R, 38)
No (32)
- Beth Meyers (D, 74)
- Christine Sinicki (D, 20)
- Dave Considine (D, 81)
- David Bowen (D, 10)
- Deb Andraca (D, 23)
- Dianne Hesselbein (D, 27)
- Don Vruwink (D, 43)
- Evan Goyke (D, 18)
- Gary Hebl (D, 46)
- Gordon Hintz (D, 54)
- Greta Neubauer (D, 66)
- Jill Billings (D, 95)
- Jimmy Anderson (D, 47)
- Jodi Emerson (D, 91)
- Jonathan Brostoff (D, 19)
- Kalan Haywood (D, 16)
- Katrina Shankland (D, 71)
- Kristina Shelton (D, 90)
- Lee Snodgrass (D, 52)
- Marisabel Cabrera (D, 9)
- Nick Milroy (D, 73)
- Robyn Vining (D, 13)
- Samba Baldeh (D, 48)
- Sara Rodriguez (D, 13)
- Shelia Stubbs (D, 78)
- Sondy Pope (D, 80)
- Steve Doyle (D, 94)
- Sue Conley (D, 44)
- Supreme Moore Omokunde (D, 17)
- Sylvia Ortiz-Velez (D, 8)
- Tip McGuire (D, 64)
- Tod Ohnstad (D, 65)
Didn't vote (3)
- Gary Tauchen (R, 6)
- Lisa Subeck (D, 79)
- Mark Spreitzer (D, 15)
Official motion: “CONCURRENCE”. Official record · This vote on its own page
What happened
-
May 17, 2022
The veto stood. Lawmakers didn't override it.
-
Nov 5, 2021
The governor vetoed it.
-
Nov 4, 2021
Sent to the governor.
-
Oct 26, 2021
The Assembly passed it too, 62 to 32.
-
Oct 25, 2021
“Read first time and referred to calendar of 10-27-2021 pursuant to Assembly Rule 45 (1)” (the official wording)
-
Oct 25, 2021
The Assembly received it.
-
Oct 25, 2021
The Senate passed it, 20 to 12.
-
Oct 25, 2021
The Senate adopted it, 20 to 12.
-
Oct 21, 2021
The committee voted to recommend passing it, 4 to 3.
-
Oct 21, 2021
“Report adoption of Senate Amendment 3 recommended by Committee on Education, Ayes 7, Noes 0” (the official wording)
-
Oct 6, 2021
The committee held a public hearing.
-
Aug 3, 2021
A state agency sent in its estimate of the cost.
-
Jul 21, 2021
Sent to the Senate Committee on Education.
-
Jul 21, 2021
Introduced in the Senate.
See the official record, word for word Hide the official record
- Jul 21, 2021 · Senate
Introduced by Senators Bernier, Darling, Felzkowski, Jacque and Wanggaard; cosponsored by Representatives Kitchens, Thiesfeldt, Allen, Armstrong, Brandtjen, Cabral-Guevara, Dittrich, James, Knodl, Mursau, Rozar, Schraa, Snyder, Tusler, Wichgers and Summerfield
- Jul 21, 2021 · Senate
Read first time and referred to Committee on Education
- Aug 3, 2021 · Senate
Fiscal estimate received
- Oct 6, 2021 · Senate
Public hearing held
- Oct 11, 2021 · Senate
LRB correction
- Oct 13, 2021 · Senate
Senate Amendment 1 offered by Senators Larson, Johnson and Smith
- Oct 13, 2021 · Senate
Senate Amendment 2 offered by Senators Larson, Johnson and Smith
- Oct 19, 2021 · Senate
Senate Amendment 3 offered by Senator Bernier
- Oct 20, 2021 · Senate
LRB correction (Senate Amendment 3)
- Oct 20, 2021 · Senate
LRB correction
- Oct 21, 2021 · Senate
Executive action taken
- Oct 21, 2021 · Senate
Report adoption of Senate Amendment 3 recommended by Committee on Education, Ayes 7, Noes 0
- Oct 21, 2021 · Senate
Report passage as amended recommended by Committee on Education, Ayes 4, Noes 3
- Oct 21, 2021 · Senate
Available for scheduling
- Oct 22, 2021 · Senate
Placed on calendar 10-25-2021 pursuant to Senate Rule 18(1)
- Oct 25, 2021 · Senate
Senate Amendment 4 offered by Senators Larson, Smith, Ringhand, Johnson, Erpenbach and Carpenter
- Oct 25, 2021 · Senate
Senate Amendment 5 offered by Senators Larson, Smith, Ringhand, Johnson, Erpenbach and Carpenter
- Oct 25, 2021 · Senate
Read a second time
- Oct 25, 2021 · Senate
Senate Amendment 3 adopted, Ayes 20, Noes 12
- Oct 25, 2021 · Senate
Senate Amendment 4 rejected, Ayes 20, Noes 12
- Oct 25, 2021 · Senate
Senate Amendment 5 rejected, Ayes 20, Noes 12
- Oct 25, 2021 · Senate
Ordered to a third reading
- Oct 25, 2021 · Senate
Rules suspended
- Oct 25, 2021 · Senate
Read a third time and passed, Ayes 20, Noes 12
- Oct 25, 2021 · Senate
Ordered immediately messaged
- Oct 25, 2021 · Assembly
Received from Senate
- Oct 25, 2021 · Assembly
Read first time and referred to calendar of 10-27-2021 pursuant to Assembly Rule 45 (1)
- Oct 26, 2021 · Assembly
Rules suspended to withdraw from calendar of 10-27-2021 and take up
- Oct 26, 2021 · Assembly
Read a second time
- Oct 26, 2021 · Assembly
Ordered to a third reading
- Oct 26, 2021 · Assembly
Rules suspended
- Oct 26, 2021 · Assembly
Read a third time and concurred in, Ayes 62, Noes 32, Paired 2
- Oct 26, 2021 · Assembly
Ordered immediately messaged
- Oct 27, 2021 · Senate
Received from Assembly concurred in
- Nov 2, 2021 · Senate
LRB correction
- Nov 2, 2021 · Senate
Report correctly enrolled
- Nov 4, 2021 · Senate
Presented to the Governor on 11-4-2021
- Nov 5, 2021 · Senate
Report vetoed by the Governor on 11-5-2021
- May 17, 2022 · Senate
Placed on calendar 5-17-2022 pursuant to Joint Rule 82 (2)(a)
- May 17, 2022 · Senate
Failed to pass notwithstanding the objections of the Governor pursuant to Joint Rule 82
Terms on this page
Veto override
Lawmakers can still pass a bill the governor vetoed, but it takes two-thirds of each chamber.
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
Veto override
Lawmakers can still pass a bill the governor vetoed, but it takes two-thirds of each chamber.
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