Skip to content
Bills from the 2021–22 session

Senate Bill 940

Comparison of voter information on the state's official voter registration list with information maintained by the Department of Transportation. (FE)

Vetoed by the governor

Both chambers passed it, and the governor vetoed it on Apr 11, 2022. Lawmakers did not ⁠, so it stands.

  1. Introduced, passed

    Feb 3, 2022

  2. Committee, passed

    Approved

  3. Senate vote, passed

    Passed 21 to 12

  4. Assembly vote, passed

    Passed 59 to 36

  5. Governor, stopped here

    Vetoed Apr 11, 2022.

  6. 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”

Read the governor's veto message · All vetoes this session

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, the Elections Commission must maintain the state's official voter registration list, and both the commission and the municipal clerk or board of election commissioners are tasked with updating voters' information on the list in various circumstances.

Current law also requires the Elections Commission and the Department of Transportation to enter into an agreement to match personally identifiable information on the official voter registration list with personally identifiable information maintained by DOT. If an individual attempts to register to vote electronically, the personally identifiable information the individual provides is instantly checked against the DOT database.

Read the full summary

Under this bill, no later than 10 days after the date of each original voter registration or the date a registered voter makes changes to his or her registration, the Elections Commission must compare the voter's personally identifiable information on the official registration list with the personally identifiable information maintained by DOT. Further, DOT's agreement with the commission must require DOT to provide the commission access to the personally identifiable information DOT maintains, as necessary for purposes of the bill.

If the Elections Commission determines that there is a discrepancy between the voter's personally identifiable information on the registration list and the voter's personally identifiable information maintained by DOT, the commission must do all of the following:

1. Correct the discrepancy on the registration list if the discrepancy concerns a single item of information, such as the voter's name, date of birth, driver's license number, or state identification card number; the discrepancy is minor, such as common variation in the voter's name, such as a nickname or missing a suffix; and the commission can correct the discrepancy on the basis of reliable information.

2. Mail a notice to the voter that informs the voter of each discrepancy identified in item 1, if there are discrepancies with respect to two or more items of information or the discrepancy cannot be corrected as described in item 1, and that the voter's registration will be suspended unless the voter corrects each discrepancy within 30 days after the date the notice is mailed.

3. Change a voter's registration from eligible to ineligible if the voter was mailed a notice of suspension under item 2 and the voter has not, within 30 days after the date the notice was mailed, corrected each discrepancy as identified in the notice.

The bill authorizes the Elections Commission to delegate the tasks specified in items 1 to 3, above, to the municipal clerk or board of election commissioners. The bill also requires the commission to keep a permanent record of each discrepancy identified by the commission as provided in the bill.

Who's behind it

5 senators are its ⁠. All 5 are Republicans.

15 more lawmakers ⁠.

See all 20 names

Authors (5)

Signed on in support (15)

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 4 votes on this bill.

Senate Committee on Elections vote to recommend it

Passed, 3 to 2 · Feb 16, 2022

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, Election Process Reform and Ethics, Ayes 3, Noes 2”. Official record · This vote on its own page

Senate vote to pass it

Passed, 21 to 12 · Feb 22, 2022

See how each of the 33 senators voted

D: Democrat, R: Republican

Official motion: “PASSAGE”. Official record · This vote on its own page

Assembly vote to pass it

Passed, 59 to 36 · Feb 24, 2022 · 2 didn't vote

See how each of the 97 representatives voted

D: Democrat, R: Republican

Yes (59)

Didn't vote (2)

Official motion: “CONCURRENCE”. Official record · This vote on its own page

Assembly vote on an amendment

Passed, 59 to 36 · Feb 24, 2022

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

Official motion: “Assembly Substitute Amendment 1 laid on table, Ayes 59, Noes 36”. Official record · This vote on its own page

What happened

  1. May 17, 2022

    The veto stood. Lawmakers didn't override it.

  2. Apr 11, 2022

    The governor vetoed it.

  3. Apr 5, 2022

    Sent to the governor.

  4. Feb 24, 2022

    2 more representatives signed on in support.

  5. Feb 24, 2022

    The Assembly passed it too, 59 to 36.

  6. Feb 23, 2022

    A state agency sent in its estimate of the cost.

  7. Feb 23, 2022

    Sent to the Assembly Committee on Rules.

  8. Feb 23, 2022

    The Assembly received it.

  9. Feb 22, 2022

    The Senate passed it, 21 to 12.

  10. Feb 16, 2022

    The committee voted to recommend passing it, 3 to 2.

  11. Feb 15, 2022

    A state agency sent in its estimate of the cost.

  12. Feb 8, 2022

    1 more representative signed on in support.

  13. Feb 7, 2022

    The committee held a public hearing.

  14. Feb 3, 2022

    Sent to the Senate Committee on Elections, Election Process Reform and Ethics.

  15. Feb 3, 2022

    Introduced in the Senate.

See the official record, word for word
  1. Feb 3, 2022 · Senate

    Introduced by Senators Wimberger, Darling, Felzkowski, Marklein and Stroebel; cosponsored by Representatives Rozar, Allen, Armstrong, Behnke, Brooks, Gundrum, Knodl, Krug, Kuglitsch, Magnafici, Moses, Penterman and Wichgers

  2. Feb 3, 2022 · Senate

    Read first time and referred to Committee on Elections, Election Process Reform and Ethics

  3. Feb 7, 2022 · Senate

    Public hearing held

  4. Feb 8, 2022 · Senate

    Representative Schraa added as a cosponsor

  5. Feb 15, 2022 · Senate

    Fiscal estimate received

  6. Feb 16, 2022 · Senate

    Executive action taken

  7. Feb 16, 2022 · Senate

    Report passage recommended by Committee on Elections, Election Process Reform and Ethics, Ayes 3, Noes 2

  8. Feb 16, 2022 · Senate

    Available for scheduling

  9. Feb 18, 2022 · Senate

    Placed on calendar 2-22-2022 pursuant to Senate Rule 18(1)

  10. Feb 22, 2022 · Senate

    Read a second time

  11. Feb 22, 2022 · Senate

    Ordered to a third reading

  12. Feb 22, 2022 · Senate

    Rules suspended

  13. Feb 22, 2022 · Senate

    Read a third time and passed, Ayes 21, Noes 12

  14. Feb 22, 2022 · Senate

    Ordered immediately messaged

  15. Feb 23, 2022 · Assembly

    Received from Senate

  16. Feb 23, 2022 · Assembly

    Read first time and referred to committee on Rules

  17. Feb 23, 2022 · Assembly

    Fiscal estimate received

  18. Feb 23, 2022 · Assembly

    Made a special order of business at 8:11 AM on 2-24-2022 pursuant to Assembly Resolution 30

  19. Feb 24, 2022 · Assembly

    Read a second time

  20. Feb 24, 2022 · Assembly

    Assembly Substitute Amendment 1 offered by Representatives S. Rodriguez, Emerson, Moore Omokunde, Spreitzer, Hintz, Brostoff, Conley, Doyle, Drake, Andraca, Billings, Considine, Haywood, Hebl, Hesselbein, Hong, Baldeh, Ohnstad, McGuire, B. Meyers, Pope, Neubauer, Shankland, Snodgrass, Sinicki, Shelton, Subeck, Vining, Vruwink, Anderson and Cabrera

  21. Feb 24, 2022 · Assembly

    Assembly Substitute Amendment 1 laid on table, Ayes 59, Noes 36

  22. Feb 24, 2022 · Assembly

    Ordered to a third reading

  23. Feb 24, 2022 · Assembly

    Rules suspended

  24. Feb 24, 2022 · Assembly

    Read a third time and concurred in, Ayes 59, Noes 36, Paired 2

  25. Feb 24, 2022 · Assembly

    Representatives Steffen and Skowronski added as cosponsors

  26. Feb 24, 2022 · Assembly

    Ordered immediately messaged

  27. Feb 24, 2022 · Senate

    Received from Assembly concurred in

  28. Mar 2, 2022 · Senate

    Report correctly enrolled

  29. Apr 5, 2022 · Senate

    Presented to the Governor on 4-5-2022 by directive of the Majority Leader

  30. Apr 11, 2022 · Senate

    Report vetoed by the Governor on 4-8-2022

  31. May 17, 2022 · Senate

    Placed on calendar 5-17-2022 pursuant to Joint Rule 82 (2)(a)

  32. 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.

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

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

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