Skip to content
Bills from the 2025–26 session

Senate Bill 145

The procedure for adding federal newborn screening recommendations to the state-required newborn screenings, granting rule-making authority, and providing an exemption from emergency rule procedures. (FE)

Topics: Health Services, Department of: Health, Maternal and infant care, United States: Health and Human Services, Department of

Stopped before the full Senate voted

The recommended passing it, but the full Senate never voted on it. The last day for votes this session was Mar 19, 2026. To try again, a lawmaker would have to start a new bill.

  1. Introduced, passed

    Mar 21, 2025

  2. Committee, passed

    Approved

  3. Senate vote, stopped here

    Stopped here. The full Senate never voted on it.

  4. Assembly vote, not reached

  5. Governor, not reached

  6. Law, not reached

Latest entry in the official record, Mar 23, 2026: “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.

Embed this on your site

Paste this code into your page. The card shows the latest record each time it loads. Preview the card

The same bill was also filed in the Assembly as AB 206. That version died when the session ended.

What it would have done

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

In general, under current law, newborns must be tested for certain congenital and metabolic disorders as specified in rules promulgated by the Department of Health Services. The federal Department of Health and Human Services maintains a list of disorders for which it recommends testing in newborns, known as the federal Recommended Uniform Screening Panel (RUSP).

Under this bill, DHS must evaluate each disorder that is included in the RUSP as of January 1, 2025, to determine whether newborns in this state should be tested for that disorder. This requirement does not apply to any disorder in the RUSP if, as of January 1, 2025, the disorder is already included in the list of disorders for which newborns must be tested in this state. In addition, the bill requires DHS to evaluate any disorder added to the RUSP after January 1, 2025, to determine whether newborns in this state should be tested for that newly added disorder. If DHS determines newborns should not be tested for the disorder, DHS must annually review medical literature and the department’s capacity and resources to test for the disorder in order to determine whether to reevaluate the inclusion of the disorder in newborn testing in this state. If, in any of these evaluations or reevaluations, DHS determines that a disorder in the RUSP should be added to the list of disorders for which newborns must be tested in this state, the bill requires DHS to promulgate rules to add that disorder.

Read the full summary

The requirements for evaluations, reviews, and reevaluations under the bill do not apply to a disorder in the RUSP if DHS is in the process of adding, by rule, the disorder to the list of disorders for which newborns must be tested in this state. However, if the rule-making procedure for that disorder does not result in promulgation of a rule, then DHS must consider the disorder under the review and reevaluation procedures under the bill.

Who's behind it

8 senators are its ⁠. 4 are Democrats and 4 are Republicans.

14 more lawmakers ⁠.

See all 22 names

Authors (8)

Signed on in support (14)

What it would cost

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

How lawmakers voted

There was one vote on this bill.

Senate Committee on Health vote to recommend it

Passed, 5 to 0 · Aug 21, 2025

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 Health, Ayes 5, Noes 0”. Official record · This vote on its own page

What happened

  1. Mar 23, 2026

    The session ended, and the bill died with it.

  2. Sep 11, 2025 to Sep 30, 2025

    3 more representatives and 2 senators signed on in support.

  3. Aug 21, 2025

    The committee voted to recommend passing it, 5 to 0.

  4. Jun 19, 2025

    A state agency sent in its estimate of the cost.

  5. Jun 12, 2025

    A state agency sent in its estimate of the cost.

  6. Jun 4, 2025

    The committee held a public hearing.

  7. Apr 1, 2025 to Jun 2, 2025

    1 more representative and 1 senator signed on in support.

  8. Mar 21, 2025

    Sent to the Senate Committee on Health.

  9. Mar 21, 2025

    Introduced in the Senate.

See the official record, word for word
  1. Mar 21, 2025 · Senate

    Introduced by Senators Jagler, Feyen, Dassler-Alfheim, James, L. Johnson, Spreitzer, Testin and Wall; cosponsored by Representatives Dittrich, Duchow, Andraca, Knodl, Murphy, Mursau, Sinicki, Stubbs and Subeck

  2. Mar 21, 2025 · Senate

    Read first time and referred to Committee on Health

  3. Apr 1, 2025 · Senate

    Senator Ratcliff added as a coauthor

  4. Jun 2, 2025 · Senate

    Representative Ortiz-Velez added as a cosponsor

  5. Jun 4, 2025 · Senate

    Public hearing held

  6. Jun 12, 2025 · Senate

    Fiscal estimate received

  7. Jun 19, 2025 · Senate

    Fiscal estimate received

  8. Aug 21, 2025 · Senate

    Executive action taken

  9. Aug 21, 2025 · Senate

    Report passage recommended by Committee on Health, Ayes 5, Noes 0

  10. Aug 21, 2025 · Senate

    Available for scheduling

  11. Sep 11, 2025 · Senate

    Representatives Udell and Moore Omokunde added as cosponsors

  12. Sep 11, 2025 · Senate

    Senator Larson added as a coauthor

  13. Sep 22, 2025 · Senate

    Representative Fitzgerald added as a cosponsor

  14. Sep 30, 2025 · Senate

    Senator Keyeski added as a coauthor

  15. Jan 27, 2026 · Senate

    Representative Subeck withdrawn as a cosponsor

  16. Mar 23, 2026 · Senate

    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