Wisconsin Lawmakers Debate GOP’s ‘Red Tape Reset’ Bills
Democrats say proposals are designed to overturn governor's court-protected rulemaking power.
The Wisconsin State Capitol on Wednesday, Aug. 6, 2025, in Madison, Wis. Angela Major/WPR
Wisconsin lawmakers are debating Republican-backed bills designed to cut back on the number of state regulations.
The bill package takes aim at rules put out by state agencies that regulate everything from businesses to the environment to childhood vaccinations.
The legislation advanced to a public hearing Thursday with support from conservative groups like the Wisconsin Institute for Law and Liberty, as well as business interest groups including Wisconsin Manufacturers & Commerce.
Democrats accused Republicans of trying to infringe on the authority of Wisconsin’s executive branch. Thursday’s hearing came months after the Wisconsin Supreme Court sided with Democratic Gov. Tony Evers in one dispute over rulemaking powers.
One of the bills would cause state regulations to expire after seven years unless officials take the steps needed to re-adopt them.
State Rep. Adam Neylon, R-Pewaukee, an author of the bill, said the goal is to make sure old regulations are still relevant.
“We cannot afford to let regulations linger on the books for decades without scrutiny, particularly when they impose real costs on employers, consumers and taxpayers alike,” Neylon said. “The red tape reset bill is not about eliminating necessary protections. It’s about ensuring that every rule is up to date and justified in serving the public good.”
Another proposal would affect any new regulation that’s expected to cost businesses or local governments more than $0 to implement. Under that proposal, the new rule could not be added unless Wisconsin first repeals an old rule to offset the compliance costs of the old one.
That differs from existing Wisconsin law, which only requires expenses to be offset if compliance with a new rule is expected to cost more than $10,000 over two fiscal years. As is the case with the existing law, that bill would include an exception for new emergency rules, as well as for new rules needed to comply with federal air and water quality standards.
State Sen. Chris Larson, D-Milwaukee, was among the Democrats who suggested it would be dangerous to allow so many regulations to be wiped off Wisconsin’s books.
“I like air and water, specifically breathable air,” Larson said. ” And I don’t know what the price tag is on that.”
Larson questioned why the bill did not include an exception to shield rules related to state laws protecting clean air and water, prompting state Sen. Julian Bradley, R-New Berlin, to say he would be “open” to a “conversation” on including such carveouts.
Another part of the package would require the state to pay back legal costs if someone successfully challenges an administrative rule in court. Additionally, a fourth bill debated on Thursday would change the process for putting out a new rule, by requiring an agency to put out a separate statement describing the scope of each new proposed rule. That differs from the current practice, in which an agency can put out a single scope statement to cover multiple related rules.
Wisconsin Supreme Court decision reset the rules for rulemaking
Republican backers have said their goal is to increase transparency while ensuring regulations are put up to public scrutiny.
But state Rep. Mike Bare, D-Verona, suggested the package could run afoul of the state constitution by attempting to create a “new legislative veto.”
In a ruling this summer, the state Supreme Court found that a GOP-led legislative committee had violated the constitution’s separation of powers principle by indefinitely blocking rules advanced by executive agencies.
Lawmakers first introduced the bills in April. Neylon said they may be altered to comply with the July ruling.
“We probably will need to do amendments to tighten up the language to make sure that it is in line with the current law of the land,” Neylon said.
But Neylon said that doesn’t mean lawmakers should “cede” their authority to state agencies.
“There needs to be some checks and balances in the system,” he said.
The Supreme Court decision came in response to actions from the GOP-controlled Joint Committee for Review of Administrative Rules. In a 4-3 ruling, the court’s liberal majority concluded the committee had overstepped its authority by attempting to indefinitely suspend rules put out by the governor’s administration.
Specifically, the state high court upheld state licensing rules that prohibited mental health professionals from practicing so-called conversion therapy on lesbian, gay, bisexual or transgender people. That widely-discredited practice attempts to change someone’s gender or sexual orientation to align with heterosexual or cisgender norms.
Lawmakers debate GOP bills designed to cut back on state regulations was originally published by Wisconsin Public Radio.
If you think stories like this are important, become a member of Urban Milwaukee and help support real, independent journalism. Plus you get some cool added benefits.
