An Act to create 13.40 of the statutes; Relating to: requiring the legislature to convene an extraordinary session if an executive order of the president of the United States freezes federal aid to the state.
SB149 would create a new statute requiring the Wisconsin Legislature to convene an extraordinary session if the President of the United States issues an executive order freezing federal aid that had previously been authorized by Congress for Wisconsin. The bill is designed as a rapid-response mechanism so lawmakers can consider a separate bill addressing the loss of federal funds and the state’s immediate fiscal exposure.
The required extraordinary-session bill would have to establish a process for estimating how much federal aid each state agency, eligible local governmental unit, and eligible nonprofit organization is likely to lose because of the freeze. It would also have to authorize payments from the state’s budget stabilization fund to help offset those losses, with priority given to aid supporting essential services. For local governments and nonprofits, payments could not exceed the amount they otherwise would have received under the relevant state appropriation of federal moneys.
The bill also contemplates a repayment mechanism if frozen federal aid is later restored. To the extent allowed by federal law, any back payment of federal aid would be used to reimburse the budget stabilization fund for advances made under the bill. If back payments are instead sent directly to a state agency, local governmental unit, or nonprofit organization, that recipient would be required to remit an equivalent amount to the state for deposit into the fund.
In practical terms, SB149 would affect state budget procedures rather than directly changing program eligibility or benefit rules. It would create a new statutory trigger for legislative action, define categories of eligible recipients, and link emergency state spending to the budget stabilization fund. The measure would potentially affect state agencies, school districts, other local governmental units, and qualifying nonprofit organizations that rely on federal pass-through funding under state appropriations.
The overall sentiment reflected in the bill text is protective and contingency-oriented, aiming to shield Wisconsin programs and services from sudden federal funding disruptions. There is no recorded committee transcript or vote history in the provided materials, and the bill ultimately failed to pass pursuant to Senate Joint Resolution 1. Because no discussion record is available, no specific points of contention are documented here, though the bill’s reliance on executive-triggered legislative intervention and use of the budget stabilization fund could be expected to raise questions about fiscal authority, emergency procedures, and the scope of state backfill commitments.
SB149 would add a new statutory requirement in chapter 13 directing legislative action in response to a presidential executive order freezing federal aid. It would not itself appropriate money, but it would mandate an extraordinary session and require any resulting bill to create an aid-loss estimation process, authorize temporary payments from the budget stabilization fund, prioritize essential services, and establish repayment rules if frozen federal funds are later restored. The bill would affect state agencies, eligible local governmental units, and eligible nonprofit organizations that receive federal moneys through state appropriations, including school districts and certain nonprofits.
The bill appears to have been introduced as a defensive fiscal measure intended to protect Wisconsin programs and recipients from abrupt federal funding interruptions. The available record shows no committee debate or vote detail, so there is no documented split in the provided materials. Its failure to pass suggests the proposal did not advance, but the context provided does not identify whether that was due to policy disagreement, procedural issues, or broader legislative priorities.
No committee transcript or vote record is provided, so specific objections are not documented. Based on the bill’s structure, likely points of contention would include whether the Legislature should be compelled to convene automatically in response to a federal executive order, whether the budget stabilization fund should be used to backfill frozen federal aid, and how broadly the state should commit to covering losses for local governments and nonprofits. Another possible issue is the bill’s dependence on federal-law permissibility for reimbursement and remittance provisions, which could raise implementation and legal-compatibility concerns.