Wisconsin · individual fact

Wisconsin unemployment rate

State unemployment, employed residents, broader underutilization, and employment growth.

Annual unemployment rate3%2024 · #40 of 50 · highest first
Civilian employed residents3,048,3692024 · #20 of 50 · highest first
U-1 · unemployed 15 weeks or longer1.2%2025 · 11-month average · #33 of 50 · highest first

Wisconsin over time

Explore Wisconsin readings, major events and reviewed actions on the same date scale. Wisconsin officeholders appear in separate lanes. National event evidence describes national context; it does not measure a Wisconsin effect.

Major events & context · A curated selection, including uncertain effects. Milestone dates do not establish that an event caused a Wisconsin change.

Enacted / issuedDid not proceedPending / in progressStatus unclear

Colors show the latest recorded status. Passing one chamber is not enactment. A number groups actions with the same date, body and status.

Annual unemployment rate Wisconsin · source units
WisconsinPublished U.S. benchmark

Move across the chart to inspect the nearest observation. Click or tap to keep a reading selected, or focus the chart and use the arrow keys. Hover over or focus a marker to explore; click or tap to pin. Press Escape to clear.

Annual unemployment rate2024: 3%1.8%4.6%7.4%Wisconsin, 2015: 4.4%Wisconsin, 2016: 3.9%Wisconsin, 2017: 3.3%Wisconsin, 2018: 3%Wisconsin, 2019: 3.2%Wisconsin, 2020: 6.4%Wisconsin, 2021: 3.8%Wisconsin, 2022: 2.8%Wisconsin, 2023: 2.8%Wisconsin, 2024: 3%201520192024
✦ Major events & context · 15National context · COVID-19 pandemic · 2020-03-11COVID-19 pandemicNational context · CARES Act expands unemployment support · 2020-03-27CARES unemployment aidNational context · First U.S. COVID-19 vaccine authorization · 2020-12-11COVID vaccine authorizationNational context · American Rescue Plan extends pandemic unemployment benefits · 2021-03-11Pandemic benefits extendedNational context · Federal pandemic unemployment programs reach their cutoff · 2021-09-06Pandemic benefits expireNational context · Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine · 2022-02-24Russia invades UkraineNational context · Federal Reserve begins its 2022 rate increases · 2022-03-16Fed rate increases beginNational context · Silicon Valley Bank failure and banking stress · 2023-03-10Banking stress / SVBNational context · UAW strikes begin at the three Detroit automakers · 2023-09-15UAW auto strikesNational context · Federal Reserve begins its 2024 rate cuts · 2024-09-18Fed rate cuts beginNational context · Hurricanes Helene and Milton · 2024-09-26Helene & MiltonNational context · Broad U.S. tariff announcement · 2025-04-02U.S. tariff announcementNational context · Federal shutdown interrupts unemployment data · 2025-10-01Federal shutdown / data gapNational context · BLS reports federal payroll decline as deferred resignations take effect · 2025-12-16Federal payroll departuresNational context · Federal Reserve raises rates in September 2026 · 2026-09-16September 2026 rate rise● Wisconsin Legislature · 6031022214221● U.S. Congress · Wisconsin delegation · 1◆ Governor · 13442■ Wisconsin agencies · 62015-12-012026-09-30

80 of 80 reviewed Wisconsin actions match · 25 date markers shown. 15 major events shown separately.

Wisconsin · 2024: 3% · Rank #40 of 50, highest first · U.S. benchmark: 4%

Unemployed residents as a percentage of the civilian labor force, using BLS Local Area Unemployment Statistics annual averages. LAUS estimates are revised each year through the program's annual processing cycle. Employment is residence-based civilian employment, not a count of jobs located in the state. Annual averages smooth within-year changes. Annual observations use December 31; monthly observations use the first of the month. Lines connect consecutive readings and do not supply values between them. Missing observations break the lines.

View observations and export data
Wisconsin Annual unemployment rate · source units
PeriodWisconsinRankU.S. benchmark
20243%#40 of 504%
20232.8%#38 of 50Not available
20222.8%#37 of 50Not available
20213.8%#39 of 50Not available
20206.4%#33 of 50Not available
20193.2%#31 of 50Not available
20183%#38 of 50Not available
20173.3%#40 of 50Not available
20163.9%#38 of 50Not available
20154.4%#33 of 50Not available
How major events are selected

The timeline combines the corresponding national fact’s reviewed event catalog, labeled National context, with individually reviewed state milestones. State events use primary sources and distinguish signing, effective and filing dates. Each milestone keeps its source-check date, geographical limits and evidence limits. This curated selection is not a complete history.

Date ranges affect events and actions. Action type, status and official-name search affect government records only. Events remain separate from action counts. An event after the latest observation extends context without creating a new reading.

Wisconsin · state comparison

Employment and unemployment over time

LAUS annual averages measure state residents. Compare unemployment rates or the number of employed residents.

Wisconsin · 20243%
Wisconsin rank#40among all 50 states
U.S. benchmark4%Same measure and period when published

#1 is the highest value. Ties share a rank and leave gaps. D.C. and territories are excluded. Rank describes the measured value; it is not an overall score of the state.

Annual unemployment rate

Unemployed residents as a percentage of the civilian labor force, using BLS Local Area Unemployment Statistics annual averages.

LAUS estimates are revised each year through the program's annual processing cycle. Employment is residence-based civilian employment, not a count of jobs located in the state. Annual averages smooth within-year changes.

Hover to inspect. Click or tap to compare that period with every state. Focus the graph and use arrow keys, Home or End to select a period. Press Escape to return to the latest period.

Wisconsin
Annual unemployment rate history in Wisconsin2.3%4.6%6.9%20152024
2024 · Wisconsin: 3% · Rank #40 of 50, highest first · U.S. benchmark: 4% · Selected for state comparison
View history and select a period
Wisconsin Annual unemployment rate history
PeriodWisconsinCompare
20154.4%
20163.9%
20173.3%
20183%
20193.2%
20206.4%
20213.8%
20222.8%
20232.8%
20243%

Compare states on the graph

Hover or focus a bar to inspect its value and rank. Use the up and down arrows, Home or End to explore states. Click, tap or press Enter to keep a state selected. Wisconsin stays highlighted. Values use the same measure and period.

Explore the map: hover or focus a state to inspect it, then click or tap to select it. Arrow keys move between states alphabetically. Wisconsin has a dark outline.

Lower value · 1.8%Higher value · 5.4%Striped: unavailable

Color shows this measure’s value, not an overall state score. Select a state on the map, graph or dropdown to read its value, rank and comparison limits below.

Wisconsin · 3%2024 · Rank #40 of 50, highest firstSelected state

50 states shown · scroll to explore every state. Missing values have no bar and are excluded from ranks. Bars start at zero; #1 means the highest value.

Compare Wisconsin with every state · 50 ranked
Annual unemployment rate · 2024 · highest value ranked #1
RankStateValueComparison notes
#1Nevada5.4%—
#2California5.3%—
#3Illinois5%—
#4Kentucky4.8%—
#5Michigan4.7%—
#6New Jersey4.6%—
#7Alaska4.5%—
#7Washington4.5%—
#9Ohio4.4%—
#10Louisiana4.3%—
#10Oregon4.3%—
#12New York4.2%—
#12Rhode Island4.2%—
#14Colorado4.1%—
#14New Mexico4.1%—
#14South Carolina4.1%—
#14Texas4.1%—
#14West Virginia4.1%—
#19Indiana4%—
#19Massachusetts4%—
#21Delaware3.9%—
#22Pennsylvania3.8%—
#23Arizona3.7%—
#23Missouri3.7%—
#23North Carolina3.7%—
#26Idaho3.6%—
#27Arkansas3.5%—
#27Kansas3.5%—
#29Florida3.4%—
#29Georgia3.4%—
#29Tennessee3.4%—
#32Connecticut3.3%—
#32Utah3.3%—
#34Iowa3.2%—
#34Maryland3.2%—
#34Mississippi3.2%—
#34Oklahoma3.2%—
#38Minnesota3.1%—
#38Wyoming3.1%—
#40Alabama3%—
#40Maine3%—
#40Montana3%—
#40Wisconsin · your comparison3%—
#44Virginia2.9%—
#45Hawaii2.8%—
#46Nebraska2.7%—
#47New Hampshire2.6%—
#48North Dakota2.4%—
#49Vermont2.3%—
#50South Dakota1.8%—

All 50 states are listed, including states without a comparable observation. Ranks use stored source precision; displayed values may round to the same number.

Wisconsin · state comparison

Behind the unemployment rate

The reviewed 2025 CPS snapshot includes both U-3 and the broader U-6 measure. It is separate from the LAUS annual history.

Wisconsin · 2025 · 11-month average1.2%
Wisconsin rank#33among all 50 states
U.S. benchmark1.6%Same measure and period when published

#1 is the highest value. Ties share a rank and leave gaps. D.C. and territories are excluded. Rank describes the measured value; it is not an overall score of the state.

U-1 · unemployed 15 weeks or longer

Unemployed 15 weeks or longer as a share of the civilian labor force.

2025 CPS averages exclude October because data were not collected during the federal shutdown. Not strictly comparable with other-year averages. These directly surveyed CPS estimates differ from LAUS model-based estimates. All states use the same 11 months here.

Compare states on the graph

Hover or focus a bar to inspect its value and rank. Use the up and down arrows, Home or End to explore states. Click, tap or press Enter to keep a state selected. Wisconsin stays highlighted. Values use the same measure and period.

Explore the map: hover or focus a state to inspect it, then click or tap to select it. Arrow keys move between states alphabetically. Wisconsin has a dark outline.

Lower value · 0.6%Higher value · 2.4%Striped: unavailable

Color shows this measure’s value, not an overall state score. Select a state on the map, graph or dropdown to read its value, rank and comparison limits below.

Wisconsin · 1.2%2025 · 11-month average · Rank #33 of 50, highest firstSelected state

50 states shown · scroll to explore every state. Missing values have no bar and are excluded from ranks. Bars start at zero; #1 means the highest value.

Compare Wisconsin with every state · 50 ranked
U-1 · unemployed 15 weeks or longer · 2025 · 11-month average · highest value ranked #1
RankStateValueComparison notes
#1California2.4%—
#2Oregon2.2%—
#3Illinois2.1%—
#3New York2.1%—
#5Connecticut2%—
#5Rhode Island2%—
#5Washington2%—
#8Massachusetts1.9%—
#8Nevada1.9%—
#8New Jersey1.9%—
#11Delaware1.8%—
#11Virginia1.8%—
#13Louisiana1.7%—
#13Michigan1.7%—
#13West Virginia1.7%—
#16Alaska1.6%—
#16Florida1.6%—
#16Mississippi1.6%—
#16New Mexico1.6%—
#16Ohio1.6%—
#16Pennsylvania1.6%—
#22Colorado1.5%—
#22Kentucky1.5%—
#22Maryland1.5%—
#22Texas1.5%—
#26Arizona1.4%—
#26Georgia1.4%—
#28Arkansas1.3%—
#28Iowa1.3%—
#28North Carolina1.3%—
#28Oklahoma1.3%—
#28South Carolina1.3%—
#33Kansas1.2%—
#33Minnesota1.2%—
#33New Hampshire1.2%—
#33Wisconsin · your comparison1.2%—
#37Tennessee1.1%—
#37Utah1.1%—
#39Idaho1%—
#39Indiana1%—
#39Nebraska1%—
#42Alabama0.9%—
#42Maine0.9%—
#42Missouri0.9%—
#42Wyoming0.9%—
#46Hawaii0.7%—
#46Montana0.7%—
#46South Dakota0.7%—
#46Vermont0.7%—
#50North Dakota0.6%—

All 50 states are listed, including states without a comparable observation. Ranks use stored source precision; displayed values may round to the same number.

Wisconsin · state comparison

Output and jobs

Annual real output growth and BEA job growth provide economic context. Neither is the unemployment rate.

Wisconsin · 20250.8%
Wisconsin rank#45among all 50 states
U.S. benchmark2.3%Same measure and period when published

#1 is the highest value. Ties share a rank and leave gaps. D.C. and territories are excluded. Rank describes the measured value; it is not an overall score of the state.

Annual real GDP growth

Change in annual real GDP from the prior year.

Annual estimates; the downloaded BEA snapshot is retained with a source hash. Revisions can change historical values and ranks.

Hover to inspect. Click or tap to compare that period with every state. Focus the graph and use arrow keys, Home or End to select a period. Press Escape to return to the latest period.

Wisconsin
Annual real GDP growth history in Wisconsin-3.8%1.9%7.6%20152025
2025 · Wisconsin: 0.8% · Rank #45 of 50, highest first · U.S. benchmark: 2.3% · Selected for state comparison
View history and select a period
Wisconsin Annual real GDP growth history
PeriodWisconsinCompare
20152%
20161.1%
20170.8%
20182.1%
20191.2%
2020-2.5%
20213.4%
20222.2%
20232.7%
20242.5%
20250.8%

Compare states on the graph

Hover or focus a bar to inspect its value and rank. Use the up and down arrows, Home or End to explore states. Click, tap or press Enter to keep a state selected. Wisconsin stays highlighted. Values use the same measure and period.

Explore the map: hover or focus a state to inspect it, then click or tap to select it. Arrow keys move between states alphabetically. Wisconsin has a dark outline.

Lower value · -0.4%Higher value · 5.1%Striped: unavailable

Color shows this measure’s value, not an overall state score. Select a state on the map, graph or dropdown to read its value, rank and comparison limits below.

Wisconsin · 0.8%2025 · Rank #45 of 50, highest firstSelected state

50 states shown · scroll to explore every state. Missing values have no bar and are excluded from ranks. Bars start at zero; #1 means the highest value.

Compare Wisconsin with every state · 50 ranked
Annual real GDP growth · 2025 · highest value ranked #1
RankStateValueComparison notes
#1Delaware5.1%—
#2Alaska4.7%—
#3California3.5%—
#4South Carolina3.3%—
#5Washington3.2%—
#6Idaho3.1%—
#7Kentucky3%—
#8Georgia2.9%—
#9Texas2.8%—
#10West Virginia2.8%—
#11Florida2.8%—
#12Rhode Island2.8%—
#13Utah2.7%—
#14Illinois2.6%—
#15New York2.5%—
#16Connecticut2.5%—
#17Ohio2.4%—
#18Virginia2.3%—
#19Oklahoma2.2%—
#20Michigan2.2%—
#21Tennessee2.1%—
#22New Jersey2%—
#23Nevada2%—
#24Montana2%—
#25Alabama2%—
#26Vermont1.9%—
#27Colorado1.9%—
#28Indiana1.9%—
#29Pennsylvania1.8%—
#30North Carolina1.8%—
#31New Mexico1.8%—
#32South Dakota1.8%—
#33New Hampshire1.7%—
#34Louisiana1.5%—
#35Hawaii1.5%—
#36Arizona1.5%—
#37Maine1.4%—
#38Oregon1.4%—
#39Massachusetts1.3%—
#40Mississippi1.3%—
#41Nebraska1.3%—
#42Missouri1.2%—
#43Kansas1%—
#44Arkansas0.9%—
#45Wisconsin · your comparison0.8%—
#46Maryland0.8%—
#47Minnesota0.7%—
#48North Dakota0.5%—
#49Wyoming0.1%—
#50Iowa-0.4%—

All 50 states are listed, including states without a comparable observation. Ranks use stored source precision; displayed values may round to the same number.

Wisconsin · state comparison

Job openings, hires, layoffs, and worker groups

A state unemployment rate does not capture all unused labor or job-market turnover.

Wisconsin · December 2025115,000
Wisconsin rank#20among all 50 states
U.S. benchmark6,550,000Same measure and period when published

#1 is the highest value. Ties share a rank and leave gaps. D.C. and territories are excluded. Rank describes the measured value; it is not an overall score of the state.

Openings · number

Number of jobs or monthly employment flows; published thousands converted to individual units.

Seasonally adjusted state JOLTS estimates, July–December 2025 as printed in the captured table. Recent estimates are preliminary and revisions can change ranks. Openings are a month-end stock; hires, quits, and layoffs are monthly flows, not distinct workers.

Hover to inspect. Click or tap to compare that period with every state. Focus the graph and use arrow keys, Home or End to select a period. Press Escape to return to the latest period.

Wisconsin
Openings · number history in Wisconsin-943,2503,642,5008,228,250July 2025December 2025
December 2025 · Wisconsin: 115,000 · Rank #20 of 50, highest first · U.S. benchmark: 6,550,000 · Selected for state comparison
View history and select a period
Wisconsin Openings · number history
PeriodWisconsinCompare
July 2025134,000
August 2025121,000
September 2025120,000
October 2025131,000
November 2025118,000
December 2025115,000

Compare states on the graph

Hover or focus a bar to inspect its value and rank. Use the up and down arrows, Home or End to explore states. Click, tap or press Enter to keep a state selected. Wisconsin stays highlighted. Values use the same measure and period.

Explore the map: hover or focus a state to inspect it, then click or tap to select it. Arrow keys move between states alphabetically. Wisconsin has a dark outline.

Lower value · 11,000Higher value · 674,000Striped: unavailable

Color shows this measure’s value, not an overall state score. Select a state on the map, graph or dropdown to read its value, rank and comparison limits below.

Wisconsin · 115,000December 2025 · Rank #20 of 50, highest firstSelected state

50 states shown · scroll to explore every state. Missing values have no bar and are excluded from ranks. Bars start at zero; #1 means the highest value.

Compare Wisconsin with every state · 50 ranked
Openings · number · December 2025 · highest value ranked #1
RankStateValueComparison notes
#1California674,000—
#2Texas608,000—
#3New York431,000—
#4Florida404,000—
#5Ohio287,000—
#6Georgia279,000—
#7Pennsylvania235,000—
#8Michigan221,000—
#9Virginia213,000—
#10North Carolina212,000—
#11Illinois211,000—
#12New Jersey172,000—
#13Tennessee143,000—
#14Minnesota135,000—
#15Massachusetts129,000—
#16Missouri128,000—
#17Maryland127,000—
#18Indiana123,000—
#19Arizona121,000—
#20Wisconsin · your comparison115,000—
#21Washington110,000—
#22South Carolina103,000—
#23Louisiana101,000—
#23Oklahoma101,000—
#25Colorado100,000—
#26Kentucky92,000—
#27Alabama91,000—
#28Oregon72,000—
#29Connecticut67,000—
#30Utah64,000—
#31Kansas61,000—
#32Arkansas60,000—
#33Mississippi59,000—
#34Iowa57,000—
#35Nevada52,000—
#36West Virginia42,000—
#37Nebraska38,000—
#38Idaho34,000—
#39New Mexico32,000—
#40Maine28,000—
#41Delaware23,000—
#42Montana22,000—
#42New Hampshire22,000—
#42Rhode Island22,000—
#45South Dakota20,000—
#46Hawaii19,000—
#47North Dakota18,000—
#48Alaska16,000—
#49Vermont11,000—
#49Wyoming11,000—

All 50 states are listed, including states without a comparable observation. Ranks use stored source precision; displayed values may round to the same number.

What candidates are saying

Explore statements about unemployment, jobs and workforce issues from FactVote’s Wisconsin candidate profiles. Compare candidates within each recorded race, with each person’s matching statements kept together. These are candidate and campaign statements, not verified outcomes.

18 statements from 7 candidates

2026 Wisconsin Governor — General Election

1 candidate with matching statements · 7 statements

David Crowley

7 statements

Democratic · Governor · WI

Jobs & workforce context

Government should help create jobs—not just be a check cutter. Under Crowley’s leadership, public dollars will multiply opportunity. Investments in housing, health care, and climate resilience pay dividends across Wisconsin, with accountability and outcomes that families can feel. That means homes p…

Read exact statement & source

Source topic or question: Housing affordability

Candidate campaign source

Government should help create jobs—not just be a check cutter. Under Crowley’s leadership, public dollars will multiply opportunity. Investments in housing, health care, and climate resilience pay dividends across Wisconsin, with accountability and outcomes that families can feel. That means homes people can afford, care that’s easy to access, and family supporting jobs.

Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 16, 2026

David Crowley — candidate-owned primary source 2 ↗
View 6 more statements from David Crowley
Jobs & workforce context

Climate action is economic investment. Crowley will invest in solar, energy retrofits, and clean infrastructure that creates thousands of union jobs across Wisconsin. He’s already cut emissions nearly 50% in Milwaukee County—now he’s ready to take that impact statewide.

Read exact statement & source

Source topic or question: Transportation and infrastructure

Candidate campaign source

Climate action is economic investment. Crowley will invest in solar, energy retrofits, and clean infrastructure that creates thousands of union jobs across Wisconsin. He’s already cut emissions nearly 50% in Milwaukee County—now he’s ready to take that impact statewide.

Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 16, 2026

David Crowley — candidate-owned primary source 2 ↗
Jobs & workforce context

Crowley supports policies and programs that ensure children and adults with disabilities — and older adults — can access the services and supports they need to live full, independent lives. He’ll champion investments in home and community-based services and strengthen the direct care workforce throu…

Read exact statement & source

Source topic or question: Health care

Candidate campaign source

Crowley supports policies and programs that ensure children and adults with disabilities — and older adults — can access the services and supports they need to live full, independent lives. He’ll champion investments in home and community-based services and strengthen the direct care workforce through better wages and benefits.

Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 16, 2026

David Crowley — candidate-owned primary source 2 ↗
Jobs & workforce context

As Governor, Crowley will modernize and expand apprenticeship programs—connecting young people and career-changers to opportunities in the trades, health care, green energy, and beyond. These aren’t just training programs; they’re pipelines to economic stability and lifelong opportunity.

Read exact statement & source

Source topic or question: Education, child care, and workforce training

Candidate campaign source

As Governor, Crowley will modernize and expand apprenticeship programs—connecting young people and career-changers to opportunities in the trades, health care, green energy, and beyond. These aren’t just training programs; they’re pipelines to economic stability and lifelong opportunity.

Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 16, 2026

David Crowley — candidate-owned primary source 2 ↗
Jobs & workforce context

Crowley will grow an economy rooted in local ownership and union labor. He’ll take his Building Bridges Program statewide—revitalizing storefronts, activating commercial corridors, and creating jobs block by block. Every infrastructure dollar will support good-paying, local jobs and lift the trades …

Read exact statement & source

Source topic or question: Transportation and infrastructure

Candidate campaign source

Crowley will grow an economy rooted in local ownership and union labor. He’ll take his Building Bridges Program statewide—revitalizing storefronts, activating commercial corridors, and creating jobs block by block. Every infrastructure dollar will support good-paying, local jobs and lift the trades with strong labor standards.

Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 16, 2026

David Crowley — candidate-owned primary source 2 ↗
Jobs & workforce context

Crowley’s plan includes universal early childhood education, new investments in public schools, and closing the special education reimbursement gap. He’ll ensure that every child has a launchpad to success—whether through college, technical school, apprenticeships, or direct-to-career pathways.

Read exact statement & source

Source topic or question: Education, child care, and workforce training

Candidate campaign source

Crowley’s plan includes universal early childhood education, new investments in public schools, and closing the special education reimbursement gap. He’ll ensure that every child has a launchpad to success—whether through college, technical school, apprenticeships, or direct-to-career pathways.

Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 16, 2026

David Crowley — candidate-owned primary source 2 ↗
Jobs & workforce context

Crowley believes every family deserves access to safe, affordable, high-quality child care. As Governor, he will champion long-term investments that stabilize providers, expand early childhood programs, and ensure working parents never have to choose between earning a paycheck and caring for their c…

Read exact statement & source

Source topic or question: Education, child care, and workforce training

Candidate campaign source

Crowley believes every family deserves access to safe, affordable, high-quality child care. As Governor, he will champion long-term investments that stabilize providers, expand early childhood programs, and ensure working parents never have to choose between earning a paycheck and caring for their children. Crowley will prioritize raising subsidy rates so families can afford care, supporting providers so they can keep their doors open, and growing pre-K readiness programs that give every child a strong start. By making child care more accessible and dependable, Crowley will strengthen Wisconsin’s workforce, support parents, and give every child the foundation to thrive.

Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 16, 2026

David Crowley — candidate-owned primary source 2 ↗

2026 Wisconsin U.S. House — District 1 — General Election

1 candidate with matching statements · 1 statement

Mitchell Berman

1 statement

Democratic · U.S. House District 1 · WI

Jobs & workforce context

Expand apprenticeships and the skilled trades so a good career doesn't require a four-year degree or a mountain of student loan debt

Read exact statement & source

Source topic or question: Education, child care, and workforce training

Candidate campaign source

Expand apprenticeships and the skilled trades so a good career doesn't require a four-year degree or a mountain of student loan debt

Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 16, 2026

Mitchell Berman — candidate-owned primary source 2 ↗

2026 Wisconsin U.S. House — District 2 — General Election

1 candidate with matching statements · 1 statement

Mark Pocan

1 statement

Democratic · U.S. House District 2 · WI

Unemployment mention

Wisconsin’s families deserve an economy that puts workers’ interests first, and Mark supports strengthening the social safety net programs that so many American families count on. These include unemployment compensation, higher education assistance, strong worker rights and pension protections, heal…

Read exact statement & source

Source topic or question: Economy, jobs, taxes, and affordability

Candidate campaign source

Wisconsin’s families deserve an economy that puts workers’ interests first, and Mark supports strengthening the social safety net programs that so many American families count on. These include unemployment compensation, higher education assistance, strong worker rights and pension protections, health care for the most vulnerable in our society, and Medicare and Social Security-to provide dignity and certainty to senior citizens. Mark believes we must embrace the challenge of ensuring that illness, job loss, old age or disability does not mean a life sentence of poverty.

Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 16, 2026

Mark Pocan — candidate-owned primary source 2 ↗
Race groups · Page 1 of 2
How statements are selected

This section matches specific unemployment, jobs and workforce issues terms in retained, attributed source text from published Wisconsin candidate profiles. A profile heading or biography alone does not qualify. The Florida geography is fixed; saved state preferences cannot change these results. A mention can concern a community or group rather than Florida’s statewide measure.

Matching is automatic and does not establish a candidate’s stance, the accuracy of a claim, or an effect on the measured result. Results are grouped by recorded race, then by candidate name. Within each candidate, the matching issue mentions appear first. Only candidates with matching retained statements are shown; this is not a complete race roster. Repeated identical text for the same candidate is shown once. Coverage follows the existing state profiles and is not a complete record of all candidates or everything they have said. Review dates are not statement dates.

Wisconsin incumbents

What incumbents are proposing

Explore reviewed bills sponsored by current Wisconsin legislators and Wisconsin’s congressional delegation, plus retained proposals from Wisconsin’s governor and agencies. Each record keeps its latest recorded status and official evidence.

61 matching sponsorships or proposals · 36 Wisconsin incumbents. These filters apply only to this section.

Rep. Alex Dallman

Wisconsin State Assembly, District 39 · R–WI

3 proposals
View proposals from Rep. Alex Dallman
Wisconsin Legislature · AB 367

exemptions from minimum wage, overtime pay, and recordkeeping requirements for minor league baseball players.

Mar 23, 2026 · Did not pass

Rep. Alex Dallman · Sponsored

FactVote reviewed summary

Sponsored AB367: exemptions from minimum wage, overtime pay, and recordkeeping requirements for minor league baseball players. Introduced proposal analysis: Currently, the state minimum wage law requires that employers pay the applicable minimum wage set in statute to their employees and that employers keep certain records that include hours of employment and wages for employees. This bill exempts from these requirements individuals who have entered into a contract to play minor league baseball and who are compensated under a collective bargaining agreement that expressly provides for wages and working conditions. Also under current law, the Department of Workforce Development must classify…

2026-03-23: Failed to pass pursuant to Senate Joint Resolution 1. The proposal did not become law.

Why this record is included

Wages and cash benefits can be components of household money income. Census income is measured before taxes, so tax relief alone is not an increase in this statistic; the provision does not determine the statewide median. This relationship does not establish causation. Actions after the fact’s measurement period cannot explain its earlier value.

Retained Wisconsin evidence context: Median household income. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.

Currently, the state minimum wage law requires that employers pay the applicable minimum wage set in statute to their employees and that employers keep certain records that include hours of employment and wages for employees. This bill exempts from these requirements individuals who have entered into a contract to play minor league baseball and who are compensated under a collective bargaining agreement that expressly provides for wages and working conditions. Also under current law, the Department of Workforce Development must classify by rule periods of work as periods to be paid at an employee’s regular rate of pay and periods to be paid at an overtime rate of at least one and one−half times that regular rate. DWD has promulgated rules requiring employers to pay overtime pay for all hours worked in excess of 40 hours per week and to keep certain records that include hours of employment and wages for employees but exempting certain employees from the overtime pay requirements. This bill exempts from these overtime pay and recordkeeping requirements individuals who have entered into a contract to play minor league baseball and who are compensated under a collective bargaining agreement that expressly provides for wages and working conditions.
Review official supporting evidence ↗
Wisconsin Legislature · AB 153

the amount of benefits received under the unemployment insurance law. (FE)

Apr 15, 2024 · Did not pass

Rep. Alex Dallman · Sponsored

FactVote reviewed summary

Sponsored AB153: the amount of benefits received under the unemployment insurance law. (FE) Introduced proposal analysis: This bill changes the maximum number of weeks of regular unemployment insurance (UI) benefits payable to an eligible claimant who is totally unemployed to an amount that varies depending upon the seasonally adjusted statewide unemployment rate. Currently, the maximum number of weeks of regular UI benefits payable to an eligible claimant who is totally unemployed and who earns sufficient wages to qualify for those benefits is fixed at 26 weeks. AB153,2,59 Under the bill, the maximum number of weeks available to claimants is determined monthly, based upon the unemployment…

2024-04-15: Failed to pass pursuant to Senate Joint Resolution 1. The proposal did not become law.

Why this record is included

Wages and cash benefits can be components of household money income. Census income is measured before taxes, so tax relief alone is not an increase in this statistic; the provision does not determine the statewide median. This relationship does not establish causation. Actions after the fact’s measurement period cannot explain its earlier value.

Retained Wisconsin evidence context: Median household income. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.

This bill changes the maximum number of weeks of regular unemployment insurance (UI) benefits payable to an eligible claimant who is totally unemployed to an amount that varies depending upon the seasonally adjusted statewide unemployment rate. Currently, the maximum number of weeks of regular UI benefits payable to an eligible claimant who is totally unemployed and who earns sufficient wages to qualify for those benefits is fixed at 26 weeks. AB153,2,59 Under the bill, the maximum number of weeks available to claimants is determined monthly, based upon the unemployment rate using the most recently available federal data. Once a claimant begins a benefit year, the claimant's maximum number of weeks of regular benefits is fixed for that benefit year. Because the maximum number of weeks of state supplemental benefits payable to a claimant is calculated in part based upon the maximum number of weeks of regular benefits payable to a claimant, the change also affects the maximum number of weeks of state supplemental benefits payable to a claimant. Under the bill, the maximum number of weeks of regular benefits for total unemployment is determined as follows: - See PDF for table
Review official supporting evidence ↗
Wisconsin Legislature · AB 937

the amount of benefits received under the unemployment insurance law. (FE)

Apr 15, 2022 · Vetoed

Rep. Alex Dallman · Sponsored

FactVote reviewed summary

Sponsored AB937: the amount of benefits received under the unemployment insurance law. (FE) Introduced proposal analysis: This bill changes the maximum number of weeks of regular unemployment insurance (UI) benefits payable to an eligible claimant who is totally unemployed to an amount that varies depending upon the seasonally adjusted statewide average unemployment rate for the first or third calendar quarter immediately preceding the beginning of the claimant's benefit year. Currently, the maximum number of weeks of regular UI benefits payable to an eligible claimant who is totally unemployed and who earns sufficient wages to qualify for those benefits is fixed at 26 weeks. AB937,2,69…

2022-04-15: Report vetoed by the Governor on 4-15-2022. This is the legislative disposition, not a finding about current enforceability.

Why this record is included

Wages and cash benefits can be components of household money income. Census income is measured before taxes, so tax relief alone is not an increase in this statistic; the provision does not determine the statewide median. This relationship does not establish causation. Actions after the fact’s measurement period cannot explain its earlier value.

Retained Wisconsin evidence context: Median household income. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.

This bill changes the maximum number of weeks of regular unemployment insurance (UI) benefits payable to an eligible claimant who is totally unemployed to an amount that varies depending upon the seasonally adjusted statewide average unemployment rate for the first or third calendar quarter immediately preceding the beginning of the claimant's benefit year. Currently, the maximum number of weeks of regular UI benefits payable to an eligible claimant who is totally unemployed and who earns sufficient wages to qualify for those benefits is fixed at 26 weeks. AB937,2,69 Under the bill, the maximum number of weeks for claimants whose benefit years begin during the first half of a given year is based upon the unemployment rate for the third quarter of the preceding year, and the maximum number of weeks for claimants whose benefit years begin during the second half of a given year is based upon the unemployment rate for the first quarter of that year. Once a claimant begins a benefit year, the claimant's maximum number of weeks of regular benefits is fixed for that benefit year. Because the maximum number of weeks of state supplemental benefits payable to a claimant is calculated in part based upon the maximum number of weeks of regular benefits payable to a claimant, the change also affects the maximum number of weeks of state supplemental benefits payable to a claimant. Under the bill, the maximum number of weeks of regular benefits for total unemployment is determined as follows: - See PDF for table
Review official supporting evidence ↗

Rep. Andrew Hysell

Wisconsin State Assembly, District 48 · D–WI

1 proposal
View proposals from Rep. Andrew Hysell
Wisconsin Legislature · AB 468

various changes to the unemployment insurance and worker’s compensation laws. (FE)

Mar 23, 2026 · Did not pass

Rep. Andrew Hysell · Sponsored

FactVote reviewed summary

Sponsored AB468: various changes to the unemployment insurance and worker’s compensation laws. (FE) Introduced proposal analysis: This bill makes various changes to the unemployment insurance and worker’s compensation laws, as follows: Unemployment insurance; substantial fault Under current law, a claimant for UI benefits whose work is terminated by his or her employer for substantial fault by the claimant connected with the claimant’s work is ineligible to receive UI benefits until the claimant satisfies certain requalification criteria. With certain exceptions, current law defines “substantial fault” to include those acts or omissions of a claimant over which the claimant exercised…

2026-03-23: Failed to pass pursuant to Senate Joint Resolution 1. The proposal did not become law.

Why this record is included

Wages and cash benefits can be components of household money income. Census income is measured before taxes, so tax relief alone is not an increase in this statistic; the provision does not determine the statewide median. This relationship does not establish causation. Actions after the fact’s measurement period cannot explain its earlier value.

Retained Wisconsin evidence context: Median household income. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.

This bill makes various changes to the unemployment insurance and worker’s compensation laws, as follows: Unemployment insurance; substantial fault Under current law, a claimant for UI benefits whose work is terminated by his or her employer for substantial fault by the claimant connected with the claimant’s work is ineligible to receive UI benefits until the claimant satisfies certain requalification criteria. With certain exceptions, current law defines “substantial fault” to include those acts or omissions of a claimant over which the claimant exercised reasonable control and that violate reasonable requirements of the claimant’s employer. This bill repeals this provision on substantial fault. Unemployment insurance; misconduct Under current law, a claimant for UI benefits whose work is terminated by his or her employer for misconduct by the claimant connected with the claimant’s work is ineligible to receive UI benefits until the claimant satisfies certain requalification criteria, and the claimant’s wages paid by the employer that terminates the claimant for misconduct are excluded for purposes of calculating benefit entitlement. Current law defines “misconduct” using a general, common law standard derived from Boynton Cab Co. v. Neubeck, 237 Wis. 249 (1941), and enumerates several specific types of conduct that also constitute misconduct. Under one of these specific provisions, misconduct includes 1) absenteeism on more than two occasions within the 120-day period before the date of the claimant’s termination, unless otherwise specified by his or her employer in an employment manual of which the claimant has acknowledged receipt with his or her signature, or 2) excessive tardiness by a claimant in violation of a policy of the employer that has been communicated to
Review official supporting evidence ↗

Rep. Angelito Tenorio

Wisconsin State Assembly, District 14 · D–WI

1 proposal
View proposals from Rep. Angelito Tenorio
Wisconsin Legislature · AB 1203

net zero emissions, carbon-free and renewable energy standards, and creating an office of sustainability and clean energy, granting rule-making authority, making an appropriation, and providing a penalty. (FE)

Apr 9, 2026 · Did not pass

Rep. Angelito Tenorio · Sponsored

FactVote reviewed summary

The introduced bill would require Wisconsin to achieve 100% clean electricity production by 2050 and change power-plant approval priorities and electricity standards. The in-state production requirement is the connection to the generation-mix fact. This describes the introduced proposal; its recorded legislative disposition is separate.

2026-04-09: Fiscal estimate received. The proposal did not become law.

Why this record is included

The introduced bill would require Wisconsin to achieve 100% clean electricity production by 2050 and change power-plant approval priorities and electricity standards. The in-state production requirement is the connection to the generation-mix fact. Natural-gas share is gas-fired electricity-industry net generation divided by total in-state generation covered by EIA Table 5. The denominator excludes estimated small-scale generation outside that table. Gas-fired plants or other in-state generation resources concern this mix; procurement targets and authorizations are distinct from an operating plant or measured output. This relationship does not establish causation. Actions after the fact’s measurement period cannot explain its earlier value.

Retained Wisconsin evidence context: Natural gas share of in-state electricity generation. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.

This bill creates an office of sustainability and clean energy and establishes clean electricity and emissions standards that must be met by specific dates. Office of sustainability and clean energy The bill creates in the Department of Administration an office of sustainability and clean energy. The secretary of administration must direct the office of sustainability and clean energy to establish, using rigorous sector-based modeling, an economy-wide decarbonization roadmap that incorporates, as appropriate, the state’s clean energy plan issued in 2022. The roadmap must be updated periodically. Emissions standards The bill provides that, by 2050, the state must achieve 100 percent clean electricity production and emit no more carbon into the atmosphere than can be removed economy-wide. Carbon-free and renewable energy standards Current law generally requires electric providers, which include electric utilities and retail electric cooperatives, to ensure that, in a given year, a certain specified percentage of the electricity sold to customers and members is generated from renewable resources. The bill creates a definition of “carbon-free energy” and requires that for the years 2030 to 2034, electric providers and certain state agencies have a minimum carbon-free energy percentage of 50 percent. Later, the bill requires electric providers and certain state agencies to have the following minimum carbon-free energy percentages: 1) for the years 2035 to 2039, 65 percent; 2) for the years 2040 to 2044, 80 percent; 3) for the years 2045 to 2049, 90 percent, and 4) for 2050 and each year thereafter, 100 percent. The bill requires each electric provider to submit a transition plan to PSC that includes the electric provider’s plan for satisfying the carbon-free energy percentage requirements. The transition plan must identify electric generating facilities that the electric provider proposes to add or retire. PSC may approve a transition plan only if certain criteria are satisfied, including that any continued use of an electric generating facility that is not a carbon-free facility is the most cost-effective decision for customers and that any retirements of such facilities are the most cost-effective decisions for customers. In addition, the bill creates a definition of “specified renewable energy” and requires that for the years 2030 to 2034, each electric provider have a minimum specified renewable energy percentage of 20 percent. Later, the bill requires electric providers to have a minimum specified renewable energy percentage of 40 percent for the years 2035 to 2039, and to have a minimum specified renewable energy percentage of 60 percent for 2040 and each year thereafter. If an electric provider violates either the minimum carbon-free energy percentage requirement or the minimum specified renewable energy percentage requirement, PSC may order the electric provider to engage in activities that would satisfy the requirement. An electric provider that violates such an order is subject to a forfeiture in an amount not to exceed the estimated cost of the electric provider to satisfy the requirement for which the order was issued. Also, under current law, a person seeking to construct a large electric generating facility having a nominal capacity of 100 megawatts or more or a high-voltage transmission line must obtain a CPCN from PSC. The bill requires PSC to, in taking action on CPCN applications, prioritize applications for facilities that minimize greenhouse gas emissions. Further, the bill requires PSC to make all of the following determinations to approve an application for a CPCN for a large electric generating facility: 1) that the proposed facility will not impede the applicant’s ability to satisfy the bill’s minimum carbon-free energy percentage requirement or minimum specified renewable energy percentage requirement; 2) that the applicant agreed to pay laborers, ironworkers, technicians, and mechanics the prevailing wage or the rate under an applicable collective bargaining agreement, whichever is greater; 3) that locations where other large electric generating facilities have been retired are used to the extent practicable; 4) that persons who previously worked at other large electric generating facilities that have been retired will be hired to the extent practicable; 5) that persons residing in this state will be hired to the extent practicable; and 6) that persons residing in the municipality where the large electric generating facility will be located will perform at least 15 percent of the labor hours on the project, to the extent practicable. Also, the bill allows PSC to determine that a proposed facility or high-voltage transmission does not satisfy certain requirements for granting a CPCN related to air pollution impact even if the proposed facility or high-voltage transmission line satisfies current state air pollution laws. The bill also prohibits PSC from issuing a certificate of authority (CA) to an electric utility for a project unless PSC determines that issuing the CA will not impede the ability of the electric utility to satisfy the bill’s minimum carbon-free energy percentage requirement or minimum specified renewable energy percentage requirement. Under current law, a public utility must obtain a CA from PSC to construct, extend, improve, or add to its existing facilities. Under the bill, the office of sustainability and clean energy is directed to create, using rigorous sector-based modeling, an economy-wide decarbonization roadmap. The roadmap is to be updated periodically. Apprentice utilization standards Under the bill, a contractor or subcontractor on a construction project of certain electric-generating facilities with estimated construction costs of not less than $10,000,000 must make a good faith effort to utilize specific percentages of registered apprentices on the projects. A contractor or subcontractor that does not meet the utilization thresholds must provide a written explanation to the Department of Workforce Development of the good faith effort to meet the requirement accompanied by supporting documentation. Failure to provide the explanation and supporting documentation subjects the contractor or subcontractor to forfeiture.
Review official supporting evidence ↗

Rep. Ann Roe

Wisconsin State Assembly, District 44 · D–WI

1 proposal
View proposals from Rep. Ann Roe
Wisconsin Legislature · AB 607

housing and homelessness; emergency rental assistance program; indigent civil legal services; workforce development; community action agencies; poverty reports; mental health; economic security; reimbursement for nonemergency medical transportation services; urban mass transit aid; lead exposure and abatement services; lead service line replacement; providing an exemption from emergency rule procedures; granting rule-making authority; and making an appropriation. (FE)

Mar 23, 2026 · Did not pass

Rep. Ann Roe · Sponsored

FactVote reviewed summary

Sponsored AB607: housing and homelessness; emergency rental assistance program; indigent civil legal services; workforce development; community action agencies; poverty reports; mental health; economic security; reimbursement for nonemergency medical transportation services; urban mass transit aid; lead exposure and abatement services; lead service line replacement; providing an exemption from emergency rule procedures; granting rule-making authority; and making an appropriation. (FE) Introduced proposal analysis: Housing, homelessness, and indigence Grants to facilitate the independent living of homeless persons Under current law, the Department of Administration provides housing grants to…

2026-03-23: Failed to pass pursuant to Senate Joint Resolution 1. The proposal did not become law.

Why this record is included

Gross rent includes contract rent and tenant-paid utilities. Rental protections, assistance, and housing supply concern components of rental-market conditions; they do not set Wisconsin’s median rent. This relationship does not establish causation. Actions after the fact’s measurement period cannot explain its earlier value.

Retained Wisconsin evidence context: Median gross rent. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.

Housing, homelessness, and indigence Grants to facilitate the independent living of homeless persons Under current law, the Department of Administration provides housing grants to counties, municipalities, community action agencies, and private organizations for the purpose of providing housing and associated supportive services to homeless individuals and families in order to facilitate the movement of homeless persons to independent living. This bill provides an additional $5,000,000 in the 2025-27 fiscal biennium to fund that grant program. Emergency rental assistance grants The bill creates an emergency rental assistance program under which DOA awards grants to provide tenant-based rental assistance to individuals and families who have suffered an economic hardship and whose annual household income does not exceed 80 percent of the median household income for the county in which the individual or family resides. The bill appropriates $10,000,000 for the program in the 2025-27 fiscal biennium. Grants to defray housing costs The bill increases funding for DOA to award grants to persons or families of low or moderate income to defray housing costs. The bill provides an additional $220,000 in each fiscal year of the 2025-27 fiscal biennium for that purpose. Duties of the Interagency Council on Homelessness The bill requires the Interagency Council on Homelessness to do all of the following every two years: 1. Identify ways in which DOA and other state agencies specified in the bill and the Wisconsin Housing and Economic Development Authority can increase access to services for homeless individuals and families, including homeless children and youths as defined under federal law. 2. Advise each of the state agencies specified in the bill and WHEDA to revise any policy or
Review official supporting evidence ↗

Rep. Ben DeSmidt

Wisconsin State Assembly, District 65 · D–WI

1 proposal
View proposals from Rep. Ben DeSmidt
Wisconsin Legislature · AB 469

the unemployment insurance waiting period.

Mar 23, 2026 · Did not pass

Rep. Ben DeSmidt · Sponsored

FactVote reviewed summary

Sponsored AB469: the unemployment insurance waiting period. Introduced proposal analysis: Currently, a claimant must wait one week after becoming eligible to receive unemployment insurance benefits before the claimant may receive benefits for a week of unemployment, except for periods during which the waiting period is suspended. The waiting period does not affect the maximum number of weeks of a claimant’s benefit eligibility. This bill permanently deletes the one-week waiting period, thus permitting a claimant to receive UI benefits beginning with his or her first week of eligibility. This describes the proposal at introduction; the recorded disposition below is separate.

2026-03-23: Failed to pass pursuant to Senate Joint Resolution 1. The proposal did not become law.

Why this record is included

Wages and cash benefits can be components of household money income. Census income is measured before taxes, so tax relief alone is not an increase in this statistic; the provision does not determine the statewide median. This relationship does not establish causation. Actions after the fact’s measurement period cannot explain its earlier value.

Retained Wisconsin evidence context: Median household income. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.

Currently, a claimant must wait one week after becoming eligible to receive unemployment insurance benefits before the claimant may receive benefits for a week of unemployment, except for periods during which the waiting period is suspended. The waiting period does not affect the maximum number of weeks of a claimant’s benefit eligibility. This bill permanently deletes the one-week waiting period, thus permitting a claimant to receive UI benefits beginning with his or her first week of eligibility.
Review official supporting evidence ↗

Rep. Brent Jacobson

Wisconsin State Assembly, District 87 · R–WI

1 proposal
View proposals from Rep. Brent Jacobson
Wisconsin Legislature · AB 164

various changes to the unemployment insurance law and federal Reemployment Services and Eligibility Assessment grants. (FE)

Mar 23, 2026 · Did not pass

Rep. Brent Jacobson · Sponsored

FactVote reviewed summary

Sponsored AB164: various changes to the unemployment insurance law and federal Reemployment Services and Eligibility Assessment grants. (FE) Introduced proposal analysis: This bill makes various changes in the unemployment insurance (UI) law, which is administered by the Department of Workforce Development. Significant changes include all of the following: Program name change The bill changes references in the statutes to “unemployment insurance” to “reemployment assistance” and requires the program and its benefits to be known as reemployment assistance. The bill also requires DWD to have a division known as the Division of Reemployment Assistance and requires the reemployment assistance…

2026-03-23: Failed to concur in pursuant to Senate Joint Resolution 1. The proposal did not become law.

Why this record is included

Wages and cash benefits can be components of household money income. Census income is measured before taxes, so tax relief alone is not an increase in this statistic; the provision does not determine the statewide median. This relationship does not establish causation. Actions after the fact’s measurement period cannot explain its earlier value.

Retained Wisconsin evidence context: Median household income. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.

This bill makes various changes in the unemployment insurance (UI) law, which is administered by the Department of Workforce Development. Significant changes include all of the following: Program name change The bill changes references in the statutes to “unemployment insurance” to “reemployment assistance” and requires the program and its benefits to be known as reemployment assistance. The bill also requires DWD to have a division known as the Division of Reemployment Assistance and requires the reemployment assistance law to be administered by that division. General qualifying requirements Under current law, a claimant for UI benefits is generally required to 1) register for work, 2) be able to work and available for work, and 3) conduct a work search for each week in order to remain eligible. A claimant is required to conduct at least four work search actions each week, and DWD may require, by rule, that an individual conduct more than four work search actions per week. Finally, if a claimant is claiming benefits for a week other than an initial week, the claimant must provide information or job application materials that are requested by DWD and participate in a public employment office workshop or training program or in similar reemployment services required by DWD. The bill does the following: 1. Requires, for the third and subsequent weeks of a claimant’s benefit year, that at least two of the required weekly work search actions be direct contacts with potential employers. 2. Requires a claimant who resides in this state, for each week other than an initial week, to submit and keep posted on the DWD’s job center website a current resume. 3. Requires, when a claimant is claiming benefits with less than three weeks of benefits left, that the claimant complete a re
Review official supporting evidence ↗
What sponsorship and proposal counts tell us

Only current Wisconsin officeholders retained in the reviewed collection qualify. Bills require a recorded primary sponsorship; cosponsors and signing officials are excluded from sponsorship counts. An official introducer recorded as acting by request is labeled “Introduced by request”; that procedural role does not establish personal policy endorsement. Governor and agency records qualify when recorded as proposed. A separately verified governor transmittal can also establish an original proposal whose latest status reflects its later outcome. Signing an enacted law alone does not establish a proposal. A record appearing under several facts is counted once per officeholder. A bill with multiple primary sponsors appears under each recorded sponsor.

Enacted bills, adopted resolutions and unsuccessful measures remain visible as proposal history. Passing one chamber is not enactment. These counts do not measure effectiveness or prove that an action changed a Wisconsin statistic. Collection reviewed Oct 5, 2026.