Hamilton Political Tidbits – June 4, 2021

The finance committee has since spent its time approving budget motions for various state agencies and programs. JFC is on pace to finish the budget and vote it out of committee by the end of June. Generally, once the committee has finished acting on the budget, it will take about a week for staff to draft the revised budget bill. Then, the budget faces a vote of the full Legislature. It is not yet clear if the bill will begin in the Senate or the Assembly.

A group of Republican state legislators are working on legislation to end Wisconsin’s participation in several federal programs that provide new or additional unemployment benefits, including the Federal Pandemic Unemployment Compensation (FPUC) program. The FPUC program provides recipients of unemployment insurance (UI) benefits with an additional $300 per week on top of the regular state benefits they are eligible for. The supplemental benefit was created in 2020 as part of the first major federal COVID-19 response package (CARES Act).

At its May 26 meeting, the Wisconsin Natural Resources Board (NRB) authorized the Department of Natural Resources (DNR) to hold a preliminary public hearing and comment period on the agency’s scope statement for board order DG-31-20. The scope statement is an early version of the agency’s proposal to amend chapter NR 809 of the Wisconsin Administrative Code, which regulates drinking water, to add enforcement standards for several per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) and pesticides.

As of June 2, Wisconsin had administered almost 5.18 million doses of COVID-19 vaccines, with more than 2.45 million Wisconsin residents or 42.1 percent of the state’s population fully vaccinated. About 83.3 percent of Wisconsinites aged 65 and older have received at least one dose.

From 2005 to 2011, Wisconsin had a six-year window where plaintiffs could sue manufacturers of white lead carbonate (a pigment formerly used in some paints) under a tort theory known as “risk-contribution.” Under this theory, plaintiffs can seek damages from a company that produced white lead carbonate used in paint even if the plaintiff cannot demonstrate that the company produced the pigment that caused an alleged injury.