Wisconsin Statutes

Wis. Stat. § 13.61 (2026)

Lobbying regulated; legislative purpose

✓ current as of July 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section WI-LEGdocs.legis.wisconsin.gov JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
13.6113.61Lobbying regulated; legislative purpose. The legislature declares that the operation of an open and responsible government requires that the fullest opportunity be afforded to the people to petition their government for the redress of grievances and to express freely to any officials of the executive or legislative branch their opinions on legislation, on pending administrative rules and other policy decisions by administrative agencies, and on current issues. Essential to the continued functioning of an open government is the preservation of the integrity of the governmental decision-making process. In order to preserve and maintain the integrity of the process, the legislature determines that it is necessary to regulate and publicly disclose the identity, expenditures and activities of persons who hire others or are hired to engage in efforts to influence actions of the legislative and executive branches.
13.61 HistoryHistory: 1977 c. 278; 1989 a. 338.
13.61 AnnotationWisconsin’s New Lobby Law. Christianson. Wis. Law. June 1991.
13.61 AnnotationIntended Advocate; Unintended Lobbyist: Regulating Elections and Lobbying in Wisconsin. Christianson. Wis. Law. Oct. 2007.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 3 cases, 1993–2010 · leading case: State v. Jensen, 2010 WI 38 (Wis. 2010).
State v. Jensen, 2010 WI 38 (Wis. 2010). · cites it 6× “" Second, Wis. Stat. § 13.61 is entitled, "Lobbying regulated; legislative purpose.”
Ash Park, LLC v. Alexander & Bishop, Ltd., 2010 WI 44 (Wis. 2010). “Contract Law in Wisconsin, supra, § 13.61 (citing McKinnon v. Benedict, 38 Wis.”
Barker v. State of Wisconsin Ethics Bd., 841 F. Supp. 255 (W.D. Wis. 1993). · cites it 2× “The ethics board is responsible for administering and enforcing Wisconsin’s lobby law, Wis.Stat. §§ 13.61 to 13.75. This responsibility includes issuing interpretive opinions and promulgating administrative rules.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.