Wisconsin Legislature Passes HMV Bill

[Cat Man]

Earlier today, the Wisconsin legislature's assembly chamber in full session acted on bill proposal AB592 to change the state statutes to allow Historic Military Vehicles to be regestered and operated in Wisconsin.

The assembly passed the bill on a unanimous voice vote. The bill was immediatly sent to the Senate were it was taken up and was passed on unanimous vote vote. No legislators spoke against the bill.

The measure will now go to the Governor where he is expected to sign it into law in the next few weeks.

There will be more to do in the future. We remain commited to contine to expand the statute provisions in the future as Wisconsin MV owners demonstrate the safe operation of our MV's. WE consider this "A good start".

Remember we did not give up anything. The Wisconsin DOT was able to use an existing state law to deny or cancel MV registrations. They have and they did. Our bill that passed today creates needed protection for all wheeled MV's.

"THANK YOU" TO EACH AND EVERY ONE OF YOU FROM WISCONSIN WHO TOOK THE TIME TO GET INVOLVED AND LOBBY YOUR LEGISLATORS.

Cat Man

[Ben Dover]

Great job! This is good news!

[Chuck Lutz]

I thought that the purpose of the two bills was to fight the WisDOT INTERPRETATION of what they would license and would not license?

So you HAD the right to use your HMVs in an UNRESTRICTED manner on the highways and byways of Wisconsin all along until some jerk at WisDOT decided they could RESTRICT or DENY licensing them when they came up for re-registration.

So 592/404 was passed and now you can only drive them to PARADES or to the REPAIR shop?

[TopKick]

I'm glad I live in Kansas!

[Dave K.]

Don't worry Chuck--corruption and idiocy is alive and well in the Wisconsin govt. SB 392 which allows CERTAIN vehicles to be driven daily is still alive and well having passed through the senate apparently. If you didn't catch the other thread some yahoo senators got most favored vehicle status for their constituents and left the truly historic military vehicles completely out of the picture! Mind boggling. What's worse is they only include Pinzgauers(? historic to anywhere?), M715s, and Hummers . This is all about greasing palms and getting votes and I'm sick of it personally--buuuuuut it ain't over till it's over and I'm only getting geared up! Off to the Gov and a guy named Steinbrink who chairs the transpo committee--I mean after all, if they can include these vehicles I want it known that I want to include my WW2 Jeep for heck's sake! It's about being fair correct?

At least Jeff Rowsam is trying for all in the hobby here. I'm by no means a fan of the bill but given the alternative of letting only select non-historic vehicles plod the roads it's something for now.

[Kevin Lockwood]

Dave K,
I hate to say this but I told you in a previous post that MVs were going to get screwed by 404. Why the Wisconsin MV folks won't wake up and smell the DOT as a rotten egg is confusing. 392 being narrowed to specific vehicles is not the result of backdoor politics it is the result of most MV people either blindly or out of confusion supporting 404. The historic MV owners ASKED TO BE RESTRICTED. They got restricted. They got 404. The folks who DO NOT want to be restricted are pushing 392. Believe me I have NO IDEA why anyone with a MV would have supported 404????? This bill reads almost verbatim to the DOT/DMV bill we fought and defeated in Kansas.

[TopKick]

Dave K,
Make sure to look at our Kansas Bill before you go. When lobbying for the rest of the HMV's, get a "NO RESTRICTION" bill passed in your favor.

[undysworld]

Hey Dave K.

I've been out here pushing for unrestricted use for you and the rest of the milvehs, including (no surprise) my Pinzgauer too.

Where have you been when 392 DID cover ALL milvehs??? Telling Jeff to support it too? Or not? (No offense intended, but I truly don't know whether you did or did not support 392 previously.)

There was no palm greasing involved, to my knowledge. Kevin's right about people blindly supporting 404. Whoever failed to support 392 sufficiently has no right to complain when those of us who did accomplish what we tried to do.

If you want to drive your WW2 Jeep to parades, your wish has been granted. If you want to use it for utility uses, why didn't you help us out earlier? Please don't go storming around trying to derail our efforts at this time. With 404 passed, the only hope for normal use is if we get 392 as well. If you want to be on that list, then let's start planning to get you on it. In either case, we could use your support. By all means, visit Rep. Steinbrink, but ask him to support the passage of 392.

At this point, I'll repeat what I posted previously. We've all supported your goal of getting 404 passed to satisfy the collectors. It is not unreasonable to ask that those collectors now back our efforts to get 392 passed to allow the rest of us to still use our trucks, even if we don't go to parades.

And for what it's worth, the US army now drives Pinzgauers too. Reportedly, they like 'em. Have you actually seen or ridden in one? Pinzgauers date back to 1971 and have been in use by numerous military groups around the globe. Just because my dad didn't drive one doesn't mean they have no historical value. History does not begin and end with the United State's borders. The last time I checked, nobody was complaining about an antique Italian Ferarri wearing historical "collector" plates, so what's your problem with Pinzgauers?

Also, you could consider the fact that if everybody in America wanted to own and drive a WW2 Jeep, very darn few of us could afford to actually be one of the lucky ones. You might not be. I think there is still sufficient room on the highways for all of us to be there, so let's not get selfish about who gets to.

Just my 2 cents.

Paul U