The following are brief summaries of this Study Committee’s first three meetings:

August 13 Meeting Summary (from the Wheeler Report)

The 2026 Legislative Council Study Committee on the Use of Artificial Intelligence in Health Care met [on August 13] to examine how AI is being deployed across health systems, insurance, Medicaid/Medicare, and mental health, and what role Wisconsin law should play. National policy experts and state-level advocates described a fast-moving, fragmented landscape: some states are restricting AI from being the sole basis for adverse coverage decisions, others are piloting AI “sandboxes” to test tools under regulator oversight, and many are experimenting with disclosure, consent, and governance rules. A recurring theme was how to balance innovation, cost-savings, and access with patient safety, privacy, and public trust, especially in areas like prior authorization, chatbots, and behavioral health.

September 9 Meeting Summary (from the Wheeler Report)

[The September 9] hearing focused on consumer health data, patient privacy, AI-assisted clinical practice, medical board authority, electronic health record tools, health-system implementation, rural and safety-net considerations, and the need for practical guardrails. It was emphasized that AI is already present in healthcare workflows, from administrative support and appointment scheduling to clinical documentation, care-gap identification, imaging, and decision-support tools. Presenters urged the committee to consider identifying lower-risk uses that support clinicians from higher-risk applications that communicate directly with patients, make autonomous recommendations, or could be perceived as replacing licensed healthcare professionals.

• The Future of Privacy Forum provided an overview of the fragmented federal privacy landscape and the rapid growth of state comprehensive privacy laws.

• The Federation of State Medical Boards discussed how AI tools are being used by both patients and clinicians, including AI-powered symptom tools, ambient scribes, clinical decision-support platforms, and pilots involving automated prescription renewal.

• Dr. Richard Bruce of the University of Wisconsin–Madison described radiology as one of the earliest and most active areas of AI adoption in medicine.

• UnityPoint Health–Meriter outlined practical considerations for healthcare organizations implementing AI, including cost, return on investment, staffing, vendor roadmaps, privacy, data retention, patient consent, environmental impact, quality of care, and the need for research.

• Marshfield Clinic described AI use from the perspective of a rural health-system deployer. They discussed generative AI tools for staff, ambient listening, care-gap closure, and inbox management.

• Outreach Community Health Centers discussed federally qualified health centers serving low-income, uninsured, Medicaid, unhoused, and medically vulnerable patients.

• Epic described its approach to AI development, emphasizing collaboration with users, validation, monitoring, and deployment.

September 10 Meeting Summary (from the Wheeler Report)

The Study Committee on the Use of Artificial Intelligence in Health Care held their third hearing [on September 10]. Dr. Sean Griffin highlighted the importance of independent accreditation, noting 600 best practices and the need for transparency and accountability. He stressed the potential risks, including data bias and ethical considerations. Ann Trinkler from Delta Dental Wisconsin detailed their use of AI in claims utilization management, ensuring human oversight. Ryan Peterson from the Alliance Cooperative underscored the unique challenges and benefits of self-funded healthcare plans, advocating for flexible, outcomes-based regulation to support AI's responsible integration. Lakeland Care, a nonprofit managing Medicaid services, emphasized AI's role in reducing repetitive tasks and improving operational decisions.