admin
Wisconsin voters face a clear choice on the ballot: curb a governor’s power to rewrite budgets with a pen that can create or raise taxes, or leave that power intact. Question 1 asks whether the state constitution should stop governors from using the so‑called partial veto on appropriation bills to “create or increase or authorize the creation or increase of any tax or fee.” This change is narrowly aimed at a headline‑grabbing move by Governor Tony Evers and the broader problem it exposed — executive lawmaking by sleight of hand.
What Question 1 would actually do
The amendment would add language to Article V of the state constitution saying: when signing an appropriation bill in part, the governor may not create or increase any tax or fee. A “Yes” vote adopts that restriction. A “No” vote keeps the current text, which a recent Wisconsin Supreme Court decision interpreted in favor of broad partial‑veto power. The Legislature put this measure on the ballot after the example everyone remembers: a two‑year school funding line turned into a grant of authority that reads through the year “2425.” That’s not a typo; it is the kind of drafting trick voters sent to the front door.
Why this matters for taxpayers and schools
Make no mistake: schools need money. No one is denying that. But the proper way to fund schools is through debate in the Legislature, not through governor‑crafted clauses that expand tax power by deleting a few characters. Governor Tony Evers defended his partial veto as support for students. The court in LeMieux v. Evers sided with him, 4–3, saying the veto fit within current law. That ruling doesn’t mean voters have to approve of the way the power was used — or reward a playbook that makes taxes easier to authorize and harder to track.
Limits, tradeoffs, and why this amendment is narrow
Question 1 wouldn’t reach back in time to erase past language. It won’t magically undo the 2023 edits; courts would sort out legal fallout if the amendment passes. It also won’t strip governors of ordinary veto tools to cut spending or fix obvious drafting errors. This is a targeted fix to stop a governor from using the partial veto to authorize tax or fee increases without the Legislature’s vote. Yes, there are gray areas courts would have to interpret. But the alternative is letting the person with the red pen become the person who quietly raises taxes for the rest of us.
Wisconsin’s constitution should make it easy to see who owns a tax increase. Voters deserve plain accountability: lawmakers vote for taxes in public, and governors sign or veto them in public. If you like the idea that the pen gets to decide future property tax bills for generations, vote no and good luck complaining next budget season. If you want elected legislators — not a single executive — to carry the responsibility for raising revenue, vote Yes on Question 1. It’s a small, sensible step to restore the proper balance of power and protect homeowners from surprise tax authority hidden in a budget line.
