In Madison, Wisconsin, a political battle is gaining momentum as Republican lawmakers aim to curtail the uniquely broad veto powers wielded by the state's governor. For nearly a century, Wisconsin governors — irrespective of party affiliation — have exercised considerable influence over state spending bills through partial vetoes. Unlike most states where governors can only diminish or abolish specific funding amounts, Wisconsin allows its governors to alter bills by striking specific words, numbers, and even punctuation, effectively reshaping legislative intent. This authority, regarded as the most potent among U.S. states, has sparked bipartisan debate over its reach and implications.
Most recently, Republican legislators introduced a proposal to amend the state constitution, which would significantly limit the governor's veto prerogatives. Instead of selectively removing words to reconfigure the meaning of bills, the proposed amendment would restrict governors to vetoing only entire sections of spending bills. The amendment must pass in two successive legislative sessions and receive voter approval before taking effect, potentially as soon as 2027.
This movement highlights the contentious nature of the veto power, which some legislators argue transforms the governor into a super lawmaker far exceeding the role's intended reach. Republican Senators Julian Bradley and Cory Tomcyzk, alongside Representative Scott Allen, have become vocal advocates for these changes. They see the current veto power as a legislative override that demands recalibration.
Contrasting this conservative push is Democratic Governor Tony Evers, whose office suggests an alternative path for balancing power dynamics. His spokesperson, Britt Cudaback, emphasized backing a proposal to grant voters the authority to instigate ballot issues through referendums, a move strongly opposed by Republicans. As Cudaback expressed, there is a growing perception that the Republican agenda favors power centralization at the expense of broader public involvement.
The underlying tension also reflects a strategic trend where Republicans resort to constitutional amendments — which the governor cannot veto — to bypass Evers' influence. Notably, five amendments were introduced last year, with an additional measure concerning the state's voter ID law slated for voter decision in April.
The historical backdrop of Wisconsin’s partial veto powers reveals an evolution marked by incremental erosion. Acquired through a 1930 constitutional amendment, these powers have since faced successive limitations. Voter-approved amendments in 1990 and 2008 curtailed tactics such as the “Vanna White” veto, which permitted the alteration of individual letters, and the “Frankenstein” veto, allowing the merging of words and numbers across sentences.
Adding to the complexity is an ongoing case before the Wisconsin Supreme Court, challenging a partial veto exercised by Governor Evers in 2023. This case questions the legitimacy of altering digits to extend a school funding increase until the year 2425, far beyond legislative intention. The court's decision could set a precedent, potentially redefining the scope of executive power under the state constitution.
As 2027 approaches, the future of Wisconsin's gubernatorial veto power hangs in the balance. The current discourse embodies a broader debate on the limits of executive authority and the pursuit of checks and balances within state governance. How this unfolds could have long-lasting implications for the state's political landscape and its legislative processes.