On the ballot Tuesday: Two constitutional amendments

One thing Gov. Tony Evers can’t veto is the will of the voters, and that’s why the Republican-controlled state legislature has put two proposed constitutional amendments on next Tuesday’s ballot.

One proposal would establish legislative oversight of federal funds, which is now lacking; another related measure would prevent the legislature from delegating its appropriations powers to any other branch of government.

The former is straightforward. The governor and the legislature have been in a titanic battle over federal COVID dollars given to the state, but in fact the governor has almost complete control over federal funds, and has had since the Great Depression.

The second is less straightforward, but presumably stems from the governor’s control of federal funds. Otherwise, the legislature is already — at least technically — prevented from delegating core powers to another branch of government.

Republicans and conservatives want voters to answer yes to both questions; Gov. Tony Evers was bound to veto both measures if the language had been sent to him in statutory form. The language can still be vetoed, but only by the voters.

Specifically the two questions are as follows:

Question 1: “Delegation of appropriation power. Shall section 35 (1) of article IV of the constitution be created to provide that the legislature may not delegate its sole power to determine how moneys shall be appropriated?”

Question 2: “Allocation of federal moneys. Shall section 35 (2) of article IV of the constitution be created to prohibit the governor from allocating any federal moneys the governor accepts on behalf of the state without the approval of the legislature by joint resolution or as provided by legislative rule?”

To become an amendment to the constitution, a lawmaker or lawmakers must introduce a joint resolution in the Senate or Assembly. Once both chambers have approved the measure in two consecutive legislative sessions, the measure heads to the voters for a thumbs-up, thumbs-down vote.

The governor of the state — one of the most powerful governorships in the country — has no say in the constitutional amendment process.

Yet another constitutional amendment will head to voters in the November 5 general election — a vote on whether to specifically make U.S. citizenship a requirement for voting eligibility.

Once again that would seem to be a settled question because the Wisconsin constitution states: “Every United States citizen age 18 or older who is a resident of an election district in this state is a qualified elector of that district.” 

But it isn’t settled. Progressive Democrats have argued that the language leaves wiggle room for statutory enactments that would allow noncitizens to vote. Specifically, they argue, while the language states that age-eligible resident citizens are automatically “qualified,” it doesn’t specifically preclude noncitizens, if they are authorized by statute.

And so the referendum question in November is: “Eligibility to vote. Shall section 1 of article III of the constitution, which deals with suffrage, be amended to provide that only a United States citizen age 18 or older who resides in an election district may vote in an election for national, state, or local office or at a statewide or local referendum?”

The amendment adds the word ‘only’ to make the language clear.

In addition to those ballot measures, two proposed amendments cleared the first session of the legislative hurdle and need to be passed in the next session to head to the voters — one relates to the freedom to worship by prohibiting government officials from closing churches for any reason; the second measure would enshrine voter ID in the constitution as a requirement for voting. 

Other issues, such as prohibiting ranked-choice voting and prohibiting the governor from using a line-item veto to increase spending, were introduced but not passed and will likely be taken up in future legislative sessions.

Weighing in

Both conservatives and liberals have been vigorously weighing in on the amendments being voted upon next week.

On the left side of the aisle are such groups as the League of Women Voters of Wisconsin, Wisconsin Education Association Council, Wisconsin Association of Local Health Departments & Boards, Wisconsin Conservation Voters, Wisconsin Public Health Association, and the Wisconsin Democracy Campaign, all of which oppose the amendments.

The League of Women Voters says passing the amendment will hinder the ability of the state to respond quickly to emergencies.

“These are large sweeping changes that will impact a wide range of issues voters care about, from education to the environment to how quickly the government can respond to emergencies (like a public health crisis or natural disaster),” the group says on its website. “The League of Women Voters of Wisconsin knows that if these amendments are passed they will be detrimental to the people of our state.”

On the other side, supporting the amendments, are luminaries such as former Gov. Tommy Thompson.

“Government works best when our elected officials work together,” Thompson said. “I have always worked this way, whether I was a state representative, a cabinet secretary, or as your governor for fourteen years. I led and I listened.”

Wisconsin’s constitution establishes the power to appropriate money to the legislature, Thompson said. 

“Clearly, this was intentional,” he said. “The United States constitution provides the same authority to Congress. Why? Because our elected representatives are closest and most responsive to the voters. And, they know and understand — they respond and advocate — for the unique needs of their local communities.”

Thompson said the Founders envisioned and designed the system so that elected representatives would drive taxing and spending decisions and would be accountable to voters.

“This is exactly what the ballot questions before you are asking,” he said. “Should your representative — the person who goes door to door to hear and respond to the concerns of their constituents, the person working with and most responsive to local government officials and needs — have a role, as is the case for all other taxpayer spending, in directing immense amounts of federal aid? Or, should all that spending be unaccountable to and uninformed by your representatives?”

The answer to the questions on the ballot, Thompson said, is absolutely “yes.”

Other supporters include Wisconsin Manufacturers and Commerce and the Badger Institute, a conservative think tank. 

The Badger Institute points out that the legislature had no input into how or where to spend billions of dollars that came to Wisconsin through three congressional bills — the CARES Act, the American Recovery Plan Act, and the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act.

Over the past three years, the Institute pointed out, its researchers found multiple instances of waste, fraud and abuse in “emergency” spending.

“The state is still sitting on $1.1 billion of this funding with no explanation for why and where that ‘emergency’ money might one day go,” the group stated. “…Passing this amendment would give the 33 state Senators and 99 Assembly members, elected by you, a say in where all of that money goes. It doesn’t get much more democratic than that.”

Wisconsin is one of only 16 states that grant their governors sole authority over those allocations, the Badger Institute asserts.

Richard Moore is the author of “Dark State” and may be reached at richardd3d.substack.com.