Public Comment

Wisconsin’s November 2026 ballot includes a proposed constitutional limit on the governor’s unusually broad partial-veto authority. The amendment would prohibit a governor from using a partial veto to create or increase, or authorize the creation or increase of, a tax or fee. The renewed debate follows litigation over Governor Tony Evers’ 2023 partial veto that altered a school-funding provision to extend a per-pupil revenue increase through 2425; the Wisconsin Supreme Court upheld that veto in 2025. Wisconsin voters have previously amended the Constitution to narrow other forms of partial veto. A governor needs a veto to check legislative spending, but changing a bill is different from rejecting part of it. Taxes and fees are especially sensitive because voters expect elected legislators to affirmatively authorize what government collects.

Should Wisconsin governors be barred from using the partial veto to create or increase a tax or fee?

Overall results

1
59% support · excluded by 7%
7

Taxing authority should be difficult to exercise accidentally or creatively because the burden falls directly on citizens.

7

A tax-and-fee boundary is narrower than abolishing the partial veto and directly targets the separation-of-powers concern that prompted the amendment.

2
52% support · excluded by 7%
7

A mandatory fiscal statement could show exactly how each partial veto changes taxes, fees, spending authority, and future budgets before it takes effect.

7

Transparency can deter creative vetoes while preserving flexibility that has been part of Wisconsin’s constitutional structure for decades.

3
48% support · excluded by 7%
7

A strong partial veto lets governors restrain or reshape sprawling budget bills and can counter legislative packages that otherwise must be accepted all at once.

4
40% support · excluded by 17%

About the author