What to know about constitutional amendment questions going to Wisconsin voters in August

Wisconsin voters next month will have the chance to weigh in on the authority of Wisconsin governors to spend federal funds, potentially upending how billions of dollars are spent in the state, according to a new nonpartisan analysis.

Wisconsin's partisan primary election is Aug. 13, and voters will see two referendum questions on their ballots asking to give the state Legislature more power over distributing federal funding, an effort sparked by clashes over Gov. Tony Evers' power to distribute billions of dollars in coronavirus relief money.

Here is what to know about the referendum questions:

What are the questions on my ballot?

The two questions will appear statewide 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?”

A “yes” vote on the first question would add to the Wisconsin Constitution an amendment prohibiting the Legislature from delegating its power to appropriate money while a “no” vote would not add that.

Voting “yes” on the second question means amending the Wisconsin Constitution to require the governor to earn legislative approval in the form of a joint resolution before expending federal funds appropriated to the state, while a “no” vote would continue to allow the governor to accept and use federal funds without that approval.

You can find a preview of your ballot at myvote.wi.gov.

Which groups support the amendments?

Republicans unanimously supported the amendments. GOP Rep. Robert Wittke of Racine, who introduced the second amendment, argued it would serve as an important check on executive power.

“It doesn't matter who's in the executive branch and who runs the legislature side, we believe it's just good governance that both branches of government have a say in this,” Wittke told the Journal Sentinel, adding that they’re looking to restore the power of the legislative branch.

Conservative think tank Badger Institute and the conservative Wisconsin Manufacturers & Commerce also supported the ballot questions.

The Badger Institute said it’s “good democratic government” for elected representatives to have a larger say in how federal dollars are allocated.

Which groups oppose the amendments?

Democrats endorsed a no to both amendments. A coalition of 16 voting rights groups, including the Wisconsin Democracy Campaign, Fair Maps Wisconsin and the League of Women Voters, urged voters to choose no as well. A “Vote No” website and tool guide said changes to the constitution would “add red tape and slow the government’s ability to respond to emergencies” and pointed out that current legislators were elected under gerrymandered voting maps.

“They're both terrible for the people of Wisconsin,” said Iuscely Flores, co-organizing director of Wisconsin Fair Maps. “We cannot let the legislature dilute the governor's power anymore. When we citizens elect him as governor, it is because we trust his decisions and how he plans to handle federal funds.”

Wisconsin Education Association Council, Wisconsin Association of Local Health Departments & Boards, Wisconsin Public Health Association and Wisconsin Conservation Voters also oppose the amendments on the basis that they would delay the allocation of federal funding during crises.

Where does the governor’s approval power come from?

The governor’s power to accept and allocate federal money without legislative approval comes from the 1930s when Wisconsin enacted the law in response to the Great Depression. It holds: “Whenever the United States government shall make available funds for the education, the promotion of health, the relief of indigency, the promotion of agriculture or for any other purpose other than the administration of the tribal or any individual funds of Wisconsin Indians, the governor on behalf of the state is authorized to accept the funds so made available.”

In the case of another crisis on the scale of the pandemic or an economic recession, the governor would no longer be authorized to accept emergency, unplanned federal government aid without legislative approval, slowing down the process of allocating funding to businesses and families, under the amendments.

Where did the debate over Evers' spending power come from?

The governor's broad power to allocate federal funds came into focus in 2020 when $5.7 billion in relief came to the state from federal laws known as the CARES Act, the American Rescue Plan Act, and the Consolidated Appropriations Act. That gave the governor sole discretion over at least $3.7 billion of that — a power Republican lawmakers unsuccessfully sought to diminish or remove in several pieces of legislation.

Throughout March and April of that year, lawmakers refused to come into session to make decisions about portions of the CARES Act that weren't under Evers' sole discretion. Federal relief via the CARES Act included provisions that would reimburse states for unemployment benefits as long as the state did not require the jobless to wait one week before they could receive aid. Wisconsin lawmakers suspended that one-week waiting period and aimed to receive benefits retroactively, despite being warned that Democratic members in the state's federal delegation would not honor the retroactive provision.

GOP legislative leaders didn't schedule floor sessions to pass the legislation until the week of April 13, three weeks after the federal CARES Act was passed. As a result, Wisconsin lost out on $25 million in federal funding to help pay for unemployment benefits during the coronavirus pandemic because Republicans who control the Legislature didn't act quickly enough.

A nonpartisan Legislative Audit Bureau in 2022 concluded Evers' administration should have disclosed more information about how state officials distributed billions of federal coronavirus relief funding across the state. They said officials did not provide auditors with information showing how state officials made decisions regarding where to distribute the funds Evers has discretion to spend.

Wittke cited the influx of federal spending into the state from pandemic-era bills in testimonies and interviews on the resolutions that led to the August amendment questions. He criticized Evers "sole discretion" over how pandemic relief was spent.

“If that is going to continue to be the case, the senator (Sen. Howard Marklein of Spring Green) and I believe that there should be checks and balances so that legislative oversight occurs," Wittke said.

Where does Gov. Tony Evers stand on the amendments?

Evers this month told reporters he encourages people to vote no on both amendments and said they were examples "of the Legislature overstepping" without giving him a chance to comment through the legislative process or veto the bill.

"Wisconsinites have not forgotten that Wisconsin Republicans led the least active full-time Legislature in America during the worst economic crisis in a decade and the worst public health crisis in a century," a spokesperson for Evers office told the Journal Sentinel.

"The results of the governor’s leadership making smart, strategic, and quick investments to stabilize Wisconsin’s economy speak for themselves, and those results would not have been possible if Republican legislators, who felt no apparent responsibility or urgency to respond to a statewide crisis, had control over Wisconsin’s federal aid."

If the referendums pass, when would the changes take effect, and how would they change the governor’s role?

Changes to state constitutions are generally proposed through legislative proposals, ballot initiatives or referendums. The questions require a simple majority to pass. The changes to the constitution would take place before the next legislative session in January 2025.

Though the proposed changes took shape following the pandemic, the amendments could affect routine allocation of federal funds, according to Wisconsin Policy Forum Vice President and Research Director Jason Stein.

Beyond putting some limits on governors' authority, the extent of the amendments' impacts is unclear and depends on how the Legislature and courts interpret them, according to Stein.

He said questions remain about whether the Legislature would allocate funds via a joint resolution, requiring votes in both the Assembly and Senate, or use legislative rules from other processes like a committee signing off on the allocation of federal funds. The latter option could work within short notice, while a joint resolution could come up against problems when the Legislature doesn't have floor sessions.

"It's important that voters understand that these amendments do not solely deal with this question of the pandemic funds, but with federal funds more broadly," Stein said. "We are talking about a broader question with this amendment, and so that when they make their decision, they should have that in mind."

Currently, federal funds are distributed through appropriations, existing line items in the state budget that include estimates for much the state can expect to receive for a specific proposal. Aid estimates may change as Congress appropriates more or less money than expected, funds returned from other states get redistributed or agencies receive funding from competitive grants.

Republicans and Evers have routinely disagreed over spending decisions throughout his term. The GOP Legislature curbed many of Evers' initiatives and thwarted his efforts to enact legislation through executive actions or special sessions. For example, the Legislature's Republican-led budget-writing committee made $6.8 billion in cuts to Evers' proposed 2023-25 spending plan, rejecting increases in spending on schools and federal funding to expand Medicaid in Wisconsin.

What are the other referendums in Wisconsin in the 2024 elections?

This year, five amendment questions will be brought to a referendum in total — the most in a single year since 1982, when 10 amendments were ratified.

In Wisconsin’s April 2 presidential primary election, voters passed two referendum questions on their ballots that asked about the use of private funds in election administration and the role of election officials.

Under the changes, clerks can't use private grants or donations to help them administer elections, and only election officials designated by law will be able to perform tasks to conduct elections.

Voters will see another election-related referendum question on their Nov. 5 ballot. One would clarify that only U.S. citizens are eligible to vote in Wisconsin, rather than "every U.S. citizen" 18 and older, which is how the state constitution is currently written. That proposal is also authored by Republicans.

Some states and cities have moved to allow non-citizens to vote in local elections, but state laws don't allow for that in Wisconsin. A Ukrainian woman was charged with election fraud after trying to vote in Mequon's school board election.

This article originally appeared on Milwaukee Journal Sentinel: Wisconsin election; what to know about referendum questions in primary