In the biennial budget, Wisconsin Governor Tony Evers made a significant and controversial use of his partial veto power, extending school funding for 400 years. This unprecedented move has drawn widespread attention and ushered in a legal battle, highlighting the complexities and potential consequences of the state’s unique gubernatorial veto powers.
The Veto Explained
Governor Evers employed his partial veto power to alter a budget provision initially intended to increase per-pupil spending by $325 for the 2023-24 and 2024-25 school years. By striking out the “20” in 2024 and the hyphen between 2024-25 in the budget text, Evers extended this increase through the year 2425, effectively ensuring an annual increase in school funding for the next 402 years. This maneuver leverages Wisconsin’s unusually broad partial veto authority, allowing governors to modify budget bills by removing individual words, numbers, or punctuation marks. Wisconsin Institute of Law and Liberty has a lengthier explanation of the veto, and its consequences here.
Legal Challenge by Wisconsin Manufacturers and Commerce (WMC)
In response to Evers’ veto, Wisconsin Manufacturers and Commerce (WMC), the state’s largest business lobby, along with taxpayers Jeffery LeMieux and David DeValk, filed a petition with the Wisconsin Supreme Court. They argue that the governor overstepped his authority, asserting that such long-term financial commitments should be decided by the legislature and voters, not unilaterally by the governor. Nathan Kane, Deputy Director of WMC’s Litigation Center, stated, “The law is clear. Voters and their elected legislators are the ones empowered to increase taxes, no one else.”
The lawsuit aims to bypass lower courts and directly address the state’s highest court, challenging the constitutionality of the veto. WMC contends that the Wisconsin Constitution forbids the governor from altering individual digits to create a new year, thus overstepping his authority and imposing undue financial burdens on taxpayers.
On Monday June 17, Wisconsin Supreme Court has accepted the case.
Tax Consequences for Wisconsin Citizens
The financial implications of Evers’ veto are significant. By ensuring a continuous increase in school funding, the veto will likely lead to higher property taxes as local governments seek to meet the funding requirements. Rick Esenberg, Director of the Wisconsin Institute for Law and Liberty, criticized the veto, calling it “a ridiculous way to make law” and predicting that it will impose a heavy tax burden on Wisconsin residents.
Opponents argue that while the veto secures long-term funding for education, it does so at the expense of taxpayers who will bear the cost of these increases for centuries. The perpetual nature of the funding increase ties the hands of future legislators and governors, limiting their ability to make budgetary adjustments based on changing economic conditions and priorities.
Historical Context and Future Implications
Wisconsin’s partial veto power has long been a tool for gubernatorial creativity in budget matters. However, Evers’ 400-year veto is one of the most extreme uses of this power, raising questions about its limits and the need for potential reforms.
As the legal challenge progresses, it will set a precedent for the extent of gubernatorial power in Wisconsin and possibly lead to further amendments to curb such expansive vetoes. The outcome of this case will not only impact current policy but also shape the political landscape for future administrations.