MILWAUKEE — Whether you’re early voting now or waiting until Aug. 13 to head to the polls, Wisconsin voters will be asked two questions about changing the state’s constitution.

Both are wordy and probably confusing with terms like “appropriation” and “allocation” tossed around. Basically, you, the voter, are being asked to weigh in on who should have power of the purse when it comes to spending federal money. 

What You Need To Know

  • During the upcoming Aug. 13 primary election, Wisconsin voters will weigh in on two constitutional amendments on the ballot that, if approved, would take away the governor’s power to spend federal money unilaterally

  • Wisconsin governors have been able to accept and spend federal funds without the Legislature’s approval since 1931

  • The state constitution has been successfully amended nearly 150 times and as recently as April when voters approved banning the use of private money to fund elections

The simplest way to explain the constitutional amendments is a “no” vote on both questions keeps things the same with the governor having unilateral power to decide how federal money is spent in Wisconsin—something that’s been the case since 1931.

Whereas, voting “yes” would change the Wisconsin Constitution and add lawmaker involvement to the process.

Question 1

The first question asks whether the state constitution should ban the Legislature from delegating its ability to approve how money is spent, otherwise called an “appropriation.”

A “yes” vote would add that ban to the Wisconsin Constitution, while a “no” vote would not add it.

Question 2

The second question asks whether the Wisconsin Constitution should ban the governor from being able to spend federal money on behalf of the state without first getting approval from lawmakers in the Legislature.

A “yes” vote on this question means the governor would need approval in the form of a joint resolution from the Legislature before spending federal money given to the state, while a “no” vote would let the governor keep accepting and spending federal money however they see fit.

Why am I being asked these questions?

The proposals stem from the COVID-19 pandemic when Gov. Tony Evers had almost complete control over how to spend billions of dollars in federal aid.

Those in favor of the proposals, namely Republicans, say the changes would make sure lawmakers have a voice in how federal funds are spent should a situation like that happen again—a matter of checks and balances.

Those opposed to the questions, including Gov. Evers, a Democrat, say, if approved, it could be more difficult for governors, regardless of party, to deal with future emergencies promptly, such as a health crisis or natural disaster, especially if there’s gridlock and disagreement—somewhat of a separation of powers view.

Related Stories