This post originally appeared at https://wifamilycouncil.org/radio/reining-in-veto-power/
2025 | Week of August 4 | Radio Transcript #1630
When Governor Tony Evers wielded his infamous partial veto in the 2023–25 state budget—stretching a modest two-year $325 per-pupil revenue limit increase for public schools across the state into the year 2425—he set into motion a constitutional and fiscal train wreck. Now, Wisconsin legislators are rightly moving to undo that veto and restore legislative authority over school funding. This is about more than policy; it’s about separation of powers, tax accountability, and rightful stewardship over education spending.
In the 2023 legislative budget, the legislature approved a $325 per pupil increase only for two years—specifically the 2023–24 and 2024–25 school years. But Governor Evers struck out the “20” and the hyphen in “2024–25,” converting the phrase into “2023–2425,” thereby locking in that increase every year for more than 400 years. Evers signed the budget, and the result was a permanent annual authority to raise revenue limits by $325 per student indefinitely.
A number of Wisconsin Republican lawmakers have proposed legislation to revoke the governor’s four-century funding mandate. They rightly argue that property tax decisions should remain with local voters and school boards, not be locked in by a governor wielding line-item veto authority.
In April 2025, the now-liberal Wisconsin Supreme Court upheld Governor Evers’ veto in a 4–3 decision. The majority, led by Justice Jill Karofsky, ruled that the governor did not exceed his constitutional veto power, emphasizing that Wisconsin’s executive may strike digits or punctuation—even if it results in a dramatically altered policy timeline—and that the constitution does not limit such power based on how much policy change is effected. In our opinion, the ruling wrongly affirms that the “partial veto remains legally valid in this context.
From a conservative, family-values viewpoint, this entire incident raises some grave concerns. For starters, unchecked executive power. The governor unilaterally rewrote legislative intent, extending a short-term increase into a multigenerational taxpayer mandate. And what about the potential property tax burden, not to mention the erosion of legislative accountability. Under the court’s logic, any legislator could write bills in ways that invite creative veto manipulations.
The new bill under consideration would restore the original legislative timeline, limiting the $325 per pupil increase to the 2023–24 and 2024–25 school years only, as originally approved. It would also reaffirm that legislative intent—not executive reinterpretation—governs how long taxpayers fund any policy. Placing that decision-making back with elected representatives and local citizens aligns with representative government and fiscal restraint.
The governor’s veto created a multi century mandate—not just for state lawmakers but for taxpayers for generations to come. That is not stewardship; it’s an imposition. Furthermore, the ruling sets a troubling precedent. When legislators draft spending bills, they must now anticipate that a governor might weaponize the partial veto to rewrite end dates, funding levels, or program durations. It places a premium on overly cautious drafting and could chill legislative boldness.
To move forward in a positive way, the legislature first needs to pass this new proposal that limits the funding increase in question to only two school years. Then the legislature should work to limit future misuse of the partial veto by drafting budget sections in plain, unmanipulable language and/or pursuing a constitutional amendment to curtail executive authority to alter numeric timelines.
This is not about whether $325 per-pupil per-year is good or bad. It’s about principle. The governor should not have the unilateral power to turn a temporary legislative measure into a centuries-long obligation. The Wisconsin Supreme Court’s split decision shines a spotlight on the need for legislative reform. We dare not just resign ourselves to executive overreach.
The great irony of this proposal to undo the 400-year debacle is that should the bill pass, it will be subjected to the governor’s veto pen. But even knowing this, the state legislature should do what it can to reaffirm the primacy of legislative intent, the rights of taxpayers, and the integrity of our constitutional order. We must not allow a governor’s creative veto pen to bind future generations to spending that was never intended. It’s time to correct the record—and reclaim the role of elected lawmakers.
For Wisconsin Family Council, this is Julaine Appling reminding you that God, through the prophet Hosea, said, “My people are destroyed for lack of knowledge.”
Haylee Lawver