Wisconsin Senate Bill SJR11

Wisconsin 2025-2026 Regular Session

• Introduced: 2/21/25
• Refer: 2/21/25

Caption

Restricting the governor’s partial veto authority to only rejecting entire bill sections of an appropriation bill that are capable of separate enactment and reducing appropriations in a bill (first consideration).

Impact

If adopted, SJR11 would place substantial restrictions on the potency of the governor's veto power. Proponents of the bill argue that it will create a clearer legislative process and ensure that appropriations are made intact, without the risk of the governor altering the intent of legislative decisions through selective vetoes. This amendment would help maintain the integrity of appropriations and diminish the possibility of executive overreach in the legislative domain, thereby reinforcing the legislature's role in budgetary matters.

Summary

Senate Joint Resolution 11 (SJR11) proposes a constitutional amendment to amend the Wisconsin Constitution concerning the partial veto authority of the governor. The resolution aims to limit the governor's ability to exercise a partial veto over appropriation bills by allowing only the rejection of entire sections of bills that can stand alone as complete laws. This change signifies a major shift from the current approach, where the governor has broader powers in modifying specific phrases or sentences within bills, which has raised concerns about the creation of laws through what some consider a 'line-item veto' approach.

Contention

The introduction of SJR11 is likely to spark considerable debate among lawmakers and stakeholders. Supporters of the bill view the current situation as fraught with potential for misuse of veto powers, which can lead to unintended policy changes that sidestep the legislative will. Conversely, opponents may argue that the flexibility in the veto power has historically allowed governors to address specific priorities and concerns without requiring a complete legislative overhaul. Hence, restricting this authority could limit the governor's responsiveness to evolving state needs and diminish the executive branch's influence in fiscal matters.