Dems propose simplifying ballot questions that amend Wisconsin Constitution

In the November election in Wisconsin, a question on the ballot asked voters if the state’s constitution should be amended to order that “only” American citizens age 18 or older may vote.

Voters approved it with an overwhelming 79%.

But the state constitution already mandated that voters must be adult citizens.

The constitutional amendment changed who can vote in Wisconsin from “Every United States citizen age 18 or older” to “Only a United States citizen age 18 or older.”

The referendum question could have led some voters to think Wisconsin did not already prohibit noncitizen voting, argued the State Democracy Research Initiative at the University of Wisconsin Law School. 

In March, state Rep. Lee Snodgrass (D-Appleton), state Sen. Jodi Habush Sinykin (D-Whitefish Bay) and state Rep. Deb Andraca (D-Whitefish Bay) proposed legislation to ensure ballot questions to change the state constitution are written in plain language and clearly indicate whether any part of the amendment already exists in state statute. 

State law already mandates that referendum questions be written concisely, but it does not require they be easily understandable for the general public. 

Between 2015 and 2023, Wisconsin voters had the chance to weigh in on five constitutional amendments. In 2024 alone, voters saw another five amendments on their ballots, and the top Republican in the state has called for more. 

“Over the years,” Andraca said in an interview, “we have seen these questions coming more and more, and it’s usually an attempt to go around the governor.”

Anything the Wisconsin State Senate and Assembly do by legislation can be vetoed.

“We have seen an escalating use of constitutional amendments since the election of Gov. Evers,” said Anthony Chergosky, a political science professor at UW–La Crosse. So “the context of the legislation is interesting.”

In Wisconsin, both chambers of the state Legislature must vote to pass a joint resolution in consecutive legislative sessions amending the state constitution. If successful, the amendment goes to the voters for their approval or rejection. Amendments are not subject to the governor’s veto or signature.

Republicans have held majorities in the Legislature since 2011 and Evers has consistently threatened to use his veto pen since his election in 2018. And in a political atmosphere of divided government and polarization, they have turned to constitutional amendments, Chergosky explained.

After voters rejected two constitutional amendments in the state primary election last August, Assembly Speaker Robin Vos (R-Rochester) told The Cap Times that the state Legislature should “double down” and continue to add amendments to ballots. 

Vos and his office did not answer questions for this story despite repeated requests.

Bringing constitutional amendments to voters can provide a way to “get a legislative victory on a topic without having to negotiate with the governor, without having to compromise,” said Dane County Clerk Scott McDonell.

McDonell, who has served in that position since 2013, oversees elections across the deep blue county. It’s not uncommon for his office to receive phone calls and complaints from voters about what’s on their ballots, he said. 

If voters are confused about how to vote because of unclear language, it can obscure the larger takeaways from the election. 

“What meaning does it have?” McDonell noted.

About 23 states have some sort of plain language requirements for their ballot measures, and in Wisconsin, ballot measures require an average of 18 years of education to comprehend, according to Ballotpedia analyses.

About 33% of Wisconsin residents 25 years and older have at least a bachelor’s degree, according to the National Institute on Minority Health and Health Disparities.

Since 1848, state voters have seen 206 amendments appear on their ballots, according to Madeline Kasper, a managing analyst with the Wisconsin Legislative Reference Bureau. Of those amendments, 152 were ratified. 

“Constitutional amendments can have long-lasting and often surprising implications,” Chergosky noted, pointing to a 1930 amendment that gave the governor the power to partially veto appropriations bills.

Amendments, Chergosky continued, are challenging to reverse and constrain the courts because constitutional interpretation is a “different ball game than statutory interpretation,” he said. “The stakes are high when it comes to changing the constitution. And we have seen that changes to the Wisconsin State Constitution have had significant effects.”

Like all legislation, the Democrats’ bill on referendums must get approved at the committee level before getting a full vote in the state Legislature, both of which the GOP majority are unlikely to facilitate.

“Republicans control what does and does not come to the floor for a vote,” Chergosky said about the bill’s chances. “The fate of this legislation will be determined by Republican leaders in the legislature.”

The state Legislature sees about 1,500 to 2,000 bills introduced in every two-year session. About a quarter of them will become law, according to a state guide.

The Badger Project is a nonpartisan, citizen-supported journalism nonprofit in Wisconsin.

This article first appeared on The Badger Project and is republished here under a Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.