Wisconsin voters will face three Republican-led constitutional amendments on the Nov. 3 general-election ballot, touching the governor’s budget powers, access to places of worship during emergencies and discrimination in government and public education. Republican lawmakers say the measures would restrain government overreach and protect equal treatment and religious liberty. Democrats and other opponents argue the amendments are unnecessary, could weaken emergency response and threaten programs intended to address longstanding inequities. Constitutional amendments must pass the Legislature in identical form during two consecutive two-year sessions before going to voters. Republicans have increasingly used that process during Democratic Gov. Tony Evers’ tenure, allowing issues to reach the ballot without requiring the governor’s approval. Including the three questions this year, voters have considered 12 amendments during Evers’ nearly eight years in office and approved seven. In April 2025, nearly 63% approved a constitutional requirement for photo identification in voting. Evers has urged voters to reject all three measures. Democratic gubernatorial nominee David Crowley, the Milwaukee County executive, also opposes them. Republican nominee U.S. Rep. Tom Tiffany supports all three. “Most people are fine with what it is,” Evers said while encouraging voters to vote no. Here is what each amendment would do. **Limiting the governor’s partial veto** The first question would bar the governor from using the partial veto to create or increase a tax or fee, or authorize such an increase. Republicans advanced the amendment after Evers used his veto authority in the 2023-25 state budget to increase school districts’ revenue limits by $325 annually for the next 400 years. The Wisconsin Supreme Court’s liberal majority upheld the veto in 2025 after it was challenged in court. The revenue-limit increase does not itself impose a specific property tax. It raises the amount school districts may receive through a combination of state aid and property taxes. Local school boards decide whether to levy the maximum amount, although most historically have done so. The state could reduce local property taxes by providing more state aid, but that approach has been uncommon. Sen. Chris Kapenga, R-Delafield, who shepherded the amendment through the Legislature, said it would reinforce the balance among the legislative, executive and judicial branches. “It’s always about separation of powers,” Kapenga said. Supporters include Wisconsin Property Taxpayers, Americans for Prosperity, the Wisconsin Realtors Association and Wisconsin Manufacturers and Commerce. The Wisconsin Education Association Council and the League of Women Voters registered against it. Crowley said he would oppose the amendment and would consider using the partial veto if elected governor. Tiffany said no governor should have the power to raise taxes or fees “with the stroke of a pen.” **Protecting worship gatherings during emergencies** The second question would amend the state’s religious-liberty provision to prohibit Wisconsin or local governments from closing places of worship or banning gatherings there during a state of emergency, including a public-health emergency. The proposal grew out of the COVID-19 pandemic, when Evers’ Safer at Home order limited religious gatherings to fewer than 10 people while allowing certain businesses, including liquor stores, to remain open. The state Supreme Court struck down that order in 2020. State Rep. Ron Tusler, R-Harrison, who led the amendment during the 2025 legislative session, said people may need communal worship most during a crisis. Supporters include Pro-Life Wisconsin and Wisconsin Family Action. The League of Women Voters opposes the measure, saying people could continue to worship individually at home during an emergency and that the government must retain the ability to protect public health. Crowley said leaders need flexibility to make difficult decisions under extreme circumstances. **Banning certain government DEI policies** The third question would add a constitutional provision barring state and local governments, public schools and other public institutions from discriminating against or granting preferential treatment to individuals or groups based on race, sex, color, ethnicity or national origin in public employment, education, contracting or administration. State Rep. Dave Murphy, R-Hortonville, said the proposal was influenced by a 2023 U.S. Supreme Court decision rejecting race-conscious admissions at Harvard and the University of North Carolina. He said programs for disadvantaged residents could continue if they were open to everyone and did not exclude people based on the listed characteristics. The Wisconsin Institute for Law and Liberty supports the amendment, which its deputy counsel, Dan Lennington, said would end discriminatory diversity, equity and inclusion programs. The conservative law firm had also successfully challenged a minority-student financial-aid program before the state Supreme Court. Opponents, including the American Civil Liberties Union of Wisconsin and the League of Women Voters, warn that the measure could restrict programs designed to address racial disparities and assist historically excluded communities. Crowley said it could affect efforts serving older adults, veterans and people with disabilities, as well as residents of different races, genders and religions. The three amendments come as Wisconsin’s 2026 gubernatorial campaign is taking shape. Crowley called the measures a distraction from the state’s affordability problems, while Tiffany said they would protect taxpayers, religious institutions and equal treatment regardless of which party controls the governor’s office.