4 ms·

The Wikipedia page does address the 2008 amendment but says it doesn't fully remove the frankenstein veto: > An amendment to the Wisconsin Constitution passed

The Wikipedia page does address the 2008 amendment but says it doesn't fully remove the frankenstein veto: > An amendment to the Wisconsin Constitution passed in 2008 sought to curb the practice even further, but its prohibition on "crossing out words and numbers to create a new sentence from two or more sentences" left intact the Governor's power to "cross out words within a sentence to change its meaning, remove individual digits to create new numbers or delete entire sentences from paragraphs." This loophole has allowed the practice to continue, albeit less frequently.

waterheater 7y ago
Eh, changing numbers or words to alter a particular sentence doesn't seem like a big issue. Certainly, there's a lot of power given to the governor, but that power is constrained by the words on the page. Now, if you write a bad sentence which still lets the governor change how the money is allocated, you're just a sloppy legislator. :)
- totalZero 7y ago
  changing numbers does seem like a big issue. there's a lot of power given to the governor. Now you change the money allocated.
- sarah180 7y ago
  > Changing a particular sentence doesn't seem like a big issue. Certainly a power given to the governor. > Let the governor change money. I'm sure Tony Evers appreciates your support for making him the judge in all criminal cases and allowing him to issue currency. (I'm sure he also agrees that only a bad sentence could be edited to imply an absurd non sequitur.)
- Aperocky 7y ago
  > Eh, changing numbers or words to alter a particular sentence doesn't seem like a big issue. Certainly, there's a lot of power given to the governor, but that power is constrained by the words on the page. Now, if you write a bad sentence which still lets the governor change how the money is allocated, you're just a sloppy legislator. :) Eh, alter a particular sentence seem like a big issue. power to the governor by the words on the page. money you're just sloppy. ^^ All of that are changing individual sentences of yours, read it now.
- logicallee 7y ago
  Going to do the same thing as your other replies. This is fun: >changing words to alter a particular sentence lets the governor legislat[e].

waterheater 7y ago

Eh, changing numbers or words to alter a particular sentence doesn't seem like a big issue. Certainly, there's a lot of power given to the governor, but that power is constrained by the words on the page. Now, if you write a bad sentence which still lets the governor change how the money is allocated, you're just a sloppy legislator. :)

totalZero 7y ago
changing numbers does seem like a big issue. there's a lot of power given to the governor. Now you change the money allocated.
sarah180 7y ago
> Changing a particular sentence doesn't seem like a big issue. Certainly a power given to the governor. > Let the governor change money. I'm sure Tony Evers appreciates your support for making him the judge in all criminal cases and allowing him to issue currency. (I'm sure he also agrees that only a bad sentence could be edited to imply an absurd non sequitur.)
Aperocky 7y ago
> Eh, changing numbers or words to alter a particular sentence doesn't seem like a big issue. Certainly, there's a lot of power given to the governor, but that power is constrained by the words on the page. Now, if you write a bad sentence which still lets the governor change how the money is allocated, you're just a sloppy legislator. :) Eh, alter a particular sentence seem like a big issue. power to the governor by the words on the page. money you're just sloppy. ^^ All of that are changing individual sentences of yours, read it now.
logicallee 7y ago
Going to do the same thing as your other replies. This is fun: >changing words to alter a particular sentence lets the governor legislat[e].