Utah Vote by Secret Ballot, Amendment A (2010)

From Ballotpedia
Revision as of 10:40, 24 October 2012 by Bailey Ludlam (Talk | contribs)

Jump to: navigation, search
Voting on Labor and Unions
Labor and unions.jpg
Ballot Measures
By state
By year
Not on ballot
Utah Constitution
Flag of Utah.png

The Utah Vote by Secret Ballot, Amendment A appeared on the November 2, 2010 statewide ballot as a legislatively-referred constitutional amendment where it was approved.[1]

The proposal called for a provision of the Utah Constitution relating to voting by secret ballot.[2]


On January 14 officials of the National Labor Relations Board said the measure, along with similar measures in Arizona, South Carolina and South Dakota, is unconstitutional and that the U.S. plans to invalidate the laws. Specifically, officials argue that the approved measures conflict with federal law and argue the case based on the Supremacy Clause of the United States Constitution.[3]

The current National Labor Relations Act can be read here.

The National Labor Relations Board stated on April 22, 2011 that it will file lawsuits against Arizona and South Dakota over the 2010 voter-approved state constitutional amendments. The NLRB did not file anything at that time, but did plan to do so soon after their announcement. The lawsuit was officially filed against Arizona on May 6, 2011, with South Dakota soon to follow.[4][5][6]

Legal challenges will not be filed against Utah and South Carolina yet, if at all, according to the agency's acting general counsel, in order "to conserve limited federal and state agency resources and taxpayer funds."

After facing the legal threats in January, the four attorneys general in South Carolina, Utah, Arizona, and South Dakota, entered into negotiations with the NLRB over the secret ballot initiatives. This occurred after the AG's wrote a letter on January 27, 2011 to the agency saying that they would "vigorously defend" the constitutional changes. However, these negotiations broke down during March 2011 after the AGs declined to sign confidentiality agreements.[7]

NLRB lawsuit legislation

During the week of June 1, 2011, legislation was introduced by U.S. Representative Jason Chaffetz (R-Utah) that aimed to stop the ability of the NLRB from suing states. The bill, HR 2118, specifically states that NLRB can sue individuals and companies, but cannot sue states challenging laws that they say conflict with the NLRA. According to Chaffetz: "H.R. 2118 ensures that states that choose to have pro-growth, right-to-work policies will not be intimidated and threatened by the NLRB. Deciding whether or not a state action violates federal law should be made by the DOJ, not a board of union friendly, politically motivated appointees."[8]

Election results

See also: 2010 ballot measure election results
Amendment A (Secret Ballot)
Approveda Yes 335,934 60.07%

Source: State of Utah Elections Office - 2010 general election results

Text of measure

This resolution proposes to amend the Utah Constitution to: include elections under state or federal law for public office, on an initiative or referendum, or to designate or authorize employee representation or individual representation among the elections that are required to be by secret ballot; and make technical changes.[2]


Although the Utah Constitution currently states, "All elections shall be by secret ballot," supporters argued that Amendment A was crucial to protecting against any future changes to that statement. "What is the cost of freedom in this country? What is the price to save something as sacred as a secret ballot?" said Rep. Carl Wimmer.[9]

"Decades ago there was abundant evidence of intimidation in other elections. We haven’t had intimidation in many, many decades in this country because we’ve had secret ballots. But we don’t want that to come back," said Mike Lee, an attorney for the Save Our Secret Ballot movement and Republican candidate for U.S. Senate.[10]

Utah Attorney General Mark Shurtleff, like most supporters, said the proposed measure would strengthen the state’s legal challenge to the federal law if Congress passes the choice act.[10]


Opponents argued that the proposed measure was rushed through the legislature. Additionally, they argued that lawmakers were simply fearful of a pending federal legislation that could make it easier to form a union.[9]

Utah AFL-CIO president Jim Judd called the amendment "a solution looking for a problem." Judd argued that the state's current constitution worked well. He pointed to development of at least three unions at private companies that formed in the last year and a half. The state constitution, he said, allowed for unionization by majority sign-up with the employer's consent.[11]

Media editorial positions

See also: Endorsements of Utah ballot measures, 2010


  • The Salt Lake Tribune opposed Amendment A. In an editorial, the board wrote, "We strongly agree that union organizing elections should be by secret ballot and that they should be administered by a neutral third party, the National Labor Relations Board. That’s the way it works today...However, because federal law already provides the secret ballot for union organizing elections, we see no reason to tinker with the Utah Constitution. Further, we do not believe that the Utah Constitution is the proper place to decide labor law. We would urge Utahns, therefore, to vote “against” Constitutional Amendment A."[12]

Path to the ballot

See also: How the Utah Constitution is amended
Labor and unions on the ballot in 2010
Nevada 2010 ballot measuresUtah 2010 ballot measuresColorado Fetal Personhood, Amendment 62 (2010)New Mexico 2010 ballot measuresArizona 2010 ballot measuresMontana 2010 ballot measuresCalifornia 2010 ballot measuresOregon 2010 ballot measuresWashington 2010 ballot measuresIdaho 2010 ballot measuresOklahoma 2010 ballot measuresKansas 2010 ballot measuresNebraska 2010 ballot measuresSouth Dakota 2010 ballot measuresNorth Dakota 2010 ballot measuresIowa 2010 ballot measuresMissouri 2010 ballot measuresArkansas 2010 ballot measuresLouisiana 2010 ballot measuresAlabama 2010 ballot measuresGeorgia 2010 ballot measuresFlorida 2010 ballot measuresSouth Carolina 2010 ballot measuresIllinois 2010 ballot measuresTennessee 2010 ballot measuresNorth Carolina 2010 ballot measuresIndiana 2010 ballot measuresOhio 2010 ballot measuresMaine 2010 ballot measuresVirginia 2010 ballot measuresMaryland 2010 ballot measuresMaryland 2010 ballot measuresRhode Island 2010 ballot measuresRhode Island 2010 ballot measuresMassachusetts 2010 ballot measuresMichigan 2010 ballot measuresMichigan 2010 ballot measuresAlaska Parental Notification Initiative, Ballot Measure 2 (2010)Hawaii 2010 ballot measuresCertified, labor, 2010 Map.png

According to Section 1, Article XXIII, a two-thirds vote was necessary in the state legislature to place the proposed amendment before the state's voters.

Similar measures

The same initiative was filed in Arizona, Arkansas, Missouri and Nevada. In 2010, legislation also known as the Employee Free Choice Act was pending before the United States Congress that would remove that requirement from federal law.

See also

Suggest a link


External links

Additional reading