Become part of the movement for unbiased, accessible election information. Donate today.

Changes in 2025 to laws governing ballot measures

From Ballotpedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Laws governing ballot measures
BallotLaw final.png
State
• Laws governing state initiative processes
• Laws governing state recall processes
• Changes to ballot measure law in 2025
• Difficulty analysis of changes to laws governing ballot measures
• Analysis of 2025 changes to laws governing ballot measures
Local
• Laws governing local ballot measures
Learn about Ballotpedia's election legislation tracker.
2026 »
« 2024

As of September 23, 2025, 73 bills had been enacted into law across 23 states concerning ballot measures, initiatives, veto referendums, referrals, local ballot measures, and recall elections.

This total includes seven constitutional amendments that require voter approval for ratification. In addition to the 73 enacted bills, six other bills were passed by legislatures but vetoed by governors.

In total, Ballotpedia tracked 605 legislative proposals on these topics in 2025.

On this page, you will find:

Legislation approved in 2025 by legislative vote

Are you aware of a bill related to ballot measures or recall that was enacted during a 2025 legislative session that is not listed here, email us at editor@ballotpedia.org.

The table below presents a list of bills passed in 2025, along with the percentages of Democrats and Republicans who voted in favor of these bills:

Note: Bills with red-colored margins indicate a margin of 50 percentage points or more where Republican support for the legislation exceeds Democratic support. Bills with blue-colored margins indicate a margin of 50 percentage points or more where Democratic support for the legislation exceeds Republican support.


Partisanship of ballot measure-related bills, 2025
State Bill D Support (%) R Support (%) Margin Description
Arizona SB 1040 100.0% 100.0% 0.0% Change recall process requirements, including extending the signature review period from 60 to 75 days, lengthening the scheduling timeline from 90 to 120 days, and modifying petition, signature, and deadline requirements
Arizona HB 2515 (Vetoed) 8.1% 100.0% R+91.9% Change taxation notice requirements for school districts, community colleges, and special taxing districts to include estimated taxes for homes valued at $100,000 and $400,000
Arizona SB 1463 (Vetoed) 0.0% 100.0% R+100.0% Require initiated constitutional amendment petitions to contain a summary of statutes that may be affected
Arizona HB 1534 (Vetoed) 0.0% 100.0% R+100.0% Transfer responsibility for preparing ballot language to the legislative council for statewide measures and to local officials for local measures, and limit ballot titles to 50 words with a clear summary of the effect of a yes and no vote
Arkansas SB 102 47.6% 99.1% R+51.4% Apply state initiative requirements to local option election petitions, including requiring background checks, requiring paid canvassers to be United States citizens, and prohibiting pay-per-signature for local option election petitions
Arkansas SB 188 100.0% 100.0% 0.0% Require sponsors to submit the full text and ballot language of a proposed initiative to the secretary of state within five days of the attorney general's approval; requires the secretary of state to post this information on its website until the day after the next general election
Arkansas SB 207 0.0% 88.5% R+88.5% Require canvassers to inform petition signers, verbally or in writing, that petition fraud is a criminal offense
Arkansas SB 208 0.0% 93.2% R+93.2% Require a photo ID to be presented to a canvasser prior to signing an initiative petition
Arkansas SB 209 0.0% 84.7% R+84.7% Allow the secretary of state to disqualify signatures collected by a canvasser upon finding, by a preponderance of evidence, that the canvasser violated state canvassing laws
Arkansas SB 210 0.0% 81.4% R+81.4% Require a petition signer to read the ballot title in the presence of a canvasser or have the ballot title read aloud to them by the canvasser prior to signing a petition
Arkansas SB 211 0.0% 89.0% R+89.0% Require canvassers to submit a sworn affidavit in order to have signatures counted to the secretary of state certifying that the canvasser complied with all laws related to canvassing, perjury, forgery, and fraudulent practices in signature gathering
Arkansas SB 351 100.0% 100.0% 0.0% Require ballot question campaign signage, literature, and other materials to include a Paid for by statement identifying the committee responsible for the expenditure
Arkansas SB 551 22.7% 87.5% R+64.8% Require signers of local option election petitions to read or have the ballot title read to them in the presence of a canvasser, require canvassers to inform signers that petition fraud is a criminal offense, and require canvassers to submit a sworn affidavit confirming compliance
Arkansas SB 584 40.9% 93.2% R+52.3% Require sponsors and canvassers to file documentation with both the county clerk and the secretary of state, and require local initiative or referendum petitions to display the full ballot title at the top of each signature page
Arkansas HB 1221 9.5% 97.0% R+87.5% Provide that signatures and certified ballot language for an initiative or referendum petition expire on the date of the next general election
Arkansas HB 1222 0.0% 85.3% R+85.3% Allow the attorney general to reject proposed initiatives if the attorney general finds that the proposal is in conflict with the U.S. Constitution or federal laws; prohibit sponsors from filing conflicting or duplicate measures
Arkansas HB 1574 4.8% 96.2% R+91.4% Require paid canvassers to be residents of the state and to live in the state
Arkansas HB 1637 4.8% 100.0% R+95.2% Require fiscal impact statements for initiative petitions and legislatively referred constitutional amendments and require fiscal impact statements to be included on the ballot
Arkansas HB 1713 8.7% 92.6% R+83.9% Prohibit the attorney general from certifying an initiative's ballot title if it is above an eighth-grade reading level as determined by the Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level formula as it existed on January 1, 2025
Arkansas HB 1837 72.2% 100.0% R+27.8% Prohibit foreign nationals from contributing directly or indirectly to ballot measure committees and require committees to affirm no prohibited funds were received
Arkansas HB 1933 43.5% 93.3% R+49.7% Establish a process for recalling school district board of directors
Colorado HB 1327 100.0% 0.0% D+100.0% Change how initiative drafts are submitted and how the Colorado Title Board sets titles and hearings, require fiscal summaries for tax-related measures to include maximum revenue estimates, and add signature-gathering reporting requirements
Florida HB 1205 0.0% 100.0% R+100.0% Change petition formatting requirements, prohibit a petition circulator from possessing more than 25 signed petition forms at one time, require circulators to register with the state; direct elections supervisors to forward instances in which 25% or more of petition signatures are invalidated for investigation by the Office of Election Crimes and Security, among other changes
Idaho HB 0377 100.0% 100.0% 0.0% Require recall petitions for city council members in cities that elect council members based on districts to include at least 20% of the number of registered voters in the last election
Idaho SB 1117 100.0% 100.0% 0.0% Requires a new fiscal impact statement for initiatives if proponents modify the initiative after receiving the certificate of review and initial fiscal impact statement
Idaho HJR 4 0.0% 98.9% R+98.9% Provide that only the state legislature has the power to legalize marijuana, narcotics, or psychoactive substances and prohibit citizen initiatives to legalize these substances
Indiana HB 1467 88.9% 100.0% R+11.1% Prohibit foreign nationals from directly or indirectly making a contribution or expenditure to influence an election on a ballot measure
Indiana SB 1 8.3% 94.3% R+86.0% Require bond referendums to be placed on general election ballots; change ballot language requirements for controlled project, school operating, and school public safety referendums
Kansas HB 2106 44.4% 100.0% R+55.6% Prohibit contributions or expenditures from a foreign national made to support or oppose a constitutional amendment
Kentucky HB 45 18.2% 100.0% R+81.8% Prohibit foreign contributions or expenditures related to ballot measure campaigns and require paid for by statements on political communications advocating for or against ballot measures
Louisiana HB 592 91.2% 99.0% R+7.8% Require the secretary of state to review proposed ballot questions for length, formatting, and question form, and make the submitting entity responsible for ensuring simple, unbiased, and concise language
Louisiana HB 693 50.0% 74.2% R+24.2% Prohibit foreign national contributions related to ballot measure campaigns, among other changes
Maine LD 1635 Voice vote Voice vote N/A Permit municipal officers to initiate a recount for a local ballot measure without a voter petition if the margin of victory or defeat is less than 1% of all votes cast
Maryland HB 322 100.0% 23.5% D+76.5% Change the process for municipalities to request inclusion of offices and questions on statewide ballots and require certification that local deadlines and procedures align with state petition and certification deadlines
Missouri HJR 3 0.0% 93.7% R+93.7% Require voter approval of citizen-initiated constitutional amendments in each congressional district, rather than statewide, among other changes
Missouri SB 22 1.8% 99.2% R+97.5% Extend the deadline for final rulings on ballot measure challenges from 56 to 70 days before the election, increase the word limit for legislative referral summaries from 50 to 100 words, allow signature collection after ballot language certification even if challenged, and protect signatures collected before a title is altered
Missouri SB 152 10.9% 100.0% R+89.1% Prohibit ballot measure committees from using funds from foreign nationals
Montana SB 226 90.0% 98.9% R+8.9% Require initiative petition signatures to be submitted to county election administrators on a staggered schedule within defined windows based on when signatures were collected
Montana SB 11 100.0% 100.0% 0.0% Revise local ballot measure laws by setting petition serial number and formatting requirements, requiring yes and no statements on petitions, and requiring signature gatherer affidavits affirming signature validity and signer awareness
Montana HB 201 3.3% 93.2% R+89.8% Require paid signature gatherers to verbally state to signers and wear a badge including their name, the state they legally reside in, and that they are a paid signature gatherer
Montana HB 179 10% 96.7% R+86.7% Prohibit foreign nationals from directly or indirectly making a contribution or expenditure to influence an election on a ballot measure
Montana HB 818 30.0% 100.0% R+70.0% Provide that signing an initiative petition does not reactivate active voter status
New Hampshire HB 228 Voice vote Voice vote N/A Establish a process for designating a primary petitioner in written applications, and require the town meeting moderator to allow the primary petitioner at least 10 minutes to introduce the article
North Dakota SB 2230 100.0% 95.1% D+4.9% Require the secretary of state to send all active voters, at least 45 days before an election, materials on each ballot measure including an objective summary, fiscal impact summary, origin (citizen-initiated or legislatively referred), and an objective analysis of a yes and no vote
North Dakota HB 1204 86.7% 89.3% R+2.7% Make it a class A misdemeanor to publish untrue, misleading, or deceptive political advertisements or news releases about a ballot measure through text, phone, social media, or other commercial media
North Dakota HB 1482 50.0% 100.0% R+50.0% Require county, city, school district, and park district elections to be held on statewide primary or regular election dates, change the timeline for other municipal elections from 20 to 64 days after the resolution is passed, and count spoiled or blank ballots in local bond elections as no votes
North Dakota SCR 4007 25.0% 79.8% R+54.8% Create a single-subject rule for constitutional initiatives and legislatively referred constitutional amendments and prohibit the secretary of state from approving initiatives for circulation that contain more than one subject
North Dakota SB 2269 100.0% 73.1% D+26.9% Provide a recall process for removing elected members of the governing body of a city, park district, or school board
North Dakota SB 2324 71.4% 97.6% R+26.1% Allow counties and cities to amend home rule charters by resolution, without a public vote, when a charter provision is preempted, superseded, or invalidated by legislation or court order
North Dakota HCR 3003 6.3% 78.9% R+72.6% Require constitutional amendments initiated by citizens or referred by the state legislature to receive a 60% vote to be adopted
Oklahoma SB 1027 0.0% 94.6% R+94.6% Establish proposition gist requirements, require signature gatherers to be state residents, ban pay-per-signature, and limit the number of signatures that can be collected from a single county
South Dakota SB 13 100.0% 100.0% 0.00% Provide that local ballot measures that are approved become effective the day after the official canvass of the election is completed
South Dakota HB 1063 100.0% 100.0% 0.00% Require the Legislative Research Council to review fiscal notes for South Dakota ballot measures after they are certified for the ballot and require the fiscal note to be updated by August 1 before the election if the previous fiscal note contains inaccurate or outdated information
South Dakota SJR 5003 12.5% 97.8% R+85.3% Require a 60% majority vote to approve constitutional amendments (rather than 50%+1)
South Dakota HB 1093 11.1% 72.9% R+61.9% Require measures to enter an agreement or issue capital outlay certificates to appear on the ballot in March, June, or November rather than at the next regular election
South Dakota HB 1169 (Vetoed) 0.0% 85.4% R+85.4% Establish a distribution requirement of at least 5% of votes cast for governor in each senate district and require petition sheets to include the senate district
South Dakota HB 1184 0.0% 83.0% R+83.0% Change the signature deadline for initiatives from the first Tuesday in May to the first Tuesday in February, thereby shortening the signature collection time from 24 months to 21 months
South Dakota SB 1256 25.0% 84.2% R+59.2% Require valid signatures from 5% of all qualified electors, rather than 5% of votes cast for governor, to qualify a statutory initiative or veto referendum, and require petition signers to provide their name, signature, registered address, and date of signing
South Dakota SB 92 100.0% 100.0% 0.0% Require the director of the Legislative Research Council and the secretary of state to review filed initiatives to ensure compliance with the state's single-subject rule
South Dakota SB 91 66.7% 100.0% R+33.3% Require initiative petitions to include the full text and ballot language in 14-point font for statutory and veto referendum measures and 16-point font for constitutional measures, and require veto referendum signatures to be filed within 90 days after session adjournment with a sworn affidavit verifying sufficient valid signatures
South Dakota SB 106 100.0% 100.0% 0.0% Require initiative petition sponsors to be registered voters in South Dakota
Tennessee SB 525 0.0% 100.0% R+100.0% Require a three-judge panel to hear challenges alleging a proposed charter amendment violates the constitution or state law, and prohibit such amendments from being placed on the ballot
Tennessee SB 626 3.7% 100.0% R+96.3% Allow county election commission to notify sponsors of a recall, referendum, or initiative petition of a defect in the petition and allow it to be cured prior to certification
Tennessee HB 888 27.3% 100.0% R+72.7% Prohibit foreign nationals from directly or indirectly making a contribution or expenditure to influence an election on a ballot measure
Texas HB 2253 98.6% 83.8% D+14.8% Allow local jurisdictions to cancel bond elections if a disaster is declared within 90 days before the election or if the governing board votes to cancel due to election system damage or potential harm to workers or voters
Texas HB 3526 100.0% 100.0% 0.0% Require the Texas Bond Review Board to develop and maintain a database of local government bond proposals or bonds issued by local governments on its website, including financial information about the bonds
Texas SB 1025 35.2% 99.1% R+63.8% Include a statement in capital letters stating THIS IS A TAX INCREASE for ballot measures that increase taxes
Texas HB 103 93.3% 99% R+5.7% Establish the creation of a public statewide database cataloging historical and current information on bonds, taxes, and bond-related projects
Texas SB 506 44.8% 100% R+55.2% Require ballot language on propositions to be neutral, to be reviewed by the secretary of state
Utah HJR 10 100.0% 100.0% 0.00% Require that constitutional amendments be published, in a manner provided by the legislature, for 60 days immediately before the next general election
Utah SJR 2 0.0% 92.7% R+92.7% Require citizen-initiated ballot measures to receive at least 60% voter approval to make certain tax-related changes that increase state revenue
Utah SB 73 0.0% 91.0% R+91.0% Require initiative applications to include information on sources for funding the proposed initiative; requires initiatives to be published in newspapers in the same manner as constitutional amendments
Utah HB 0481 100.0% 100.0% 0.0% Contingent on voter approval of a constitutional amendment, require the lieutenant governor to publish the full text of constitutional initiatives for 60 days preceding the next general election and to publish the question for any other type of ballot measure for 60 days preceding the next general election
Virginia HB 2768 (Vetoed) 100.0% 4.6% D+95.4% Allow voters in counties with a county manager system to authorize their board to set its size, elect a chairman at-large, and change member election methods through a board-referred measure or initiated petition
Washington SB 5370 100.0% 84.2% D+15.8% Create a process allowing port districts to extend commissioner terms from four to six years through either a commission resolution or a voter petition signed by 10%, with final approval by simple majority vote
Wyoming HB 112 100.0% 77.4% D+22.6% Change the ballot measure reapproval timeline for property taxes funding senior citizen service districts from every two years to every four years
Wyoming HB 337 87.5% 98.8% R+11.3% Prohibit foreign nationals from donating directly or indirectly to ballot measure committees
Wyoming HB 79 (Vetoed) 12.5% 75.3% R+62.8% Provide that bond measures decided at elections other than a general election require both majority voter approval and a turnout exceeding 25% plus one of the qualified electors who voted in the district’s last general election

Legislation enacted in 2025 by state

The tables below show the legislative vote for each bill by party, with NV displaying members of the chamber that were absent or not voting.

Arizona

SB 1040

Senate Bill 1040: The bill changed recall election requirements: extends county recorder time to review signatures from 60 to 75 days; extended scheduling timeline from 90 to 120 days; and changed petition requirements, signature requirements, and signature deadlines.[1]

SB 1040 Vote Senate House
Yes No NV Yes No NV
Total 28 0 2 58 0 2
Democratic (D) 11 0 2 26 0 1
Republican (R) 17 0 0 32 0 1

SB 1463

Senate Bill 1463 (Vetoed): Would have required constitutional initiative petitions to include a summary of statutes that may be affected and would have changed petition formatting requirements.[2]

SB 1463 Vote Senate House
Yes No NV Yes No NV
Total 17 11 2 31 27 2
Democratic (D) 0 11 2 0 27 0
Republican (R) 17 0 0 31 0 2

HB 2515

House Bill 2515 (Vetoed): Would have changed information required for taxation notices for school districts, community colleges, and special taxing districts to show estimated taxes for homes valued at both $100,000 and $400,000.[3]

HB 2515 Vote Senate House
Yes No NV Yes No NV
Total 18 11 1 34 23 2
Democratic (D) 1 11 1 2 23 1
Republican (R) 17 0 0 32 0 1

HB 1534

House Bill 1534 (Vetoed): Transfers responsibility of preparing ballot language from the secretary of state and attorney general to the legislative council for statewide measures, and to local city, town, or county officials for local measures; limits ballot titles to 50 words with a clear summary of the effect of a yes and no vote.[4]

HB 1534 Vote Senate House
Yes No NV Yes No NV
Total 17 12 1 33 25 2
Democratic (D) 0 12 0 0 25 0
Republican (R) 17 0 1 33 0 2


Arkansas

SB 102

Senate Bill 102: The bill applied state initiative requirements to local option election petitions, including requiring initiative sponsors to submit signed statements to county clerks at least 30 days before beginning signature collection including a final list of all names and addresses of each paid canvasser, as well as current state criminal history and criminal record searches certifying that canvassers have no disqualifying offenses; required paid canvassers to be United States citizens; and prohibited pay-per-signature for local option election petitions.[5]

SB 102 Vote Senate House
Yes No NV Yes No NV
Total 29 5 1 87 7 6
Democratic (D) 2 4 0 8 7 4
Republican (R) 27 1 1 79 0 2

SB 188

Senate Bill 188: The bill requires sponsors within five days of a proposal being certified by the attorney general to submit to the secretary of state the full text of the proposal, the certified popular name and ballot title, and the attorney general's certified letter. The bill also requires the secretary of state to post this information on its website until the day after the next general election.[6]

SB 188 Vote Senate House
Yes No NV Yes No NV
Total 34 0 1 97 0 3
Democratic (D) 6 0 0 18 0 1
Republican (R) 28 0 1 79 0 2

SB 207

Senate Bill 207: The bill required canvassers to notify petition signers, either verbally or in writing, that petition fraud is a criminal offense. If a petitioner fails to provide the notification, they would be charged with falsifying materials related to initiative or referendum petitions, a Class A misdemeanor. Class A misdemeanors are punishable by a fine of up to $2,500 and/or up to one year of jail time. [7]

SB 207 Vote Senate House
Yes No NV Yes No NV
Total 25 9 1 67 26 7
Democratic (D) 0 6 0 0 17 2
Republican (R) 25 3 1 67 9 5

SB 208

Senate Bill 208: The bill required a photo ID to be presented to a canvasser prior to signing an initiative petition.[8]

SB 208 Vote Senate House
Yes No NV Yes No NV
Total 26 6 3 70 24 6
Democratic (D) 0 6 0 0 17 2
Republican (R) 26 0 3 70 7 4

SB 209

Senate Bill 209: Allow the secretary of state to disqualify signatures collected by a canvasser if the secretary of states finds 'by a preponderance of evidence' that the canvasser violated any state laws related to canvassing[9]

SB 209 Vote Senate House
Yes No NV Yes No NV
Total 26 6 3 62 29 9
Democratic (D) 0 6 0 0 19 0
Republican (R) 26 0 3 62 10 9

SB 210

Senate Bill 210: The bill required a petition signer to read the ballot title in the presence of a canvasser or have the ballot title read aloud to them by the canvasser prior to signing a petition.[10]

SB 210 Vote Senate House
Yes No NV Yes No NV
Total 22 10 3 57 33 10
Democratic (D) 0 6 0 0 19 0
Republican (R) 22 4 3 57 14 10

SB 211

Senate Bill 211: The bill required canvassers to submit a sworn affidavit in order to have signatures counted to the secretary of state certifying that the canvasser complied with all laws related to canvassing, perjury, forgery, and fraudulent practices in signature gathering.[11]

SB 211 Vote Senate House
Yes No NV Yes No NV
Total 24 9 2 65 27 8
Democratic (D) 0 6 0 0 19 0
Republican (R) 24 3 2 65 8 8

SB 351

Senate Bill 351: The bill required ballot question campaign signage, literature, and other campaign materials to include a "Paid for by" statement specifying the committee that made the expenditure.[12]

SB 351 Vote Senate House
Yes No NV Yes No NV
Total 34 0 1 97 0 3
Democratic (D) 6 0 0 19 0 0
Republican (R) 28 0 1 78 0 3

SB 551

Senate Bill 551: Require signers of local option election petitions to read the ballot title in the presence of a canvasser or have it read to them; require canvassers to notify signers that petition fraud is a criminal offense; require canvassers to submit a sworn affidavit that signers read the ballot title in their presence.[13]

SB 551 Vote Senate House
Yes No NV Yes No NV
Total 18 9 8 71 20 9
Democratic (D) 0 5 1 5 12 2
Republican (R) 18 4 7 66 8 7


SB 584

Senate Bill 584: Require sponsors and canvassers to file required documentation to the county clerk as well as the secretary of state; requires the local ballot initiative or referendum to contain the full ballot title at the top of each signature page.[14]

SB 584 Vote Senate House
Yes No NV Yes No NV
Total 32 0 3 73 20 7
Democratic (D) 5 0 1 4 13 2
Republican (R) 27 0 2 69 7 5


HB 1221

House Bill 1221: The bill provided that signatures for an initiative or referendum petition expire on the date of the next general election following certification of the ballot language; provide that certified ballot language expires on the date of the next general election.[15]

HB 1221 Vote Senate House
Yes No NV Yes No NV
Total 25 8 2 75 14 11
Democratic (D) 0 6 0 2 13 4
Republican (R) 25 2 2 73 1 7

HB 1222

House Bill 1222: The bill allowed the attorney general to reject proposed initiatives if the attorney general determines that the proposal conflicted with the U.S. Constitution or federal laws. The bill also prohibited sponsors from filing conflicting measures—defined as two or more petitions concerning the same subject, having the same general purpose, and containing different language in the text—targeting the same election unless the sponsor had previously filed a petition that was rejected.[16]

HB 1222 Vote Senate House
Yes No NV Yes No NV
Total 25 8 2 62 30 8
Democratic (D) 0 6 0 0 17 2
Republican (R) 25 2 2 62 13 6

HB 1574

House Bill 1574: The bill required paid canvassers to be residents of the state and to live in the state.[17]

HB 1574 Vote Senate House
Yes No NV Yes No NV
Total 25 8 1 76 16 8
Democratic (D) 0 6 0 1 14 4
Republican (R) 25 2 1 75 2 4

HB 1637

House Bill 1637: The bill required fiscal impact statements for initiative petitions and legislatively referred constitutional amendments and require fiscal impact statements to be included on the ballot.[18]

HB 1637 Vote Senate House
Yes No NV Yes No NV
Total 27 6 1 80 14 6
Democratic (D) 0 6 0 1 14 4
Republican (R) 27 0 1 79 0 2

HB 1713

House Bill 1713: The bill prohibited the attorney general from certifying an initiative's ballot title if it is above an eighth-grade reading level as determined by the Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level formula as it existed on January 1, 2025.[19]

HB 1713 Vote Senate House
Yes No NV Yes No NV
Total 29 5 5 60 23 17
Democratic (D) 2 4 4 0 17 2
Republican (R) 27 1 1 60 6 15

HB 1837

House Bill 1837: Prohibits foreign nationals from donating directly or indirectly to ballot measure committees; requires ballot question committees and treasurers to affirm on campaign finance reports that the ballot question committee has not knowingly or willingly received contributions or expenditures from a prohibited source.[20]

HB 1837 Vote Senate House
Yes No NV Yes No NV
Total 34 0 1 87 5 8
Democratic (D) 5 0 1 8 5 6
Republican (R) 29 0 0 79 0 2

HB 1933

House Bill 1933: Establishes a process for recalling school district board of directors.[21]

HB 1933 Vote Senate House
Yes No NV Yes No NV
Total 33 2 0 74 18 8
Democratic (D) 4 2 0 6 11 2
Republican (R) 29 0 0 68 7 6

Colorado

HB 1327

House Bill 1327: Rep. Emily Sirota (D-9), Rep. Meg Froelich (D-3), and Sen. Cathy Kipp (D-14) sponsored the legislation, which made several changes to the ballot measure process in Colorado, including:[22]

  • First, the law modifies how initiative drafts are submitted and how the Colorado Title Board operates regarding setting titles and hearings:
    • If five or more initiative drafts on the same subject are submitted in a single cycle with at least one shared designated representative, proponents must also submit a chart showing the differences among the drafts.
    • The ballot title is required to note whether the proposed measure creates a new law or modifies, extends, or repeals existing law.
    • The Title Board’s final scheduled meeting is moved from the third to the first Wednesday in April. Rehearings for measures from that final meeting are now held on the third Wednesday in April, rather than within 48 hours.
  • Second, the law makes changes to fiscal summaries for ballot measures:
    • For citizen-initiated ballot measures with a proposed tax increase, the Title Board's summary must include the maximum dollar amount of the proposed increase in state and local revenue and spending for both the first and, if phased in, the final full fiscal year.
    • For legislative referrals with a proposed tax increase, the fiscal note must include the maximum estimated revenue increase for both the first and final fiscal year, and the ballot question must reflect this fiscal estimate.
  • Third, the law also adds reporting requirements for signature gathering:
    • Proponents must notify the secretary of state when signature collection reaches 25%, 50%, and 75% of the required threshold. If petition circulation stops, proponents must report this within 5 days. The secretary of state must publish these updates online. A designated representative may be fined up to $1,500 for failing to comply.
HB 1327 Vote Senate House
Yes No NV Yes No NV
Total 22 12 1 42 19 4
Democratic (D) 22 0 1 42 0 1
Republican (R) 0 12 0 0 19 3

Florida

HB 1205

House Bill 1205: Requires petition circulators to register with the secretary of state and complete mandatory training; require circulators to sign a statement affirming they were not paid based on the number of signatures collected; requires signatures to include the voter's Florida driver's license or state identification card number or the last four digits of the voter's social security number; requires the attorney general to ensure compliance of the fiscal impact statement along with the ballot language and constitutionality; changes fiscal impact statement processes; defines petition circulator to exclude individuals who physically possess no more than 25 signed petition forms; requires initiative sponsors to submit a letter every third election cycle to prevent signature expiration; prohibits sponsors from sponsoring more than one amendment; establishes specific requirements for initiative petition formatting including specific font sizes and displaying a notice that it is a misdemeanor to knowingly sign a petition more than once; require sponsors to affirm they are not convicted felons, are residents of the state, and citizens of the U.S.; enacts criminal penalties for violations; directs county supervisors of elections to forward instances when 25% or more of signatures are invalidated to the Office of Election Crimes and Security.[23]

HB 1205 Vote Senate House
Yes No NV Yes No NV
Total 28 9 1 81 30 8
Democratic (D) 0 9 1 0 30 3
Republican (R) 27 0 0 81 0 5

Idaho

HJR 4

House Joint Resolution 4: The proposed constitutional amendment, which requires voter approval in 2026, would provide that only the state legislature has the power to legalize marijuana, narcotics, or psychoactive substances and prohibiting citizen initiatives to legalize these substances.[24]

HJR 4 Vote Senate House
Yes No NV Yes No NV
Total 29 6 0 58 10 2
Democratic (D) 0 6 0 0 9 0
Republican (R) 29 0 0 58 1 2

HB 0377

House Bill 0377: Required recall petitions for city council members in cities that elect council members based on districts to include at least 20% of the number of registered voters in the last election.[25]

H 0377 Vote Senate House
Yes No NV Yes No NV
Total 33 0 2 66 0 4
Democratic (D) 6 0 0 9 0 0
Republican (R) 27 0 2 57 0 4

SB 1117

Senate Bill 1117: Requires a new fiscal impact statement for initiatives if proponents modify the initiative after receiving the certificate of review and initial fiscal impact statement.[26]

Senate Bill 1117 Vote Senate House
Yes No NV Yes No NV
Total 35 0 0 66 0 4
Democratic (D) 6 0 0 7 0 2
Republican (R) 29 0 0 59 0 2

Indiana

SB 1

Senate Bill 1: Requires bond referendums to be placed on general election ballots; changes ballot language requirements for controlled project, school operating, and school public safety referendums.[27]

SB 1 Vote Senate House
Yes No NV Yes No NV
Total 37 10 2 65 29 6
Democratic (D) 2 7 1 1 26 3
Republican (R) 35 3 1 64 3 3

HB 1467

House Bill 1467: Prohibit foreign nationals from directly or indirectly making a contribution or expenditure to influence an election on a ballot measure.[28]

HB 1467 Vote Senate House
Yes No NV Yes No NV
Total 47 0 3 92 4 4
Democratic (D) 8 0 2 24 4 2
Republican (R) 39 0 1 68 0 2

Kansas

HB 2106

House Bill 2106: Prohibited contributions or expenditures from a foreign national made to support or oppose a constitutional amendment.[29]

HB 2106 Vote Senate House
Yes No NV Yes No NV
Total 39 0 1 94 25 6
Democratic (D) 9 0 0 11 25 1
Republican (R) 30 0 1 83 0 5


Kentucky

HB 45

House Bill 45: The bill prohibited foreign contributions or expenditures related to ballot measure campaigns; requires a "paid for by" statement on political communications advocating for or against ballot measure campaigns.[30]

HB 45 Vote Senate House
Yes No NV Yes No NV
Total 29 6 3 77 12 11
Democratic (D) 0 6 1 4 12 4
Republican (R) 29 0 2 73 0 7

Louisiana

HB 592

House Bill 592: State Rep. Beau Beaullieu (R-48) sponsored the legislation. The bill requires that the Secretary of State review proposed ballot questions to ensure that they do not exceed 200 words in length, do not include bolded, underlined, or crossed out words, and that they are in the form of a question. HB 592 also requires that the entity that submitted a ballot question is responsible for ensuring that the ballot question is composed of simple, unbiased, and concise language.[31]

HB 592 Vote Senate House
Yes No NV Yes No NV
Total 38 1 0 82 9 14
Democratic (D) 11 0 0 14 9 9
Republican (R) 27 1 0 68 0 5

HB 693

House Bill 693: The legislation made changes to campaign finance law in Louisiana, including prohibiting foreign nationals from directly or indirectly making or promising to make contributions in connection with a ballot measure, the recall of a public officer, or any political committee, expanding on the existing ban related to elections for political office.[32]

HB 693 Vote Senate House
Yes No NV Yes No NV
Total 31 6 2 55 42 8
Democratic (D) 9 1 1 5 22 5
Republican (R) 22 5 1 50 20 3

Maine

LD 1635

Legislative Document 1635: The legislation permitted municipal officers to initiate a recount for a local ballot measure if the margin of victory or defeat is less than 1% of all votes cast, including any blank ballots, without requiring a voter petition.[33]
Note: No roll-calls were recorded on LD 1635.

Maryland

HB 322

House Bill 322: Changes the process for municipalities to file requests with the state board of elections to include municipal offices and questions on statewide ballots; requires municipalities making such requests to certify that they have established deadlines and procedures consistent with the state deadlines for petition filings and certification of ballot questions.[34]

HB 322 Vote Senate House
Yes No NV Yes No NV
Total 41 5 1 99 34 6
Democratic (D) 33 0 1 95 0 5
Republican (R) 8 5 0 4 34 1

Missouri

HJR 3

House Joint Resolution 3: The constitutional amendment was designed to require voter approval of citizen-initiated constitutional amendments in each congressional district, rather than statewide; add language prohibiting foreign nationals and foreign adversaries, as defined, from spending to support or oppose ballot measures, with penalties for violations; and add language regarding penalties for ballot initiative signature petition fraud, among other changes.[35]

SB 22 Vote Senate House
Yes No NV Yes No NV
Total 21 11 2 98 58 3
Democratic (D) 0 9 1 0 52 0
Republican (R) 21 2 1 98 6 3


SB 22

Senate Bill 22: The legislation extends timeline for final rulings on ballot measure challenges from 56 to 70 days prior to the election; increases the word limit for ballot summaries for legislative referrals from 50 to 100 words; allows signature collection to begin after ballot language is certified even if the title is challenged and provides that signatures collected before a ballot title is altered may not be invalidated.[36]

SB 22 Vote Senate House
Yes No NV Yes No NV
Total 24 10 0 109 46 7
Democratic (D) 0 10 0 1 45 7
Republican (R) 24 0 0 108 1 0

SB 152

Senate Bill 152: The legislation prohibits ballot measure committees from using funds from foreign nationals for preliminary campaign activities and from accepting contributions or in-kind support from foreign nationals or from individuals or entities that received such contributions. It would also require donors contributing over $2,000 to certify that they are not foreign nationals and have not received more than $10,000 from foreign nationals within a four-year period.[37]

SB 152 Vote Senate House
Yes No NV Yes No NV
Total 28 2 4 94 47 20
Democratic (D) 6 2 2 0 47 5
Republican (R) 22 0 2 94 0 15

Montana

HB 201

House Bill 201: Requires paid signature gatherers to verbally state to signers and wear a badge including their name, the state they legally reside, and that they are a paid signature gatherer.[38]

HB 201 Vote Senate House
Yes No NV Yes No NV
Total 27 22 1 57 42 1
Democratic (D) 1 17 0 1 41 0
Republican (R) 26 5 1 56 1 1

SB 226

Senate Bill 226: Requires initiative petition signatures to be submitted on a staggered basis to county election administrators within defined windows depending on when signatures were collected.[39]

SB 226 Vote Senate House
Yes No NV Yes No NV
Total 47 2 1 95 5 0
Democratic (D) 17 1 0 37 5 0
Republican (R) 30 1 1 58 0 0


SB 11

Senate Bill 11: Revises local ballot measure laws; establishes requirements for serial numbers of petitions and petition formatting, requires 'yes' and 'no' statements on petitions, and requires an affidavit from signature gatherers that the signatures are genuine and that signers knew the content of the petition.[40]

SB 11 Vote Senate House
Yes No NV Yes No NV
Total 50 0 0 99 0 1
Democratic (D) 18 0 0 41 0 1
Republican (R) 32 0 0 58 0 0

HB 179

House Bill 179: Provide that signing an initiative petition does not reactivate active voter status.[41]

HB 179 Vote Senate House
Yes No NV Yes No NV
Total 50 0 0 58 42 0
Democratic (D) 18 0 0 0 42 0
Republican (R) 32 0 0 58 0 0

HB 818

House Bill 818: Prohibits foreign nationals from directly or indirectly making a contribution or expenditure in connection with a statewide ballot measure.[42]

HB 818 Vote Senate House
Yes No NV Yes No NV
Total 37 13 0 56 44 0
Democratic (D) 6 12 0 0 42 0
Republican (R) 31 1 0 56 2 0

New Hampshire

House Bill 228

House Bill 228: Rep. Diane Pauer (R-Hillsborough 36) sponsored the legislation, which addressed petitioned articles at annual or special town meetings. Specifically, the bill establishes a process for designating a primary petitioner in written applications. If no primary petitioner is named, the first registered voter listed on the application is designated by default. The bill requires the moderator to provide the primary petitioner with at least 10 minutes to introduce the article at the meeting. The primary petitioner may also designate another registered voter to present the article by submitting written notice to the moderator. In the House and Senate, HB 228 was approved by voice vote.[43]

North Dakota

HB 1138

House Bill 1138: State Sen. Paul Rose (R-32) sponsored the legislation. The bill changes the timeline of elections held for voters to approve or deny bond measures. Before the bill was passed, the date of the election was no less than 20 days after the measure was passed by the governing body (such as a city or county). Under HB 1138, elections for bond measures must be held no less than 64 days after a bond measure is passed by a governing body.[44]

HB 1138 Vote Senate House
Yes No NV Yes No NV
Total 44 2 1 90 0 4
Democratic (D) 4 1 0 10 0 1
Republican (R) 40 1 1 80 0 3

HB 1204

House Bill 1204: Makes it a class A misdemeanor to publish an untrue, misleading, or deceptive political advertisement or news release regarding a ballot measure via text message, telephone call, on social media, or other commercial medium.[45]

HB 1204 Vote Senate House
Yes No NV Yes No NV
Total 45 1 1 77 14 3
Democratic (D) 5 0 0 8 2 1
Republican (R) 40 1 1 69 12 2

HB 1482

House Bill 1482: Requires county, city, public school districts, or park districts to hold elections on statewide primary or regular election dates; changes the time for other municipalities to hold elections from at least 20 to 64 days after the initial resolution is passed; provides that spoiled or blank ballots cast at a local bond measure election can be counted as a no vote on a bond measure.[46]

HB 1482 Vote Senate House
Yes No NV Yes No NV
Total 43 4 0 88 4 2
Democratic (D) 1 4 0 7 4 0
Republican (R) 42 0 0 81 0 2

SCR 4007

Senate Concurrent Resolution 4007: Referred a constitutional amendment to the 2026 ballot that would create a single subject requirement for constitutional initiatives and legislatively referred constitutional amendments; prohibits the secretary of state from approving an initiative to circulate if the secretary of state determines the initiative embraces more than one subject.[47]

SCR 4007 Vote Senate House
Yes No NV Yes No NV
Total 46 1 0 57 36 1
Democratic (D) 4 1 0 0 11 0
Republican (R) 42 0 0 57 25 1

SB 2230

Senate Bill 2230: Requires the secretary of state to distribute materials to all active voters at least 45 days prior to an election on a ballot measure including an objective summary, a fiscal impact summary, whether the measure was initiated by citizens or referred by the legislature, and an objective analysis of a yes and no vote.[48]

SB 2230 Vote Senate House
Yes No NV Yes No NV
Total 46 1 0 87 5 2
Democratic (D) 5 0 0 11 0 0
Republican (R) 41 1 0 76 5 2

SB 2269

Senate Bill 2269: Provides a recall process for removing elected members of the governing body of a city, park district, or school board.[49]

SB 2269 Vote Senate House
Yes No NV Yes No NV
Total 46 0 1 56 32 6
Democratic (D) 5 0 0 10 0 1
Republican (R) 41 0 1 46 32 5

SB 2324

Senate Bill 2324: Allowed counties and cities to amend their home rule charters through a resolution when a portion of the charter is preempted, superseded, or invalidated by a legislative act or court order, without requiring a vote of the people.[50]

SB 2324 Vote Senate House
Yes No NV Yes No NV
Total 45 1 1 85 6 3
Democratic (D) 5 0 0 5 4 2
Republican (R) 40 1 1 80 2 1

HCR 3003

House Concurrent Resolution 3003: The amendment, which requires voter approval in 2026, was designed to require constitutional amendments initiated by citizens or referred by the state legislature to receive a 60% vote to be adopted.[51]

HCR 3003 Vote Senate House
Yes No NV Yes No NV
Total 33 13 1 65 28 1
Democratic (D) 1 4 0 0 11 0
Republican (R) 32 9 1 65 17 1

Oklahoma

SB 1027

Senate Bill 1027: The bill requires the gist of a proposition to explain the proposition in basic words, not contain any words that have special meaning or are not commonly known to the citizens of the state, not contain euphemisms or words that are code words or an attempt to deceive voters, be neutral, and indicate whether the proposition will have a fiscal impact and describe funding sources and tax increases. The bill also requires signature gatherers to be registered voters in the state. The bill also prohibits signature gatherers from being paid based on the number of signatures collected. The bill requires entities funding initiative signature gathering campaigns to submit weekly reports to the secretary of state detailing the expenditures and attesting that the funds are not from out of state. The bill limits the amount of signatures collected from a single county to 11.5% of the number of votes cast in the county in the last gubernatorial election for statutory petitions and 20.8% for constitutional petitions.[52]

SB 1027 Vote Senate House
Yes No NV Yes No NV
Total 36 8 3 69 23 6
Democratic (D) 0 8 0 0 17 1
Republican (R) 36 0 3 69 6 5


South Dakota

SJR 5003

Senate Joint Resolution 5003: The proposed constitutional amendment, which requires voter approval in 2026, was designed to require a 60% supermajority vote (rather than a simple majority of 50%+1) to approve constitutional amendments.[53]

SJR 5003 Vote Senate House
Yes No NV Yes No NV
Total 29 4 2 61 5 3
Democratic (D) 0 2 1 1 5 0
Republican (R) 29 2 1 60 0 3

SB 13

Senate Bill 13: The bill provided that voter-approved local ballot measures become effective the day after the official canvass of the election is completed.[54]

SB 13 Vote Senate House
Yes No NV Yes No NV
Total 35 0 0 68 0 0
Democratic (D) 3 0 0 6 0 0
Republican (R) 32 0 0 62 0 0

SB 91

Senate Bill 91: Required initiative petitions to include the full text and ballot language in fourteen-point font for statutory measures and veto referendum measures and sixteen-point font for constitutional measures; required veto referendum signatures to be filed within 90 days after the legislative session adjourns and include a sworn affidavit stating the petition contains the required number of valid signatures.[55]

SB 91 Vote Senate House
Yes No NV Yes No NV
Total 32 3 0 70 0 0
Democratic (D) 0 3 0 6 0 0
Republican (R) 32 0 0 64 0 0

SB 92

Senate Bill 92: Required the director of the Legislative Research Council and the secretary of state to review filed initiatives to ensure compliance with the state's single-subject rule.[56]

SB 92 Vote Senate House
Yes No NV Yes No NV
Total 34 0 1 70 0 0
Democratic (D) 3 0 0 6 0 0
Republican (R) 31 0 1 64 0 0


SB 106

Senate Bill 106: Required initiative petition sponsors to be a registered voter in South Dakota.[57]

SB 106 Vote Senate House
Yes No NV Yes No NV
Total 35 0 0 70 0 0
Democratic (D) 3 0 0 6 0 0
Republican (R) 32 0 0 64 0 0


SB 1256

Senate Bill 1256: Required valid signatures from 5% of the total qualified electors in the state to qualify a statutory initiative or veto referendum for the ballot (rather than 5% of the votes cast for governor); require signers for all ballot measures (statutory, constitutional, and veto referendums) to include their name, signature, address matching their voter registration in the county they are registered, and the date of signing.[58]

SB 1256 Vote Senate House
Yes No NV Yes No NV
Total 21 12 2 61 9 0
Democratic (D) 0 2 1 2 4 0
Republican (R) 21 10 1 59 5 0

HB 1063

House Bill 1063: Requires the Legislative Research Council to review fiscal notes for South Dakota ballot measures after they are certified for the ballot and requires the fiscal note to be updated by August 1 before the election if the previous fiscal note contains inaccurate or outdated information.[59]

HB 1063 Vote Senate House
Yes No NV Yes No NV
Total 35 0 0 68 0 1
Democratic (D) 3 0 0 6 0 0
Republican (R) 32 0 0 62 0 1

HB 1093

House Bill 1093: Requires measures to enter an agreement or issue capital outlay certificates to be on the ballot in March, June, or November (rather than at the next regular election).[60]

HB 1093 Vote Senate House
Yes No NV Yes No NV
Total 19 16 0 52 18 0
Democratic (D) 0 3 0 1 5 0
Republican (R) 19 13 0 51 13 0

HB 1169

House Bill 1169 (Vetoed): The bill would have established a distribution requirement of at least 5% of votes cast for governor in each senate district and require petition sheets to include the senate district.[61]

HB 1169 Vote Senate House
Yes No NV Yes No NV
Total 19 15 1 63 6 1
Democratic (D) 0 2 1 0 5 1
Republican (R) 19 13 0 63 1 0

HB 1184

House Bill 1184: Changed the signature deadline for initiatives from the first Tuesday in May to the first Tuesday in February, thereby shortening the signature collection time from 24 months to 21 months.[62]

HB 1184 Vote Senate House
Yes No NV Yes No NV
Total 19 15 1 59 9 1
Democratic (D) 0 2 1 0 6 0
Republican (R) 19 13 0 59 3 1

Tennessee

HB 888

House Bill 888: State Rep. Chris Todd (R-73) sponsored the legislation. The bill prohibits political campaign committees, that were created to support or oppose a ballot measure, from receiving contributions from foreign nationals. It prohibits any foreign national from directing the decision process of other individuals concerning supporting or opposing ballot measures. The bill also requires political campaign committees that support or oppose ballot measures to obtain an affirmation from all donors that the donor is neither a foreign national nor have they received more than $100,000 from a foreign national in the past four years.[63]

HB 888 Vote Senate House
Yes No NV Yes No NV
Total 28 1 2 75 15 0
Democratic (D) 1 1 2 5 15 0
Republican (R) 27 0 0 70 0 0

SB 525

Senate Bill 525: State Sen. Paul Rose (R-32) sponsored the legislation. The bill required a three-judge panel to hear any civil action when a proposed charter amendment ordinance is alleged to violate the constitution or state law; prohibits an amendment to the charter of a home rule municipality from being placed on any ballot if the amendment is in violation of the constitution or state law.[64]

SB 525 Vote Senate House
Yes No NV Yes No NV
Total 25 5 0 73 21 0
Democratic (D) 0 5 0 0 21 0
Republican (R) 25 0 0 73 0 0

SB 626

Senate Bill 626: State Sen. Richard Briggs (R-7) sponsored the legislation. The legislation allowed county election commissions to notify sponsors of a recall, referendum, or initiative petition of a defect in the petition and allow it to be cured prior to certification.[65]

SB 626 Vote Senate House
Yes No NV Yes No NV
Total 22 4 0 72 22 0
Democratic (D) 0 4 0 1 22 0
Republican (R) 22 0 0 71 0 0

Texas

HB 103

House Bill 103: Establishes the creation of a public statewide database cataloging historical and current information on bonds, taxes, and bond-related projects, to be managed by the Texas comptroller.[66]

HB 103 Vote Senate House
Yes No NV Yes No NV
Total 29 1 0 127 4 19
Democratic (D) 10 1 0 46 3 13
Republican (R) 19 0 0 81 1 6

HB 2253

House Bill 2253: State Sen. Angela Paxton (R-8) sponsored the legislation. The bill allows local jurisdictions to cancel bond elections if the governor issues a disaster declaration affecting the local jurisdiction within 90 days before the election or the governing board of the local jurisdiction votes to cancel it due to damage to the election system, potential harm to election workers, or potential harm to voters within the jurisdiction. The bill also authorizes the governing body of local jurisdictions to hold open meetings to determine whether to cancel an election.[67]

HB 2253 Vote Senate House
Yes No NV Yes No NV
Total 31 0 0 123 17 10
Democratic (D) 11 0 0 60 1 1
Republican (R) 20 0 0 63 16 9

HB 3526

House Bill 3526: The bill requires the Texas Bond Review Board to develop and maintain a publicly accessible database of local government bond proposals and issued bonds, including financial information such as estimated repayment amounts, principal and interest paid, and required tax rate increases. The bill also requires local governments proposing bond issues must submit reports to the Board before and after bond elections.[68]

HB 3526 Vote Senate House
Yes No NV Yes No NV
Total 31 0 0 131 0 19
Democratic (D) 11 0 0 50 0 12
Republican (R) 20 0 0 81 0 7

SB 506

Senate Bill 506: State Reps. Dennis Paul (R-129), Steve Toth (R-15), and Carl Tepper (R-84) sponsored the legislation. The bill requires ballot questions to be written with "definiteness, certainty, and facial neutrality that the voters are not misled." The bill would also allow voters to petition the secretary of state to review the ballot questions of local charter amendments, initiatives, and referendums to determine if they are misleading, inaccurate, or prejudicial. If the question is found to be so, the city would be required to draft a new question and give notice of the ballot measure election with the new question. SB 506 would also prohibit a local jurisdiction from placing a ballot measure on the ballot if an initiative addressing the same topic has already qualified for the ballot or if the measure would contradict a provision of the qualified initiative.[69]

SB 506 Vote Senate House
Yes No NV Yes No NV
Total 23 8 0 102 37 11
Democratic (D) 3 8 0 19 37 6
Republican (R) 20 0 0 83 0 5

SB 1025

Senate Bill 1025: Requires ballot propositions that propose the imposition or increase of a tax to include, at the top of the proposition in capital letters, the statement "THIS IS A TAX INCREASE". [70]

SB 1025 Vote Senate House
Yes No NV Yes No NV
Total 28 2 1 102 45 1
Democratic (D) 8 2 1 17 44 1
Republican (R) 20 0 0 85 1 0

Utah

HB 0481

House Bill 0481: The bill is contingent on voter approval of a constitutional amendment on the 2026 ballot. The bill was designed to require the lieutenant governor to publish the full text of constitutional initiatives for 60 days preceding the next general election and require the lieutenant governor to publish the question for any other type of ballot measure for 60 days preceding the next general election.[71]

HB 0481 Vote Senate House
Yes No NV Yes No NV
Total 28 0 1 70 0 5
Democratic (D) 5 0 1 14 0 0
Republican (R) 23 0 0 56 0 5

HJR 10

House Joint Resolution 10: The proposed amendment would require that constitutional amendments be published, in a manner provided by the legislature, for 60 days immediately before the next general election.[72]

HJR 10 Vote Senate House
Yes No NV Yes No NV
Total 29 0 0 70 0 5
Democratic (D) 6 0 0 14 0 0
Republican (R) 23 0 0 57 0 5

SB 73

Senate Bill 73: The bill requires initiative applications to include information on sources for funding the proposed initiative; requires initiatives to be published in newspapers in the same manner as constitutional amendments.[73]

SB 73 Vote Senate House
Yes No NV Yes No NV
Total 21 6 2 50 19 6
Democratic (D) 0 5 1 0 13 1
Republican (R) 21 1 1 50 6 5

SJR 2

Senate Joint Resolution 2: The proposed constitutional amendment, which requires voter approval in 2026, would require citizen-initiated ballot measures to receive at least 60% voter approval to make certain tax-related changes, including (a) imposing a new tax; (b) expanding an existing tax to apply to additional items or transactions; (c) increasing an existing tax rate; or (d) adjusting a property tax rate in a way that reduces the rate less than it would decrease under current law.[74]

SJR 2 Vote Senate House
Yes No NV Yes No NV
Total 21 8 0 55 17 3
Democratic (D) 0 6 0 0 13 1
Republican (R) 21 2 0 55 5 2

Virginia

HB 2768

House Bill 2768 (Vetoed): The bill would have allowed voters in counties using a county manager plan system of government to authorize their board to set its size, elect a board chairman at-large, and change how members are elected through a referred measure by the board or an initiated petition.[75]

HB 2768 Vote Senate House
Yes No NV Yes No NV
Total 21 18 0 53 44 3
Democratic (D) 21 0 0 50 0 1
Republican (R) 0 18 0 3 44 2

Washington

Senate Bill 5370

Senate Bill 5370: State Sens. Paul Harris (R-17), Mike Chapman (R-24), Deborah Krishnadasan (D-26), Liz Lovelett (D-40), and T'wina Nobles (D-28) sponsored the legislation. The bill creates a process for port districts to increase the terms of their port commissioners from four years to six years. The bill offers two ways for the term length to increase. The first is for port commissioners to pass a resolution and put the measure on the ballot; the second is by submission of a petition signed by 10% of voters that voted in the last election. In the event that the measure is on the ballot, a simple majority vote is required for the measure to pass and for the terms of port commissioners to increase.[76]

SB 5370 Vote Senate House
Yes No NV Yes No NV
Total 48 0 0 88 9 1
Democratic (D) 29 0 0 59 0 0
Republican (R) 19 0 0 29 9 1

Wyoming

HB 122

House Bill 122: State Rep. Marilyn Connolly (R-40) sponsored the legislation. The bill changes the timeline for reapproval of property taxes that fund senior citizen service districts. In Wyoming, if voters approve a measure to authorize a property tax that funds a senior citizen service district, the question to reauthorize that property tax must be approved every two years. The bill changes that timeline to every four years.[77]

HB 122 Vote Senate House
Yes No NV Yes No NV
Total 29 2 0 44 17 1
Democratic (D) 2 0 0 6 0 0
Republican (R) 27 2 0 38 17 1

HB 337

House Bill 337: The bill prohibited foreign nationals from donating directly or indirectly to ballot measure committees.[78]

HB 337 Vote Senate House
Yes No NV Yes No NV
Total 31 0 0 58 2 2
Democratic (D) 2 0 0 5 1 0
Republican (R) 29 0 0 53 1 2

HB 79

House Bill 79 (Vetoed): The bill would have provided that bond measures voted on at an election other than a general election that receive a majority of the vote in approval can only be adopted if the total number of ballots cast is more than 25% plus one of the total number of qualified electors who voted in the district in the last general election.[79]

HB 79 Vote Senate House
Yes No NV Yes No NV
Total 30 1 0 52 7 3
Democratic (D) 1 1 0 3 3 0
Republican (R) 29 0 0 49 4 3

Legislation proposed in 2025

The following map shows the number of bills related to ballot measures or recall elections in each state. Click on a state to see a list of bills in that state. Click Back in the upper left-hand corner to return to the map.


Rulings in 2025

The following is a list of court rulings issued in 2025 that affected the ballot measure process.

Ohio

Brown v. Yost

See also: Brown v. Yost, April 22, 2025

The U.S. District Court for Southern Ohio ruled that the fair and truthful requirement is a content-based restriction on speech because it grants the state editorial control over part of the plaintiffs’ speech without a compelling state interest, violating the First Amendment. The Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals' 2-1 ruling on April 9 and the U.S. Supreme Court's 6-3 ruling on April 22 denied requests to stay the district court’s ruling.[80]

Cynthia Brown, Carlos Buford, and Jenny Sue Rowe filed a lawsuit alleging that the state law requiring the Ohio Attorney General to determine whether petition summaries for citizen-initiated constitutional amendments are fair and truthful before those petitions can advance violate the First Amendment’s free speech protections.

South Dakota

Dakotans for Health v. Johnson

U.S. District Court for South Dakota ruled that HB 1184, signed on March 31, 2025, violated the U.S. Constitution. HB 1184 modified the signature deadline for ballot initiatives from six months to nine months before the general election, which also had the effect of shortening the maximum signature collection period from 24 to 21 months.[81]

Judge Camela Theeler ruled that "the State has failed show that the nine-month deadline created by HB 1184 furthers an important regulatory interest. Therefore, nine-month filing deadline in SDCL §§ 2-1-1.1 and -1.2 is unconstitutional under the First Amendment."[81]


See also

Footnotes

  1. ↑ Arizona State Legislature, "SB 1040," accessed April 1, 2025
  2. ↑ Arizona Legislature, "SB 1463," accessed May 19, 2025
  3. ↑ Arizona State Legislature, "HB 2515," accessed April 25, 2025
  4. ↑ Arizona Legislature, "HB 1534," accessed May 9, 2025
  5. ↑ Arkansas State Legislature, "SB 102," accessed February 28, 2025
  6. ↑ Arkansas State Legislature, "SB 188," accessed February 28, 2025
  7. ↑ Arkansas State Legislature, "SB 207," accessed February 28, 2025
  8. ↑ Arkansas State Legislature, "SB 208," accessed March 5, 2025
  9. ↑ Arkansas State Legislature, "SB 209," accessed March 16, 2025
  10. ↑ Arkansas State Legislature, "SB 210," accessed March 5, 2025
  11. ↑ Arkansas State Legislature, "SB 211," accessed March 5, 2025
  12. ↑ Arkansas State Legislature, "SB 351," accessed April 16, 2025
  13. ↑ Arkansas State Legislature, "SB 551," accessed April 1, 2025
  14. ↑ Arkansas State Legislature, "SB 584," accessed April 1, 2025
  15. ↑ Arkansas State Legislature, "HB 1221," accessed February 28, 2025
  16. ↑ Arkansas State Legislature, "HB 1222," accessed February 28, 2025
  17. ↑ Arkansas State Legislature, "HB 1574," accessed April 9, 2025
  18. ↑ Arkansas State Legislature, "HB 1637," accessed April 9, 2025
  19. ↑ Arkansas State Legislature, "HB 1713," accessed April 16, 2025
  20. ↑ Arkansas State Legislature, "HB 1837," accessed April 25, 2025
  21. ↑ Arkansas State Legislature, "HB 1933," accessed April 1, 2025
  22. ↑ Colorado State Legislature, "House Bill 1327," accessed June 9, 2025
  23. ↑ Florida Legislature, "HB 1205," accessed May 9, 2025
  24. ↑ IdahoState Legislature, "House Joint Resolution 4," accessed March 24, 2025
  25. ↑ Idaho State Legislature, "H 0377," accessed April 1, 2025
  26. ↑ Idaho State Legislature, "SB 1117," accessed April 9, 2025
  27. ↑ Indiana General Assembly, "SB 1," accessed May 19, 2025
  28. ↑ Indiana General Assembly, "HB 1467," accessed April 11, 2025
  29. ↑ Kansas State Legislature, "HB 2106," accessed April 1, 2025
  30. ↑ Kentucky State Legislature, "HB 45," accessed April 1, 2025
  31. ↑ Louisiana State Legislature, "House Bill 592," accessed August 7, 2025
  32. ↑ Louisiana State Legislature, "House Bill 693," accessed June 27, 2025
  33. ↑ Maine State Legislature, "Legislative Document 1635," accessed June 13, 2025
  34. ↑ Maryland General Assembly, "HB 322," accessed May 19, 2025
  35. ↑ Missouri State Legislature, "House Joint Resolution 3," accessed September 24, 2025
  36. ↑ Missouri Senate, "SB 22," accessed April 25, 2025
  37. ↑ Missouri Senate, "SB 152," accessed July 9, 2025
  38. ↑ Montana Legislature, "HB 201," accessed May 25, 2025
  39. ↑ BillTrack50, "SB 226," accessed May 25, 2025
  40. ↑ Montana Legislature, "SB 11," accessed May 19, 2025
  41. ↑ Montana Legislature, "HB 179," accessed May 19, 2025
  42. ↑ Montana Legislature, "HB 818," accessed May 22, 2025
  43. ↑ New Hampshire General Court, "House Bill 228," accessed July 28, 2025
  44. ↑ North Dakota Legislative Branch, "House Bill 1138," accessed August 7, 2025
  45. ↑ North Dakota Legislative Assembly, "HB 1204," accessed May 19, 2025
  46. ↑ North Dakota Legislative Branch, "HB 1482," accessed April 29, 2025
  47. ↑ North Dakota Legislative Branch, "SCR 4007," accessed May 2, 2025
  48. ↑ North Dakota Legislative Branch, "SB 2230," accessed April 25, 2025
  49. ↑ North Dakota Legislative Branch, "SB 2269," accessed April 22, 2025
  50. ↑ North Dakota State Legislature, "SB 2324," accessed April 1, 2025
  51. ↑ North Dakota State Legislature, "SB 2324," accessed April 1, 2025
  52. ↑ Oklahoma Legislature, "SB 1027 Bill Summary," accessed May 25, 2025
  53. ↑ South Dakota State Legislature, "SJR 5003," accessed March 16, 2025
  54. ↑ South Dakota State Legislature, "SB 13," accessed February 14, 2025
  55. ↑ South Dakota State Legislature, "SB 91," accessed April 1, 2025
  56. ↑ South Dakota State Legislature, "SB 92," accessed April 1, 2025
  57. ↑ South Dakota State Legislature, "SB 106," accessed April 1, 2025
  58. ↑ South Dakota State Legislature, "SB 1256," accessed April 1, 2025
  59. ↑ South Dakota State Legislature, "HB 1063," accessed March 16, 2025
  60. ↑ South Dakota State Legislature, "HB 1093," accessed March 24, 2025
  61. ↑ South Dakota State Legislature, "HB 1169," accessed April 1, 2025
  62. ↑ South Dakota State Legislature, "HB 1184," accessed April 1, 2025
  63. ↑ Tennessee General Assembly, "HB 888," accessed May 22, 2025
  64. ↑ Tennessee General Assembly, "SB 525," accessed April 29, 2025
  65. ↑ Tennessee General Assembly, "SB 626," accessed May 9, 2025
  66. ↑ Texas Legislature Online, "HB 103 Enrolled Version," accessed July 15, 2025
  67. ↑ Texas State Legislature, "House Bill 2253," accessed July 31, 2025
  68. ↑ Texas Legislature Online, "HB 3526 Enrolled Version," accessed May 30, 2025
  69. ↑ Texas State Legislature, "Senate Bill 506," accessed July 31, 2025
  70. ↑ Texas Legislature Online, "SB 1025 Enrolled Version," accessed May 30, 2025
  71. ↑ Utah State Legislature, "HB 0481," accessed April 1, 2025
  72. ↑ Utah State Legislature, "House Joint Resolution 10," accessed March 26, 2025
  73. ↑ Utah State Legislature, "Senate Bill 73," accessed March 26, 2025
  74. ↑ Utah State Legislature, "Senate Joint Resolution 2," accessed March 11, 2025
  75. ↑ Virginia State Legislature, "HB 2768," accessed March 26, 2025
  76. ↑ Washington State Legislature, "Senate Bill 5370," accessed August 7, 2025
  77. ↑ Wyoming State Legislature, "House Bill 122," accessed August 7, 2025
  78. ↑ Wyoming State Legislature, "HB 337," accessed March 7, 2025
  79. ↑ Wyoming State Legislature, "HB 79," accessed March 24, 2025
  80. ↑ U.S. Supreme Court, "Brown v. Yost," accessed April 28, 2025
  81. ↑ 81.0 81.1 United States District Court for the District of South Dakota, "Dakotans for Health v. Johnson," August 29, 2025
Retrieved from "https://ballotpedia.org/wiki/index.php?title=Changes_in_2025_to_laws_governing_ballot_measures&oldid=10512804"