Everything you need to know about ranked-choice voting in one spot. Click to learn more!

Daily Brew: April 18, 2019

From Ballotpedia
Jump to: navigation, search

April 18, 2019

Get your daily cup of news




%%subject%%

Today's Brew highlights those states that are asking voters to enact or change signature distribution requirements for ballot initiatives + the effect of term limits on state executives in 2019  
The Daily Brew

Welcome to the Thursday, April 18 Brew. Here’s what’s in store for you as you start your day:

  1. Lawmakers ask voters to decide initiative signature distribution requirements in 2020
  2. Three state executives are ineligible to run for re-election in 2019 due to term limits
  3. President Trump issues second veto of his presidency

Lawmakers ask voters to decide initiative signature distribution requirements in 2020

Voters in at least two states—Arkansas and Montana—will decide ballot measures in 2020 that would change distribution requirements for future initiative signature petition drives. A distribution requirement is a rule that requires that petitions for a ballot measure must be signed by a minimum number or percent of voters from certain political subdivisions for the measure to qualify for the ballot.

If approved by voters Arkansas House Joint Resolution 1008 would amend the state constitution as follows:

  • require that an initiative receive at least half of the required percentage of signatures from each of 45 counties (three-fifths of the state’s 75) instead of the current requirement of 15,
  • require a three-fifths vote of both chambers of the legislature to refer a proposed constitutional amendment to voters,
  • eliminate the current 30-day grace period for additional signature collection, and
  • move the deadline for signature submission and legal challenges forward to earlier in an election year.  

In Montana, two amendments will appear on the ballot that would not change the currently enforced distribution requirement. Rather, they would codify in the state constitution the distribution requirement that is currently in effect because of both a court ruling and an opinion by the state attorney general.

Currently, 17 of the 26 states with an initiative or veto referendum process have a distribution requirement. Of the 17 with a distribution requirement, nine are Republican trifectas, five have divided government, and three are Democratic trifectas. Of the nine states with initiative or referendum processes but without a distribution requirement, four are Republican trifectas, and five are Democratic trifectas.  



In the 17 states which have distribution requirements for initiative petitions, the political jurisdiction upon which they are based varies. In seven states, the distribution requirement is spread out over a state's counties (Arkansas, Massachusetts, Maryland, Nebraska, New Mexico, Ohio, and Wyoming). In five states, it is calculated based on state legislative districts (Alaska, Colorado, Idaho, Montana, and Utah). The other five states with a distribution requirement are based on U.S. House districts (Florida, Michigan, Mississippi, Missouri, and Nevada). Washington, D.C., also has a distribution requirement based on city wards.

Michigan was the most recent state to enact new distribution requirements for initiatives, which were approved by the legislature and signed into law on December 28, 2018. The new legislation limits the number of signatures collected in any one congressional district to 15 percent of the total required. This effectively requires valid signatures from a minimum of seven different congressional districts for a successful initiative petition.

The Idaho State Legislature passed a pair of bills earlier this month to increase the state's initiative signature requirement and its distribution requirement, among other changes. Governor Brad Little (R) vetoed the bills, however, citing a fear that they would draw a lawsuit. Lawmakers in Arizona, Maine, and Missouri also considered or are considering enacting or changing distribution requirements during 2019 legislative sessions.

Learn more about stories like this by signing up for our State Ballot Measure Monthly newsletter.

Three state executives are ineligible to run for re-election in 2019 due to term limits

Three states—Kentucky, Louisiana, and Mississippi—are holding regularly scheduled state executive elections in 2019. In those states, 10 state executive offices are subject to term limit restrictions in their states. This includes all seven of Kentucky's state executive offices, as well as Louisiana's governor and Mississippi's governor and lieutenant governor.

Of these 10 positions, three are held by incumbents who are prevented from running for re-election in 2019 due to being term-limited. These incumbents are:

  • Kentucky Secretary of State Alison Lundergan Grimes (D),
  • Mississippi Governor Phil Bryant (R), and
  • Mississippi Lieutenant Governor Tate Reeves (R).

All three were first elected in 2011 and re-elected in 2015. Reeves is running for governor of Mississippi in the Republican primary on August 6, 2019. Neither Grimes nor Bryant has announced future plans in politics.

Thirty-seven states have laws limiting the number of terms state executive officials can serve. In 2018, 131 of the 303 state executive positions on the ballot were subject to term limits, and 49 state executive officials were ineligible to run for re-election.

This included two Democratic and 11 Republican governors. Four of those 13 offices changed party hands as four governorships previously held by Republicans were won by Democrats. Those open-seat winners were Janet Mills (D) in Maine, Gretchen Whitmer (D) in Michigan, Steve Sisolak (D) in Nevada, and Michelle Lujan Grisham (D) in New Mexico.

President Trump issues second veto of his presidency

On Tuesday, President Donald Trump (R) vetoed a Congressional resolution directing the removal of U.S. troops from Yemen. It was his second veto since taking office.

The measure, which was sponsored by Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), passed by a 54-46 margin in the Senate with seven Republicans joining all 47 Democrats in voting in favor. The vote in the House was 247 to 175 with 10 members voting “present” or not voting. Sixteen Republicans and 231 Democrats voted in favor of the measure with 175 Republicans opposed. A Congressional override of President Trump's veto would require 67 votes in the Senate and 290 in the House.

President Trump's only previous veto occurred on March 15, 2019, on a resolution overriding his declaration of a national emergency on the border with Mexico.

At this point in their first terms, both Barack Obama (D) and Bill Clinton (D) had issued two vetoes,  George H.W. Bush (R) had issued 20 vetoes, and Ronald Reagan (R) had issued 16. George W. Bush (R) did not issue any vetoes until his second term.

Barack Obama (D) and George W. Bush (R) each issued 12 vetoes over the course of their two terms—the least of any president since World War II. The record number of vetoes issued by a president is 635, held by Franklin D. Roosevelt (D).

In U.S. history, there have been 2,576 presidential vetoes and 111 of those have been overridden by a two-thirds vote of both houses of Congress. Seven presidents issued no vetoes during their time in office.


See also