Daily Brew: April 2, 2026
Welcome to the Thursday, April 2, 2026, Brew.
By: Lara Bonatesta
Here’s what’s in store for you as you start your day:
- Florida, South Dakota, Utah enact proof of citizenship laws for voter registration
- Washington Legislature establishes a millionaire tax. Since 1932, Washington voters have rejected seven income tax measures and approved one
- Four candidates running for mayor of Arlington, Texas on May 2
Florida, South Dakota, Utah enact proof of citizenship laws for voter registration
Florida, South Dakota, and Utah have joined nine other states in enacting laws requiring documentary proof of citizenship to register to vote.
On April 1, Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis (R) signed HB 991, which includes a proof of citizenship requirement that takes effect on January 1, 2027. On March 26, South Dakota Gov. Larry Rhoden (R) signed SB 175. The bill takes effect immediately, meaning the documentary proof of citizenship requirement will be in place for the state’s June 2 primary. On March 25, Utah Gov. Spencer Cox (R) signed HB 209, which takes effect on May 6, ahead of the state's June 23 primary.
The Florida law requires election officials to verify whether a prospective voter provided proof of citizenship when applying for a driver’s license or state ID card. If not, the person must provide proof of citizenship to be registered to vote. This also applies to individuals who are updating their registration with a change of name, address, or party affiliation. Six groups filed a federal lawsuit on April 1 seeking to block Florida’s law from being implemented.
The South Dakota and Utah laws allow voters who do not provide proof of citizenship to cast a ballot in federal elections only. To vote in state or local elections, however, voters must provide proof of citizenship. Documents establishing citizenship include a state driver’s license or ID card, a birth certificate, a naturalization certificate, or a passport. South Dakota and Utah do not require individuals who previously provided proof of citizenship to do so again when re-registering to vote, such as after an address change.
Individuals who are currently registered to vote in South Dakota do not have to provide proof of citizenship unless they have been removed from the voter rolls. South Dakota’s voter removal process begins when any voter “has failed to vote, has not updated the voter's registration information, and has not replied to a confirmation mailing at least once during the last preceding four consecutive years.”
The new Utah law does not require currently registered voters to provide proof of citizenship unless election officials notify them that their citizenship could not be established. The law requires election officials to complete a review of registered voters using state and federal data to determine U.S. citizenship by July 1, 2026.
Federal law prohibits noncitizens from voting in any federal election, and no state constitutions explicitly allow noncitizens to vote in state or local elections. All 49 states with voter registration systems require voters to attest they are a U.S. citizen when registering to vote. The District of Columbia and municipalities in three states allow noncitizens to vote in local elections.
While the South Dakota and Utah laws only apply to state or local offices, prospective voters in all 50 states would be required to provide proof of citizenship in order to vote in federal races under legislation currently before the U.S. Senate.
The Republican-sponsored SAVE America Act says states could not accept voter registration applications for federal elections unless they include documentary proof of citizenship, such as a passport, military ID, or an enhanced REAL ID. Applicants could also present a different government-issued photo ID plus another document, such as a birth certificate or naturalization certificate.
The SAVE America Act would also require voters who register by mail to present their proof of citizenship in person to an election official before the election. In states that have same-day voter registration, voters could provide such proof at the polls on Election Day.
Individuals who have changed their name would need to provide proof of citizenship with their old name, as well as either "additional documentation as necessary to establish that the name on the documentation is a previous name of the applicant" or an affidavit attesting that the name on the documentation is their previous name.
Florida, Utah, and South Dakota are the 10th, 11th, and 12th states to enact laws requiring proof of citizenship to register to vote in at least some cases, joining Alabama, Arizona, Georgia, Kansas, Louisiana, Mississippi, New Hampshire, Ohio, and Wyoming.
Alabama and Louisiana have not implemented their proof-of-citizenship laws. A U.S. District Court blocked Kansas' proof-of-citizenship law in 2018.
Ten of the 12 states with laws requiring proof of citizenship have Republican trifectas, while Arizona and Kansas have divided government. Of the states without documentary proof of citizenship laws, 16 have Democratic trifectas, 13 have Republican trifectas, and nine have divided government.
Legislators in 24 states have introduced 41 bills related to proof of citizenship for elections. On April 1, Gov. Tate Reeves (R) signed legislation in Mississippi requiring the state’s voter rolls to be checked against federal citizenship data, in addition to the state’s driver’s license database. An Iowa bill requiring proof of citizenship for registration has passed in one chamber.
Wyoming was the only state to enact a proof-of-citizenship law in 2025. Two states, Louisiana and Oklahoma, enacted legislation related to proof of citizenship in 2024.
For more information on documentary proof of citizenship laws, click here.
Washington Legislature establishes a millionaire tax. Since 1932, Washington voters have rejected seven income tax measures and approved one
Washington Gov. Bob Ferguson (D) signed Senate Bill 6346 (SB 6346) on March 30, imposing a 9.9% tax on household income above $1 million beginning in 2028. Before SB 6346, Washington was one of nine states that did not have an individual income tax.
The legislation follows decades of ballot measures regarding personal income taxes in Washington. Voters have decided on eight ballot measures related to a personal income tax, approving one and rejecting seven.
In 2024, the Washington Legislature approved an indirect initiated state statute, Initiative 2111, which prohibited state and local governments from enacting a personal income tax. SB 6346 amended this language to add an exception for the tax on household income above $1 million. Let's Go Washington sponsored the indirect initiative.
Opponents of SB 6346 cannot file a veto referendum against the bill. In Washington, legislation enacted for the “support of the state government and its existing public institutions” is exempt from the referendum power. The bill includes language stating, “The tax imposed in this act is necessary for the support of the state government and its existing public institutions.”
History of income tax ballot measures in Washington
The one income tax ballot measure that was approved, Initiative 69 of 1932, was an initiated state statute establishing a graduated income tax ranging from 1% to 7%. Initiative 69 received 70% of the vote. On Sept. 8, 1933, the Washington Supreme Court, in Culliton v. Chase, ruled that Initiative 69 violated the state constitution's clause that "all taxes shall be uniform upon the same class of property..." The Court held that income is property under the state constitution, and because the constitution requires taxes on the same class of property to be uniform, an income tax could not have graduated rates.
The Legislature proposed several constitutional amendments to address the Court's ruling.
- In 1936, voters rejected SJR 7, which would have amended the uniform taxation clause to allow for a graduated income tax.
- In 1938, voters rejected SJR 5, which would also have allowed a graduated income tax.
- In 1942, voters rejected HJR 4, which would have defined income as distinct from property for taxation, giving the Legislature the power to enact graduated net income taxes and creating income tax deductions, offsets, and exemptions.
- After HJR 4, the Legislature did not propose an income tax amendment until 1970, when voters rejected HJR 42. It would have reduced the maximum property tax rate to 1% and established a flat income tax.
- The Legislature last proposed a change in 1973, when voters rejected HJR 37, which would have limited school district taxes and authorized a graduated income tax.
Voters have also rejected two initiated state statutes after Initiative 69. In 1944, 70% of voters rejected an initiative to establish a flat 3% income tax to fund monthly payments to the elderly, blind, disabled, and widowed. In 2010, 64% of voters rejected Initiative 1098, which would have established a tax on adjusted gross income of more than $200,000 for individuals and $400,000 for married couples.
Recent ballot measures to tax income of $1 million or more
Nationwide, voters have decided on three ballot measures to enact a tax on incomes of more than $1 million since 2000.
- In 2004, voters in California approved Proposition 63 53.7%-46.3%. It established a 1% tax on income of more than $1 million and dedicated the revenue to mental health services and programs.
- In 2022, voters in California rejected Proposition 30 57.6%-42.3%. It would have established a 1.75% tax on income of more than $2 million and dedicated the revenue to zero-emission vehicle subsidies, zero-emission vehicle infrastructure, such as electric vehicle charging stations, and wildfire suppression and prevention programs.
- In 2022, voters in Massachusetts approved Question 1, 52.3%-47.7%. It levied a 4% tax on income of more than $1 million and dedicated revenue to education and transportation purposes.
Ballot measures addressing income taxes have been proposed in several states for 2026, including California, Colorado, Iowa, Massachusetts, Missouri, Nebraska, and New Hampshire, but none have qualified for the ballot.
Click here to learn more about income tax-related ballot measures.
Four candidates running for mayor of Arlington, Texas on May 2
Incumbent Jim Ross, Steve Cavender, Hunter Crow, and Shaun Mallory are running in the nonpartisan general election for mayor of Arlington, Texas, on May 2. Ross and Cavender lead in endorsements and local media attention.
Ross was first elected mayor in 2021, when he defeated Michael Glaspie 54.4%-45.6%. He was re-elected in 2023, defeating Amy Cearnal 51.8%-48.2%.
Ross is an attorney, U.S. Marine Corps veteran, and former member of the Arlington Police Department. The Arlington Professional Firefighters Association and the Arlington Police Association endorsed Ross. Ross is running on his record. His campaign website said he has "brought over 27,000 new jobs to Arlington...[and] increased the average wage by more than 20%," during his two terms in office.
Cavender is a veteran of the U.S. Marine Corps Reserve and the U.S. Army Reserve. Cavender is a real estate developer and the president of the River Legacy Foundation. Former mayors Jeff Williams and Richard Greene endorsed Cavender. Cavender says he is running because "Arlington deserves energetic, fiscally responsible leadership that puts residents and taxpayers first."
The Arlington Report's Chris Moss reported that in a press release, Cavender said "he was urged to run 'for the past couple years' by civic and community leaders and small business owners who are frustrated with budget shortfalls and rising property taxes." Moss also reported that "Ross said many of the [budget and tax] issues were caused by the Tarrant County Appraisal District’s move to freeze property appraisals."
Arlington has a council-manager government. The mayor is one of nine members of the city council and has responsibilities including presiding over council meetings and representing the city. The city council appoints a city manager to serve as chief executive. Arlington mayors are elected to three-year terms in nonpartisan elections and are subject to a three-term limit.
Arlington is the 49th most populous city in the U.S. Twenty-three of the 100 most populous cities will hold mayoral elections in 2026. Currently, 67 of those cities have Democratic mayors, 22 have Republican mayors, one has a Libertarian mayor. Three cities have independent mayors, and six have mayors who identify as nonpartisan. One mayor’s partisan affiliation is unknown.
In August 2025, a representative from Ross' office sent a statement to Ballotpedia saying that he was an independent. On March 31, a representative from Cavendar’s campaign told Ballotpedia that he is nonpartisan.
Click here to read more about the 2026 mayoral election in Arlington.
