Your feedback ensures we stay focused on the facts that matter to you most—take our survey.
Mandatory vote about holding a statewide constitutional convention
A mandatory vote about whether a statewide constitutional convention shall be held is a constitutional requirement in fourteen states.
A constitutional convention is a gathering where delegates propose amendments and changes to the state constitution. A constitutional convention question can be automatically scheduled to be put on the ballot for voters to decide, a state legislature can vote to put the question to voters, or citizens can file an initiative to place it on the ballot.[1]
Currently, 44 states have a process of deciding on a constitutional convention. In fourteen states, the question of whether to hold a constitutional convention is automatically referred to a statewide ballot without any requirement for a vote of the state legislature to place the question on the ballot. These requirements mandate that at preset intervals, the voters in the state shall be given the opportunity to vote on whether or not the state should hold a state constitutional convention. A state constitutional convention is a gathering of elected delegates who propose revisions and amendments to a state constitution.[1]
Requirements by state
Fourteen states have a constitutional provision where a constitutional convention question is automatically referred to a statewide ballot without any requirement for a vote of the state legislature.
- Five states provide for the question to be placed on the ballot every 10 years.
- One state provides for the question to be placed on the ballot every 16 years.
- Eight states provide for the question to be placed on the ballot every 20 years.
The following map provides information on mandatory votes regarding whether a constitutional convention should be held:
States allowing for mandatory votes for a constitutional convention
The following table outlines states that provide for mandatory votes for a constitutional convention:
| Mandatory votes for a constitutional convention | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| State | How often is a mandatory vote for a constitutional convention held? | Law | |
| Alaska | Every 10 years | Article 13, Section 3 | |
| Connecticut | Every 20 years | Article 13, Section 2 | |
| Hawaii | Every 10 years | Article XVII, Section 2 | |
| Illinois | Every 20 years | Article XIV, Section 1 | |
| Iowa | Every 10 years | Article X, Section 3 | |
| Maryland | Every 20 years | Article XIV, Section 2 | |
| Michigan | Every 16 years | Article XII, Section 3 | |
| Missouri | Every 20 years | Article XII, Section 3a | |
| Montana | Every 20 years | Article XIV, Section 3 | |
| New Hampshire | Every 10 years | Part 2, Article 100 | |
| New York | Every 20 years | Article XIX, Section 2 | |
| Ohio | Every 20 years | Article XVI, Section 3 | |
| Oklahoma | Every 20 years | Article XXIV, Section 2 | |
| Rhode Island | Every 10 years | Article XIV, Section 2 | |
Arguments
The following is a list of claims and arguments about mandatory votes regarding whether a constitutional convention should be held.
Support
Below is a selection of claims and arguments that have been made in support of mandatory votes on whether a constitutional convention should be held.
A mandatory vote makes it more likely for a convention to occur because it bypasses the legislature
John J. Dinan, writing in the Montana Law Review, said, "Mandatory convention referendums, which are available in just over one-quarter of the states, have therefore been responsible in the contemporary era for more unlimited conventions featuring elected delegates than have legislatively initiated convention calls. Insofar, then, as conventions can be viewed as beneficial in providing a comprehensive examination of the cumulative effect of piecemeal amendments, the mandatory convention referendum is more likely than other mechanisms to allow a convention to be called, largely because it bypasses the legislature."[1]
Oppose
Below is a selection of claims and arguments that have been made in opposition to mandatory votes on whether a constitutional convention should be held.
There is more discussion regarding individual constitutional amendments and potentially less discussion with an automatic ballot referral
John J. Dinan, writing in the Montana Law Review, said, "When a legislature approves a convention call and submits it to the people, there is a much greater likelihood that the referendum vote will have been preceded by substantial discussion among public officials and in the media. Such discussion tends to increase citizen knowledge about state constitutions and build confidence in their capacity to pass judgment on the wisdom of constitutional reform. There is no guarantee that such discussion and coverage will take place when the convention question is placed on the ballot automatically, without any necessary participation of legislators in the process."[1]
See also
Footnotes
