Minnesota Gubernatorial Approval of Constitutional Changes Amendment (2016)
| Gubernatorial Approval of Constitutional Changes Amendment | |
|---|---|
 | |
| Election date November 8, 2016 | |
| Topic Constitutional language | |
| Status Not on the ballot | |
| Type Constitutional amendment | Origin State legislature |
| Voting on State Executive Official |
|---|
|
| Ballot Measures |
| By state |
| By year |
| Not on ballot |
The Minnesota Gubernatorial Approval of Constitutional Changes Amendment did not make the November 8, 2016 ballot in Minnesota as a legislatively referred constitutional amendment. The measure, upon voter approval, would have required the Minnesota Governor's approval of constitutional amendments before they could appear on a ballot for constituents to vote upon. The measure would have done this by embedding proposed constitutional changes within statutes, which require the governor's signature. If the governor vetoed the constitutional changes, the legislature could place the proposed amendment placed on the ballot anyway, but it would have needed a two-thirds vote to do so.[1]
Text of measure
Ballot title
The proposed ballot title was:[1]
| “ |
Shall the Minnesota Constitution be amended to require gubernatorial approval of a law proposing a constitutional amendment before the proposed amendment is submitted to the voters and, if the governor vetoes the law proposing the constitutional amendment, to provide for legislative override of the gubernatorial veto by a two-thirds majority vote of each house? |
” |
Constitutional changes
- See also: Article IX, Minnesota Constitution
The proposed amendment would have amended Section 1 of Article IX of the Minnesota Constitution. The following underlined text would have been added by the proposed measure's approval:[1]
Support
Rep. Clark Johnson (D-19A) sponsored the amendment in the legislature.[3]
Arguments
- Rep. Clark Johnson said he didn't want to see a repeat of 2012, a year when Republicans successfully got a same-sex marriage ban and voter identification requirement certified for the ballot. He argued that Republicans did this to increase voter turnout, although both amendments were defeated by voters. He elaborated, "I do not like the idea of legislating through constitutional amendments... My thinking is let’s do as we would if it were straight-up legislation. You reserve the constitutional amendment process for what need to be constitutional amendments."[4]
Path to the ballot
- See also: Amending the Minnesota Constitution
A simple majority vote in both chambers of the Minnesota State Legislature was required to refer this amendment to the ballot.
See also
External links
Footnotes
- ↑ 1.0 1.1 1.2 Minnesota Legislature, "HF 230," accessed February 3, 2015
- ↑ 2.0 2.1 Note: This text is quoted verbatim from the original source. Any inconsistencies are attributable to the original source. Cite error: Invalid
<ref>tag; name "quotedisclaimer" defined multiple times with different content - ↑ Minnesota Legislature, "HF 230 Status," accessed February 3, 2015
- ↑ Mankato Free Press, "Rep. Clark Johnson seeks to change process to amend constitution," February 1, 2015
 |
State of Minnesota St. Paul (capital) |
|---|---|
| Elections |
What's on my ballot? | Elections in 2026 | How to vote | How to run for office | Ballot measures |
| Government |
Who represents me? | U.S. President | U.S. Congress | Federal courts | State executives | State legislature | State and local courts | Counties | Cities | School districts | Public policy |
